CDZ Why I used to be keen on Mr. Trump and why today I am not

[320 Years of History]

I don't know if I feel an apology is necessary for allowing his line of clothing to be made abroad, but for making any statements about returning manufacturing jobs to the U.S., I without question think Mr. Trump needs to apologize for the hypocrisy he's exhibiting by having anything to say about "bringing manufacturing back to the U.S." If he at all truly believed that U.S. manufacturing is important, he'd (1) not allowed his line to be made in Mexico, the land of criminals, and transmitters of infectious diseases, and (2) he'd have by now at least announced that he has ceased production, or minimally cancelled the contract with the factory, "whatever/something" and will begin producing his clothing domestically by a specific date (ideally prior to the election). He could at least literally put his money where his mouth and ideology is. The fact of the matter is that the U.S. has multiple clothing factories and textile manufacturers. Indeed, one clothing manufacturer is in Bloomfield, NJ, New York, 35 minutes from NYC.

Exacta Clothing factor floor

Donald Trump's label

Am I "anti-Trump?" As someone to have lunch with or play a game of tennis with? No. As a politician who I trust to be true to his word? Yes. I don't trust the man to be equitable and honest in his dealings. The matter of his clothing line's fabrication is now the second thing over which Mr. Trump has had complete control -- the first being his statement that he'd run as an independent if he doesn't win the Republican nomination -- and that is not consistent with his stated ideals or intentions.

The key is both situations is that Mr. Trump made those choices and he's the one who is in control of having made them. He wasn't forced to make either decision/statement and in both cases there existed(s) one or more perfectly viable alternatives that would have created no inconsistency or appearance thereof.

• Re: the statement --
  • Mr. Trump could have just kept his damn mouth shut and said nothing about what he might or might not do.
  • Mr. Trump could have stuck to his word and not signed that pledge.
  • Mr. Trump could have signed the pledge and be done, that is not hint that me may yet not adhere to it.
• Re: the manufacturing --
  • He could have never gone with a Mexican manufacturer. I don't know when Mr. Trump began making clothing, but I do know he had to have been considering a run for President at least a year ago; he didn't wake one morning and decide to toss his hat into the race. His views about American manufacturing jobs certainly didn't just appear like a bolt of lightening in the sky.
  • He could announce a change in the place of his clothing's manufacture, and a timeline for it, with regard to moving his clothing production operations back to the U.S.

Instead, what does Mr. Trump do re: the manufacturing? He wants to talk about currency revaluations. Excuse me? What does the average American understand about currency valuation and the related economics? Hell, what does Mr. Trump know about that arcane subject? I'm sure Mr. Trump is not totally ignorant about economics, but I doubt he's got the know-how of a Fed member such that he has any business promulgating policy on that matter. I don't even know if a President has any authority to dictate monetary policy, much less international monetary policy. If in fact he doesn't or a President can't, it's just disingenuous blathering that Mr. Trump has issued.

Looking Forward:
An area about which I've heard little is that of what will happen with Mr. Trump's assets and financial interests if he becomes President of the U.S? We all know they will potentially go into blind trust. I get that the blind trust thing is one of those "best one can do/expect" as goes trying to ensure that there is at least the appearance of a modicum of integrity among folks who hold high elected office.

The thing is that I have to wonder just how blind it'd be for Mr. Trump. After all, for him we're not talking about just tossing a financial portfolio of investments into trust, we're talking about turning over the management of businesses that he had a daily role in running, and running for a score of years. Just how naive must one be to think that for every presidential decision he would make that Mr. Trump doesn't know what real impact it will have on his finances and corporate operations? Ditto with regard to those of his closest friends and business associates? Let's get real. Show me someone who, upon seeing Dick Cheney become the Vice Presidential nominee, if not upon Bush's winning the election, didn't buy Halliburton stock and I'll show you an idiot. (Nevermind that the Trump company isn't public; it's a family run business.)

