Understanding Donald Trump

x299353078_donald-trump-pres-blogIt seems Donald Trump is drawing maximum heat from both Republicans and Democrats. Trump is also drawing maximum attention. Attention is what all of the others need but have no way to get. Trump may also be the first non apologizer. Demands for an apology are coming like machine gun fire. What will happen if Trump never apologizes? The problem his detractors have is that if Trump does apologize, he is apologizing for telling the truth. The truth is not used in politics so people are confused and disoriented when it makes an appearance.

Don’t misunderstand. Trump is not honest. He has just found a unique set of circumstances where the truth might actually have utility. He has nothing to lose by being straight forward. I see Trump’s discourse as distinguishing him from all of the other candidates. That is a long shot approach but he would have no chance at all as just one member of the mob of sixteen. The other candidates all bury one another with mush.

Do not expect truthfulness out of Donald Trump for the duration of the campaign. It is hard to win an argument with Trump when he is wrong. Telling the truth in the early days of the campaign gives him a distinct advantage. He will be perceived as a straight shooter all the way to the end. All he has to do is not apologize and his early truthful discourse will fade away. The straight shooter image will stick.

Trump may be the best in the world at diminishing others who attack him. I am not sure who will take the risk more than once. Give Trump a black eye. Just expect two black eyes in return.

Would a contest between Hilary Clinton and Donald trump be interesting? The world’s best liar would be squared off against the world’s greatest put down artist.

(Visited 16 times, 1 visits today)
0 0 votes
Article Rating

About Fantasy Free Economics

James Quillian independent scholar,free market economist,and teacher of natural law. Who is James Quillian? Certainly I am nobody special, Just a tireless academic and deep thinker. Besides that, I have broken the code with respect to economics and political science. Credentials? Nothing you would be impressed with. I am not a household name. It is hard to become famous writing that virtually no one in the country is genuinely not in touch with reality. But, if I did not do that, there would be no point in my broking the broken the code. If you read the blog, it is easy to see that there are just a few charts, no math and no quantitative analysis. That is not by accident. Given what I know, those items are completely useless. I do turn out to be highly adept at applying natural law. Natural law has predominance over any principles the social science comes up. By virtue of understanding natural law, I can debunk, in just a few sentences , any theory that calls for intervention by a government. My taking the time to understand the ins and outs of Keynes General Theory is about like expecting a chemistry student to completely grasp all that the alchemists of the middle ages thought they understood in efforts to turn base metals into goal. Keynesian theory clearly calls for complete objectivity. Government can only make political decisions. Keynesian techniques call for economic decisions. So, why go any further with that? Fantasy Free Economics is in a sense a lot like technical analysis. Technical analysis began with the premise that it was impossible to gain enough information studying fundamentals to gain a trading advantage. Study the behavior of investors instead. Unlike technical analysis, I don't use technical charts. What I understand are the incentives of different people and entities active in the economics arena. For example, there is no such thing as an incentive to serve with life in the aggregate. In the aggregate, only self interest applies. It is routinely assumed otherwise. That is highly unappealing. But, I am sorry. That is the way it is. I can accept that because I am genuinely in touch with reality. Step one in using Fantasy Free Economics is for me to understand just how little I really know. A highly credentialed economist may know 100 times what I do based on the standard dogma. Compare the knowledge each of us has compared to all there is to know and we both look like we know nothing at all. There is always more than we don't know than what we do know. I am humble enough to present myself on that basis. Why? That is the way it is. I am not bad at math. I have taught math. What I understand is when to use it and when to rely on something else. Math is useless in natural law so I don't use it. While others look at numbers, I am busy understanding the forces in nature that makes their numbers what they are. That gives me a clear advantage.
This entry was posted in Daily Comments and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments