Donald Trump

[Zach Caldwell]

​Many of you have probably already heard. Donald Trump as entered into the Presidential race on the Republican side. The left seems kind of giddy with his entry while the right seems split on his being in the race.

 

What do you think? Is he for real, or is this all just some major PR stunt for him? He has said he was thinking about or seriously considering running in past elections but never took the plunge. It seems he has now. But then again, he has 120 days to file his intent with the Election Commission, will he? 

[Mark C.]

He has absolutely less than .001 percent chance of winning and he knows it, even if he does finance his campaign with his own money. He is a shrewd business man and will not spend hundreds of millions or even billions on a lost cause.

[ken barber]

I hope he does spend billions and makes the right seem crazier than they are. Trump is maniac that is only interested in his own welfare giving him any media coverage makes the Left seem like the most logical choice in the world

[D'Artagnon]

Let us be perfectly frank here: Even to Donald Trump, Trump's candidacy is a farce.

 

He likes to call names, play games, make up "simple and intelligent" solutions to complex problems and he thinks that full on dictators like Putin will take him seriously.  He is little more than a very smart carnival barker with some experience in the real estate game.  His understanding of government only extends to what he "thinks" the executive branch of the United States government is.  He has no idea of the political acumen required to get even a simple, common sense, imminently necessary bill through congress, even with a congress made up of allies instead of ideological opponents.

 

Let us remember what is on this man's resume for the temp job he hasn't even filled out the necessary applications for, as of this posting.  He has a very popular reality television show where the premise is he gets to fire people.  So he is basically already killing jobs, professionally.  He has raised buildings using other peoples money and puts his name on them.  Which is akin to either plagiarism or stealing a scientific paper.  He's filed for bankruptcy several times,  yet he tells the world that he is worth over $9 billion US Dollars.  He complains that other politicians can't fill a room, yet he hired actors and basically bribed people off the street with T-shirts to get people into his announcement speech.

 

This man actually was a paid performer for the WWE.  Allegations have come out, that I am still seeking verification of, that he dodged the draft.  This man changes political parties like some people change socks.  In the last presidential election, He first opposed, then backed Mitt Romney, and after the election was lost, he threw Mitt Romney under the bus.  This is not the team player or even team leader the Republican party needs.

 

People who know me, know I am a centrist with some liberal leanings and some conservative leanings.  I think it is good for the country as a whole when both parties, while keeping their unique identities, work together.  Believe it or not, both sides want change and have their own ideas about what changes are needed.  There has been resistance to opposing views with such vehemence of late that it almost seems reactionary.  Which saddens me.  However, I think even my Republican/Conservative friends can agree that this "candidate" is only out for himself.  He has always been talk and bluster, lacking substance of any sort or any idea of what actual policy might be.  He has put his name in for political office before only to withdraw when he has to debate with actual politicians, who will chew him up and spit him out like a little school boy caught cheating on a quiz. 

 

Brass is not gold, Mr. Trump.  Your record shows you are full of hot air, cheap shine on cheaper product, and that you change your positions on the whim of what you think people want to hear.  Beating up Rosy O'Donnel in the media doesn't mean you've won an intellectual championship.  A man of your supposed intelligence should know that you don't eat New York Pizza in the open with a fork, and never with Sarah Palin (Its the green eggs and ham rule, you should know better).  And honestly, whom do you believe you are fooling with that billion dollar comb over hyper weird brain covering oddity you refer to as a hairstyle? 

 

He's as phony a candidate as he is at everything else he does.  How he manages to keep billions of dollars, a sense of self respect, the respect of anyone he's not paying, for that matter, is completely beyond me.  Part of me wants him to stay in the race and have the other Republicans cut him to shreds so he will finally go away.  Part of me wants him to stay in it so he can waste millions of his own fortune, only to realize he's way out of his league.  Part of me wants his candidacy to be a short cut for someone else in the Republican nomination pack to emerge as a clear, logical, thoughtful, intelligent, persuasive, capable leader who can make the party no longer the joke it's become of late.

 

Yeah, part of me wants to see all that.  But the more sane and sensible part of me just wants this buffoon to go away.  You stain the process, sir, with your idiocy and flash.  You cheapen the office you claim to run for, and the other candidates, by not being serious and simply looking for attention.  In short, Mr. Trump, please desist.  You haven't got it in you, and with any common sense at all, the whole country will realize it.  You can't tell Putin "you're fired" and expect him to take you seriously.  You can't claim China is stealing all our jobs when your clothing line is produced there.  You can't claim the American Dream is dead (with respect to the recent loss of Dusty Rhodes) while you're living high on the hog.  You can't expect to lead Americans when you consider them so far beneath you.  Even Darryl Issa knows that wont fly.

