CDZ Has anyone heard Donald Trump say anything besides what's wrong with everyone else but him?

[Vigilante]

Perhaps THIS from his statements on his website will help the OP!

Trump agenda:
1. Build the Wall
2. Enforce laws pertaining to illegals
3. Balance budgets
4. Middle class tax cut
5. Simplify tax code
6. Make military strength a priority
7. Tear up all foreign trade pacts which are taking our jobs, especially China & Mexico & Japan
8. Install hugely successful people from private sector for making foreign trade deals
9. Take better care of wounded vets
10. Eliminate/reduce useless federal bureaucracy

Trump is conservative on these issues:
Pro life since at least 2011, wanted to ban partial birth abortion as far back as 2000.
Pro Traditional marriage. “Gay rights is not my thing.”
Pro capital punishment “Capital punishment isn’t uncivilized; murderers living is”
Hold Judges accountable
Opposes “Common core is a disaster” Teach citizenship, quit “dumbing down”.
Anti education unions (2000)
For school choice
“Climate Change is a hoax”
“No Cap-and-Tax”
For drilling our own.
On Environment “Good development enhances the environment”
Stressed the importance of a strong family & culture of life (2015)
Supports Israel
Opposes Iran deal and letting Iran obtain the bomb.
Wants to crush ISIS quickly.
Wants a military so strong no one will challenge us.
Against unbalanced trade deals that kill American jobs.
Against warrantless government surveillance of citizens.
Is against having a high national debt. Warns that $24T is a point of no return.
Against gun control
For assault weapon ban but says the AR-15 shouldn’t be considered an assault weapon.
Wants to repeal Obamacare and replace it with market driven polices and increased competition among insurance companies.
Wants to increase military spending.
Will close the border to illegals
Will send the criminals and sponges back.
Will deport all illegals but will let the hard working ones go through the legal process to come back.
Against Anchor babies
Knows unemployment is much higher than official stats.
Will bring jobs back through better trade negotiation.
Attended military academy and Wharton Business School.
Stood up for Birthers and challenged Obama on his fraud.
Believes USA is “the greatest force for freedom the world has ever known”
Wants to honor commitments on Social Security and Medicare, which we can afford to do if he gets the economy going full steam.
Wants to reduce the fraud in disability and other programs.
Against marriage penalties in tax code.
Wants to reduce income taxes and eliminate corporate tax.
Wants to rebuild our infrastructure.
Wants to apply welfare-to-work to 76 other welfare programs (2011)
Doesn’t have time for political correctness.
Not afraid to call out either party or both when they are wrong.
Not a puppet to rich campaign donors.

 

[320 Years of History]

Perhaps THIS from his statements on his website will help the OP!

Trump agenda:
1. Build the Wall
2. Enforce laws pertaining to illegals
3. Balance budgets
4. Middle class tax cut
5. Simplify tax code
6. Make military strength a priority
7. Tear up all foreign trade pacts which are taking our jobs, especially China & Mexico & Japan
8. Install hugely successful people from private sector for making foreign trade deals
9. Take better care of wounded vets
10. Eliminate/reduce useless federal bureaucracy

