Donald Trump for president?

[Mr. Desmond]

You get offended when we use the term liberal media but you don't stop taking shots at Fox, fact is the liberal media is ignoring the stories on Benghazi, Fast and Furius and Hillary's e-mail servers so while Fox takes positions to the right the rest of the media just refuses to cover stories that don't fit their agenda.  As Carson said, Hillary is depending on people being ignorant to the facts and the liberal media makes it easier for them to remain ignorant.

Because Fox does things with news that should not be done.

I watch it occasionally to see the attempted brainwashing.

At least on MSNBC, ones knows it is all commentary all the time. And I rarely watch it.

You are incorrect - NYT does discuss Clinton's emails, and has hit Hillary hard with non-flattering articles.

Benghazi --- hacked to death, but you would not know it because Fox does not report facts. You know, some things are total FUBAR -- How about Bush being investigated for not knowing about 9/11?

How about Reagan and Iran-Contra? Impeachable offense but brushed under table.

Benghazi -- disorganized situation, Ambassador thought he was bullet-proof, loved to play video games, ignored his security people, miscommunication between CIA and State.

I know little about Fast and Furious.

But I just pointed out two BIG events that no one wanted to touch...

Focus on the big picture...

Our infrastructure, reform the Tax Code, technology advances, reform ACA, reform Immigration, organized security, etc.

Fox and MSNBC have us focused on little things - social issues, voter fraud that does not exist but new rules that have  basis in discrimination. Let's get over the small potatoes social issues by treating people equally, allow people to vote early and absentee with multiple voting places, and get to the meaty issues.

Look at the forest. We are a great country with small-minded pols.

[acerimusdux]

Here's a poll that says Carson won.

Trump has 19% picking him for "who won", but 30% picking him for "who lost".  On balance, the best performers there seem to have been Carson, Rubio, and Huckabee.

[Gunther]

I watched the debates last night and was impressed with everyone but Trump, Christie and Bush. [LIST] [*] Trump didn't say anything new, you can't debate in sound bites.  We get it, the US is losing to China, Mexico and everyone else, but how do we start winning?  How is he going to turn the US into a manufacturing country, how is he going to improve the border security?  Anyone can identify problems, we need someone to fix them.  I am mixed on his decision to not support the RNC nominee.  I don't believe you should blindly support whoever wins, but he's also leaving the door open to kill the entire election for the GOP if he doesn't get his way.   [*] Christie came off like the obnoxious NJ resident he is.  His retort to Paul was on point but his in your face tactics won't play well in the rest of the country.  I did appreciate his take on social security, btw, when did social security become an entitlement, last time I checked, that was my money, so why is it being thrown under the same label as welfare?  It's obvious the government "stole" our money from SS and while I'd like them just to return it, I don't see that as a feasible option.  Christie has a realistic approach to fixing it.    [*] Bush is another career politician and should have had better answers to some of the questions.  He and some of the others have to leave God out of the debates, religion isn't going to fix the problems we have. [/LIST] Paul is an outlier, he doesn't fit the GOP mold but I like much of what he says.  He hurt himself going after Christie they way he did, the cheap shot about hugging Obama during Sandy was uncalled for. Carson was clearly the most intelligent person on stage, I loved his answer on race and his decision to not just cheap shot Obama on Syria but instead provided an answer that indicates he understands the problem with our military and how weak it is today. Rubio and Cruz are good candidates but I'm tired of all of them trying to tell their sob story about how poor they were growing up.  I don't care if their father was a mailman, bartender or construction worker, they're not poor anymore so let's not pretend they are. Huckabee, Walker and Kasich are decent candidates but they are afterthoughts.  Kasich benefitted from home field advantage but overall he didn't belong on the stage with the rest of them, I'd have rather seen Fiorina on stage.  Huckabee and Walker need to distinguish themselves or they will be forgotten.

Good post, in fact I could have written it, verbatim. Carly is awesome, she will be on the big stage next time but no one else from the 2nd tier candidates. She'll bump Kasich, Christie, or Paul.

