Author President Donald J. Trump  (Read 622776 times)

5 Members and 18 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #210 on: January 16, 2016, 06:55:30 PM »
Only anomalies can win, and the only anomaly is Trump due to his media presence.

That's where you went off into the weeds. He's succeeding because he's saying the things regular Americans say to one another at the kitchen table, and he's doing it with fearlessness and strength. I've never seen two seconds of The Apprentice.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #211 on: January 16, 2016, 07:10:13 PM »
That's where you went off into the weeds. He's succeeding because he's saying the things regular Americans say to one another at the kitchen table, and he's doing it with fearlessness and strength. I've never seen two seconds of The Apprentice.

I meant the news media. He gets ratings, so he gets lots of coverage. One of the complaints last time around was that Romney wasn't getting enough media attention. That will not happen to Trump. CNN can't afford to ignore him.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #212 on: January 16, 2016, 10:34:45 PM »
I meant the news media. He gets ratings, so he gets lots of coverage.

So then I think the question should be, "Why does Trump get ratings?" I don't think it's because of the popularity of his TV show.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #213 on: January 16, 2016, 10:49:44 PM »
Cruz is whistling past the graveyard on his election eligibility, which is quite a different thing from citizenship. Its especially hypocritical since he and most right wingers are Constitution literalists.  The Constitution is clear using the idiom of the 18th Century to define "natural born".   It didn't mean no Presidents born by caesarian. And since it leaves the definition of naturalization (citizenship reqts for ALL born outside the US) to Congress, one must do logic gymnastics to see it otherwise.  It's moot anyway because Rafael is an asshole, and will fade when he leaves fundie-rich "Evangeland" and thumping his Dominionism is anathema. 

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #214 on: January 16, 2016, 11:02:47 PM »
Cruz is whistling past the graveyard on his election eligibility, which is quite a different thing from citizenship. Its especially hypocritical since he and most right wingers are Constitution literalists.  The Constitution is clear using the idiom of the 18th Century to define "natural born".   It didn't mean no Presidents born by caesarian. One must do logic gymnastics to see it otherwise.  It's moot anyway because Rafael will fade when he leaves fundie-rich "Evangeland".
Yep, it is a weird deal. Calls and outraged on the media for his "new york" comments (some saying like the typical 'new york jew' type of trope or just the "banker" stuff) but his biggest backers are rich folks who have a love of Israel in the odd modern Christian mega-church style or in the 'make weapons' way and etc. And his family works, and deals, with "those bankers." He is a highly educated and very smart guy (even his detractors say that and, unlike this character Obama, was known at his law school etc and in the legal community.) But, to me, and apparently I actually "agree" according to surveys with him, but he seems smarmy and something 'aint right.' But, then again, I have the same feeling about Trump and still wonder if he is not some stalking horse for Billary/Democrats. Again, I like MUCH of what he says but his history and manner (or lack thereof?)

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #215 on: January 16, 2016, 11:58:43 PM »
Agreed. I don't believe she'll even be the nominee. I've believed for months that she's going to be indicted. Others are now coming around on that.

There are 150 FBI agents working on 2 separate Hillary "situations". 5 FBI agents on your ass is a little concerning, even if you're a Clinton. 50 is very worrisome. 150 is "we need to move to Paraguay and get plastic surgery" serious.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/12/hillary-whistles-past-the-fbi-graveyard-but-dems-are-starting-to-look-nervous/

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #216 on: January 17, 2016, 12:03:08 AM »
There are 150 FBI agents working on 2 separate Hillary "situations". 5 FBI agents on your ass is a little concerning, even if you're a Clinton. 50 is very worrisome. 150 is "we need to move to Paraguay and get plastic surgery" serious.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/12/hillary-whistles-past-the-fbi-graveyard-but-dems-are-starting-to-look-nervous/

Maybe you could interview Chelsea

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #217 on: January 17, 2016, 12:23:23 AM »
Because he's a punchable televangelist who should be selling prayer cloths.

