Trump Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vouthon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thorolfr said:
Maureen Dowd at the New York Times mocked the sincerity of Mr. Trump’s recent apology for saying the “wrong things” in a pretended “Open Letter From Mr. Trump”: “I’m sorry I asked African-Americans ‘What do you have to lose by supporting me?’ in front of a crowd of white people. I’m sorry I can never find my African-American.”
Click to expand...
I guess she didn’t realize the rally was televised and widely covered by the press . Or perhaps she thinks blacks don’t watch news shows and don’t know how to read
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Trump, on the other hand, has never served in a public office, and he is already 70. It is a little too late to start learning what public service is all about.
Click to expand...
Well, I don’t know about that. Public service is really not that difficult of a concept to learn. It isn’t so much about learning as it is about intention, proclivities and character.

Hillary appears to confuse public service with self-service as a matter of routine. With her, it appears to be less about learning and more about intention from the very beginning. She has had ample opportunities to learn, but seems a tediously slow learner, at best.

I would sooner trust someone with the right intention, even though unproved in terms of holding office than someone who has a proven track record of selling access to all and sundry in order to profit from public office.

Again, she is very good at serving herself, and seems to flagrantly cast aside serving the public. Well… unless “public” is narrowly defined as those who contribute to the Clinton Foundation or pay exorbitant fees to have any of them speak at functions.

I am getting the impression that many on this forum have not, themselves, “learned” what public service is all about because they appear to think that what the Clintons do is somehow of beneficial service to the public. Speaking of learning, I would think that that learning is the most important learning that needs to happen in this election.

Churchill learned in the refiner’s fire of the war what he had previously not understood regarding public service. Trump can learn and is already showing signs of having done so despite the steep learning curve he is facing. Hillary thinks she knows it all because she measures her success with regard to “servicing” the public in terms of how much the “public” is willing to pay for her services.

You can’t teach an old dog new tricks when she has all the bones. Though this dog definitely can bark – that has been proven on YouTube. Rumor has it that she can also bite – in the back, in the neck and other places besides. That is just a rumor, mind you.
 
lmachine said:
Anyone who satisfies citizenship requirements should be granted citizenship. If they want to change things about how our government works then they are free to lobby for it just like anyone else. Plenty of people have views that are inconsistent with the Constitution and work to change it.
Click to expand...
Of course. And that explains why the US is in the shape it is in.

You need to read **A Free People’s Suicide ** by Os Guinness and If You Can Keep It by Eric Metaxas.

Or take the shortcuts here…

youtu.be/LlHFR3dxuIg

And here…

youtu.be/UmtOdNtCTxg
 
Peter_Plato said:
Well, I don’t know about that. Public service is really not that difficult of a concept to learn…
Click to expand...
Starting at the Presidential level? ** Ha!** When was the last time we had a good President of the US who had no previous public service experience? Eisenhower? Nope. He was a general. That is public service too. Trump didn’t even do that. And if you search much farther back in history, you come to times when the nation was much less complicated, so such an example would have limited applicability. No, I think you are going to have a hard time supporting the thesis that experience in public service is not needed for leader of the most powerful nation on earth.
 
It is amazing that we all sit at our keyboards and blast away, typing all these words about what it takes to be President, what qualifications are needed, etc, etc, when not one of us has been in that position.

What other position can people be put in that is similar to being President? Nothing, when you consider it.

Should voters need experience in similar positions before voting (aka hiring) the next President? What makes us experts and knowledgeable about the job of President that we somehow know best?

How many bad presidents have had public service experience?

But we are worldly, we are cynical, we are skeptical; we know who is best for a job we have never had.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Starting at the Presidential level? ** Ha!** When was the last time we had a good President of the US who had no previous public service experience? Eisenhower? Nope. He was a general. That is public service too. Trump didn’t even do that. And if you search much farther back in history, you come to times when the nation was much less complicated, so such an example would have limited applicability. No, I think you are going to have a hard time supporting the thesis that experience in public service is not needed for leader of the most powerful nation on earth.
Click to expand...
Well, for your thesis to hold, the inverse would also have to be true – that having loads of previous public service experience guarantees good public service by holders of that office.

I have enough experience in the field of education to inform you that teachers, for example, or administrators are not necessarily better merely because of having loads of experience. There have been first year teachers who are stellar while some with 35+ years of experience are cringeworthy.

There might be a case to be made that experience, in a general sense, improves performance, but there are so many presumptions and qualifiers to that general rule that it is difficult to draw conclusions with regard to how any one teacher or politician (present case included) will do. And that certainly isn’t sufficient to make the case you are attempting to, to wit: that Trump has little experience and, therefore, will do poorly. That just ain’t a compelling argument.

Experience will improve a good teacher or politician, but it won’t make a bad one good nor, even, necessarily better. It quite often does the reverse. A case in point might, in fact, be HRC.
 
samwise11 said:
It is amazing that we all sit at our keyboards and blast away, typing all these words about what it takes to be President, what qualifications are needed, etc, etc, when not one of us has been in that position.

What other position can people be put in that is similar to being President? Nothing, when you consider it.

Should voters need experience in similar positions before voting (aka hiring) the next President? What makes us experts and knowledgeable about the job of President that we somehow know best?

