Donald Trump Challenges Obama.... Stephen Colbert responds with a counter!

[David in FL]

There - fixed it for you David.

LOL. I can live with that. Still waiting for an answer though.....

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Yes they are.....but The Washington Times explains quite succinctly that this particular contention is nothing but myth.

Sorry....

http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/6/clinton-gingrich-and-the-balanced-budget-myth/

The old surplus myth theory? Oh, my...

Let's use the same stats for all Presidents, shall we?

How about OMB and On Budget - Clinton shows a surplus for 3 years.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

[zipazoid]

Okay David. Lemme rephrase your question...which hopefully helps answers it -

Why wouldn't Obama give Trump relevance by taking his money?

It's a ploy, David. And you know this. Let's say Obama responds like you think he should - 'Okay Donald...here's my college transcripts. Now donate the $5m to Red Cross relief efforts in NY/NJ.'

Now picture The Donald -

"I did a wonderful things by making this man...the least transparent president in the history of the United States, to release his college transcripts. It was a beautifully patriotic thing I did and I should be lauded for doing so. For my next amazing feat, I will make this president release his college thesis."

Again, the reason Obama doesn't even acknowledge Trump's offer is because Trump is a media wh0re. Do you really think for even a second he truly cares about Obama's college transcripts....and more importantly, does anyone else?

Trump is irrelevant. By ignoring him, he stays that way. That's why Obama ignored him...and should consider doing so.

[David in FL]

Okay David. Lemme rephrase your question...which hopefully helps answers it - Why wouldn't Obama give Trump relevance by taking his money? It's a ploy, David. And you know this. Let's say Obama responds like you think he should - 'Okay Donald...here's my college transcripts. Now donate the $5m to Red Cross relief efforts in NY/NJ.' Now picture The Donald - "I did a wonderful things by making this man...the least transparent president in the history of the United States, to release his college transcripts. It was a beautifully patriotic thing I did and I should be lauded for doing so. For my next amazing feat, I will make this president release his college thesis." Again, the reason Obama doesn't even acknowledge Trump's offer is because Trump is a media wh0re. Do you really think for even a second he truly cares about Obama's college transcripts....and more importantly, does anyone else?  Trump is irrelevant. By ignoring him, he stays that way. That's why Obama ignored him...and should consider doing so.

So he's more concerned by Trump's perceived "relevance", whatever that means, than he is about his ability to donate $5 mil to charity? I don't get that one..... But maybe my priorities when it comes to charitable giving are different than his.

[zipazoid]

Originally Posted by David in FL

So he's more concerned by Trump's perceived "relevance", whatever that means, than he is about his ability to donate $5 mil to charity?

I don't get that one..... But maybe my priorities when it comes to charitable giving are different than his.

You do get that one, David. Again, you're playing dumb & it just doesn't suit you.

You keep putting it on Obama, which is not correct. You should put it on Trump. Like this -

Why doesn't Trump just donate the money? Why does he have to get his jollies by making Obama do something for the money?

He is the President of the United States. It would grossly cheapen the office to do a tap dance to some grossly rich guy in order to make him part with some of his money. Trump should just donate the money to a charity of his choice rather than trying to demean the office of the presidency.

That's what this is about. It's about Trump trying to show he's so powerful he can make the president do stupid human tricks.

[David in FL]

The old surplus myth theory? Oh, my... Let's use the same stats for all Presidents, shall we? How about OMB and On Budget - Clinton shows a surplus for 3 years. [URL=http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals]http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals[/URL]

Really? Come on. You're supposed to be a finance guy. Certainly you understand the impropriety in how that number was calculated. [quote name="zipazoid" url="/t/62889/donald-trump-challenges-obama-stephen-colbert-responds-with-a-counter/36#post_782321"] You do get that one, David. Again, you're playing dumb & it just doesn't suit you. You keep putting it on Obama, which is not correct. You should put it on Trump. Like this - Why doesn't Trump just donate the money? Why does he have to get his jollies by making Obama do something for the money? He is the President of the United States. It would grossly cheapen the office to do a tap dance to some grossly rich guy in order to make him part with some of his money. Trump should just donate the money to a charity of his choice rather than trying to demean the office of the presidency. That's what this is about. It's about Trump trying to show he's so powerful he can make the president do stupid human tricks.  [/quote] Not playing anything, but you're right in that I think this is an issue about Obama. He has a chance to disprove a blowhard and to donate $5 mil to charity and won't do it. I really can't understand that, especially since we all believe that there's nothing whatsoever harmful in the documents that Trump would like released. But again, Obama and I may just prioritize charitable giving differently. That's ok. And btw, Presidents do all sorts of things in exchange for various types of consideration for any number of items that they consider important......including charitable fundraising.

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Really?

Come on. You're supposed to be a finance guy. Certainly you understand the impropriety in how that number was calculated.

Not playing anything, but you're right in that I think this is an issue about Obama. He has a chance to disprove a blowhard and to donate $5 mil to charity and won't do it.

I really can't understand that, especially since we all believe that there's nothing whatsoever harmful in the documents that Trump would like released.

But again, Obama and I may just prioritize charitable giving differently. That's ok.

And btw, Presidents do all sorts of things in exchange for various types of consideration for any number of items that they consider important......including charitable fundraising.

My, you're a stubborn sort.

I guess the words "to my satisfaction" mean nothing to you.

But forget that, look at this strategically, or strateegerily, as you're probably accustomed to that spelling. If the President gives the Donald any publicity or responds to this stunt at this time, it takes focus away from the election and towards the Donald. It focuses attention to his zany, crazy right-wing "views," which I don't think the Donald even believes. He is a cynical salesman - like Mitt.

Sorry, strateegery calls for a no response.

