Donald Trump for president?

[dkolo]

The Don for President?  Psshaawwww!   Deez Nuts would perform far better in the White House.  LINK (That's a perfectly safe link, btw.)

You got He's Nuts and Deez Nuts neck and neck in the polls, haha.

[Gunther]

When one doesn't have an argument, change it... typical  The pont is Trump is inciting crazies (and criminals) to act against immigrants and then makes excuses for them.

Not trying to change the argument rather attempting to expose this standard liberal tactic. Instead of focusing on the real issue of illegal immigrant crime, where there are literally thousands committed each day in this country, you choose one isolated incident, spin blame onto Trump, then use it to try to gin up outrage and hatred. This is exactly how the ridiculous black lives matter charade was started. 90% of black murder is perpetrated by other blacks but yeah, let's focus on 5 or 6 isolated incidents and incite riots over them while ignoring the root cause. It's divisive and insidious.

[Ernest Jones]

Not trying to change the argument rather attempting to expose this standard liberal tactic. Instead of focusing on the real issue of illegal immigrant crime, where there are literally thousands committed each day in this country, you choose one isolated incident, spin blame onto Trump, then use it to try to gin up outrage and hatred. This is exactly how the ridiculous black lives matter charade was started. 90% of black murder is perpetrated by other blacks but yeah, let's focus on 5 or 6 isolated incidents and incite riots over them while ignoring the root cause. It's divisive and insidious.

I'd be interested to hear what you believe the "root cause" is. I believe the "root cause" is perpetual poverty, limited opportunities, huge racial wage gaps and other social issues that continue to linger as a hangover of history. I'm sure you think that's all bleeding heart BS though because 'Merica is the land of opportunity.

[Mac62]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gunther

Not trying to change the argument rather attempting to expose this standard liberal tactic. Instead of focusing on the real issue of illegal immigrant crime, where there are literally thousands committed each day in this country, you choose one isolated incident, spin blame onto Trump, then use it to try to gin up outrage and hatred.

This is exactly how the ridiculous black lives matter charade was started. 90% of black murder is perpetrated by other blacks but yeah, let's focus on 5 or 6 isolated incidents and incite riots over them while ignoring the root cause. It's divisive and insidious.

I'd be interested to hear what you believe the "root cause" is. I believe the "root cause" is perpetual poverty, limited opportunities, huge racial wage gaps and other social issues that continue to linger as a hangover of history. I'm sure you think that's all bleeding heart BS though because 'Merica is the land of opportunity.

I'll bite on this one.  I think the root cause is the angry victim mentality perpetuated by hatemongers like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan, and the inability to let go of something that ended over 150 years ago which no currently living person was ever directly affected by.  It's the glorification of "Thug Life" and having criminals/gangsters as role models.  It's the derision of being called an "Uncle Tom" or "house n***a" if one attempts to rise beyond the ghetto lifestyle.  Limited opportunities or racial wage gaps?  I don't see that in today's world of "Equal Employment Opportunity", where employers can be harshly sanctioned/fined for such actions.

As far as Trump's comments on immigration - I don't believe that Mexico is "sending" anybody here (and all illegal immigrants aren't Mexican, either - many of them come from Central American countries such as Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, etc.).  The illegals come of their own accord, with hopes of making a better life here in the "land of opportunity".  I don't agree that they're all gangbangers, rapists and crooks, but there are certainly those among them.  Do a little research on Mara Salvatrucha/ MS-13.  It's a viciously violent gang which has permeated the U.S. and is comprised mostly of Central Americans - Salvadorans in particular.

Trump's proposed solution of "building a wall" is so childishly simplistic that it makes me wonder if he's ever even seen the Mexican border or done any research on illegal immigration/smuggling.  Firstly, it would cost billions of dollars to build a wall which would have any appreciable effect on slowing the ingress of illegals; secondly, it would cost billions of dollars in constant upkeep.  Thirdly, illegals/smugglers would tunnel under it, blast through it, fly over it, boat around it...he hasn't the slightest clue how sophisticated and resourceful they are.  You don't just build a multi-billion dollar monstrosity of a wall, call it good and think you've solved the illegal immigration problem.  I'd expect that kind of suggestion if we asked a bunch of third graders how we should stop illegal immigration, but it's disappointing coming from a grown man who has ambitions of being the President of our country.

The way to make the biggest dent in the illegal immigration problem is to slap huge fines on any employer who employs them, and imprison the employers for repeated violations.  Take away the jobs and you take away a large part of their reason for being here.  But the truth is, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats want to do that, despite their empty rhetoric.  Illegals are cheap labor and I don't believe for one second that only liberals/Democrats have illegals as nannies, landscapers, construction workers, housecleaners, cooks, dishwashers, field laborers, etc.  Like it or not, they comprise a significant portion of the American workforce, and until that changes you're not going to stop them from coming here.

