2016 elections - because it's never too early

[Martinus]

Why is building a wall right wing? Is having no borders a left wing position? 

[Valmy]

Why is building a wall right wing? Is having no borders a left wing position? 

In the US being anti-illegal immigrant is a right wing thing. That might not be true world-wide.

[Martinus]

I'd say he's right wing, but not conservative right wing.

He's a mess, ideologically and otherwise.  He's got no coherent ideology, just a bunch of thoughts that enter his head.

This is the part of the Trump criticism I don't quite understand. I get it that one may disagree with some of his ideas or policies - but why is not being an ideologue a bad thing? I'd rather have a President with pragmatic solutions to actual problems, that may not necessarily fit an ideological framework than one that slavishly follows a coherent ideology.

[Valmy]

This is the part of the Trump criticism I don't quite understand. I get it that one may disagree with some of his ideas or policies - but why is not being an ideologue a bad thing? I'd rather have a President with pragmatic solutions to actual problems, that may not necessarily fit an ideological framework than one that slavishly follows a coherent ideology.

I would also like a President with pragmatic solutions to problems. But you seem to think one with impractical solutions to made up problems is better

[Eddie Teach]

This is the part of the Trump criticism I don't quite understand. I get it that one may disagree with some of his ideas or policies - but why is not being an ideologue a bad thing? I'd rather have a President with pragmatic solutions to actual problems, that may not necessarily fit an ideological framework than one that slavishly follows a coherent ideology.

He tells audiences what they want to hear, that may be pragmatic as far as getting elected but not for solving problems.

[Barrister]

I'd say he's right wing, but not conservative right wing.

He's a mess, ideologically and otherwise.  He's got no coherent ideology, just a bunch of thoughts that enter his head.

This is the part of the Trump criticism I don't quite understand. I get it that one may disagree with some of his ideas or policies - but why is not being an ideologue a bad thing? I'd rather have a President with pragmatic solutions to actual problems, that may not necessarily fit an ideological framework than one that slavishly follows a coherent ideology.

Well pragmatism is an ideology too.  But that's not what Trump is selling.  "Build a wall - and make Mexico pay for it" is not very pragmatic.  The US already has a wall along most of the border.  The only places where there is no wall is unpopulated desert.

Ideology matters because nobody knows what issues are going to come up over the next 4 years.  But when you know a person's pattern of thinking you can have a pretty good guess how that person is going to respond.

But Trump is actively selling the opposite - he says unpredictability is a positive.  But that means you have no freaking clue what he's actually going to do once he gets elected.

[DGuller]

This is the part of the Trump criticism I don't quite understand. I get it that one may disagree with some of his ideas or policies - but why is not being an ideologue a bad thing? I'd rather have a President with pragmatic solutions to actual problems, that may not necessarily fit an ideological framework than one that slavishly follows a coherent ideology.

There is a difference between having an ideology and being an ideologue.  Ideology is a prism through which you interpret the world.  You don't have to stick to it religiously, but it's good to have a baseline from which to deviate.  People without any guiding ideology tend to be as coherent as committees, and about as effective.

[Martinus]

Well, I think he represents this type of CEO approach to politics. When you get a CEO for a company, the decision is not based on whether candidate A believes cost cutting is always the answer, candidate B believes in organic growth and candidate C believes in acquisitions of competitors - you get someone to get the job done. Now, I get it that you may think Trump's policies bonkers but I don't think you can fault him for lack of an ideology. If anything, it is a refreshing change from ideologues like Cruz.

[DGuller]

Well, I think he represents this type of CEO approach to politics. When you get a CEO for a company, the decision is not based on whether candidate A believes cost cutting is always the answer, candidate B believes in organic growth and candidate C believes in acquisitions of competitors - you get someone to get the job done. Now, I get it that you may think Trump's policies bonkers but I don't think you can fault him for lack of an ideology. If anything, it is a refreshing change from ideologues like Cruz.