Trump is conservative on these issues:
Pro life since at least 2011, wanted to ban partial birth abortion as far back as 2000.
Pro Traditional marriage. “Gay rights is not my thing.”
Pro capital punishment “Capital punishment isn’t uncivilized; murderers living is”
Hold Judges accountable
Opposes “Common core is a disaster” Teach citizenship, quit “dumbing down”.
Anti education unions (2000)
For school choice
“Climate Change is a hoax”
“No Cap-and-Tax”
For drilling our own.
On Environment “Good development enhances the environment”
Stressed the importance of a strong family & culture of life (2015)
Supports Israel
Opposes Iran deal and letting Iran obtain the bomb.
Wants to crush ISIS quickly.
Wants a military so strong no one will challenge us.
Against unbalanced trade deals that kill American jobs.
Against warrantless government surveillance of citizens.
Is against having a high national debt. Warns that $24T is a point of no return.
Against gun control
For assault weapon ban but says the AR-15 shouldn’t be considered an assault weapon.
Wants to repeal Obamacare and replace it with market driven polices and increased competition among insurance companies.
Wants to increase military spending.
Will close the border to illegals
Will send the criminals and sponges back.
Will deport all illegals but will let the hard working ones go through the legal process to come back.
Against Anchor babies
Knows unemployment is much higher than official stats.
Will bring jobs back through better trade negotiation.
Attended military academy and Wharton Business School.
Stood up for Birthers and challenged Obama on his fraud.
Believes USA is “the greatest force for freedom the world has ever known”
Wants to honor commitments on Social Security and Medicare, which we can afford to do if he gets the economy going full steam.
Wants to reduce the fraud in disability and other programs.
Against marriage penalties in tax code.
Wants to reduce income taxes and eliminate corporate tax.
Wants to rebuild our infrastructure.
Wants to apply welfare-to-work to 76 other welfare programs (2011)
Doesn’t have time for political correctness.
Not afraid to call out either party or both when they are wrong.
Not a puppet to rich campaign donors.

No, that didn't help. I have the same questions I had before:

• How is Mr. Trump going to accomplish those things?
• By what plausible means does he expect to pay for them?
• And to a lesser extent, why the heck has Mr. Trump waited this long and still not volunteered that information?

That is the information I want (along with the stuff I noted in post #13) from Mr. Trump. Once I have that information, I can then use it to determine whether I will support Mr. Trump. Lacking it, however, I can only refuse to support Mr. Trump. That's subtly different from actively opposing him, but different it is.

Of course, it's not lost on me that the majority of Mr. Trump's supporters likely don't understand that distinction, and lacking the cognitive skills to understand such things is IMO, part of why they haven't realized his proposals are ludicrous, even if they sound good on a superficial level.

 

[Kalki]

"Now, to address the overwhelming amount of undocumented migrants in the U.S, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) launched Operation Wetback in June 1954, as a way to repatriate illegal laborers back to Mexico. The illegal workers who came over to the states at the initial start of the program were not the only ones affected by this operation, there were also massive groups of workers who felt the need to extend their stay in the U.S well after their labor contracts were terminated.[2] In the first year, over a million Mexicans were sent back to Mexico; 3.8 million were repatriated when the operation was all set and done." From: wikipedia under the Bracero program

 

[Kalki]

"The Immigration Act of 1924, or Johnson–Reed Act, including the National Origins Act, and Asian Exclusion Act (Pub.L. 68–139, 43 Stat. 153, enacted May 26, 1924), was a United States federal law that limited the annual number of immigrants who could be admitted from any country to 2% of the number of people from that country who were already living in the United States in 1890, down from the 3% cap set by the Immigration Restriction Act of 1921, according to the Census of 1890. It superseded the 1921 Emergency Quota Act. The law was primarily aimed at further restricting immigration of Southern Europeans and Eastern Europeans.[1] In addition, it severely restricted the immigration of Africans and outright banned the immigration of Arabs and Asians. According to the U.S. Department of State Office of the Historian the purpose of the act was "to preserve the ideal of American homogeneity". From wikipedia under Immigration Act of 1924

There were other acts like this as well. Congress has the power to naturalize and regulate immigration, the president does not have the authority, but certain ones have violated the Constitution by granting amnesty to illegal aliens in America, in the past. Amnesty is illegal by circumventing the immigration laws.

U.S. Constitution:

Article I Section 8: "The Congress shall have power [...] To establish a uniform rule of naturalization...

If anyone is an American, please study history and the Constitution as a civic duty.

Certain liars in the news media and elsewhere, have stated that the 14th amendment applies to illegal aliens, however:

"A 2010 Congressional Research Service report, however, observed that, though it could be argued that Congress has no power to define “subject to the jurisdiction” and the terms of citizenship in a manner contrary to the Supreme Court’s understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment as expressed in Wong Kim Ark and Elk, since Congress does have broad power to pass necessary and proper legislation to regulate immigration and naturalization under the Constitution, Art. I, § 8, cls. 4 & 18 of the constitution Congress arguably has the power to define “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” for the purpose of regulating immigration." From wikipedia

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/147254.pdf

 

[S.J.]