[Mr. Desmond]

Good post, in fact I could have written it, verbatim.

Carly is awesome, she will be on the big stage next time but no one else from the 2nd tier candidates. She'll bump Kasich, Christie, or Paul.

Carly has a record of greatness:

Failed CEO Of Hewlett-Packard

As CEO of Hewlett-Packard, Carly Fiorina laid off 18,000 workers. When reflecting on her tenure, she admitted she wished she had "done them all faster."

Fiorina Fired At Least 18,000 HP Employees

Millionaire Fiorina Called the Outsourcing of American Jobs "Right Shoring. " The San Francisco Chronicle reported, "Labor unions have battled 'offshoring,' which Fiorina calls 'right-shoring,' for decades, he said."  [ San Francisco Chronicle, 1/9/04]

Fiorina Defended The Outsourcing Of American Jobs. Investors Business Daily reported, "During their presentation, Barrett and Fiorina had to defend the tech industry for its growing reliance on overseas tech workers. IBM, Intel, Hewlett-Packard and others have moved many jobs offshore, including customer service call center operators and even engineers." [ Investors Business Daily , 1/8/04]

Fiorina Laid Off Nearly 18,000 HP Workers During "Restructuring." The Omaha-World Herald reported, "Hewlett-Packard, based in Palo Alto, Calif., had a $ 903 million loss on revenue of $ 56.6 billion for its fiscal year that ended last Oct 31. According to a summary by Hoover's Inc., an Austin, Texas, provider of business information, Hewlett-Packard has undergone extensive restructuring under Chief Executive Officer Carly Fiorina. The company announced earlier this year that it planned to cut 17,900 people by October because of a weak economy and its merger with Compaq." [ Omaha-World Herald , 9/29/03]

Fiorina Suggests Her Biggest Mistake Was Not Firing More People More Quickly. Fortune reported, "Fiorina does not agree, naturally, that there's been a brain drain (at HP). In fact, she believes that one lesson she's learned while running HP is that she should have moved more quickly in ejecting certain people. Smartened up now, she says, 'I would have done them all faster. Every person that I've asked to leave, whether it's been clear publicly or not, I would have done faster.'"  [ Fortune, 2/7/05]

Fiorina: "There Is No Job That Is America's God-Given Right Anymore." The San Francisco Chronicle reported, "Fiorina's statement that 'there is no job that is America's God-given right anymore' triggered particularly strong reaction. The pair spoke in Washington representing the Computer Systems Policy Project, a group of eight chief executives from the nation's top information technology firms." [ San Francisco Chronicle, 1/9/04]

Fiorina Comments On Offshoring Enraged Workers Groups . The San Francisco Chronicle reported, "Comments made in Washington on Tuesday by Carly Fiorina, CEO of Palo Alto information technology giant Hewlett-Packard, and Craig Barrett, chief executive of Santa Clara chipmaker Intel Corp., drew an unusually strong reaction from workers, who suggested the pair forfeit their own highly paid jobs to Chinese or Russian executives working for a quarter of their pay." [ San Francisco Chronicle, 1/9/04]

Enraged Workers E-Mailed Chronicle To Complain About Fiorina's Insensitive Comments. According to the San Francisco Chronicle , "But with unemployment at 7.2 percent in Santa Clara County in November, the latest figure available, Fiorina's statement hit a sore spot.  'I am curious how Ms. Fiorina would feel about her job being outsourced to China or India,' Sean Ryan of Alameda, where the county unemployment rate is 6.1 percent, wrote in a representative e-mail to The Chronicle . 'I am certain that there are many extremely bright, ambitious and successful executive types in those countries who would be able to do her job just as well if not better than she can at a cost savings to HP shareholders of millions of dollars per year.'" [ San Francisco Chronicle , 1/9/04]

Centerpiece Of Fiorina's Tenure Described As "Total Flop" And "Disastrous"

She makes Trump look good.

