Author Topic: President Trump  (Read 473065 times)

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #700 on: January 10, 2016, 02:42:20 PM »
For us it means we're screwed. (Trump policies)

Yes he might beat Hillary, on her way to prison.  And yes he is better than Hillary.  What I mean is, conservatives who think his policies will be conservative are screwed if he wins.

On the forum, we read, dig deep, find sources, study facts, solutions and alternatives on a whole range of topics for the entire term between elections and then some reality tv guy that doesn't give a rat's ass about policy details, rights or the constitution, facts or unintended consequences, doesn't know a minority in Iraq from a ruling party in Iran, nor a nuclear triad, walks in and takes it all.  If this happens, like 8 years under Obama and the rest of it, we deserve what is coming.

8 years of George Bush and 8 years of Obama.  8 years of Bill Clinton before that.  This is not a proud period in this country.  We defeated Hitler and the Soviet Union.  We build the strongest and most prosperous country is earth's history, we had the world turning toward freedom and we squander it by turning against everything that made it great.  And now for what little we have learned we about to leap for another big government solution, a candidate who never said he was conservative, against everything we have learned.  We really do have an opportunity to make America Great Again and Trump isn't it.

If you haven't watched the movie "Idocracy", you really need to. It was supposed to be set far in the future, but everyday it's looking more and more like a documentary.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19778
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #701 on: January 10, 2016, 02:46:38 PM »
I am not quite as negative on Trump as you.

Cruz is my first choice.

Rubio is up there with Trump to me.

Somethings I like about Kasich but he is just too much of an appeaser.

So is Christie.  


Carson never struck me as really ever viable.

Fiorina........?

Who else?

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19464
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #702 on: January 10, 2016, 03:07:41 PM »
If you haven't watched the movie "Idocracy", you really need to. It was supposed to be set far in the future, but everyday it's looking more and more like a documentary.

Like you say, I think I am watching it.  (   

Also, both the Obama and Trump campaigns remind me of the Pat Paulson campaign, if anyone is old enough to remember that.  The campaigns follow that as closely as they do that military strategy theory.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/p/pat_paulsen.html
https://books.google.com/books/about/How_to_wage_a_successful_campaign_for_th.html?id=q50bAQAAIAAJ

Bill Clinton, 1996, Let's build a bridge to the 21st century.
Pat Paulsen, 1968, As I have always said, the future lies ahead.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile
Why I will never vote for Trump
« Reply #704 on: January 14, 2016, 08:31:31 AM »
second post:

Though he distorts and/or get the facts wrong with some of his particulars, the thought process here in this POTH piece is worth noting:
=============================

Beginning with Ronald Reagan, I have voted Republican in every presidential election since I first became eligible to vote in 1980. I worked in the Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations and in the White House for George W. Bush as a speechwriter and adviser. I have also worked for Republican presidential campaigns, although not this time around.

Despite this history, and in important ways because of it, I will not vote for Donald Trump if he wins the Republican nomination.


I should add that neither could I vote in good conscience for Hillary Clinton or any of the other Democrats running for president, since they oppose many of the things I have stood for in my career as a conservative — and, in the case of Mrs. Clinton, because I consider her an ethical wreck. If Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton were the Republican and Democratic nominees, I would prefer to vote for a responsible third-party alternative; absent that option, I would simply not cast a ballot for president. A lot of Republicans, I suspect, would do the same.

There are many reasons to abstain from voting for Mr. Trump if he is nominated, starting with the fact that he would be the most unqualified president in American history. Every one of our 44 presidents has had either government or military experience before being sworn in. Mr. Trump, a real estate mogul and former reality-television star, hasn’t served a day in public office or the armed forces.


During the course of this campaign he has repeatedly revealed his ignorance on basic matters of national interest — the three ways the United States is capable of firing nuclear weapons (by land, sea and air), the difference between the Quds Force in Iran and the Kurds to their west, North Korea’s nuclear tests, the causes of autism, the effects of his tax plan on the deficit and much besides.

Mr. Trump has no desire to acquaint himself with most issues, let alone master them. He has admitted that he doesn’t prepare for debates or study briefing books; he believes such things get in the way of a good performance. No major presidential candidate has ever been quite as disdainful of knowledge, as indifferent to facts, as untroubled by his benightedness.

It is little surprise, then, that many of Mr. Trump’s most celebrated pronouncements and promises — to quickly and “humanely” expel 11 million illegal immigrants, to force Mexico to pay for the wall he will build on our southern border, to defeat the Islamic State “very quickly” while as a bonus taking its oil, to bar Muslims from immigrating to the United States — are nativistic pipe dreams and public relations stunts.


Even more disqualifying is Mr. Trump’s temperament. He is erratic, inconsistent and unprincipled. He possesses a streak of crudity and cruelty that manifested itself in how he physically mocked a Times journalist with a disability, ridiculed Senator John McCain for being a P.O.W., made a reference to “blood” intended to degrade a female journalist and compared one of his opponents to a child molester.



Mr. Trump’s legendary narcissism would be comical were it not dangerous in someone seeking the nation’s highest office — as he demonstrated when he showered praise on the brutal, anti-American president of Russia, Vladimir V. Putin, responding to Mr. Putin’s expression of admiration for Mr. Trump.

“It is always a great honor,” Mr. Trump said last month, “to be so nicely complimented by a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond.”

Mr. Trump’s virulent combination of ignorance, emotional instability, demagogy, solipsism and vindictiveness would do more than result in a failed presidency; it could very well lead to national catastrophe. The prospect of Donald Trump as commander in chief should send a chill down the spine of every American.

For Republicans, there is an additional reason not to vote for Mr. Trump. His nomination would pose a profound threat to the Republican Party and conservatism, in ways that Hillary Clinton never could. For while Mrs. Clinton could inflict a defeat on the Republican Party, she could not redefine it. But Mr. Trump, if he were the Republican nominee, would.

Mr. Trump’s presence in the 2016 race has already had pernicious effects, but they’re nothing compared with what would happen if he were the Republican standard-bearer. The nominee, after all, is the leader of the party; he gives it shape and definition. If Mr. Trump heads the Republican Party, it will no longer be a conservative party; it will be an angry, bigoted, populist one. Mr. Trump would represent a dramatic break with and a fundamental assault on the party’s best traditions.

