Donald Trump for president?

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtogolf

If there was a thumbs up in this room I'd have given you one.  All items are on point but I doubt those you're directing them at will agree.

Mr. Desmond.....you have been powned.

I am assuming that is a spelling error and should be "owned"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

You never know, Chop. Under a Pub, we would have gone to austerity -- see Greece -- that's what they wanted, for no one to spend money. Think back to 2009 and think about 5-6 years like that year.

Some good things have occurred, and bad., and the not so good -- just like other Presidential terms. And remember, Congress has a lot to do with the success of a President. The Dems needed 60 votes in the Senate to pass anything, and they rarely got the 60 because of the animosity and partisanship. Could Obama have resolved that? Maybe. But the Pubs really made it personal about making sure he had a miserable Presidency.

And it's costing them. Boehner has let the radical elements of his Party mouth off so much with their extremist speeches and positions that a person like Trump now seems acceptable. Karma is a bitch.

I'm not sure if you've been trolling these past few weeks with your superficial, one-sided, leftist posts but if so, you finally reeled me in.

1. Greece is a socialist regime (fyi, that is radical left not "Pub") which spent more than it had; hence their difficulties. Same shit happening in Detroit, Cali, Illinois, and other places run by leftists. As Margaret Thatcher said (paraphrased), "Socialism will always fail because at some point, they run out of other people's money".

2. The Senate didn't pass anything because Harry Reid buried more bills than any senate leader in history. And both Dems and Republicans can't stand Obama because Obama is a narcissistic, petulant child. The most recent trade bill was killed by Dems, the Republicans actually sided with Obama on it (much to my chagrin). He's been an abomination from all angles and has cost himself.

3. Boehner has been a horrible leader because if he had his way, he would have given Obama everything he wanted. Thankfully there are enough reps in the House with the backbone to stand up for their constituents who are overwhelmingly opposed to every single Obama strategy. These are not radicals, they are following the will of the American people.

4. The left has gotten so radical that folks supporting an avowed socialist believe they are in the mainstream or even the majority; you are not.

I've tried to ignore this glib disinformation you've been posting of late but I had to respond to this one. I won't get into a back and forth on it because I don't enjoy it and my favorite major is a few short hours away.

Watch the insults @Gunther

[danL]

Many are dropping the word "illegal" ......

"Hillary Clinton put Donald Trump in her sights.

In a speech at the National Council of La Raza in Kansas City, the Democratic frontrunner for the presidential nomination expressed her displeasure with the Republican candidate and real estate mogul’s invectives against Mexican immigrants, many of whom Trump said are “drug dealers” and “rapists.”

“It was appalling to hear Donald Trump describe immigrants as drug dealers, racists and criminals,” Clinton said. “He’s talking about people you and I know. He’s talking about people who love this country, work hard and want nothing more than a chance to build a better life for themselves and this country.”"  - [URL=http://time.com/3956564/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-basta/]http://time.com/3956564/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-basta/[/URL]

Either Time has reported this incorrectly or Clinton deliberately dropped the word "illegal". To me this is exactly the political double speak that I spoke of in the previous post.

The dropping of the word "illegal" is a massive difference. It is not what the Donald said. He was referring to illegal immigrants.

What does Hillary Clinton think about illegal immigrants?

No-one is talking about immigrants only illegal immigrants. Big f'ing difference.

Have yet to see the press question Hillary on this.

Why shouldn't the Don be president after all you guys elected a Hollywood actor to be president and he never even ran a successful corporation   :)

One big reason is he is a radical Islamic sympathizer. Of course he'd say different, but anyone who blames the host of the draw Muhammad contest does not understand the importance of not backing down in the face of danger when you are exercising your right to free speech. If illegal immigrants tried to kill Trump would we blame Trump? He sure would if he were us.

[mdl]

I'm not sure if you've been trolling these past few weeks with your superficial, one-sided, leftist posts but if so, you finally reeled me in.