Conclusion:
The short is that when he first announced his candidacy, I was keen on him -- businessman, charismatic, independently wealthy enough not to have to pander to "big corporate money," calling out existing politicians for their "partnership" with lobbyists and political fundraising, etc. -- but now, I just do not trust Mr. Trump because I don't see the alignment between his words/ideology and his actions, actions that he had to answer to nobody else to take. I am now convinced that Mr. Trump's early acts/remarks that I thought boded well for him were little but him pandering to voters just to get their votes, not because he genuinely believed in and espoused the ideas and themes he articulated. I now believe Mr. Trump will do or say whatever he thinks folks want to hear and that will curry favor with whomever he needs to in order to achieve his ends. He's just too Machiavellian for my tastes.

Note:

For the folks in the "peanut gallery," I'm not here discussing what other candidates or exiting officials have said or done. I'm talking about Mr. Trump. That's it and that's all this thread is to be about.​

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

He's doing what he has to do to stay competitive.
You have to be willing to pay higher prices for goods made in America which I'm willing to do to bring those jobs back.

 

[S.J.]

Yeah, that's an inconsistency for sure, but probably not as much as defending a rapist by attacking the victim as Hillary (the champion of children and women) did. I'll still vote for Trump since he is less of a hypocrite.

 

[william the wie]

He's doing what he has to do to stay competitive.
You have to be willing to pay higher prices for goods made in America which I'm willing to do to bring those jobs back.

Trump has a very good idea when those industries will return and who will get what very few jobs will be created.

When either African wages rise enough to make R&D into textile robots profitable or standardization of robots causes competence to rise and robotic "Wage" costs drop below human wages enough to create tailor made clothing while you wait then we are 12-36 months to having a few robot techs, electricians and sales clerks replace the textile industry for ready to wear clothes.

 

[jwoodie]

He's just too Machiavellian for my tastes.

Note:
For the folks in the "peanut gallery," I'm not here discussing what other candidates or exiting officials have said or done. I'm talking about Mr. Trump. That's it and that's all this thread is to be about.

Your disqualification of Mr. Trump without mention of other candidates seems a little too convenient. Doesn't this provide a default excuse for voting for Hillary if he is the GOP nominee?

 

[320 Years of History]

He's just too Machiavellian for my tastes.

Note:
For the folks in the "peanut gallery," I'm not here discussing what other candidates or exiting officials have said or done. I'm talking about Mr. Trump. That's it and that's all this thread is to be about.

Your disqualification of Mr. Trump without mention of other candidates seems a little too convenient. Doesn't this provide a default excuse for voting for Hillary if he is the GOP nominee?

No, it doesn't. It means that of all the Republicans running, Mr. Trump is not one for whom I'll vote.

 

[320 Years of History]

Yeah, that's an inconsistency for sure, but probably not as much as defending a rapist by attacking the victim as Hillary (the champion of children and women) did. I'll still vote for Trump since he is less of a hypocrite.

"It was a mistake," you said. But the cruel thing was, it felt like the mistake was mine, for trusting you.
― David Levithan


Actually that's two of them, and here's a third.



Now, with regard to his 2008 remarks, Mr. Trump has said, "the Clintons and I get along with everybody virtually, because that was -- when I needed approvals, when I needed something from Washington, I always got what I wanted." That remark all but echoes the point I made in the OP; Mr. Trump's only principle is that of having his way. He will do and say anything to get what he wants. He "got along" with folks and said what he needed to say to get what he wanted in 2008, and that's exactly what he's doing now.

I mean really. It's not as though Mr. Trump in 2008 was a young man whose views and principles may still be in the formative stage. He was 60+ years old in 2008. I don't know how much experience with being 60+ years old any of you have, or how many 60+ year olds you know. I do know that by 60, intelligent people (not necessarily knowledgeable, but intelligent) have figured out what they stand for, what they believe in; they have developed a "world view," and it isn't going to change in the space of seven years.

Why are Mr. Trump's age, 2008 and present remarks all relevant? Because taken together, it becomes clear there's no telling what the man actually stands for. I honestly have no idea what that man will do if he becomes President. I know only that he has shown me that he will on one occasion say/do one thing and later say/do that which is diametrically opposed to his initial remarks.

