Go get him at his tweet coz nobody is holding anyone back
Except they block anyone who is too critical.
GrahamS - Member
This CEO comparison is bizarre chewkw.
It is absolutely appropriate in President Trump's case. Nothing bizarre at all in his style of leadership. Leadership is leadership.
If the shareholders are happy with that actions then all will be well regardless of things happening ...I get the "shaking things up" metaphor but if a controversial new CEO was appointed to a major international company, and they hired a whole new team of senior management, who they said were the best people, and they then fired those same people while dragging the company through a series of scandals and PR disasters, then what would happen?
If everything goes according to the shareholders wishes then confidence vote will remain.They would get a vote of no confidence from the board.
As long as the people are happy that is good enough. He has done his job. Congratulation or seeking approval is not important because deep down people know who have done them right. 🙂No one would be congratulating them on a job well done.
If the shareholders are happy
And how do we know that? Wait another 3.5 years to find out? Or maybe conduct a poll in the meantime?
If only there was an indicator of the president's popularity..... hmmmmm. Some sort of rating of approval from the population/shareholders
So President Trump uses the legitimate blocking rules to block people? 😆 Is President Trump breaching the tweeting rules? 😛GrahamS - Member
Go get him at his tweet coz nobody is holding anyone back
Except they block anyone who is too critical.
I specifically equated shareholders and board of directors as the same in this case. You have not read what I said have you?batfink - Member
No mate..... CEO answers to the board. If Trump was behaving like this as a CEO - he would have been booted out long ago.
Okay, let's try your way of board of directors ... who do you think have more power? Board of directors or shareholders? 😆
Who do you think would be fired if they go against the wishes of shareholders?
Of course it is valid because President Trump was the leader of Trump Organisation. It is leadership. 🙄Anyway, the CEO analogy was yours. I think Graham was arguing that it wasn't valid.
Whenever that is ... 😆batfink - Member
And how do we know that? Wait another 3.5 years to find out? Or maybe conduct a poll in the meantime?
Shareholders do not care for popularity. Shareholders care for their own investment. 😆If only there was an indicator of the president's popularity..... hmmmmm. Some sort of rating of approval from the population/shareholders
I specifically equated shareholders and board of directors as the same in this case. You have not read what I said have you?
no you didn't? Unless the word specific means something different to you?
So your CEO analogy only works if the board doesn't exit?
Of course it is valid because President Trump was the leader of Trump Organisation. It is leadership
yeah ok:
"The Trump Organization is an American privately owned international conglomerate"
I think this is why most of us don't regard Trump's business experience as particularly relevant - Trump is used to leading with absolute power.
The reality of being president is that you need to be able to draw on more sophisticated leadership behaviors, than perhaps Mr Trump has in his arsenal. He simply doesn't know how to get things done in an environment where just saying something doesn't make it law.
batfink - Member
So your CEO analogy only works if the board doesn't exit?
It works on both.
The bottom line is that the shareholders/stakeholders call the shots to retain or to fire the CEO or board of directors. 😛
Regardless of whether it is publicly or privately own organisation, the shareholders call the shots.I think this is why most of us don't regard Trump's business experience as particularly relevant - Trump is used to leading with absolute power.
President Trump being the majority shareholders in his previous appointment as the leader of Trump organisation knows that. He knows how to please the "shareholders" as he was once majority shareholder.
The reality of being president is that you need to be able to draw on more sophisticated leadership behaviors, than perhaps Mr Trump has in his arsenal. He simply doesn't know how to get things done in an environment where just saying something doesn't make it law.
It is all about leadership style, sophisticated or not, and President Trump is still the leader of a nation. If President Trump gets things done according to the people voted for him then it does not matter how he leads.
Ok.... so how do the voters "fire" a sitting president?
This is your analogy
The How to guide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/politics/how-the-impeachment-process-works-trump-clinton.html?_r=0
Most likely charge - obstruction of justice with respect to the firing of Comey, bonus points if he fires the special prosecuter or interferes too much in that one.
Why would the Repulicans (share holders in this case) vote for it? Save their skins from a deeply unpopular and toxic president who could see them wiped out in mid terms.
Regardless of whether it is publicly or privately own organisation, the shareholders call the shots.