[Mac62]

One more comment on Trump's Wall:  Does he think the entire U.S. / Mexican border is flat and smooth like the lots he builds his hotels and casinos on?  Has he ever seen the topography of the Sonoran Desert?  The gullies, canyons, arroyos, jagged hills. mountains and rivers?  Has he ever seen flash floods racing through washes in the desert, and the destruction they can wreak?  That wall would be as porous as Swiss cheese before it was even completely built.  Mister City Slicker needs to get out of his fine Italian leather chair behind his polished marble desk and go spend some time with the Border Patrol to actually see what the border looks like.  Get those thousand-dollar loafers dirty in some garbage-strewn border canyons and maybe then he'd realize how silly his wall sounds to people who've been there and done that.

[RandallT]

Good for a laugh.

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

Obama is not running for office any longer, and 17 Republicans are running -- they comment on any negative, blow it up, and say "This is why our country is not working."

Well, let's look at that ... Haven't we always had illegal immigrants in the country, and don't a portion of them commit crimes? Just like a portion of our citizenry commits crimes? Now Trump has said Mexico sends us the bad ones... True? It sounds like a sale to me. I listened to Trump's town hall, a portion of it yesterday, and was thinking, this guy is entertaining, but I don't think he has any facts.

Question: Do we want any President to address all local murders committed in the country?

I hope he has other priorities... I haven't agreed with Obama's priorities ... but what can one expect?

The border has been an issue since before Obama took office and in 6 years he's done zero about it because he knows that everyone that crosses that border is likely a vote for the democrats.

I do expect the POTUS to address murders when they are committed by illegal aliens who are being given sanctuary in cities within our country.  Why hasn't he discontinued federal aide to these cities who willfully break our laws?  Why shouldn't we just assume that since he hasn't addressed the problem he's condoning the actions of these people and cities who are breaking the law?

This is not correct. He has not done "zero" and in fact has done more than his predecessor. He certainly does not condone this. That is a ridiculous assumption. Why would he spend time having press conference on stories like when there are far greater issues to worry about?

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2013/jul/01/debbie-wasserman-schultz/more-border-security-and-patrols-under-obama-previ/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/immigration/border-security

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/29/the-2007-immigration-bill-set-border-security-targets-weve-hit-most-of-them/

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/02/u-s-deportations-of-immigrants-reach-record-high-in-2013/

Regardless of this, we could build the new Great Wall of China on the border and it will have little effect on illegal immigration. They will find other ways to get in. The real problem is Americans who employ the illegal aliens. None of the Pols talk about this.

In reality, illegal immigration is a minor issue for me and frankly most of the northern part of the US. It is a big deal for the southern border states, but there are not that many of them. It makes great headlines, but does it really affect your life that much? I don't see it at all for me.

[Vinsk]

This is not correct. He has not done "zero" and in fact has done more than his predecessor. He certainly does not condone this. That is a ridiculous assumption. Why would he spend time having press conference on stories like when there are far greater issues to worry about? [URL=http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2013/jul/01/debbie-wasserman-schultz/more-border-security-and-patrols-under-obama-previ/]http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2013/jul/01/debbie-wasserman-schultz/more-border-security-and-patrols-under-obama-previ/[/URL] [URL=https://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/immigration/border-security]https://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/immigration/border-security[/URL] [URL=http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/29/the-2007-immigration-bill-set-border-security-targets-weve-hit-most-of-them/]http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/29/the-2007-immigration-bill-set-border-security-targets-weve-hit-most-of-them/[/URL] [URL=http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/02/u-s-deportations-of-immigrants-reach-record-high-in-2013/]http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/02/u-s-deportations-of-immigrants-reach-record-high-in-2013/[/URL] Regardless of this, we could build the new Great Wall of China on the border and it will have little effect on illegal immigration. They will find other ways to get in. The real problem is Americans who employ the illegal aliens. None of the Pols talk about this. In reality, illegal immigration is a minor issue for me and frankly most of the northern part of the US. It is a big deal for the southern border states, but there are not that many of them. It makes great headlines, but does it really affect your life that much? I don't see it at all for me.

http://cis.org/node/4573 Long read but may enlighten you. I think the impact of immigration overall is quite significant.

[newtogolf]

This is not correct. He has not done "zero" and in fact has done more than his predecessor. He certainly does not condone this. That is a ridiculous assumption. Why would he spend time having press conference on stories like when there are far greater issues to worry about?

