By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Look at how many Americans truly love Donald Trump!

Rpruett on 27 August 2015
osed125 said:
DonFerrari said:
osed125 said:

By managing a company, not a country.


So by using his own money he generated more jobs than those guys using taxpayer money? I congrat that.

That's a no brainer...if I build a McDonalds (using my own money) I have to hire people to work on it, thus I generated 20 jobs. That's what business men do; the more money you have, the more jobs you can potentially generate.

And in the case of basically all business men, they do it to generate more money, not because of the kindness of their hearts. Trump is no different.

But my original point is simple, managing a country is way way waaaaaaaaaaaaaay different and complicated than managing a company, especially a power house such as the United States. Nothing that Trump has said or done gives me confidence that he can run a country. 

Trump will use the same taxpayer money all Presidents prior to him have used, and he will have to use that money in education, health, military, building a wall, which are things he hasn't dealth with or at least not on this scale; not talking about raw numbers only, but also the implications it will have on foreign economy, international relationships, and who knows maybe even war.

And Obama, Hilary, Jeb Bush, Bernie Sanders, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, etc, etc have ?   Please.  Your logic is easily disproven by the simple fact that the only person who could possibly be 'fit' to be President under your quota is a President running for his second term.  

I would say that Donald Trump, creating, running, directing an over 9-10 billion dollar global empire of that magnitude within the private sector has far more in common with being the President of the Untied States than the level of magnititude of anything these other candidates have done.



Around the Network
Eddie_Raja on 27 August 2015

LOL it's one sign. People act like a ton of people protest at soldier's funerals - but it's just a moronic parish of 12 people.



Prediction for console Lifetime sales:

Wii:100-120 million, PS3:80-110 million, 360:70-100 million

[Prediction Made 11/5/2009]

3DS: 65m, PSV: 22m, Wii U: 18-22m, PS4: 80-120m, X1: 35-55m

I gauruntee the PS5 comes out after only 5-6 years after the launch of the PS4.

[Prediction Made 6/18/2014]

osed125 on 27 August 2015
Rpruett said:
osed125 said:
DonFerrari said:
osed125 said:

By managing a company, not a country.


So by using his own money he generated more jobs than those guys using taxpayer money? I congrat that.

That's a no brainer...if I build a McDonalds (using my own money) I have to hire people to work on it, thus I generated 20 jobs. That's what business men do; the more money you have, the more jobs you can potentially generate.

And in the case of basically all business men, they do it to generate more money, not because of the kindness of their hearts. Trump is no different.

But my original point is simple, managing a country is way way waaaaaaaaaaaaaay different and complicated than managing a company, especially a power house such as the United States. Nothing that Trump has said or done gives me confidence that he can run a country. 

Trump will use the same taxpayer money all Presidents prior to him have used, and he will have to use that money in education, health, military, building a wall, which are things he hasn't dealth with or at least not on this scale; not talking about raw numbers only, but also the implications it will have on foreign economy, international relationships, and who knows maybe even war.

And Obama, Hilary, Jeb Bush, Bernie Sanders, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, etc, etc have ?   Please.  Your logic is easily disproven by the simple fact that the only person who could possibly be 'fit' to be President under your quota is a President running for his second term.  

I would say that Donald Trump, creating, running, directing an over 9-10 billion dollar global empire of that magnitude within the private sector has far more in common with being the President of the Untied States than the level of magnititude of anything these other candidates have done.

He hasn't said or shown any of his plans to deal with many of these problems. Every time someone shoots a difficult question he either insults or avoids it completely. 

Someone asked him: "How will you defeat ISIS" and he basically said: "I will hit them very hard and bomb the hell out of them and take their oil"....what kind of answer is that? that is the kind of answer someone says at a dinner, not someone with a political mindset. If are hitting them "very hard" you will have to kill civilians, you will have to send troops to Syria, has he considered the implications of any of that? he hasn't said anything as far as I'm aware off.

About the wall, he says that U.S will build it and THEN Mexico will have to pay for it...seriously? and if Mexico doesn't pay he will refuse the Visa to Mexican diplomats I believe is what he said...if he is crazy enough to go with this plan, he will ruin the relations with Mexico, which is a very big player economically.

I don't think he has addressed any of the economic issues (not sure if anyone has asked him to be honest), China's economic growth has been moving very slowly in last few years, and as one of the most powerful economic countries in world, this can and will affect the rest of the world, has Trump give any plans for this?

He was also asked one time how will he deal with Putin and his "expansion", his answer basically was "I will convince him and have a good relationship with him"...well how? by having a beer with him? or vodka maybe? we need substantial strategies and clear answers. 

By the way, Trump is worth 3 billion, not 10 billion. 