And the Donald placed a time limit on his "offer," proving it's a stunt.

A stunt is a stunt is a stunt - it's name is the Donald.

[David in FL]

A stunt is a stunt is a stunt - it's name is the Donald.

No argument there!

[zipazoid]

Quote:

He has a chance to disprove a blowhard and to donate $5 mil to charity and won't do it.

Obama responded...by not responding. That was the best strategy. His dignity, and far more importantly, the dignity of the presidency remains intact.

And again...it's not Obama refusing to donate to a charity, it's Trump. He'll only donate if Obama does pretty backflips for him. Screw that. Just donate the money, especially since Trump can look out from his perch atop his tower in Manhattan & see devastation in every direction.

Quote:

And btw, Presidents do all sorts of things in exchange for various types of consideration for any number of items that they consider important......including charitable fundraising.

Such as?

[David in FL]

Such as?

Surely you jest? Every time they show up at a charitable fundraiser.... We won't even get into the normal political quid pro quo that happens every day in the political arena.

[zipazoid]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Surely you jest?

Every time they show up at a charitable fundraiser....

We won't even get into the normal political quid pro quo that happens every day in the political arena.

Oh that's hilarious - you are actually equating a political fundraiser to a carnival barker trying to get the president to release his college transcripts.

[David in FL]

Oh that's hilarious - you are actually equating a political fundraiser to a carnival barker trying to get the president to release his college transcripts.

C'mon Zip. Your reading comprehension has to be better than that! I said CHARITABLE fundraisers......and yes, it's the same thing. In exchange for some Presidential "tap dancing" as you put it, a charity benefits with much larger donations than if the President hadn't done so. The fact that you or I don't like this particular guy, doesn't change the end result.

[Valleygolfer]

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

Quote:

Originally Posted by GaijinGolfer

The key words in this are, "to my satisfaction".  Trump is never going to be satisfied no matter what Obama does.

Obama was on Leno, and Jay asks him, "What's his beef with you?"

The President says, "I think it all started when we were kids, playing soccer together in Kenya. He wasn't very good ..."

I admire the President's sense of humor.

Humorous response, I wonder which writer wrote that for him. Honestly if you do not think that the president isn't briefed on what questions and topics will be covered on a show like this you believe that the current government set up is a good idea.

[zipazoid]

Originally Posted by David in FL

C'mon Zip. Your reading comprehension has to be better than that!

I said CHARITABLE fundraisers......and yes, it's the same thing. In exchange for some Presidential "tap dancing" as you put it, a charity benefits with much larger donations than if the President hadn't done so.

The fact that you or I don't like this particular guy, doesn't change the end result.

Okay, lemme rephrase it.

You are equating the president showing up at a CHARITABLE fundraiser (happy?), and perhaps giving a speech to Trump dangling a $5m donation if Obama divulges his college transcripts.

Again, I plead to your intelligence, David. Surely you see the difference. If you don't you're either playing dumb for the sake of debate or you can't put your disdain for Obama to the side and look at this objectively.

And let's try a test of the second - let's say it was 2006 & Michael Moore offered $5m to GW Bush for him to release his college transcripts - would you be as 'I don't see a problem with that' as you do this?

[David in FL]

And let's try a test of the second - let's say it was 2006 & Michael Moore offered $5m to GW Bush for him to release his college transcripts - would you be as 'I don't see a problem with that' as you do this?

Of course. Another blithering idiot. As long as there's nothing embarrassing or somehow incriminating in those records, take his money, donate it, and laugh at him. No downside at all. Now, if there's something to be embarrassed about in those records, that could change everything. But that couldn't be the case here......:-\

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by David in FL

But that couldn't be the case here......

Obama has shown he has no patience for these games.

The right plays them; he refuses to play.

You know the reason - he can't win with that crowd, and the other 75% don't care.

[David in FL]

You know the reason - he can't win with that crowd, and the other 75% don't care.

Does that mean you're predicting a 75/25 Obama victory.....or are you just pulling numbers out of your nether regions and hoping no one calls you on it? Honestly though, I'm just disappointed at the $5 mil loss to charity because Obama doesn't have the cajones to stand up to a weenie like Trump.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by zipazoid

Okay, lemme rephrase it.

You are equating the president showing up at a CHARITABLE fundraiser (happy?), and perhaps giving a speech to Trump dangling a $5m donation if Obama divulges his college transcripts.

Again, I plead to your intelligence, David. Surely you see the difference. If you don't you're either playing dumb for the sake of debate or you can't put your disdain for Obama to the side and look at this objectively.

And let's try a test of the second - let's say it was 2006 & Michael Moore offered $5m to GW Bush for him to release his college transcripts - would you be as 'I don't see a problem with that' as you do this?

Originally Posted by David in FL

Of course. Another blithering idiot. As long as there's nothing embarrassing or somehow incriminating in those records, take his money, donate it, and laugh at him. No downside at all.

Now, if there's something to be embarrassed about in those records, that could change everything.

But that couldn't be the case here......

I agree 100% with Zip here.  You are not dumb, so you are playing dumb for some odd reason.  (I'm guessing it's the disdain for Obama thing he mentioned)  The idea that anybody who's not crazy would give this any validity is ridiculous.  It's very birther-esque.  If I walk up to a strange woman at a bar and offer her $100 to prove [to my satisfaction] that her amazing breasts are natural, every sane, sober person in the bar would think I'm an idiot ... and several would want to punch me in the face.  Both correct responses.

Also, in reference to the bold above, I think that is better applied to "your guy" not releasing his tax records.  That is actually a common practice for presidential candidates - as opposed to humoring a rich attention-***** - so what is your opinion on Mitt's reasons for refusing that request?