The Rational Process


One of the most vexing things a lot of Red Pill aware men encounter when they interact with women today is the expectation that women are coequally as rational agents as men. We were taught from the earliest ages by our blank-slate equalist teachers that boys and girls are all the same, having coequal potential for coequal successes in life (as they define them), then primarily focusing on the ‘correct’, female way of educating both sexes. This education isn’t limited to just the classroom; the Village uses many ways (media, pop culture, religion, etc.) to deliver what is fundamentally the same message – boys and girls, men and women, are essentially, effectively, the same with respect to their potentials. Now, that’s the message not the practice. Even when they are forced to recognize definitive differences they simply dismiss them by saying “We’re more alike than different” in the presumption that this should be enough to refocus and reinforce their blank-slate belief set.

So when men and women consider differences in gender, differences in double standards, inequalities in gender-specific issues and pretty much any empirical debate about these and other differences, men presume that the women they are ‘debating’ with are also looking for earnest, equitable answers beginning from the same coequal state of mutual interest. This is almost never the case.

The pretense that’s been embedded into men from the earliest years of their Blue Pill conditioning is since men and women are coequal agents they should both be interested in finding an objective truth together. But the frustration in this ‘debate’ comes from the simple fact that our differences are actually much more significant than the dismissals of equalists would want them to be. The roots of this deliberate misunderstanding are twofold: First, the innate solipsistic self-interest of women, and second, women’s predisposition to interpret information using the Emotional (versus Rational) interpretive processes.

When men and women debate intersexual issues of contention men opt for their innately preferred Rational interpretive process; we look for factual evidence to support a premise. Women opt for the Emotional process and then consider evidence. This difference in processing is where a lot of personal and ideological obstacles come into play between men and women. Our educational priorities of both men and women prioritizes the importance of emotion and its expression before a consideration of the Rational process. We teach boys/men to sublimate their natural proclivity towards reason by replacing it with the Emotional process. Thus, we’ve seen the push to encourage men to get in touch with their feelings or their feminine sides since the late 60s.

As I mentioned last week, women prioritize context (how a conversation makes them feel) in communication while men prioritize content (the information of the conversation); these differences are part of our biological/neurological evolved inheritances. This is where the misunderstanding starts between the sexes; however, calling this a ‘misunderstanding’ is a bit of a misnomer.

I’m sure a lot of readers think this is a longwinded way of saying women’s emotions blind them to the facts that men present to them when they debate. While this is true in a sense, this is shortsighted because, in the interests of simplifying things, most guys will just blow off the dynamics that build up this (often deliberate) miscommunication. Women don’t like the way a Rational-prioritized conversation makes them feel. Often the reality is unflattering to their solipsistically defined egos – but the communication feels wrong because women’s presumption is that men should just know to acknowledge their feelings in that debate (all communication really). On the female side the presumption is that men and women, being blank-slate equals, already know to prioritize the Emotional process, while on the male side men presume women will prioritize the Rational process because, again, we’re all the same, right?

This presuming that one sex sees the same way as the other is endemic in our time. I had a reader pose me with a similar example:

I had a conversation with my LTR at dinner tonight where I did a thought exercise with her. I asked her to imagine what it would be like if people visually saw different colors when they looked at various objects but had consistent names for those colors in their own minds. For example, person A sees what person B calls Blue, but it looks like what would be called green if person A could peer into person B’s mind. The point was we can’t know what colors actually look like from an individual subjective perspective. Although I tried several times to walk through this, she couldn’t comprehend what I was trying to explain. I then realized that this exercise involved imagining a first person conscious experience from multiple perspectives. This test could be a proxy test for (women’s) solipsism.

This thought experiment is a good way to illustrate solipsism in women, but it’s an even better example of the default presumptions men and women have of each other in other areas. As it stands today, in our feminine-primary social order, the Blue Pill conditions us to default to cognitive models that are defined by the female experience. Thus, whatever best satisfies a female-primary purpose is always considered the correct purpose. The way women think, the way women prioritize their Emotional interpretive process, is the right way for men to think – and the mutual presumption is that men already do (or should) think and process stimuli like women do. Anything else, anything that would recognize a difference in men from women, always feels wrong.

This default presumption of a female-correct way of interpreting and experiencing the world isn’t limited to our differences in communication. This misalignment of interpretive differences also extends to the false presumption that men and women approach the concept of love from a mutually understood perspective. Men love idealistically, women love opportunistically, yet men’s presumption is that both men and women approach love from the Disneyesque idealism they believe women are capable of. Men too believe that women see the same colors they do and have the same names for those colors. In this case those colors are the concepts and approaches women have towards love. I may write a new essay outlining this dynamic soon, but I’ve already written many prior posts on this experiential difference.

Rationalism vs. The Rational Process

As a result of pushing the Emotional process as the correct way of interpreting our world the Rational process necessarily gets demonized today. It feels wrong to a social order predicated on the Emotional process, so the truths that the Rational process reveals seem cruel, biased or vindictive when they refute the interpretations of the Emotional process. The importance of Emotion has been elevated above an interpretive process to where it’s now entered a metaphysical realm. This is where the Emotional process becomes Emotionalism. In the light of this, the Rational process is overshadowed and sublimated in importance. But the Rational process is what exposes emotionalism for what it is: Emotion is an evolved, biological interpretive process that serves our species well, but the feelings it generates are biological responses to environmental stimuli, not evidence of some higher consciousness or mythic existential importance that goes beyond anything in the physical realm.