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2013/jul/01/debbie-wasserman-schultz/more-border-security-and-patrols-under-obama-previ/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/immigration/border-security

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/29/the-2007-immigration-bill-set-border-security-targets-weve-hit-most-of-them/

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/02/u-s-deportations-of-immigrants-reach-record-high-in-2013/

Regardless of this, we could build the new Great Wall of China on the border and it will have little effect on illegal immigration. They will find other ways to get in. The real problem is Americans who employ the illegal aliens. None of the Pols talk about this.

In reality, illegal immigration is a minor issue for me and frankly most of the northern part of the US. It is a big deal for the southern border states, but there are not that many of them. It makes great headlines, but does it really affect your life that much? I don't see it at all for me.

I in no way want a wall built, as @Mac62 stated a wall is for public effect only, illegals will tunnel through as is already happening.

You're 100% wrong that the NE isn't impacted by illegal aliens.  Here on Long Island it's a huge problem for some towns (Bayshore, Brentwood, Amityville, Hempstead, Riverhead, Central Islip to name a few).

Driving down some LI roads you'll see hundreds of illegal aliens lining the streets waiting for contractors to pick them up for day labor jobs.  Some of our school systems have had such a deluge of illegals that the systems are collapsing because their tax budgets cannot fund the number of students receiving entitlements in their district.  The schools aren't equipped to handle the numbers of non-English speaking students and those that can speak the slightest bit of English are being placed in regular classes where they struggle and slow down the rest of the class causing these school districts to drop below state guidelines.  The best teachers are also leaving schools in these districts as violence has also increased and they can find work in better districts.

In terms of neighborhoods, they typically rent homes where 5+ families live and not a single one pays taxes but makes maximum use of town resources.  The properties aren't maintained and the overall value of the homes in the neighborhood drop.   They drive cars without licenses or insurance and Hispanics have becoming the  #1 offender of DWI on Long Island.

Taxes continue to rise on Long Island which is driving out the middle class families who can no longer afford to live here because the increases in taxes to cover the costs of illegal aliens has been overwhelming the last 10 years.  Long Island has also had some of their largest businesses relocate due to the heavy tax burden.   Greater entitlement demand combined with less tax revenue results in bankruptcy.

This is a huge problem for Long Island and it will continue to get worse, it's in a downward spiral and eventually if the illegal immigration issues aren't resolved it will bankrupt NY.

[mvmac]

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2015/8/20/donald-winning-club-championships-is-hard-literally-hard.html

Thanks to Luke Kerr-Dineen for working through The Donald's Time interview where the leader in polls for the Republican party presidential nomination talks about his readiness for office. After winning club championships.

From Time's interview attributed to their staff:

You know I’ve had great success. Even in golf I’ve won many golf club championships. I don’t know if you guys play golf. But to win a club championship is hard, literally hard. And you have to beat scratch players…You got a lot of good players. I’ve won many club championships. So my life has been about winning. My life has not been about losing. So I get a kick out of watching these guys who were not even successful people saying, “Oh, he’s just having fun.”

It’s not having fun. Actually I could have more fun. I own here’s a picture, I own Turnberry in Scotland that just hosted the Women’s British Open. I wouldn’t mind being at Turnberry. I may never see it again.

[acerimusdux]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/uk-usa-election-poll-trump-idUKKCN0QQ2E020150821

Quote:

Even when Trump was pitted directly in the poll against just his top two competitors, 44 percent backed him. Bush won about 29 percent of respondents, and Carson 25 percent.

Still think Trump could actually win that nomination. He has 6 months to broaden his message some. He doesn't need to do it now.

[Gunther]

[URL=http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/uk-usa-election-poll-trump-idUKKCN0QQ2E020150821]http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/uk-usa-election-poll-trump-idUKKCN0QQ2E020150821[/URL] Still think Trump could actually win that nomination. He has 6 months to broaden his message some. He doesn't need to do it now.

He is a phenomenon. It's been fun to watch the Dems and Republican establishment pee their pants over his success.

[jbishop15]

He is a phenomenon. It's been fun to watch the Dems and Republican establishment pee their pants over his success.

There are literally zero Democrats who are legitimately afraid of Trump. Dude is a clown, and an idiot, and has about as much a chance of winning the presidency as the lint in my pants pockets.

[saevel25]

There are literally zero Democrats who are legitimately afraid of Trump.

Dude is a clown, and an idiot, and has about as much a chance of winning the presidency as the lint in my pants pockets.

I pretty much agree. The only issue I see is, the USA very rarely allows one party to hold office for a long time, more than two terms. The centrists in the country, who primarily have voted more republican in the past, but can be swayed, tend to bounce back and forth cyclically. The last time democrats had more than two terms in a row was back in WWII with FDR and Truman. I think a lot of that had to do with WWII and not willing to switch presidencies during such troubled times.

