CDZ Alright Trump supporters, sell me.

[Fair&Balanced]

Actually, POTUS is very analogous to CEO of a major company, and looked at in that light, as you have admitted he does what's best for the company.

False. The President is generally going to get the same benefits from office regardless of how well or poorly America does. This is obviously not so for a CEO. The fact that you even suggested that they are similar is ludicrous (politics is not the same as business...hence why they are two totally separate fields of study). There are several differences but focusing solely on the self-interested difference it is a major one.

It's not as different as you make it seem.

The motives for getting in each perspective field aren't even all the at different.

Getting into politics to feed your own ego, doesn't automatically mean you will be a failure.

I agree. However, remember that we originally began this discussion debating the particular point on whether Trump would be self-serving or not. I've provided a lot of points as to why I believe that there is more than enough evidence to reasonably assume Trump would be self serving, however, you really haven't provided any reasons for why Trump would put America first rather than himself first other than that...he should do it in theory.

Please provide a reason for your belief. Please provide historical evidence, or actions that he has performed that has led you to believe that he will put America rather than himself first. I've done no less for you point towards why I believe the opposite. Please extend me the same kindness I've extended to you by providing a reason for your beliefs rather than just simply stating that you believe something.

You're asking me to provide historical evidence that leads me to believe he'd put the country first and I've done that. I've shown that he has ALWAYS put the organization that he has been the head of first. What you REALLY want is evidence of him putting the US first when he was not in a position that desired him to put the US first, and no I can not do that.

Completely the opposite of Hillary, who has several times been in positions where she was expected to put the USA first and didn't, Trump has NEVER been in a position where he should have put country first.

There is NO historical reason for Trump to have had ever put country first. So , you can't knock him for not having done so.

Every American has opportunities to put this country first. Those with resources moreso than those without.

Opportunity =/= responsibility.

 

[Never3ndr]

I never said that Trump, as a businessman, shouldn't have been doing what he's been doing...because it works, and it works well. He's one hell of a business man. I'm actually going back to university right now to move into the business world and I have nothing but respect for him in that aspect.

On the other hand, he isn't running to be CEO of another corporation that I can vote for as a shareholder. He's running for president of the United States of America. I'm pointing out that has done nothing in the past to make us believe that he would actually do anything but keep benefiting himself. As a hyper successful businessman you can actually start going out of your way to take a hit from your profits to benefit Americans. He hasn't. Look at Elon Musk. That guy makes a lot of decisions that aren't solely in his company's benefit, but for the benefit of the greater good...take Tesla open sourcing their patents as a great example of that.

My point is that Trump has done nothing in the past to actually make anybody think that he would put America first. Now, his rhetoric all says that...but then again so does Hillary's rhetoric...are we also going to take her word for it when she's shown time and time again in the past that she puts her own interests first? If you really think that Trump would put America first then point to an actual case of why. Point to where Trump, in the past, has taken a big hit in order to benefit his country rather than himself. I am aware of no such thing, which is why I don't believe his rhetoric.

Actually, POTUS is very analogous to CEO of a major company, and looked at in that light, as you have admitted he does what's best for the company.

False. The President is generally going to get the same benefits from office regardless of how well or poorly America does. This is obviously not so for a CEO. The fact that you even suggested that they are similar is ludicrous (politics is not the same as business...hence why they are two totally separate fields of study). There are several differences but focusing solely on the self-interested difference it is a major one.

It's not as different as you make it seem.

The motives for getting in each perspective field aren't even all the at different.

Getting into politics to feed your own ego, doesn't automatically mean you will be a failure.

I agree. However, remember that we originally began this discussion debating the particular point on whether Trump would be self-serving or not. I've provided a lot of points as to why I believe that there is more than enough evidence to reasonably assume Trump would be self serving, however, you really haven't provided any reasons for why Trump would put America first rather than himself first other than that...he should do it in theory.

Please provide a reason for your belief. Please provide historical evidence, or actions that he has performed that has led you to believe that he will put America rather than himself first. I've done no less for you point towards why I believe the opposite. Please extend me the same kindness I've extended to you by providing a reason for your beliefs rather than just simply stating that you believe something.

