The Trump Thread!!!

[jaganar]

I was just in New Orleans and a lady with a suit case on Canal asked a couple in front of me if they had received their free cell phones. They replied no. The lady then proceeded to tell the couple it's free to sign up and she had the phones with her. The couple declined and kept walking. She didn't ask me if I wanted my free cell phone. I guess it's because I'm white...

There are easily abused programs. Not everyone abuses the system but some do and I would bet it's millions and millions. Is it the reason we are bankrupt? No. But, that doesn't mean we should ignore it either. You don't keep going to Starbucks everyday if you are broke because you cut out the filet mignon and lobster every night.

race has nothing to do with it CHASE,
or have you forgotten how many people who vote republican are on food stamps and gvt assistance.

on your lobster comment ,

1- thats rich but easy to attack next time try thinking of the FREE BEST INSURANCE A SENATOR/CONGRESS PERSON IS ENTITLED TO even if they serve one term and attempt to calculate how much of our DEBT is related to the SAME S/C PEOPLE WHO RECEIVE A LIFE TIME PAYCHECK .

2- IM MaF that scum like this keep cutting help for our elderly and downtrodden *read it as republicans, since they were the only party who shut our nation down and WE HAD NORTH KOREA LAUGHING AT US * atleast the democrats are trying , the reps dont give a *censored* since they dont even see those socio-economic areas from where they live.

3-on your free cellphone point , our government has a deal with russia and here in NYC when they come over , first thing they do is jack up the welfare office as asylum residents... there was also an article about a woman from russia who lived on staten island HER HUSBAND HAD LIKE 14 STORES HE OWNED and she was on WELFARE , so dont just assume its people of color, who milk the system alright . you never heard from that article again cus thats how the MEDIA works.

 

[InCali]

I was just in New Orleans and a lady with a suit case on Canal asked a couple in front of me if they had received their free cell phones. They replied no. The lady then proceeded to tell the couple it's free to sign up and she had the phones with her. The couple declined and kept walking. She didn't ask me if I wanted my free cell phone. I guess it's because I'm white...

There are easily abused programs. Not everyone abuses the system but some do and I would bet it's millions and millions. Is it the reason we are bankrupt? No. But, that doesn't mean we should ignore it either. You don't keep going to Starbucks everyday if you are broke because you cut out the filet mignon and lobster every night.

That's called setting up a straw man and punching its lights out. I don't think anyone is saying "Hey, let's ignore corruption or graft of any sort because it's okay or not important." I think what most are saying is that slimy, self absorbed individuals try to distract the public from larger issues by casting a broad blanket of allegations at those who have less political leverage than those very rich who are totally shafting the lower/working/middle class.

Let me give you an example. Obama was accused of "class warfare" by the same people who were supported by corporations involved in destroying communities by moving their operations overseas because of the tax breaks they received.

So, Romney, McConnell, Ryan, etc. push austerity for the poorest amongst us while handing out tax breaks for the richest in the name of creating a "strong" economy and Obama is involved in "class warfare" for calling Bull$#!t. Really?

Look, I'm not a huge Obama supporter, though I voted for him because I felt he was a better alternative than McCain/Palin (Palin? Seriously?? REALLY??? Do we really need someone with the IQ of a bar of soap to be VP?) or Romney/Ryan.

 

[chaseter]

When people say entitlement reform needs to happen, the left say...we lose more money elsewhere. That's true but that's also a straw man. Reform needs to happen everywhere. Each side has their own reasons (votes mainly) for choosing what they want to cut.

Vote third party or don't vote. Voting for the lesser of two evils is self fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Kelly]

Trump has hit a vein of anger in our country. I cannot stand the man, but he has hit on something that both parties need to look at and pay attention to...I'm not saying he is right in his assessment of immigrants, his assessment of Iran, his assessment of China, etc....what I am saying is there is a portion of what he says in each of those assessments that is a problem.....today 52% of those crossing the border are from Mexico, yes....the vast majority are coming for jobs, not to commit crimes. The Iran policy of this President sucks, yes.....but "something" needed to be done, however....giving without receiving anything isn't exactly good policy. China is now running out of steam, their economy was revved up for over a decade, and it has now run out of energy...but there are MAJOR problems with our trade with Asian countries overall INCLUDING JAPAN, not just China. AGAIN, we have given far more than we have received. So though Trump is a misogynistic a-hole, and he is WAY OVER THE TOP which brings out the "OVER THE TOP" crazies out there. There is a touch of truth at the very bottom of what he says. I just can't get through all of the other crap he says to actually hear any policy from him......oh wait, he doesn't talk policy. Well, I voted for a man in 2008 that didn't talk policy either, only platitudes to spark the fire of the left. We now have someone that is sparking the fire of the right....*shakes head* where is the person that actually talks like they know what the hell they are talking about?