Hahahaha - no. A private company doesn't have shareholders.
I'll just post this again, in case you missed it:
The Trump Organization is an American privately owned international conglomerateI think this is why most of us don't regard Trump's business experience as particularly relevant - Trump is used to leading with absolute power.
The reality of being president is that you need to be able to draw on more sophisticated leadership behaviors, than perhaps Mr Trump has in his arsenal. He simply doesn't know how to get things done in an environment where just saying something doesn't make it law.
batfink - Member
Ok.... so how do the voters "fire" a sitting president?This is your analogy
Not before the shareholders(voters) see their "investment return" or outcome after a period of time. Annual account for organisation so for Presidency that will be the next election term.
Therefore, the success or failure of the CEO depends entirely on what is presented to the shareholders and their persuading power. 😛
Most likely charge - obstruction of justice with respect to the firing of Comey, bonus points if he fires the special prosecuter or interferes too much in that one.
I have to believe that his failure to divest his business interests will amount to something - I'd love to see him prosecuted for corruption, rather than just impeached.
Prosecution is a high bar for a president (sitting or former) but he's so clearly lining his own pockets (via the Trump organisation) that the evidence must be plentiful.
Not before the shareholders(voters) see their "investment return" or outcome after a period of time. Annual account for organisation so for Presidency that will be the next election term.
well it's like dancing with an elephant here but...
The Shareholders in this elaborate case are either the public or their representatives in Congress and the Senate.
The first test will be the mid term elections or the run up to them. A deeply unpopular president who is unable to do anything despite having control of both houses looks like a waste of time. The fix is remove one of the problems so either the president or the houses.
The Congressmen and Senators then can decide as the "Shareholders" that one of the many allergations is worth a go, line up a replacement and go for impeachment. Once that happens he is finished (they won't vote unless they know the outcome) other option is let the people decide in the mid term elections and see how much red turns blue.
I have to believe that his failure to divest his business interests will amount to something - I'd love to see him prosecuted for corruption, rather than just impeached.
I'd say impeachment is the gateway to the rest - hence his desire to look up the rules on pardoning people - is House of Cards really that accurate??
Not before the shareholders(voters) see their "investment return" or outcome after a period of time. Annual account for organisation so for Presidency that will be the next election term.
Graham's original point was that if (in YOUR analogy) Trump was a CEO acting as erratically as he is, delivering as little as he has, hiring people blatantly not able to fulfill their duties and then firing them shortly afterwards..... he would be removed by the board, or by the shareholders.
As you've just pointed out, with the US presidency, there is no opportunity to do that until his re-election - unless he does something impeachable.
Therefore..... your CEO analogy is bullsh*t.
batfink - Member
Hahahaha - no. A private company doesn't have shareholders.
Crikey ... knock yourself out with [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_held_company ]Wiki.[/url] 😆
uh huh..
A privately held company or close corporation is a business company owned either by non-governmental organizations or by a relatively small number of shareholders or company members which does not offer or trade its company stock (shares) to the general public on the stock market exchanges, but rather the company's stock is offered, owned and traded or exchanged privately
care to tell me who the Trump organisation's "shareholders" are?
batfink - Member
Graham's original point was that if (in YOUR analogy) Trump was a CEO acting as erratically as he is, delivering as little as he has, hiring people blatantly not able to fulfill their duties and then firing them shortly afterwards..... he would be removed by the board, or by the shareholders.
Like I said previously the shareholders deliberately elected the candidate they want regardless of his leadership style. The shareholders are also the one elected the board of directors. So if the board of directors are seen as conflicting with the shareholders choice they will not survive their career.
Although the board of directors may be seen as having the power to remove the CEO, they still need to get the approval of the shareholders or they can bite the dust with their career.
Nobody is forcing anyone beyond the rules of laws so do whatever you can within the law.As you've just pointed out, with the US presidency, there is no opportunity to do that until his re-election - unless he does something impeachable.
The leadership or CEO analogy is not difficult to understand ... 😯Therefore..... your CEO analogy is bullsh*t.
