Donald Trump for president?

[Ernest Jones]

10 minutes ago, iacas said:

Reagan?

[Lihu]

2 hours ago, Dave2512 said:

Was at two bars last night and politics came up in casual talk with strangers. Not one Trump supporter. Surprisingly most were pro Sanders, wide demographic variance too. I asked one couple if they would vote for him even if it became obvious he was unelectable and they looked at me like I was nuts. He is gaining steam, his rally in Denver was massively attended. Despite not encountering any Trump fans it's clear people on the street are tired of the status quo.

I agree with this!

[AbsoluteTruths]

 

[Dave2512]

So "crazy Bernie" and Trump have different sides of the same coin supporters? From that clip the only difference I see is who they support. 2016 year of the fanatic voter. 

[Braivo]

15 hours ago, Dave2512 said:

But we're just now getting to primaries. Six months ago nobody knew what would happen. He's a long way from running away with anything, his mouth will see to that.  

 

[saevel25]

 

 

[acerimusdux]

In a USA Today poll:
 

Quote

 

• Clinton loses by 2 points to Trump (43%-45%), 1 point to Cruz (44%-45%), 6 points to Rubio (42%-48%) and 11 points to Kasich (38%-49%). That's a weaker standing than the former secretary of State showed in December's survey, when she narrowly led Trump and Cruz and trailed Rubio by just 2 points.

• Sanders loses by 1 point to Trump (43%-44%), 3 points to Kasich (41%-44%) and 4 points to Rubio (42%-46%) — each of them a slightly stronger showing than Clinton — and he leads Cruz by 2 points (44%-42%).

 

It's funny how many people really have believed Trump couldn't win. This poll now has him beating both leading Democrats. And, I do think he's more electable than Cruz.

Republican's best candidate though would be Kasich. I think Clinton will be the Democratic nominee.

[pumaAttack]

1 hour ago, acerimusdux said:

In a USA Today poll:
 

It's funny how many people really have believed Trump couldn't win. This poll now has him beating both leading Democrats. And, I do think he's more electable than Cruz.

Republican's best candidate though would be Kasich. I think Clinton will be the Democratic nominee.

 

Those polls really don't mean much...

 

People will vote for their party line, regardless of the nominee.   The hypotheticals take away from the logical aspect that there will only be two choices.

[phan52]

On ‎2‎/‎16‎/‎2016 at 1:42 PM, Braivo said:

 Secondly, this is still primary season, once the general election hits and people are faced with Hillary v. Trump he will become even more appealing, I live in MI, a typically liberal state, and Trump leads in all of the polls. He is going to appeal to a lot of Dems who are repulsed by Hillary. 

 

I believe that just the opposite will happen. It is important to point out that Trump does not know or appreciate the important issues. He doesn't address any policy position directly. I'm fairly certain that Hillary will be the Dem nominee and she will bury Trump in any debates. Hillary has baggage but she knows her stuff. All Trump will have is boasts and insults and I believe at that point that the American people will recognize the seriousness of the situation. Trump is not a serious person.

[Golfingdad]

24 minutes ago, phan52 said:

 

I believe that just the opposite will happen. It is important to point out that Trump does not know or appreciate the important issues. He doesn't address any policy position directly. I'm fairly certain that Hillary will be the Dem nominee and she will bury Trump in any debates. Hillary has baggage but she knows her stuff. All Trump will have is boasts and insults and I believe at that point that the American people will recognize the seriousness of the situation. Trump is not a serious person.

You remind of this speech:

"For the last couple of months, Senator Rumson has suggested that being president of this country was, to a certain extent, about character, and although I have not been willing to engage in his attacks on me, I've been here three years and three days, and I can tell you without hesitation: Being President of this country is entirely about character. For the record: yes, I am a card-carrying member of the ACLU. But the more important question is why aren't you, Bob? Now, this is an organization whose sole purpose is to defend the Bill of Rights, so it naturally begs the question: Why would a senator, his party's most powerful spokesman and a candidate for President, choose to reject upholding the Constitution? If you can answer that question, folks, then you're smarter than I am, because I didn't understand it until a few hours ago. America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then, you can stand up and sing about the "land of the free". I've known Bob Rumson for years, and I've been operating under the assumption that the reason Bob devotes so much time and energy to shouting at the rain was that he simply didn't get it. Well, I was wrong. Bob's problem isn't that he doesn't get it. Bob's problem is that he can't sell it! We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections. You gather a group of middle-aged, middle-class, middle-income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family and American values and character. And wave an old photo of the President's girlfriend and you scream about patriotism and you tell them, she's to blame for their lot in life, and you go on television and you call her a *****. Sydney Ellen Wade has done nothing to you, Bob. She has done nothing but put herself through school, represent the interests of public school teachers, and lobby for the safety of our natural resources. You want a character debate, Bob? You better stick with me, 'cause Sydney Ellen Wade is way out of your league.