How many bad presidents have had public service experience?

But we are worldly, we are cynical, we are skeptical; we know who is best for a job we have never had.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, you seem to have forgotten that it is up to the people (AKA we all who “sit at our keyboards and blast away, typing all these words about what it takes to be President, what qualifications are needed, etc, etc, when not one of us has been in that position”) are the ones who must make the decision as to who will be president.
 
Peter_Plato said:
Well, for your thesis to hold, the inverse would also have to be true – that having loads of previous public service experience guarantees good public service by holders of that office.
Click to expand...
I don’t have a corresponding thesis that says that. I only claim that experience is a necessary condition, not a sufficient condition, for doing a good job as President.
I have enough experience in the field of education to inform you that teachers, for example, or administrators are not necessarily better merely because of having loads of experience. There have been first year teachers who are stellar while some with 35+ years of experience are cringeworthy.
Click to expand...
Even first year teachers get some experience teaching during their training. And they are not trying to start out at the top of their field. But Trump is.
There might be a case to be made that experience, in a general sense, improves performance, but there are so many presumptions and qualifiers to that general rule that it is difficult to draw conclusions with regard to how any one teacher or politician (present case included) will do.
Click to expand...
Would you hire a painter with no experience to paint your house? Would you hire a plumber with no experience to design the plumbing system of a new school? Would you trust a doctor with no experience in heart surgery to do open heart surgery on you? I don’t think so. I think that is pretty compelling.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
I don’t have a corresponding thesis that says that. I only claim that experience is a necessary condition, not a sufficient condition, for doing a good job as President.

Even first year teachers get some experience teaching during their training. And they are not trying to start out at the top of their field. But Trump is.

Would you hire a painter with no experience to paint your house? Would you hire a plumber with no experience to design the plumbing system of a new school? Would you trust a doctor with no experience in heart surgery to do open heart surgery on you? I don’t think so. I think that is pretty compelling.
Click to expand...
Seems rather strange to see Obama supporters suddenly becoming concerned about experience
 
estesbob said:
Seems rather strange to see Obama supporters suddenly becoming concerned about experience
Click to expand...
Obama had experience in the Senate before running for President. Before that he served as a state senator in Illinois for eight years. It wasn’t a lot. But it was something. Trump has zero public service experience.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Obama had experience in the Senate before running for President. Before that he served as a state senator in Illinois for eight years. It wasn’t a lot. But it was something. Trump has zero public service experience.
Click to expand...
Obama had Zilch experience. He was a State Senator that missed more votes than he made . He was in the U.S. Senate for years for less than 4 years and introduced absolutely no bills of significance

Trump has extensive executive experience managing a billion-dollar company that created more than 40,000 jobs . Ill put my fate in the hands have a successful business executive over that of a community organizer who was elected solely because of the color of his skin any day of the week. The only positive thing I can say about Obama is he is far more qualified than Hillary but that is damning with praise
 
estesbob said:
Obama had Zilch experience. He was a State Senator that missed more votes than he made . He was in the U.S. Senate for years for less than 4 years and introduced absolutely no bills of significance.
Click to expand...
Saying you don’t like the way Obama did his job is not the same thing as saying he has no experience doing that job.
 
estesbob said:
Trump has extensive executive experience managing a billion-dollar company that created more than 40,000 jobs.
Click to expand...
He created jobs for the sole purpose of benefiting himself and his business. Any successful businessman “creates jobs”. That doesn’t make it a noble accomplishment worthy of praise. It is just an observation that he is rich and powerful and does a lot of business.

No matter how much experience he has in business, that does not substitute for experience in public service. I will ask again, in the entire history of the US, when have we had a good President that came to the office with zero experience in public service?
 
LeafByNiggle said:
I don’t have a corresponding thesis that says that. I only claim that experience is a necessary condition, not a sufficient condition, for doing a good job as President.

Even first year teachers get some experience teaching during their training. And they are not trying to start out at the top of their field. But Trump is.

Would you hire a painter with no experience to paint your house? Would you hire a plumber with no experience to design the plumbing system of a new school? Would you trust a doctor with no experience in heart surgery to do open heart surgery on you? I don’t think so. I think that is pretty compelling.
Click to expand...
The latter is a good point, yet it is precisely the reason (lack of public service experience) why many people are attracted to Trump as a candidate. I think this is because people don’t trust those who are in public service, associating this with corruption and the like.
 
meltzerboy said:
The latter is a good point, yet it is precisely the reason (lack of public service experience) why many people are attracted to Trump as a candidate. I think this is because people don’t trust those who are in public service, associating this with corruption and the like.
Click to expand...
It has been a very long time since ordinary people could see much benefit from the election of “insiders”. After all, what is “public service” to most of them? Somebody climbs the public office ladder, participates in deceptions calculated to make people think he’s doing what he promised to do when he really isn’t, makes a great deal of money and then retires at the public’s expense.

Not saying that’s true of all without exception, but there’s plenty enough of it.

Living off the public isn’t the same thing as “serving” them. “Public service” in and of itself in the sense of simply holding office is meaningless as a qualification. It can also be a tremendous negative.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top