================
This is without question one of the most amusing articles I have ever seen written in the NY Times. I have no fondness for Donald Trump, but...
Jim Just now

Interesting. The GOP required Trump to sign a loyalty pledge to support the GOP nominee even if it wasn't Trump. So now the old-guard GOP...
GXXX

It's becoming tiresome to read yet another Republican shill shocked, shocked I tell you, by Trump's candidacy. The shills express dismay at...
=================


The Republican Party’s best traditions, of course, have not always been evident. (The same is true of the Democratic Party, by the way.) Over the years we have seen antecedents of today’s Trumpism both on issues and in style — for example, in Pat Buchanan’s presidential campaigns in the 1990s, in Sarah Palin’s rise in the party, in the reckless rhetoric of some on the right like Ann Coulter.

The sentiments animating these individuals have had influence in the party, and in recent years growing influence. But they have not been dominant and they have certainly never been in control. Mr. Trump’s securing the Republican nomination would change all that. Whatever problems one might be tempted to lay at the feet of the Republican Party, Donald Trump is in a different and more destructive category.

In these pages in July 1980, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the Democratic senator from New York, declared, “Of a sudden, the G.O.P. has become a party of ideas.” If Mr. Trump wins the nomination, the G.O.P. will become the party of anti-reason.

I will go further: Mr. Trump is precisely the kind of man our system of government was designed to avoid, the type of leader our founders feared — a demagogic figure who does not view himself as part of our constitutional system but rather as an alternative to it.

I understand that it often happens that those of us in politics don’t get the nominee we want, yet we nevertheless unify behind the candidate who wins our party’s nomination. If those who don’t get their way pick up their marbles and go home, party politics doesn’t work. That has always been my view, until now. Donald Trump has altered the political equation because he has altered the moral equation. For this lifelong Republican, at least, he is beyond the pale. Party loyalty has limits.

No votes have yet been cast, primary elections are fluid, and sobriety often prevails, so Mr. Trump is hardly the inevitable Republican nominee. But, stunningly, that is now something that is quite conceivable. If this scenario comes to pass, many Republicans will find themselves in a situation they once thought unimaginable: refusing to support the nominee of their party because it is the best thing that they can do for their party and their country.

Peter Wehner, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, served in the last three Republican administrations and is a contributing opinion writer.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2016, 11:58:47 AM by Crafty_Dog »

DDF

  • Guest
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #705 on: January 14, 2016, 10:48:10 AM »
Yet with all of the expertise and experience in the encumbents, here we are.

Trump - 2016

or....

Lose your own country to more of the same.

I know what I'll choose. The best argument against sitting politicians, is themselves. One has to seriously question the logic of an article that attempts to refute Trump based on that.

At least Putin has a firm grasp on what it is to be Russian, isn't apologetic, portrays strength, and certainly isn't busy giving Russia away to win votes.

And the author has the nerve to spoeak of "ethics."  :mrgreen:
« Last Edit: January 14, 2016, 10:50:16 AM by DDF »


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile
Pravda on the Hudson goes after Trump
« Reply #707 on: January 17, 2016, 08:35:26 AM »

Our Pat, with his background in both Trump and Real Estate, is uniquely qualified to comment.  I gotta say that the description of Trump as having a short concentration span resonates with me.  Indeed I have commented on his "drive by" nature here.



What Donald Trump’s Plaza Deal Reveals About His White House Bid

By DAVID SEGALJAN. 16, 2016
Photo
“To me the Plaza was like a great painting,” Donald Trump said of the hotel he agreed to buy in 1988 and later lost in bankruptcy. “It wasn’t purely about the bottom line.” Credit Benno Friedman/Corbis

The day Donald Trump called and asked for a one-on-one meeting in the winter of 1988, Tom Barrack was a relative newcomer to the high-stakes poker game of New York real estate. He had worked for nearly two years for Robert Bass, the Texas billionaire investor, and had played an important role in winning the Plaza Hotel for his boss the year before. Mr. Trump was the country’s most quotable and ostentatious financial celebrity, a guy with a jet, a 282-foot yacht and a fondness for peach-toned marble.

But among the people he negotiated with, Mr. Trump had a reputation for both steeliness and finesse. So Mr. Barrack was wary. A mere four months after Mr. Bass had taken control of the Plaza, he gave Mr. Barrack the go-ahead to put it up for auction. Mr. Trump was calling to say, in effect, skip the auction. We’ll strike a deal, the two of us, right here in my office.

“Just come over,” Mr. Trump said, in Mr. Barrack’s recollection. “Give me half an hour.”

Mr. Barrack was soon sitting in Mr. Trump’s office in Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue. The two had met a few times, because Mr. Trump had been angling to acquire the Plaza for years. Now that it was going back on the market, Mr. Trump didn’t want to miss out.

“How can I live without it?” Mr. Trump asked, gesturing to the Plaza, which could be seen from his window, just two blocks north. “It’s right in my backyard.”

“You should own it,” Mr. Barrack replied. “But you’re going to have to pay for it.”

Mr. Trump quickly agreed to a price of slightly more than $400 million, an unprecedented sum for a hotel at the time. Just a few years later, the Plaza wound up in bankruptcy protection, part of a vast and humiliating restructuring of some $900 million of personal debt that Mr. Trump owed to a consortium of banks. Never one for regrets, Mr. Trump today regards the purchase as a triumph.

“To me the Plaza was like a great painting,” he said in an interview in late December. “It wasn’t purely about the bottom line. I have many assets like that and the end result is that they are always much more valuable than what you paid for them.”

How Mr. Trump came to own, operate and then lose the Plaza reveals a lot about his business style. For decades, Mr. Trump has boasted of his boardroom skills in self-exalting speeches and books. As the front-runner in the Republican presidential race, he frequently argues that his corner-office prowess uniquely suits him to negotiate with world leaders.


What does this prowess look like up close? In the Plaza tale, Mr. Trump demonstrated both strengths (an ability to charm or strong-arm, as the occasion required) and weaknesses (a kind of hungry impatience that left him searching for new trophies as soon as one had been acquired). His methods as a political candidate mirror his methods as an executive, say those who have dealt with the latter and seen the former. In fact, the more you know about Mr. Trump’s past, the more his run for high office looks like an effort to close the biggest deal of his life.

“He has the ability to imagine what the other party wants him to be and then be that person,” said Michael D’Antonio, author of “Never Enough: Donald Trump and the Pursuit of Success.” “He presents the Trump that will work in the moment.”
A Disarming Dealmaker

When Mr. Trump made that call to Mr. Barrack he was 41 and New York City’s showiest developer. Then, as now, his braggadocio could sound like a parody of braggadocio. There was, for instance, the moment in 1984 when he told The Washington Post he could handle the United States’ side of nuclear arms talks with the Soviets.