[pauses]

I've loved two women in my life. I lost one to cancer, and I lost the other 'cause I was so busy keeping my job I forgot to do my job. Well, that ends right now. Tomorrow morning, the White House is sending a bill to Congress for its consideration. It's White House Resolution 455, an energy bill requiring a 20 percent reduction of the emission of fossil fuels over the next ten years. It is by far the most aggressive stride ever taken in the fight to reverse the effects of global warming. The other piece of legislation is the crime bill. As of today, it no longer exists. I'm throwing it out. I'm throwing it out writing a law that makes sense. You cannot address crime prevention without getting rid of assault weapons and handguns. I consider them a threat to national security, and I will go door to door if I have to, but I'm gonna convince Americans that I'm right, and I'm gonna get the guns. We've got serious problems, and we need serious people, and if you want to talk about character, Bob, you'd better come at me with more than a burning flag and a membership card. If you want to talk about character and American values, fine. Just tell me where and when, and I'll show up. This is a time for serious people, Bob, and your fifteen minutes are up. My name is Andrew Shepherd, and I *am* the President."

[phan52]

28 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

     

Quote

  41 minutes ago, phan52 said:

 

I believe that just the opposite will happen. It is important to point out that Trump does not know or appreciate the important issues. He doesn't address any policy position directly. I'm fairly certain that Hillary will be the Dem nominee and she will bury Trump in any debates. Hillary has baggage but she knows her stuff. All Trump will have is boasts and insults and I believe at that point that the American people will recognize the seriousness of the situation. Trump is not a serious person.

 

You remind of this speech:

"For the last couple of months, Senator Rumson has suggested that being president of this country was, to a certain extent, about character, and although I have not been willing to engage in his attacks on me, I've been here three years and three days, and I can tell you without hesitation: Being President of this country is entirely about character. For the record: yes, I am a card-carrying member of the ACLU. But the more important question is why aren't you, Bob? Now, this is an organization whose sole purpose is to defend the Bill of Rights, so it naturally begs the question: Why would a senator, his party's most powerful spokesman and a candidate for President, choose to reject upholding the Constitution? If you can answer that question, folks, then you're smarter than I am, because I didn't understand it until a few hours ago. America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then, you can stand up and sing about the "land of the free". I've known Bob Rumson for years, and I've been operating under the assumption that the reason Bob devotes so much time and energy to shouting at the rain was that he simply didn't get it. Well, I was wrong. Bob's problem isn't that he doesn't get it. Bob's problem is that he can't sell it! We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections. You gather a group of middle-aged, middle-class, middle-income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family and American values and character. And wave an old photo of the President's girlfriend and you scream about patriotism and you tell them, she's to blame for their lot in life, and you go on television and you call her a *****. Sydney Ellen Wade has done nothing to you, Bob. She has done nothing but put herself through school, represent the interests of public school teachers, and lobby for the safety of our natural resources. You want a character debate, Bob? You better stick with me, 'cause Sydney Ellen Wade is way out of your league.

[pauses]

I've loved two women in my life. I lost one to cancer, and I lost the other 'cause I was so busy keeping my job I forgot to do my job. Well, that ends right now. Tomorrow morning, the White House is sending a bill to Congress for its consideration. It's White House Resolution 455, an energy bill requiring a 20 percent reduction of the emission of fossil fuels over the next ten years. It is by far the most aggressive stride ever taken in the fight to reverse the effects of global warming. The other piece of legislation is the crime bill. As of today, it no longer exists. I'm throwing it out. I'm throwing it out writing a law that makes sense. You cannot address crime prevention without getting rid of assault weapons and handguns. I consider them a threat to national security, and I will go door to door if I have to, but I'm gonna convince Americans that I'm right, and I'm gonna get the guns. We've got serious problems, and we need serious people, and if you want to talk about character, Bob, you'd better come at me with more than a burning flag and a membership card. If you want to talk about character and American values, fine. Just tell me where and when, and I'll show up. This is a time for serious people, Bob, and your fifteen minutes are up. My name is Andrew Shepherd, and I *am* the President."