You're asking me to provide historical evidence that leads me to believe he'd put the country first and I've done that. I've shown that he has ALWAYS put the organization that he has been the head of first. What you REALLY want is evidence of him putting the US first when he was not in a position that desired him to put the US first, and no I can not do that.

Completely the opposite of Hillary, who has several times been in positions where she was expected to put the USA first and didn't, Trump has NEVER been in a position where he should have put country first.

There is NO historical reason for Trump to have had ever put country first. So , you can't knock him for not having done so.

I've pointed to a specific case where the head of an organization, Elon Musk, did not act in the best interest of his organization, but did something that would have an impact on the greater good (opening his patents to the competition). You can be the head of an organization and still act for the benefit of the greater good.

On the other hand, just because you are put in charge of something doesn't mean that you always work in its best interest. Trump owns that company and directly benefits from it doing well. However, we have many examples both politically and business wise of self-interested leaders acting in their own interest to the detriment of the organization that they lead. Politically you can look at what Cheney did to America or what many politicians in Washington (like Hillary) are doing. Business wise you just look at the multiple heads of corporations (the classic example is Enron) who act in their own interest and it has a grave effect on the corporation.

You act like if Trump was president then he would automatically run it like his own business...first of all, he can't. It is impossible. It isn't a business it is a government. If you keep confusing the two I'm going to have to assume that you are ignorant what those two separate sectors are. Second, he doesn't directly benefit from being president. If America does well he only has a tertiary benefit from it. On the other hand, he's shown REPEATEDLY that he is willing to use political office to directly benefit his company, solely his company, and nothing but his company (which his admitted political donations in order to try and get policy pushed in his favor).

With all of that said, there is plenty of evidence that Trump has had ample opportunity to put America first. He's been in a position of great power (he is a successful businessman with a literal wealth of resources), yet he hasn't.

 

[Never3ndr]

False. The President is generally going to get the same benefits from office regardless of how well or poorly America does. This is obviously not so for a CEO. The fact that you even suggested that they are similar is ludicrous (politics is not the same as business...hence why they are two totally separate fields of study). There are several differences but focusing solely on the self-interested difference it is a major one.

It's not as different as you make it seem.

The motives for getting in each perspective field aren't even all the at different.

Getting into politics to feed your own ego, doesn't automatically mean you will be a failure.

I agree. However, remember that we originally began this discussion debating the particular point on whether Trump would be self-serving or not. I've provided a lot of points as to why I believe that there is more than enough evidence to reasonably assume Trump would be self serving, however, you really haven't provided any reasons for why Trump would put America first rather than himself first other than that...he should do it in theory.

Please provide a reason for your belief. Please provide historical evidence, or actions that he has performed that has led you to believe that he will put America rather than himself first. I've done no less for you point towards why I believe the opposite. Please extend me the same kindness I've extended to you by providing a reason for your beliefs rather than just simply stating that you believe something.

You're asking me to provide historical evidence that leads me to believe he'd put the country first and I've done that. I've shown that he has ALWAYS put the organization that he has been the head of first. What you REALLY want is evidence of him putting the US first when he was not in a position that desired him to put the US first, and no I can not do that.

Completely the opposite of Hillary, who has several times been in positions where she was expected to put the USA first and didn't, Trump has NEVER been in a position where he should have put country first.

There is NO historical reason for Trump to have had ever put country first. So , you can't knock him for not having done so.

Every American has opportunities to put this country first. Those with resources moreso than those without.

Opportunity =/= responsibility.

Correct. Perhaps I should point out, however, that it doesn't erase the fact that you have still failed to provide any solid reason as to why we should have reasonable belief why Trump would actually act in America's interest if he is president other than the fact that you THINK he will.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

It's not as different as you make it seem.

The motives for getting in each perspective field aren't even all the at different.

Getting into politics to feed your own ego, doesn't automatically mean you will be a failure.

I agree. However, remember that we originally began this discussion debating the particular point on whether Trump would be self-serving or not. I've provided a lot of points as to why I believe that there is more than enough evidence to reasonably assume Trump would be self serving, however, you really haven't provided any reasons for why Trump would put America first rather than himself first other than that...he should do it in theory.