It is going to be a crazy political season.....but hey, makes my classes fun to teach.

 

[chaseter]

race has nothing to do with it CHASE,
or have you forgotten how many people who vote republican are on food stamps and gvt assistance.

on your lobster comment ,

1- thats rich but easy to attack next time try thinking of the FREE BEST INSURANCE A SENATOR/CONGRESS PERSON IS ENTITLED TO even if they serve one term and attempt to calculate how much of our DEBT is related to the SAME S/C PEOPLE WHO RECEIVE A LIFE TIME PAYCHECK .

2- IM MaF that scum like this keep cutting help for our elderly and downtrodden *read it as republicans, since they were the only party who shut our nation down and WE HAD NORTH KOREA LAUGHING AT US * atleast the democrats are trying , the reps dont give a *censored* since they dont even see those socio-economic areas from where they live.

3-on your free cellphone point , our government has a deal with russia and here in NYC when they come over , first thing they do is jack up the welfare office as asylum residents... there was also an article about a woman from russia who lived on staten island HER HUSBAND HAD LIKE 14 STORES HE OWNED and she was on WELFARE , so dont just assume its people of color, who milk the system alright . you never heard from that article again cus thats how the MEDIA works.

It has everything to do with race. Otherwise, why wasn't I asked? They were dressed way nicer than me so it wasn't a socioeconomic guess. It was racial profiling. It hurts.

 

[InCali]

When people say entitlement reform needs to happen, the left say...we lose more money elsewhere. That's true but that's also a straw man. Reform needs to happen everywhere. Each side has their own reasons (votes mainly) for choosing what they want to cut.

Vote third party or don't vote. Voting for the lesser of two evils is self fulfilling prophecy.

That's no straw man. It's a fact; we DO lose more money elsewhere (mainly to the rich lining their own pockets; look at the income distribution stats.).

I NEVER say we should ignore corruption of any kind. It's not true that we can't walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. There does need to be reforms of every kind, but with Citizen's United decision, how does that happen? As it stands now, the very rich have unlimited ability to fund any PR project that benefits them and the repubs aren't the only ones taking big money.

As far as only voting for 3rd party candidates, we can have a discussion about that, but the way the elections in the U.S. are set up it is win or lose. This isn't the type of parliamentary legislature that allocates a certain level of representation for a certain level of support. An easy argument can, and has, been made that 3rd parties simply cripple the candidates from one party or the other (ie Nader or Perot).

We're stuck in a major clusterfrell.....

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Trump has hit a vein of anger in our country. I cannot stand the man, but he has hit on something that both parties need to look at and pay attention to...I'm not saying he is right in his assessment of immigrants, his assessment of Iran, his assessment of China, etc....what I am saying is there is a portion of what he says in each of those assessments that is a problem.....today 52% of those crossing the border are from Mexico, yes....the vast majority are coming for jobs, not to commit crimes. The Iran policy of this President sucks, yes.....but "something" needed to be done, however....giving without receiving anything isn't exactly good policy. China is now running out of steam, their economy was revved up for over a decade, and it has now run out of energy...but there are MAJOR problems with our trade with Asian countries overall INCLUDING JAPAN, not just China. AGAIN, we have given far more than we have received. So though Trump is a misogynistic a-hole, and he is WAY OVER THE TOP which brings out the "OVER THE TOP" crazies out there. There is a touch of truth at the very bottom of what he says. I just can't get through all of the other crap he says to actually hear any policy from him......oh wait, he doesn't talk policy. Well, I voted for a man in 2008 that didn't talk policy either, only platitudes to spark the fire of the left. We now have someone that is sparking the fire of the right....*shakes head* where is the person that actually talks like they know what the hell they are talking about?

It is going to be a crazy political season.....but hey, makes my classes fun to teach.

That person talking policy based on actual facts that you're looking for, his name is Bernie Sanders

 

[InCali]

That person talking policy based on actual facts that you're looking for, his name is Bernie Sanders

I've listened to Bernie for awhile now (though it's a little early for me to zoom in just now) and have a pretty good idea of what he's saying. I've helped negotiate several collective bargaining agreements with the University of California and the problem is that both the President, and, for that matter, the bargaining team, is only as strong as its support.