I was speaking in terms of legality.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #218 on: January 17, 2016, 12:57:48 AM »
So then I think the question should be, "Why does Trump get ratings?" I don't think it's because of the popularity of his TV show.

Well, the high ratings probably are in part due to his celebrity status. You'll have people that would not normally tune into a presidential primary debate going there just to see what Trump will say. The resonance within the GOP voters, however, is not due to that. That's entirely due to his message. Everyone is sick of the establishment, there's no question of that, and Trump certainly says it like it is and resonates. He resonates with me because, well, a lobbyist can't really buy a guy already worth billions of dollars.

What should scare the Democrats with Trump are the polls that look at crossovers. Trump is getting unusually high marks in potential cross over democrats, the black vote, the Hispanic vote, etc. That makes him a true wildcard that could win the general election simply because the equation is very different from any previous election. Look at how wrong the pundits have been with Trump since June, they haven't called anything right. They predicted implosion and god knows what, but none of that happened. That means they can't predict the general election either.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #219 on: January 17, 2016, 01:04:24 AM »
Agreed. I don't believe she'll even be the nominee. I've believed for months that she's going to be indicted. Others are now coming around on that.


Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #220 on: January 17, 2016, 01:21:19 AM »
There are 150 FBI agents working on 2 separate Hillary "situations". 5 FBI agents on your ass is a little concerning, even if you're a Clinton. 50 is very worrisome. 150 is "we need to move to Paraguay and get plastic surgery" serious.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/12/hillary-whistles-past-the-fbi-graveyard-but-dems-are-starting-to-look-nervous/

man.  heavy stuff.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #221 on: January 17, 2016, 01:44:01 AM »

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #222 on: January 17, 2016, 01:54:40 AM »
I was speaking in terms of legality.

i really am in no position to speak to the legality of cruz serving, particularly when constitutional scholars can't seem to agree.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #223 on: January 17, 2016, 02:17:31 AM »
I just took a minute to actually read the facts on the question of Cruz' eligibility. I sometimes like to know exactly what I am talking about.

In this case, it's taken all the fun out of it--it would seem clear to me, that he is eligible, but the issue would have to be dealt with in Congress as well as the judiciary, were he to actually come within farting distance of being nominated.

It's a moot point, but one that likely will one day matter. Perhaps, he's paving the way for Schwarzenegger to be tapped for veep!

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #224 on: January 17, 2016, 02:28:16 AM »
Well, the high ratings probably are in part due to his celebrity status. You'll have people that would not normally tune into a presidential primary debate going there just to see what Trump will say. The resonance within the GOP voters, however, is not due to that. That's entirely due to his message. Everyone is sick of the establishment, there's no question of that, and Trump certainly says it like it is and resonates. He resonates with me because, well, a lobbyist can't really buy a guy already worth billions of dollars.

What should scare the Democrats with Trump are the polls that look at crossovers. Trump is getting unusually high marks in potential cross over democrats, the black vote, the Hispanic vote, etc. That makes him a true wildcard that could win the general election simply because the equation is very different from any previous election. Look at how wrong the pundits have been with Trump since June, they haven't called anything right. They predicted implosion and god knows what, but none of that happened. That means they can't predict the general election either.

Trump gets high ratings entirely because of his celebrity status, because the decision makers at the  cable "news" networks and publications chose ratings over serious news coverage and investigative reporting.  Trump's speeches get unprecedented live coverage, which results in a disproportionate amount of free airtime that is grossly unfair to every other candidate, regardless of party.

The major media has also glossed over the fact that even though he's rich, he's not nearly the success he claims to be. He likes to dismiss his business bankruptcies as shrewd business moves, but in reality they cost him a great deal because he unwisely personally guaranteed some business loans. As a result, his equity positions in the companies was greatly reduced, his executive power was mostly neutered and reduced to figurehead status, and he was forced to sell the huge yacht he'd just bought from the Sultan of Bahrain to raise cash for his creditors.  Maybe he can shrug it off now, but at the time it had to sting a lttle.