Please provide a reason for your belief. Please provide historical evidence, or actions that he has performed that has led you to believe that he will put America rather than himself first. I've done no less for you point towards why I believe the opposite. Please extend me the same kindness I've extended to you by providing a reason for your beliefs rather than just simply stating that you believe something.

You're asking me to provide historical evidence that leads me to believe he'd put the country first and I've done that. I've shown that he has ALWAYS put the organization that he has been the head of first. What you REALLY want is evidence of him putting the US first when he was not in a position that desired him to put the US first, and no I can not do that.

Completely the opposite of Hillary, who has several times been in positions where she was expected to put the USA first and didn't, Trump has NEVER been in a position where he should have put country first.

There is NO historical reason for Trump to have had ever put country first. So , you can't knock him for not having done so.

Every American has opportunities to put this country first. Those with resources moreso than those without.

Opportunity =/= responsibility.

Correct. Perhaps I should point out, however, that it doesn't erase the fact that you have still failed to provide any solid reason as to why we should have reasonable belief why Trump would actually act in America's interest if he is president other than the fact that you THINK he will.

Look

If you have a former CEO of McDonalds who always put McD first, who then went to Wal Mart and always put Wal Mart first then moved onto Phizer and always put them first applying for the job of CEO at Acme and he says "if hired , I'll put Acme first" would you look around and say "hey this asshole has never put Acme first, why would anyone believe he would if we hired him?" Of course not, that would be ridiculous.

 

[Never3ndr]

I agree. However, remember that we originally began this discussion debating the particular point on whether Trump would be self-serving or not. I've provided a lot of points as to why I believe that there is more than enough evidence to reasonably assume Trump would be self serving, however, you really haven't provided any reasons for why Trump would put America first rather than himself first other than that...he should do it in theory.

Please provide a reason for your belief. Please provide historical evidence, or actions that he has performed that has led you to believe that he will put America rather than himself first. I've done no less for you point towards why I believe the opposite. Please extend me the same kindness I've extended to you by providing a reason for your beliefs rather than just simply stating that you believe something.

You're asking me to provide historical evidence that leads me to believe he'd put the country first and I've done that. I've shown that he has ALWAYS put the organization that he has been the head of first. What you REALLY want is evidence of him putting the US first when he was not in a position that desired him to put the US first, and no I can not do that.

Completely the opposite of Hillary, who has several times been in positions where she was expected to put the USA first and didn't, Trump has NEVER been in a position where he should have put country first.

There is NO historical reason for Trump to have had ever put country first. So , you can't knock him for not having done so.

Every American has opportunities to put this country first. Those with resources moreso than those without.

Opportunity =/= responsibility.

Correct. Perhaps I should point out, however, that it doesn't erase the fact that you have still failed to provide any solid reason as to why we should have reasonable belief why Trump would actually act in America's interest if he is president other than the fact that you THINK he will.

Look

If you have a former CEO of McDonalds who always put McD first, who then went to Wal Mart and always put Wal Mart first then moved onto Phizer and always put them first applying for the job of CEO at Acme and he says "if hired , I'll put Acme first" would you look around and say "hey this asshole has never put Acme first, why would anyone believe he would if we hired him?" Of course not, that would be ridiculous.

Those are businesses where the CEO directly benefits from them doing well (through bonuses, salary gains, stock ownership jumps, etc.). Again, America is not a business. America is a country. Equating a CEO to a president is about the same thing as equating an orange to an orangutan. Sure they may both be living organisms, but they are pretty damn different and what works for one doesn't work for the other.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

You're asking me to provide historical evidence that leads me to believe he'd put the country first and I've done that. I've shown that he has ALWAYS put the organization that he has been the head of first. What you REALLY want is evidence of him putting the US first when he was not in a position that desired him to put the US first, and no I can not do that.

Completely the opposite of Hillary, who has several times been in positions where she was expected to put the USA first and didn't, Trump has NEVER been in a position where he should have put country first.