If anyone were to garner enough public support to undo what's been done over the past few decades and dramatically start to change the distribution of wealth in this country (along with some other things), I think their life would be at risk. I really hate to say that, but doubt I'm the only one who thinks this is the case.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

I've listened to Bernie for awhile now (though it's a little early for me to zoom in just now) and have a pretty good idea of what he's saying. I've helped negotiate several collective bargaining agreements with the University of California and the problem is that both the President, and, for that matter, the bargaining team, is only as strong as its support.

If anyone were to garner enough public support to undo what's been done over the past few decades and dramatically start to change the distribution of wealth in this country (along with some other things), I think their life would be at risk. I really hate to say that, but doubt I'm the only one who thinks this is the case.

Similar things were said about the first black president as well. But I do agree that there would be some extremely powerful people who would be upset if he was able to accomplish what he wanted. Much more powerful than disgruntled rednecks

 

[InCali]

Similar things were said about the first black president as well. But I do agree that there would be some extremely powerful people who would be upset if he was able to accomplish what he wanted. Much more powerful than disgruntled rednecks

Yup. I reminds me of that my Sociology prof told me many years ago: Two of the most dangerous things you can do in politics is to mess with people's money or their drugs.

 

[Kelly]

That person talking policy based on actual facts that you're looking for, his name is Bernie Sanders

I like Bernie Sanders, but he hasn't impressed me much in the policy area either. His ideas are great, and on paper they look wonderful....actually putting them in place will never happen, so IMO he's a great guy, with great ideals...but unrealistic. This country is not ready to go that far left....and his fiscal policy cannot, and will not ever match the cost of his domestic policy, no matter how good it is sounds and looks on paper.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

I like Bernie Sanders, but he hasn't impressed me much in the policy area either. His ideas are great, and on paper they look wonderful....actually putting them in place will never happen, so IMO he's a great guy, with great ideals...but unrealistic. This country is not ready to go that far left....and his fiscal policy cannot, and will not ever match the cost of his domestic policy, no matter how good it is sounds and looks on paper.

If he were able to redirect funding from our bloated military budget it wouldn't be a problem. With a GOP-run Senate and Congress, that will never happen though

 

[Kelly]

If he were able to redirect funding from our bloated military budget it wouldn't be a problem. With a GOP-run Senate and Congress, that will never happen though

He wouldn't need to if someone had the balls to do a true audit of every department that is a part of this "bloated bureaucracy" it isn't just the military budget that is the problem. AUDITING the DOD however would go a long way, and there wouldn't necessarily be a "cut" to the military, but a redirecting of the funds to where they belong, in the paychecks of our men and women fighting for us..... and also cut straight across the board don't pick and choose, because that is when the lobbyists get their hands in the cookie jar and that has been the problem from the start. But, no one will do that because they have their hands in the pockets of many of these agencies and lobby groups that keep them afloat, INCLUDING Bernie.

 

[InCali]

I like Bernie Sanders, but he hasn't impressed me much in the policy area either. His ideas are great, and on paper they look wonderful....actually putting them in place will never happen, so IMO he's a great guy, with great ideals...but unrealistic. This country is not ready to go that far left....and his fiscal policy cannot, and will not ever match the cost of his domestic policy, no matter how good it is sounds and looks on paper.

I could be wrong, but I just can't see Trump winning in the general election against just about any Demo candidate, including Sanders, unless he goes through some major changes. Sanders would be hard pressed against a few of the repubs. Bush, in particular and in spite of his last name, would be difficult. I can't believe i'm saying this, but Romney might be another. Fiorina, Rubio, or Paul could be viable IF they ran into a candidate like Sanders. Santorum and Perry are a joke and aren't worth the fork you can stick in them.

On the Demo side, I think there are 2 that would have the best chance in a general election: Clinton and Biden. My preference is to support Sanders. I haven't followed things, but I think people have some real image issues with Clinton; at least until her husband starts talkin' his $#!t. That guy is the best politician I've ever seen in my life and it's not really even close. Biden comes off as not particularly exciting, but a pretty straight talker (uh....sometimes TOO straight talking and maybe a shade off color on occasion t; kind of like a well rounded, smart, anti-Trump with integrity. Trump v Biden?? Joe wins hands down.

