Rouge Rover
Senior Member
- Jan 27, 2016
- 935
- 120
- 45
Trump is not perfect but who is? He's bombastic but it's working for him and I think he's a realist and probably one of the more reasonable people in the GOP field.
At a cocktail or dinner party, I'd find his remarks entertaining and even stimulating for the sake of conversation. As a man asking for my vote, they are just empty. Such an individual needs more gravitas than is good fodder for party chit chat. Heck, I've heard more gravitas at myriad such parties. I'm a D.C. native, after all; politics is nearly always a topic at social events, be they swanky ones or just casual gatherings of family and close friends, and there is always a pretty good batch of folks of the various political persuasions, . It's unavoidable. Even the folks in the highly disadvantaged neighborhoods in which I mentor young kids talk politics.
Red:
Obviously nobody is. I don't require perfection. As goes the topic of the OP for this thread, really a direct answer would have been more than enough. Mr. Trump spend the majority of the time following the question talking about his paying for his campaign costs...as if that tell anyone what he will replace O-care with or how he'd change it.
Other:
As for his remarks about being self-funding. I understand fully that the point of that line is to establish himself as clearly not being a political insider, so to speak. Well, for many folks that may ring true, but the reality is Mr. Trump has for years been the very worst kind of insider. He's been the kind who used his money to "buy" the favor of folks who hold political power. He openly said so on several occasions.
I don't know about everyone else, but in my book, offering what amounts to a bribe is no better or worse than accepting one. The former shows a willingness to manipulate; the latter shows a willingness to be manipulated. I don't want to knowingly support (vocally, financially, or with my vote) either kind of person.
I don't care to do so unknowingly either, but if I look for clear evidence of it, which I do, and can't find it, there's not much for me to credibly think about it. And I'm talking about clear evidence, not hints and innuendo that may or may not be truly indicative of moral/ethical malfeasance or turpitude.
To illustrate the sort of integrity I'm talking about....Some years ago, I had an international telecom exec with whom I have been somewhat closely acquainted since college ask me to come in to do a study with the aim of showing that an initiative he wanted to implement would be cost effective. I asked him what if our research indicated it would not e cost effective. His reply was showing that it would be is what we were to do. I declined to take on the engagement. He found a competing firm to to the work and they found as he wanted. Five years later, he got ousted in large part because the initiative didn't meet its targeted financial objectives. I could have done the same thing my competitor did, and I and my firm would have collected tens of millions in fees, that is, until the client sued, which they did sue the other firm. And then where would my career have ended up? More importantly, how could I have lived with myself for such a lapse in integrity?
The situations and circumstances may differ in the course of a Presidency and Presidential campaign, but that's the level of integrity I expect of someone who asks me to vote for them. If they didn't exhibit it before asking for my vote, they had damn sure find it by the time they do.
Actually Trump did give an answer. You've already analysed this with another poster. What he said was except for a couple of changes the ACA stays.
Perhaps I misheard the interview/conversation. I didn't hear Mr. Trump say ACA stays. Making one change hardly rings with tones of "disaster," which is what Mr. Trump did say. Indeed, Mr. Trump began his remarks with "I have been so against Obamacare from the beginning." Really, so against it that all he has to offer as a change or revamping is removing the "borders?" That's the only specific thing he identified that he'd alter.
Trump didn't use the words "the ACA stays" but reading between the lines helps. You've already pointed out the private sector is already involved so his his comment on that has no value. Really all he talked about was changing one thing.