I don't work for Trump organisation so perhaps you might want to investigate that yourself? However, who are the shareholders is not important. The important bit is shareholder(s) call the shot. 🙄batfink - Member
... care to tell me who the Trump organisation's "shareholders" are?
whats that you have no idea what you are going on about... how unusual
As explained in your convoluted example the shareholders are the elected representatives and they have a mechanism for removing Trump - he just fired the link to the party in RP so it's a risky time and he doesn't have many allies over on the hill.
What was I thinking? Forgot the "no engagement" rule. Sorry you all had to sit through that.
meanwhile:
[url= https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-dictated-sons-misleading-statement-on-meeting-with-russian-lawyer/2017/07/31/04c94f96-73ae-11e7-8f39-eeb7d3a2d304_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_airforceone-759pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.6b24aa0026d8 ]https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-dictated-sons-misleading-statement-on-meeting-with-russian-lawyer[/url]
Turns out that Jnr's initial statement to the press about the infamous Russia meeting (the one that was later found to be lie).... was "personally dictated" to him from airforce 1 by Donald senior.
fake news I'm sure
So it's taken just 10 days for the White House Director of Communications to get sacked. As he wasn't due to start until August 15th, is this the only politician in history to get booted out by his boss before officially starting his job?
The Orange Donkey was responsible for hiring the totally useless Scaramucci in the first place, yet says this is a "great day for the White House".
Beyond farce.
Great effort last night with miss direction and obfuscation. You could almost call it an exercise in maskirovka.
Not that it's really takes anything away from the absurdity of Drumps being really very bad at his job.
Why are you all feeding the chewkw troll? His responses are so badly thought out and worded it's not even entertaining to read - please stop...
Chewkw - please try and be a bit more entertaining if you're going to take the effort to troll a thread. As it stands some actually worthwhile things to read (such as the VF article) could get lost among the bollocks you're giving yourself a pat on the back for (you do deserve our pity though).
Donald Trump dictated 'misleading statement on son's meeting with Russian lawyer'
He knowingly lied to the American people and there's evidence, this Trump fellow doesn't sound like one of the good guys! More like a bag filled with baws if you ask me.
STOP ENGAGING WITH THE RESIDENT TROLL. YOU'RE PLAYING RIGHT INTO HIS HANDS.
Chewkw - member
Like I said previously the shareholders deliberately elected the candidate they want regardless of his leadership style.
Indeed.
I worked for a company which had an OK, but unexciting CEO. The shareholders voted for the company to be bought by another one, replacing the old CEO with the shiny new one.
They hoped the new one would be dynamic and exciting, make lots of changes and get a great return on equity.
But sadly it turned out he was an idiot. He also hired idiots (so they wouldn't show him up). He couldn't make decisions, didn't get anything done, and just let everything slide, while enjoying lots of nice expensive perks of being the CEO.
Eventually the company was sold for a lot less than the original price to another competitor. Their CEO turned out to be equally useless. After a while my job was shipped out to India and I was paid (quite well) to work for someone else. Last I heard, the remains of the company had been sold for next to nothing to Infineon.
Chewkw, if you've read this far, just remember that Trump may have been elected to do lots of worthwhile things, but that doesn't mean that he can live up to it.
I'm not sure democracy works very well iat the moment.
If your going to have equal voting rights, you need equal access to information and education.
Sure it'll workout in the end but not before some pain.
[quote=chewkw ]President Trump being the majority shareholders in his previous appointment as the leader of Trump organisation knows that. He knows how to please the "shareholders" as he was once majority shareholder.
So what you're saying here is that Trump likes to self-pleasure? 😆
Though you're getting seriously close to falling out of character here chewy - more of the incomprehensible rambling or people will start to see through your "character".
As for everybody else - what's the point of engaging?
Yes, but it's keeping it away from the rest of the forumSTOP ENGAGING WITH THE RESIDENT TROLL. YOU'RE PLAYING RIGHT INTO HIS HANDS.
Why are you all feeding the chewkw troll?
Because otherwise this place is just an echo chamber of people agreeing that Trump is terrible.
chewkw is the only one left here that is prepared to defend Trump no matter what he does.
His responses are so badly thought out and worded
Could be worse, I read this wonderfully eloquent response this morning...
[img] 
[/img]
Read is a strong term, I got there were words, perhaps in the wrong order? Perhaps punctuation might help.