1. Greece is a socialist regime (fyi, that is radical left not "Pub") which spent more than it had; hence their difficulties. Same shit happening in Detroit, Cali, Illinois, and other places run by leftists. As Margaret Thatcher said (paraphrased), "Socialism will always fail because at some point, they run out of other people's money".

2. The Senate didn't pass anything because Harry Reid buried more bills than any senate leader in history. And both Dems and Republicans can't stand Obama because Obama is a narcissistic, petulant child. The most recent trade bill was killed by Dems, the Republicans actually sided with Obama on it (much to my chagrin). He's been an abomination from all angles and has cost himself.

3. Boehner has been a horrible leader because if he had his way, he would have given Obama everything he wanted. Thankfully there are enough reps in the House with the backbone to stand up for their constituents who are overwhelmingly opposed to every single Obama strategy. These are not radicals, they are following the will of the American people.

4. The left has gotten so radical that folks supporting an avowed socialist believe they are in the mainstream or even the majority; you are not.

I've tried to ignore this glib disinformation you've been posting of late but I had to respond to this one. I won't get into a back and forth on it because I don't enjoy it and my favorite major is a few short hours away.

Lol.  Welcome to fantasyland.  Seriously.  Get a grip on reality.

[acerimusdux]

No.... he is disadvantaged, as are you, if you can't tear that rant apart.

And I will not respond because it is not good for the forum, but it is good for people to vent... but he lost me in his first sentence.

So you are letting that softball pass by? OK, I'll pinch hit then:

1. The Socialists in Greece only came to power just under 6 months ago, they didn't cause the problem. It was the centrist parties, of both the left and right, which got Greece into this mess.

2. Hard to believe Obama is hated by everyone on both sides, when in fact he has better polling favorables than any of the announced presidential candidates from either side.

3. Also hard to say the Republicans in the house are following the will of the people. At best, of maybe half the people. If you go by polls, the people favor the Republicans on some issues (Terrorism, the deficit, trade, regulation of business) and favor Democrats on other issues (immigration, health care, minimum wage, addressing inequality).

4. The "avowed socialist" in the race may not be in the mainstream, but he also has better favorables/unfavorables than Trump.  And pretty comparable to Scott Walker, who might be the most viable challenger to Bush other than Trump.

Going by this poll :

If I sort by favorables:

44.7 Barack Obama

42.9 Hillary Clinton

35.0 Jeb Bush

29.9 Marco Rubio

28.7 Mike Huckabee

26.8 Bernie Sanders

25.5 Scott Walker

24.8 Ben Carson

24.4 Rand Paul

23.1 Donald Trump

and unfavorables:

60.5 Donald Trump

46.6 Hillary Clinton

44.4 Barack Obama

41.1 Jeb Bush

38.5 Rand Paul

36.6 Mike Huckabee

31.0 Marco Rubio

24.2 Bernie Sanders

23.9 Scott Walker

18.7 Ben Carson

So getting back to the thread topic, those are some ugly numbers for Trump if he really hopes to win the presidency.

[Elmer]

I'm not sure if you've been trolling these past few weeks with your superficial, one-sided, leftist posts but if so, you finally reeled me in.

1. Greece is a socialist regime (fyi, that is radical left not "Pub") which spent more than it had; hence their difficulties. Same shit happening in Detroit, Cali, Illinois, and other places run by leftists. As Margaret Thatcher said (paraphrased), "Socialism will always fail because at some point, they run out of other people's money".

2. The Senate didn't pass anything because Harry Reid buried more bills than any senate leader in history. And both Dems and Republicans can't stand Obama because Obama is a narcissistic, petulant child. The most recent trade bill was killed by Dems, the Republicans actually sided with Obama on it (much to my chagrin). He's been an abomination from all angles and has cost himself.

3. Boehner has been a horrible leader because if he had his way, he would have given Obama everything he wanted. Thankfully there are enough reps in the House with the backbone to stand up for their constituents who are overwhelmingly opposed to every single Obama strategy. These are not radicals, they are following the will of the American people.

4. The left has gotten so radical that folks supporting an avowed socialist believe they are in the mainstream or even the majority; you are not.