I wish I could link to all the sources, but I'm on my phone so it's very cumbersome, I will post them later.



Nintendo and PC gamer

Rpruett on 27 August 2015
osed125 said:

He hasn't said or shown any of his plans to deal with many of these problems. Every time someone shoots a difficult question he either insults or avoids it completely. 

Someone asked him: "How will you defeat ISIS" and he basically said: "I will hit them very hard and bomb the hell out of them and take their oil"....what kind of answer is that? that is the kind of answer someone says at a dinner, not someone with a political mindset. If are hitting them "very hard" you will have to kill civilians, you will have to send troops to Syria, has he considered the implications of any of that? he hasn't said anything as far as I'm aware off.

About the wall, he says that U.S will build it and THEN Mexico will have to pay for it...seriously? and if Mexico doesn't pay he will refuse the Visa to Mexican diplomats I believe is what he said...if he is crazy enough to go with this plan, he will ruin the relations with Mexico, which is a very big player economically.

I don't think he has addressed any of the economic issues (not sure if anyone has asked him to be honest), China's economic growth has been moving very slowly in last few years, and as one of the most powerful economic countries in world, this can and will affect the rest of the world, has Trump give any plans for this?

He was also asked one time will he deal with Putin and his "expansion", his answer basically was "I will convince him and have a good relationship with him"...wellhow  how? by having a beer with him? or vodka maybe? we need substantial strategies and clear answers. 

By the way, Trump is worth 3 billion, not 10 billion. 

I wish I could link to all the sources, but I'm on my phone so it's very cumbersome, I will post them later.

He hasn't said or shown any of his plans to deal with many of these problems. Every time someone shoots a difficult question he either insults or avoids it completely. 

If anything Trump talks TOO much.  What "plans" have any of these candidates truly laid out?  How can any of them plan for something (When they have 5% of the information) ?   Trump doesn't give fluff answers because he's not a formally trained politician.   He re-iterates what he thinks are important (Economy, Economy, Economy) and he's absolutely right.  

Dodge questions like Hilary?   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrJ3fG5iATc&list=FLTfmPjzlovESsub0rzd_TGg&index=2      Or how about Jeb Bush  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOPT2VEaGSg

Someone asked him: "How will you defeat ISIS" and he basically said: 

Take the oil.  I heard it,  I thought it was a fine philosophy.  You cut off their funding and guess what?  No more guns, no more mobility.  No more growth.  You might not like how he said it or understood his point but it's very valid.  Stop watering the plant and watch it wither away and die.

About the wall, he says that U.S will build it and THEN Mexico will have to pay for it...seriously?

The United States gives 200 million dollars PER year to Mexico.  They don't have to get that you know.  That's just pure money,  not counting the actual financial and economic help they are provided via NAFTA and other policies.  It's called leverage, and the United States has all of it.  

China's economic growth has been moving very slowly in last few years

Take the manufacturing jobs back from China and the rest of the world. Turn back into a country of producers, not consumers and we all win.   He's mentioned China (And one of the few) at every turn.  He's certainly ahead of the curve in the discussion compared to other candidates.

will he deal with Putin and his "expansion", his answer basically was "I will convince him and have a good relationship with him".

Every deal is people. One thing a global CEO and businessman knows is that you win over the person, you win over the deal.  I really find it funny that people will question his actual business acumen.  (Negotiating is almost exclusively business oriented).



Aeolus451 on 27 August 2015
RadiantDanceMachine said:
Aeolus451 said:


It's not backpedaling. I'm not gonna make that kind of bet with someone I suspect will just make another account afterwords. You're unwilling to debate against my point with your own points. 

First of all, it's afterwards. Not afterwords. 

Second of all, you haven't made any points. You just backed away from a bet I instigated. 

I made a point "Last time I checked, republicans took control of congress from the liberals and next will be the white house.  " and you jumped right to a bet as a weak defense when you're not someone that anyone can trust on here.

As i said repeatly to you, I will not make bets with a suspected alt. It's utterly pointless. Your word is worthless with bets. If you're unwilling to let go of your "let's make a bet" defense than let's just drop this altogether.  



Around the Network
Insidb on 27 August 2015

By all indications, it's just a matter of when, not if, Trump burns out. His inflammatory comments have preemptively offended and alienated a significant portion of the voter base (blacks, hispanics, women, etc.). It's very hard to win a general election, when you've directly offended 14%, 17%, and 51% of the citizenry, respectively. Most elections are won by swing voters, and he's already assuring votes for his potential opposition. As his offensive parade continues, he just generates more fodder for the Democratic party to use to curry favor with Americans, and Americans (by and large) are consumers of middle intelligence. None of this even accounts for the fact that the Democratic voter base is perennially growing and the Republican voter base is dying off, so the voters will be ever-shifting towards the Democratic party, up until election day.