Of course, it's WAY too early to know anything. Kinda like predicting the OW box office for FF; you can be WAY off base.

 

[Kelly]

I could be wrong, but I just can't see Trump winning in the general election against just about any Demo candidate, including Sanders, unless he goes through some major changes. Sanders would be hard pressed against a few of the repubs. Bush, in particular and in spite of his last name, would be difficult. I can't believe i'm saying this, but Romney might be another. Fiorina, Rubio, or Paul could be viable IF they ran into a candidate like Sanders. Santorum and Perry are a joke and aren't worth the fork you can stick in them.

On the Demo side, I think there are 2 that would have the best chance in a general election: Clinton and Biden. My preference is to support Sanders. I haven't followed things, but I think people have some real image issues with Clinton; at least until her husband starts talkin' his $#!t. That guy is the best politician I've ever seen in my life and it's not really even close. Biden comes off as not particularly exciting, but a pretty straight talker (uh....sometimes TOO straight talking and maybe a shade off color on occasion t; kind of like a well rounded, smart, anti-Trump with integrity. Trump v Biden?? Joe wins hands down.

Of course, it's WAY too early to know anything. Kinda like predicting the OW box office for FF; you can be WAY off base.

Unfortunately I was on target for that one..... it bombed.

Bill Clinton is the best politician out there, and someone I actually miss in the White House, but I'm not sure I want to vote for Hillary just to get him back in.....

 

[InCali]

He wouldn't need to if someone had the balls to do a true audit of every department that is a part of this "bloated bureaucracy" it isn't just the military budget that is the problem. AUDITING the DOD however would go a long way, and there wouldn't necessarily be a "cut" to the military, but a redirecting of the funds to where they belong, in the paychecks of our men and women fighting for us..... and also cut straight across the board don't pick and choose, because that is when the lobbyists get their hands in the cookie jar and that has been the problem from the start. But, no one will do that because they have their hands in the pockets of many of these agencies and lobby groups that keep them afloat, INCLUDING Bernie.

I think the military could and should be "cut". I'd like a lot less people in the military "fighting for us" and I think we should take better care of the ones that have to. No one wants to hear about what I think about former presidents and VPs who were "strong military" supporters that used their family's connections to avoid military service. At least the president father of said former president wasn't a hypocrite about this sort of thing....although Sr.'s VP had the IQ of a "potatoe" (sic). I don't want to rag on potatoes and rather like them; I just don't think they're very smart.

 

[InCali]

Unfortunately I was on target for that one..... it bombed.

Bill Clinton is the best politician out there, and someone I actually miss in the White House, but I'm not sure I want to vote for Hillary just to get him back in.....

(I am standing comfortably in front of you, with my hand in my front pocket, looking at you square in the eye).

I feel your pain.....

I guarantee you that if Bill Clinton could run for President that there's no one out there who wouldn't get thrown to the side like Josh Trank.

 

[InCali]

Hey.....where's Lex and Taarna? I miss them.......

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

He wouldn't need to if someone had the balls to do a true audit of every department that is a part of this "bloated bureaucracy" it isn't just the military budget that is the problem. AUDITING the DOD however would go a long way, and there wouldn't necessarily be a "cut" to the military, but a redirecting of the funds to where they belong, in the paychecks of our men and women fighting for us..... and also cut straight across the board don't pick and choose, because that is when the lobbyists get their hands in the cookie jar and that has been the problem from the start. But, no one will do that because they have their hands in the pockets of many of these agencies and lobby groups that keep them afloat, INCLUDING Bernie.

I agree lots of house cleaning accounting should be done across the board for the government

Unfortunately I was on target for that one..... it bombed.

Bill Clinton is the best politician out there, and someone I actually miss in the White House, but I'm not sure I want to vote for Hillary just to get him back in.....

One of the plus sides I do see w/ Hillary besides getting Bill in there would be the fact that she is a career politician and she knows how to play the game. Maybe, just maybe, we can get rid of a little of this partisan gridlock we have been stuck in for the last sseveral years. I know it's basically politicians making back room and deals and basically f***ing all of us as usual, but I honestly think it's the best case scenario based on what is likely to happen.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I think Trump's appeal is rather simple. Bigots can live vicariously through him. He can say what they feel to a national audience. He is the 21st century's George Wallace.