“It would take an hour and a half to learn everything there is to learn about missiles,” he boasted. “I think I know most of it anyway.”

By 1987, he had casinos in Atlantic City, a mansion in Palm Beach, Trump Tower, all the trappings of an up-and-coming tycoon, along with a best seller, “The Art of the Deal.” What Mr. Trump lacked was the kind of old-money Manhattan landmark that would add prestige to his portfolio.

The Plaza, which he’d been yearning to buy since his mid-20s, was that landmark. The hotel had opened in 1907, a 19-story French Renaissance “chateau” with roughly 800 rooms. It billed itself as “the world’s most luxurious hotel,” and over the years its habitués included F. Scott Fitzgerald, Marlene Dietrich and Frank Lloyd Wright, who lived there while construction of the Guggenheim Museum was underway. When the Beatles performed on “The Ed Sullivan Show” in 1964, they stayed at the Plaza.


Mr. Bass came into possession of the Plaza when he, along with a Japanese corporation, bought its owner, the Westin chain. Mr. Bass was enamored with the hotel’s history and cachet, but he had little experience in the hospitality industry.

As Mr. Bass pondered the matter, Mr. Barrack, who was based in Manhattan, started to appreciate that the Plaza could fetch an irresistible price. By February 1988, he was readying an auction.

It was around this time that Mr. Trump picked up the phone and requested that half-hour meeting with Mr. Barrack at Trump Tower.

To understand what happened next, you need to know that in every real estate deal, the two big variables are price and contingencies. The latter come after an initial purchase price is agreed to and are essentially conditions demanded by the buyer after a thorough inspection of the property. A condition could be a problem with the plumbing, the roof or a thousand other particulars, and every condition can reduce the price of the property. With a building as old as the Plaza, a proper inspection could take months and include union contracts and an assortment of licenses for food and drink.

On the phone, when Mr. Trump asked him to abandon the auction, Mr. Barrack initially thought it was a ploy related to contingencies.


“I told him: ‘You’re too good. You’ll want to buy it and it will get tied up in all these contingencies.’ He said, ‘No, it’ll be a real deal.’ I said, ‘No contingencies.’”

Once in Mr. Trump’s office, the haggling began. Mr. Barrack said he expected 10 to 15 participants in the coming auction and an ultimate price as high as $500 million. What if I gave you $390 million today? Mr. Trump asked. Mr. Bass has an offer of $410 million in hand, Mr. Barrack countered. Mr. Trump raised his bid, and they settled on a final price of $407.5 million.

“Then he did something amazing,” Mr. Barrack recalled. “He said: ‘You’ve owned the property for four months. I want you to tell me everything that’s wrong with it and how to fix it. I said, ‘We just said, no contingencies.’ He said: ‘This is not in a contract. Nothing in writing. Just tell me what is wrong with the property and how to fix it.’”

In essence, Mr. Trump was telling Mr. Barrack that he trusted him to disclose everything that a team of lawyers and inspectors would typically need at least 90 days to unearth. It was like asking an enemy for a map of a minefield. And by saying, in effect, “I’m at your mercy and will believe what you tell me,” Mr. Trump was appealing to Mr. Barrack’s integrity. Which was very disarming.

Mr. Barrack thought over Mr. Trump’s question for a moment. He had already worked out most of the major problems.

“The biggest issue,” he told Mr. Trump, “is Fannie Lowenstein.”

He was referring to a woman, who might have been in her 80s, who lived by herself in a tiny, rent-controlled apartment in the Plaza. With Ms. Lowenstein there, reconfiguring the building as a condominium or a co-op, which was Mr. Trump’s plan and the only way to justify the $407 million price tag, would be far more difficult. But she had adamantly refused to give up her rent-control rights and move to a larger apartment in the Plaza.
Continue reading the main story
Donald Trump: Presidential Candidates on the Issues

“I’ll do the deal in a week, for $407.5 million,” Mr. Trump said, “and you take care of Fannie Lowenstein. All I want at the closing is to hear that Fannie Lowenstein is happy.”

Mr. Barrack left the meeting in a daze, both thrilled and anxious.

“It was a genius deal for Trump,” Mr. Barrack said, “because while an auction would have fetched a bigger initial price, it would have been tangled up in contingencies. And he’d just convinced me to fix everything for him.”

Mr. Trump had correctly sized up Mr. Barrack: someone who was trying to prove himself and wanted a major coup.

“He kind of looked at me and said, ‘I’ll make you a star,’” said Mr. Barrack, who now runs Colony Capital, a real estate investment firm based in Los Angeles with 300 employees. “It’s the same talent on display when he gives political speeches. He reads an entire crowd with the same precision that he reads an individual.”

For Mr. Barrack, winning over Ms. Lowenstein was a project. She knew more about tenant law than any lawyer, and for the next two months, the two spoke four or five times a week. He ultimately offered her an apartment in the Plaza that was almost 10 times as large as her studio apartment, with a view of Central Park. Rent-free. For life. Also, new furniture, new dishes, new everything. She grudgingly agreed. But she also wanted a piano. She got a Steinway.


To Mr. Barrack’s amazement, Mr. Trump handled nearly all of the negotiations for the Plaza himself. Much as Mr. Trump is doing in his current campaign, which is notably lacking in consultants and pollsters, he operated largely by gut instinct.

When Mr. Trump did consult outside counsel about the Plaza, his instructions were to make as little trouble as possible, no matter how daunting the numbers looked.

“He toned me down,” recalled Jonathan A. Bernstein, then a lawyer at Dreyer & Traub. “He had come to the conclusion that this was a deal he wanted to do, and he was completely aware of the downsides, and my job was to get him the best legal document I could. You don’t tell him, ‘Are you crazy?’ You say: ‘It’s $400 million and $12 million in N.O.I.,’” or net operating income. “‘Are you O.K. with that?’”
Huge Debt, Lost Prize

Once he owned the hotel, Mr. Trump put his wife, Ivana, in charge of renovating it, paying her, as he put it at the time, “one dollar a year plus all the dresses she can buy.” She and a team oversaw a restoration that included new paint, new furniture and a revival of the major public spaces, like the Palm Court tearoom.

“Some of it came out great; some of it came out kind of chintzy,” said Barbara Res, then an employee of the Trump Organization. “We went about trying to restore it but in a way that didn’t cost too much money.”


