Does anyone actually think that Donald Trump would make a good President?

[ChrisL]

I don't know why anyone would think Trump is less worthy of the presidency than the failures we've elected recently. I figure he cannot possibly be worse than Obama and could very well prove to be the best President we have had in a very long time.

I am all for trying something completely different since what we've been doing has not been working, unless you are a Liberal Kool-Aid guzzler.

Is Trump my first choice? I don't know, it's way too early to say. However, I sure wouldn't write him off the way so many foolishly have.

I don't necessarily hate some of his ideas (however, I DO hate some of them - lol). TBH, I think I just don't really like him very much. What about his recent comments about Megyn Kelly? I could see him making these kinds of comments about others too. This might be okay in the business world, but I don't know how this is going to count towards his "diplomacy" points.

 

[Adrian]

I think his style of diplomacy is precisely what we need to slap some sense into the world and remind them why a whole lot of them even exist.

No. The time for kissy-face French diplomacy is long past thanks to the wanker we have as POTUS at the moment. I think Trump might just be the medicine this nation and this world has needed for a very long time.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And I am saying they are unrelated and that is a terribly naive viewpoint.

Well, I disagree. I think they are very closely related from my own experiences. Perhaps yours have been different. What now? I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that subject.

Doesn't matter about your experiences. Appearing to be nice means nothing with regard to honesty and fairness. I can think of a million examples of completely despicable people who fooled others into believing they were nice people. Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy, for example.

Yes, I guess I've had different experiences... I've been screwed over by "nice people" too many times to count... I go to by tires for the car, the salesman is a nice guy, I pay 25% more for my tires because he was so nice. Happens to people all the time.

By the same token, 90-year-old farmer I knew in North Carolina, grumpy and cantankerous as the day was long, totally unpleasant to be around, rude and obnoxious to others, no hesitation to hurt your feelings with what he said, didn't give a shit if you liked him or not... but the man would give you the shirt off his back to help you. When he passed away, I went to his funeral and was shocked... you couldn't get into the building where his body rested for viewing. There were thousands of people there to say goodbye to this very "un-nice" man. Come to find out, he had helped so many people through the years and never mentioned it. The man was honest, perhaps TOO honest at times... The man was fair... but he wasn't NICE.

I'm not saying that never can happen, but I don't think it is too common. Usually, nice people have pretty good personality traits, like honesty, integrity, etc. (not that a person can't slip up of course). Anyway, I can't even say that DT isn't "nice" per se. I just don't really see how a person could be dishonest and "nice" at the same time. I guess that could be subjective on what is nice too. Anyhow, I still disagree.

No they don't. You're just gullible. Usually, "nice" people have one personality trait: the ability to figure out what you want to hear. Everything else is completely negotiable.

You really don't see how someone can be dishonest and nice? You clearly have not bought a used car recently.

Well, I'm not talking about "fake" nice people. That is "fake" nice, or people pretending to be nice to gain something.

I think you are confusing "nice" with "good".

 

[Cecilie1200]

I don't know why anyone would think Trump is less worthy of the presidency than the failures we've elected recently. I figure he cannot possibly be worse than Obama and could very well prove to be the best President we have had in a very long time.

I am all for trying something completely different since what we've been doing has not been working, unless you are a Liberal Kool-Aid guzzler.

Is Trump my first choice? I don't know, it's way too early to say. However, I sure wouldn't write him off the way so many foolishly have.

I don't necessarily hate some of his ideas (however, I DO hate some of them - lol). TBH, I think I just don't really like him very much. What about his recent comments about Megyn Kelly? I could see him making these kinds of comments about others too. This might be okay in the business world, but I don't know how this is going to count towards his "diplomacy" points.

I think the main point to remember about Trump's interaction with Megyn Kelly is that he WOULD make rude comments about others. He treated her just the same as he would treat anyone he felt was attacking him. He's not the one hung up on the fact that she's female; she and her defenders are. They automatically leaped to the assumption that any mention of "blood" in relation to a female HAD to be about her menses and started ranting about how you can't talk to a woman that way.

As I've said before, Megyn's menstrual cycle didn't even cross my mind when Trump made the remark. Given the context, I assumed he meant she was getting so worked up, she was giving herself an aneurysm (this based specifically on the association "blood coming from her eyes". In over thirty years of having menstrual periods, I have never once bled from the eyes.)

In a weird way, I think Trump showed respect for Megyn Kelly by going after her and being rude to her. Given the sort of person he is, if he'd reacted to her by being polite and courteous, he basically would have been saying he believed she was a vaporous fainting flower who couldn't mix it up with the big boys like her male colleagues can, and had to be handled with kid gloves like a fragile girl.