Mr. Mukasey, for example, explains the ridiculousness of Mr. Trump's proposal to round up and ship home some 11 million illegal aliens, presumably because it's not dawned on Mr. Trump just how ridiculous that proposal is. What makes it just silly? Well, for one thing, said Mukasey, were we to use every law enforcement person employed in the U.S. today to do nothing -- that's not one bit of other types of law enforcement -- but locate and apprehend illegal aliens, it'd take two years to to round up and ship off the existing 11 million illegal aliens.

It won't be 11 million. Once he cuts off their welfare, most of them will leave on their own.

What if they don't? What if they begin rioting? 11 million on the loose, rioting, stealing etc.

Then we won't have to look for 'em. Arrest 'em and deport 'em.

 

[320 Years of History]

Kalki wrote:
I didn't mean that Zinn should have included knowledge of those things from the point of view of the power structure, but from the point of view of the people to show how the people were, and still are, harmed by those things. I meant that Zinn would not write about the financing of bolshevism from America, because he would not want people to know that happened or to look into it in depth and see who did that. The reason why is because Zinn's entire basis of the book was to destroy ethnic whites and ethnic white states. Zinn hated white people, the sole purpose of his work was premised on this. That is why I would never recommend his work to anyone.

Students are forced to read Zinn, not because of what happened, but because his agenda is the same agenda of the rest of his ilk in power: to destroy ethnic white identity and instill white guilt, to train them that they are the only group on this planet that do not have the human right to their own ethnic identity; to train them not to protest when the authorities take every action that only results in the destruction of white identity.

Here is a question: Would Zinn quote the same quotes on African slavery that are in the book: ' ? Where are those quotes in his book for the "losers"? He seems to have missed them. Intentionally, and on purpose. Because the point is to blame white people for everything bad, to instill guilt in white people.

Zinn's work is actually more harmful than good, because it deflects attention away from, and does not address, how the system actually is today, and how the powers-that-be are destroying and enslaving peoples, not only in America, but throughout the world, not 200 years ago, but right now at the present.

On the new imperialism:
The reason the old type of colonialism disappeared is because International Finance wanted to control and regulate and harvest the other nations like large plantations, through unequal currency exchange rates, and creating a structure of debt enslavement to each nation's government, along with the use of sanctions rather than physical coercion to accomplish the same thing: colonialism or imperialism. It is more efficient than physical colonialism and along the same principle of the Hazard Circular of 1862:

"Slavery is likely to be abolished by the war power, and all chattel slavery abolished. This I and my European friends are in favor of, for slavery is but the owning of labor and carries with it the care of the laborers, while the European plan, led on by England, is that capital shall control labor by controlling wages. The great debt that capitalists will see to it is made out of the war must be used as a means to control the volume of money; to accomplish this the bonds must be used as a banking basis. We are now waiting for the Secretary of the Treasury to make this recommendation to Congress. It will not do to allow the greenback, as it is called, to circulate as money any length of time, as we cannot control that. But we can control the bonds, and through them the bank issue" (Hazard Circular of 1862).


My reply:
]
I didn't ask before, although I thought about asking:

• "What is up" with the recurring Jewish undercurrent that appears in each of your book citations (post #38)?
• Would you either state that the Jewishness is coincidental (if it is, okay), or not coincidental. It seems that your remarks dance around something -- I don't know what, which is why I'm asking. If the Jewish undercurrent be intended, can you please just come out and plainly state whatever be the Jewish connection you've yet to openly discuss in this thread?
• Do you have some "axe to grind," be it pro or anti Jewry, Zionism, etc? If so, please be clear in stating what it be and, equally importantly, what it has to do with this thread's topic?