The Rational process throws a cold bucket of truth on lofty emotionalism. As a result, and because emotionalism has been a basis of our social order for millennia now, the Rational process had to be debased in importance.

Trust in the LORD with all your heart and do not lean on your own understanding. – Proverbs 3:5

This scripture is an example of the conflict between emotionalism and the rationalism that popular social consciousness would like to apply to the Rational interpretive process. The Rational process is based in our collective and subjective intelligence. Healthy men and women both have the mental hardware to use the Rational process well, but where we differ is in our gendered mental firmware. When we collectively prefer one process to the other, this is where we decide which gender’s process will define our social order. In order for emotionalism to supersede rationality and ensure its preeminence appeals to the emotional above the rational have to be popularized.

If we could depend on an unbiased, unadulterated form of reason the Rational process would be a superior methodology. But as I stated before, rationalism is dependent on intelligence and that intelligence takes time. In some ways the Rational process is sensitive to both instinct and emotion, in other’s that reasoning is painfully, sometimes fatally slow. The world happens fast and vacillating in the reasoning process might easily kill an individual. Fortunately we have instinct and emotion to carry us through. The Rational process requires time because it requires learning, contemplation, theorizing and any number of high-order thinking processes to be effective. And even then, that effectiveness depends on reasoning’s accuracy. For the past three or four hundred years we’ve increasingly had the luxury to develop our Rational process, but for all the advancements it’s given us, when it comes to intersexual dynamics emotion is still the priority.

We have placed such importance on emotion at the expense of reason that we’ll risk personal safety in our ‘right’ to express it. No doubt most men are familiar with repressing their emotional responses, but it’s interesting to consider that even with this self-control and even with our innate predilection to process emotion differently than women, men are the ones accused of failing to be ‘in touch with their emotions’. On first glance Robert Greene’s quote here appears to be wisdom (I think it is) – self-control, mastery of one’s emotional state, is a virtue. Yet, in our emotional-primary social order we’ll hear women complain that men are less emotionally available. And this conflict illustrates again that whatever is expedient to the female imperative is what is to be considered ‘correct’ at that moment.

Empiric reason is the foundation of what humanity has made of itself. Setting aside emotionality and considering challenges in a Rational interpretive process is fundamental to understanding the emotional and instinctive process and their advantages and weaknesses. For the record it’s my belief that all of these interpretive processes in union are are necessary elements in the human experience, but my focus on these processes is to lay a foundation for a better understanding of them. It’s easy to get caught up in the demonization of the instinctual and the rational when the emotional is defining what’s bad or good for our collective experiences.

When I wrote Appeals to Reason I was exploring the futility of expecting women to transition into a logical reasoning of why she should logically be with a guy who was more than happy to embody all of the aspects she stated she wants in a man. The manosphere idiom is “no woman was ever reasoned or logicked into bed with a guy”, women don’t follow the Rational process when it comes to interrelating with men. It’s all Instinctual and Emotional, and usually in that order. A man might be able to use his rational facilities to better understand women’s evolved instinctual and emotional responses, and what prompts them, but reason itself isn’t the key to that interrelation.

Appealing to women’s logic and relying on deductive reasoning to sort it out is the calling card of a Beta mind. There is nothing more anti-seductive for women than appealing to her reason. Arousal, attraction, sexual tension, subcommunication of desire, all happen indirectly and below the social surface for women. It’s not that women are incapable of reasoning (hypergamy is one logical bitch) or are crippled by their emotion-based hindbrains, it’s that if you’re asking her how to be more attractive you don’t Get It. It’s in the doing, not the asking.

If you’ve stuck with me to the end of this series I want to say thanks. I really felt that these interpretive processing models needed to be fully outlined as what I’ll get into in the coming months will need this as a basis for it.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

709 comments on “The Rational Process

  1. Do these MSM types have a RP Road to Damascus (if fleeting) moment when they find out their wives are fucking around?

    About 25% find out…the ones who get divorce-raped. Occasionally a UMC woman will be well-trained and fool around and then feel guilty and confess. Lots of times a UMC woman will put a man on starvation sex diet, but then the men think that that’s due to age/health issues. And the woman will usually be obese.

    Sometimes the beta will be very hungry and fool around…maybe use professional services.

  2. But Peterson’s explanation of the mechanics here is revealing. There actually is research suggesting that monogamy might have developed through a sort of cultural selection process whereby monogamous cultures had fewer unmarried men and thus less crime, abuse, and so on, thus allowing them to out-compete polygamous cultures

    Kind of ironic that the article says that Peterson’s explanation is based on garbage pseudo-science.

    Genes don’t create a “cultural selection process”. Monogamy only occurs by design.

    “That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.”

    Old books still contain wisdom. Those who ignore old book wisdom are reduced to mere speculation.

  3. From the article referenced by EI:

    Women did not flock to the high-status men, those men took the women they wanted.

    If there were no rules and it was a sexual free for all, then this makes sense because of men’s superior strength. But all societies, even primitive societies, have rules. The chief wants his women exclusive to himself and will punish men who violate his rule of exclusivity.