The primary problem for the Republican party is its inability to evolve and tendency to retard social progress, often touting fiscal concerns for thinly-veiled bigotry (whether it be against women, hispanics, blacks, gays, etc.). The secondary problem (only because so many Americans are ignorant) is the never-ending promotion of trickle-down Reagonomics, which failed under Reagan, has left behind a legacy from which the nation has yet to recover, and has failed in all of its multifarious iterations. Someone referred to the wealthfare state as an omen that somehow is foretelling of the rise of "communism and socialism." This is far from the case, because welfare programs barely dent the federal budget or your wallet; most of your tax dollars go to corporate subsidies (and then they don't even pay taxes themselves). American has already transitioned into an oligarchy and an aristocracy is right around the corner, because people refuse to do their homework and see what they actually pay, who they pay it to, what those payees pay, and what those payees for (or usually don't).



I3LuEI3omI3eR on 28 August 2015
Insidb said:
By all indications, it's just a matter of when, not if, Trump burns out. His inflammatory comments have preemptively offended and alienated a significant portion of the voter base (blacks, hispanics, women, etc.). It's very hard to win a general election, when you've directly offended 14%, 17%, and 51% of the citizenry, respectively. Most elections are won by swing voters, and he's already assuring votes for his potential opposition. As his offensive parade continues, he just generates more fodder for the Democratic party to use to curry favor with Americans, and Americans (by and large) are consumers of middle intelligence. None of this even accounts for the fact that the Democratic voter base is perennially growing and the Republican voter base is dying off, so the voters will be ever-shifting towards the Democratic party, up until election day.

The primary problem for the Republican party is its inability to evolve and tendency to retard social progress, often touting fiscal concerns for thinly-veiled bigotry (whether it be against women, hispanics, blacks, gays, etc.). The secondary problem (only because so many Americans are ignorant) is the never-ending promotion of trickle-down Reagonomics, which failed under Reagan, has left behind a legacy from which the nation has yet to recover, and has failed in all of its multifarious iterations. Someone referred to the wealthfare state as an omen that somehow is foretelling of the rise of "communism and socialism." This is far from the case, because welfare programs barely dent the federal budget or your wallet; most of your tax dollars go to corporate subsidies (and then they don't even pay taxes themselves). American has already transitioned into an oligarchy and an aristocracy is right around the corner, because people refuse to do their homework and see what they actually pay, who they pay it to, what those payees pay, and what those payees for (or usually don't).

This is a very educated and well said statement... probably one of the most thought of statements I've ever read on this Board... I can't really add anything else because you've said enough Good Sir!

OG: Remember not only does he read a book written by Hitler before he goes to bed...

I heard Joe Bidden democratic election bid is picking up steam. I really hope he is picked out between him and Hilary.



Jimbo1337 on 28 August 2015
Insidb said:
By all indications, it's just a matter of when, not if, Trump burns out. His inflammatory comments have preemptively offended and alienated a significant portion of the voter base (blacks, hispanics, women, etc.). It's very hard to win a general election, when you've directly offended 14%, 17%, and 51% of the citizenry, respectively. Most elections are won by swing voters, and he's already assuring votes for his potential opposition. As his offensive parade continues, he just generates more fodder for the Democratic party to use to curry favor with Americans, and Americans (by and large) are consumers of middle intelligence. None of this even accounts for the fact that the Democratic voter base is perennially growing and the Republican voter base is dying off, so the voters will be ever-shifting towards the Democratic party, up until election day.

The primary problem for the Republican party is its inability to evolve and tendency to retard social progress, often touting fiscal concerns for thinly-veiled bigotry (whether it be against women, hispanics, blacks, gays, etc.). The secondary problem (only because so many Americans are ignorant) is the never-ending promotion of trickle-down Reagonomics, which failed under Reagan, has left behind a legacy from which the nation has yet to recover, and has failed in all of its multifarious iterations. Someone referred to the wealthfare state as an omen that somehow is foretelling of the rise of "communism and socialism." This is far from the case, because welfare programs barely dent the federal budget or your wallet; most of your tax dollars go to corporate subsidies (and then they don't even pay taxes themselves). American has already transitioned into an oligarchy and an aristocracy is right around the corner, because people refuse to do their homework and see what they actually pay, who they pay it to, what those payees pay, and what those payees for (or usually don't).