To give you a bit of perspective, although none is needed to just answer the questions directly, and my perspective is irrelevant to direct answers to the questions....When I was considering the text you cited in post #38, I could not help but notice a strong Jewish theme running through all of them, that is, a lot of it has to do with events orchestrated by or centrally involving key Jewish figures. The PNAC isn't specifically Jewish, but to the extent it be the precursor to the O-Y Plan (how one group and a plan developed by another individual are correlated as "father and son" isn't clear to me, but whether they are or not isn't the point of yours or my post, so I'll move on past that), the Jewish connection yet runs through your having mentioned the PNAC.

The Idea of Zinn being a Racist:
Come now. Zinn was a white guy. To the best of my recollection, he wed a white woman. While it's not impossible for a person belonging to a given ethnic identity group to hate that s/he is and hate others who are on the basis of that alone, it's highly unlikely. At the least, one committed to such a belief would actively seek and mate with another person who shared it, thereby producing mixed race kids. For such a person, that would at least be a meaningful "step in the right direction" for their descendents.

Red:
Students in general aren't forced to read a damn thing, but, yes, if that book is among the course texts for a given class and they don't read it, their grade will suffer accordingly.

I don't know to what extent pre-collegiate students are assigned A People's History to read, be it specifically as a course text or otherwise. I do know that at least in Tucson, that particular book was removed from the assortment of course texts. I have no indication that the book is among or not among the assigned texts in other public school systems' curricula. I am aware of some private schools that used it.

Blue:
Can you be more specific for I really don't have the first idea of what might be answers to the following:

• What is "ethnic white?"
• Can you identify several specific "actions that only results in the destruction of white identity?"
• What is "white identity?"

Green:
I haven't read that book, but I found some excerpts from it here: Crude Oil Price History Chart | MacroTrends .

Based on what I see there, I doubt Zinn would have cited that book in much of anything he wrote. The tone of what I see in the noted synopsis is that the author as extrapolated the acts of individual Jews to the point that they constitute a concerted and deliberate effort among Jews as an ethnic identity group. I don't find that credible at all. I mean really, the guy writes about Jews selling sheets to KKK members...nevermind that to the KKK, Jews aren't meaningfully better than blacks. Heck, were I a black merchant who receives an order for a large quantity of white sheets, be the customer a KKK purchasing agent or not, I'd sell them regardless of what the buyer intends to do with them. As a merchant, clan dollars, ISIS dollars, black folks' dollars, etc. are as useful to me as anyone else's dollars.

Purple:
Say what? You'll need to expound on how what that remark should be taken to be so.

 

[SingleVoyce]

Perhaps THIS from his statements on his website will help the OP!

Trump agenda:
1. Build the Wall
2. Enforce laws pertaining to illegals
3. Balance budgets
4. Middle class tax cut
5. Simplify tax code
6. Make military strength a priority
7. Tear up all foreign trade pacts which are taking our jobs, especially China & Mexico & Japan
8. Install hugely successful people from private sector for making foreign trade deals
9. Take better care of wounded vets
10. Eliminate/reduce useless federal bureaucracy

