Donald Trump

If you're only going off of a 49 second youtube video, sure, go ahead. Only 49 seconds. Forget about the 70,000lbs of supplies he donated from his own pocket. Where the hell is the Clinton foundation when you need them?
For that matter, where the hell is the help from Black Lives Matter when thousands of black families have been displaced from their homes and lost their livelihoods from the flood?

 

Well today this thread is officially a year old and still going strong. A while back I said we should reach 2000 posts by the election but we've already done it. It's such a fertile subject, with Trump constantly putting his foot in his mouth, Hillary as the onerous alternative and the threat of Armageddon hanging over our heads. So, 2500 by the election?

 

To be fair Newo, Armageddon is supposed to hit the whole world I understand for most americans their country is the whole world but if Trump doesn't push the wrong button (ok big if but still) it is just the USA that will go down (further ).

 

The evidence is mounting that Donald Trump isn't as rich as he claims. An investigation into his business holdings revealed twice as much debt as he reported on his federal disclosure forms.

An investigation by The New York Times into the financial maze of Mr. Trump’s real estate holdings in the United States reveals that companies he owns have at least $650 million in debt — twice the amount than can be gleaned from public filings he has made as part of his bid for the White House. The Times’s inquiry also found that Mr. Trump’s fortunes depend deeply on a wide array of financial backers, including one he has cited in attacks during his campaign.

For example, an office building on Avenue of the Americas in Manhattan, of which Mr. Trump is part owner, carries a $950 million loan. Among the lenders: the Bank of China, one of the largest banks in a country that Mr. Trump has railed against as an economic foe of the United States, and Goldman Sachs, a financial institution he has said controls Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, after it paid her $675,000 in speaking fees.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/politics/donald-trump-debt.html?_r=0

But at least he's not an establishment candidate, he just lies like one.

 

If Trump becomes our prez and actually does a good job, will all the Trump haters in HF still complain no matter what, or will you graciously accept your new daddy like a man?

 

Yes, why is Our President hanging out with the 1% on Martha's Vineyard ?

 

If you want a serious answer (not sure ) maybe rephrase the question

But it seems a too big of an if. It's a hypothetical question. And nope, one doesn't have to be a hater to come to that conclusion.

 

It's what they do. The whole thing is a game for cronies and connected families on both sides of the aisle.

 

Do you ever read Dana Milbank, Paul Krugman, Richard Cohen, Charles Blow?

They will double down, its a hyper-partisan world out there. the cannonization of Mr Obama is next for the agenda.

 

No need to ask "if trump gets in" the fix is in and he isn't the one who has the election rigged for him.
Even in a fair election I would doubt he would win with the amount of people he has insulted.

 

I don't see why. Trump is just like all the other corporate goons who have been raping the US economy and fucking Americans to scrape every possible nickel from their hide. Every job posting I see these days reads like a description of 2 or 3 different occupations. Employees have become nothing more than a spreadsheet entry, as long as they "hit their numbers". Whatever metric those numbers follow. Dip too many times and you're out of work for a bit. Piss someone off and you're blackballed in your field for years. Absolute feudal rule defines corporate America.

While I don't see Trump as being blatantly predatory like say Romney, Fiorina or Bezos, he's been a major player in corporate greed for decades. I'm supposed to think he's had an epiphany? The only one I'm sure of is that if he doesn't rein in some of the changes made by GW and Obama, his way of life will suffer dramatically. Trump's in it for #1, make no mistake. I'd feel slightly better about him if he was maybe 30% as power hungry as the Clintons. But all he speaks of sounds like more of his 0.015% elitist take on greatness through greed.

Personally, I think we're screwed by either party. But if a war is headed our way, the Clintons will delay it. I don't see Trump as being able to take a punch delicately. I bet this naked statue artist has a life-altering encounter soon.

 

He'all still have orange skin, pursed lips, t-rex arms, and tiny hands correct?

 

Harry Truman used to say he never answered "iffy" questions--for good reason. If we found that the tiger is really a pussycat at heart, or that Hitler deep down inside was a humanitarian who was giving the Jews tough love, would we change our opinion of them? Such questions are the essence of "push" polling, the nefarious practice of planting false ideas in people's heads by seemingly asking them their opinions: "If you knew that Mother Teresa was a Devil worshiper doing drugs and having group sex with the College of Cardinals, would it change your opinion of her? All the signs Donald Trump has given us suggest that he's a dangerous demagogue who is exploiting nativist anxieties about "the other" to gain power. Will the leopard change his spots after the election? I don't want to wait and tune in to see. But if you like those questions, how would you answer this one: If Hillary becomes our prez and actually does a good job, will all the Hillary haters still complain no matter what, or will you graciously accept your new mama like a man or woman, as the case may be?

 

That's a trick question. Hillary can't do a good job, she's too much of an old white, crony pig. Ironic, considering the Left has railed against this very behavior for so many years.

 

It's not a trick question... Trump can't do a good job either.

 

And that's the sad fact. This election is the extreme example of the "lesser of evils" choice that seems to be the norm in our national elections of late. What can be done about it? There are no easy answers, but three that I'd try are1) overturn the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC that prevents restriction of campaign spending by corporations and labor unions, so that they can spend unlimited amounts on political campaigns; (2) eliminate the Electoral College for our presidential elections, or at least eliminating the "winner take all" provisions of 48 of our states; and (3) establish a national primary in place of the assorted state primaries and caucuses. Citizens United can be overturned the hard way, by constitutional amendment, or the easy way, by appointing sensible justices to the Supreme Court. It would only take one, and that seat is currently vacant. Getting rid of the Electoral College would also require a constitutional amendment, but eliminating "winner take all" can be done state by state--and every change would be an improvement. Nebraska and Maine have already done it; two down, forty-eight plus D.C. to go. A national primary would eliminate caucuses for the nomination of presidential candidates, and have all the voting done on the same day, so that early primary states, rural Iowa and Nebraska, don't have disproportionate influence and late-voting states aren't effectively disenfranchised because the presumptive nominee has already been declared. That might be done by an ordinary act of Congress, since the U.S. Constitution says nothing about parties or primaries. These changes would radically democratize our political process. Now if we can only do something about improving the electorate's political education!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2G9MR1n7Es

 

I agree, particularly with points 2 and 3. I would also add that the national primary should be a blanket primary, or "jungle primary", like they have in Louisiana.

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

 

I do not want a president speaking in anger, speaking off the cuff, saying stupid, inflammatory things.


Speaking of Citizens United. Remembering Our Presidents State of the Union message where he admonished the Supreme Court justices sitting right in front of him; right in the Capitol Building, in front of the full House and Senate, right on TV !

It was a prepared speech, it wasn't spontaneous.

Being a jerk is not presidential, not in Trump, not in anybody.

We could use less partisan carping from our leaders.