He's also getting a huge pass on his fraudulent Trump University, which was essentially a sales scam that employed bait and switch tactics and paid bonuses to the "instructors" for every sucker student they persuaded to pay more for the advanced courses that would teach them the real secrets to riches that weren't revealed to the cheap chumps who settled for the introductory course. A lot of people may be surprised to know that the business practices of "Trump U." are the subject of ongoing legal actions, and things could get interesting for Trump when the verdicts are reached.

Even though I've thought he was a tasteless, narcissistic, blowhard dick since back in the early eighties when he was married to his first Eastern European trophy wife and erupted onto the pop culture scene as The Donald, master of The Deal, I don't completely disagree with him.  However, I've also been hearing sensible ideas for making America great again from people on the next bar stool for many years, but just because they're occasionally right doesn't mean they're presidential timber.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #225 on: January 17, 2016, 03:16:39 AM »
Stirring finish, R.G.G.  Strong invocation of "presidential timber" — almost made it your own.

Obviously, no alum in history ever sued their alma mater for a non-performing diploma.  Not ever. 

Certainly no one ever transmuted their spite into a full-blown tort case.  Not even once.

Tell billionaires they're not successful after you've earned your first 500 million.  "Had to sting a little" doesn't cut it.


Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #226 on: January 17, 2016, 12:58:02 PM »

Obviously, no alum in history ever sued their alma mater for a non-performing diploma.  Not ever. 


It's a little bit different when a person's alma mater wasn't accredited and was a university in name only until a judge ruled that it couldn't call itself that because it didn't meet the necessary criteria.  It's difficult to see how Trump University was anything but a fraudulent scheme that was misrepresented from the start.  There's a lot of detailed information available that's summarized here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trump_Entrepreneur_Initiative

And I didn't say he's not a success.  He's a genius at self-promotion, but he's made some ill-advised, reckless financing decisions that wound up costing him a lot of money. I'm pretty sure most smart business people would never consider using their personal assets as collateral for business loans to the extent he has over the years. 

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #227 on: January 17, 2016, 02:28:01 PM »
I'm pretty sure most smart business people would never consider using their personal assets as collateral for business loans to the extent he has over the years.
Most "successful businessmen" are employees and even the most highly paid are faint shadows of the likes of Trump and other highly successful entrepreneurs who often lay large personal fortunes on the line to get where they are.  Many of the wealthiest have been dead broke multiple times.   In a normal time, I could never vote for Trump, but these are not normal times.  And it appears he'd be running against an incompetent and phony SJW who'd be shared as lunch among several adversaries.  The rest of the GOP field are either phony hacks or stuck in 1987.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #228 on: January 17, 2016, 02:47:29 PM »
Trump gets high ratings entirely because of his celebrity status, because the decision makers at the  cable "news" networks and publications chose ratings over serious news coverage and investigative reporting.  Trump's speeches get unprecedented live coverage, which results in a disproportionate amount of free airtime that is grossly unfair to every other candidate, regardless of party.

Correct. That's not going to change by election time, so it favors Trump. It may be a shitty way of doing things, but it's reality, and that's all that matters.

Quote
The major media has also glossed over the fact that even though he's rich, he's not nearly the success he claims to be. He likes to dismiss his business bankruptcies as shrewd business moves, but in reality they cost him a great deal because he unwisely personally guaranteed some business loans. As a result, his equity positions in the companies was greatly reduced, his executive power was mostly neutered and reduced to figurehead status, and he was forced to sell the huge yacht he'd just bought from the Sultan of Bahrain to raise cash for his creditors.  Maybe he can shrug it off now, but at the time it had to sting a lttle.