Mr. Trump offered design opinions and growled when necessary. After a hotel union put up resistance to changes requested by his wife — that ashtrays be regularly stamped with the Plaza’s logo, for instance — Mr. Trump issued a threat.

“I called these guys up,” he told The New York Times soon after the purchase, “and said, ‘Do it, or I’ll turn the Plaza into a condo with three janitors and a super.’”

Opinion was split over the merits of the deal. Among the many who thought that Donald Trump had overpaid was Donald Trump. In a full-page ad he took out in New York magazine in November 1988, he called the transaction “the first time in my life I have knowingly made a deal which was not economic — for I can never justify the price I paid, no matter how successful the Plaza becomes.”

This proved prescient. By 1990, the Plaza needed an operating profit of $40 million a year to break even, according to financial records that Mr. Trump disclosed at the time. The hotel had fallen well short of that goal, and with renovating expenses, in one year it burned through $74 million more than it brought in.

But Mr. Trump didn’t spend a lot of time sweating over the Plaza’s finances. He was too busy with new challenges. A few months after the Plaza deal closed, he purchased the Eastern Air Shuttle for $365 million, and in 1990, he opened the Trump Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City, which cost $1 billion to build. Some of the loans he took out to pay for deals were personally guaranteed.

“The fact is, you do feel invulnerable,” Mr. Trump told Timothy O’Brien, author of “Trump Nation,” discussing this period in his life. “And then you have a tendency to take your eye off the ball a little bit and hunt around for women. And hunt around for models.”


A lack of focus was not Mr. Trump’s only problem. The updraft in the real estate market of the ’80s turned into a headwind by the early ’90s, and more than $3 billion in loans — $900 million of which were personally guaranteed — went into default. Dozens of banks came calling and, after lengthy negotiations, a meeting was held in a large conference room in the law offices of Weil, Gotshal & Manges, the firm that represented the largest lender, Citibank. There, some 50 bankers and lawyers watched Mr. Trump sign over nearly all of his properties — the Plaza, other buildings, the shuttle, the yacht, the jet — in exchange for more favorable terms on his personal guarantees.

The banks could have easily toppled Mr. Trump into personal bankruptcy, “but we all agreed that he’d be better alive than dead,” said Alan Pomerantz, then head of the real estate department at Weil. “We needed him to help sell all of his assets, and the deal was that as he sold off more, we’d reduce his personal guarantee.”

In effect, the banks allowed Mr. Trump to remain solvent so that they could get the benefit of his gift for salesmanship. In exchange, the banks provided him with $450,000 a month to operate his business and cover personal expenses. It was so tight a leash that when Marla Maples, his girlfriend at the time, turned up on television waving the costly Harry Winston diamond she’d been given as an engagement ring, the paymasters wanted a word with the groom-to-be.

“I didn’t buy it,” Mr. Trump said, according to Mr. Pomerantz. It was a three-month loaner, given in exchange for on-air mentions of Harry Winston.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Trump called that story “completely false.”

The banks shopped the Plaza around, without success, for a few years before finally selling it in a deal that valued it at $325 million to a partnership between Prince Alwaleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia and CDL Hotels International of Singapore in 1995. None of the proceeds went to Mr. Trump, according to several people involved.


Still, he told me that the sale was yet another victory. The terms were, to use one of his favorite words, fantastic, and relieved him of a vast personal debt.

“One of the great deals was the Plaza, because way beyond the price, I was able to get favors from the banks and from others,” he said. Speaking of Prince Alwaleed, he added: “He paid too much for the hotel. He wanted that hotel so badly, and I put him through the wringer and made a great deal.”

Of course, it cost the Saudi-Singapore partnership $75 million less than Mr. Trump had spent for the same building seven years earlier. Mr. Trump also claimed in the interview that he owned 100 percent of the Plaza until the day it was sold, a version of events totally at odds with published reports at the time and the recollections of others involved in the deal.

This may be yet another parallel to Mr. Trump’s performance on the hustings, where he has bent the truth into so many outlandish shapes that PolitiFact anointed his entire campaign the 2015 Lie of the Year. Among the more memorable whoppers: a Twitter post that 81 percent of whites are killed by blacks (PolitiFact cites the true figure as 15 percent) and that on television he’d seen thousands of people in Jersey City cheering the collapse of the World Trade Center.


Mr. Trump’s prediction that the Plaza would be worth far more than it cost him did come true. Unfortunately for him, it happened in 2004, when the hotel was sold yet again, this time for $675 million to an Israeli developer who carved up the rooms in the way that Mr. Trump had originally imagined. Half of the building was turned into condominiums, which eventually sold for a total of $1.4 billion.

Feuding With the Prince

Today, Mr. Trump’s brief ownership of the Plaza is one of the least-known chapters of a protean career. It was not the last time one of his properties would need the shelter of bankruptcy protection, and it marked the beginning of his transition from an owner of major assets to a manager of major assets. An increasing share of his wealth would come in the future from licensing his name, not just to builders but sellers of suits, cologne, chandeliers, mattresses and more. In professional parlance, he went from “asset heavy” to “asset light.”

The Plaza deal also demonstrated both his intense drive and ambition as well as his tendency to spread himself dangerously thin as he looks for other conquests. Abraham Wallach, a former executive at the Trump Organization, said Mr. Trump was a man without any conventional vices, but he had a hopeless addiction to notoriety and was always prowling for another deal that would gain attention and enhance his status.

“I’ve been shocked he has demonstrated such focus during the presidential campaign,” Mr. Wallach said. “In business, he would focus for about two or three days before the closing, and after that he would lose interest.”

Recently, the hotel and a central character in this narrative have intersected with his presidential run. After Mr. Trump called in December for a “complete shutdown” on Muslims’ entry into the United States, Prince Alwaleed posted on Twitter: “You are a disgrace not only to the G.O.P. but to all America. Withdraw from the U.S. presidential race as you will never win.”

Mr. Trump returned fire: “Dopey Prince @Alwaleed_Talal wants to control our U.S. politicians with daddy’s money. Can’t do it when I get elected.”

That same day, Dec. 11, Mr. Trump gave a speech at a luncheon where he was heckled by protesters waving signs that read, “Stop the war on immigrant communities” and “Trump, making America hate again.” Several people were ejected from the building.

