CDZ Alright Trump supporters, sell me.

[320 Years of History]

The thing that sells me is that he owes no allegiance to either party. He isn't bound by a party's ideology and therefor can act in a way that he thinks is best. It is my fervent hope that his ego is big enough that he wants to be the man that saved this country.

The less he has a sense of allegiance to others, the more disconcerted I become. People who owe nothing to anyone are liable to do anything regardless of whom it deserves. They are rogues and scoundrels who will shamelessly do "whatever" to "whomever."

For example, have you heard Trump apologize for all the horrible insults he's made? Have you heard the man say, "Yes, I was mistaken," about any of the myriad outright falsehoods or fictional fabrications he's uttered thus far in the 2016 election cycle?

I haven't, and that tells me he has zero remorse, that his sole ethical compass points to one thing only, whatever it is that he deems constitutes winning. Well, I'm sorry, but even though I have little regard for the character traits of the average American, I yet hope that most folks aren't as bad as that. G.W. Bush apologized for engaging the U.S. and its people in the Iraq War II. I mean, heck, many convicted murderers, rapists and other felons apologize for their deeds, even if it's offered in words only. But Trump there's only radio silence....

Correction: "deserves" in the first paragraph of my comment should have been "disserves."

 

[320 Years of History]

I have not complained that we do not have 9% growth rate of China.

China's rapid growth has been fueled by it's massive trade surplus and is certainly related to how America is doing.

Of course it has. Exports create job growth. Make something foreigners want to import and you'll have job growth and it creates real GDP growth.

• Does Export Growth Create Jobs?
  
• Made in America: Increasing Jobs through Exports and Trade
  
• Manufacturing, Exporting, and Creating Jobs in the United States

China makes things the people want to buy, mainly because they perceive the goods made in China (or other comparatively low labor cost countries) as being "good enough" for whatever their needs are and less expensive than are the competing goods made elsewhere. If one wants to buy "stuff" made in the U.S. or Italy, or wherever else, fine, but one'll pay a lot more for those goods. Don't believe me, go shopping for a garment or shoes made in Italy, or an appliance or piece of furniture made in Germany, or a watch made in Switzerland or Germany, or anything else made absent international patent protection. I guarantee you they'll cost more than one made in China. Re: watches, appliance and furniture in particular, I can assure you that with very, very few exceptions, not one of them will perform any better as a consequence of having been made outside China.

 

[Correll]

The thing that sells me is that he owes no allegiance to either party. He isn't bound by a party's ideology and therefor can act in a way that he thinks is best. It is my fervent hope that his ego is big enough that he wants to be the man that saved this country.

The less he has a sense of allegiance to others, the more disconcerted I become. People who owe nothing to anyone are liable to do anything regardless of whom it deserves. They are rogues and scoundrels who will shamelessly do "whatever" to "whomever."

For example, have you heard Trump apologize for all the horrible insults he's made? Have you heard the man say, "Yes, I was mistaken," about any of the myriad outright falsehoods or fictional fabrications he's uttered thus far in the 2016 election cycle?

I haven't, and that tells me he has zero remorse, that his sole ethical compass points to one thing only, whatever it is that he deems constitutes winning. Well, I'm sorry, but even though I have little regard for the character traits of the average American, I yet hope that most folks aren't as bad as that. G.W. Bush apologized for engaging the U.S. and its people in the Iraq War II. I mean, heck, many convicted murderers, rapists and other felons apologize for their deeds, even if it's offered in words only. But Trump there's only radio silence....

This makes no sense.

He will "owe" the people who elected him.

He will want a second term.

He will want a legacy that will be H-U-G-E, for the remainder of his life.


His lack of apologies is a result of his being such an negotiator for his entire life. He is not engaging in dialog so much as he is communicating AT people.


THis is very annoying in most situations.

But, if fits perfectly with situation we have with a media that is completely biased AGAINST republicans, and opponents who see any civility as a sign of weakness.


BTW, have you ever heard a lib apologize for incorrectly accusing a republican of being racist?

Any liberal?

Does that make ALL of you rogues and scoundrels who will shamelessly do "whatever" to "whomever."

 

[mudwhistle]

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.