 

Thoughts, anyone?

[Rilbur]

Wow, D'Artagnon, don't hold back.  Tell us what you really think of the guy.  Holding it in isn't healthy for you!

[D'Artagnon]

Intellectual, or so-called intellectuals in this case, bullies bring out my protective streak, 

[Steve T.]

I had to laugh yesterday when scrolling through my Facebook timeline when I came across a post from an old friend that I went to school with.  The gist of her post was that she was an adamant supporter of "The Donald" and if she got messages from ANYONE who badmouthed him, she would immediately unfriend them "...no second chances!"  I've encountered similar warnings from other freinds and family members over the last month or so as other "esteemed statesmen" have entered the race for the Republican presidential nomination.  Honestly, sometimes I wonder if maybe I was born in some alternate universe, like I read about in many of the stories here, and then thrust into this one!  I can't believe that we had much the same experiences while growing up, but hold such completely different political views now.

Donald Trump's motives are something that I can't really figure out.  On the one hand, I can see him as the ultimate grifter, much like Sarah Palin, who enters the race, knowing that he has absolutely no chance of winning the nomination, just so that he can raise money for his "campaign" knowing that he can keep anything he doesn't spend.  You might say, "He's got tons of money.  He doesn't need to do that!"  That may be true, but I've never met a rich person who figured he had enough money, and what better way to get more than to have adoring followers just send it to them?  

On the other hand, he could honestly be one of those who arrogantly feels like everyone else is wrong about the state of the country and only he can fix it.  Not that I think he can actually win, but I worry more about ones like that than the former.  He's got a large following (maybe not as large as he thinks) and stranger things have happened.  Hey, Bush kinda, sorta won.  IF he makes it to the primaries, I doubt he'll be around long after they start.  We shall see.
 

[Steve T.]

Very nicely done, D'Artangon!  Can you do Cruz or the Huckster next? 

[D'Artagnon]

Just looking at the political landscape, and without making any personal choices or references, I can make these statements.

 

Most of the unknown candidates will likely drop out shortly after the first debate.  Even Fox News knows there's too many of them for all of them to get a clear voice on the national stage.  So I figure by the end of the first debate, we'll see a lot of horse trading, alliances and influence peddling among the more nationally known weaker contenders.  Republicans lately have been short on imagination but their party has one very powerful strength going for them: once the pecking order is established, they generally all get on the same rope and pull together.  Once unified, they are a singular machine.  It is simply a matter of figuring who's going to take the wheel.

 

As far as the major candidates, I see three rising to the top.  Despite all other rhetoric and bluster from the fringes, the choice will eventually come down to just these few.  Jeb Bush, has the family name and connections, was a decent governor in a very difficult time in Florida (Four hurricanes crossed the state in a 6 week period, we were wrecked for years).  Rand Paul, represents a more thinking and doing portion of the Republican electorate instead of the praying and yelling side.  Even if he doesn't take a major part of the vote, he'll make the others worry.  Rick Santorum, with his harsh views on anything in the government and Democrats in general, he can be a dark horse that can gather the base of the party and make a solid run for it.

 

As for the remaining big names, I have a few ideas where they might go. 

 

Marco Rubio will likely find a way to make it known he can be Vice President.  But he and Bush don't really like each other.  Bush wont need Rubio to get the Latino vote.  He could however make an interesting running mate.  He's young, he's passionate, and while he might get the dry mouth during TV speeches, he is a good orator.  The Latino vote will be a deciding factor in this general election, and Rubio's Cuban heritage may make a difference.  Remember, Obama won Florida by winning Miami.  Marco Rubio and Rand Paul or Rick Santorum could give Mr, Bush a serious run for the Oval Office. 

 

Bobby Jindal is likely to realize that he's not ready for the big chair yet, but might find a way to turn this into a senate seat bid.  He will likely be a contender down the line, but it's not his turn yet.  Still, he's patient and can make the most of this situation, even if he has to pull out of the race early.  Not a serious candidate for VP, this time.

 

Carly Fiorina will likely get a lot of votes from Republican women, but mostly for being a woman.  I haven't heard any big policy concerns from her, nothing to distinguish her from the rest of the pack, but as a potential Vice, she could be a way to swing voters from Hillary should Ms. Clinton win the Democratic nod.  Look for Carly to make that move just before the debates, especially if she gets sidelined from the stage. 

 

The right honorable governor from Texas, Rick Perry, is still in legal trouble of his own, and might have to face corruption charges, which would take him out of the race entirely.  I look for him to be taken from things before debate time, consulting with lawyers. 