Trump is conservative on these issues:
Pro life since at least 2011, wanted to ban partial birth abortion as far back as 2000.
Pro Traditional marriage. “Gay rights is not my thing.”
Pro capital punishment “Capital punishment isn’t uncivilized; murderers living is”
Hold Judges accountable
Opposes “Common core is a disaster” Teach citizenship, quit “dumbing down”.
Anti education unions (2000)
For school choice
“Climate Change is a hoax”
“No Cap-and-Tax”
For drilling our own.
On Environment “Good development enhances the environment”
Stressed the importance of a strong family & culture of life (2015)
Supports Israel
Opposes Iran deal and letting Iran obtain the bomb.
Wants to crush ISIS quickly.
Wants a military so strong no one will challenge us.
Against unbalanced trade deals that kill American jobs.
Against warrantless government surveillance of citizens.
Is against having a high national debt. Warns that $24T is a point of no return.
Against gun control
For assault weapon ban but says the AR-15 shouldn’t be considered an assault weapon.
Wants to repeal Obamacare and replace it with market driven polices and increased competition among insurance companies.
Wants to increase military spending.
Will close the border to illegals
Will send the criminals and sponges back.
Will deport all illegals but will let the hard working ones go through the legal process to come back.
Against Anchor babies
Knows unemployment is much higher than official stats.
Will bring jobs back through better trade negotiation.
Attended military academy and Wharton Business School.
Stood up for Birthers and challenged Obama on his fraud.
Believes USA is “the greatest force for freedom the world has ever known”
Wants to honor commitments on Social Security and Medicare, which we can afford to do if he gets the economy going full steam.
Wants to reduce the fraud in disability and other programs.
Against marriage penalties in tax code.
Wants to reduce income taxes and eliminate corporate tax.
Wants to rebuild our infrastructure.
Wants to apply welfare-to-work to 76 other welfare programs (2011)
Doesn’t have time for political correctness.
Not afraid to call out either party or both when they are wrong.
Not a puppet to rich campaign donors.

No, that didn't help. I have the same questions I had before:

• How is Mr. Trump going to accomplish those things?
• By what plausible means does he expect to pay for them?
• And to a lesser extent, why the heck has Mr. Trump waited this long and still not volunteered that information?

That is the information I want (along with the stuff I noted in post #13) from Mr. Trump. Once I have that information, I can then use it to determine whether I will support Mr. Trump. Lacking it, however, I can only refuse to support Mr. Trump. That's subtly different from actively opposing him, but different it is.

Of course, it's not lost on me that the majority of Mr. Trump's supporters likely don't understand that distinction, and lacking the cognitive skills to understand such things is IMO, part of why they haven't realized his proposals are ludicrous, even if they sound good on a superficial level.

I would love to see Mr. Trump's plan to balance the budget but so far all I have seen is promises of more military spending and tax cuts. It's hard to see how you can balance the budget and do both of those.

Most of the candidates seem to be making similar promises however so Trump is not much different. The main problem I have with Trump is that his behavior is so erratic. I makes me nervous to think that someone who flies off the handle that easily would have the power of the POTUS.

 

[Vigilante]

Perhaps THIS from his statements on his website will help the OP!

Trump agenda:
1. Build the Wall
2. Enforce laws pertaining to illegals
3. Balance budgets
4. Middle class tax cut
5. Simplify tax code
6. Make military strength a priority
7. Tear up all foreign trade pacts which are taking our jobs, especially China & Mexico & Japan
8. Install hugely successful people from private sector for making foreign trade deals
9. Take better care of wounded vets
10. Eliminate/reduce useless federal bureaucracy

Trump is conservative on these issues:
Pro life since at least 2011, wanted to ban partial birth abortion as far back as 2000.
Pro Traditional marriage. “Gay rights is not my thing.”
Pro capital punishment “Capital punishment isn’t uncivilized; murderers living is”
Hold Judges accountable
Opposes “Common core is a disaster” Teach citizenship, quit “dumbing down”.
Anti education unions (2000)
For school choice
“Climate Change is a hoax”
“No Cap-and-Tax”
For drilling our own.
On Environment “Good development enhances the environment”
Stressed the importance of a strong family & culture of life (2015)
Supports Israel
Opposes Iran deal and letting Iran obtain the bomb.
Wants to crush ISIS quickly.
Wants a military so strong no one will challenge us.
Against unbalanced trade deals that kill American jobs.
Against warrantless government surveillance of citizens.
Is against having a high national debt. Warns that $24T is a point of no return.
Against gun control
For assault weapon ban but says the AR-15 shouldn’t be considered an assault weapon.
Wants to repeal Obamacare and replace it with market driven polices and increased competition among insurance companies.
Wants to increase military spending.
Will close the border to illegals
Will send the criminals and sponges back.
Will deport all illegals but will let the hard working ones go through the legal process to come back.
Against Anchor babies
Knows unemployment is much higher than official stats.
Will bring jobs back through better trade negotiation.
Attended military academy and Wharton Business School.
Stood up for Birthers and challenged Obama on his fraud.
Believes USA is “the greatest force for freedom the world has ever known”
Wants to honor commitments on Social Security and Medicare, which we can afford to do if he gets the economy going full steam.
Wants to reduce the fraud in disability and other programs.
Against marriage penalties in tax code.
Wants to reduce income taxes and eliminate corporate tax.
Wants to rebuild our infrastructure.
Wants to apply welfare-to-work to 76 other welfare programs (2011)
Doesn’t have time for political correctness.
Not afraid to call out either party or both when they are wrong.
Not a puppet to rich campaign donors.