    So, monogamy (in the sense of women being required to be exclusive) gets enforced by the chief and his govt. Then other men want women and the tribe needs more genetic diversity and the chief’s friends get women, but there aren’t enough women for the chief’s friends to have four women each. The men without women maybe cause trouble in the tribe, so the chief decides that each of his friends only gets one woman so that the troublemakers can also have a woman to prevent trouble in the future. Laws against polygamy could develop in this scenario. (Maybe also people noticed the effects of inbreeding and this led to monogamy.) This seems to be Peterson’s take.

  4. One guy, Peterson, is easier to target than a manosphere in total. An Atlas Shrugged scenario. The anointed few, behind layers and layers of risk management, seeing little wrong with the cultural direction, are playing by old school Saul Alinsky tactics. They’re in power, the smartest, most connected and can’t conceive any alternative. They’re baffled how to deal with Peterson, et. al. He’s making them lurch from their comfort. The BP world is reacting to the world…not acting or shaping it.

    Change occurs subtly and afterwards they’ll proclaim they saw it all along.

    Alinskites are unprepared. They hadn’t a plan beyond “take over”. Like Hamas. How’s that turning out?

  5. ” . . . all societies, even primitive societies, have rules.”

    And if you don’t follow the rules, in the absence of courts, well, accidents happen. And, for that matter, on purposes. I’ve addressed the issue before that primative “egalitarian” societies are not happy, fuzzy bunny land where everyone lives in peace and harmony. They can be fucking brutal.

    Read (NOT see) Cheyenne Autumn. Tribal intersexual rules play a major role in this true story, and they may not be what you think they are a priori. And both Blue Pill and Red Pill behaviours among the tribe members have an effect on history.

    Tony Hillerman’s modern setting Navajo detective novels also involve tribal sexual rules.

    And in the meantime you can watch this video about an event in Viking history that may have had a profound influence on the history of the world:

  6. “I started lifting, and I enjoy it greatly actually, but doesn’t seem to help with my sex (and general) drive.”

    this should be discussed more

    if you lift heavy. if you pull big deadlifts. if you’re triggering growth in cns, muscles, bones…

    you’re going to be fucking wrecked. of course you won’t be fucking so much because you’ll be sleeping and eating and sleeping and rebuilding

    once you max out on a big cycle, take some fucking time off. like months. more. let your body rest. eat. fuck. put on some fat. enjoy life.

    i train to have a better quality of life and for health, not to be fucking sore and beat up all the time. and all real GROWTH comes way after the simulus and if you’re restimulating the system before you give it ALL the time to adapt that it needs, you’re cutting yourself way short and wasting your time. “there’s no finish at the finish line”. some motherfuckers put washers on the ends of their bars because technically the body is moving more than before and there’s only two directions, no maintenance

    “I just started to put my eating habits right (lot of potential there), but no results yet.”

    takes time for cells to turn over. patience. takes time for the body to get used to burning the new fuel to max it. patience. you are what you eat. it’s fucking everything right there. eat clean. then lift heavy. your body does the rest. as long as you rest well

  7. “There shall be a large physical earthquake tomorrow, 22 May 2018…of extraordinary magnitude…”

    I have no doubt your farts are impressive, but they don’t count as earthquakes.
    No, not even the wet ones.

  8. I was eating lunch & finishing watching “The Clapper” where at the end, Eddie and Judy are proclaiming their love to each other. Mrs. Gamer yelled, “I love you” at me from about thirty feet away. I answered, after a pause, “I get that a lot.”

    I’m such an asshole. XD

  9. This morning, after a bout of early morning tandem body surfing, Mrs. Gamer and I were still entwined and she brings up a vid of Jennifer Lopez dancing that she got in an email and Mrs. Gamer wants me to watch it…Mrs. Gamer thinks that Jennifer Lopez has a great butt, but I think that it’s disproportional and I much prefer Mrs. Gamer’s sparse ass…so, I’m watching this vid of J Lo’s ass and thinking how funny it is that Mrs. Gamer wanted me to watch J Lo’s ass while we’re still entwined…

    …I tell ya, ain’t life just a bunch of Froot Loops?

  10. What is “the MSM” or “MSM types” that was referenced in some comments this morning? Not ringing any bells, thanks.

    Howhowhow, the main issue you have is a lack of desire in your sexual relationship with her, and I assume it goes for both of you.. Think on that for a bit and really ask yourself if she actively turns you on, do you fantasize about her or others/porn? Do you to still tease and talk dirty, does she ever just pull your belt off and blow you or something similar showing feral and submissive desire? Don’t blame everything on yourself either.. Improve and deal with what you can control. Embracing your burden of performance doesn’t mean you’re perfect and always win, it’s a mindset and a process.
    Last thing, if your investment in that flat is hindering you from being objective about your relationship, (cheating or not) you really need to think on that… I was in a desireless marriage and understand where you’re coming from on the sex stuff, I was also afraid (literally) of the financial impact divorce would have, but 2+ years later it was the best damn decision I’ve ever made..