[Gunther]

Carly has a record of greatness:

Failed CEO Of Hewlett-Packard

As CEO of Hewlett-Packard, Carly Fiorina laid off 18,000 workers. When reflecting on her tenure, she admitted she wished she had "done them all faster."

Fiorina Fired At Least 18,000 HP Employees

Millionaire Fiorina Called the Outsourcing of American Jobs "Right Shoring. " The San Francisco Chronicle reported, "Labor unions have battled 'offshoring,' which Fiorina calls 'right-shoring,' for decades, he said."  [ San Francisco Chronicle, 1/9/04]

Fiorina Defended The Outsourcing Of American Jobs. Investors Business Daily reported, "During their presentation, Barrett and Fiorina had to defend the tech industry for its growing reliance on overseas tech workers. IBM, Intel, Hewlett-Packard and others have moved many jobs offshore, including customer service call center operators and even engineers." [ Investors Business Daily , 1/8/04]

Fiorina Laid Off Nearly 18,000 HP Workers During "Restructuring." The Omaha-World Herald reported, "Hewlett-Packard, based in Palo Alto, Calif., had a $ 903 million loss on revenue of $ 56.6 billion for its fiscal year that ended last Oct 31. According to a summary by Hoover's Inc., an Austin, Texas, provider of business information, Hewlett-Packard has undergone extensive restructuring under Chief Executive Officer Carly Fiorina. The company announced earlier this year that it planned to cut 17,900 people by October because of a weak economy and its merger with Compaq." [ Omaha-World Herald , 9/29/03]

Fiorina Suggests Her Biggest Mistake Was Not Firing More People More Quickly. Fortune reported, "Fiorina does not agree, naturally, that there's been a brain drain (at HP). In fact, she believes that one lesson she's learned while running HP is that she should have moved more quickly in ejecting certain people. Smartened up now, she says, 'I would have done them all faster. Every person that I've asked to leave, whether it's been clear publicly or not, I would have done faster.'"  [ Fortune, 2/7/05]

Fiorina: "There Is No Job That Is America's God-Given Right Anymore." The San Francisco Chronicle reported, "Fiorina's statement that 'there is no job that is America's God-given right anymore' triggered particularly strong reaction. The pair spoke in Washington representing the Computer Systems Policy Project, a group of eight chief executives from the nation's top information technology firms." [ San Francisco Chronicle, 1/9/04]

Fiorina Comments On Offshoring Enraged Workers Groups . The San Francisco Chronicle reported, "Comments made in Washington on Tuesday by Carly Fiorina, CEO of Palo Alto information technology giant Hewlett-Packard, and Craig Barrett, chief executive of Santa Clara chipmaker Intel Corp., drew an unusually strong reaction from workers, who suggested the pair forfeit their own highly paid jobs to Chinese or Russian executives working for a quarter of their pay." [ San Francisco Chronicle, 1/9/04]

Enraged Workers E-Mailed Chronicle To Complain About Fiorina's Insensitive Comments. According to the San Francisco Chronicle , "But with unemployment at 7.2 percent in Santa Clara County in November, the latest figure available, Fiorina's statement hit a sore spot.  'I am curious how Ms. Fiorina would feel about her job being outsourced to China or India,' Sean Ryan of Alameda, where the county unemployment rate is 6.1 percent, wrote in a representative e-mail to The Chronicle . 'I am certain that there are many extremely bright, ambitious and successful executive types in those countries who would be able to do her job just as well if not better than she can at a cost savings to HP shareholders of millions of dollars per year.'" [ San Francisco Chronicle , 1/9/04]

Centerpiece Of Fiorina's Tenure Described As "Total Flop" And "Disastrous"

She makes Trump look good.

Well, being a business person myself, having managed offshore teams in India and the Philippines, and having been a victim of a massive layoff, I fail to see anything wrong with the positions cited above. I don't want to get into a big discussion on unions but suffice to say, I'm against them. Carly won't back away from anything here, she'll explain it and probably very well.

