I find the executive actions (EPA, immigration, title 9, etc.) interesting. If we assume Trump is really just an empty shell trying to get elected by the most convenient means, then an old argument about unelected bureaucrats running the country becomes more relevant. These entrenched employees high up enough to be considered "executives", yet low enough to avoid the changing of the guard after an election, should be able to wrangle Trump effectively ... ensure that things continue to be done in somewhat traditional, stable, ways. But if Trump really does hold some core beliefs that he'd be willing to take action on, it would be interesting to see how far he could get. My cynical guess is he'd go for the high-profile, easier to achieve, actions just so he can maintain and advance "Trump" as a household name, allowing the real governing to be done by the entrenched bureaucrats (or any competent people he may - accidentally - bring with him).
On 05/14/2016 07:04 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > From a machine learning perspective, politics is ensemble weak learning. > His is just without logical constraints between the weak learners. I think > it is more likely his actions are without purpose or coherent ideology. He's > not gaming different constituencies to get his way, he is just looking for a > way to be instrumental. He's a shallow person, a salesman and an aspiring > actor. -- ⛧ glen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
