Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 394 posts

Re: Trump

#131

Post by Aldo_MX »

stcredzero wrote: post #117
Aldo_MX wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Trump is the most visible and frightening symptom of a massive wave of ignorance and insecurity among the American electorate. The issue is not the massive wave of ignorance and insecurity, the issue is that those people will procreate more ignorant and insecure people and the issue will never end. We have a system where the well-thought vote of an educated person has the same value than the sensationalism-based vo…

the issue is that those people will procreate more ignorant and insecure people and the issue will never end. Highly procreative undereducated underclasses have long been a staple of American life. Give people enough resources and opportunities, and they will often better themselves. What you are seeing is what happens when you economically squeeze people.

> Give people enough resources and opportunities, and they will often better themselves.

The paradox is that giving people resources and opportunities is the wisdom behind left-wing politics, the opposite of what Trump and the Republican party represent...

Re: Trump

#132

Post by ebbv »

ethanhunt_ wrote: post #92
ebbv wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not fact checking, it's repeating Trump's spin on what he's said, and it's just not true.

If you watch the interview that someone linked above, it is what he says. He says: - he is being unfair, so now I say "why" Now people invert this argument and say Trump is saying "He can't do his job because of his heritage". That's completely different from saying "he is not doing his job, and the most probable reason is his heritage". Now you can certainly say that even the latter argument is racist or xenophobic…

You're nitpicking man. It's not about the exact wording Trump used. Candidates are constantly paraphrased, that's part of the way it goes. Trump agreed with the reporter's assertion, and the basis of what he says is the same; that the guy's heritage implies his ability to do his job. Which is absurd, AND one of the main reasons that it has gotten so much attention is it highlights that Trump is aware that he has angered latinos with his overt racism.

Anyway, whatever, man. Keep nitpicking if you want. It's really sad that you feel a need to do that to make even a weak attempt to defend that horrible piece of human garbage.

Re: Trump

#133

Post by mej10 »

hubert123 wrote: post #127
mej10 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump: Jake, if he was giving me fair rulings, I wouldn't be talking to you this way. He's given me horrible rulings. Tapper: But I don't care if you criticize him. That's fine. You can criticize every decision. What I'm saying is, if you invoke his race as a reason why he can't do his job ... Trump: I think that's why he's doing it.

Race can be a motivator, you know that right? Human beings are not machines with 0 bias just because they are in a position where they are supposed to have 0 bias.

Yes, it can be. And if it is a major factor in this case, then there are methods of legal recourse.

But instead he says that the judge treated him unfairly due to his race. Literally racist.

Re: Trump

#134

Post by ethanhunt_ »

minimaximus wrote: post #110
ethanhunt_ wrote: post #20

Disappointed to see Sam repeat things that are plainly false. Everyone says that Trump says such horrible things, but why is it that so often those same people have to misquote him to make it seem horrible? > He has said that a judge of Mexican descent couldn’t treat him fairly because of his heritage and that we should ban Muslims from entering the country. He said that a judge of Mexican descent isn't treating him…

Nice try, but you're defending the indefensible. You're arguing semantics when it's very clear what Trump means by his words, that he repeats in different sentences and occasions. What's the difference between what he actually said regarding the judge in his case and your 'clarification'? it's the same thing. You also conveniently ignored the fact that Trump wants to ban about 1.2 billion people from entering the US…

> You also conveniently ignored the fact that Trump wants to ...

I didn't ignore it, nobody even mentioned. Every argument should stand on its own, and be built on facts and logic.

Tossing in words like Nazis, frothing-in-the-mouth, dangerous, fool, racism, misogyny, and dictator are all unrelated buzzwords.

If you think this judge situation is so vile and leads to racist dictatorship, why have you not called for the resignation of Obama after his admin tried to force a judge with Iranian heritage from hearing Iranian-American immigration cases?

Re: Trump

#135

Post by ch4s3 »

>we're drowning in political correctness I'm always curious when people say this, what do they actually mean? Is there a specific thing happening that I'm not aware of here? In all seriousness, what is Sam referring to here?

Re: Trump

#136

Post by kafkaesq »

weinzierl wrote: post #33

> To anyone familiar with the history of Germany in the 1930s, it's chilling to watch Trump in action. [...] Demagogic hate-mongers lead down terrible paths. It would be particularly embarrassing for us to fall for this—we are a nation of immigrants, and we know that immigrants built this country (and Trump, of course, is the grandson of immigrants and married to an immigrant). As Hitler was Austrian, technically spe…

As Hitler was Austrian, technically speaking, he was an immigrant too.

Well, the Anschluß took care of that.

Re: Trump

#137

Post by acconrad »

So we flag posts that are political opinion pieces but as soon as Sam Altman does it we're free to hit the front page and keep it up in perpetuity?

Re: Trump

#138

Post by mikeash »

curiousgal wrote: post #120
mikeash wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he really has anything to lose. The government isn't going to do anything to him, even if Trump wins. And among his peers, I'm sure that criticizing Trump as being unfit for office is about as controversial as insulting the taste of Bud Light.

I didn't mean it that sense. People in the US tend to always bring a person's employer into the picture whenever they disagree with said person's opinion. So his public opinion can affect ycombinator.

The tech community as a whole is heavily anti-Trump, so this will only help his image there.

Re: Trump

#139

Post by kafkaesq »

clevernickname wrote: post #19

I thought "pure politics" posts weren't allowed/were discouraged on HN? >dang 47 days ago >It isn't that it's pro-Trump, it's that it's pure politics. Such posts always get heavily flagged, and it's hard to disagree with that, since they're typically not posted to gratify intellectual curiosity. >Basic Income stories are political, but they aren't purely political. There's an intellectual interest in thinking about a…

It's not "pure politics" in the sense that it's from the president of Y Combinator.

And when he's talking about the need for people to no longer be silent he's referring to the circles he runs with (VCs, Bilderbergers, etc). So in that sense his statement his very relevant.

Re: Trump

#140

Post by tomjen3 »

Oh for fuck sake. Not another smart person who links Trump to Hitler. PG spends a third of his twitter feed making that comparison, it is getting tiresome. Back when Bush was president we (meaning the leftist groups I read) used to assume Bush would turn the US into a concentration camp, would institute military law, etc. We were certain that he wouldn't give up power to a black guy and just leave the White House peacefully. Death certain. Guess what? We were wrong.

Now all I hear is "people who vote for Trump don't know what is good for them", "I can't believe people are stupid enough to believe what Trump says", "Trump is Hitler", etc - not to mention an air that if you don't agree with me, then you are part of the problem, because it is so obvious.

These people aren't stupid, nor is Trump. There is a huge problem in America, you have islamists who are openly attacking western values and western people, but the left side of the political spectrum won't even acknowledge the problem, so like republicans on climate issues, they don't put solutions out for discussions, so, by default, you are left with whatever the other party suggests, in this case Trumps ban on immigration. There is a huge amount of people who feel cheated of the good jobs their parents and grandparents had and believe these have been sent overseas by the big corporations. Yes stopping immigration is a stupid idea, yes a 35% import tax is a bad thing for the economy, but what is Clintons alternative? Se won't even talk about these problems, so I guess more of the same? Sorry, not acceptable. Trumps solutions are bad, but they sound good and there are no alternatives, so of course he is going to win on that one.

If you don't want Trump elected, you have to engage in the debate, you have to acknowledge the problems as his base sees them, at least long enough to convince them that his solutions aren't good.

Post reply on HN