Donald Trump for president?

[rkim291968]

I object to naming anything significant with a politician's name.    Pivoting this into a Trump post, I strongly believe if Trump becomes the POTUS, he will name many things after him while he is still in office.   Trump Yosemite National Park, Mount Shasta Trump, Trump Kennedy Airport, Trump Washington Monument, Trump National Cemetery, Trump Panama Canal (and make Panama pay for the change), Trump-ISIS war, ....

[acerimusdux]

But really, how insignificant is McKinley? is this really worthy of outrage?

If he really wanted to cause partisan outrage, I suppose he could have named it Mount Cleveland.  FWIW, the Republican delegation from Alaska had lobbied for the change.

[rehmwa]

Donald Trump......

the right - stupid enough that Trump is currently in first place

the left - stupid enough that they are trying constantly to manufacture and identify ways to try and kill his campaign instead of encourage it

I give up

(in seriousness?  I'm encouraged that at least one side is trying to move away from career politicians (Trump, Carsin, Carly) - not thrilled with one of those options - but happy with the general concept

It's really time to get away from two parties consisting of "Old White Professional Politicians Doing the Same Thing Under Two Different Labels")

[Golfingdad]

FWIW, the Republican delegation from Alaska had lobbied for the change.

It's not worth anything. We can't waste time letting information and facts get in the way of complaining and blaming Obama!! Come on, get with the program!!!! ;)

[Mac62]

Quote:

Originally Posted by acerimusdux

FWIW, the Republican delegation from Alaska had lobbied for the change.

It's not worth anything. We can't waste time letting information and facts get in the way of complaining and blaming Obama!! Come on, get with the program!!!! ;)

C'mon now - in all fairness, Obama's administration has been blaming Bush for everything for the last eight years, so a little turnabout is fair play.

(FWIW, I'm Independent/no party affiliation.)

[rkim291968]

Originally Posted by Mac62

C'mon now - in all fairness, Obama's administration has been blaming Bush for everything for the last eight years, so a little turnabout is fair play.

(FWIW, I'm Independent/no party affiliation.)

That's what politicians do .... and second your "FWIW."    Trump will be no different if he becomes the POTUS.  In fact, he will blame congress, senate, his own party, DEMs, Mexico, China, Russia, Fox, Aljazeera, ISIS, weather, Rosie O, Obama, Hispanics, illegal aliens, women, Supreme court, ... if he does not get his way.

What are all your opinions on Carson now tying Trump in IOWA poll? People looking for fresher alternative to Trump? Even Fiorina is in third place.

[Mac62]

What are all your opinions on Carson now tying Trump in IOWA poll?   People looking for fresher alternative to Trump?  Even Fiorina is in third place.

I don't put a lot of stock in the polls at this point, we're way too far removed from the elections (and even the party nominations) for them to have much relevance.  It would be akin to doing a Fantasy Football draft for the following season in March.  Even so, Carson does seem to be gaining traction.  Maybe a combination of the right demographics and people wanting to depart from 'politics as usual'?  He seems to be a very intelligent, articulate and highly thoughtful man.  From what I've seen so far, he appears to be pretty extreme right wing, but without all the bluster, ego and vitriol of Trump.  Not too hard to see how he could have a much wider appeal than The Donald, especially in the minority and female voting blocs.

[newtogolf]

That's what politicians do .... and second your "FWIW."    Trump will be no different if he becomes the POTUS.  In fact, he will blame congress, senate, his own party, DEMs, Mexico, China, Russia, Fox, Aljazeera, ISIS, weather, Rosie O, Obama, Hispanics, illegal aliens, women, Supreme court, ... if he does not get his way.

What are all your opinions on Carson now tying Trump in IOWA poll?   People looking for fresher alternative to Trump?  Even Fiorina is in third place.

In fairness, Trump, Fiorina and Carson are in an enviable position in that none of the problems they inherit can be blamed on them as they are not in politics.  I think it would be reasonable for them to blame Obama, the House and Senate.

[newtogolf]

It's not worth anything. We can't waste time letting information and facts get in the way of complaining and blaming Obama!! Come on, get with the program!!!! ;)

My issue wasn't with the name change, it was with the timing.  I'm aware that Alaska has been trying to change the name of the mountain for many years and the Republicans from Ohio have prevented the measure from being voted on.

I guess Obama wanted to deliver big news on his trip to Alaska and that's the reason for the timing.

[Golfingdad]

My issue wasn't with the name change, it was with the timing.  I'm aware that Alaska has been trying to change the name of the mountain for many years and the Republicans from Ohio have prevented the measure from being voted on.

I guess Obama wanted to deliver big news on his trip to Alaska and that's the reason for the timing.

So cynical.

People wanted things done.  They got things done.  But a guy I don't like had something to do with it, so let's complain!

[RandallT]

Fallon does Trump.

Trump- He's in Your Head!

[newtogolf]

So cynical.

People wanted things done.  They got things done.  But a guy I don't like had something to do with it, so let's complain!

If GW was POTUS I'd have made the same comment, not everything is about Obama.  I'd think there's a huge list of issues the POTUS would have to address at this time, renaming a mountain would / should be near the bottom of the list.

[Golfingdad]

If GW was POTUS I'd have made the same comment, not everything is about Obama.  I'd think there's a huge list of issues the POTUS would have to address at this time, renaming a mountain would / should be near the bottom of the list.

I believe you, but it's still complaining for complaining's sake.

The whole "it's not the most important thing on the agenda so why are they 'wasting time'" argument is silly.