There is NO historical reason for Trump to have had ever put country first. So , you can't knock him for not having done so.

Every American has opportunities to put this country first. Those with resources moreso than those without.

Opportunity =/= responsibility.

Correct. Perhaps I should point out, however, that it doesn't erase the fact that you have still failed to provide any solid reason as to why we should have reasonable belief why Trump would actually act in America's interest if he is president other than the fact that you THINK he will.

Look

If you have a former CEO of McDonalds who always put McD first, who then went to Wal Mart and always put Wal Mart first then moved onto Phizer and always put them first applying for the job of CEO at Acme and he says "if hired , I'll put Acme first" would you look around and say "hey this asshole has never put Acme first, why would anyone believe he would if we hired him?" Of course not, that would be ridiculous.

Those are businesses where the CEO directly benefits from them doing well (through bonuses, salary gains, stock ownership jumps, etc.). Again, America is not a business. America is a country. Equating a CEO to a president is about the same thing as equating an orange to an orangutan. Sure they may both be living organisms, but they are pretty damn different and what works for one doesn't work for the other.

After the first $2B or so, how Trump benefiting by putting his company first? EGO, and his EGO is going to demand that try to live up to his word here.

 

[Cruz-Clinton]

Again, America is not a business.

What's up.

 

[LoneLaugher]

It's not as different as you make it seem.

The motives for getting in each perspective field aren't even all the at different.

Getting into politics to feed your own ego, doesn't automatically mean you will be a failure.

I agree. However, remember that we originally began this discussion debating the particular point on whether Trump would be self-serving or not. I've provided a lot of points as to why I believe that there is more than enough evidence to reasonably assume Trump would be self serving, however, you really haven't provided any reasons for why Trump would put America first rather than himself first other than that...he should do it in theory.

Please provide a reason for your belief. Please provide historical evidence, or actions that he has performed that has led you to believe that he will put America rather than himself first. I've done no less for you point towards why I believe the opposite. Please extend me the same kindness I've extended to you by providing a reason for your beliefs rather than just simply stating that you believe something.

You're asking me to provide historical evidence that leads me to believe he'd put the country first and I've done that. I've shown that he has ALWAYS put the organization that he has been the head of first. What you REALLY want is evidence of him putting the US first when he was not in a position that desired him to put the US first, and no I can not do that.

Completely the opposite of Hillary, who has several times been in positions where she was expected to put the USA first and didn't, Trump has NEVER been in a position where he should have put country first.

There is NO historical reason for Trump to have had ever put country first. So , you can't knock him for not having done so.

Every American has opportunities to put this country first. Those with resources moreso than those without.

Opportunity =/= responsibility.

Correct. Perhaps I should point out, however, that it doesn't erase the fact that you have still failed to provide any solid reason as to why we should have reasonable belief why Trump would actually act in America's interest if he is president other than the fact that you THINK he will.

What was correct? That equation is meaningless in the context of this discussion.

 

[Never3ndr]

I agree. However, remember that we originally began this discussion debating the particular point on whether Trump would be self-serving or not. I've provided a lot of points as to why I believe that there is more than enough evidence to reasonably assume Trump would be self serving, however, you really haven't provided any reasons for why Trump would put America first rather than himself first other than that...he should do it in theory.

Please provide a reason for your belief. Please provide historical evidence, or actions that he has performed that has led you to believe that he will put America rather than himself first. I've done no less for you point towards why I believe the opposite. Please extend me the same kindness I've extended to you by providing a reason for your beliefs rather than just simply stating that you believe something.

You're asking me to provide historical evidence that leads me to believe he'd put the country first and I've done that. I've shown that he has ALWAYS put the organization that he has been the head of first. What you REALLY want is evidence of him putting the US first when he was not in a position that desired him to put the US first, and no I can not do that.

Completely the opposite of Hillary, who has several times been in positions where she was expected to put the USA first and didn't, Trump has NEVER been in a position where he should have put country first.

There is NO historical reason for Trump to have had ever put country first. So , you can't knock him for not having done so.

Every American has opportunities to put this country first. Those with resources moreso than those without.