While I agree that he's a 21st Century George Wallace and that bigots are a core part of his base, I think his appeal goes beyond just bigotry and is actually more complex than you're making it out to be. Look at the rise of other GOP candidates, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina. Many voters right now are just venting their frustration because they're sick of the establishment and are looking at people who are viewed outside of it.

It's the same thing with Bernie Sanders while democratic socialists and hardcore progressives are a core part of his base, much of his appeal comes from the fact that he too is viewed as outside of the establishment. I'm willing to bet that many Democrats supporting Bernie are not democratic socialists the way he is. But many Democrats don't want Hillary for the exact reason that you yourself oh so eloquently stated in another thread: "She is a distant, power hungry entitled insider who has had everything handed to her on a silver platter. She was given a seat in the senate in a Blue State, because she was the first lady of a popular Democratic president, and then she was grudgingly given the office of secretary of state as a consolation prize for losing an election to a nobody."

It also doesn't help that the perceived front runners of the primaries, Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush have been running shockingly god awful campaigns. You would think that both would have known better and learned lessons from their family and past experiences. If Hillary and Jeb ran better campaigns than just simply relying on their last names and big money, they probably would be doing much better.

The main difference between the Democrats and Republicans right now is that Republicans have 16 candidates to divide up their support from all sorts of factions. It's why you don't see an outsider with a commanding lead nor do you see an established politician being able to break away from the pack. Democrats on the other hand have just Hillary and Bernie, because Hillary scared away credible challengers on the establishment end. She has that field all to herself, and Bernie is pretty much solidifying the grassroots field all to himself.

 

[hippie_hunter]

One of the plus sides I do see w/ Hillary besides getting Bill in there would be the fact that she is a career politician and she knows how to play the game. Maybe, just maybe, we can get rid of a little of this partisan gridlock we have been stuck in for the last sseveral years. I know it's basically politicians making back room and deals and basically f***ing all of us as usual, but I honestly think it's the best case scenario based on what is likely to happen.

I actually think that if Hillary won the 2008 nomination, she would have had a much easier time than Obama. One of the Obama Administration's biggest problems IMO was just how politically inexperienced Obama was and how he really wasn't willing to play the game. He's a politician who hates playing politics and saw himself as a Mr. Smith Goes To Washington type of character. Unfortunately reality kinda smacked him in the face pretty hard and a lot of mistakes could have been avoided if Obama knew how to play the game a bit better.

Obama also had very few friends from his time in the Senate because he's a natural introvert. Hillary on the other hand had plenty of friends in Washington that would have been more forgiving and more willing to listen to.

 

[Kelly]

I agree lots of house cleaning accounting should be done across the board for the government



One of the plus sides I do see w/ Hillary besides getting Bill in there would be the fact that she is a career politician and she knows how to play the game. Maybe, just maybe, we can get rid of a little of this partisan gridlock we have been stuck in for the last sseveral years. I know it's basically politicians making back room and deals and basically f***ing all of us as usual, but I honestly think it's the best case scenario based on what is likely to happen.

I would like to believe that, especially after watching someone for 8 years that had absolutely no idea what it meant to cross the aisle....but those 8 years have really soured my optimism in that regard.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Bill being in the White House again means absolutely nothing. Notice how she is essentially running against everything her husband did in the White House?

 

[InCali]

Bill being in the White House again means absolutely nothing. Notice how she is essentially running against everything her husband did in the White House?

Oh, I don't know about that. You might be right, but times change and "Slick Willy" will be able to change with them until he's senile. He's a very smart, very savvy, very knowledgable guy (he might not think a question regarding the difference between Hamas and Hezbollah was a "Gotcha" question and, in fact, might just know a couple of Palestinian and Iranian leaders.... ), does NOT mind rubbing elbows, and and I'll tell you that if I had negotiations on the table in front of me, I'd want that guy as my chief negotiator.

We had a "Slick Willy" (Willie Brown) out here in California who was a very accomplished politician, very smart, very savvy, and I'll tell you for a fact he is by FAR the second Slickest Willy. I met the second Slickest one and he was a complete and utter jerk who didn't have a second for you unless you could advance his agenda. A democratic waste of plasma IMO. I know he did some good things, but I felt like taking a shower after meeting him. I don't know what he's been up to lately, but best to be about 100 miles or more away from him.

I might just have to start keeping up with things in a little more detail and dig out my old wonk hat from the attic.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

So Trump and his wife got booed by everyone in his hometown for the US Open, not exactly the low-class crowd for that event