It may not have been respectful on a personal level, but on a professional level . . .

 

[Bush92]

Can't be worse than Bush II or Obama.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think his style of diplomacy is precisely what we need to slap some sense into the world and remind them why a whole lot of them even exist.

No. The time for kissy-face French diplomacy is long past thanks to the wanker we have as POTUS at the moment. I think Trump might just be the medicine this nation and this world has needed for a very long time.

I still worry that Trump is more bombastic and off-the-cuff than would be good in the long run. We'll have to see how the rest of the campaign shakes out.

Meanwhile, I love that he's put the other candidates in the position where THEY can't play kissy-face French diplomacy without it blowing up in their faces. The voters are sick and tired of Republican candidates trying to make nice and get the Democrats to like them, to the point where they spend the entire campaign season apologizing for any occasion where they might have accidentally sounded like they espoused conservative views and values. All the liberals have to do is pretend they've got their collective panties in a ruffle over some faux-outrage, and the Republicans fall all over themselves to do a mea culpa, and basically leave their supporters twisting in the wind. I'm far from the only person sick unto death of this routine.

One thing you know about Donald Trump, he doesn't understand the concept of mea culpa at all. If you choose to defend something he said, he might double down and say something even more offensive, but there's zero chance he's going to back down and basically saw off the branch behind you once you go out on that limb.

Ted Cruz seems to have gotten the giant, screaming memo from the conservative base. I was comparing and contrasting a video of him dealing with hecklers with Bernie Sanders getting his ass handed to him, verbally speaking, but heckling members of his own ill-mannered trash base. Ted did a great job. He managed to be very polite and mature, while also being firm and refusing to let them shout him down or derail the discussion. And he got said what he had to say, without a bit of apology for saying it. He reminded me of a really good preschool teacher disciplining a class of unruly toddlers and bringing them into line.

 

[oreo]

There's been a lot of Trump support recently on the boards, but it's almost always been couched in anti-liberal rhetoric - along the lines of "I like Trump because he makes liberals upset". I have yet to see anyone put there cards on the table and publicly state that they think he would be a good President.

So here we go. Let's here some positive things about Donald Trump from the resident supporters.

What qualities does Donald Trump have that would make him a good President?

I really don't know anyone who claims to be conservative that would actually donate to Hillary Clinton's senate campaign fund, and then receive a phone call from Bill Clinton, just prior to (Trump) announcing his running for nominee of the Republican party. Do You?

Here is Carly Fiorina outing Trump on this during the earlier debate:

 

[oreo]

Well at least Donald Trump has two supporters left. This is Hilarious!

 

[Adrian]

Ted Cruz's problem is the fact that he is still just another career politician and is far more like the others than different.

Look Trump is not the outsider I would have preferred, but if he is the only alternative to the same liberal drift toward socialism, then I'd be willing to give him a shot at it. What the hell? Again, at this point he cannot possibly suck worse than the thought miser sitting in the Oval Office these days.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ted Cruz's problem is the fact that he is still just another career politician and is far more like the others than different.

Look Trump is not the outsider I would have preferred, but if he is the only alternative to the same liberal drift toward socialism, then I'd be willing to give him a shot at it. What the hell? Again, at this point he cannot possibly suck worse than the thought miser sitting in the Oval Office these days.

See, the difference between us is that I don't give a rip for "outsider" or "career politician" or any label other than "conservative" and "liberal". I don't care if the candidate has made a career out of politics. I want a candidate who understands how angry, fed up and frustrated conservatives are; who understands where the country needs to go and how to get there; who is willing to articulate that, no matter how loudly the left screeches and squawks; and who doesn't back down and wring his hands ineffectually in the corner the first time some leftist looks at him cross-eyed.

 

[Adrian]

Ted Cruz's problem is the fact that he is still just another career politician and is far more like the others than different.

Look Trump is not the outsider I would have preferred, but if he is the only alternative to the same liberal drift toward socialism, then I'd be willing to give him a shot at it. What the hell? Again, at this point he cannot possibly suck worse than the thought miser sitting in the Oval Office these days.

See, the difference between us is that I don't give a rip for "outsider" or "career politician" or any label other than "conservative" and "liberal". I don't care if the candidate has made a career out of politics. I want a candidate who understands how angry, fed up and frustrated conservatives are; who understands where the country needs to go and how to get there; who is willing to articulate that, no matter how loudly the left screeches and squawks; and who doesn't back down and wring his hands ineffectually in the corner the first time some leftist looks at him cross-eyed.