Opportunity =/= responsibility.

Correct. Perhaps I should point out, however, that it doesn't erase the fact that you have still failed to provide any solid reason as to why we should have reasonable belief why Trump would actually act in America's interest if he is president other than the fact that you THINK he will.

What was correct? That equation is meaningless in the context of this discussion.

He was trying to say (at least this was my interpretation) that saying that Trump had the ability / opportunity to put America first is not necessarily addressing his argument that Trump didn't have the responsibility to put America first (which, in theory, he would have to do if President).

My counter was trying to get him to address that he has no evidence actually supporting his argument while we have several cases of Trump benefiting himself before his nation. What is his evidence that Trump will do what this poster thinks he should do rather than what he's done his entire career? He keeps trying to equate the government to a business which is not an accurate assumption in the least.

 

[Never3ndr]

Every American has opportunities to put this country first. Those with resources moreso than those without.

Opportunity =/= responsibility.

Correct. Perhaps I should point out, however, that it doesn't erase the fact that you have still failed to provide any solid reason as to why we should have reasonable belief why Trump would actually act in America's interest if he is president other than the fact that you THINK he will.

Look

If you have a former CEO of McDonalds who always put McD first, who then went to Wal Mart and always put Wal Mart first then moved onto Phizer and always put them first applying for the job of CEO at Acme and he says "if hired , I'll put Acme first" would you look around and say "hey this asshole has never put Acme first, why would anyone believe he would if we hired him?" Of course not, that would be ridiculous.

Those are businesses where the CEO directly benefits from them doing well (through bonuses, salary gains, stock ownership jumps, etc.). Again, America is not a business. America is a country. Equating a CEO to a president is about the same thing as equating an orange to an orangutan. Sure they may both be living organisms, but they are pretty damn different and what works for one doesn't work for the other.

After the first $2B or so, how Trump benefiting by putting his company first? EGO, and his EGO is going to demand that try to live up to his word here.

Are you really making your case based off his ego?

You do know that Trump has had business failures in the past (failures in pretty much every measure)...yet his ego didn't prevent those failures, they just prevent him from admitting that they were failures (in my mind, a good business man should always have failures...it means they are constantly pushing the envelope and trying new and different things...some of which won't work). Ego is no indication that he will do what he says he would...what it is an indication of is that he will try to silence all those that point to him not doing what he said...as indicated by his constant media bashing and blacklisting media sources not covering him favorably.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You're asking me to provide historical evidence that leads me to believe he'd put the country first and I've done that. I've shown that he has ALWAYS put the organization that he has been the head of first. What you REALLY want is evidence of him putting the US first when he was not in a position that desired him to put the US first, and no I can not do that.

Completely the opposite of Hillary, who has several times been in positions where she was expected to put the USA first and didn't, Trump has NEVER been in a position where he should have put country first.

There is NO historical reason for Trump to have had ever put country first. So , you can't knock him for not having done so.

Every American has opportunities to put this country first. Those with resources moreso than those without.

Opportunity =/= responsibility.

Correct. Perhaps I should point out, however, that it doesn't erase the fact that you have still failed to provide any solid reason as to why we should have reasonable belief why Trump would actually act in America's interest if he is president other than the fact that you THINK he will.

What was correct? That equation is meaningless in the context of this discussion.

He was trying to say (at least this was my interpretation) that saying that Trump had the ability / opportunity to put America first is not necessarily addressing his argument that Trump didn't have the responsibility to put America first (which, in theory, he would have to do if President).

My counter was trying to get him to address that he has no evidence actually supporting his argument while we have several cases of Trump benefiting himself before his nation. What is his evidence that Trump will do what this poster thinks he should do rather than what he's done his entire career? He keeps trying to equate the government to a business which is not an accurate assumption in the least.

I agree with you. The desire to spin Trump's supposed business chops into characteristics that would make him a great POTUS is strong among his "fans".

His demeanor and the irresponsible manner in which he has run his campaign is clear evidence that he does not put America first.

 

[Boss]

Pred, let me give this a shot since I am totally on the same page with you and I've been struggling with the same question of WHY my vote should go to Donald Trump...