I've tried to ignore this glib disinformation you've been posting of late but I had to respond to this one. I won't get into a back and forth on it because I don't enjoy it and my favorite major is a few short hours away.

I wont respond point by point. However I would point out that not so long ago we had a president that determined we were in the black and gave us all back some money. This same POTUS then waged 2 wars with money the country didnt have, so he essentially kept them off the books. However eventually, along with other factors put us in the red.

Which is a way of saying the country " spent more than it had; hence their difficulties"

[saevel25]

This same POTUS then waged 2 wars with money the country didnt have, so he essentially kept them off the books. However eventually, along with other factors put us in the red.

Which is a way of saying the country "   spent more than it had; hence their difficulties"

Still a tad different then USA.

Greek GDP is $238 billion. That puts it somewhere between Louisiana and Oregon in terms of GDP ;)

Their primary sector is agriculture and fishery.

Overall in the scheme of things they have very little influence in the world.

The USA has a ton of leeway because we are the largest economy in the world. We are the most advanced country in the world. We have the most political push in the world. So we can get away with wasting trillions on a 2nd war and still come out alright.

Honestly the war really didn't hurt us economically. It was one of the largest businesses in the USA (GM) going through bankruptcy (thank you Unions). Then the housing market crashing because of the artificially inflated housing prices do to high risk low income available loans giving people the ability to buy homes they couldn't afford otherwise (thank you Bill Clinton)

Honestly if those two things didn't happen then we wouldn't even feel the cost of going to war.

[rkim291968]

I am against any candidate who is going to be too far left or too far right, and continue the fight of "them" against "us."   There is just "us" in USA ( ).    DT won't even be a them or us.   It will be all about "meeeeeee."   A narcissist will do what narcissist does.   The first quality I'd look for in today's presidency is the leadership to unite us all (or at least 70% of us).   Obama didn't have it - and don't say Reps didn't give him the chance.    A great leader will rise above it all.   DT certainly does not have it.   In fact, DT will make the division even worse.    From Rep side, Jeb Bush looks the best in that regard.  From Dem side, I know it isn't Ms. Clinton.   My Dem politician knowledge ends there so I don't know who in Dem can be a moderate candidate who can bring two sides closer.

A pet peeve of mine on today's politics - I hear many media, politicians in public refer to the president by his name, Obama.   Not Mr. President, not President Obama, not President.   Just Obama.    Love him or hate him, he is our president and we collectively voted him in.   He deserves certain respect, starting with how we address him in public.   Same courtesy should extend to DT if he ever (God forbid) becomes a president of USa.   I'd expect media (even MSNBC) to address him properly, not as "Trump."

[Mr. Desmond]

Still a tad different then USA.

Greek GDP is $238 billion. That puts it somewhere between Louisiana and Oregon in terms of GDP ;)

Their primary sector is agriculture and fishery.

Overall in the scheme of things they have very little influence in the world.

The USA has a ton of leeway because we are the largest economy in the world. We are the most advanced country in the world. We have the most political push in the world. So we can get away with wasting trillions on a 2nd war and still come out alright.

Honestly the war really didn't hurt us economically. It was one of the largest businesses in the USA (GM) going through bankruptcy (thank you Unions). Then the housing market crashing because of the artificially inflated housing prices do to high risk low income available loans giving people the ability to buy homes they couldn't afford otherwise (thank you Bill Clinton)

Honestly if those two things didn't happen then we wouldn't even feel the cost of going to war.

Wars all costs money and lives ... and injuries. We will be paying disabled and injured vets for the rest of their lives. And then there is the human cost of what occurred and continues to occur in Iraq. And if I remember, it was Bush's minion, Paul Bremer who fired the Iraqi Army ... 500,000 armed men who guess what ... waged a war against us and continue to do so. Now if we would have paid them ... guess what?

Personally, I would have taxed Iraqi oil to pay us back. Surprised we did not do that.

As to the politics, most of the time it takes two ... we can pass around the blame to everyone and us for electing ....