[Mr. Desmond]

Well, being a business person myself, having managed offshore teams in India and the Philippines, and having been a victim of a massive layoff, I fail to see anything wrong with the positions cited above. I don't want to get into a big discussion on unions but suffice to say, I'm against them.

Carly won't back away from anything here, she'll explain it and probably very well.

She explained it so well that she was forced out.

Nothing wrong with that.  Her acerbic tongue plays well with some in the GOP, but does not impress others who are willing to look at her actions, instead of her words and style.

Maybe the Trumpinator will add her to his cabinet.

The GOP is not the GOP that my parents embraced.

This GOP is irresponsible and lacks serious thought in the right places -- its candidates.

At least Kasich is interesting, there might be hope for Rubio.

[rkim291968]

Christie came off like the obnoxious NJ resident he is.  His retort to Paul was on point but his in your face tactics won't play well in the rest of the country.  I did appreciate his take on social security, btw, when did social security become an entitlement, last time I checked, that was my money, so why is it being thrown under the same label as welfare?  It's obvious the government "stole" our money from SS and while I'd like them just to return it, I don't see that as a feasible option.  Christie has a realistic approach to fixing it.

Didn't he (or someone, I forget who) basically say people with high asset shouldn't get SS?  That's not any candidate's money to decide.   I paid SS for years and if I happened to retire with $$$$ in the bank, I am not eligible to get my SS?   Isn't that socialism?   I have plans for my SS.  Anyone taking it away from me will turn me into a political activist really quick.

[Gunther]

Didn't he (or someone, I forget who) basically say people with high asset shouldn't get SS?  That's not any candidate's money to decide.   I paid SS for years and if I happened to retire with $$$$ in the bank, I am not eligible to get my SS?   Isn't that socialism?   I have plans for my SS.  Anyone taking it away from me will turn me into a political activist really quick.

He talked about a threshold of like $4mm in liquid assets, but yeah, that's what he said. Since I'll never have that much, it seemed pretty reasonable but I certainly understand the opposition to it.

[Mr. Desmond]

Didn't he (or someone, I forget who) basically say people with high asset shouldn't get SS?  That's not any candidate's money to decide.   I paid SS for years and if I happened to retire with $$$$ in the bank, I am not eligible to get my SS?   Isn't that socialism?   I have plans for my SS.  Anyone taking it away from me will turn me into a political activist really quick.

The tax system is full of socialistic and capitalist ideas and incentives.

It's not your money either -- you sent it to the government. Now what they decide to do with it and what benefits you receive is up to Congress.

Socialism? Believe it or not, the great Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive with socialistic tendencies, and he is graded out as a top 5 President.

[rkim291968]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkim291968

Didn't he (or someone, I forget who) basically say people with high asset shouldn't get SS?  That's not any candidate's money to decide.   I paid SS for years and if I happened to retire with $$$$ in the bank, I am not eligible to get my SS?   Isn't that socialism?   I have plans for my SS.  Anyone taking it away from me will turn me into a political activist really quick.

He talked about a threshold of like $4mm in liquid assets, but yeah, that's what he said. Since I'll never have that much, it seemed pretty reasonable but I certainly understand the opposition to it.

I won't have $4M either when I retire.  But they can keep moving the goal post as they see fit.  What if the threshold is lower to ( fill in your number here ) so that you will no longer be eligible to get SS?    They need to fix the budget and work on boosting economy instead of looking to take away SS from anyone.   Oh, BTW, Christie, that money saved by withholding SS payments to people with $4mm will not amount to much.   The last time I checked, they make up less than 1% of Americans.

[RandallT]

Well, being a business person myself, having managed offshore teams in India and the Philippines, and having been a victim of a massive layoff, I fail to see anything wrong with the positions cited above. I don't want to get into a big discussion on unions but suffice to say, I'm against them.

Carly won't back away from anything here, she'll explain it and probably very well.