1. He is not part of the beltway establishment body politic. This election is a mandate against the establishment. Even someone like Ted Cruz, who has done nothing but stand up against the establishment, is still being tied to the establishment. The polls showing single-digit approval ratings for Congress are being manifest in the candidacy of someone who is a total outsider, yet has the money, moxy and balls to not be corrupted by them.

2. His foreign policy views can sound a little shaky sometimes but overall, they appear to be more in line with Reagan foreign policy than G.W. Bush. It's Peace Through Strength... not isolationist but definitely not interventionist. We can't afford to go around the world trying to plant democracy in places they hate us. We need a strong military and a leader who understands how to use it most effectively.

3. Trump is not an ideologue. Say what you will about his views on various issues or his contributions to politicians, his positions are not tied to an ideology. Now, his positions might be influenced by the ideology of others at times, but he is fairly pragmatic and takes a more 'populist' approach when considering these things. I think that could be a good thing for a president because it gives him a little more cover from the charge of being a partisan. We are so politically polarized now that we really need a kind of "neutral" person who can be objective in order to bring the two sides together for positive change. Not sure how successful Trump would be at this, but he's not "tied" to one side or the other.

I realize this isn't a whole lot and we certainly don't have any kind of "record" we can look at with Trump to see if he actually CAN do the things he says in terms of government. But like it or not, it appears he will win the GOP nomination and it's going to be Trump or Hillary. And maybe against Hillary, he's not a bad choice? If nothing else, he serves to reset politics and potentially end the gridlock of partisan polarization. After Trump, perhaps the left and right can again work together? It's a possibility.

 

[Kat]

3. He is a liberal in his heart, and will advance many destructive liberal policies.

How do you know what is in his heart?
As a businessman of course he used and gave to every side.Businessmen do that. He has never denied it either.
At this point I couldn't say what is in his heart though.

 

[320 Years of History]

Here are my problems with Donald Trump:

1. Yes he knows business and it's a good thing, but I fear he will throw the baby out with the bath water.
2. I believe very strongly that Trump will betray all of you supporters in the end.
3. He is a liberal in his heart, and will advance many destructive liberal policies.

One additional thing, my inclination is the vote against Hillary in the general, but I am at this point, not 100% sure that I will.

You know, I'd have thought that in nine months, the man could have either (1) never created those doubts, or (2) altered course to as not to perpetuate them. That he's not done either of those things is very disconcerting to me.

 

[PredFan]

Here are my problems with Donald Trump:

1. Yes he knows business and it's a good thing, but I fear he will throw the baby out with the bath water.
2. I believe very strongly that Trump will betray all of you supporters in the end.
3. He is a liberal in his heart, and will advance many destructive liberal policies.

One additional thing, my inclination is the vote against Hillary in the general, but I am at this point, not 100% sure that I will.

CDZ - Alright Trump supporters, sell me.
1. At this point, I'm not sure we need the baby
2. Every politician betrays their supporters at some point, because of 2 things 1) No politician is going to support every policy view of every supporter and 2) no matter the promises we all know and understand that NO POTUS is going to single handily manage to get their entire agenda through. Though we sometimes forget that when we get upset that something wasn't accomplishment
3. He hasn't even lied about what he is. If you don't understand that he's running as a Republican out of necessity, that is not his fault. And besides, there is a reason Cruz is hooting and hollering about bathrooms and abortion and getting his ass kicked in primaries around the county. Time for conservatives to wake up, you are going to have to let some of the social issues go , that's the bottom line.

Yeah we need the baby. In this case the baby is our rights and freedoms, especially economic freedom. I understand that politicians do that, except that is, Ted Cruz, but I have seen no reason to believe that Trump will do any if it. Trumps reason for hi popularity is the promises that he is making. The wall, the immigrants, the trade deals, at least that is what people are telling me.

I don't think ANY of the candidates would , if you asked them, believe they are against freedom. So in that sense, no they aren't wanting to throw away the baby.

And Personally, I don't believe a wall will ever be built. Even if Trump were elected and 100% dead set on it, the POTUS simply doesn't have that kind of sole authority.