As my folks often said, "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." It's a matter of trust. Sure,. Mr. Trump inspires confidence in the short term; he is very good at using his charisma to make one want to trust him, all the more so because he says what one wants to hear at that moment, but for the long haul, there's just no telling what to expect from him. I would sooner back someone with whom I disagree on any number of things, but of whom I at least know where they stand.


I'm not upset that you lied to me; I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.
― Friedrich Nietzsche

 

[S.J.]

Yeah, that's an inconsistency for sure, but probably not as much as defending a rapist by attacking the victim as Hillary (the champion of children and women) did. I'll still vote for Trump since he is less of a hypocrite.

"It was a mistake," you said. But the cruel thing was, it felt like the mistake was mine, for trusting you.
― David Levithan


Actually that's two of them, and here's a third.



Now, with regard to his 2008 remarks, Mr. Trump has said, "the Clintons and I get along with everybody virtually, because that was -- when I needed approvals, when I needed something from Washington, I always got what I wanted." That remark all but echoes the point I made in the OP; Mr. Trump's only principle is that of having his way. He will do and say anything to get what he wants. He "got along" with folks and said what he needed to say to get what he wanted in 2008, and that's exactly what he's doing now.

I mean really. It's not as though Mr. Trump in 2008 was a young man whose views and principles may still be in the formative stage. He was 60+ years old in 2008. I don't know how much experience with being 60+ years old any of you have, or how many 60+ year olds you know. I do know that by 60, intelligent people (not necessarily knowledgeable, but intelligent) have figured out what they stand for, what they believe in; they have developed a "world view," and it isn't going to change in the space of seven years.

Why are Mr. Trump's age, 2008 and present remarks all relevant? Because taken together, it becomes clear there's no telling what the man actually stands for. I honestly have no idea what that man will do if he becomes President. I know only that he has shown me that he will on one occasion say/do one thing and later say/do that which is diametrically opposed to his initial remarks.

As my folks often said, "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." It's a matter of trust. Sure,. Mr. Trump inspires confidence in the short term; he is very good at using his charisma to make one want to trust him, all the more so because he says what one wants to hear at that moment, but for the long haul, there's just no telling what to expect from him. I would sooner back someone with whom I disagree on any number of things, but of whom I at least know where they stand.


I'm not upset that you lied to me; I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.
― Friedrich Nietzsche

I do notice, however, that you don't hold Hillary to that same standard.

 

[320 Years of History]

Yeah, that's an inconsistency for sure, but probably not as much as defending a rapist by attacking the victim as Hillary (the champion of children and women) did. I'll still vote for Trump since he is less of a hypocrite.

"It was a mistake," you said. But the cruel thing was, it felt like the mistake was mine, for trusting you.
― David Levithan


Actually that's two of them, and here's a third.



Now, with regard to his 2008 remarks, Mr. Trump has said, "the Clintons and I get along with everybody virtually, because that was -- when I needed approvals, when I needed something from Washington, I always got what I wanted." That remark all but echoes the point I made in the OP; Mr. Trump's only principle is that of having his way. He will do and say anything to get what he wants. He "got along" with folks and said what he needed to say to get what he wanted in 2008, and that's exactly what he's doing now.

I mean really. It's not as though Mr. Trump in 2008 was a young man whose views and principles may still be in the formative stage. He was 60+ years old in 2008. I don't know how much experience with being 60+ years old any of you have, or how many 60+ year olds you know. I do know that by 60, intelligent people (not necessarily knowledgeable, but intelligent) have figured out what they stand for, what they believe in; they have developed a "world view," and it isn't going to change in the space of seven years.

Why are Mr. Trump's age, 2008 and present remarks all relevant? Because taken together, it becomes clear there's no telling what the man actually stands for. I honestly have no idea what that man will do if he becomes President. I know only that he has shown me that he will on one occasion say/do one thing and later say/do that which is diametrically opposed to his initial remarks.

As my folks often said, "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." It's a matter of trust. Sure,. Mr. Trump inspires confidence in the short term; he is very good at using his charisma to make one want to trust him, all the more so because he says what one wants to hear at that moment, but for the long haul, there's just no telling what to expect from him. I would sooner back someone with whom I disagree on any number of things, but of whom I at least know where they stand.