Ideology is a strategic thing, not a tactical thing.  Your corporate examples are all tactical.  You can't be an effective CEO without having an idea of what your strategy is.

[Admiral Yi]

Well, I think he represents this type of CEO approach to politics. When you get a CEO for a company, the decision is not based on whether candidate A believes cost cutting is always the answer, candidate B believes in organic growth and candidate C believes in acquisitions of competitors - you get someone to get the job done. Now, I get it that you may think Trump's policies bonkers but I don't think you can fault him for lack of an ideology. If anything, it is a refreshing change from ideologues like Cruz.

When you're the CEO of a company your objectives are predefined.

[Martinus]

Well, I think he represents this type of CEO approach to politics. When you get a CEO for a company, the decision is not based on whether candidate A believes cost cutting is always the answer, candidate B believes in organic growth and candidate C believes in acquisitions of competitors - you get someone to get the job done. Now, I get it that you may think Trump's policies bonkers but I don't think you can fault him for lack of an ideology. If anything, it is a refreshing change from ideologues like Cruz.

Ideology is a strategic thing, not a tactical thing.  Your corporate examples are all tactical.  You can't be an effective CEO without having an idea of what your strategy is.

Trump's strategy is to Make America Great Again.

[Valmy]

America is great right now. He is a possible threat to that.

[Berkut]

I'd say he's right wing, but not conservative right wing.

He's a mess, ideologically and otherwise.  He's got no coherent ideology, just a bunch of thoughts that enter his head.

I'd say he's right wing, but not conservative right wing.

He's a mess, ideologically and otherwise.  He's got no coherent ideology, just a bunch of thoughts that enter his head.

DG is exactly right. Trying to call Trump "any-wing" is missing the point. The guy is a giant bag of ego, nothing more or less.

[Berkut]

I'd say he's right wing, but not conservative right wing.

He's a mess, ideologically and otherwise.  He's got no coherent ideology, just a bunch of thoughts that enter his head.

This is the part of the Trump criticism I don't quite understand. I get it that one may disagree with some of his ideas or policies - but why is not being an ideologue a bad thing? I'd rather have a President with pragmatic solutions to actual problems, that may not necessarily fit an ideological framework than one that slavishly follows a coherent ideology.

Obviously DG will have a different response to this.

The problem is not that he is not ideologically straightbound, it is that he has no ideology, period. He has no basis for his policy decisions other than whatever pops into his head the moment someone asks him about something.

Being ideologically flexible and willing to looks at solution outside the straightjacket of your political tribe is hugely important. Having no actual policy, framework, or structure to your thinking beyond your ego is dangerous.

Being convinced you are the smartest man on the planet is not an ideology. It is a condition.

[Razgovory]

I'd say he's right wing, but not conservative right wing.

He's a mess, ideologically and otherwise.  He's got no coherent ideology, just a bunch of thoughts that enter his head.

This is the part of the Trump criticism I don't quite understand. I get it that one may disagree with some of his ideas or policies - but why is not being an ideologue a bad thing? I'd rather have a President with pragmatic solutions to actual problems, that may not necessarily fit an ideological framework than one that slavishly follows a coherent ideology.

Because ideas without framework are incoherent.  Before we adopt a policy we need to ask ourselves "Why".  If we don't do this, our policies will often be at cross purposes or unjust.  For instance, Trump doesn't understand why we have military bases in many countries.  For whatever reason the ideology of collective defense is lost on him.  For some reason he thinks that US bases in Japan are some sort of way for the Japanese to screw over the US.

Another example closer to your, erhm, heart.  Why do we legalize sodomy but criminalize adults having sex with children?  I know you know why, you stated it.  The reason you have given (and that I agree with), is based on certain legal theories and ideology.  Without this ideology we might make both illegal, or both legal, or adults having sex with children legal and sodomy illegal.  All of those situations would be unjust.