For one, like @RFKFREAK was saying above, not everybody agrees on what the most important thing is, and secondly, how much time is really being taken away from his day to sign a piece of paper for this?

[rkim291968]

Did anyone see MSNBC making fun of Trump's prolific usage of the world "disaster" today?   I didn't know he used it so many times to refer to just about everything.   It will make a nice late night skit, or parody.

[jcjim]

C'mon now - in all fairness, Obama's administration has been blaming Bush for everything for the last eight years, so a little turnabout is fair play.

(FWIW, I'm Independent/no party affiliation.)

Well the economy was trashed and one step from a depression by Bush and his famous treasury Paulson bumb...Trillions stolen by wall street and nobody was charged with anything.......

[Gator Hazard]

Well the economy was trashed and one step from a depression by Bush and his famous treasury Paulson bumb...Trillions stolen by wall street and nobody was charged with anything.......

It still amazes me when people think that one person or one party is always to blame, and ironically it is NEVER their party.  And your republican and democrat "representatives" thank you for that. Bush is not the entire reason why the economy crashed, in fact he walked in the door and not long after that 9/11 happened.  He walked in the door and Enron crashed.  He walked in the door and Tyco crashed.  He walked in the door and MCI Worldcom crashed. Does anyone think that those companies built up and unraveled in the two years Bush was in office?  Or that terrorism and the purveyors of it just magically appeared as soon as Bush was in office?

The events and boilings up of things that cause an economy to crash take years to fester, it doesn't just happen overnight.  I could point fingers at Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, I could point fingers at the head of the SEC  under Clinton, Arthur Leavitt.  We could point fingers at Clinton himself. But too many people take the easy button approach and its just way, way easier to say "well, uhh, ya know..BUSH!  Yeah, that dude.  You know, he was president when this all happened".  I get it, I know Bush had a lot to do with the economy but so did the others mentioned above that came to me just off the top of my head.  Congress who holds the purse strings was controlled by democrats during most of his administration.  Do you hold them responsible? (And by you I am not pointing you specifically out @ jcjim.  I am talking in general after having noticed many posts that have become polarizing).

This is why I am an independent, got tired of arguing in circles in absolutes, it got old fast and it never got anywhere.  I could never be a true republican because I can't get over some of their fringe beliefs (if I could vote for or against them as an independent I would not be registered as one at all but you can't vote for any candidates in a primary without being in a party pretty much) and obvious denial of the way of the world (abortion, gay marriage, etc.).  I could never be a liberal because of the same reasons, idealism is great, but its not practical.  We can't feed, cloth and provide healthcare and benefits to the entire world with open borders and open arms.  I would love to do it, really would, but the world doesn't work that way.  I also felt most liberals were too condescending, they seem to know it all, they know what everyone needs, and know what is best for everyone, even if those persons don't know it and since they are smarter than everyone else they will just make those decisions for us.

I prefer to point fingers at individuals with power who make bad decisions no matter what their party and I prefer to vote for individuals.

Didn't I say I was done talking politics?   Now, back to Trump, I can have fun laughing at him all day.  Have to check out those skits.

Flame away

[RandallT]

For those of us who think Trump would be self-aggrandizing as president, doesn't that kind of prove the wisdom of our founders? Limiting centralized power and all that. They foresaw exactly this. Well, maybe not Trump exactly- and maybe not his hair. But that someone sometime would come along and be power-hungry. Or some movement might take advantage of electoral advantages for a short period of time, if rules allowed them to.

Checks and balances between branches of government (and between states and federal government) are a beautiful thing. Even if we have a benevolent dictator for 50 years who does wonderful things with central power, who is to say that in year 51, it becomes less benevolent. But then it's too late- power was ceded and aggrandized at high levels and there's no turning back.

So why would we worry about the central government not being able to "get things done"/dysfunctional congress/etc.... and then turn around and worry that central government has too much power?  Dysfunction of congress is a feature, not a bug, if you ask me. It saves us from megalomaniacs.

We can survive crappy presidents, I think, but only if the system allows us to put up a fight against them. The death of our country will be when our future is determined by one man.

With that said, we need a good leader, and I don't see any on the horizon right now. It's all very sad. Until one comes along, I'm glad we still have some ability to withstand crappy ones.

[davedove]

For those of us who think Trump would be self-aggrandizing as president, doesn't that kind of prove the wisdom of our founders? Limiting centralized power and all that. They foresaw exactly this. Well, maybe not Trump exactly- and maybe not his hair. But that someone sometime would come along and be power-hungry. Or some movement might take advantage of electoral advantages for a short period of time, if rules allowed them to.

Checks and balances between branches of government (and between states and federal government) are a beautiful thing. Even if we have a benevolent dictator for 50 years who does wonderful things with central power, who is to say that in year 51, it becomes less benevolent. But then it's too late- power was ceded and aggrandized at high levels and there's no turning back.

So why would we worry about the central government not being able to "get things done"/dysfunctional congress/etc.... and then turn around and worry that central government has too much power?  Dysfunction of congress is a feature, not a bug, if you ask me. It saves us from megalomaniacs.

We can survive crappy presidents, I think, but only if the system allows us to put up a fight against them. The death of our country will be when our future is determined by one man.

With that said, we need a good leader, and I don't see any on the horizon right now. It's all very sad. Until one comes along, I'm glad we still have some ability to withstand crappy ones.

I completely agree that Congresses inability to act is really an important part of government.  The founders didn't believe laws should be passed too quickly and neither do I.

Too often people look to the government to do something when, in many cases, the best thing the government can do is get their hands out of an issue and get out of the way.