I'm not upset that you lied to me; I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.
― Friedrich Nietzsche

I do notice, however, that you don't hold Hillary to that same standard.

The fact of the matter is that I can honestly say that aside from small children and adolescents (or adults now whom I knew before they were not adults), I don't know, know of, or have one person in my entire circle of friends, acquaintances, family members, or random folks on whom I've relied and about whom I can say they repeatedly say/do A and then later do/say -A.

I understand that people will lie, exaggerate, whatever you want to call material and deliberate misrepresentations of facts, facts great and small. I don't care for that either. The thing is that few people will do that in public and on the record. Even fewer are they who will will go back on their word.

(IMO, the bulk of people who are in that group of "the few who will do that" are mostly people who've been elected to public office, appointed to public office, sought to get elected to public office, and/or opine about people who hold or want public office.)

When a person publicly, and entirely of their own volition, says "I'm going to X," that person needs to either (1) do X, or (2) equally publicly state they were mistaken, over optimistic, etc., "something" credible and not hard to explain or convince folks that it's so.

Red:
This thread isn't about Mrs. Clinton, it's about what Mr. Trump has said and done. There's no aim to compare him with anyone else. My aim in looking at Mr. Trump's record is to determine whether there are any "deal breakers," as far as I'm concerned, in his character. I have found a "deal breaker."

Let me give you an example. Imagine you have a subordinate to whom you assign a task and upon their asserting they can perform it, you ask them to tell you when they would have it completed. They give you a date and you both agree to it. The date comes and they either (1) don't deliver, or (2) deliver an subpar product. Now, they've let you down and you begin to lose faith in them; you don't trust them as much as you were initially willing to.

You may give them another opportunity at some point down the road, but when you do so you are skeptical about whether they will best their prior performance and meet the expectations they again set with you. Quite literally, you are as much testing them as you are giving them an opportunity. Because you got "surprised" the first time, however, you are skeptical; you build in a contingency plan so that you don't find yourself "pressed" to recover from depending on them for a second time.

If that person lets you down the second time, you're unlikely to trust them from that point forward. You probably don't think of them as a liar just as I don't think of Mr. Trump as an outright liar. What you do think is that they have poor judgment and a lack of understanding about the task at hand, what it takes to accomplish it, and their ability to do so. Be that as it may, you don't trust them to stick to their word.

The above is where I was with Mr. Trump when I created this thread.

If, in the course of discussing the reasons why they failed to deliver (either time), they start making excuses instead of owning their own shortfalling(s), you start to think that not only do they have the developmental needs that you know quite well caused them to underdeliver, but also that they are manipulative, that is, they are trying to "spin" things to curry some degree of absolution from you. They aren't lying per se (hopefully); they are just not owning the truth of what happened. At that point, they have now not only "blown" their chance to gain your respect for their work abilities by delivered on time, within budget and at at the quality level expected, they have also "blown" their opportunity to show you they are at least a person of integrity. By doing that, the degree of regard you have for them drops even more. (I happen to think that when they make excuses they are also not a wise person, for they've also shown that they didn't recognize that the discussion was their opportunity to (1) show me they have come to grasp that which before they did not, and/or (2) obtain the input they need to ensure they can overcome the obstacles that held them back the first (or second) time.)

Well, that's exactly where I am with Mr. Trump as of having written post #7.

Everyone makes errors. Not everyone repeats them. When it comes to making the mistake of saying X and doing -X, Mr. Trump has repeated that mistake at least three times in public, and at a point in life whereby he should have learned not to and how not to. He has not; I have no idea or way to anticipate what he actually will do on any given matter. Therefore I do not trust him.

And truly, it really doesn't matter whether he's "right" IMO on "this or that" matter of policy. His demonstrated willingness to say/do X and later say/do -X tells me that I can't rely on him actively doing X (or trying to) even though he said that X was what he thinks needs to be done. Therefore, I do not trust him.