I would submit that anyone who has made a career of politics is by definition an out of touch individual who is far less qualified to lead than a citizen who has successfully made his/her way in the real world.

I further suggest that labels such as "liberal" and "conservative" have not served us well in that the two ideologies have become blurred. I think it's much more important to determine who is and who is not a part riot or a traitor. These designations are recognizable by a person's words and actions.

This is why candidates must be judged by what stands before us, not what they claim s ands before us.

 

[Boss]

Ted Cruz's problem is the fact that he is still just another career politician and is far more like the others than different.

Look Trump is not the outsider I would have preferred, but if he is the only alternative to the same liberal drift toward socialism, then I'd be willing to give him a shot at it. What the hell? Again, at this point he cannot possibly suck worse than the thought miser sitting in the Oval Office these days.

See, the difference between us is that I don't give a rip for "outsider" or "career politician" or any label other than "conservative" and "liberal". I don't care if the candidate has made a career out of politics. I want a candidate who understands how angry, fed up and frustrated conservatives are; who understands where the country needs to go and how to get there; who is willing to articulate that, no matter how loudly the left screeches and squawks; and who doesn't back down and wring his hands ineffectually in the corner the first time some leftist looks at him cross-eyed.

I would submit that anyone who has made a career of politics is by definition an out of touch individual who is far less qualified to lead than a citizen who has successfully made his/her way in the real world.

I further suggest that labels such as "liberal" and "conservative" have not served us well in that the two ideologies have become blurred. I think it's much more important to determine who is and who is not a part riot or a traitor. These designations are recognizable by a person's words and actions.

This is why candidates must be judged by what stands before us, not what they claim s ands before us.

I keep pointing out that "Conservatism" is NOT an ideology. Liberalism IS. Conservatism is a philosophy which encompasses a number of ideologies. What has happened is, the Liberal Left have developed a "Frankenstein Ideology of Conservative" and they attach every undesirable and odious viewpoint to that false ideology in order to have a counter to their "more perfect" ideology of Liberalism.

Unfortunately, the Uncle Remus stories have been banned and expunged from our literature, but it is reminiscent of the Tar Baby story. The Libs have created the Tar Baby and us right-wingers spend all our time flailing away at it as we become even more entangled. We have to constantly fight their notion that Conservatism is an ideology.... we can't accept that. It's a Tar Baby!

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ted Cruz's problem is the fact that he is still just another career politician and is far more like the others than different.

Look Trump is not the outsider I would have preferred, but if he is the only alternative to the same liberal drift toward socialism, then I'd be willing to give him a shot at it. What the hell? Again, at this point he cannot possibly suck worse than the thought miser sitting in the Oval Office these days.

See, the difference between us is that I don't give a rip for "outsider" or "career politician" or any label other than "conservative" and "liberal". I don't care if the candidate has made a career out of politics. I want a candidate who understands how angry, fed up and frustrated conservatives are; who understands where the country needs to go and how to get there; who is willing to articulate that, no matter how loudly the left screeches and squawks; and who doesn't back down and wring his hands ineffectually in the corner the first time some leftist looks at him cross-eyed.

I would submit that anyone who has made a career of politics is by definition an out of touch individual who is far less qualified to lead than a citizen who has successfully made his/her way in the real world.

I think it depends on the candidate. At the end of the day, I'm all about the individual.

I further suggest that labels such as "liberal" and "conservative" have not served us well in that the two ideologies have become blurred. I think it's much more important to determine who is and who is not a part riot or a traitor. These designations are recognizable by a person's words and actions.

No, conservative and liberal aren't the least bit blurred. Republican and Democrat are. Conservatives are still very much what they always have been, and a big part of the anger that Donald Trump is tapping into is that conservatives don't feel like they're being respected and represented by the party that wants their votes.

Traitor, again, is something that needs to be determined on an individual basis. I think most Democrats are, but I think a few of them are just monumentally stupid. (I'm talking officeholders now. The vast majority of rank-and-file Democrats are dumber than the contents of my catbox.)

This is why candidates must be judged by what stands before us, not what they claim s ands before us.

That's why people are so excited by Donald Trump right now. They're tired of being bullshitted. As I've said before, Donald Trump is bellicose and obnoxious, but I'm pretty sure that everything he says originates right underneath that dead cat on his head, probably about a half-second before it travels out of his mouth. At no time do I think we're being handed a slick political line.

Down the road, I think that may become a problem, but right now, it's a breath of fresh air.

 

[Boss]

That's why people are so excited by Donald Trump right now. They're tired of being bullshitted. As I've said before, Donald Trump is bellicose and obnoxious, but I'm pretty sure that everything he says originates right underneath that dead cat on his head, probably about a half-second before it travels out of his mouth. At no time do I think we're being handed a slick political line.