1. Throw what out? Trade? Can we make worse deals than we have been? Can he be worse than Hillary? Cruz only knows how to work the legal system, what does he know about business?

2. Betray supporters by being more liberal than Hillary? Certainly more liberal than Cruz but that's true for everyone else too. Cruz can't repeal the IRS or establish a flat tax. That's just stump speech.

3. Like what?

1. Throw out our economy, our freedom, and the constitution in the name of a full focus on business.
2. Betray his supporters by not doing anything he says he will. And in many cases not even trying.
3. Like most if not all of their social programs for start.

You're confusing Trump with Hillary.

 

[mudwhistle]

The primary difference in the media between a Hillary presidency and a Trump presidency is with Hillary they will spend all of their time defending her....while a Trump presidency means they will be spending all of their time and effort trying to destroy him.

 

[Correll]

Your assumptions have nothing to do with what will actually happen.

Correct. However, I try to not make assumptions that are too far out of left field. Which is why I work off of basic knowledge, like Trump's demeanor and rhetoric, or how Washington tends to operate, like logrolling, and make reasonable conclusions based off our knowledge. This is literally one of the bases for how we generate knowledge.

Your assumption that he doesn't know how to negotiate, despite a life time of doing just that, is an assumption way out of left field.

You are not allowing, AT ALL, for your own biases.

My assumption is that he will or will not negotiate and I address both of those scenarios. Either he will negotiate, and his voter base, which is largely depending upon him to be a "maverick" and independently force change upon Washington, will have voted for a candidate that has no intention of following through on his rhetoric. Or, he will not negotiate and we have a likely scenario of a government who stalemates itself into a shutdown due to a lack of cooperation between legislative and executive branches (this actually happened recently...have you really forgotten about it?).

It isn't like this is a trick question. He either follows through on his rhetoric and tries to bulldoze change into Washington and "stir up the establishment" or he doesn't and he fails his voter base who primarily votes for him because that is what they (misguidedly) desire.

Edit: Take the Mexican wall. Their leadership has repeatedly said that they have no interest in paying for that wall. Now, how has Trump said he would "negotiate" this standstill? Well, in his words, the "wall just got 10 feet higher." This is literally one of his primary campaign standpoints and points towards how his rhetoric indicates he has no intention of negotiating...which is why a lot of his voter base supports him.

1. You assume that he supporters are rigid and unreasonable.

2. You assume that any negotiation with Congress must result in policies that will NOT satisfy Trump's supporters.

3. You assume that the United States has no leverage on Mexico.

1. I'm assuming his supporters want somebody in office who isn't "establishment" and will shake things up. In other words, that they want a candidate that is going to ignore the "bought" Washington politicians and march to his own tune, the tune of (in their mind) the people. Now, if that is an incorrect assumption please point towards clear evidence that this is not so. Please tell me how Trump has made his platform off of listening to politicians and cooperating with his party.

2. Read above. He's running his campaign off of not negotiating. I've made no statement on whether or not he could negotiate policies that would satisfy his voter base...I've made statements that his voter base would be unhappy with the ACTION of his negotiations...not the results.

3. When did I ever say that? Please, quote me. I've pointed towards Trump being unreasonable, but what that has to do with Mexico and our leverage is pretty much nil.

1. What you did there was take what his supporters want, ie "anti-establishment" and then restated it in such a way to change the meaning to what you wanted it to be, ie a strawman, and then you addressed that.

You assume that one cannot "shake things up" AND engage in effective negotiation.

1b And he just came out of a intense primary, where the Establishment was being dicks. Asking for evidence of working together, at this point is time is unreasonable. Once he has the Nomination locked up, you will get a better idea of how he can work with the Republican Party.

2. Link to where he said he will NOT negotiate.

3. "Edit: Take the Mexican wall. Their leadership has repeatedly said that they have no interest in paying for that wall. Now, how has Trump said he would "negotiate" this standstill? Well, in his words, the "wall just got 10 feet higher." This is literally one of his primary campaign standpoints and points towards how his rhetoric indicates he has no intention of negotiating...which is why a lot of his voter base supports him."