LOL!! Not far off I guess. Trump reminds me of Bob Rumson. But rather than a stirring speech, I think it takes place in the context of a debate. Trump makes everything seem so simple - "I'll make great deals". Problems solved. But when they get right down to it in the general election, serious issues are on the table and Trump doesn't have a grasp of them, nor is he interested. He would lose badly in a one-on-one debate against a seasoned pol. Right now he is dealing with amateurs. Hillary ain't no amateur.

[Fourputt]

2 minutes ago, phan52 said:

LOL!! Not far off I guess. Trump reminds me of Bob Rumson. But rather than a stirring speech, I think it takes place in the context of a debate. Trump makes everything seem so simple - "I'll make great deals". Problems solved. But when they get right down to it in the general election, serious issues are on the table and Trump doesn't have a grasp of them, nor is he interested. He would lose badly in a one-on-one debate against a seasoned pol. Right now he is dealing with amateurs. Hillary ain't no amateur.

And that is likely to be her downfall.  From all of the reportage on this campaign, the voters are sick and tired of the "experienced" politician.  They are sick of the status quo, and a vote for her is a vote for 4 more years of the same old same old.  Unless the trend changes drastically, a maverick is going to sit in the oval Office next year, not a business as usual DC politician.

[Golfingdad]

Speaking of polls ... http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/17/politics/donald-trump-ted-cruz-poll-supreme-court/index.html

Quote

Ted Cruz has inched ahead of Donald Trump in a new national poll released Wednesday, the first national poll of the 2016 cycle that shows the Texas senator on top of the Republican field.

 

[Dave2512]

Trump very interesting on MSNBC tonight. He is vying for votes from both parties and seems to be getting across. Win lose whatever he is influencing 2016. 

[rkim291968]

Kasich seems to be the antithesis of Trump.   I love what Kasich has been saying.   He seems to want to bring two Americas together.   

[phan52]

13 hours ago, Fourputt said:

And that is likely to be her downfall.  From all of the reportage on this campaign, the voters are sick and tired of the "experienced" politician.  They are sick of the status quo, and a vote for her is a vote for 4 more years of the same old same old.  Unless the trend changes drastically, a maverick is going to sit in the oval Office next year, not a business as usual DC politician.

The GOP debates have been nothing but shouting matches and trading insults. Childish in comparison to the Dem debates, where they actually discuss substantive things. I think somebody with a grasp of substantive things vs. a clueless "maverick" is a serious mismatch. I am trying to give the American people some credibility here. If they go for the "maverick" who simply states that he will make great deals and insults his opponent, then I am wrong about the electorate. I hope I'm not.

 

[14ledo81]

22 minutes ago, phan52 said:

The GOP debates have been nothing but shouting matches and trading insults. Childish in comparison to the Dem debates, where they actually discuss substantive things. I think somebody with a grasp of substantive things vs. a clueless "maverick" is a serious mismatch. I am trying to give the American people some credibility here. If they go for the "maverick" who simply states that he will make great deals and insults his opponent, then I am wrong about the electorate. I hope I'm not.

 

 

I am going to guess if they vote for him, this is not how they viewed him......

[phan52]

6 minutes ago, 14ledo81 said:

 

Quote

 phan52 said:

 

The GOP debates have been nothing but shouting matches and trading insults. Childish in comparison to the Dem debates, where they actually discuss substantive things. I think somebody with a grasp of substantive things vs. a clueless "maverick" is a serious mismatch. I am trying to give the American people some credibility here. If they go for the "maverick" who simply states that he will make great deals and insults his opponent, then I am wrong about the electorate. I hope I'm not.

 

 

I am going to guess if they vote for him, this is not how they viewed him......

Well, my point is, let's see how he is viewed when/if he actually gets in a substantive, one-on-one debate. Nothing of the sort has happened yet, even in interviews where he more often filibusters than he does answer questions.

Edited February 18, 2016 by phan52