 

Ted Cruz has made enough of a mess of things in congress, for his own party, that the voters already have dismissed him.  Despite being first to announce his candidacy, he's seen as the biggest kid at the kids table during Thanksgiving.  He might make a push to be considered the VP, but not seriously.  Still, he's a wild one and might try to go Independent on the others, maybe snag some Tea Party support along the way.  However, It should be noted that when he gave up his senate seat to run for president, he did sign up for Obama Care.

 

The good Doctor Ben Carson is still something of a mystery to me, but he seems to be upswinging on popularity.  Can he defeat the Bush Machine or the Paul Legacy?  Not a chance.  And his views on immigration may surprise you.  Will he be a good choice for VP?  Well, he's charismatic, often speaks his mind even if it's against the party line, charming, witty and can swing the black vote to whomever he VP's for.  Why not him, he's got all the traits of Joe Biden without the senate experience or understanding of international relations.

 

Then there's Huckabee.  This man is still a political heavyweight.  He has deep ties to the evangelical wing of the party and has made his views on abortion, gay rights, marriage equality and other hot button social issues known.  And he could be a VP candidate because of all this.  But he wont.  The social agenda of the religious right might be big and powerful, but the sheer weight of economic issues and international relations don't merit this man having much of a chance to win the general election, even as a VP.  Look for him to get his job back with Fox News soon.

 

Let's see, who am I forgetting.  Oh, Lindsey Grahame.  The man from South Carolina who speaks with the soft Hawkish tones of a younger, southern gay John McCain without the elder statesman's military experience, respect or restraint (if you can believe that), but the same ardor to win, even if the fight isn't winable without just plain glassing the middle east from on high.  He's direct, he's short on his answers and he thinks that will set him apart on the foreign affairs, immigration and military matters.  And while at first that seems like a strength, his real talent in the past has been in asking tough questions, not answering them.  Still, a strong VP candidate.  He and Santorum might make an interesting ticket.

 

Scott Walker cannot be ruled out as a VP contender.  Let's face it, the man won three elections for Governor inside of two terms, including a recall election.  He's highly divisive, but also very charismatic.  And you have to respect his record on winning elections.  I don't think this is his year to get the big brass ring, but he would be a hell of a campaigner as a running mate.  He likely wont get a lot of the Latino or Black vote, but he can likely swing a lot of white voters from the mid-west.  Look for him to make a big push in the election after this one if the Dems keep the White House.  He and Rick Santorum have similar ideas.  

 

Something else to consider here is this.  Many states have laws that prevent someone from holding a House or Senate seat in Washington and run for president.  And while the reasons for this might be political and archaic, that means that if many of these Senators stay in the race beyond a certain deadline, there will be many seats in congress in play as well.  I don't know if the Republicans in general have thought about this.  They could have a huge effort to win the White House, actually win it, but lose the senate, handing the reigns of legislative power back to the Democrats.  The stakes are high.  I have the feeling someone is going to point out this fatal flaw soon and we may see a number of the candidates fall off for the greater good of the party.

 

Posters Edit: These are just broad view opinions of how I think things may shake out, not a condemnation or show of support for any particular candidate.  Please read these as analysis with as little of my personal political views coloring things as possible.

[Steve T.]

http://www.motherjones.com/mixed-media/2015/06/nbc-finally-dumps-donald-trump#123

 

NBC announces that they are cutting all ties to Donald Trump. 

 

Apparently being an insensitive man [edited to comply with posting rules] has consequences in the real world outside his boardroom.

[D'Artagnon]

LOL, Steve, you can say Jackass without the dollar signs.  We wont judge.  Unless of course you were making fun of his money as well as his $tupidity, in which ca$e I agree with you.

 

[NOTE: use of the word jackass is acceptable depending on content and context. As a personal attack is it not acceptable.]

[Zach Caldwell]

I have to step in here and caution everyone. Our rules are pretty clear, we do not tolerate attacking anyone or any group. Name calling is considered attacking someone. You may express a dislike for someone or their position, but please do not do so in a personal manner.

[Zach Caldwell]

I saw this just the other day and thought I would post it here for your thoughts and impressions.

 

This 92 year old woman never voted in her life. Now she has registered to vote in the coming US Presidential Election because there is now a candidate she can be passionate about.

 

http://www.wbko.com/home/headlines/First-time-voter-92-says-shes-for-Trump-313275291.html 

[Steve T.]

Can you believe that Trump is now leading the pack when it comes to Republicans seeking the nomination?  I don't think it will last, but it doesn't say anything good about the state of the Republican party.

[D'Artagnon]

To my Republican friends, I say to you this:  Do NOT panic about Trump being the current leader in the polls.  Remember that at the early stages of the campaign last time around Michelle Bachman was in the lead.  And Governor Perry.  And at one point so was Governor Huckabee.  With a field as big and, let us admit it, loud as the current Republican contenders for nomination is, the early part of the race will be dominated by those who speak loudest, no matter how divisive or extreme their "stated" views are.  And let's also keep in mind that after the nomination, you'll often find the Republican candidate makes a slight shift towards center.  They may be too far right for a center shift to be readily apparent at that point, but that's what plays to the base.