  11. Brit and Cambridge prof Stefan Halper was the mole inside the Trump campaign.

    Believed Hillary Clinton Would Be a Better Steward for U.S.-UK Relations

    In March 2016, Halper told Russia’s Sputnik News that he believed then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton would prove to be a steadier hand in preserving the “special relationship” enjoyed by the United States and Britain.

    “I believe Clinton would be best for US-UK relations and for relations with the European Union. Clinton is well-known, deeply experienced and predictable. US-UK relations will remain steady regardless of the winner although Clinton will be less disruptive over time,” Halper said.

    Has the whole Trump-Russia collusion investigation been a MI-6 operation?

    Oh, wait, google search only showed this on conservative sites. It’s obviously a lie spread by conservatives. Google would NEVER scrub references to this from its search.

  12. In addition to Jennifer Lopez height and weight, we have some of her famous body measurements here for those of you in the market for some #bodygoals. Her breast size is 34 inches, her waist is 26 inches and her hips are 37 inches.

    A “pear” glass.

  13. Sputnik News?! We now cite that as a primary news source?

    Sputnik News is Russia Today is the FSB formerly the KGB. Do we still want to pretend we don’t know when we are being played? It wasn’t enough we chose to swallow their FB takeover and we keep begging for more?

    Please don’t go on about how the Russians are really our BFF’s, I am here to tell you they are not and never will be. Though we chellovecks will happily tell you we are your besties so long as you buy our borscht. Yeah sure the Russians will help save white Christendom from the ravening hordes and will help run the NRA by way of the Russian Duma Senator who is on its executive board and got it $30M to play with.

    None dare call it treason? Who used to say that?

  14. Human beings ( and most animals and nature ) is not symmetrical.

    Women have hips…and thighs….and asses…..

    If a man.prefers a woman that’s flatter and less fertile,😁 and built more like a.young boy than an actual woman, that’s his choice and his right, but it doesn’t mean a non.flattened female is odd or strange.

    Jennifer Lopez as is spectacular in person btw.😂😂👍👍

  15. Novaseeker
    Well, all that is happening is that the MSM is worried about Peterson, and they are now really focused on trying to discredit him and take him out.

    Which is pretty funny considering how Peterson is deep Blue Pill; married to the same girl he met when he was 8 years old, contemptuously dismissive of the Red Pill and very opposed to PUA in any form, something of a pedestalizer, etc. He’s not even purple pill.

    Of course he doesn’t talk down to young men with utter contempt; unlike the entire MSM and virtually all of the celebrity pastors. Perhaps that act of actually regarding young men as human beings who can be taught rather than disposable objects is what really arouses the ire of the Female Imperative and thus the MSM?

  16. What I find amazing in the age of trump, is that normally virulent anti communist/Russia right wing super patriots are suspiciously silent or non plusses by all of this Russia stuff.

    Full of shit. Lmao.

  17. Novaseeker
    The BP programming in this group is quite thick and is rather strongly socially reinforced such that even in the teeth of female infidelity and, in some cases, divorce rape, it remains intact. To do otherwise, after all, would be to become a misogynist — which for most of these types is a fate worse than death in their own eyes, never mind social disapproval..

    Makes perfect sense. These are the people that have been shoving ever more of the Female Imperative demands into society since the 1970’s, it is to be expected they would be True Believers in the standard narrative. They would be clueless on the topic of AF-BB, and tend towards True Romantic status.

    Any red-pilling would have to occur on the individual level: the UMC / UC man who gets divorce raped but who stumbles across some piece of manosphere truth would not be able to share any of that with his co workers or most (all?) of his social circle. He might become the alpha of his group after that, but only as a one-off situation.

    These are the MSM writers, the court judges, the upper level managers of both industry and government; all of whom serve the FI on a daily basis without really knowing.

  18. AR
    “These are the MSM writers, the court judges, the upper level managers of both industry and government; all of whom serve the FI on a daily basis without really knowing.”
    How do you get them to read the green code? Been noticing how this affected my trauma growing up as a child. How do you speak to adults who control aspects of the community while serving the FI?
    You know when you change something when you are no longer in the comfort zone.
    We power so much of are own demise… How do you handle people without your best interest at heart?

  19. This may be old news here but.. I heard this the other day and laughed my ass off.
    The symbol now called ‘hashtag’ used to have another name.. It was ‘pound’. That kinda puts a whole new (and more accurate) light on “#metoo” Lol!

  20. @Anonymous Reader

    “I’ve said for a while now that in the future the only people marrying will be UMC / UC and the religious folks.”

    I would also throw in there the growing numbers of sub-optimal incel soyboys who out of female companionship starvation and sexual frustration will resort to marrying imported Internet-order ESL brides.

    Naturally, these brides, once acculturated, will branch swing for higher and higher status men, according to their hypergamic drives. (Engage the Hyper-Drive?)

    And like the UMC/UC cuck set, they too will be cucked and also look the other way — but not out of any social or religious stigma, but out of the ‘Better to live with the devil I know than to burn in incel hell’ principle.

  21. Color me surprised at the vitriolic chatter among the Red Pill cognoscenti about the royal wedding and Jordan Peterson lately.

    The Red Man group’s Saturday summit harping on the blue pill travesty that is the Harry/Meghan deal and the harping on Twitter about JBP being blue pill in intersexual matters. Appears lowbrow. Those people are set in their ways. It’s not an evil plot against Red Pill. It’s not like Red Pill is an ideology that needs to be defended in the public all of the sudden.