No, that didn't help. I have the same questions I had before:

• How is Mr. Trump going to accomplish those things?
• By what plausible means does he expect to pay for them?
• And to a lesser extent, why the heck has Mr. Trump waited this long and still not volunteered that information?

That is the information I want (along with the stuff I noted in post #13) from Mr. Trump. Once I have that information, I can then use it to determine whether I will support Mr. Trump. Lacking it, however, I can only refuse to support Mr. Trump. That's subtly different from actively opposing him, but different it is.

Of course, it's not lost on me that the majority of Mr. Trump's supporters likely don't understand that distinction, and lacking the cognitive skills to understand such things is IMO, part of why they haven't realized his proposals are ludicrous, even if they sound good on a superficial level.

Has the Hildebeast or Col. Sanders done anything specific, besides GIVE ME YOUR MONEY AND I'LL GIVE IT AWAY TO THE MINORITIES, MUSLIM'S INVADERS, ILLEGAL ALIENS, AND THE INDIGENT SO THEY WILL VOTE FOR ME????

 

[320 Years of History]

Has the Hildebeast or Col. Sanders done anything specific, besides GIVE ME YOUR MONEY AND I'LL GIVE IT AWAY TO THE MINORITIES, MUSLIM'S INVADERS, ILLEGAL ALIENS, AND THE INDIGENT SO THEY WILL VOTE FOR ME????

Well, they each, along with most of the other folks running for President, have at least held public office and as a result of having done so, have some awareness of which of their proposals are plausibly implementable. That's at least better than, lacking that much experience in public office, not knowing and thus proposing things that, however good they sound, are implausibly implementable. I can easily forgive Mr. Trump for his understandable ignorance, just as I can forgive anyone else their non-willful ignorance, but I cannot and will not support him, or anyone else, while they remain in that state of just not knowing/understanding.

The Presidency, and establishing and leading public policy is, from square one, a job, a process, that one cannot truly understand until one has held it, or at least been close to it while holding another job. If Mr. Trump were to present fully flushed out proposals that show, in part by their being quite practical and plausibly implementable, a keen awareness of the limits of what as President he can accomplish, I'd be more inclined to support him and might just do so. Right now, however, his proposals lack the "meat" to convince me that he does. Many of his competitors in the Presidential race at least have "in office" experience that tells one they at least know those limits, even if they don't expressly reflect them in their "I'm all that" campaign promises.

It's really a matter of their having earned a greater level of "the benefit of the doubt" as goes holding public office than has Mr. Trump. Having not earned that "benefit," Mr. Trump has to "step up" and provide more substance to overcome not having it. That's no different than what a new member of one's staff would have to do, and Mr. Trump surely knows that, yet he's not following through and doing it; he's not behaving, performing, like someone who does know it, and , quite frankly, that's a big problem in my mind.

 

[Vigilante]

Has the Hildebeast or Col. Sanders done anything specific, besides GIVE ME YOUR MONEY AND I'LL GIVE IT AWAY TO THE MINORITIES, MUSLIM'S INVADERS, ILLEGAL ALIENS, AND THE INDIGENT SO THEY WILL VOTE FOR ME????