The building was the Plaza Hotel.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2016, 08:54:46 AM by Crafty_Dog »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile
Donald Trump at Liberty U. today.
« Reply #708 on: January 18, 2016, 07:55:10 PM »
FOX gave his speech a bunch of free time (I don't recall Cruz, Rubio, or any of the others getting this treatment) but I must say he was quite engaging.  Indeed, he sounded rather lucid , , , until he showed profound trade protectionist based economic illiteracy on how free trade works , , ,


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile


objectivist1

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1060
    • View Profile
A Christian Argument Against Trump...
« Reply #713 on: January 22, 2016, 08:47:02 AM »
For your consideration.  I'm not saying I necessarily agree with this analysis:

Trump’s Essence Is Winning, Christ’s Is Sacrifice, Now Choose

By Steve Berman  |  January 21, 2016


I daresay more words have been spilled on the topic of Donald Trump in the past six months than on any candidate in any race since Ronald Reagan, but it’s been difficult to get to what Aristotle called the “teleology” of Trump. Teleology: It’s the reason for his existence.

Aristotle asked “what causes something to be what it is, to have the characteristics that it has, or to change in the way that it does?” And from that question, he developed his philosophical concepts of substance and form.

We know a table is a table when we look at it because of its form, but the substance is wood, glue and nails.

The substance of Trump is a man obsessed with success. It doesn’t matter what endeavor he’s in, he wants to win. He discards whatever is not advancing him toward a win, and acquires what does advance him. He wakes up every morning with that same belief and goes to bed knowing he’s done all he can do achieve it that day.

And now the form: a man shaped by the power of positive thought. Trump’s religion is the Christianity of Norman Vincent Peale, author of “The Power of Positive Thinking.”

    “The great Norman Vincent Peale was my minister for years,” Trump told CNN last July, a sentiment he repeated in Atlanta and in Iowa during stops in Ames and Dubuque.

    Peale, for his part, described Trump as “kindly and courteous” with “a streak of honest humility,” and touted him as “one of America’s top positive thinkers and doers.” The minister also called Trump “ingenious” and predicted that he would be “the greatest builder of our time.”

Peale preached a Christianity styled on what today is called “Word of Faith.” I’ve been to some churches where Jesus is the name, but the game is “name it, claim it.” This brand of faith relies on verses like John 14:13-14 “And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.”

Oh, and do they ask.

For Trump, who answered “I try not make mistakes where I have to ask forgiveness” when asked for his views on asking for God’s forgiveness by CNN’s Anderson Cooper, it’s all about living for the purpose for which he believes God placed him here. And to Trump, that purpose is to succeed in everything he does.

To win.

He doesn’t drink. He doesn’t smoke. He doesn’t do drugs. And he doesn’t believe that his relationships are as important as the service he can give to his country by succeeding. For that, Trump feels he owes no apology to man or to God. Psychologists might call this a narcissistic personality disorder, but it’s really not. It’s his personal brand of faith, based not so much in the Bible as it is in his own ability to picture his success, and then attain it.

Trump has been planning this run for president for a very long time. He’s kicked it around since he was in his late 20’s. It’s never been far from his peripheral gaze: A prize of all prizes, and the success of all successes. That’s his essence. That’s the reason Trump believes God made him for such a time as this.

Substance, form, purpose were Aristotle’s tools. The substance of Trump running for president versus him being president are two different things. But the form and the essence are the same: Trump wants to win, and that’s problematic.

Jesus cautioned against too much success in this life. Matthew 19:23-24:

    Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

1 Timothy 6:9-10, the Apostle Paul wrote:

    Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

Making the deal, building the wall, whatever it is that Trump wants to do is not what God’s Word recommends. Should he become president, Trump will stay true to form, in the Aristotelian sense. Bible-believing Christians must be careful about supporting Trump. It brings to mind the story of the scorpion and frog, which I’ve used before as an illustration.

    One day, a scorpion decided he wanted to leave his desert home and live in a forest, so he set out on a journey.  Reaching a river he could not cross, he came across a frog, and asked for help.  Here’s how their conversation went.

    “Hellooo Mr. Frog!” called the scorpion across the water, “Would you be so kind as to give me a ride on your back across the river?”

    “Well now, Mr. Scorpion! How do I know that if I try to help you, you wont try to kill me?” asked the frog hesitantly.

    “Because,” the scorpion replied, “If I try to kill you, then I would die too, for you see I cannot swim!”

    Now this seemed to make sense to the frog. But he asked. “What about when I get close to the bank? You could still try to kill me and get back to the shore!”

    “This is true,” agreed the scorpion, “But then I wouldn’t be able to get to the other side of the river!”

    “Alright then…how do I know you wont just wait till we get to the other side and THEN kill me?” said the frog.

    “Ahh…,” crooned the scorpion, “Because you see, once you’ve taken me to the other side of this river, I will be so grateful for your help, that it would hardly be fair to reward you with death, now would it?!”

You can guess what happened.  Halfway across the river, the scorpion stung the frog.

    “You fool!” croaked the frog, “Now we shall both die! Why on earth did you do that?”

    The scorpion shrugged, and did a little jig on the drowning frog’s back.

    “I could not help myself. It is my nature.”

    Then they both sank into the muddy waters of the swiftly flowing river.

We cannot expect Trump to suddenly change his nature or his faith. We can pray for him (we should pray for him, and for President Obama also and a number of leaders who need Jesus), but we should not base our assumptions on what the man says, but on who he really is.

Trump will do what he needs to do to succeed. I don’t believe those who say he’ll trash the Constitution, or go for an authoritarian style. That’s not his nature. He wants his opponents to agree with him and to make the deal. He’ll stake a position, summon supporters, build consensus, fight off attacks, and move forward until the deal is done. That’s what he’s always done, and that’s what he will continue to do.

But for Christians, be careful what you ask for, because it might not be what you’re really getting. To “make America great,” Trump will sacrifice Biblical values, sink the country to a moral low point (defining success as winning in monetary, military, and nationalistic terms), and attack anyone who opposes him.

As one pastor (who I will leave unnamed) put it, “if we elect this man to the White House, the first time Christians disagree with him, we will get everything that’s coming to us.”

Scary words. Now choose.


"You have enemies?  Good.  That means that you have stood up for something, sometime in your life." - Winston Churchill.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19778
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #714 on: January 22, 2016, 09:09:21 AM »
"As one pastor (who I will leave unnamed) put it, “if we elect this man to the White House, the first time Christians disagree with him, we will get everything that’s coming to us.”

I agree.  This is a very real concern.

Sure many of us can like him now.   But what if we become the target for him (once he no longer needs us).  When we are called crude names the honeymoon will end fast.