  22. The drug dealer doesn’t care that you colluded with the state to entrap him then acted like it was biology.

    He just murders your kids.

  23. SJF

    Surprised you are surprised. There is one way out and only one and it’s dark red. Any dimunition in pigment reduces the chances of success. It’s pushing and shoving time from here on out. No more sugar coating. All bitter. All real. Prophets against False Prophets.

  24. On a brighter note, the #metoo movement has taken a hit when one of its proponents, Miss North Carolina, lost to a neutral Miss Nebraska. Suck eggs, all you SJWs.

  25. “There is one way out and only one and it’s dark red. Any dimunition in pigment reduces the chances of success. It’s pushing and shoving time from here on out. No more sugar coating. All bitter. All real. Prophets against False Prophets.”

    I get that.

    Color me dark red. ‘Cause I am.

    It’s just that I find the talk to be Top Down Noise, instead of bottoms up in the UMC taking care to hone in on the signal of Red Pill Anna Karenina lifestyle with agency.

    But then again the Red Pill iconoclasts have a job to do, which is what you describe. Good call on that perspective Sentient. I’m not out to save the world. They are in a sense.

    On a side note, this past weekend was a paradox full of cognitive dissonance in my daughter talking to my wife about her wedding plans and trying to make it a grand fun time had by all. It’s in the preliminary stages and money talk was had. And refinements are going down. They were in a tizzy, mom and daughter. Girl talk and all. I talked to her separately and channeled some sense into the potential plans. Not a big deal. What guy remembers the event, the photo album and the venue? Does that stuff really matter in the long run?

  26. @ SJF

    Weddings are covert social mafia induction cermomies between Uncle Sam and women. Tag team extortion from men, both get paid regardless the outcome. Your daughter is to be a made woman. All upside, no downside.

  27. There was a time when non-conformity was a defining characteristic of the RP movement.
    Guess that ship sailed.

  28. This your home, Eh?
    I’ll leave a song for ol’ Beelz up there.
    Maybe you were right, bub.
    Demanded conformity is THE SJW route.

  29. MM is fighting for feminism with the Palace’s blessing… this must have been an arranged marriage to placate the feminzi hordes. They will have to change the nations name from UK to cUK.

  30. I like anon because she’s an INTJ woman. And I’d have intellectual intercourse verbal communication with her any day. (But she’s no Ayn Rand.)

    She is right about a few things. She has a cool masculine husband and hopefully is raising a few right young men. She is right about the girl just wanting How Howie to show some masculine desire for his HB7 and not be such a man pussy.

    The Devil Went Down to Georgia:

    “In this song, Satan himself pays a visit to Georgia and challenges a boy named Johnny to a fiddle duel: If Johnny can play the fiddle better than the devil, he gets a golden fiddle, but if he loses, the devil gets his soul. After a sinister performance by the devil, complete with histrionics like fire and demon backup singers, Johnny plays as if he was possessed, nailing a performance inspired by his roots in the Deep South and winning the golden fiddle when the devil concedes defeat.”

    “The Devil’s just blowing smoke. If you listen to that, there’s just a bunch of noise. There’s no melody to it, there’s no nothing, it’s just a bunch of noise. Just confusion and stuff.” –Songfacts.

    Nice metaphor. The FI and Feminism today is just the devil blowing smoke. See? anon’s just here watching out for her husband and boys.

  31. SJF, thank you.
    And thank you for “getting” my metaphor.

    I think Eh is right about my not belonging here as far as posting, for the most part.
    But I do like to read,
    and I’d hate to see this place go the echo chamber route which seems to be happening in so many forums.
    I have little opinion on Peterson specifically (outside the fact I don’t believe him to be a Christian, and some of his ideas I like, some I reject…overall I think this is a healthy place to be, rejecting the bad ideas and accepting the good without the demand everyone agree and adhere to some undefined standard).
    -anon out

  32. Total conformity in the RP world will reduce it to the realm of the alt right, meaning a bunch of angry and hate filled.clowns that can no longer offer valuable and helpful insights or problem solving.

    When everyone willingly chooses to conform, and lunatics seize control, irrelevance and targeting soon follows.

    Jordan Petersen is just a man with an assload of opinions and a book to sell. Yes, he’s intelligent and all that blah blah blah, and he’s ( for me ) fun to watch, but he’s not always correct. He’s at about 50/50, which is pretty good, but it means overexposure will seal his fate as the 50% of shit that he’s incorrect about will become 100% of how his.message is perceived.

    And he’s a little too arrogant to see the freight train coming.

    ” Data monkeys ” usually die when they step out into sunlight because the church of data is usually flawed.

    I listen to Jordan because I respect a man that thinks. I won’t buy the Petersen t shirt though.

  33. @ anon

    Don’t leave. Again😁.

    Your perspective is needed, and everyone doesn’t have to agree.

  34. Ohh squee!
    (jumps up and down squealing with delight)
    I’ll come back (sporadically) after my man retires (a few months left).
    But not much because it is a male space.
    -anon out. again.

  35. Blax

    I won’t buy the Petersen t shirt though.

    Well you can’t clean a room much with one. He will sell vacuums.