Now I've got to tie in DT ... oh, yes, if you thought Bush was bad, just think if DT was elected. But with those negatives and 81% of Hispanics saying "No Way" to the Donald, doubt if that right wing extremist capitalistic luxurious dream will occur.

[saevel25]

A pet peeve of mine on today's politics - I hear many media, politicians in public refer to the president by his name, Obama.   Not Mr. President, not President Obama, not President.   Just Obama.    Love him or hate him, he is our president and we collectively voted him in.   He deserves certain respect, starting with how we address him in public.   Same courtesy should extend to DT if he ever (God forbid) becomes a president of USa.   I'd expect media (even MSNBC) to address him properly, not as "Trump."

I didn't vote him in ;)

No he doesn't. He deserves the respect he earns. I respect the position of the president. Just becoming the president doesn't warrant respect, especially after his nearly 8 years in office. He had my respect for about 6 months, then he lost it.

Wars all costs money and lives ... and injuries. We will be paying disabled and injured vets for the rest of their lives. And then there is the human cost of what occurred and continues to occur in Iraq. And if I remember, it was Bush's minion, Paul Bremer who fired the Iraqi Army ... 500,000 armed men who guess what ... waged a war against us and continue to do so. Now if we would have paid them ... guess what?

If we actually start paying for their injuries and disabilities now, cause we do a very inadequate job supporting the military after sending them into  harms way.

I respect the military a ton. No one should blame the military for doing the job they signed up to do. If people want to blame someone, then blame Bush, or Congress. In the end, we should fully support our military after the war in medical, mental and job support.

Honestly, we spend WAY MORE money on useless programs than we do on supporting our military. How about fixing social security, medicare and medicaid. As well as go after people who cheat the system and waste more money than any money spent on actually helping those who fought on our behalf and who deserve it more.

I rather see money go to our military after a war than those who use welfare money to buy big screen TV's rather than feed their kids.

And if I remember, it was Bush's minion, Paul Bremer who fired the Iraqi Army ... 500,000 armed men who guess what ... waged a war against us and continue to do so. Now if we would have paid them ... guess what?

They might have still waged war against use anyways? They could have taken our money and turned on us. They could have kept demanding more money and if we didn't pay then also waged war on us. You have no clue the exact dynamics in those negotiations. It isn't a white or black scenario where, "Oh if we pay them they won't try to kill us".

[Mr. Desmond]

I didn't vote him in ;)

No he doesn't. He deserves the respect he earns. I respect the position of the president. Just becoming the president doesn't warrant respect, especially after his nearly 8 years in office. He had my respect for about 6 months, then he lost it.

If we actually start paying for their injuries and disabilities now, cause we do a very inadequate job supporting the military after sending them into  harms way.

I respect the military a ton. No one should blame the military for doing the job they signed up to do. If people want to blame someone, then blame Bush, or Congress. In the end, we should fully support our military after the war in medical, mental and job support.

Honestly, we spend WAY MORE money on useless programs than we do on supporting our military. How about fixing social security, medicare and medicaid. As well as go after people who cheat the system and waste more money than any money spent on actually helping those who fought on our behalf and who deserve it more.

I rather see money go to our military after a war than those who use welfare money to buy big screen TV's rather than feed their kids.

They might have still waged war against use anyways? They could have taken our money and turned on us. They could have kept demanding more money and if we didn't pay then also waged war on us. You have no clue the exact dynamics in those negotiations. It isn't a white or black scenario where, "Oh if we pay them they won't try to kill us".

Ummm, fellow member, I am making the point that before we send men to war, we need to recognize the costs of that war include lives and injuries, and to make certain that War is a last resort.

You were saying the war was good for the economy... I was making the point about other costs that you so cavalierly neglected to mention.

Ummm, fellow member, the reason we were able to stop the insurgency is that Petreus PAID the Sunnis to become our partners, or at least not fight us.

Wow ... spin city is on...  and as to the Donald, I do not know if he would consider any of these costs ... Donald may not realize that government is not business, and all the CEO is supposed to do generally is to carry out the laws and conduct foreign policy...