He is a very big risk.  His biographer was on cable the other day and more or less stated how in his deals that went bad he always came out better than everyone else.  And if he starts to lose he turns tail and runs.

If what is good for him is consistently what is good for America that we are in "good company".  If we get a divergence however, we will be left with all the debt.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19464
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #717 on: January 25, 2016, 07:20:49 AM »
A Rush comment on Trump.  When he repeats himself he is trying to figure out what to say next, not reiterating the point.  This is not a slam, just advice on how to listen to him.  I noticed it again when he appeared on Meet the dePressed yesterday.

He reminds me in that of Joe Biden.  When he would repeat himself over and over in the VP debates for emphasis, he was always wrong.  Trump does it instead of silence or saying uh or um.  It works for him, he is obviously he is a very successful speaker.  Just don't think that his repetition of a statement means double or triple emphasis.  It doesn't.  Sometimes it means just the opposite.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #718 on: January 25, 2016, 07:23:46 AM »
A Rush comment on Trump.  When he repeats himself he is trying to figure out what to say next, not reiterating the point.  This is not a slam, just advice on how to listen to him.  I noticed it again when he appeared on Meet the dePressed yesterday.

He reminds me in that of Joe Biden.  When he would repeat himself over and over in the VP debates for emphasis, he was always wrong.  Trump does it instead of silence or saying uh or um.  It works for him, he is obviously he is a very successful speaker.  Just don't think that his repetition of a statement means double or triple emphasis.  It doesn't.  Sometimes it means just the opposite.

It'll be great to watch American policy shaped by stream of consciousness ramblings.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19464
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #719 on: January 25, 2016, 07:52:12 AM »
It'll be great to watch American policy shaped by stream of consciousness ramblings.

Great, in a gallows humor sort of way.

DDF

  • Guest
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #720 on: January 25, 2016, 08:48:31 AM »
It's funny to watch people attempt to slam someone that is worth a conservative 4.5 Billion, as though he "rambles to himself."

One also has to remember, that Trump is selling a popular brand to a pissed off (and rightfully so) public.

Not everyone that ever served a dictator, did so unwillingly.... there was oftentimes, mass public approval....

A good section of the rightful owners of the American States, have had it with the politically correct and systematic raffling off of the country, giving it away to illegals, and others still, attempting to subvert the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.

Maybe a dictator with American first values is precisely what the country needs and let the losers beware (or three zones, Liberal, Conservative, and Free). I support that fully. I am far from alone.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #721 on: January 25, 2016, 09:43:34 AM »

"Maybe a dictator with American first values is precisely what the country needs"

I profoundly disagree.  We need a president who believes in the American Creed and who will apply it. 

DDF

  • Guest
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #722 on: January 25, 2016, 10:24:39 AM »

"Maybe a dictator with American first values is precisely what the country needs"

I profoundly disagree.  We need a president who believes in the American Creed and who will apply it. 

I would agree IF it could be decided what that is. The problem is that it isn't. Mikulski (Senator D Maryland just stated "Let's not get involved in constitutional arguments...") just stated that in regard to gun control. There is no definition in a unilateral manner as to what the American Creed is. http://freedomoutpost.com/2016/01/during-gun-control-hearing-senator-blurts-out-lets-not-get-involved-in-constitutional-arguments/

My question then is, how else do you define in a resound manner, what that creed is to be?

It's a fair question. I have proposed my answer.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19464
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #723 on: January 25, 2016, 11:16:43 AM »

"Maybe a dictator with American first values is precisely what the country needs"

I profoundly disagree.  We need a president who believes in the American Creed and who will apply it. 

I would agree IF it could be decided what that is. The problem is that it isn't. Mikulski (Senator D Maryland just stated "Let's not get involved in constitutional arguments...") just stated that in regard to gun control. There is no definition in a unilateral manner as to what the American Creed is. http://freedomoutpost.com/2016/01/during-gun-control-hearing-senator-blurts-out-lets-not-get-involved-in-constitutional-arguments/

My question then is, how else do you define in a resound manner, what that creed is to be?

It's a fair question. I have proposed my answer.

Defined here by Crafty:

http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?action=post;msg=92793;topic=1736.750;sesc=4fa5408003f8d5f8290a92723f78fc2b

From another thread:

American Creed= Free minds, free markets, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of contract, right of self-defense (hence guns and knives, etc) property rights, privacy, all connected with responsibility for the consequences of one's action.  All this from our Creator, not the State nor majority vote.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #724 on: January 25, 2016, 02:50:43 PM »
It's funny to watch people attempt to slam someone that is worth a conservative 4.5 Billion, as though he "rambles to himself."

**Trump chose his father well. Most people don't have the forethought to be born to a New York multimillionaire.

One also has to remember, that Trump is selling a popular brand to a pissed off (and rightfully so) public.

**Yes, despite what he did and said for years, now he is a conservative, depending when and where you catch him. Is the public pissed? Yes and rightly so, but the cure for 8 years of a narcissistic personality unfit for the office isn't another narcissist unqualified for the job.

Not everyone that ever served a dictator, did so unwillingly.... there was oftentimes, mass public approval....

**I am unaware of this leading to a happy ending, ever in human history.

A good section of the rightful owners of the American States, have had it with the politically correct and systematic raffling off of the country, giving it away to illegals, and others still, attempting to subvert the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.

**I have myself, but we must avoid getting sucked into a cult of personality in our anger.

Maybe a dictator with American first values is precisely what the country needs and let the losers beware (or three zones, Liberal, Conservative, and Free). I support that fully. I am far from alone.

DDF

  • Guest
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #725 on: January 25, 2016, 04:26:14 PM »
It's funny to watch people attempt to slam someone that is worth a conservative 4.5 Billion, as though he "rambles to himself."

**Trump chose his father well. Most people don't have the forethought to be born to a New York multimillionaire.

One also has to remember, that Trump is selling a popular brand to a pissed off (and rightfully so) public.

**Yes, despite what he did and said for years, now he is a conservative, depending when and where you catch him. Is the public pissed? Yes and rightly so, but the cure for 8 years of a narcissistic personality unfit for the office isn't another narcissist unqualified for the job.

Not everyone that ever served a dictator, did so unwillingly.... there was oftentimes, mass public approval....

**I am unaware of this leading to a happy ending, ever in human history.

A good section of the rightful owners of the American States, have had it with the politically correct and systematic raffling off of the country, giving it away to illegals, and others still, attempting to subvert the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.