[quote=GrahamS ]
chewkw is the only one left here that is prepared to defend Trump no matter what he does.
In reality, he's intentionally taking a fake contrary position purely to get a rise out of everyone that bites
He can't see posts unless you mention his name so he's easy to avoid.
Someone has to present the other side of the argument. Even now, 39% of voters approve of Trump.
If chewkw gave up, I would feel duty bound to pick up the baton, and honestly I just don't have the time or inclination to do it properly.
oldnpastit - Member
Someone has to present the other side of the argument. Even now, 39% of voters approve of Trump.
The most Trump supporting and optimistic poll has him at 39,he hasn't hit that high on most for a long while.
Having said that, it would be nice if chewkw could post facts about how Trump is making America great again, specifically. Not just half baked analogies and assertions.
Judge a tree by its fruit.
GrahamS - Member
Counter question chewkw: do you still stand by your analysis that Trump will serve at least eight years, possibly more?Yes. Eight years.
yet you wouldn't take a bet on him surviving one term. |
Having said that, it would be [s]nice[/s] astonishing if chewkw could post facts about how Trump is making America great again, specifically. Not just half baked analogies and assertions.
Mooch will be missed, so much comedy potential
Mooch will be missed, so much comedy potential
Yep, he was so new and different.. 😉
[img] 
[/img]
.. he had a blue tie.
so hes reached a new low in approval ratings
It seems getting his son to lie about that russia meeting is sinking through, coupled with his laughable attempts at getting a healthcare deal
even his base are turning on him
lowest so far is 33% !, 538 adjusted has his new low of 37
I think thats why hes aiming for affirmative action and all the alt-right immigration paranoia stuff to shore him up with the nutters
I don't understand how the worlds greatest person can't stop these leaks.
the leaks keep on coming
unfortunately, I don't think the demographic who were/are fans of the wall, are going to understand the implications of that. They will just take it at face value:
"Donald asks the Mexican president to stop saying he won't pay for the wall"
Meanwhile, the republicans seem to acknowledge that their man is out of control:
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/03/trump-robert-mueller-senate-russia-firing ]Article[/url]US senators from both parties are seeking to protect the special counsel Robert Mueller from being fired by Donald Trump, marking the first bipartisan bid by lawmakers to impose a check on the president against the backdrop of the Russia investigation.A pair of bills were unveiled on Thursday, co-sponsored by both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate, that would take measures to bar the president from directly firing the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 US election and any involvement by the president and his team.
Mueller, who was appointed after Trump fired the then FBI director, James Comey, in May, has convened a grand jury in Washington, according to a Wall Street Journal report published Thursday, in a sign that his inquiry is escalating.
I know that the president is protected (to a limited degree) from prosecution whilst in office - or for things he does as president. But all of the Russia stuff was prior to him being in office.... not sure where that leaves him if the Russia stuff is proven?
Also..... was previously talking about actual prosecutions rather than just impeachment. The winning combination of decades of dodgy-dealings + armies of people now digging into his business and financial affairs, surely must mean that this is a distinct possibility?
I mean, this barely made the headlines: [url= https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/06/trump-organization-charged-eric-trumps-cancer-charity-golf-events.html ]Donald's son's charity paid $1.2m to his dad[/url]
Without suggesting that there was any competence there in the first place, it actually looks like his bizarre behaviour isn't down to a simple character defect.
[url= https://www.google.es/amp/www.independent.co.uk/voices/donald-trump-mental-health-disorder-personality-doctors-yale-psychiatrist-investigation-a7874586.html%3famp ]He's ill [/url]
Strange as it seems, he probably deserves sympathy.
And removal from office a.s.a.p., obvs.
Doctors diagnosing people without access to their medical records, time with the patient, and family, are probably guilty of "Fake...." , well, you get the picture.
Its time for a sweep, I give him sixty days max.
Well he'll be on holiday for 17 of those days Wilburt, that gives him a fighting chance... 8)
If he's ill it's just as likely physical, he's overweight, tall, loves junk food, bad tempered, doesn't exercise (golf doesn't count 😉 ) he's a heart attack red flag !
I imagine he's bigly statind up and closely monitored tho.