 

In all likelihood, the Republican field will cut itself by half, very soon.  The realities of trying to get a significant piece of the pie are just too far from likely for many of them.  Expect to see campaigns merge, alliances form and the major players start looking for way to snipe at each other by taking careful pot-shots at the Democratic contenders that bounce to other Republicans.  Back handed compliments such as "Well, his policies are definitely not as extreme as HIlary's, but I still think that idea is very Liberal."  It will happen.

[tkyrchncs]

I am not as optimistic about the loyal opposition (I'm a life-long Democrat) as you are, D'Artagnon.  The last election was the Republicans' to lose, and lose they did.  By NOT unifying early and working effectively for ONE candidate.

[D'Artagnon]

Oh, I agree.  There are large factional issues within the Republican party, which are apparently finally coming home to roost.  While I personally find it interesting to watch the various factions and odd alliances within what used to be a very tightly knit group, it does mean that the chance of getting someone from their political philosophy who is not only more centrist, electable and likely to work well with other nations, seems to be growing smaller.  As much as the Republicans view Democrats as being "less patriotic" or "appeasement minded" or even "anti-christian" it seems like the Democrats are more focused and willing to work together.  And work across the aisles in congress.

 

While my own leanings are far more Democratic, I would like to see a much more common sense approach to who we wind up choosing for our leadership.  Have differences in how you'd do things, sure.  But let's realize that the problems our nation faces are better served by not automatically saying "No, I don't want to do that because you want to do it, and I don't want to have people think I'm like you."

 

317 million people depend on the things our president does on a daily basis.  Perhaps we all need to act like we're at the grown ups table.  No heat on that remark, just a sadness that all sides need to keep in mind what the job they're stumping for really is: a temporary, public service, ceremonial, public relations on an international scale, law enforcement and managerial position.  Emphasis on temporary.

 

Thoughts?

[Rilbur]

My thoughts are that you're describing the self-destruction of the Republican party.

 

Which sounds awesome.  Now if we can only get the Democrats to hop on the bandwagon, maybe we can get some real political reform going!

[tkyrchncs]

I'm thinking that it isn't the system that's in place, so much as it is the apathy of the American people of late.  I have a reasonably intelligent nephew, age 24, who does not know the names of any executive officials of the US besides President and VP, and none of the state ones besides governor, nor can he name his congressman or state delegate or Senators or state senator.  He has never called any of them or written to any of them or even emailed any of them.  The voter turnout here is almost never as high as 50%, and when I ask people why they don't vote, I get snide and cynical answers.  Many of them are actually AFRAID of their government(s).  It makes me want to cry.

[Rilbur]

The voter turnout here is almost never as high as 50%, and when I ask people why they don't vote, I get snide and cynical answers.  Many of them are actually AFRAID of their government(s).  It makes me want to cry.

 

V for Vendetta is a great movie.  "People shouldn't be afraid of their government.  Governments should be afraid of their people."  That argument, once made, was what made me flip 180 degrees on the second amendment.

 

Frankly, our government is heading straight for some kind of breakdown, and that statement gets half the reason why.

[A.B]

It'll be hilarious for the rest of the world to see trump as pres lol.

[Al Norris]

 

V for Vendetta is a great movie.  "People shouldn't be afraid of their government.  Governments should be afraid of their people."  That argument, once made, was what made me flip 180 degrees on the second amendment.

People have often referenced this saying to Thomas Jefferson, in which he is reputed as saying:
"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

This comes from Federalist #4. But Jefferson never wrote for the Federalist Papers. That was the work of Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison, and the quote does not appear there as written.

It is a sentiment that the founders had as it bears on the limited powers of the Federal Government. Regardless of who originally said something like this or when it was said, it remains a sort of truism, that the people should hold in their own hands, the same military power of the State.

[Rilbur]

It is a sentiment that the founders had as it bears on the limited powers of the Federal Government. Regardless of who originally said something like this or when it was said, it remains a sort of truism, that the people should hold in their own hands, the same military power of the State.

And I do believe you were the one who convinced me, though you didn't use that exact quote

[Rwinn]

I'm not expert in politics let alone the politics of another country but my history teacher make me notice that our own politics is greatly influenced by yours since WW2. example when G.W Bush was elected we elected a president which party had similar view of thing and when he was re-elected our own was too and when you elected Obama we once again elected a president with similar political view (the only time there was a divergence was our last election but only because the president of that time chose to quit politics for a time)