Well, they each, along with most of the other folks running for President, have at least held public office and as a result of having done so, have some awareness of which of their proposals are plausibly implementable. That's at least better than, lacking that much experience in public office, not knowing and thus proposing things that, however good they sound, are implausibly implementable. I can easily forgive Mr. Trump for his understandable ignorance, just as I can forgive anyone else their non-willful ignorance, but I cannot and will not support him, or anyone else, while they remain in that state of just not knowing/understanding.

The Presidency, and establishing and leading public policy is, from square one, a job, a process, that one cannot truly understand until one has held it, or at least been close to it while holding another job. If Mr. Trump were to present fully flushed out proposals that show, in part by their being quite practical and plausibly implementable, a keen awareness of the limits of what as President he can accomplish, I'd be more inclined to support him and might just do so. Right now, however, his proposals lack the "meat" to convince me that he does. Many of his competitors in the Presidential race at least have "in office" experience that tells one they at least know those limits, even if they don't expressly reflect them in their "I'm all that" campaign promises.

It's really a matter of their having earned a greater level of "the benefit of the doubt" as goes holding public office than has Mr. Trump. Having not earned that "benefit," Mr. Trump has to "step up" and provide more substance to overcome not having it. That's no different than what a new member of one's staff would have to do, and Mr. Trump surely knows that, yet he's not following through and doing it; he's not behaving, performing, like someone who does know it, and , quite frankly, that's a big problem in my mind.

Now, I hate to tell you this, BUT WHY THE FUCK DO YOU THINK TRUMP IS SO POPULAR?...... I'll clue you in...HE HAS NOT BEEN A FUCKING POLITICIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Isn't that one of the MAIN REASONS almost a majority of Republican's (He's now polling around 40+% in most NEW polls) and as stated many times on this board approx. 20% of DemocRATS would vote for him!

When he gets to run against Joe "The World's Dumbest Politician and SEXUAL ABUSER" Biden for the presidency after the convention declares that the Hildebeast is indicted, and they REFUSE to let Col Sanders be laughed at by a large majority of the country for his .....

Trump will ROMP to the presidency and might get over 60% of the general vote!

 

[320 Years of History]

Now, I hate to tell you this, BUT WHY THE FUCK DO YOU THINK TRUMP IS SO POPULAR?...... I'll clue you in...HE HAS NOT BEEN A FUCKING POLITICIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

...

Well, that's just a stupid reason in multiple dimensions.

• Would you hire a boat captain to sail your ship through the most challenging seas on the planet if the guy/gal had zero experience sailing similar seas?
• When you are assigning tasks of any sort to your staff, do you assign the most difficult ones to the least experienced personnel specifically because they have no experience performing those or somewhat similar tasks?

The idea of liking and electing a non public politician (because let's be real, being a senior business exec is very much a political job) seems quite novel and cool, but that's about the beginning and end of the value of such an idea. Might a non public politician be successful in the job, just as an inexperienced boat captain might make it through the roughest seas? Sure, it's possible, but putting him/her there is hardly a conservative way of viewing decision making; it's a far riskier approach to trying to obtain a goal other than merely putting them in the role simply for the sake of putting an inexperienced person in it.

 

[PredFan]

Has anyone heard Hillary Clinton say anything besides what's wrong with everyone else but her?

 

[Vigilante]

Now, I hate to tell you this, BUT WHY THE FUCK DO YOU THINK TRUMP IS SO POPULAR?...... I'll clue you in...HE HAS NOT BEEN A FUCKING POLITICIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

...

Well, that's just a stupid reason in multiple dimensions.

• Would you hire a boat captain to sail your ship through the most challenging seas on the planet if the guy/gal had zero experience sailing similar seas?
• When you are assigning tasks of any sort to your staff, do you assign the most difficult ones to the least experienced personnel specifically because they have no experience performing those or somewhat similar tasks?

The idea of liking and electing a non public politician (because let's be real, being a senior business exec is very much a political job) seems quite novel and cool, but that's about the beginning and end of the value of such an idea. Might a non public politician be successful in the job, just as an inexperienced boat captain might make it through the roughest seas? Sure, it's possible, but putting him/her there is hardly a conservative way of viewing decision making; it's a far riskier approach to trying to obtain a goal other than merely putting them in the role simply for the sake of putting an inexperienced person in it.