Should a president be psychologically tested as a matter of course, anyway?
Good analysis of him & the Whitehouse on R4 last night. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08zdffw
It's indicative of just how far the Independent has fallen from it's perch to print a tawdry story speculating on the President's mental health. It cheapens the debate and isn't helpful to the millions of people suffering from mental health problems who do continue to hold down careers, hiding in plain sight.
To label Trump as "mentally ill" at arm's length is lazy journalism.
Besides, if we are going to speculate about the cardiac health of White House personnel, then take a look at Bannon. He has a face like a full English breakfast.
Well said PJM.
PJM, you've not read the article then?
The story about him being diagnosed at a distance by a group of psychologists is old news, this article is exploring whether it's right to do that or not.
I do not agree that speculative diagnosis is correct or fair. I also believe that there are those who would wrongly use health status to discriminate. But I also believe that actual disease doesn’t give a damn about ethical debate. Cancer killed my grandfather, and he was a nice guy.In the end, it comes down to whether someone is fit to do a job and whether it is safe for them to do so. For Trump, the stakes are high. I do not believe he should be diagnosed from afar, but I do believe that well-meaning concern should be met with investigation. Then again, that’s just me.
Given how low it seems to me that the US political system has become (corruption, in hock to various corporations and interesr groups etc) I'd not be surprised if Trump did two terms. Plus change the so he can serve a third and then have Don jr crowned King Donald the 2nd.
agree with nedrapier the article doesnt say that at all did nickc, grahams or PJM actually read it?
Plus change the so he can serve a third and then have Don jr crowned King Donald the 2nd.
been thinking that for a while but itll be ivanka, then Baron......
For Trump, the stakes are high. I do not believe he should be diagnosed from afar, but I do believe that well-meaning concern should be met with investigation. Then again, that’s just me.
I did read the piece, I found the above quote to be somewhat mealy-mouthed in it's cod sympathy. Regardless of whether Trump is or isn't suffering from mental illness, he's clearly lacking the intellectual agility required to do his job. I think that's evident to all.
In the end, it comes down to whether someone is fit to do a job and whether it is safe for them to do so. For Trump, the stakes are high. I do not believe he should be diagnosed from afar, but I do believe that well-meaning concern should be met with investigation. Then again, that’s just me.
Well-meaning concern! Of course. 😀
This is typical 'Republishing un-evidenced claim by commenting on it' journalism that some of the broadsheets seem to like. The Indy has no money to fund its own skilled journalism, so is reduced to this.
It's not as if there is a lack of evidenced stories about Trump antics. The man is a buffoon. As a doctor*, I don't see anything more unhinged about his behaviour in recent years. He appears to have been this unhinged his entire adult life.
*I am not actually a doctor.
ned, that's exactly what the article does and the bit that you quote supports PMJ's point of view. This bit
...is essentially saying, "he acts a bit weird, dosn't he? He probably needs to see a doctor"but I do believe that well-meaning concern should be met with investigation.
do presidents have any sort of mental health screening?
what happened when Regan developed Alzheimers?
“I’m going to be working for you, I’m not going to have time to go play golf,”
Tweet tweet.
what happened when Regan developed Alzheimers?
Told him he was nicked, and to get his trousers on?
Apologies if it's in the links up there, but this is quite incredible
I genuinely believe he has an IQ well below 100 and has only got where he's got (in life generally) because of his money and not because of any smart moves
I'm hungry
look at Bannon. He has a face like a full English breakfast.
Pushes plate away
what happened when Regan developed Alzheimers?
Alzheimers, at least in its earlier stages isn't that big a deal. It causes difficulties in filing and accessing certain memories but it doesn't cause people to loose reason. People don't necessarily forget anything they just don't have a very direct route to remembering things. All thats needed is for the people around you to adapt a little. It wouldn't have made Regan crazy, it would have just made his work difficult.
I had a boss who I now realise had a scary amount in common with Trump.
It always amazed me that he enjoyed the success in his industry that he did. One of my colleagues who I did a lot of drinking with after work (it was that sort of office) genuinely believed the guy was a 'visionary' in his field, but all I saw was flying by the seat of the pants in order to deliver on ridiculous promises or unrealistic fees.