YOu seem to think that just because the Mexican Government says they won't pay, that that is the end of negotiations. We have tremendous leverage on Mexico. It will be a hostile and unfriendly negotiation, and they will participate.

 

[Correll]

Russia does not have the market to replace US.

And they have no desire to have a 300 billion dollar trade deficit with CHina, even if they could.

Again... that doesn't matter... they don't HAVE to replace anything... that's the advantage you have when you're a communist dictatorship... your people work for a bowl of rice a day whether the economy is good or bad. The ruling class isn't going to suffer and the people can't throw anyone out of office if things get worse. Russia has been courting Chinese trade for years... that's the primary reason Nixon opened trade with them, to somewhat discourage their trade with Russia.

So again, they don't have to replace our trade outright... they just need Russia and a few other communist regimes to take up most of the slack and keep their ruling class fat and happy. We're going to be the big loser because we import about $100 billion per year to China... that's thousands of American jobs right there.

The Chinese aren't working for a bowl of rice a day anymore.

They have been experiencing rapid economic growth and that has translated into rising living standards, for many, AND rising expectations.

You can bet right now, that those communists in charge over their are watching our election very carefully, and they are terrified that Trump might win.


We HAVE BEEN LOSING, for a long time.

The wealth we have been transferring to Asia has made both Japan and SOuth Korea first world nations, and is in the process of making China a superpower.

We haven't been losing...for a long time. We have been, and remain, one of the greatest nations in the world. Our economy has reliably been among the top 3 or 5, our military has been #1 for as long as I can remember, our culture is probably the most prevalent and well known in the world. By pretty much any measure America is one of the greatest nations on the planet and has been for at least the last 30 or so years (since Vietnam and post-war Vietnam, and, arguably, during that time).

Let me fill you in on a basic economic fact...a third or second world country can easily experience rapid expansions, especially when they have the resources to offer to the world (like China large labor force and growing human and physical capital resources). However, it is exceptionally difficult for a first world nation to rapidly expand their economy outside of some sort of large technological breakthrough, war, or any other extreme or rare scenario that cannot be depended upon. The fact that China is gearing up to be a 1st world power rather than a 2nd world power (since moving further away from basic communism) is both expected and non-related to how America is doing.

Just as an FYI, Japan has been a first world nation since the early 1900's. Why you bring them up when we are talking about things in 2016 is beyond me.

Trade wise we have been losing for a long time.

Our Middle CLass has had stagnant wages as wages have been rising in Japan and South Korea and China for decades.

OUr economy has been the largest since the turn of the Century. The 19th century. We are on a path to lose that claim.

I have not complained that we do not have 9% growth rate of China.

China's rapid growth has been fueled by it's massive trade surplus and is certainly related to how America is doing.

Japan was smoking rubble after WWII. It's rebuilding into the FIrst World Nation it is today was fueled by it's trade surpluses with US.

Just as an FYI, having a trade deficit is not uncommon when you have a strong currency...this is why China keeps devaluing their currency. It makes their goods cheaper and so they sell more abroad, and it also makes imported good more expensive (since it takes more of your currency to buy foreign goods) so they import less. If you are so unhappy about trade are you advocating for the most common sense solution? De-valuing the American dollar to make it relatively worthless in comparison to other 1st world nations? This would solve the problem in the same way as China...many more foreign nations would look to have their products manufactured here and we would not be able to afford goods from other nations. So we could stop importing from Mexico since it would be more expensive to buy a Mexican made T-shirt than one made by an American! Hey, you can go back to your T-shirt making business...isn't that what we all have dreamed about!

As an aside, I'd actually argue that we don't have a trade deficit, that we actually have a massive surplus...but that we don't count the products we typically export...like use of our websites and idea generation. When was the last time you saw google searches, youtube views, or facebook profiles being listed as part of our trade? This comprises probably the largest thing that we have given to the world, but doesn't tend to be counted on in the trade floor even though, through advertisements and data generation, they are veritable cash cows.

You didn't really address any of my points, there.

And yes, I do think our currency needs to be devalued. Any nation with an much debt and as bad a Balance of Trade as US, should not have such a strong currency.

It is a handicap we face because the Dollar is the World's reserve currency.

 

[Correll]

I have not complained that we do not have 9% growth rate of China.