  36. Total conformity in the RP will reduce it to the wonderland of antifa meaning a bunch of angry and hate filled.clowns that can no longer offer valuable and helpful insights or problem solving.

    Blax, I’m sure you really, really, really believe the story that Russia used Trump to influence the election and that the Russia probe is a counterintel op (which it may have been at one time, but is now a political tool to impede DT). If the probe truly still is a counterintel op, then there should be at least a little info about exactly what Trump or his staff did as far as conspiring with the Russians. Where is any evidence? Comey has admitted that his staff covered up for HRC by changing one word in the final report of the investigation and that she is guilty as hell. What did anyone in the DT campaign do in regard to Russia that was criminal?

    Seems to me that accusing someone of a crime without evidence is wrong. Or have you deleted “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor” from your Bible?

  37. “Well you can’t clean a room much with one.”

    If you can’t get a many times laundered diaper to do the job that’s the next best thing. Not as cheap as Viva paper towels though.

    “Blax, I’m sure you really, really, really believe the story that Russia used Trump to influence the election . . . ”

    I don’t think that’s it. I think it’s just that New Yorkers and bicycle racers have known Trump longer and better than most.

    Blaximus is a NYer. I’m a NY bicycle racer. We’ve seen the con game; over and over and . . .

  38. Sure, accusing anyone – President or not – of a crime without evidence is wrong and unconstitutional.

    As far as evidence against trump, the public doesn’t know yet. The exceptions are the numerous guilty pleas so far, and an abundance of Russian players being identified in meetings neither trump son(s) and associates.

    Again, America isn’t all that familiar with the dude in the Whitehouse. He has a track record.

    I’m waiting for the end of the investigation and the presentation of evidence, but I also understand the nature of the man under investigation. It’s just odd to me that a vocal section of the American public doesn’t seem concerned and keep trying to point at people that aren’t President of the United States. It’s 2018.

    Hence my ” full of shit ” pronouncements.

    I don’t consider myself a faux patriot crying about muh flag and paying lip service to veterans and ignoring repeated mass murders . 😂 but I am ” patriotic ” enough to be concerned about foreign influences in our broken and vulnerable political system.

    And I don’t give a shit whether it’s Russians or Chinese or bavarians. If they can be identified and there’s evidence, I would like to see prosecution and changes made to prevent this dangerous fuckery going forward.

  39. It’s just odd to me that a vocal section of the American public doesn’t seem concerned and keep trying to point at people that aren’t President of the United States.

    So you don’t care that a U.S. Secretary of State broke the law? Yeah, you are just so very partisan, er, patriotic.

    You are very Alinskyite with your tactics. Props for distraction and diversion. People should learn from you.

    Funny how the MSM are rabidly against DT, yet they can’t find any actual dirt to report on him. He must be paying them off….

    The elites seem to hate DT. I’m sure that’s just a shell game to keep our eyes off of all the money they’re making. I mean, just because the Koch brothers are pro-illegal-immigration because they want cheap factory workers and DT is anti-illegal-immigration….


    So Trump set up deals where he benefited no matter whether other parties benefited or not? Shame on him. And props to him for making sure that he won no matter how other parties did. When you set up deals, there are always things you don’t know even when the deal closes. Sometimes it’s just things people think are inconsequential but they turn out to be important and sometimes people are just good at playing their cards close to their vest and sometimes people are good at ferreting out info and sometimes people just are better at bargaining.

  40. “I think it’s just that New Yorkers and bicycle racers have known Trump longer and better than most.” What insights do you have to tell us that you are afraid to?

  41. Blax

    It’s just odd to me that a vocal section of the American public doesn’t seem concerned and keep trying to point at people that aren’t President of the United States. It’s 2018.

    Yeah I mean – what difference, at this point, does it make? Jeeez…

    Re Trump “con” – like to know specifics. I’m a NY’er. You may say he is a PR hound, a buffoon even, but where is the “con” stuff coming from specifically?

  42. “So Trump set up deals where he benefited no matter whether other parties benefited or not? Shame on him.”

    You say that as if I said it was a bad thing. It takes a Harry Anderson to game a three card monte gamer on their own turf.

    “What insights do you have to tell us that you are afraid to?”

    None that I’m afraid to, but nothing terribly revealing beyond the fact that he’s a con man. Everything he does is some sort of con. Everything. His run for President is a con to write TRUMP across the pages of history.

    The thing is, although I’ve gotten my fingers a bit singed by some of his previous cons (I was never in deep enough to get burned, I could read the man well enough not to do that) I think in this case what he needs to do to pull off the con works for me.

    I also think he knows perfectly well that he’s a con man, just as a grifter running three card monte does, but does it in no small part because that’s how the game is played, but hates the players for the game.

    I.e. that he is driven to win and will do whatever it takes, but would prefer a fair game. His greatest joy is in conning the con men. Out gaming the Clintons put him at the all time top of the con field.

    And ya ever notice that no one talks about or investigates the fact that there was blatant, right out in the open, collusion between the Clinton campaign and Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden the UK and Australia? Wat’s wit dat?

  43. Not to mention their long term and rather dirty relationship with . . . Russia.

    It’s an old con: if you’ve got dirt under your carpet and you’re afraid your enemy is going to find it, aggressively accuse him of putting it there.