**I have myself, but we must avoid getting sucked into a cult of personality in our anger.

Maybe a dictator with American first values is precisely what the country needs and let the losers beware (or three zones, Liberal, Conservative, and Free). I support that fully. I am far from alone.

Completely valid GM... Don't quite know what the answer is.

« Last Edit: January 26, 2016, 06:40:45 AM by DDF »

DDF

  • Guest
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #726 on: January 26, 2016, 06:41:06 AM »
GM - I thought about what you said last night, especially the narcisist portion of it, and I find it to be quite correct.

I think you just swayed me on Trump. He is a narcisist, and perhaps we need someone in office that has a bit more humility.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #727 on: January 26, 2016, 07:17:14 AM »
GM - I thought about what you said last night, especially the narcisist portion of it, and I find it to be quite correct.

I think you just swayed me on Trump. He is a narcisist, and perhaps we need someone in office that has a bit more humility.


Those who would lead us deserve the strictest vetting. We fail to do so at our peril.

DDF

  • Guest
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #728 on: January 26, 2016, 07:27:03 AM »
GM - I thought about what you said last night, especially the narcisist portion of it, and I find it to be quite correct.

I think you just swayed me on Trump. He is a narcisist, and perhaps we need someone in office that has a bit more humility.


Those who would lead us deserve the strictest vetting. We fail to do so at our peril.

I agree. I am limited to one message per hour. I'll generate a proper one within the next 24 hours and send it.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19464
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #729 on: January 26, 2016, 09:00:19 AM »
Trump is running to be the greatest President ever in post-constitutional America.

Since it's all about him, the slogan should be, Make Trump Great Again.
-------------------------------------------------

Taunting Pat to jump back in ....

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19464
    • View Profile
NBC WSJ, Trump % in general election, 39 against Bernie and 41 against HRC
« Reply #730 on: January 26, 2016, 09:13:41 AM »
GOP might as well nominate a Democrat as Trump.  That's who wins.
Trump makes socialism popular.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

Funny that the polls are all wrong, yet the only reason he is relevant is because of the polls.

What (positive info) is left to learn about him; he has been the central news story for almost a year.  All he has left to offer is to bring others down.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2016, 09:17:17 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #731 on: January 26, 2016, 05:30:11 PM »
Openness to being persuaded is a very rare quality.  Respect DDF!



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile

DDF

  • Guest
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #733 on: January 27, 2016, 06:38:13 AM »
Openness to being persuaded is a very rare quality.  Respect DDF!




Sir.... thank you. I'm not a big fan of narcisists.... of any flavour, and GM nailed it with that one.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19778
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #734 on: January 27, 2016, 06:49:05 AM »
The recent press conference with Trump essentially boasting and telling off anyone who gets in his way may be a tipping point for me.  His total lack of any humility and his big head getting bigger every second makes it hard to fathom that this guy is not potentially very dangerous.

On one hand he says he would deal.  On the other hand he shoves anyone out of the way who publicly criticizes him and a really crude and sometimes even vulgar manor.

I would absolutely vote for him over Hillary or any Dem.  But I put Cruz and Rubio ahead of him for sure.  Too bad because I do like his positions on a number of things such as taxes, immigration (of course), security, maybe trade (I don't understand trade enough to be qualified to really assess this) and looking out for us first the world second.

I wonder if his children think about him what they say.  They all seem like great kids and happy.  Are they afraid of him? And it is all a facade or is it real?  He seems like a great parent.  All his kids are privileged but seem very well adjusted and good people.

Trump is the type of guy who one could like until you no longer agree with him.  He has potential to be more of a "tyrant" than Obama.  Not that he would be but his personality just seems to suck up all the power it can.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2016, 06:53:35 AM by ccp »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Blood coming out of his whatever
« Reply #735 on: January 27, 2016, 08:03:24 AM »
I hear sand can do that.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile
What could go wrong with Donald Trump?
« Reply #736 on: January 27, 2016, 09:32:59 AM »
January 26, 2016:

TRUMP: Well, I think that I’m going to be able to get along with Pelosi. I think I’m going to be able to -- I’ve always had a good relationship with Nancy Pelosi. I’ve never had a problem. Reid will be gone. I always had a decent relationship with Reid, although lately, obviously, I haven’t been dealing with him so he’ll actually use my name as the ultimate -- you know, as the ultimate of the billionaires in terms of, you know, people you don’t want.

But I always had a great relationship with Harry Reid. And frankly, if I weren’t running for office I would be able to deal with her or Reid or anybody. But I think I’d be able to get along very well with Nancy Pelosi and just about everybody.

Hey, look, I think I’ll be able to get along well with Chuck Schumer. I was always very good with Schumer. I was close to Schumer in many ways. It’s important that you get along. It’s wonderful to say you’re a maverick and you’re going to stand up and close up the country and all of the things, but you have to get somebody to go along with you.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: What could go wrong with Donald Trump?
« Reply #737 on: January 27, 2016, 09:35:35 AM »
An intellectually lazy narcissist ? They make the best presidents! Ask any Obama supporter.


January 26, 2016:

TRUMP: Well, I think that I’m going to be able to get along with Pelosi. I think I’m going to be able to -- I’ve always had a good relationship with Nancy Pelosi. I’ve never had a problem. Reid will be gone. I always had a decent relationship with Reid, although lately, obviously, I haven’t been dealing with him so he’ll actually use my name as the ultimate -- you know, as the ultimate of the billionaires in terms of, you know, people you don’t want.

But I always had a great relationship with Harry Reid. And frankly, if I weren’t running for office I would be able to deal with her or Reid or anybody. But I think I’d be able to get along very well with Nancy Pelosi and just about everybody.

Hey, look, I think I’ll be able to get along well with Chuck Schumer. I was always very good with Schumer. I was close to Schumer in many ways. It’s important that you get along. It’s wonderful to say you’re a maverick and you’re going to stand up and close up the country and all of the things, but you have to get somebody to go along with you.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19464
    • View Profile
Re: What could go wrong with Donald Trump?
« Reply #738 on: January 27, 2016, 09:57:58 AM »
In that talk he praised Pelosi, Reid and Schumer while ripping Ted Cruz as nasty.

As I have said to Pat, Trump is the one choosing to not be on my side.