China's rapid growth has been fueled by it's massive trade surplus and is certainly related to how America is doing.

Of course it has. Exports create job growth. Make something foreigners want to import and you'll have job growth and it creates real GDP growth.

• Does Export Growth Create Jobs?
  
• Made in America: Increasing Jobs through Exports and Trade
  
• Manufacturing, Exporting, and Creating Jobs in the United States

China makes things the people want to buy, mainly because they perceive the goods made in China (or other comparatively low labor cost countries) as being "good enough" for whatever their needs are and less expensive than are the competing goods made elsewhere. If one wants to buy "stuff" made in the U.S. or Italy, or wherever else, fine, but one'll pay a lot more for those goods. Don't believe me, go shopping for a garment or shoes made in Italy, or an appliance or piece of furniture made in Germany, or a watch made in Switzerland or Germany, or anything else made absent international patent protection. I guarantee you they'll cost more than one made in China. Re: watches, appliance and furniture in particular, I can assure you that with very, very few exceptions, not one of them will perform any better as a consequence of having been made outside China.

Thank you for agreeing with me.

 

[PredFan]

This thread has kind of gone off the rails. Let me address my OP to sum up:

I am sold...barely.
The thing that sells me is that he owes no allegiance to either party. He isn't bound by a party's ideology and therefor can act in a way that he thinks is best. It is my fervent hope that his ego is big enough that he wants to be the man that saved this country. This is very thin, and it is very easily destroyed by Trump with words and actions coming up during the general election run.

Thanks all for your input.

Actually the fact that he has no close ties to either party is one of his greatest dangers. If Trump gets into office we could face a likely scenario of a government shut down due to a total lack of cooperation between government branches. As it is right now, at least there are two sides of the battle...a Democratic president with a minority in Congress versus the majority Republican Congress. If Trump gets into office it will devolve into a free for all with the executive branch battling the entire Congress while Congress splits itself with its partisan divide.

In fact, this is such a realizable danger that Trump's presidency is listed as one of the greatest threats to the economy recently...as dangerous as a large jihadist attack. The government is already barely operating...why people think that inserting a third player into the game is going to make it any better is absurd.

Government shutdowns are never a bad thing.

 

[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.

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.

Yes. I fear however that that is one of the worst of the "lesser of two evils" that I have ever witnessed.

That is the worst case scenario.

And as I pointed out, in the WORST CASE scenario, it still makes more sense to vote for Trump.

Now,

Imagine just a few ways, it could be better.


1. He could successfully lower the number of illegals and visa workers, thus reducing supply for labor and thus increasing wages.

2. He could successfully negotiate better trade deals to bring back significant numbers of manufacturing jobs.

3. He could reduce tensions with Russia, to the increased safety of US all.


There is no chance that Hillary will do ANY of these. She is against those policies.

1. Increased wages will lead to increased prices.
2. Trade deals aren't what causes jobs to go over seas.
3. Russia is not a threat to us.

But, your point about voting against Hillary is of course a good one, if he ends up actually being different from her. We must hope.

1. Somewhat. Minor prices hikes spread over the nation as a whole, to the benefit of the Working Class, and Middle Class AND the Balance of Trade, imo, would be a net positive.

2. Bad trade deals certainly are part of the problem.

3. Well, depends what you mean. If Turkey makes a habit of shooting down Russia planes and it leads to war between Turkey and Russia, with NATO drawn in, it would be pretty bad for US interests, what with lots of Americans killed, and vast expenditure of treasure, for no real benefit to the US.

For one example.

I disagree with pretty much all of that but thanks for the input.

 

[PredFan]

This thread has kind of gone off the rails. Let me address my OP to sum up:

I am sold...barely.
The thing that sells me is that he owes no allegiance to either party. He isn't bound by a party's ideology and therefor can act in a way that he thinks is best. It is my fervent hope that his ego is big enough that he wants to be the man that saved this country. This is very thin, and it is very easily destroyed by Trump with words and actions coming up during the general election run.

Thanks all for your input.

Now that he has the Republican nomination in the bag, his "words and actions" are going to be designed to counter HIllary's panic mongering.

By the time HIlary and her people are done, you will feel a lot better about Trump.