Fiorina fights. And she does it eloquently, forcefully, with grace, and without sounding like a kook.

After her debate last night in the earlier group, she went on Hardball with Chris Matthews.  As an outsider, non-politician, I'd take her over Trump any day, based on what I've seen. To anyone who thinks Benghazi won't hurt Hillary, I think she effectively gets across here in simple terms why this is not some "fog of war" kind of thing.

I missed the debates, but a brief look through news sources makes it seem like it was Fiorina's night, and she's likely to climb up a bit in the ranks. She'll certainly take the fight to Hillary and get the message across that Hillary has been wrong on major foreign policy issues over the years (Assad, destabilizing Libya, Russia reset, etc)

[Gunther]

I won't have $4M either when I retire.  But they can keep moving the goal post as they see fit.  What if the threshold is lower to ( fill in your number here ) so that you will no longer be eligible to get SS?    They need to fix the budget and work on boosting economy instead of looking to take away SS from anyone.   Oh, BTW, Christie, that money saved by withholding SS payments to people with $4mm will not amount to much.   The last time I checked, they make up less than 1% of Americans.

I hear you. Something has to be done, however. Anything that puts the IRS out of business will get my vote (Christie's plan does not do this, FYI). Flat tax or fair tax both seem viable although I have a hard time envisioning either of these ever coming to fruition.

[rkim291968]

Fiorina fights. And she does it eloquently, forcefully, with grace, and without sounding like a kook.

After her debate last night in the earlier group, she went on Hardball with Chris Matthews.  As an outsider, non-politician, I'd take her over Trump any day, based on what I've seen. To anyone who thinks Benghazi won't hurt Hillary, I think she effectively gets across here in simple terms why this is not some "fog of war" kind of thing.

I missed the debates, but a brief look through news sources makes it seem like it was Fiorina's night, and she's likely to climb up a bit in the ranks. She'll certainly take the fight to Hillary and get the message across that Hillary has been wrong on major foreign policy issues over the years (Assad, destabilizing Libya, Russia reset, etc)

I work in Silicon Valley where you will hardly find any support for Fiorina.  Everyone knows what she did with HP and that was not pretty.  She is much more eloquent but I see her as a female version of Trump, both are narcissistic to a fault IMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkim291968

I won't have $4M either when I retire.  But they can keep moving the goal post as they see fit.  What if the threshold is lower to ( fill in your number here ) so that you will no longer be eligible to get SS?    They need to fix the budget and work on boosting economy instead of looking to take away SS from anyone.   Oh, BTW, Christie, that money saved by withholding SS payments to people with $4mm will not amount to much.   The last time I checked, they make up less than 1% of Americans.

I hear you. Something has to be done, however. Anything that puts the IRS out of business will get my vote (Christie's plan does not do this, FYI). Flat tax or fair tax both seem viable although I have a hard time envisioning either of these ever coming to fruition.

Agreed!

[RJH999]

I work in Silicon Valley where you will hardly find any support for Fiorina. Everyone knows what she did with HP and that was not pretty.  She is much more eloquent but I see her as a female version of Trump, both are narcissistic to a fault IMO.  Agreed!

I don't think anybody in the United States has any support for Fiorina...

[Gunther]

I don't think anybody in the United States has any support for Fiorina...

[quote name="rkim291968" url="/t/82688/donald-trump-for-president/320_40#post_1181190"]I work in Silicon Valley where you will hardly find any support for Fiorina.  Everyone knows what she did with HP and that was not pretty.  She is much more eloquent but I see her as a female version of Trump, both are narcissistic to a fault IMO.  [/quote]Well, Carly ain't lookin to win Cali. Her appeal is that she's not a politician and she is crushing Hillary (or the opposition), which our candidates have been too scared to do the past few elections. I don't see her getting the nomination but I could see her as a VP choice.

