Trump!!!

Trump would be great, I think.(cautiously optimistic despite his New Yorker version of being a Republican) I fell for it once before when Perot was running in '92. Are the Clintons lucky enough to have two middlers seal the races for them?(assuming Trump doesn't get the nomination and runs third party if he doesn't)

 

The Trump democrats?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-rides-a-blue-collar-wave-1447803248

 

Just think, in our lifetime we get Obama, and looming is Hillary Clinton, and Donald Trump, who may fit better than most as CEO... after all, the President is the Executive Branch.

We've also had Al Gore, Joe Lieberman, Geraldine Ferraro, Walter Mondale, Dick Cheney, Dan Quayle, Spirao Agnew, Sarah Palin, Mike Dukakis. Not to mention, Bill Clinton.

Somehow due to the fiber of the American people, we're a great nation in spite of a group of individuals that other than Donald Trump I doubt anyone would hire or join in an effort to build a company, produce a movie, build an arts center, run a university, run a research center, or lead an army. (I've left out the more worthy to run for, or hold, President or VP).

This goes to show that a country is not the government, and the government is not the country. The people are the country. Add the Constitution.

When we say God Bless America, we probably mean God Bless the American People and the Constitution. We endure in spite of the guvmint and elected officials.

 

Trumpy Cat

 

There is a claim out there that CNN edited their video to make Trump look bad (or worse) on the database issue
The bolded part is what they are supposed to have edited out

-------------------------------
Reporter: Should there be a database system that tracks Muslims who are in this country?

Trump: There should be a lot of systems, beyond databases. We should have a lot of systems, and today you can do it. But right now we need to have a border, we have to have strength, we have to have a wall, and we cannot let what’s happening to this country happen any longer.

Reporter: Is that something your White House would like to implement?

Donald Trump: I would certainly implement that. Absolutely.

 

Joe
Say it ain't so.
That CNN or MSNBC or any media would selectively edit Trump or any GOP Pol to make them look bad.

 

There is another Republican Debate scheduled on CNN in mid-December.

I hope that the RNC and even the other candidates stick together and insist that this issue be fully flushed out and, if the claim is true, that CNN be forced to own up to it. If it is true, it's pretty outrageous. Otherwise, cancel the debate. I think the last R-debate on CNN was the highest ratings they have ever had, for anything, ever*. So, the RNC has a large degree of leverage. Although I question whether they are smart enough to use it.


* Their previous record was a 1993 (when CNN had much less competition) episode of "Larry King Live" with Al Gore debating H Ross Perot on NAFTA. And the ratings for the R-debate absolutely blew away the Gore v. Perot ratings.

 

I remember watching that debate as a 17 year old high school senior. (That should put into perspective for @texas_ex2000 what a dateless loser I used to be. While he was probably making out with some smokin' hot cheerleader, I was watching a NAFTA debate.) Though I think Perot has been vindicated by history, Al Gore smoked him in the debate.

 

Would ya let me finnnish

 

I peaked in high-school. I'm sure you have some leggy former pom girl sitting in the passenger seat of your beautiful Porsche going 150+ on the Autobahn.

In the end, brains and success win out.

 

I did peak when I got married. My wife could have done way better than me, and even better, she doesn't know it.

 

If Trump goes third party, ......

will he run as a Whig?

 

If that's true, it's a despicable act.

 

Whigs are underappreciated. Log Cabin, Hard Cider campaign. Old Glory Coast to Coast.

 

What is up with Trump? Now he's emboldened enough to simply lie? See his comments on "thousands and thousands of Muslims celebrating" in New Jersey on 9/11. See also his comments that the Obama Admin plans to let 200,000 Syrian refugees.

Andrea Mitchell described him best on Meet The Press yesterday: "He's a flamethrower with consistently incendiary rhetoric." That may be what a segment of the Republican Party wants but it has no business manning the Whitehouse, IMHO.

 

You'll notice that in the last several weeks, he had toned it down, and his poll numbers sank while Carson's and Cruz's rose. He probably figures that the best way to bring them up is to smack talk again.