What you want to happen and what is actually happening are two different things.  Hillary Clinton is plummeting in the polls, with no signs of rebounding, while Trump consistently increases his lead amongst the GOP candidates.  The only Hispanics that he is pissing off are the illegal immigrants, who can't vote in the first place.  He is actually gaining tons of support from the hispanics shown in the recent Nevada poll:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/trump-leads-nevada-poll-with-overwhelming-hispanic-support-300114592.html

According to the South Carolina poll:

http://www.monmouth.edu/assets/0/32212254770/32212254991/32212254992/32212254994/32212254995/30064771087/79e36e02-d83c-4fb8-83c2-4c131bdf0a1a.pdf

Ideology – Trump wins very conservative (33%), somewhat conservative (31%) and moderate to liberal (23%) voters.

Evangelicals – Nearly two-thirds of the GOP primary electorate in South Carolina call themselves evangelical Christians. This group backs Trump (33%)

Tea Party – Tea Party supporters back Trump (33%)

Gender – Trump (35%) holds a wide lead over Carson (12%) among men, but a narrower 25% to 18% edge among women.



Insidb on 28 August 2015
Jimbo1337 said:
Insidb said:
By all indications, it's just a matter of when, not if, Trump burns out. His inflammatory comments have preemptively offended and alienated a significant portion of the voter base (blacks, hispanics, women, etc.). It's very hard to win a general election, when you've directly offended 14%, 17%, and 51% of the citizenry, respectively. Most elections are won by swing voters, and he's already assuring votes for his potential opposition. As his offensive parade continues, he just generates more fodder for the Democratic party to use to curry favor with Americans, and Americans (by and large) are consumers of middle intelligence. None of this even accounts for the fact that the Democratic voter base is perennially growing and the Republican voter base is dying off, so the voters will be ever-shifting towards the Democratic party, up until election day.

The primary problem for the Republican party is its inability to evolve and tendency to retard social progress, often touting fiscal concerns for thinly-veiled bigotry (whether it be against women, hispanics, blacks, gays, etc.). The secondary problem (only because so many Americans are ignorant) is the never-ending promotion of trickle-down Reagonomics, which failed under Reagan, has left behind a legacy from which the nation has yet to recover, and has failed in all of its multifarious iterations. Someone referred to the wealthfare state as an omen that somehow is foretelling of the rise of "communism and socialism." This is far from the case, because welfare programs barely dent the federal budget or your wallet; most of your tax dollars go to corporate subsidies (and then they don't even pay taxes themselves). American has already transitioned into an oligarchy and an aristocracy is right around the corner, because people refuse to do their homework and see what they actually pay, who they pay it to, what those payees pay, and what those payees for (or usually don't).

What you want to happen and what is actually happening are two different things.  Hillary Clinton is plummeting in the polls, with no signs of rebounding, while Trump consistently increases his lead amongst the GOP candidates.  The only Hispanics that he is pissing off are the illegal immigrants, who can't vote in the first place.  He is actually gaining tons of support from the hispanics shown in the recent Nevada poll:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/trump-leads-nevada-poll-with-overwhelming-hispanic-support-300114592.html

According to the South Carolina poll:

http://www.monmouth.edu/assets/0/32212254770/32212254991/32212254992/32212254994/32212254995/30064771087/79e36e02-d83c-4fb8-83c2-4c131bdf0a1a.pdf

Ideology – Trump wins very conservative (33%), somewhat conservative (31%) and moderate to liberal (23%) voters.

Evangelicals – Nearly two-thirds of the GOP primary electorate in South Carolina call themselves evangelical Christians. This group backs Trump (33%)

Tea Party – Tea Party supporters back Trump (33%)

Gender – Trump (35%) holds a wide lead over Carson (12%) among men, but a narrower 25% to 18% edge among women.

You are not wrong about his current ascent; the media coverage has made that obious, but we must contenxtualize this phenomenon. This ascent is very early in the primaries and very far away from the general election. He is leading GOP candidates, but there are many miles to go and much dirt to dig and throw. Keep in mind that those are the very same demographics that baced Romney in a losing campaign, and he was far less offensive in his loss. The firsr debate, as I'm sure you noticed, has way too many candidates to produce any meaninful insign on any of them (We heard snippets on talking points.). As the candidates dwindle, they will become more aggressive and damaging. Fully expect Trump to get slammed like "corporate raider" Romney and have the middle class step out on him. With regards to SC, those polls are largely irrelevant; this is a bastion for the GOP: taking poll numbers from a Red State is akin to tracking Hillary in NY. 

I'm not going to snow you, because you seem to be a person who (rightfully) wants qualification for debate points. Here is an aggregate of all the major 2016 general election polls, and Clinton is leading all of them v. Trump (including Fox):

http://www.270towin.com/2016-polls/2016-general-election-matchups/



Dark_Lord_2008 on 28 August 2015

Trump is a weathervane. He changes his stance on lots of issues. He is stirring things up by saying silly things to attract media publicity. Time will reveal if he is a genuine President contender or he is a joke candidate.