Icewolf

Double post.

Thanks for the advice, especially on the incompetence thing. With the vision it's not so much the corporate thing. To give some context my job is to review applications for grant funding and advise the committee which makes the decision. In one case a member disagreed with my assessment and I was able to talk them round by exploring with them the difference between grant funding this thing and what would arise if we advised them to seek private finance. This is what I think is meant by clearly explaining vision. Me doing this badly was with another project that I felt should be rejected and a committee member disagreed. At the route of this was a fairly to adequately present wjat a good project in this area would look like. This would be a failure to present a vision.

So. I had my annual performance appraisal this week. It all went well, got told I am very good at my job. I also got told that the next career step is management. So far so good. However the next part is trickier. For this step I need better personal skills apparently. Including more eye contact ( a thing I hate) and also more general ability to influence and Express vision. Now I am not a socially awkward penguin but I am also not exactly warm and personable either. I do tend to be standoffish and also don't deal well with people who irritate me. I also confront incompetence with a lack of diplomacy. So has anyone else been set such targets and have any tips on how to get ready to move into management?

So the results of the first race are in, and its Nico Rosberg picking up where he left off last year with a strong win, Hamilton a slightly scrappy second, and Ferrari looking very strong to pick up third with Sebastion Vettel, and looking far more competitive against Mercedes than in any previous year since the turbo period began. Grosjean getting a record equalling sixth for a team debut, Alonso living out his dream of being a stunt pilot, Verstappen thoroughly losing his temper, F1 is back and it looks like it is going to be a good season. Thoughts?

Do you have any hobbies? In particular any clubs you belong to that have both girls and boys?

If you look at general election match up polls Kaisch outscores trump against hillary by about 15 points.

If you accept the view of the establishment, there are two views of the future. 1. Clinton wins, spends 4 years by which point there are 12 years of democrat rule which is a good opportunity to put in place a strong Republican mainstream candidate (if they can find one this time), and also gives you 4 years to clear out the insanity of the Trump brigade. Then 8 years of the next Republican president. 2. Trump wins, spends 4 years being the mouthpeice of Republicanism whilst systematically trashing the US economy and its allies if he actually implements the policies he is on, hands the democrats an overwhelming majority in 2020 and probably splits the party apart in the process. The alternatives are 4 years of a maniac with some republican influence, and then 8 years of democrat, or 4 years of democrat probably stalled by a Republican congress then 8 years of Republican. Its a fairly obvious choice.

Fun fact you won't notice from the media narrative. If Trump continues on his current trend, and wins the nomination with the vote share he has got to date (which seems probable given how much Rubio voters favour Cruz over Trump) he would be the least popular Republican Candidate among Republican voters ever in terms of vote share.

It really comes down to the blurry line between being civilized, and being honest. I try to be honestly civilized. If your a Socialist... you are not offended by it. If you are offended by it, and you are in favor of government controlled, cradle to grave entitlements... then your just a liar. You may believe you are some kind of Robin Hood hero, out for the little guy, and the guardian angel of the less fortunate, but in reality you are a Socialist, an underachiever, a mooch, a thief... someone who believes they are entitled to free living just because they breathe air. I am a Conservative Capitalist... and I have been called much worse. Just being honestly civilized. I'm not offended by it, you were the one that described it as an insult. In anycase, I do not believe in the ending of private enterprise, therefore I am not a socialist. It is not that I am a liar, it is that your definition of socialist does not match the commonly used one. I do find the fact that you are calling anyone who thinks a social welfare safety net is a good idea an underachiever a little strange as it means your list of underachievers includes Warren Buffet, the current US President, Stephen Hawking and a lot of other extremely successful and talented people.

Guys,, I think letting theflash clarify his position and situation a bit more would be more productive than lots of generic advice about shyness.

Too bad most European core countries still haven't been able to ride out the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. Just look at the pathetic growth rates EU core members have produced post 2008 (Germany is an exception). Compare that with the growth rate of the US where the crisis hit the hardest - you can see a healthy rebound from 2010 onwards. Of course, there are a million factors to consider, but it's worth pointing out that welfare states only work well when their economies are strong enough to bear the significant operational costs, and their economies are much slower to recover after crises. The main factor being EU states following a strict neo-classical economic policy of austerity in the face of recession. The same policy that the US Republican party advocated. It didn't work, hence the slow growth. German growth has been rocky and mostly driven by export demand supported by a devalued currency, and the fact their own programme of austerity ended sooner than a lot of other countries. The US, which did not follow the same path of harsh spending cuts had a faster falling deficit, and saw actual economic growth. The UK, which had some half hearted austerity (consisting in large part of cover for the Tories to cut things they dislike, like disability benefits whilst jacking up state pensions for their voter base) fell somewhere in the middle of the road.