 

I will go along with exaggeration only. There were plenty of Muslims celebrating the Twin Towers coming down. More and more media accounts keep coming out about this as people dig them out. Ignore them if you want, but the eyewitness accounts are there. Plus, its been ~15years, no one has perfect recall.

And Andrea Mitchell is a creep. Did you see her poking around the killers' pad? That was shameful.

 

Exaggeration? That's an understatement.

Trump: "Thousands and thousands of Muslims cheering in the streets."
Rudolph Guiliani: "There were reports of cheering by Muslims. Pockets of them. 10's of Muslims if I had to guess."

This was corroborated by the NYC Police Chief at the time. Furthermore Trump claimed to have "watched them on TV" which none of the evidence so far has shown. You're too smart to rationalize that Trump statement, Joe Fan. There are much better fights to fight.

 

Look, I will let you in on a secret since you probably never have read not ever will read Trump's book. The short version goes like this -- First, never negotiate any deal unless you are serious about it. And if you are serious about it, then negotiate seriously.

Next, you should be the one to set the terms of the negotiations at the outset. Do this by opening with outrageous and large demands. Then, by the time the deal is final, you will end up with what you actually wanted at the beginning.

If you take a look at the big picture of the way Trump has handles the media, this has been what is going on. You may not or probably do not agree with this but, from our side, we see the US media as heavily-biased. They always control the narrative. But Trump has flipped the script on them. Look at how much time all the networks devote to him. He gets at least twice as much coverage as any other candidate, including Hillary. And the networks have no choice because they are always chasing ratings. He knows how TV works. Trump has made it so Trump is the only one who guarantees ratings. The networks are all chasing him. Every day.

So, let's start with a quick look at the southern border immigration issue. He was going to deport them all. Build a wall and make Mexico pay for it. What did this do? it's changed the terms of the immigration debate completely. It changed the narrative, moved the discussion.

Next, look at his most recent no entry visas to Muslims. Same thing. Trump, with only a couple comments, changed the entire narrative. It has been something to see. And none of the other Republicans would ever do it. Yet Americans (including even our in-the-bag media) are now publicly talking about issues that would have never even been allowed. Not until Trump plowed in, right? From my perspective, it's been great.

Now, think back to Trump's campaign promises. What is the one constant he has promised? That he will negotiate better deals. That the US has been dumb, has had dumb deal negotiators for a long time. He promises that will end.

Put all this together and you should be able to see what he is doing with these two hot-button political issues -- (1) Immigration and (2) Islamic terrorism. Go back and think about his book. Then think about his opening positions on these two issues. He followed his own script. He gave a demonstration in front of everyone, even though not everyone recognized it for what it was at the time. In the course, Trump has done the impossible, he gamed the system. I do not know how long it will take the media to catch on. But it's been absolutely fascinating to watch so far.

 

Do you feel lying is OK if the ends justify the means?

 

You think Trump is channeling Saul Alinksy/Karl Marx/Machiavelli?
I think Trump is channeling Trump

Poticians say all kind of stuff while running. Just words.
Here is an example -- Candidate Obama promising to "cut deficit in half by 2012"
Boy, that was a good one wasn't it!

 

So, all politicians lie so it's OK?

 

I outlined above what i think Trump is doing -- he is following his own book.

As far as what I personally think, I would like for the same standard to be applied to both sides. I dont think that's too much to ask. We shouldnt even have to ask for it.

 

Trump back in October: 'I like the word compromise … but if you are going to compromise, ask for about three times more than you want.'

 

Which is worse or has more direct impact on us?
A candidate extolling what they would someone at the highest levels of gov't?

 

I can agree with a common standard. I fully expect politicians to make promises they know they can't keep. The issue I have with Trump's rhetoric is that they aren't campaign promises. They are lies specifically designed to control the dialogue. He's not even playing fast and loose with the facts. Again, I expect politicians to use only the facts that support their agenda. Trump is truly making up the "facts" though. That's another level of dishonesty in my book and dangerous. That's moving from debating the merits of candidates to outright propaganda.