  44. He out played the deepstate and became the Prez that wasn’t supposed to be. It was supposed to be a Clinton/Bush campaign with Clinton winning. Those damn populist just were getting in the way of the two royal political families. The Dems were able to rein in their populist Bernie, but the RNC wasn’t able to rein in theirs.

  45. The con comes in when a man states a falsehood, knowingly, as a fact in order to obtain a favorable outcome for himself solely.

    ” I will build a great wall “, without understanding funding or logistics, then pointing to repairs to existing structures as ” wall being built as planned “. That’s pure trump style bullshitting.

    ” I will declare China a currency manipulator ” and ” I will bring back jobs from China for the American people “, while getting deftly played by Chinese – 500 million to trump development company from the Chinese while seeking help for Chinese phone maker.

    He’s way out of his depth, but he’s not learning. He’s still operating as he always has, even though the parameters of the office are totally different. But he ” TALKS ” a game that’s radically different from what he’s actually doing, and he is fully aware of this while doing so.

    That is a con. That’s who trump has always been ( hence why I don’t begrudge him too much ).

    There are a half dozen more examples over the past 18 months, and hundreds over the past 40 years. His reputation is well established…. At least in the tri state.

  46. Blax

    Oh China… Yeah the Indonesian company that hired Trump’s group in 2015 (as just one of the partners, among others) and has gotten shedloads of Chinese money already ($425M and construction services), got more of the same… to develop the Indonesian property in Indonesia, as they’ve planned from the outset. OK

    On Wall – hmmm… seem to recall Congress was the obstacle to funding last go round…

    But sure, let’s just go with your “trust us man…” as proof.

  47. @ j

    Lol. I’ll say it again for the record, the first lesson I learned as a man was to.he able to identify a con when presented, and never be a sucker.

    People often talk about trumps ability to persuade, but I’ve never ever understood exactly what they saw that was so very persuasive. He’s like every shitty car salesman I’ve ever dealt with.

    Considering his full measure of inheritance from his father, his business track record is lackluster at best, and a dozen real estate dudes in NYC could buy and sell him numerous times over – but those cats don’t seek the spotlight.

    The cult of personality.

    Good or bad? Time reveals all in the end.

  48. Sentient

    Lol. Recognize the con when you see it.

    Imo, every single representative holding a seat in our government needs to be summarily replaced asap. Our debt is running at 20 trillion plus, and we’ve had yet another round of tax cuts that won’t benefit the broader populace, so of course there’s no money for ” the greatest wall ” on the southern border. That’s simple math.

    All conversation that states otherwise is a part of the great con. When debt surpasses GDP, we should all be able to see what will happen next.

    But maybe China will forgive our debt.

  49. Btw, Hillary nor Obama are President. Keep your eye on the ball and mind the slight of hand.

  50. Blax

    But maybe China will forgive our debt.

    Lol. Recognize the con when you see it.

    When you borrow $100K the bank owns you, when you borrow $100M you own the bank…

  51. Blaximus
    I am ” patriotic ” enough to be concerned about foreign influences in our broken and vulnerable political system.

    Yeah, well, ok. One small problem:
    That ship sailed… and sank…over 100 years ago.

  52. “He’s way out of his depth, but he’s not learning.”


    he’s adapting faster than anyone believed he could (cs: “they’ll get you six ways from sunday” – he was never supposed to give that sotu address) he has more energy than anyone thought he had (shifts narratives faster than people can handle. the resisters are exhausted and IG report ain’t even out yet. he is literally the queen’s worst nightmare and he’s fucking destroying her in the ongoing revolutionary war. rat lines blocked. human trafficking pummeled. NK freed. clowns on the run everywhere. no name destroyed in syria. cleaning out his own party early so he can unseal record of congressional sexual harrassment payoffs right before election time leaving dnc no time for replacements or whatever the fuck the plan is). he’s showing motherfuckers their control files (bye bye ryan)

    “He’s still operating as he always has”

    good. proven success. what did he always trade on? information. guess what? now he has full ongoing access to decompartmentalized intel. he knows more about what is going on than almost every other human on earth. he used to read six newspapers before most people even thought about waking up. now he reads his pdbs and the fucking orb and while most of us have a hard drive, he has bluffdale. how would you act if you “had everything”? unpredictably maybe? would you clue people in to how much you knew? or what your plans for their destruction were?

    “even though the parameters of the office are totally different”


    he is chief executive of corp. largest corp ever. good thing he’s probably vsg and only needs 4 hours of sleep

    “But he ” TALKS ” a game that’s radically different from what he’s actually doing, and he is fully aware of this while doing so.”

    “why would i announce what i’m gonna do before i do it?” only results matter (his window is guaranteed 4 years as senate will not convict after impeachment) is the us trade defecit growing or shrinking? are powerful executives resigning (eric schmidt on 12/21- explain that one!!!)? are known pieces of shit (brennan, clapper, lynch, holder, comey, mccabe, hussein, no name, cs, hillary) squirming?

    why the fuck are all those federal indictments sitting there sealed (standard deviation outside of norm)? backpage? nxivm? schneiderman? preet?

    too many conincidences. too many powerful corrupt NY people getting removed. they all want potus dead and gone. why?