 

[TNHarley]

I am fully against tax credits. But am I going to turn them down in February? Hell no.
Same goes with him. This is just ignorant reasons to be against him.
Look at the way he buys politicians. So what? the establishment gamed the system. Don't be mad at him. Be mad at the whack jobs you voted for that implemented that crap.
He wants to make this a business environment. He wants to make it to where people don't get punished for keeping their money/jobs here. He wants to make it to where companies WANT to produce here. We don't have that now.
There are MANY reasons to dislike Trump, but this is stupid. Period.
"WWWWAAAAAHHHHHH he is playing along in the system WE created. WWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH"

 

[Toro]

I am fully against tax credits. But am I going to turn them down in February? Hell no.
Same goes with him. This is just ignorant reasons to be against him.
Look at the way he buys politicians. So what? the establishment gamed the system. Don't be mad at him. Be mad at the whack jobs you voted for that implemented that crap.
He wants to make this a business environment. He wants to make it to where people don't get punished for keeping their money/jobs here. He wants to make it to where companies WANT to produce here. We don't have that now.
There are MANY reasons to dislike Trump, but this is stupid. Period.
"WWWWAAAAAHHHHHH he is playing along in the system WE created. WWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH"

Trump didn't have to start a line of clothing. He wasn't forced to play along in the system.

There are American clothiers. Hart Schafer Marx is an American suit maker. Allen Edmonds is a maker of fine shoes in Wisconsin. Trump could have chosen to have his clothes made in America.

 

[LoneLaugher]

This thread doesn't have enough references to Hillary for my liking. Step it up, nutbags!

 

[Correll]

I don't know if I feel an apology is necessary for allowing his line of clothing to be made abroad, but for making any statements about returning manufacturing jobs to the U.S., I without question think Mr. Trump needs to apologize for the hypocrisy he's exhibiting by having anything to say about "bringing manufacturing back to the U.S." If he at all truly believed that U.S. manufacturing is important, he'd (1) not allowed his line to be made in Mexico, the land of criminals, and transmitters of infectious diseases, and (2) he'd have by now at least announced that he has ceased production, or minimally cancelled the contract with the factory, "whatever/something" and will begin producing his clothing domestically by a specific date (ideally prior to the election). He could at least literally put his money where his mouth and ideology is. The fact of the matter is that the U.S. has multiple clothing factories and textile manufacturers. Indeed, one clothing manufacturer is in Bloomfield, NJ, New York, 35 minutes from NYC.

Exacta Clothing factor floor

Donald Trump's label

Am I "anti-Trump?" As someone to have lunch with or play a game of tennis with? No. As a politician who I trust to be true to his word? Yes. I don't trust the man to be equitable and honest in his dealings. The matter of his clothing line's fabrication is now the second thing over which Mr. Trump has had complete control -- the first being his statement that he'd run as an independent if he doesn't win the Republican nomination -- and that is not consistent with his stated ideals or intentions.

The key is both situations is that Mr. Trump made those choices and he's the one who is in control of having made them. He wasn't forced to make either decision/statement and in both cases there existed(s) one or more perfectly viable alternatives that would have created no inconsistency or appearance thereof.

• Re: the statement --
  • Mr. Trump could have just kept his damn mouth shut and said nothing about what he might or might not do.
  • Mr. Trump could have stuck to his word and not signed that pledge.
  • Mr. Trump could have signed the pledge and be done, that is not hint that me may yet not adhere to it.
• Re: the manufacturing --
  • He could have never gone with a Mexican manufacturer. I don't know when Mr. Trump began making clothing, but I do know he had to have been considering a run for President at least a year ago; he didn't wake one morning and decide to toss his hat into the race. His views about American manufacturing jobs certainly didn't just appear like a bolt of lightening in the sky.
  • He could announce a change in the place of his clothing's manufacture, and a timeline for it, with regard to moving his clothing production operations back to the U.S.

Instead, what does Mr. Trump do re: the manufacturing? He wants to talk about currency revaluations. Excuse me? What does the average American understand about currency valuation and the related economics? Hell, what does Mr. Trump know about that arcane subject? I'm sure Mr. Trump is not totally ignorant about economics, but I doubt he's got the know-how of a Fed member such that he has any business promulgating policy on that matter. I don't even know if a President has any authority to dictate monetary policy, much less international monetary policy. If in fact he doesn't or a President can't, it's just disingenuous blathering that Mr. Trump has issued.

