Donald Trump for president?

[newtogolf]

4 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

If Hillary wins it's not because they republicans put forth the wrong candidate it's because they have made the party a joke with all the infighting. Nothing to do with Trump.

You're right, the GOP should have never allowed Trump to run if they weren't going to back him.  They gave him the pulpit to rally voters and now that he has, they decide he's not the right person to represent them.  Trump was arrogant, brash and politically incorrect long before he ran for POTUS, anyone that saw him on television or read his books knows this.  Whoever is heading the GOP needs to be fired because they have made a lot of mistakes this election.  

If Trump were not in the race or at least not running under the republican ticket, better candidates like Rand Paul might have had an opportunity to get more media attention.  

[14ledo81]

4 hours ago, jamo said:

It doesn't cost billions upon billions of dollars to lock my car doors.

So cost is the determining factor for you?  If the wall was free, you would approve of it?

[Dave2512]

There is no wall it's just something he made up to rile up his mob and keep himself in the headlines. 

[saevel25]

28 minutes ago, 14ledo81 said:

So cost is the determining factor for you?  If the wall was free, you would approve of it?

No such thing as free. 

If so I still wouldn't want a wall. It's just stupid sounding. It's like we rather act unenlightened barbarians and build castles and walls. It's like the ultimate cop-out of actually coming up with a meaningful joint resolution with Mexico.

 

[iacas]

I'm still an outsider to politics, but isn't the whole "wall" thing like… months old?

3 hours ago, Dave2512 said:

There is no wall it's just something he made up to rile up his mob and keep himself in the headlines. 

I think @Dave2512 is getting at that. Are y'all picking on the "wall" thing because it's easy, or has Trump recently kept bringing it up?

And again, it's easy to throw stones when you haven't staked out your own territory. Hillary supporters would have a hard time defending some of the things she's done, would they not?

[Dave2512]

He has mentioned it recently at rallies but it's more cheerleading than anything. It's a slogan maybe even a symbol for his strict immigration opinions. We'll hear more wall remarks due to Belgium. His immigration stance, the wall etc. is mostly about national security. 

[14ledo81]

I agree that the "wall" thing is old and pointless to talk about. I don't see it being built.

I just mentioned it to show (IMO) @saevel25's flawed comparison to locking your car.  

[saevel25]

6 minutes ago, 14ledo81 said:

I just mentioned it to show (IMO) @saevel25's flawed comparison to locking your car.  

I don't see it as flawed. In many ways locking your car is pointless since it doesn't deter the real criminals who have means to bypass the locks or who will just smash the window in. 

If you build a wall there will be people still as determined to cross it and will not care there is a wall there and will not care it's illegal to cross it. They are very similar. Both are intended to keep people out, yet both are meaningless to those willing enough. 

 

[Mr. Desmond]

17 minutes ago, 14ledo81 said:

I agree that the "wall" thing is old and pointless to talk about. I don't see it being built.

I just mentioned it to show (IMO) @saevel25's flawed comparison to locking your car.  

The wall is real in Trump's Website

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform

[Dave2512]

He will have to make it 40 feet underground given the vast number of tunnels from Mexico to the US. His wall gained traction because it's a cheer at his campaign stops. He says what are we going to do and the crowds answer build a wall. He follows with who is going to pay for it, the come back Mexico! Beyond that his opponents have used it to construct their own silly sarcastic bridges Trump jabs. 

[Gunther]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

 

@Dave2512

And again, it's easy to throw stones when you haven't staked out your own territory. Hillary supporters would have a hard time defending some of the things she's done, would they not?

@saevel25 has quite vociferously admonished us for bringing Hillary up in this thread, because you know, it's entitled Donald Trump for President.  It's OK to talk about Trump's current opponents but evidently not the next one.

Not sure if that policy will be waived once the primary season is over but I'll leave those decisions to smarter folks than me.

[Dave2512]

Probably because Hillary has yet to become Trump's concern. He's the one that's put so much into running down his primary opponents. It was smart too, he has kept them on the ropes and stolen all the news coverage. He is a tyrant freak but the way he's controlled the republican primaries is brilliant. But he'll have to up his game Hillary isn't Little Marco. 

[Golfingdad]

5 hours ago, newtogolf said:

You're right, the GOP should have never allowed Trump to run if they weren't going to back him.  They gave him the pulpit to rally voters and now that he has, they decide he's not the right person to represent them.  Trump was arrogant, brash and politically incorrect long before he ran for POTUS, anyone that saw him on television or read his books knows this.  Whoever is heading the GOP needs to be fired because they have made a lot of mistakes this election.  

If Trump were not in the race or at least not running under the republican ticket, better candidates like Rand Paul might have had an opportunity to get more media attention.  

Honest question: Did the GOP have a choice?  I thought that you pick your party, you get your signatures, and you're on the ballot, no?

[Dave2512]

It didn't matter because they had 17 candidates. He was just one of many and early on polls were whacked due to the crowded field. He slid through unnoticed because the party elite expected more mileage from Bush. For a minute even Carson had momentum. Cruz came out of Iowa the leader, that was just 50 days ago.

[rkim291968]

Trump even if he becomes the POTUS, he won't be able to do most of what he said or says.   It's simply not possible with our constitution, budget, ....  E.g, the reality is that no one can build an effective wall and make Mexico pay for it.  Make China pay for what?  Ban Muslims to enter US?   When these things don't happen, he will just blame everyone/everything else - congress, senate, DEM, GOP establishment,, Megan Kelly, Fox, his ex-wife & dead father, Santa Claus, ....    And the Trump followers will buy his excuses, too.   

[Dave2512]

22 minutes ago, rkim291968 said:

Trump even if he becomes the POTUS, he won't be able to do most of what he said or says.   It's simply not possible with our constitution, budget, ....  E.g, the reality is that no one can build an effective wall and make Mexico pay for it.  Make China pay for what?  Ban Muslims to enter US?   When these things don't happen, he will just blame everyone/everything else - congress, senate, DEM, GOP establishment,, Megan Kelly, Fox, his ex-wife & dead father, Santa Claus, ....    And the Trump followers will buy his excuses, too.   

Funny thing is all of that is same as it ever was so why do we allow politicians to earn our trust on promises we know they can't keep. All of that has happened to Obama, been nothing but 7 years of opposition roadblocks. Then election season comes and the outgoing president gets blamed for not solving and undoing decades of problems. That's why Trump is doing well he doesn't fit the mold and he's pointing fingers both ways. 

[14ledo81]

7 hours ago, saevel25 said:

I don't see it as flawed. In many ways locking your car is pointless since it doesn't deter the real criminals who have means to bypass the locks or who will just smash the window in. 

If you build a wall there will be people still as determined to cross it and will not care there is a wall there and will not care it's illegal to cross it. They are very similar. Both are intended to keep people out, yet both are meaningless to those willing enough. 

 

If locking cars was pointless, nobody would do it.  There wouldn't even be locks on cars.

 

[jamo]

10 hours ago, 14ledo81 said:

So cost is the determining factor for you?  If the wall was free, you would approve of it?

I'd still think it was pretty much pointless, but sure, if you can snap your fingers and have a wall appear, fine by me.