Most people aren't going to be interested in that unless there was a juicy shenanigan in there somewhere. Same with Trump university. It's just not going to matter to the people interested in his message, and it's not going to matter to the pop culture. It's only going to matter to his detractors who weren't going to vote for him in the first place. A juicy shenanigan would change that, but after all this time, it probably would have come up by now if there was one.

Quote
Even though I've thought he was a tasteless, narcissistic, blowhard dick since back in the early eighties when he was married to his first Eastern European trophy wife and erupted onto the pop culture scene as The Donald, master of The Deal, I don't completely disagree with him.  However, I've also been hearing sensible ideas for making America great again from people on the next bar stool for many years, but just because they're occasionally right doesn't mean they're presidential timber.

One of the sad truths that we never talk about in the US is that the higher you go up the ladder, the more of a bullshit artist you have to be in order to pull it off. This is especially true of politics. If you become president, it's basically because you are bullshit artist-in-chief among the other contending bullshit artists. People have become acclimatized to "presidential timber" being some polished cardboard cut out that's good at dodging questions and making nice catchphrases. That went a long way towards allowing a string of people that had absolutely no business being president to get that office and use it to satisfy special interests. Those days need to be over. They needed to be over after Bill Clinton, but weren't. That state of affairs leaves only two choices in this field; Trump and Sanders, because they are the only two that are willing to buck the establishment. Everyone else up there is just a plain old bullshit artist hiding behind a cardboard cut out. A lie. That needs to be said.


Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #229 on: January 17, 2016, 03:19:14 PM »

One of the sad truths that we never talk about in the US is that the higher you go up the ladder, the more of a bullshit artist you have to be in order to pull it off. This is especially true of politics. If you become president, it's basically because you are bullshit artist-in-chief among the other contending bullshit artists. People have become acclimatized to "presidential timber" being some polished cardboard cut out that's good at dodging questions and making nice catchphrases.

That's actually a perfect description of Trump.

And I truly believe he's getting a pass from the media on the Trump University issue that other candidates wouldn't in the same situation. Maybe I'm wrong, but candidates have been nitpicked for much less in the past.

Call me old fashioned, because I am old, but I remember a time when it would have been considered unconscionable for a presidential candidate to deal with protesters by imperiously demanding their coats be confiscated and they be tossed out into sub-zero temperatures. Such an action would have been roundly condemned by editorial boards and politicians of all persuasions, and there would have been a clamor for him to drop out of the race. Not to stick up for her in any way, but imagine the outrage if Hillary had done that. Unfortunately, a lot of people can't tell entertainment from reality any more, and that frightens the hell out of me.   




Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #230 on: January 17, 2016, 03:55:25 PM »
People have become acclimatized to "presidential timber" being some polished cardboard cut out that's good at dodging questions and making nice catchphrases. That went a long way towards allowing a string of people that had absolutely no business being president to get that office and use it to satisfy special interests. Those days need to be over. They needed to be over after Bill Clinton, but weren't. That state of affairs leaves only two choices in this field; Trump and Sanders, because they are the only two that are willing to buck the establishment. Everyone else up there is just a plain old bullshit artist hiding behind a cardboard cut out. A lie. That needs to be said.

brilliance.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #231 on: January 17, 2016, 03:58:57 PM »
only two choices in this field; Trump and Sanders

WHO COULD HAVE SEEN... oh, yeah, this one is me.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #232 on: January 17, 2016, 04:08:54 PM »
That's actually a perfect description of Trump.

So let me get this straight, you would prefer the person that gets bought by special interests behind the scenes and then tells you they can't be bought over a person explaining to you how he's spent decades buying politicians. That doesn't make sense to me. You seem to want more of the same, but that wasn't working.

Quote
And I truly believe he's getting a pass from the media on the Trump University issue that other candidates wouldn't in the same situation. Maybe I'm wrong, but candidates have been nitpicked for much less in the past.