Since we cannot discuss issues in a somewhat honest manner based on something close to reality, or do so without insulting each other, (see Mr. Gunther) ... my time is limited in these discussions. Good luck.

[acerimusdux]

Still a tad different then USA.

Greek GDP is $238 billion. That puts it somewhere between Louisiana and Oregon in terms of GDP ;)

Their primary sector is agriculture and fishery.

Actually, you are missing the most important difference. The U.S. borrows in it's own currency.  And, we have a government with enough political stability and credibility that it could borrow a heck of a lot more at still very low interest rates. For the US, whether to borrow, tax, or print money is mainly a financing decision.  When long term interest rates are really low, like now, borrowing is arguably the most economical choice for taxpayers.  This is mostly true of Japan as well, which has managed to run debt up to 235% of GDP (though they really do need to start cutting it now).

Greece is in the spot it's in mainly due to the Euro. They simply can't afford to have their economy being tied to what appears to be, in effect, Germany's currency.  The big problem now though is, if they tried to introduce a new currency, they wouldn't have the credibility to do so, and their existing debts would still be in Euros, anyway.

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by saevel25

Still a tad different then USA.

Greek GDP is $238 billion. That puts it somewhere between Louisiana and Oregon in terms of GDP ;)

Their primary sector is agriculture and fishery.

Actually, you are missing the most important difference. The U.S. borrows in it's own currency.  And, we have a government with enough political stability and credibility that it could borrow a heck of a lot more at still very low interest rates. For the US, whether to borrow, tax, or print money is mainly a financing decision.  When long term interest rates are really low, like now, borrowing is arguably the most economical choice for taxpayers.  This is mostly true of Japan as well, which has managed to run debt up to 235% of GDP (though they really do need to start cutting it now).

Greece is in the spot it's in mainly due to the Euro. They simply can't afford to have their economy being tied to what appears to be, in effect, Germany's currency.  The big problem now though is, if they tried to introduce a new currency, they wouldn't have the credibility to do so, and their existing debts would still be in Euros, anyway.

Nice summary, thanks.

[Golfingdad]

And now he says John McCain isn't a war hero because "he was captured." https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/07/18/trump-slams-mccain-for-being-captured-in-vietnam/ Wonder what lunacy is next?

[RJH999]

And now he says John McCain isn't a war hero because "he was captured." https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/07/18/trump-slams-mccain-for-being-captured-in-vietnam/ Wonder what lunacy is next?

[RandallT]

And now he says John McCain isn't a war hero because "he was captured."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/07/18/trump-slams-mccain-for-being-captured-in-vietnam/

Wonder what lunacy is next?

This may take some wind out of his sails. I think many who like Trump were naturally disposed to think McCain was a DC Republican lifetime politician who needs to step down, but at a minimum they respected his military service (and the honor/heroism with which he conducted himself in captivity). DT's nomination popularity seems like it has an expiration date fairly soon.

[acetoolguy]

It will be very hard for him to talk his way out of this. If he thinks saying this was a good idea, it speaks volumes for his judgment.

[boogielicious]

[QUOTE name="Golfingdad" url="/t/82688/donald-trump-for-president/240_30#post_1171446"] And now he says John McCain isn't a war hero because "he was captured." [URL=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/07/18/trump-slams-mccain-for-being-captured-in-vietnam/]https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/07/18/trump-slams-mccain-for-being-captured-in-vietnam/[/URL] Wonder what lunacy is next?[/QUOTE] This may take some wind out of his sails. I think many who like Trump were naturally disposed to think McCain was a DC Republican lifetime politician who needs to step down, but at a minimum they respected his military service (and the honor/heroism with which he conducted himself in captivity). DT's nomination popularity seems like it has an expiration date fairly soon.

You would think they would respect it. But after the way they treated John Kerry's service, nothing surprises me anymore. I just want DT to stay in the race for the sake of comedy writers everywhere.

[Mulligan Jeff]

Trump will announce Dennis Rodman as his running mate. Dennis has foreign relations experience. That will take the spotlight off The Donald. Wag the dog Donald!