Looking Forward:
An area about which I've heard little is that of what will happen with Mr. Trump's assets and financial interests if he becomes President of the U.S? We all know they will potentially go into blind trust. I get that the blind trust thing is one of those "best one can do/expect" as goes trying to ensure that there is at least the appearance of a modicum of integrity among folks who hold high elected office.

The thing is that I have to wonder just how blind it'd be for Mr. Trump. After all, for him we're not talking about just tossing a financial portfolio of investments into trust, we're talking about turning over the management of businesses that he had a daily role in running, and running for a score of years. Just how naive must one be to think that for every presidential decision he would make that Mr. Trump doesn't know what real impact it will have on his finances and corporate operations? Ditto with regard to those of his closest friends and business associates? Let's get real. Show me someone who, upon seeing Dick Cheney become the Vice Presidential nominee, if not upon Bush's winning the election, didn't buy Halliburton stock and I'll show you an idiot. (Nevermind that the Trump company isn't public; it's a family run business.)

Conclusion:
The short is that when he first announced his candidacy, I was keen on him -- businessman, charismatic, independently wealthy enough not to have to pander to "big corporate money," calling out existing politicians for their "partnership" with lobbyists and political fundraising, etc. -- but now, I just do not trust Mr. Trump because I don't see the alignment between his words/ideology and his actions, actions that he had to answer to nobody else to take. I am now convinced that Mr. Trump's early acts/remarks that I thought boded well for him were little but him pandering to voters just to get their votes, not because he genuinely believed in and espoused the ideas and themes he articulated. I now believe Mr. Trump will do or say whatever he thinks folks want to hear and that will curry favor with whomever he needs to in order to achieve his ends. He's just too Machiavellian for my tastes.

Note:

For the folks in the "peanut gallery," I'm not here discussing what other candidates or exiting officials have said or done. I'm talking about Mr. Trump. That's it and that's all this thread is to be about.​

As a businessman Trump played by the rules and in the environment that other people created.

As a President he would have a shot at making those rules.

His proposals for those rules sound pretty good. Far better than any I have heard from the other candidates, both parties.

 

[TNHarley]

I am fully against tax credits. But am I going to turn them down in February? Hell no.
Same goes with him. This is just ignorant reasons to be against him.
Look at the way he buys politicians. So what? the establishment gamed the system. Don't be mad at him. Be mad at the whack jobs you voted for that implemented that crap.
He wants to make this a business environment. He wants to make it to where people don't get punished for keeping their money/jobs here. He wants to make it to where companies WANT to produce here. We don't have that now.
There are MANY reasons to dislike Trump, but this is stupid. Period.
"WWWWAAAAAHHHHHH he is playing along in the system WE created. WWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH"

Trump didn't have to start a line of clothing. He wasn't forced to play along in the system.

There are American clothiers. Hart Schafer Marx is an American suit maker. Allen Edmonds is a maker of fine shoes in Wisconsin. Trump could have chosen to have his clothes made in America.

That is ridiculous lol. I hope you know that.
Having a business is about making money. If our establishment didn't cripple american businesses, he probably would have made them here.
I just ordered a Carhartt (american made) jacket the other day. It was 90 bucks. I could have gotten a similar one from china for 18.

 

[TNHarley]

I don't know if I feel an apology is necessary for allowing his line of clothing to be made abroad, but for making any statements about returning manufacturing jobs to the U.S., I without question think Mr. Trump needs to apologize for the hypocrisy he's exhibiting by having anything to say about "bringing manufacturing back to the U.S." If he at all truly believed that U.S. manufacturing is important, he'd (1) not allowed his line to be made in Mexico, the land of criminals, and transmitters of infectious diseases, and (2) he'd have by now at least announced that he has ceased production, or minimally cancelled the contract with the factory, "whatever/something" and will begin producing his clothing domestically by a specific date (ideally prior to the election). He could at least literally put his money where his mouth and ideology is. The fact of the matter is that the U.S. has multiple clothing factories and textile manufacturers. Indeed, one clothing manufacturer is in Bloomfield, NJ, New York, 35 minutes from NYC.