However, it seemed to work, and it seemed to boil down to the 'Just trust me, this will work' delivered with such conviction that you tended to believe him when every instinct you possessed told you he was wrong. Clients seemed to trust him also which kept the work coming in, and even when it felt like the wheels were falling off and we were juggling chainsaws (except all the chainsaws were currently airborne and you'd just run out of hands) things seemed to work out in the end.
His mannerisms were pure Trump as well, and everyone worried he was one bad day away from a heart attack...
Edit: Should mention, he was also a genuinely decent guy out of the office, always looking out for the staff etc. etc. Just a crazy guy to work for.
Trump has a personality disorder - he is exhibits all the signs in a classic manner. Its common in business as the qualities to succeed and the signs of a personality disorder have a huge overlap. I also think he is a bit dim
YOu can argue over what type of personality disorder - narcissistic, psychopathic, etc but its as clear as day that he has one
this is not a mental illness. Its a developmental abnormality
Maybe he has a personality disorder, maybe he doesn't. Either way, he won the election and is making America Great Again.
([i]Standing in for Chewkw, someone has to[/i]).
Narcissistic personality disorderYou may:
believe that there are special reasons that make you different, better or more deserving than others
have fragile self-esteem, so that you rely on others to recognise your worth and your needs
feel upset if others ignore you and don’t give you what you feel you deserve
resent other people’s successes
put your own needs above other people’s, and demand they do too
be seen as selfish and ‘above yourself’
take advantage of other people.
I'm Sat in the US looking for signs of being great again, they have their massive security blanket flags flying, pictures of the supreme leader around the place and no idea what else
So I see Trump is away for a nice 17 day holiday playing golf at his private golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey.
Nice work ethic he has eh?
[url= https://s1.postimg.org/692tgcnun/trump_holidays_vs_obama.pn g" target="_blank">https://s1.postimg.org/692tgcnun/trump_holidays_vs_obama.pn g"/> [/img][/url]
But maybe The Donald is just in the wrong job?
[url= https://s1.postimg.org/a2j2ke3vj/trump_holidays.pn g" target="_blank">https://s1.postimg.org/a2j2ke3vj/trump_holidays.pn g"/> [/img][/url]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40829060
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/aug/07/seth-rich-trump-white-house-fox-news ]fake news fox and whitehouse [/url]
a year ago today
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/232572505238433794
@realDonaldTrumpAn 'extremely credible source' has called my office and told me that @BarackObama's birth certificate is a fraud
Trump and Murdoch,now there's a partnership to make merica great again 😯
[url= 
]Whatever Trump just asked Murdoch,it's making Jerry feel a bit sick[/url]
So I see Trump is away for a nice 17 day holiday
More fake news.
The Whitehouse is being refurbished, so he has to go somewhere else.
Not "on holiday", but getting out of the way of the builders.
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-play-golf-bedminster-new-jersey-working-vacation-white-house-17-days-maintenance-a7880236.html ]Donald Trump filmed ‘playing golf’ after saying he will be working[/url]
The Whitehouse is being refurbished, so he has to go somewhere else.
Specifically, a golf course. 😆
Hurrah!! No more FAKE News!
Mmmm the president's own news channel for "real" news. All other news is fake.
All a bit "North Korean" isn't it?
Still ten point to those that said several hundred pages back in this thread that he was only standing for president so he could launch his own news network.
NewsWeek did a lovely cover story about Trump:
[img] 
[/img]
The outraged reaction of the Trump Army on Twitter is quite an interesting read:
https://twitter.com/Newsweek/status/893467917731467265
They certainly still seem to be very divided over there with little sign of it getting any better and real deep-rooted resentment and distrust of media and liberals.
I also think he is a bit dim
[img]
[/img]
That's pretty brutal from newsweek!
I do worry that, as the attacks on Trump are becoming more direct, it's just making it easier for Trump supporters to validate their "liberal media" conspiracy theories. Which is obviously their preferred truth.
However - the 39% do seem to be immune to facts and incapable of critical thinking.... so perhaps tabloid-y rhetoric is the only way to get through to them? "Going high" doesn't seem to be working 🙁
Pfffff, it does feel that the trump/trumpists are making us all collectively dumber.