[newtogolf]

Didn't he (or someone, I forget who) basically say people with high asset shouldn't get SS?  That's not any candidate's money to decide.   I paid SS for years and if I happened to retire with $$$$ in the bank, I am not eligible to get my SS?   Isn't that socialism?   I have plans for my SS.  Anyone taking it away from me will turn me into a political activist really quick.

Rick, I'm with you, I want my money too, but the reality is that the government wasted it (no need to rehash what they spent it on).   There's no way to recoup the loss so we need to make some tough decisions.  People with substantial wealth (>$4M) aren't going to need the benefit the way someone with $0 assets will.  I also agree we need to extend the retirement age, we're living longer so it's only natural we extend the definition of retirement age.

Here's the reality, if someone doesn't do something we will run out of money within 20 years and then no one gets social security.  I'd also like to see the government allow individuals to place their retirement money into a private tax free account (similar to 401K or Roth) so they can manage it on their own if they choose to and aren't a burden to the overall program.  We also need to get more people working (on the books).  Unemployment, welfare, illegal immigrants and others working off the books contribute nothing to the fund but will still expect something at retirement.  Instead of social security they will receive welfare, so in the end we're paying for them no matter what.

[newtogolf]

She explained it so well that she was forced out.

Nothing wrong with that.  Her acerbic tongue plays well with some in the GOP, but does not impress others who are willing to look at her actions, instead of her words and style.

Maybe the Trumpinator will add her to his cabinet.

The GOP is not the GOP that my parents embraced.

This GOP is irresponsible and lacks serious thought in the right places -- its candidates.

At least Kasich is interesting, there might be hope for Rubio.

Given your lean towards the left I wouldn't expect you to understand business and unions.  Many that have your position like to talk the talk but don't like to pay the money for what they claim to believe in.  If HP used local labor the cost of their products would be higher than the competition.  How many people are willing to and can afford to pay 15% - 25% more to have a product "Made in the USA"?

This isn't 1960, we're in a global economy and HP must compete with Epson, Canon, Kodak, Ricoh, etc.  We've lost our edge in manufacturing, "Made in the USA" doesn't carry any weight except to isolationists and some union flag waving fanatics.   HP outsourced manufacturing and gets to sell their products into China, if they manufacture exclusively in the USA they may lose that right.  If HP costs increase 15% - 25% and their revenue and profits drop what do you think will happen to their stock value?

Until the unions realize that labor is a global market and that they have to ensure their members wages are competitive against other countries, jobs will continue to be outsourced as it's the most fiscally responsible way for a business to make money for their shareholders (which is who they answer to, not the government).

[rkim291968]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkim291968

Didn't he (or someone, I forget who) basically say people with high asset shouldn't get SS?  That's not any candidate's money to decide.   I paid SS for years and if I happened to retire with $$$$ in the bank, I am not eligible to get my SS?   Isn't that socialism?   I have plans for my SS.  Anyone taking it away from me will turn me into a political activist really quick.

Rick, I'm with you, I want my money too, but the reality is that the government wasted it (no need to rehash what they spent it on).   There's no way to recoup the loss so we need to make some tough decisions.  People with substantial wealth (>$4M) aren't going to need the benefit the way someone with $0 assets will.  I also agree we need to extend the retirement age, we're living longer so it's only natural we extend the definition of retirement age.

Here's the reality, if someone doesn't do something we will run out of money within 20 years and then no one gets social security.  I'd also like to see the government allow individuals to place their retirement money into a private tax free account (similar to 401K or Roth) so they can manage it on their own if they choose to and aren't a burden to the overall program.  We also need to get more people working (on the books).  Unemployment, welfare, illegal immigrants and others working off the books contribute nothing to the fund but will still expect something at retirement.  Instead of social security they will receive welfare, so in the end we're paying for them no matter what.

I understand the reality and something needs to be done.   But taking money from one group to shore up the broken SS system isn't the answer.  It's like going to a sword fight with a toothpick.   Had Christie gave a better idea of improving SS system than what he said in the debate, he'd done better.