Exacta Clothing factor floor

Donald Trump's label

Am I "anti-Trump?" As someone to have lunch with or play a game of tennis with? No. As a politician who I trust to be true to his word? Yes. I don't trust the man to be equitable and honest in his dealings. The matter of his clothing line's fabrication is now the second thing over which Mr. Trump has had complete control -- the first being his statement that he'd run as an independent if he doesn't win the Republican nomination -- and that is not consistent with his stated ideals or intentions.

The key is both situations is that Mr. Trump made those choices and he's the one who is in control of having made them. He wasn't forced to make either decision/statement and in both cases there existed(s) one or more perfectly viable alternatives that would have created no inconsistency or appearance thereof.

• Re: the statement --
  • Mr. Trump could have just kept his damn mouth shut and said nothing about what he might or might not do.
  • Mr. Trump could have stuck to his word and not signed that pledge.
  • Mr. Trump could have signed the pledge and be done, that is not hint that me may yet not adhere to it.
• Re: the manufacturing --
  • He could have never gone with a Mexican manufacturer. I don't know when Mr. Trump began making clothing, but I do know he had to have been considering a run for President at least a year ago; he didn't wake one morning and decide to toss his hat into the race. His views about American manufacturing jobs certainly didn't just appear like a bolt of lightening in the sky.
  • He could announce a change in the place of his clothing's manufacture, and a timeline for it, with regard to moving his clothing production operations back to the U.S.

Instead, what does Mr. Trump do re: the manufacturing? He wants to talk about currency revaluations. Excuse me? What does the average American understand about currency valuation and the related economics? Hell, what does Mr. Trump know about that arcane subject? I'm sure Mr. Trump is not totally ignorant about economics, but I doubt he's got the know-how of a Fed member such that he has any business promulgating policy on that matter. I don't even know if a President has any authority to dictate monetary policy, much less international monetary policy. If in fact he doesn't or a President can't, it's just disingenuous blathering that Mr. Trump has issued.

Looking Forward:
An area about which I've heard little is that of what will happen with Mr. Trump's assets and financial interests if he becomes President of the U.S? We all know they will potentially go into blind trust. I get that the blind trust thing is one of those "best one can do/expect" as goes trying to ensure that there is at least the appearance of a modicum of integrity among folks who hold high elected office.

The thing is that I have to wonder just how blind it'd be for Mr. Trump. After all, for him we're not talking about just tossing a financial portfolio of investments into trust, we're talking about turning over the management of businesses that he had a daily role in running, and running for a score of years. Just how naive must one be to think that for every presidential decision he would make that Mr. Trump doesn't know what real impact it will have on his finances and corporate operations? Ditto with regard to those of his closest friends and business associates? Let's get real. Show me someone who, upon seeing Dick Cheney become the Vice Presidential nominee, if not upon Bush's winning the election, didn't buy Halliburton stock and I'll show you an idiot. (Nevermind that the Trump company isn't public; it's a family run business.)

Conclusion:
The short is that when he first announced his candidacy, I was keen on him -- businessman, charismatic, independently wealthy enough not to have to pander to "big corporate money," calling out existing politicians for their "partnership" with lobbyists and political fundraising, etc. -- but now, I just do not trust Mr. Trump because I don't see the alignment between his words/ideology and his actions, actions that he had to answer to nobody else to take. I am now convinced that Mr. Trump's early acts/remarks that I thought boded well for him were little but him pandering to voters just to get their votes, not because he genuinely believed in and espoused the ideas and themes he articulated. I now believe Mr. Trump will do or say whatever he thinks folks want to hear and that will curry favor with whomever he needs to in order to achieve his ends. He's just too Machiavellian for my tastes.

Note:

For the folks in the "peanut gallery," I'm not here discussing what other candidates or exiting officials have said or done. I'm talking about Mr. Trump. That's it and that's all this thread is to be about.​

As a businessman Trump played by the rules and in the environment that other people created.

As a President he would have a shot at making those rules.

His proposals for those rules sound pretty good. Far better than any I have heard from the other candidates, both parties.