It happened to me with McCain.

After a campaign of hearing the nonsense that the LEft was lying about McCain, I felt fine, well, almost fine going in there and voting for McCain.

That didn't happen for me with McCain. Yes invited against 0bama and yes McCain would have been better but I still did not lie him.

 

[PredFan]

Here are my problems with Donald Trump:

1. Yes he knows business and it's a good thing...

Really?

Yes really.

 

[PredFan]

The thing that sells me is that he owes no allegiance to either party. He isn't bound by a party's ideology and therefor can act in a way that he thinks is best. It is my fervent hope that his ego is big enough that he wants to be the man that saved this country.

The less he has a sense of allegiance to others, the more disconcerted I become. People who owe nothing to anyone are liable to do anything regardless of whom it deserves. They are rogues and scoundrels who will shamelessly do "whatever" to "whomever."

For example, have you heard Trump apologize for all the horrible insults he's made? Have you heard the man say, "Yes, I was mistaken," about any of the myriad outright falsehoods or fictional fabrications he's uttered thus far in the 2016 election cycle?

I haven't, and that tells me he has zero remorse, that his sole ethical compass points to one thing only, whatever it is that he deems constitutes winning. Well, I'm sorry, but even though I have little regard for the character traits of the average American, I yet hope that most folks aren't as bad as that. G.W. Bush apologized for engaging the U.S. and its people in the Iraq War II. I mean, heck, many convicted murderers, rapists and other felons apologize for their deeds, even if it's offered in words only. But Trump there's only radio silence....

Of course there is a flip side of that coin. Like I said, I hope his ego, specifically his desire to be the POTUS that saved the country, is his over-riding motivation. Not being bound to a dogma might be a good thing there.

His lack of apology is not a factor for 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.

1. Throw what out? Trade? Can we make worse deals than we have been? Can he be worse than Hillary? Cruz only knows how to work the legal system, what does he know about business?

2. Betray supporters by being more liberal than Hillary? Certainly more liberal than Cruz but that's true for everyone else too. Cruz can't repeal the IRS or establish a flat tax. That's just stump speech.

3. Like what?

1. Throw out our economy, our freedom, and the constitution in the name of a full focus on business.
2. Betray his supporters by not doing anything he says he will. And in many cases not even trying.
3. Like most if not all of their social programs for start.

You're confusing Trump with Hillary.

That is the thing. There may not be that much of a difference.

 

[320 Years of History]

The thing that sells me is that he owes no allegiance to either party. He isn't bound by a party's ideology and therefor can act in a way that he thinks is best. It is my fervent hope that his ego is big enough that he wants to be the man that saved this country.

The less he has a sense of allegiance to others, the more disconcerted I become. People who owe nothing to anyone are liable to do anything regardless of whom it deserves. They are rogues and scoundrels who will shamelessly do "whatever" to "whomever."

For example, have you heard Trump apologize for all the horrible insults he's made? Have you heard the man say, "Yes, I was mistaken," about any of the myriad outright falsehoods or fictional fabrications he's uttered thus far in the 2016 election cycle?

I haven't, and that tells me he has zero remorse, that his sole ethical compass points to one thing only, whatever it is that he deems constitutes winning. Well, I'm sorry, but even though I have little regard for the character traits of the average American, I yet hope that most folks aren't as bad as that. G.W. Bush apologized for engaging the U.S. and its people in the Iraq War II. I mean, heck, many convicted murderers, rapists and other felons apologize for their deeds, even if it's offered in words only. But Trump there's only radio silence....

Of course there is a flip side of that coin. Like I said, I hope his ego, specifically his desire to be the POTUS that saved the country, is his over-riding motivation. Not being bound to a dogma might be a good thing there.

His lack of apology is not a factor for me.

Dogma isn't the thing to which one need be bound. Common decency is.

 

[PredFan]

The thing that sells me is that he owes no allegiance to either party. He isn't bound by a party's ideology and therefor can act in a way that he thinks is best. It is my fervent hope that his ego is big enough that he wants to be the man that saved this country.

The less he has a sense of allegiance to others, the more disconcerted I become. People who owe nothing to anyone are liable to do anything regardless of whom it deserves. They are rogues and scoundrels who will shamelessly do "whatever" to "whomever."