Great candidate for people who don't believe in constitutional limits on power and want surprises everyday in their public policy choices.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2016, 12:52:10 PM by DougMacG »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Guest
Turnabout is Fair Play
« Reply #739 on: January 27, 2016, 10:53:16 AM »
Some prime RINO points made here. This is what causes the Trump phenomena, IMO:

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/09/07/an-open-letter-to-jonah-goldberg-re-the-gop-and-donald-trump/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #740 on: January 27, 2016, 11:02:31 AM »
So, how is voting for Trump the solution?

DDF

  • Guest
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #741 on: January 27, 2016, 11:27:22 AM »
I don't disagree with what Trump is saying currently. I don't like that he lacks humility.

Having said that, I don't care that either Cruz or Rubio are Latinos. I work with Latinos every single day and they're mostly great people. I still don't know which one that I would support though....almost certainly the more religious of the two would be my choice. so long as it isn't just talk.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19778
    • View Profile
Trump on O'Reilly tonight
« Reply #743 on: January 27, 2016, 01:30:20 PM »
I cannot tell the difference between this being a single soap opera or reality TV show episode and a serious Presidential interview.  Why does Trump keep making this about Kelly and Kelly and Fox keep making it tabloid material:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/donald-trump-appear-bill-oreillys-859775

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Cruz center stage
« Reply #744 on: January 27, 2016, 03:27:58 PM »
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/361234.php

I like the empty podium idea.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile
Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #745 on: January 27, 2016, 03:32:49 PM »
My first thought is that it is better to not have it.  (Not sure of issues concerning bringing someone else in).  NO ONE is indispensable, and of Trump does not want to play, then Life moves on.
 

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72340
    • View Profile
WSJ: The leap of Trump
« Reply #748 on: January 28, 2016, 07:26:29 AM »
The Leap of Trump
As the GOP nominee or President, he would be a political ‘black swan.’
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on January 26 in Marshalltown, Iowa. ENLARGE
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on January 26 in Marshalltown, Iowa. Photo: Scott Olson/Getty Images
Jan. 27, 2016 7:06 p.m. ET
711 COMMENTS

Financial analyst and our contributor Donald Luskin has described Donald Trump as a “black swan” over the political economy. He’s referring to an outlier event that few anticipated and whose impact is impossible to predict. As the voting season begins in Iowa, this strikes us as a useful way for Republicans to think about the Trump candidacy.

We’ve been critical of Mr. Trump on many grounds and our views have not changed. But we also respect the American public, and the brash New Yorker hasn’t stayed atop the GOP polls for six months because of his charm. Democracies sometimes elect poor leaders—see the last eight years—but their choices can’t be dismissed as mindless unless you want to give up on democracy itself.

The most hopeful way to interpret Mr. Trump’s support is that the American people aren’t taking decline lying down. They know the damage that has been done to them over the last decade—in lower incomes, diminished economic prospects, and a far more dangerous world. But they aren’t about to accept this as their fate.

Americans aren’t Japanese or Europeans—at least not yet. Mr. Trump’s promise to “make America great again” is for many patriotic voters a rallying cry for U.S. revival. In that sense it is motivated more by hope than by the “anger” so commonly described in the media.
***

The problem is that Mr. Trump is an imperfect vessel for this populism, to say the least. On politics and policy he is a leap into the known unknown. That so many voters seem willing to take this leap suggests how far confidence in American political leaders has fallen. We can debate another day how the U.S. got here, but with the voting nigh it’s important to address what a Trump nomination could mean for the GOP and the country.

Pundits on the right are stressing the obvious that Mr. Trump is no conservative, but he’s also no liberal. He has no consistent political philosophy that we can detect beyond a kind of relentless pragmatism that is common in businessmen. Mr. Trump calls it “the art of the deal.” The President he may most resemble in that populist pragmatism, if not in manners, is another business success who turned to politics, Herbert Hoover.

Can Mr. Trump win the Presidency if he is the nominee? Who knows? We’ve argued that the GOP nominee should be the favorite this year, and perhaps Mr. Trump can mobilize middle-class voters in Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio and Pennsylvania and win more states than Mitt Romney did. We certainly know he wouldn’t shrink from flaying Hillary Clinton.

But there’s no guarantee that Mr. Trump would win the mainstream, college-educated Republican voters he would also need to win. His net negative rating with the public is the highest in the presidential field in the latest WSJ/NBC poll at minus-29. Jeb Bush is minus-27, Mrs. Clinton minus-nine.

Mr. Trump might be able to repair this image if he ran a more sober campaign as the nominee than he has run so far, but he could also blow up under months of intense media scrutiny. His biggest test would be showing he has the temperament to be President, and his tantrum this week over Megyn Kelly and Fox News isn’t reassuring.

All of which means that Mr. Trump has the widest electoral variability as a candidate. He could win, but he also could lose 60% to 40%, taking the GOP’s Senate majority down and threatening House control. A Clinton Presidency with Speaker Nancy Pelosi would usher in an era of antigrowth policies worse than even 2009-2010. This is the killer black swan.

And how would Mr. Trump govern as President? Flip a coin. Maybe he would surround himself with astute advisers, work closely with Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, and craft a reform agenda to revive the economy a la Reagan. His tax reform outline is close enough to sensible that Mr. Ryan could knock it into shape. He would not want to be a “loser” in office.

But history teaches that Presidents try to do what they say they will during a campaign, and Mr. Trump is threatening a trade war with China, Mexico and Japan, among others. He sometimes says he merely wants to start a negotiation with China that will end happily when it bows to his wishes. China may have other ideas. A bad sign is that Mr. Trump has hired as his campaign policy adviser Stephen Miller, who worked for Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.), the most antitrade, anti-immigration Senator.

Foreign policy would also be a leap in the dark. Mr. Trump has said he respects former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton, and so do we. But Mr. Trump also admires Vladimir Putin—enough so that even after a British judge found last week that Mr. Putin had “probably” ordered the murder in London of a Russian defector, Mr. Trump defended Mr. Putin because he wasn’t found “guilty.”
***

Mr. Trump has shown great staying power in the polls, and perhaps his campaign organizing talents will be as strong as his social-media skills. But Iowa and New Hampshire are only the beginning of primaries that have weeks or months to run, and a huge chunk of voters haven’t made up their minds.

Ted Cruz has his own electoral and governing issues and he isn’t the only alternative to Mr. Trump, despite what both men would like Americans to believe. Voters could still elevate one of the other candidates. Republicans should look closely before they leap.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Guest
Authors of their Antithesis
« Reply #749 on: January 29, 2016, 04:04:35 PM »
Another piece examining the staid GOP mainstream's role in creating Trump, by contrast if nothing else:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-is-shocking-vulgar-and-right-213572