I enjoy his tax and trade policies. They are actually pro-American.
Even the people that talk shit about the tax plan say ti would add 4% growth. And that doesn't even INCLUDE his trade policies. Those globalist hacks are scared to consider that!

 

[Correll]

I am fully against tax credits. But am I going to turn them down in February? Hell no.
Same goes with him. This is just ignorant reasons to be against him.
Look at the way he buys politicians. So what? the establishment gamed the system. Don't be mad at him. Be mad at the whack jobs you voted for that implemented that crap.
He wants to make this a business environment. He wants to make it to where people don't get punished for keeping their money/jobs here. He wants to make it to where companies WANT to produce here. We don't have that now.
There are MANY reasons to dislike Trump, but this is stupid. Period.
"WWWWAAAAAHHHHHH he is playing along in the system WE created. WWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH"

Trump didn't have to start a line of clothing. He wasn't forced to play along in the system.

There are American clothiers. Hart Schafer Marx is an American suit maker. Allen Edmonds is a maker of fine shoes in Wisconsin. Trump could have chosen to have his clothes made in America.

I imagine that those guys are pretty special.

Trump is a businessman, with no special talent for clothing that I am aware of.

It would have been very impressive if he had built a domestic clothing company.

That he went with the norm in the market and did not, is not really a minus.

 

[Toro]

I am fully against tax credits. But am I going to turn them down in February? Hell no.
Same goes with him. This is just ignorant reasons to be against him.
Look at the way he buys politicians. So what? the establishment gamed the system. Don't be mad at him. Be mad at the whack jobs you voted for that implemented that crap.
He wants to make this a business environment. He wants to make it to where people don't get punished for keeping their money/jobs here. He wants to make it to where companies WANT to produce here. We don't have that now.
There are MANY reasons to dislike Trump, but this is stupid. Period.
"WWWWAAAAAHHHHHH he is playing along in the system WE created. WWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH"

Trump didn't have to start a line of clothing. He wasn't forced to play along in the system.

There are American clothiers. Hart Schafer Marx is an American suit maker. Allen Edmonds is a maker of fine shoes in Wisconsin. Trump could have chosen to have his clothes made in America.

I imagine that those guys are pretty special.

Trump is a businessman, with no special talent for clothing that I am aware of.

It would have been very impressive if he had built a domestic clothing company.

That he went with the norm in the market and did not, is not really a minus.

He doesn't have a special talent for clothing. That's why he's not forced to play the game. He didn't have to go into clothing. He made that choice.

His special talent isn't even in real estate. His talent is branding.

 

[TNHarley]

People should only open a business if they don't have a choice? LOL
RIDICULOUS argument. Stick to one that makes sense, please. Like him looking like a 5 year old girl at the last debate.

 

[Toro]

I am fully against tax credits. But am I going to turn them down in February? Hell no.
Same goes with him. This is just ignorant reasons to be against him.
Look at the way he buys politicians. So what? the establishment gamed the system. Don't be mad at him. Be mad at the whack jobs you voted for that implemented that crap.
He wants to make this a business environment. He wants to make it to where people don't get punished for keeping their money/jobs here. He wants to make it to where companies WANT to produce here. We don't have that now.
There are MANY reasons to dislike Trump, but this is stupid. Period.
"WWWWAAAAAHHHHHH he is playing along in the system WE created. WWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH"

Trump didn't have to start a line of clothing. He wasn't forced to play along in the system.

There are American clothiers. Hart Schafer Marx is an American suit maker. Allen Edmonds is a maker of fine shoes in Wisconsin. Trump could have chosen to have his clothes made in America.

That is ridiculous lol. I hope you know that.
Having a business is about making money. If our establishment didn't cripple american businesses, he probably would have made them here.
I just ordered a Carhartt (american made) jacket the other day. It was 90 bucks. I could have gotten a similar one from china for 18.

Other American clothiers have made it in America. He could have also. He made that choice.

Trump is part of the establishment. He's the guy giving money to the politicians to perpetuate the system. And he benefitted enormously from it.

 

[Toro]

Oh, as it pertains to your jacket, do you believe that raising taxes on your jacket so that the price rises from $18 to $90 will create jobs and produce a good business environment? Isn't this what liberals do?