For example, have you heard Trump apologize for all the horrible insults he's made? Have you heard the man say, "Yes, I was mistaken," about any of the myriad outright falsehoods or fictional fabrications he's uttered thus far in the 2016 election cycle?

I haven't, and that tells me he has zero remorse, that his sole ethical compass points to one thing only, whatever it is that he deems constitutes winning. Well, I'm sorry, but even though I have little regard for the character traits of the average American, I yet hope that most folks aren't as bad as that. G.W. Bush apologized for engaging the U.S. and its people in the Iraq War II. I mean, heck, many convicted murderers, rapists and other felons apologize for their deeds, even if it's offered in words only. But Trump there's only radio silence....

Of course there is a flip side of that coin. Like I said, I hope his ego, specifically his desire to be the POTUS that saved the country, is his over-riding motivation. Not being bound to a dogma might be a good thing there.

His lack of apology is not a factor for me.

Dogma isn't the thing to which one need be bound. Common decency is.

Common decency? When has THAT ever been a winning strategy?

 

[320 Years of History]

I have not complained that we do not have 9% growth rate of China.

China's rapid growth has been fueled by it's massive trade surplus and is certainly related to how America is doing.

Of course it has. Exports create job growth. Make something foreigners want to import and you'll have job growth and it creates real GDP growth.

• Does Export Growth Create Jobs?
  
• Made in America: Increasing Jobs through Exports and Trade
  
• Manufacturing, Exporting, and Creating Jobs in the United States

China makes things the people want to buy, mainly because they perceive the goods made in China (or other comparatively low labor cost countries) as being "good enough" for whatever their needs are and less expensive than are the competing goods made elsewhere. If one wants to buy "stuff" made in the U.S. or Italy, or wherever else, fine, but one'll pay a lot more for those goods. Don't believe me, go shopping for a garment or shoes made in Italy, or an appliance or piece of furniture made in Germany, or a watch made in Switzerland or Germany, or anything else made absent international patent protection. I guarantee you they'll cost more than one made in China. Re: watches, appliance and furniture in particular, I can assure you that with very, very few exceptions, not one of them will perform any better as a consequence of having been made outside China.

Thank you for agreeing with me.

??? LOL It's not about you.

Now look at the actual balance of trade the EU enjoys compared to the U.S.

• European Union balance of trade
• U.S. balance of trade

In spite of their goods costing more, vastly more, than Chinese made goods, the E.U. nonetheless exports more than it imports. Why? Because businesses in the E.U. make investments in producing things people outside the E.U. are willing to and do buy. Now if one looks at what businesses must invest in (purchase) so they can produce things in American that non-Americans will buy, there are three major categories: land, labor and capital (money and/or equipment). Can you deduce (not guess) which of those inspire producers to refrain from investing in producing goods in the U.S? The cause hasn't changed since the start of the millennium.

• March 2000
• October 2007

But in what industry is the U.S. a net exporter? Services. Why? Because human intellectual capital, which is in turn used to provide services, is the thing in which the U.S. has a comparative advantage. What does that indicate for U.S. workers? It indicates that they need to "get over" expecting to work in the manufacturing sector and seek jobs in the service sector or pursue training that boosts their skill sets so that they have some human intellectual capital of note to offer to prospective employers. Is there a good living to be made selling one's intellectual capital? With starting salaries in the ~$70K - ~$150K range, depending on the services sector one enters, there damn sure is; I and my colleagues have been doing it since the 1980s and business is booming.

Why do you think Mr. Sanders advocates for free (or nearly free) college for everyone? Quite simply because it plays to the U.S.' comparative advantage. The simple fact is that the requisite intellectual capital doesn't come from high school learning; it comes from higher education. Could we as a nation drive the learning level into the high school range? Sure, but that would require kids to go to school more, perhaps for most of the year rather than for just nine or ten months of it and doing that would need to begin in kindergarten or first grade.