Down the road, I think that may become a problem, but right now, it's a breath of fresh air.

Absolutely spot on! Not only is Trump a breath of fresh air who has people excited, they are fired up! For the first time in a long time, they are enthusiastic about a candidate who is "no-bullshit!" Who doesn't belong to the political establishment inside the beltway. Who isn't going to cater to special interests or lobbyists and isn't in the pocket of crony corporatists and thug labor unions.

MANY of us... and I am talking about conservatives, independents, libertarians, moderates and even some Democrats... Have lamented long and hard for someone outside the establishment, not part of the Old Boy's Club or career politician, with the resources and wherewithal to actually run a viable national campaign... now we have someone like that and some of those same people want to dismiss him.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

That's why people are so excited by Donald Trump right now. They're tired of being bullshitted. As I've said before, Donald Trump is bellicose and obnoxious, but I'm pretty sure that everything he says originates right underneath that dead cat on his head, probably about a half-second before it travels out of his mouth. At no time do I think we're being handed a slick political line.

Down the road, I think that may become a problem, but right now, it's a breath of fresh air.

Absolutely spot on! Not only is Trump a breath of fresh air who has people excited, they are fired up! For the first time in a long time, they are enthusiastic about a candidate who is "no-bullshit!" Who doesn't belong to the political establishment inside the beltway. Who isn't going to cater to special interests or lobbyists and isn't in the pocket of crony corporatists and thug labor unions.

MANY of us... and I am talking about conservatives, independents, libertarians, moderates and even some Democrats... Have lamented long and hard for someone outside the establishment, not part of the Old Boy's Club or career politician, with the resources and wherewithal to actually run a viable national campaign... now we have someone like that and some of those same people want to dismiss him.

Totally agree... look at the mess the Ivy Leaguers and the establishment types have created! What fools thinks we jut need more of these types.. seriously? Clinton and Bush?

Good Lord.

 

[Adrian]

Ted Cruz's problem is the fact that he is still just another career politician and is far more like the others than different.

Look Trump is not the outsider I would have preferred, but if he is the only alternative to the same liberal drift toward socialism, then I'd be willing to give him a shot at it. What the hell? Again, at this point he cannot possibly suck worse than the thought miser sitting in the Oval Office these days.

See, the difference between us is that I don't give a rip for "outsider" or "career politician" or any label other than "conservative" and "liberal". I don't care if the candidate has made a career out of politics. I want a candidate who understands how angry, fed up and frustrated conservatives are; who understands where the country needs to go and how to get there; who is willing to articulate that, no matter how loudly the left screeches and squawks; and who doesn't back down and wring his hands ineffectually in the corner the first time some leftist looks at him cross-eyed.

I would submit that anyone who has made a career of politics is by definition an out of touch individual who is far less qualified to lead than a citizen who has successfully made his/her way in the real world.

I think it depends on the candidate. At the end of the day, I'm all about the individual.

I further suggest that labels such as "liberal" and "conservative" have not served us well in that the two ideologies have become blurred. I think it's much more important to determine who is and who is not a part riot or a traitor. These designations are recognizable by a person's words and actions.

No, conservative and liberal aren't the least bit blurred. Republican and Democrat are. Conservatives are still very much what they always have been, and a big part of the anger that Donald Trump is tapping into is that conservatives don't feel like they're being respected and represented by the party that wants their votes.

Traitor, again, is something that needs to be determined on an individual basis. I think most Democrats are, but I think a few of them are just monumentally stupid. (I'm talking officeholders now. The vast majority of rank-and-file Democrats are dumber than the contents of my catbox.)

This is why candidates must be judged by what stands before us, not what they claim s ands before us.

That's why people are so excited by Donald Trump right now. They're tired of being bullshitted. As I've said before, Donald Trump is bellicose and obnoxious, but I'm pretty sure that everything he says originates right underneath that dead cat on his head, probably about a half-second before it travels out of his mouth. At no time do I think we're being handed a slick political line.

Down the road, I think that may become a problem, but right now, it's a breath of fresh air.

I respectfully disagree with you regarding conservatives and liberals. First of all, "liberal" is hardly the proper designation for this brand of autocratic Marxists and their ignorant and/or brainwashed minions.