Perhaps YOU really believe your own propaganda...others know better!

 

[Arianrhod]

Has anyone heard Hillary Clinton say anything besides what's wrong with everyone else but her?

Okay, now that we've eliminated "B-b-b-but Obama!" and "B-b-b-but Hillary!" let's run through every Democratic candidate ever and then get back to the topic, which is Trump the Inexperienced, whose main asset seems to be "Hey, I've never done this before, but so what? I'm me, and I'm the best ME EVAH!" and why this is so appealing to a certain type of American.

 

[Agit8r]

He hasn't given a single concrete proposal of how he'll make America great and classy again--all just empty platitudes.

DONALD J. TRUMP POSITIONS

 

[PredFan]

Has anyone heard Hillary Clinton say anything besides what's wrong with everyone else but her?

Okay, now that we've eliminated "B-b-b-but Obama!" and "B-b-b-but Hillary!" let's run through every Democratic candidate ever and then get back to the topic, which is Trump the Inexperienced, whose main asset seems to be "Hey, I've never done this before, but so what? I'm me, and I'm the best ME EVAH!" and why this is so appealing to a certain type of American.

You missed the point. The point is that all politicians do that. Get it yet?

 

[WheelieAddict]

I heard he is going to build a big beautiful wall, with a big beautiful door, and by the power of Trump Mexico will pay for it all. Also:

 

[WheelieAddict]

The China thing seems silly but Trump is using it to appeal to voters whose jobs were "outsourced" to China. And a lot of manufacturing jobs were. It's not a bad strategy.

 

[SingleVoyce]

He hasn't given a single concrete proposal of how he'll make America great and classy again--all just empty platitudes.

DONALD J. TRUMP POSITIONS

I tried this before and all I got was some Obama-bashing but I'm going to try again. What makes Trump and his supporters (and maybe others) think that America is not currently "great"?

Our military is unquestionably the strongest in the world. Our economy is the strongest in the world. Our currency is the standard for the entire world. We have millions of people applying to legally immigrate to our country. We are respected and envied by people in most of the world. We have more individual freedom that anywhere in the world. Opportunities for self improvement are more available here than anywhere in the world. Sounds pretty great to me. What is the basis for the claim that we are not?

 

[320 Years of History]

The China thing seems silly but Trump is using it to appeal to voters whose jobs were "outsourced" to China. And a lot of manufacturing jobs were. It's not a bad strategy.

Yes, it's an appeal to the vengeance of a sort that such folks might want to obtain. In making that claim, among other things, Mr. Trump tacitly offers to be their champion. One of the other things he's doing is talking out of both sides of his mouth. His own clothing line is made in Mexico. Outsourced to Mexico or outsourced to China, the outcome for the American worker is the same: their job no longer exists in America. Such workers have several choices:

• Retrain and find a different job
• Do nothing and find a different job
• Retrain and take no new job
• Do nothing and take no new job
• Complain about their job having been outsourced, and do one of the above

Mr. Trump is appealing to the folks who want to complain, but he himself hypocritically has enabled the outsourcing of jobs in the creation of his own line of clothing.

People may like that someone panders to their fears, angst, and anger, but the nation doesn't need that in its President. What it needs is someone who'll issue the right messages, which, from the standpoint of American business, as well as from the standpoint of what makes economic sense, is "get over it; move on."

The simple fact is that the companies that outsourced "whatever" to places like China and Mexico did so because their managers determined that at the time it made more business sense to do than to keep producing "whatever" in the U.S. Trust me, if and when it makes more business sense (basically more profit) to bring the productive process back to the U.S., they will, but until it does, they will not. Who wins the Presidency isn't going to change that.


There's no question that what Mr. Trump is doing is a good strategy for winning, at least it appears that way right now. It wouldn't be such a good strategy if more of the electorate were not such loons.