Trump v GOP

  • Thread starter Thread starter Abynissa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LeafByNiggle said:
Oh, I have no doubt the charity-oriented arms of these various churches and religious institutions are very efficient agents of charitable good works. But the largest part of most people’s donations are to their local church’s general fund. And that fund goes mostly to pay the bills to keep their own church open, which benefits mostly themselves. I say “mostly” because a portion of the general fund in our church also goes to charitable works, but most of my donation goes to benefit me in that I have a church to go to.
Click to expand...
Is this comment somehow trying to make the argument that government is effective at spending money? :ehh:
 
Ridgerunner said:
I have never been a Republican. I was born and raised Democrat and worked for the party for years. I had to leave when I came to the realization that one could not simultaneously be a dedicated Catholic and a dedicated Democrat. So now I’m just myself, without a party.

Nevertheless, it has long seemed to me the Repub party is always potentially splintered, with a lot of internal discord and occasional shifts. I think one could safely say its “party regulars” tend to be ideological purists who nevertheless are so afraid of looking bad that they are often supine in the face of Democrat aggressiveness.

The Dem party used to be factional too, but it isn’t anymore. It is now about abortion and nothing else. But it has to put on a better face for campaigns.

Trump is not my favorite Repub candidate, and I admit my favorite is very unlikely to prevail in the primary. But I will have to say Trump reminds me a lot of Truman, who my parents loved; rough spoken, aggressive, says what he thinks whether it’s sufficiently “urbane” or “mannerly” or not, has a lot of appeal to working people.

The ideological purists don’t like him, and I can see why. He probably doesn’t know what the Austrian School of economics is, and doesn’t care. But, strange to tell, even Arthur Laffer likes him. Why? Because he has actually been in the real world and made his way in it, and is of a practical turn of mind rather than an ideological turn of mind.

Those to whom “proper manners” mean a lot don’t like him either. He doesn’t meet their expectations of politically correct speech. As much as so many of us decry political correctness, we’re so bathed in it that it has seeped into our pores and we often sound just like the people who most make fools and “etiquette marionettes” of us.

So now Trump has our attention, so what’s he going to tell us? More importantly, what’s he going to do?
Click to expand...
Your last question gets to the heart of the issue and perhaps is the main problem with Trump for many of the electorate: “What’s he going to do?” In truth, we have no idea, and I wonder whether Trump knows either.
 
I find much to dislike about either Hillary or Trump. The European system of many parties looks better to me than the American two party system.
 
ucfengr said:
What have any of the other candidates of either party done to demonstrate competence in foreign policy? Given Trump’s non-trivial foreign business ventures, it’s probably reasonable to assume that he’s more qualified than any of the other candidates to effectively manage foreign policy.
Click to expand...
Yes, his multiple bankruptcies, failed business ventures, and settled lawsuits certainly speak to his business acumen.
 
Cider said:
LOL Trumps “business plan” is to make Mexico pay for the wall by taxing imports. You know those imports that American’s buy and that the American public will pay for with increased prices.

Sounds like a genius plan to me :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Increasing tariffs on Mexican goods is certainly one possible mechanism for funding the wall, but it isn’t necessarily the only one. Another way to get Mexico to pay for the wall would be a tax on the remittances illegal immigrants send home to Mexico, or wherever else they may have come from. I don’t think the tariff idea is inherently a bad one. Many US companies have moved manufacturing operations down to Mexico to take advantage of the lower labor costs and because of NAFTA (that “Great Sucking Sound” Ross Perot talked about back in the 1990s), are able to “import” them to the US with no tariffs. Ford, for example, makes the Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ in Mexico, as well as the 6.7L Power Stroke Diesel engine for their heavy duty trucks. Putting a tariff on those goods may have the effect of increasing the costs in Mexico such that it makes sense to bring their manufacturing back to the US.
 
meltzerboy said:
Your last question gets to the heart of the issue and perhaps is the main problem with Trump for many of the electorate: “What’s he going to do?” In truth, we have no idea, and I wonder whether Trump knows either.
Click to expand...
Other than supporting abortion and Planned Parenthood, we have even less idea what Hillary Clinton would actually do.

That can be troubling, and should be very troubling to a liberal, most of whom do not favor foreign wars. By her actions and by Trump’s words, she’s three times the hawk he is. Democrats should absolutely shun her for that reason alone. Besides favoring the Iraq War Phase II, she was in the middle of the feckless attack on Libya that handed it over to the terrorist organizations. And have you ever watched that “We came, we saw, Quaddhaffi died” video followed by that unnervingly creepy laugh? He was a bad, bad man, but he was also tortured and sodomized to death and she found it something to laugh about. And some are worried that Trump is too harsh a personality?

Watch the video. It’s on YouTube. If Trump had done that, it would be on the liberal media every single day, relentlessly, with commentators tearing their hair and rending their garments in rage and horror.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Other than supporting abortion and Planned Parenthood, we have even less idea what Hillary Clinton would actually do.

That can be troubling, and should be very troubling to a liberal, most of whom do not favor foreign wars. By her actions and by Trump’s words, she’s three times the hawk he is. Democrats should absolutely shun her for that reason alone. Besides favoring the Iraq War Phase II, she was in the middle of the feckless attack on Libya that handed it over to the terrorist organizations. And have you ever watched that “We came, we saw, Quaddhaffi died” video followed by that unnervingly creepy laugh? He was a bad, bad man, but he was also tortured and sodomized to death and she found it something to laugh about. And some are worried that Trump is too harsh a personality?