I'm okay with taking that approach -- it's how I'd restructure education in order to then provide for "free college" -- too for it means that there are approximately two years (three-plus if winter and spring breaks are shortened and the school day is extended to match the typical work day) over the course of twelve (K-12) that could be driven into pre-college education. The result being that with no difficulty change in curricula, students can acquire the equivalent of two years of what is currently thought of as college learning by the time they finish high school. Students who enter what would then be considered the AP track could conceivably finish high school with what we now think of as three years of college. Nationally paying for that last one or two years of education taken in collegiate institutions becomes much more affordable.

Of course, doing that would generate huge outcry from the daycare industry as it'd essentially be unnecessary. Higher education institutions would also gripe, although for them the change need only mean that what today is considered master's degree curricula would become undergraduate curricula. Young folks would gripe too because they'd have to, in order to perform highly academically, they'd need to spend less time Facebooking, Instagramming and Tweeting.

 

[320 Years of History]

The thing that sells me is that he owes no allegiance to either party. He isn't bound by a party's ideology and therefor can act in a way that he thinks is best. It is my fervent hope that his ego is big enough that he wants to be the man that saved this country.

The less he has a sense of allegiance to others, the more disconcerted I become. People who owe nothing to anyone are liable to do anything regardless of whom it deserves. They are rogues and scoundrels who will shamelessly do "whatever" to "whomever."

For example, have you heard Trump apologize for all the horrible insults he's made? Have you heard the man say, "Yes, I was mistaken," about any of the myriad outright falsehoods or fictional fabrications he's uttered thus far in the 2016 election cycle?

I haven't, and that tells me he has zero remorse, that his sole ethical compass points to one thing only, whatever it is that he deems constitutes winning. Well, I'm sorry, but even though I have little regard for the character traits of the average American, I yet hope that most folks aren't as bad as that. G.W. Bush apologized for engaging the U.S. and its people in the Iraq War II. I mean, heck, many convicted murderers, rapists and other felons apologize for their deeds, even if it's offered in words only. But Trump there's only radio silence....

Of course there is a flip side of that coin. Like I said, I hope his ego, specifically his desire to be the POTUS that saved the country, is his over-riding motivation. Not being bound to a dogma might be a good thing there.

His lack of apology is not a factor for me.

Dogma isn't the thing to which one need be bound. Common decency is.

Common decency? When has THAT ever been a winning strategy?

It's been a central part of my academic, personal and professional success for the past 55+ years. Doing unto others as one'd have them do unto oneself works very well and takes no special skills.

 

[Boss]

Here are my problems with Donald Trump:

1. Yes he knows business and it's a good thing...

Really?

Yes really.

George Soros knows business too... just sayin'.

 

[PredFan]

The thing that sells me is that he owes no allegiance to either party. He isn't bound by a party's ideology and therefor can act in a way that he thinks is best. It is my fervent hope that his ego is big enough that he wants to be the man that saved this country.

The less he has a sense of allegiance to others, the more disconcerted I become. People who owe nothing to anyone are liable to do anything regardless of whom it deserves. They are rogues and scoundrels who will shamelessly do "whatever" to "whomever."

For example, have you heard Trump apologize for all the horrible insults he's made? Have you heard the man say, "Yes, I was mistaken," about any of the myriad outright falsehoods or fictional fabrications he's uttered thus far in the 2016 election cycle?

I haven't, and that tells me he has zero remorse, that his sole ethical compass points to one thing only, whatever it is that he deems constitutes winning. Well, I'm sorry, but even though I have little regard for the character traits of the average American, I yet hope that most folks aren't as bad as that. G.W. Bush apologized for engaging the U.S. and its people in the Iraq War II. I mean, heck, many convicted murderers, rapists and other felons apologize for their deeds, even if it's offered in words only. But Trump there's only radio silence....

Of course there is a flip side of that coin. Like I said, I hope his ego, specifically his desire to be the POTUS that saved the country, is his over-riding motivation. Not being bound to a dogma might be a good thing there.

His lack of apology is not a factor for me.

Dogma isn't the thing to which one need be bound. Common decency is.

Common decency? When has THAT ever been a winning strategy?

It's been a central part of my academic, personal and professional success for the past 55+ years. Doing unto others as one'd have them do unto oneself works very well and takes no special skills.

I'm sorry, I assumed you knew we were talking about politics.