Firstly, if European Socialist is an insult, why are you throwing it around? I thought this was supposed to be a civilised discussion. Secondly, the news story was generated by the bar brawling that took place, and nicely highlighted that Trump thinks the actions of his supporters that have lead to them being charged with assault are justified. Beating up protesters is against freedom of speech, and guess what Trump was highlighted as claiming was acceptable? It may pander to his supporters, but the majority will not thank him for that.

How old are you? Serious question, if you want some advice it will help to know what sort of social situations you are in. Do you get nervous talking to strangers in general?

This sounds like wishful thinking, and a typical opinion, from a European Socialist. This party that you claim is tearing itself apart and facing it's last election, is the same party that currently controls both Houses of Congress. We're not going anywhere. This is nothing new, we always have spirited debates. I think frustration is setting in... maybe now George Bush will get a break and you guys can have a new American President to hate. I'm having a great time... why so serious? I am absolutely not a socialist. AS for the GOP, maybe it is some wishful thinking as I think the US republicans are dangerous for the wider world, and in particular Trump is dangerous for the wider word. However, things do not look good. 1. The only electable candidates in this round have fallen flat 2. Most of the candidates are shockingly bad 3. There is no "unity" candidate left in the race. The two front runners represent extreme wings of the party that don't really get along, and have members that will run against the other candidate. 4. Neither of the two leading candidates can win a majority in any state, and more importantly, when asked if they would be satisfied with candidate X as the candidate, neither gets significantly above 50%. We can also assume fairly clearly that the 50% for each are a different 50%. 5. After years of trying to be the party of anti-deficit spending, that identity has crashed and burned as all the candidates try to outdo themselves in being the biggest unfunded tax cutter. All in all, does this sound like a party that is in good health?

He would be easily beaten if there was a single good Republican candidate. There isn't. There is also the fact that the GOP is tearing itself apart, and is likely facing its last election as having even a semblance of a united party.

Look at the numbers. Realclear politics has him 10 points behind Rubio in election matchups (Rubio heads Clinton by 4, Trump trails by 6). The majority of REPUBLICAN voters say they would not be satisfied to have him as their candidate. He managed to trail Bernie "I'm a socialist sanders" by 10 percentage points. These are not the numbers of a popular man. The biggest lie the media are selling right now is that Trump is popular. He is not. He is actually the least popular major candidate right now if you look at how people will vote in the general.

If you are financially secure and want to aim to do that, that is great. The key I think is to actually be doing it rather than talking about doing it. I've lost count of the number of people I've known who say they are writing a novel (apparently in the UK at any one time its about 2.5 million people) and when asked about it "its going really well," and then "how many words have you written" it becomes "well, I haven't exactly started writing....." Obviously I know that it might be that a person is doing background research and is genuinely making progress without having written the first word, but that is harder to fit into an illustrative example so sue me bitch. Plus if you can go back to studying after, a CV that says "I was a combat medic, then spent a year trying to see if I could make it as a comedian/activist, couldn't so came back to school" isn't a bad one.

Spoken French is quite hard because there are so many shorthands used in spoken french. Not just dropping words and shortening words, but merging them together. Ils ont (They have) becomes Ilseont when spoken. Also, unlike English homophones were there is always a difference in useage to seperate them (so I saw, I am sawing) in French they are perfectly happy to have "Je suis" (I am) and "Je suis" (I follow). And "il porte un porte au port, et il porte une chemise" is also a legitimate sentence (He carries a door to the port, and he wears a shirt). Porte being either wearing, carrying (when conjugated in the 3rd person singular present tense), or a door.

Sorry for the delay gang, my wife twisted my arm and forced me into the jacuzzi. I don't know why you have a hard time understanding this Ice. I keep repeating myself, and for some reason, you just refuse to accept it as reality. So here it is again... I will support the Republican that is winning. Donald Trump is winning, and he will continue to keep winning. There is nothing that will stop him. If something happens... like maybe he is exposed as being a straw man for Hillary Clinton... I have thought about that scenario... or they have him killed... I have thought about that scenario too... I will then support the next Republican that is winning. Beating the Democrats like a dirty rug is all I care about in this election. Terrorists are something I care less about than Democrats. I don't care where they put them (not here of course), or what they do to them... just as long as they are not able to hurt anyone else... ever. Every moment that I do not have to think about a terrorist, is one more moment I have to think about something that is worth my time. If it were up to me, I would have them executed after I had drained every last piece of information from their maggot brains... and I would not give a shit how anyone felt about it. In regards to the first point, Trump may be leading but he has not already won. We are talking about a candidate who has yet to win a majority in any single state. He is also the least likely of the Republican field to actually be able to win the general. And you keep setting out that you fundamentally disagree with him on many points. Therefore it doesn't make sense that you seem to be stating that you support whoever is leading in the delegate count, rather than trying to work against a candidate that you don't agree with to get a candidate you prefer on the ticket.

