Dilbert 4 Trump?
Interesting couple of blog entries by Scott Adams (he of Dilbert creator fame) this last couple of weeks. The first why is on why Trump may not be so bad a risk as president as he first seems. It made me chuckle at times, but I don’t buy it – arguing ‘Trump doesn’t mean it most of the time’ just doesn’t cut it for me (nor does the portrayal of Clinton as a drug addled alcoholic seem entirely fair!). But an interesting read none-the-less… What did get me thinking about this article was the notion that you can’t evaluate how well leaders (or decisions) have performed due to the fact you never get to see how the alternatives would have played out. Yet, we are often certain we are pretty good at it!
The second is a humorous take on why you should publicly endorse Clinton – presumably in all her wine-drug-addled glory. Basically, his reasoning is if you that if you don’t, half the US populace (and possibly a greater proportion of the world’s) will want to assassinate you if Trump wins. Not sure that is the best reasoning either, but there you go!