[Torus34]

There are a number of folks who make their living as 'conservative' entertainers, most notably as talk show hosts on AM radio. There are others, something of a sub-set, who appear as guests on these shows and write 'conservative' books. On these shows the material ranges from items in the day's news which have a strong ideological tint to conspiracy theories -- sometimes relatively complex. For the most part, there is little actual impact other than improved sales of the products hawked on the shows, most notably in 'red' counties.

For years, all went along smoothly. The hosts could suggest any manner of outlandish proposals with impunity. They were not taken seriously by politicians and no harm was done. When their suggestions were not followed, they simply turned to different ones or dropped back to reliable audience-retainers such as Benghazi, Russian ownership of uranium, 'You don't have to change your doctor',' and the evils of liberalism in general.

It appears, if some sources are to be given credence, that a sea change has occurred. We have a President of the United States of America who actually listens to some talk show hosts and gives real weight to what they say. It's possible that this, at bottom, was the spark that resulted in the present partial government shutdown.

If so, then as President Trump continues to act out the advice of the talk show hosts, he is finding himself on a path with fewer and fewer options. Bit by bit, he's being boxed in by his own rhetoric. It may well cost him any possibility of re-election.

Meanwhile, the talk show hosts have a series of comments on Benghazi, the ACA, Mr. Barack Obama, Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton and the dastardly deeds of liberalism ready to hand. They can simply ignore the President twisting in a wind of his, and their, making.

The show will go on.

[One Degree]

There are a number of folks who make their living as 'conservative' entertainers, most notably as talk show hosts on AM radio. There are others, something of a sub-set, who appear as guests on these shows and write 'conservative' books. On these shows the material ranges from items in the day's news which have a strong ideological tint to conspiracy theories -- sometimes relatively complex. For the most part, there is little actual impact other than improved sales of the products hawked on the shows, most notably in 'red' counties.

For years, all went along smoothly. The hosts could suggest any manner of outlandish proposals with impunity. They were not taken seriously by politicians and no harm was done. When their suggestions were not followed, they simply turned to different ones or dropped back to reliable audience-retainers such as Benghazi, Russian ownership of uranium, 'You don't have to change your doctor',' and the evils of liberalism in general.

It appears, if some sources are to be given credence, that a sea change has occurred. We have a President of the United States of America who actually listens to some talk show hosts and gives real weight to what they say. It's possible that this, at bottom, was the spark that resulted in the present partial government shutdown.

If so, then as President Trump continues to act out the advice of the talk show hosts, he is finding himself on a path with fewer and fewer options. Bit by bit, he's being boxed in by his own rhetoric. It may well cost him any possibility of re-election.

Meanwhile, the talk show hosts have a series of comments on Benghazi, the ACA, Mr. Barack Obama, Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton and the dastardly deeds of liberalism ready to hand. They can simply ignore the President twisting in a wind of his, and their, making.

The show will go on.

All revolutions mobilize the ‘ignorant masses’. There is actually no difference between these ‘conservative entertainers’ and ‘liberal entertainers’ or ‘communists propagandists’ other than your own bias. They all are selling something.

[Torus34]

One Degree: Sir, I agree with your post. However, the thrust of the OP was that we have a government shutdown affecting many people that's perhaps due to a President of the United States listening to radio folks who, in turn were tooling* him. That, as far as I know, is something of a first.

* Ref: www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Tool

Regards

[One Degree]

One Degree: Sir, I agree with your post. However, the thrust of the OP was that we have a government shutdown affecting many people that's perhaps due to a President of the United States listening to radio folks who, in turn were tooling* him. That, as far as I know, is something of a first.

* Ref: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Tool

Regards

People seem to have trouble making up their minds if he is an insane dictator who won’t listen to anyone, or he is totally manipulated by Fox and podcasts. The discrepancy between the two indicates both are baseless accusations politically motivated.

[Torus34]

Sir, you are stating extremes and trying to reach a conclusion from them. It's called the fallacy of the excluded middle. The middle, in this instance, is that President of the United States of America may be driven more than, say, the average American by his ego and his own view of himself. This, in a person who pumps gas at the local station, is not of major consequence to the nation at large. I, incidentally, hold neither of the positions you postulated.

Regards and, if you're in a northern clime, stay warm.

[One Degree]

Sir, you are stating extremes and trying to reach a conclusion from them. It's called the fallacy of the excluded middle. The middle, in this instance, is that President of the United States of America may be driven more than, say, the average American by his ego and his own view of himself. This, in a person who pumps gas at the local station, is not of major consequence to the nation at large. I, incidentally, hold neither of the positions you postulated.

Regards and, if you're in a northern clime, stay warm.

Actually, you stated one extreme and I added the other to show the flaw in your reasoning. The ‘middle’ is definitely excluded in your reasoning as well as the other extreme, but does not create a fallacy in my own.
Is he driven more by his ego than Pelosi, Schumer, etc.? The people at the basis of the contradictory attacks on him? Why are you pointing out Trump instead of all Presidents? You are saying this is unique and the only uniqueness I see is him not pretending to be something he isn’t.
Actually, his dedication to his campaign promises is also unique which is also evidence he isn’t being manipulated by anyone.

Well central not northern, but 4 to 7 inches of snow forecast for the weekend.
Hope you have a safe and warm weekend also.

[Torus34]

One Degree: Sir, I'm focused on President of the United States of America Donald Trump as opposed to, say, Mr. James K. Polk or Mr. Millard Fillmore because he is the current President and therefore the one who has the greatest possibility of saying or doing something which can affect my life and that of those I know and care about. It is, I should think, a defensible position.

Ragards.

[One Degree]

One Degree: Sir, I'm focused on President of the United States of America Donald Trump as opposed to, say, Mr. James K. Polk or Mr. Millard Fillmore because he is the current President and therefore the one who has the greatest possibility of saying or doing something which can affect my life and that of those I know and care about. It is, I should think, a defensible position.

Ragards.

I understand that, but the anti Trump propaganda is based upon concentrating on his personality to distract from his policies which they have no valid arguments against. Therefore, I will attempt to discredit attacks on his personality as irrelevant or disingenuous. We should argue policy, not personality.

[Torus34]

Gotcha. I hope you distinguish between comments about the personality of the President of the United States of America Donald Trump per se and comments which link his personality to his words and actions.

Regards.

[One Degree]

Gotcha. I hope you distinguish between comments about the personality of the President of the United States of America Donald Trump per se and comments which link his personality to his words and actions.

Regards.

There isn’t much connection between the two with Trump. He performs for the public and pursues his agenda privately. It is actually similar to believing you understand who posters are by what they post. You have no way of knowing how much is argument to demonstrate a point and how much is personal conviction. At least I know I do both.

[Torus34]

One Degree: We appear to have drifted a considerable distance from the thrust of the OP.

I will end our discussion here.

Regards.

[One Degree]

One Degree: We appear to have drifted a considerable distance from the thrust of the OP.

I will end our discussion here.

Regards.

I apologize for distracting from your purpose. I have a tendency to do that since I often have a different view.
I will try to remember not to comment further here.
Have a good day.