Hmmm, Trump has a history of not giving a shit about rights. He is very much pro eminent domain, and he wants to force companies to do things like come back to America. The freedom to conduct business as I see fit doesn't seem to sit well with him.

You're incorrect. Trump does not condone forcing any business to stay in the US. He DOES favor imposing a tarriff on products built by a company that leaves the US, but those companies are free to leave and pay those tarrifs.

And if your way of doing business is shitting on your US employees to save a few bucks, I have no problem with the government slapping you with a penalty.

If we are going to erase the $19T debt at any point, we are going to have come up with a new paradigm. Business as usual isn't going to get it done. That means taxes and penalties for companies that color outside of the lines as well as incentives for companies which do.

I DO have a problem with it. Rather than punishing businesses for doing what they should haves right to do, we should instead make it so they won't want to leave. Tariffs are the wrong answer.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

CDZ - Alright Trump supporters, sell me.
1. At this point, I'm not sure we need the baby
2. Every politician betrays their supporters at some point, because of 2 things 1) No politician is going to support every policy view of every supporter and 2) no matter the promises we all know and understand that NO POTUS is going to single handily manage to get their entire agenda through. Though we sometimes forget that when we get upset that something wasn't accomplishment
3. He hasn't even lied about what he is. If you don't understand that he's running as a Republican out of necessity, that is not his fault. And besides, there is a reason Cruz is hooting and hollering about bathrooms and abortion and getting his ass kicked in primaries around the county. Time for conservatives to wake up, you are going to have to let some of the social issues go , that's the bottom line.

Yeah we need the baby. In this case the baby is our rights and freedoms, especially economic freedom. I understand that politicians do that, except that is, Ted Cruz, but I have seen no reason to believe that Trump will do any if it. Trumps reason for hi popularity is the promises that he is making. The wall, the immigrants, the trade deals, at least that is what people are telling me.

I don't think ANY of the candidates would , if you asked them, believe they are against freedom. So in that sense, no they aren't wanting to throw away the baby.

And Personally, I don't believe a wall will ever be built. Even if Trump were elected and 100% dead set on it, the POTUS simply doesn't have that kind of sole authority.

Hmmm, Trump has a history of not giving a shit about rights. He is very much pro eminent domain, and he wants to force companies to do things like come back to America. The freedom to conduct business as I see fit doesn't seem to sit well with him.

You're incorrect. Trump does not condone forcing any business to stay in the US. He DOES favor imposing a tarriff on products built by a company that leaves the US, but those companies are free to leave and pay those tarrifs.

And if your way of doing business is shitting on your US employees to save a few bucks, I have no problem with the government slapping you with a penalty.

If we are going to erase the $19T debt at any point, we are going to have come up with a new paradigm. Business as usual isn't going to get it done. That means taxes and penalties for companies that color outside of the lines as well as incentives for companies which do.

I DO have a problem with it. Rather than punishing businesses for doing what they should haves right to do, we should instead make it so they won't want to leave. Tariffs are the wrong answer.

He is talking about doing that as well. Carrot and stick. That's an approach that works.

I can understand disagreeing the tactic , but it is a valid tactic.

 

[Correll]

Here are my problems with Donald Trump:

1. Yes he knows business and it's a good thing, but I fear he will throw the baby out with the bath water.
2. I believe very strongly that Trump will betray all of you supporters in the end.
3. He is a liberal in his heart, and will advance many destructive liberal policies.

One additional thing, my inclination is the vote against Hillary in the general, but I am at this point, not 100% sure that I will.

You know that Hillary will be a leftist with leftist policies and appointments. 100%.

There is a non-zero percent chance the Trump will not.

 

[PredFan]

Pred, let me give this a shot since I am totally on the same page with you and I've been struggling with the same question of WHY my vote should go to Donald Trump...

1. He is not part of the beltway establishment body politic. This election is a mandate against the establishment. Even someone like Ted Cruz, who has done nothing but stand up against the establishment, is still being tied to the establishment. The polls showing single-digit approval ratings for Congress are being manifest in the candidacy of someone who is a total outsider, yet has the money, moxy and balls to not be corrupted by them.