As for conservatives, you have the fiscal and security focused conservatives. You have your neo-cons with their Agents of Shield complex, and you have the Christian soldiers and social conservatives. All too often these three mega factions do harm to the greater conservative message and goal. Throw in the other micro scisms and you have a house divided. Why else do you think the 20% of Americans who identify as liberal have been able to dictate to the majority of Americans who identify as conservative? Hell, we have people in the conservative tent who are about as conservative as Debbie Wasserman Schultz (see Lindsey "I'm not gay, honest!"Graham)

Sooner or later you will realize I'm right just like always happens. You will shake your head and ask , "Who WAS that unmasked man? How could anyone be so smart and handsome all at once? Wow! What a guy!

Just watch it happen.

 

[Boss]

As for conservatives, you have the fiscal and security focused conservatives. You have your neo-cons with their Agents of Shield complex, and you have the Christian soldiers and social conservatives. All too often these three mega factions do harm to the greater conservative message and goal. Throw in the other micro scisms and you have a house divided. Why else do you think the 20% of Americans who identify as liberal have been able to dictate to the majority of Americans who identify as conservative? Hell, we have people in the conservative tent who are about as conservative as Debbie Wasserman Schultz (see Lindsey "I'm not gay, honest!"Graham)

Again... What you are describing are philosophical Conservatives who have different assorted ideological leanings. Conservatism is a PHILOSOPHY which has been perverted into a false "ideology" by the Liberals who need an adversary they can defeat.

Someone like a Donald Trump can unite these various conservatives by articulating conservative philosophy and maintaining a 'neutral' ideology-driven agenda. The main problem Conservatives have now is the way some of them have accepted the meme that "Conservative" is this particular ideology and they think their ideology best represents all Conservatives so they reject all Conservatives who don't agree with them.

It's time to take a step back, if you are a Conservative, and try to wrap your mind around the concept of Conservative philosophy as opposed to some "ideology" we must follow like sheep. We can still have different opinions on specific issues but respect that we ALL are opposed to radical Liberal ideology.

 

[Adrian]

Ted Cruz's problem is the fact that he is still just another career politician and is far more like the others than different.

Look Trump is not the outsider I would have preferred, but if he is the only alternative to the same liberal drift toward socialism, then I'd be willing to give him a shot at it. What the hell? Again, at this point he cannot possibly suck worse than the thought miser sitting in the Oval Office these days.

See, the difference between us is that I don't give a rip for "outsider" or "career politician" or any label other than "conservative" and "liberal". I don't care if the candidate has made a career out of politics. I want a candidate who understands how angry, fed up and frustrated conservatives are; who understands where the country needs to go and how to get there; who is willing to articulate that, no matter how loudly the left screeches and squawks; and who doesn't back down and wring his hands ineffectually in the corner the first time some leftist looks at him cross-eyed.

I would submit that anyone who has made a career of politics is by definition an out of touch individual who is far less qualified to lead than a citizen who has successfully made his/her way in the real world.

I think it depends on the candidate. At the end of the day, I'm all about the individual.

I further suggest that labels such as "liberal" and "conservative" have not served us well in that the two ideologies have become blurred. I think it's much more important to determine who is and who is not a part riot or a traitor. These designations are recognizable by a person's words and actions.

No, conservative and liberal aren't the least bit blurred. Republican and Democrat are. Conservatives are still very much what they always have been, and a big part of the anger that Donald Trump is tapping into is that conservatives don't feel like they're being respected and represented by the party that wants their votes.

Traitor, again, is something that needs to be determined on an individual basis. I think most Democrats are, but I think a few of them are just monumentally stupid. (I'm talking officeholders now. The vast majority of rank-and-file Democrats are dumber than the contents of my catbox.)

This is why candidates must be judged by what stands before us, not what they claim s ands before us.

That's why people are so excited by Donald Trump right now. They're tired of being bullshitted. As I've said before, Donald Trump is bellicose and obnoxious, but I'm pretty sure that everything he says originates right underneath that dead cat on his head, probably about a half-second before it travels out of his mouth. At no time do I think we're being handed a slick political line.

Down the road, I think that may become a problem, but right now, it's a breath of fresh air.

A very lucid post.

 

[oreo]

These two do!




But seriously, how many conservatives do you know that would have donated to Hillary Clinton's senate campaign fund, and then received a phone call from Bill Clinton just prior to announcing his candidacy?

Carly Fiorina called Trump out on this.

 

[Boss]

Carly Fiorina called Trump out on this.

I am well aware. Trump makes no bones about it... he has been 'friends' with the Clintons, donated to Hillary's campaign... she attended his wedding. Do you somehow think his supporters aren't aware of this? It's one of the first mud balls you people threw at Trump... didn't work.

For the record, Fiorina says that if Trump wins the GOP nomination, she will "enthusiastically support him." (....I would LOVE to see him make her his VP pick!)