Also you have to consider, Arnold won the governorship in California. If you read any of his debate transcripts its more pathetic than Trump. He basically went all Hollywood, kept pushing his old movie tag lines.

[jbishop15]

I pretty much agree. The only issue I see is, the USA very rarely allows one party to hold office for a long time, more than two terms. The centrists in the country, who primarily have voted more republican in the past, but can be swayed, tend to bounce back and forth cyclically. The last time democrats had more than two terms in a row was back in WWII with FDR and Truman. I think a lot of that had to do with WWII and not willing to switch presidencies during such troubled times.  Also you have to consider, Arnold won the governorship in California. If you read any of his debate transcripts its more pathetic than Trump. He basically went all Hollywood, kept pushing his old movie tag lines.

Yeah, but that was before social media and 24/7 media coverage. Everything trump says is recorded and parsed over. Plus, in terms of social issues, this country has been in a leftward shift (with a few unfortunate blips) for over 100 years. Also, the Dems could've held the presidency for the last 23 years, were it not for an illegal Supreme Court ruling on the Presidency in 2000 (in which Bush lost the pop vote), and war time fears in 2004. I'd say many people in this country are economic moderates, or slightly right-center (not me though!) But the vast majority of them support things like gay marriage, and the Christian Right that controls the Republican Party does not. Until Republicans shift leftward socially, they are going to have a tough time winning Presidential elections.

[saevel25]

Yeah, but that was before social media and 24/7 media coverage. Everything trump says is recorded and parsed over. Plus, in terms of social issues, this country has been in a leftward shift (with a few unfortunate blips) for over 100 years.

I would disagree on that. It has taken big movements to move the social issues leftward. I would say the country is very slow moving on social issues. Heck the Civil Rights happened in the 1960's, only 55 years ago. Women's suffrage was just over 100 years ago.

Though I might mention it took a republican to actually free the slaves ;)

What do you think social media would have been like with JFK, who was known to be a player. Heck FDR might have not been president with social media. They hid the fact he was in a wheel chair for a long time. No one wanted to see a disable president during that time.

Just saying, that social media isn't just a negative for republicans. Look at Clinton, she's getting mauled over this email and server stuff.

I would say that Trump probably has the least likely chance just because I think there are republicans who would just not vote for him. I think he's going to loose bad in the southern states with the Latino vote. Still, I wouldn't write off any candidate against a democrat. Its US politics, nothing is certain.

[jbishop15]

I would disagree on that. It has taken big movements to move the social issues leftward. I would say the country is very slow moving on social issues. Heck the Civil Rights happened in the 1960's, only 55 years ago. Women's suffrage was just over 100 years ago.  Though I might mention it took a republican to actually free the slaves ;)  What do you think social media would have been like with JFK, who was known to be a player. Heck FDR might have not been president with social media. They hid the fact he was in a wheel chair for a long time. No one wanted to see a disable president during that time.  Just saying, that social media isn't just a negative for republicans. Look at Clinton, she's getting mauled over this email and server stuff.  I would say that Trump probably has the least likely chance just because I think there are republicans who would just not vote for him. I think he's going to loose bad in the southern states with the Latino vote. Still, I wouldn't write off any candidate against a democrat. Its US politics, nothing is certain.

We're on the same page; what I was saying about social media is not that Clinton is protected (far from it) but that Trump's more radicalized positions are not unknown to the public, whereas even as recently as the 1980s some might've not known. Those big movements are definitely to credit for the leftward shift. But that belays the years and years of incremental buildup that lead to those movements. It was a shift leftward, if only by increments. Before there was artiste equality, there was the Stonewall Riots and Matthew Shepard's murder to change the hearts and minds. There is no chance the Republicans win the Latino vote, or the African-Amercian vote. That's 38% of the country right there. Not a lot of wiggle room for conservatives.

[acerimusdux]

There is no chance the Republicans win the Latino vote, or the African-Amercian vote. That's 38% of the country right there. Not a lot of wiggle room for conservatives.

As recently as 2004 though Republicans did still win 40% of the Hispanic vote. I think something like a Kasich/Rubio ticket could do as well (or even top that).

I think Kasich is probably the guy best positioned on the issues in the Republican field, but not sure yet if he's going to have the charisma to actually be a good candidate.  I would agree Trump's potential problems with both Women and Latinos might limit his general election upside, but don't underestimate the importance of charisma, either. Trump, even with his flaws, already looks like more of a threat to me than guys like Bush, Carson, or Cruz.

It's really hard to predict what will happen on the Republican side though with so many candidates. But I think eventually the threat of a Trump win might cause some conservatives to get behind a more moderate conservative like Jeb, Kasich, Walker, or Rubio. The question is, will this happen soon enough to deny Trump a significant share of electors.