2. His foreign policy views can sound a little shaky sometimes but overall, they appear to be more in line with Reagan foreign policy than G.W. Bush. It's Peace Through Strength... not isolationist but definitely not interventionist. We can't afford to go around the world trying to plant democracy in places they hate us. We need a strong military and a leader who understands how to use it most effectively.

3. Trump is not an ideologue. Say what you will about his views on various issues or his contributions to politicians, his positions are not tied to an ideology. Now, his positions might be influenced by the ideology of others at times, but he is fairly pragmatic and takes a more 'populist' approach when considering these things. I think that could be a good thing for a president because it gives him a little more cover from the charge of being a partisan. We are so politically polarized now that we really need a kind of "neutral" person who can be objective in order to bring the two sides together for positive change. Not sure how successful Trump would be at this, but he's not "tied" to one side or the other.

I realize this isn't a whole lot and we certainly don't have any kind of "record" we can look at with Trump to see if he actually CAN do the things he says in terms of government. But like it or not, it appears he will win the GOP nomination and it's going to be Trump or Hillary. And maybe against Hillary, he's not a bad choice? If nothing else, he serves to reset politics and potentially end the gridlock of partisan polarization. After Trump, perhaps the left and right can again work together? It's a possibility.

Also well done. You are the 2nd one to make this point. The most important thing that Trump has is his lack of ties to dogma. It is perhaps why he can be called both a liberal and a far right wacko. I do believe he wants to do what is right, if for no other reason than his ego and ambition to be the best.

As I said, the difference between Trumps ego and 0bama's ego is that 0bama is tied to the radical left.

 

[Fishlore]

Here are my problems with Donald Trump:

1. Yes he knows business and it's a good thing, but I fear he will throw the baby out with the bath water.
2. I believe very strongly that Trump will betray all of you supporters in the end.
3. He is a liberal in his heart, and will advance many destructive liberal policies.

One additional thing, my inclination is the vote against Hillary in the general, but I am at this point, not 100% sure that I will.

CDZ - Alright Trump supporters, sell me.
1. At this point, I'm not sure we need the baby
2. Every politician betrays their supporters at some point, because of 2 things 1) No politician is going to support every policy view of every supporter and 2) no matter the promises we all know and understand that NO POTUS is going to single handily manage to get their entire agenda through. Though we sometimes forget that when we get upset that something wasn't accomplishment
3. He hasn't even lied about what he is. If you don't understand that he's running as a Republican out of necessity, that is not his fault. And besides, there is a reason Cruz is hooting and hollering about bathrooms and abortion and getting his ass kicked in primaries around the county. Time for conservatives to wake up, you are going to have to let some of the social issues go , that's the bottom line.

Yeah we need the baby. In this case the baby is our rights and freedoms, especially economic freedom. I understand that politicians do that, except that is, Ted Cruz, but I have seen no reason to believe that Trump will do any if it. Trumps reason for hi popularity is the promises that he is making. The wall, the immigrants, the trade deals, at least that is what people are telling me.

I don't think ANY of the candidates would , if you asked them, believe they are against freedom. So in that sense, no they aren't wanting to throw away the baby.

And Personally, I don't believe a wall will ever be built. Even if Trump were elected and 100% dead set on it, the POTUS simply doesn't have that kind of sole authority.

Hmmm, Trump has a history of not giving a shit about rights. He is very much pro eminent domain, and he wants to force companies to do things like come back to America. The freedom to conduct business as I see fit doesn't seem to sit well with him.

Yours is a very interesting criticism of Mr. Trump. He certainly has made quite a point about both the business issues you brought up. He is no "free trader" but his flat tax plan is an enormous tax cut for the wealthy.

 

[PredFan]

3. He is a liberal in his heart, and will advance many destructive liberal policies.

How do you know what is in his heart?
As a businessman of course he used and gave to every side.Businessmen do that. He has never denied it either.
At this point I couldn't say what is in his heart though.

Because of what he has said in the past, before he became a candidate. Also because of the things he has been saying lately now that he thinks he has it won.