Failed business ventures don't stick. If they did, most presidents of the last century wouldn't have gotten elected. We all have our failures, bankruptcies, divorces, and bullshit happen in life. You bring up the Trump University thing, but that doesn't shock or surprise me at all. It just makes me wonder how so many writer's workshops, "film schools", etc. manage to exist in NY, because they do the same shit Trump did. Now, if he'd have gotten caught porking a member of the staff, then you'd have something.

Quote
Call me old fashioned, because I am old, but I remember a time when it would have been considered unconscionable for a presidential candidate to deal with protesters by imperiously demanding their coats be confiscated and they be tossed out into sub-zero temperatures. Such an action would have been roundly condemned by editorial boards and politicians of all persuasions, and there would have been a clamor for him to drop out of the race. Not to stick up for her in any way, but imagine the outrage if Hillary had done that. Unfortunately, a lot of people can't tell entertainment from reality any more, and that frightens the hell out of me.

That's because you grew up in the age of decorum and smoke screens. There was a time where senators would fist fight in the senate, one nearly beating another one to death with a cane at one point. Andrew Jackson's attacks on Buchanan make Trump seem like a pretty flower. Likewise, Trump has nothing on Teddy Roosevelt as far as bravado and arrogance. But over the course of the early 20th century, a pall of decorum was set up that presented a sort of "professionalism" to politics, an air of some kind of false dignity that did nothing but provide a smoke screen for politicians to hide their corruption behind. Trump broke that, and now, for some unknown reason, everyone seems shocked by it.

Hillary is equally Teflon, she should be in prison. She won't be. There is no shortage of criticism out there about how Hillary controls press access, protestor access etc.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #233 on: January 17, 2016, 04:24:26 PM »

I suspect Trump is holding back much that he knows on the Clintons, and during the general election campaign would pull back the curtain on the real rottenness of the American political circus with the Arkansas grifters at stage center.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #234 on: January 17, 2016, 04:29:40 PM »
I suspect Trump is holding back much that he knows on the Clintons, and during the general election campaign would pull back the curtain on the real rottenness of the American political circus with the Arkansas grifters at stage center.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #235 on: January 17, 2016, 05:43:36 PM »
I suspect Trump is holding back much that he knows on the Clintons, and during the general election campaign would pull back the curtain on the real rottenness of the American political circus with the Arkansas grifters at stage center.

Yeah, I agree. The Republican Party, for whatever reason, has always left the kid gloves on regarding Hillary. Trump won't.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #236 on: January 17, 2016, 08:38:04 PM »
Yeah, I agree. The Republican Party, for whatever reason, has always left the kid gloves on regarding Hillary. Trump won't.
Thankfully.  There certainly has not been enough anger nor attack ads in recent campaigns.  It's time to really let the mud fly.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #237 on: January 17, 2016, 09:36:30 PM »
Thankfully.  There certainly has not been enough anger nor attack ads in recent campaigns.  It's time to really let the mud fly.
I think it'll have more substance than simple political mud.  Monica is mud. Benghazi is mud.  I think Trump will talk about HRC used the Senate job solely to build an '08 campaign chest, and how the Clinton Fdn is a salary generator for FOB&H, a shell for B&H political activity, and a shadow broker for deals to benefit the Clintons and their big contributors.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #238 on: January 18, 2016, 01:16:55 AM »
There are 150 FBI agents working on 2 separate Hillary "situations". 5 FBI agents on your ass is a little concerning, even if you're a Clinton. 50 is very worrisome. 150 is "we need to move to Paraguay and get plastic surgery" serious.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/12/hillary-whistles-past-the-fbi-graveyard-but-dems-are-starting-to-look-nervous/

No, Lynch will not prosecute.

Hillary will call it a political whack job of the Republicans. She will secure the democratic nomination.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #239 on: January 18, 2016, 02:20:29 AM »
Yeah, I agree. The Republican Party, for whatever reason, has always left the kid gloves on regarding Hillary. Trump won't.

Which is why I scratched my head watching George Will repeat himself yet again today, confidently declaring Trump unelectable. No other candidate would skewer Hillary as Trump would.