Forget about the democrats for a moment. You said you are a strong believer in the constitution, and were a part of the Tea Party movement because of their belief in the constitution. Donald Trump is a man who has declared that he does not accept the rule of law, does not stand by the principle of Freedom of Speech, and regards the entire thing as an inconvenience. Can you explain for me how you reconcile those two positions, support for the constitution and support for Donald Trump over the other Republican candidates? As for the torture thing, it does not yield useful information or intelligence. However it is a recruiting tool. Don't think for a moment that I am blind to the danger of terrorism. One of my colleagues lost a friend in the Paris attacks. 2 days after the Paris attacks I went to Brussels, pointing out to my boss it was 300 miles away. Turns out the terrorists were hiding in Brussels, and I only just got out of the city before the lockdown began. However, I also know that most muslims are like me and you. The overwhelming majority in fact. Even in the territories held by Islamic state, the majority are like you. The people that hate the west are a small group. They are surrounded however by less hardcore people who in the absence of the Islamic state group would not do anything to commit harm. These people probably don't approve of a lot of the actions of IS. However in the comparison between IS and the US backed forces that previously held their territory (or Assad backed forces) a bit of brutality isn't that bad. After all, the Iraqi and Syrian army committed abuses. And as did the US army, as they took people away and tortured them for years. If those propoganda tools (the abuse by Assad's forces, the torture by American forces) hadn't existed, then that soft core group would see a much bigger contrast between Islamic State and the west. And therefore would be far less likely to tolerate their presence. Please don't read this as sympathy for terrorists. I don't have any. I don't want them to win. However, I honestly do not see how handing them a brilliant propoganda tool that yields no useful intelligence helps us achieve that aim. I also dislike them because of their cruelty and the acts they carry out. However, I really do not see the point in doing those very same acts in order to stop them. If the terrorists are morally wrong, then we are also morally wrong if we replicate their actions.

How can taxation be considered more against the constitution that undermining the 1st amendment, or protection against cruel and inhumane treatment? I find it quite contradictory to in one breath insist that the constitution is sacred, and then happily cheer on a person whose campaign pledges are to undermine not only the basis of the US constitution, but some fairly basic human rights principles at the same time. Either the constitution is sacred or it isn't. There isn't a halfway house in which "these actions which break it are fine, these actions which break it are not." As for torture, apart from the fact it is morally wrong, it does not work. The actions in Guantanamo bay have not only endangered the lives of American citizens, but of any citizen of a country associated with America.

If you believe that Bernie Sanders is a mainstream moderate, I can then understand why you would believe the Tea Party to be extreme right... but in both cases, you would be off the mark. As a participant and supporter of the Tea Party since it began in early 2009, I can tell you everything there is to know about why, how, where it was a success, and where we failed. The goal of the Tea Party was to sustain our Constitution through the era of Barack Obama, and to minimize his effect on our country. There is nothing extreme right about that. Maintaining the role of our limited government, and the exploding national debt, is what it's all about. It's still alive and well... So why are you not doing everything to stop Trump, a man who by his own statements regards the constitution as an inconvenience? In particular the desire to restrict freedom of speech by "closing down bits of the Internet" and advocating loudly for torture. He also stated that people would do what he told them even if his instructions where outside the authority of a President under the constitution.

Now THAT is a hard language to learn. how long have you been at it? A year and 3 months. Mixture of private tuition and evening classes at the local education centre. In the evening classes I am alongside people who are in their 3rd year. My reading is pretty much there, my writing is moderate, spoken and listening is beginning to get there. Pronunciation is ok, speaking is somewhat stuttered and bad (depends how tired I am), its the listening that is hard (but much better than it was six months ago). I also work partly in French, so I need to be able to read French documents and emails.

I think Rubio will try to stay in, and I think the establishment will try to keep him in. The simple reason is that at the moment, there is still no state (I think) that has given a 50% vote share to one candidate. If the contest ended today then there would be no person who can claim a mandate in this race. By keeping the vote split, it makes it easier to have a contested convention and to present Rubio as a compromise candidate that can unify the party. On the other hand, I think this could be the end of the GOP. There are very clearly 2 separate camps both of which are not willing to tolerate each others candidates anymore. Fear of democrat power may keep them together for a while, but can you really see the party sticking together much longer?

Trump got up on stage and mocked a person for being disabled. He is a bully. A pathetic schoolyard bully.