    “That is a con. That’s who trump has always been ( hence why I don’t begrudge him too much ).”

    but all you guys begrudge him a shitton. i find guys over a certain age – omg’s around same age as potus – have so much envy and when they criticize him for being stupid or immoral or a fraud or whatever, they just look stupid.

    motherfucker lives at the top of a skyscraper with his name on it. he never ever ran for public office and then became potus on first try. he gives kevin directions to the front desk in home alone 2.


    he’s a baller. no way around it.

    better to study and emulate then sit around butt hurt

  53. And for clarity, I was referring to China and trump investment in 2018, not 2015 – before trump took office. A blind trust would’ve been in order, but trump has other ideas.

    Investigate away Mueller.😂😂

  54. Blax

    And for clarity, I was referring to China and trump investment in 2018, not 2015 – before trump took office.

    LOL. That’s the thing man, for clarity… IT IS THE ONLY INVESTMENT… the one from 2015 IS the one from 2018… the same Indonesian developer’s long term CHINA FINANCED 3,000 Hectare “Disneyland”… this is just another tranche of funding to the INDONESIAN developer in a multi year, multi phase development.

  55. Btw, trump doesn’t fully ” own ” trump tower. You’ve accepted the visual portion of his con.

  56. “Wassup with the strawman army deployment?”

    i never used to criticize jams while they were happening


    1. i was having too much fun experiencing

    2. i had no idea where the jam was going, so i was not qualified to weigh in

    i can’t see the plan

    but i can see people i despise getting fucked up by it

    i want to encourge their demise

    so that means supporting the plan right now


    building 7.

    potus knows about steel framed skyscrapers

    and that they don’t just collapse into their own footprints because of burning office supplies

    building 7.

  57. Lol. I’ll say it again for the record, the first lesson I learned as a man was to.he able to identify a con when presented, and never be a sucker.

    Lol, the MSM are long time con artists and you always parrot their line…maybe you know it’s a con and are just trying to con us, because the alternative is clearly unthinkable for a thinking man….

  58. Blax, you criticisms are generally reserved for the alt-right, Trump, and others on the right. I don’t recall you ever criticizing the left. Rather, you cover for them. It smells bogus.

  59. “Btw, trump doesn’t fully ” own ” trump tower. You’ve accepted the visual portion of his con.”


    just so we’re clear

    everything he has is based on fradulent fed reserve debt notes

    he is the king of debt.

    but so is every “billionaire”

    because they hold billions of notes backed by nothing but violence

    of course he is a fraud. so am i. i trade fake notes for real calories. i’m a fraud. con man.

    in this system, we all are.

    so, I dont’ give a shit about what he has or doesn’t have or owes or owns

    i care only about him doing the job of defending the constitution

    and from the looks of it so far, he is doing just that

    i guess I’m wondering what would satisfy his critics.

    ceo of a company that made tangible goods? ceo of big bank? ceo of financial, insurance companies? they’re just as phony as real estate.

    so who is qualified to run the biggest company in the world?

    and why?

    why is managing widget production better than managing something else?

    who did you write in for president?

    how would you feel if everyday you woke up and the news talked about you in 90% negative terms no matter what you did?

    like it or not, trump is one of the only things standing between us and all seeing eye and honestly i can’t think of anyone else I would replace him with at this point

    but i also think it’s a problem that a lot of citizens think this is a democracy. it’s not.

    resisters are breaking apart. too many different agendas.

    we can rally behind the document.

    best one written so far

    isn’t it great that we get to be around to see how this plays out?

    i love it.

  60. ” . . . I think Obama’s gaming of the Clintons was more devious…”

    Because that is the nature of the game when you are part of the court inside the castle.

    Trump had to employ siege engines to gain entry.

  61. @Blaximus,

    We often talk about how even if men change their beta ways, their women have seen them for too long in the beta light and can’t accept the new alpha version.

    With respects to Trump, regardless of how much we can debate the evidence of “con,” once a person feels that way about him, I doubt they will be able to see anything past that and judge the man in his new role, despite data appearing to point to something different.

    Opinions will differ, though, and life goes on. Now back to gaming.

  62. Asd

    Brother, you’re steeped in the right/left paradigm.There are no ” leftist ” commenting here for me to challenge, so there’s a reason for your perception. I don’t ” parrot ” anything.

    I’m not beholden to ” ideologies ” the way that you appear to be. I have zero investment in such things because they are tantamount to circle jerking en masse and I’m not really big on masturbation.

    Again, there are positions that trump, and even the alt right have that I agree with because they make good sense.doesn’t mean I have to go all in 100% with every position stated.

    A man has to have an ability to stand on his understanding and principles, because herd mentalities are in the realm of the female.

  63. Asd

    I don’t ” parrot ” anything.

    lol, Limbaugh has funny clips where he runs through an audio list of MSM talking heads saying the exact same shit using the exact same words…and guess what? You sound JUST…LIKE…THEM…same shit…same words…it’s funny as hell…

  64. I don’t dispute that Trump is a master gamesman or that he has been playing the MSM…but he has come thru with a lot of his campaign promises…especially jobs.

  65. What company owns the stations that promoted that parroted message asd?

    And is that company a paragon of leftism?


Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: