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

Forums - Politics - What do you think of Donald Trump?

 

What do you think about Trump?

He's amazing! GOD BLESS 'MURICA 88 25.51%
 
Uh... wasn't he a busine... 28 8.12%
 
Ew, of course not! Especi... 123 35.65%
 
I'd like a small loan of a million dollars 106 30.72%
 
Total:345
Kagerow said:
contestgamer said:

Probably tax aversion which is legal and all large companies do it. If taxes weren't so high then perhaps companies and the wealthy wouldn't need to be hiding their money offshore.



Wait, applicable American tax rate is high?




Anything over 15% is high and the wealthy pay far more than that when you add every tax in the american system together. (middle class pay more as well)





Around the Network
dangerguy said:
Well, regardless of how you may feel, Trump will never win in a general election and the reality it, he probably won't even win the Republican nomination.

He's too vitriolic and he's hurt his chances with Hispanics. You need about 44% of the Latino vote to win the general. Mitt Romney got about 20%.

If you think otherwise, you're in the "conservative bubble" which blocks out reality. Think back to 2012. You had Obama, who had already passed Obamacare, he was a Muslim, he was born in Kenya, he was socialist, he was coming for your guns, he was a communist, and he was (and is) absolutely despised by conservatives, yet he won re-election against Mitt Romney, who is far more Presidential and moderate than any of the clowns leading now (Trump, Cruz, Carson).

 

Lol, not true at all. You just need more votes than the other guy. If Trump increases his share substantially with the silent electorate, specifically white males he can offset the losses with Latinos.



hershel_layton said:
Also, people say he's cool for "speaking his mind".

He legit said he wants to kill ISIS and "take their oil".

I guarantee you 100% he'll probably lie and try to invade Syria, even after he "cuts the head off of ISIS".




Oh, and for the Conservatives saying I am only bashing him to suck up to another candidate, I actually hate the liberals and conservatives in this race. They all suck. They are not what a leader should be if they want to run for the most powerful country in the world.

 

So whats wrong with invading Syria?



Jimbo1337 said:
Insidb said:

 

 

Take your own advice:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=7698266

Because I clearly stated that he accepts small donations and I mentioned absolutely nothing about being self-funded.  You then proceed to post a link that Donald Trump isn't exactly self-funded.  From your article, they mention that he obtained nearly 3.7 million dollars from 73,942 "unsolicited donations", which is roughly $50 per person.  Oh look!  These are small donations that I was talking about.  First read, then think, then type next time...mkay?  

You then proceed to post that "only Sanders can make the not beholden to big donors campagin" when you yourself just pointed out that Donald Trump only accepts small donations from the link that YOU posted.  

Going back to your first point:

You pointed out that big donors are "unwilling to start investing in another campagin".  Do you actually believe what you type?  I mean seriously...

Do you honestly believe that with Trump's huge poll numbers from the start, that he was unable to get ONE huge donor?  It's not like his numbers just rose dramatically like Ted Cruz in the past month or so.  Would you like me to give you links of Donald Trump saying that he rejected huge amounts of money from big donors on numerous occassions?



While it is true that he hasn't raised the kind of money most other candidates have, I think that's still missing the bigger issue here.

I see the appeal of him being plain spoken, and him saying whatever is on his mind. But I don't think that makes up for most of his ideas being really bad. Ignoring how someone might feel about him personally, he's come out with very few actually policies and most of them are bad ideas according to experts in those respective fields.

For instance, the Tax Foundation looked as his tax plan and found that the country would lose a trillion dollars a year in tax revenue. They also found that people who higher tax brackets would benefit significantley more than the average American would. While the average American would see an after tax income increase of between .6% and 8.3% (depending on current tax bracket), people in the top 10% of wage earners would see an increase of 14.6%, and people in the top one percent would see an increase of 21.6%.

Another issue, is Trumps immigration plan. Ignoring costs, most of the actual policies in his plan just wouldn't work. Take his plan to repeal birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants. Fist off, doing so would require repealing the 14th amendment. Which I think most people would see as a bad thing. Next, this is what the Migration Policy Center had to say about this idea:

"The reality is this: Repealing birthright citizenship would create a self-perpetuating class that would be excluded from social membership for generations."

"Under a scenario denying U.S. citizenship to babies with one parent who is unauthorized, our analysis finds that the unauthorized population would balloon to 24 million in 2050 from the 11 million today."

"Touted by its supporters as a solution to reduce illegal immigration, repeal in fact would have the completely opposite effect."

" Study after study makes clear the gains to the U.S. economy and civic fabric that result from the full integration of immigrants into society—integration that is well underway by the second generation."

" there is nothing about eliminating birthright citizenship that is in the national interest."

 

So, you may like the way he talks, or the way he is funding his campaign, but his ideas (the few of them he's put forward so far) have been looked at by the experts and have been found to be bad for the country. How can you support a candidate like that?



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

He is fucken bonkers.



Around the Network
contestgamer said:
hershel_layton said:
Also, people say he's cool for "speaking his mind".

He legit said he wants to kill ISIS and "take their oil".

I guarantee you 100% he'll probably lie and try to invade Syria, even after he "cuts the head off of ISIS".




Oh, and for the Conservatives saying I am only bashing him to suck up to another candidate, I actually hate the liberals and conservatives in this race. They all suck. They are not what a leader should be if they want to run for the most powerful country in the world.

 

So whats wrong with invading Syria?

 

You mean other than the immense waste of resources and human life? Nothing I guess...



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

He's an idiot reality TV show host and it's laughable that the U.S. Wants him to be Obama's successor.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Normchacho said:
contestgamer said:

 

So because deportation expensive we shouldnt enforce laws? If rape kits are expoensive should we refuse victims their use? What about prosecuting and locking up murderers? It costs a lot at a macro level.

We have laws and if you break them you get punished - that costs money, it's nothing new.

Also, if we hurt Mexico it would have a neglible effect on the US economy but an enormous one on theirs. We could enact such sanctions on that country that millions would die of starvation if we really wanted to. That would make their government even more unpopular. We can freeze any assets they have and take it (whether it's illegal doesn't matter, we're the US no one will challenge us) If we have someone strong enough, someone like Putin, to threaten the lives of millions of Mexicans you better believe that money would be paid. They're next door neighbours - look what we did to Iraq a world away. We could do ten times worse to a neighbour if we had someone with the balls to do it -  but we wouldnt need to, they would pay up to avoid that kind of devastation before it happens.

 

Did you just argue two contradictory points in two consecutive posts?

"Jay walking is illegal too, people do it and we dont freak out. If taxes were much lower it wouldnt be a problem."

"We have laws and if you break them you get punished - that costs money, it's nothing new."

 

When the main detrement of illegal immigration is supposedly economic, it's stupid to do more damage fixing the problem than the problem itself caused. 

 

I hope you realize the way you're talking about the situation in Mexico is fucking insane. First off, there is no way you could do that much damage to Mexico without generating a huge backlash from Canada and the rest of Central and South America. Canada being the Unted States largest trade partner. China also has a pretty sizable stake in Mexicos economy. So we would be doing a very good job of pissing off pretty much all of our largest trade partners.

Oh, and what would we do doing all this damage for? What's the upside? The damage done in cost alone would heavily outweigh any economic benefit, and the damage it would do to our foreign policy would be immense.

You mention what America could do "if we really wanted to" and I guess you are correct, there is a lot we could do if we really wanted to. But leaving  millions of people to starve because they don't want to pay for a border wall they can't afford? That's just...wrong.

 

Canada and south america needs us way more than we need them. The US is in a very unique and advtanagous position - we can crush most of the rest of the world, especially the powerless countries with minimal foreign blowback due to our control of most of the world economy and international finance systems, not to mention overwhelming military superiority. You think Canada will enact sanctions against us for crushing Mexico? We could pulverize the Canadian economy.  The fact is this is all theoretical - I guarantee the Meican government will pay up pretty quickly once we cripple their economy and perhaps even replace some of their leadership. Yes, it would cost us money to do it, but we'd just charge the Mexicans for that too - in the end they'll pay whatever we want because we could turn their economy in to a stone age trading system. It's not wrong - it's simply an incentive for them to do what Trump wants them to do.



contestgamer said:
Normchacho said:

 

Did you just argue two contradictory points in two consecutive posts?

"Jay walking is illegal too, people do it and we dont freak out. If taxes were much lower it wouldnt be a problem."

"We have laws and if you break them you get punished - that costs money, it's nothing new."

 

When the main detrement of illegal immigration is supposedly economic, it's stupid to do more damage fixing the problem than the problem itself caused. 

 

I hope you realize the way you're talking about the situation in Mexico is fucking insane. First off, there is no way you could do that much damage to Mexico without generating a huge backlash from Canada and the rest of Central and South America. Canada being the Unted States largest trade partner. China also has a pretty sizable stake in Mexicos economy. So we would be doing a very good job of pissing off pretty much all of our largest trade partners.

Oh, and what would we do doing all this damage for? What's the upside? The damage done in cost alone would heavily outweigh any economic benefit, and the damage it would do to our foreign policy would be immense.

You mention what America could do "if we really wanted to" and I guess you are correct, there is a lot we could do if we really wanted to. But leaving  millions of people to starve because they don't want to pay for a border wall they can't afford? That's just...wrong.

 

Canada and south america needs us way more than we need them. The US is in a very unique and advtanagous position - we can crush most of the rest of the world, especially the powerless countries with minimal foreign blowback due to our control of most of the world economy and international finance systems, not to mention overwhelming military superiority. You think Canada will enact sanctions against us for crushing Mexico? We could pulverize the Canadian economy.  The fact is this is all theoretical - I guarantee the Meican government will pay up pretty quickly once we cripple their economy and perhaps even replace some of their leadership. Yes, it would cost us money to do it, but we'd just charge the Mexicans for that too - in the end they'll pay whatever we want because we could turn their economy in to a stone age trading system. It's not wrong - it's simply an incentive for them to do what Trump wants them to do.

 

So...I actually just think you might be a genuinely bad person. That, or you're just very shortsighted.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Normchacho said:
contestgamer said:

 

Canada and south america needs us way more than we need them. The US is in a very unique and advtanagous position - we can crush most of the rest of the world, especially the powerless countries with minimal foreign blowback due to our control of most of the world economy and international finance systems, not to mention overwhelming military superiority. You think Canada will enact sanctions against us for crushing Mexico? We could pulverize the Canadian economy.  The fact is this is all theoretical - I guarantee the Meican government will pay up pretty quickly once we cripple their economy and perhaps even replace some of their leadership. Yes, it would cost us money to do it, but we'd just charge the Mexicans for that too - in the end they'll pay whatever we want because we could turn their economy in to a stone age trading system. It's not wrong - it's simply an incentive for them to do what Trump wants them to do.

 

So...I actually just think you might be a genuinely bad person. That, or you're just very shortsighted.

 

I just want what's best for America.  And illegal immigration is not.