Watch the video. It’s on YouTube. If Trump had done that, it would be on the liberal media every single day, relentlessly, with commentators tearing their hair and rending their garments in rage and horror.
Click to expand...
We have an excellent idea what Hillary would do on many issues because she has told us in detail, and we have her record as a Senator and a Secretary of State to provide additional details. Trump, on the other hand, has completely reversed himself on many of the most important issues and has no record of public service.

I agree that Hillary is hawkish and she did express pleasure that Qaddhaffi died, although I don’t believe that she would have approved of the manner in which he died at the hands of his own people. I think she’d be tough against our enemies and favor a strong military. She’d also be be tough on Republicans in the House and Senate in order to get things done. You seem to think that if Democrats knew the real Hillary, they’d be horrified. I think that Democrats know her pretty well, in fact, and most (including Sanders supporters) agree that she’d be a good President – and heads and shoulders above any of the GOP candidates.
 
adowcday said:
We have an excellent idea what Hillary would do on many issues because she has told us in detail, and we have her record as a Senator and a Secretary of State to provide additional details. Trump, on the other hand, has completely reversed himself on many of the most important issues and has no record of public service.

I agree that Hillary is hawkish and she did express pleasure that Qaddhaffi died, although I don’t believe that she would have approved of the manner in which he died at the hands of his own people. I think she’d be tough against our enemies and favor a strong military. She’d also be be tough on Republicans in the House and Senate in order to get things done. You seem to think that if Democrats knew the real Hillary, they’d be horrified. I think that Democrats know her pretty well, in fact, and most (including Sanders supporters) agree that she’d be a good President – and heads and shoulders above any of the GOP candidates.
Click to expand...
Hillary has a integrity and trust issue and is under FBI investigation. Shes not even heads and shoulders above a common criminal at the moment. 🤷 Trump doesn’t have that issue.
 
gracepoole said:
Yes, his multiple bankruptcies, failed business ventures, and settled lawsuits certainly speak to his business acumen.
Click to expand...
grace, if I recall, you work at a university? Private enterprise is a different world.

In private enterprise, the majority of businesses fail. If you are an entrepreneur and start multiple businesses, expect half to fail within a couple years. They consider it a learning experience and a badge of honor.
 
Theo520 said:
grace, if I recall, you work at a university? Private enterprise is a different world.

In private enterprise, the majority of businesses fail. If you are an entrepreneur and start multiple businesses, expect half to fail within a couple years. They consider it a learning experience and a badge of honor.
Click to expand...
Um, sure.
 
GaryTaylor said:
Hillary has a integrity and trust issue and is under FBI investigation. Shes not even heads and shoulders above a common criminal at the moment. 🤷 Trump doesn’t have that issue.
Click to expand...
His choice to advocate for a war crime seems to indicate the opposite.
 
adowcday said:
We have an excellent idea what Hillary would do on many issues because she has told us in detail, and we have her record as a Senator and a Secretary of State to provide additional details. Trump, on the other hand, has completely reversed himself on many of the most important issues and has no record of public service.

I agree that Hillary is hawkish and she did express pleasure that Qaddhaffi died, although I don’t believe that she would have approved of the manner in which he died at the hands of his own people. I think she’d be tough against our enemies and favor a strong military. She’d also be be tough on Republicans in the House and Senate in order to get things done. You seem to think that if Democrats knew the real Hillary, they’d be horrified. I think that Democrats know her pretty well, in fact, and most (including Sanders supporters) agree that she’d be a good President – and heads and shoulders above any of the GOP candidates.
Click to expand...
EXPRESSED PLEASURE? The woman smiled when she said it and then laughed, knowing exactly how he died. Honestly, if some Repub had done that, clergy would be fainting away on national TV. University profs would be burning images of him in effigy on campuses. Psychiatrists would be on TV earnestly and somberly diagnosing him as a psychopath.

Do Democrats not worry that episode exemplified the real person? If that was her reaction to a savage, brutal murder-by-torture, what reason can anyone possibly have to think she cares a thing about them?

And how was she tough on the A.Q. affiliates in Libya? By giving them second-line missiles instead of the top of the line? By not giving them enough MREs and ammunition to take Tripoli on the first try?

How was she tough on A.Q. and ISIS affiliates in Syria? By not getting arms and money to them fast enough?

No, I think if most Dems knew the real Hillary, they would support her anyway because she supports abortion. Notwithstanding her total defense of Planned Parenthood, her warmongering, her having been on the board of (to liberals) the odious Walmart . However, a fair number of Dems supported Sanders all the same, and seemingly no small number voted for Trump. There are always a few lemmings who don’t go over the cliff.

My purpose in saying what I said to Meltzerboy was to get him to take a look at what all liberals purport to abhor. Despite his being a Democrat, it has often seemed to me that he is not a total Kool-Aid drinker; a trait that could possibly result in his being thrown out of the party.

For me, leaving the party was its total dedication to abortion and its abandonment of any semblance of actual care for the poor and working people.

But we can’t really know what Hillary will do because we don’t know everything that’s on Big Business’ agenda. If we knew the latter, we would know the former.
 
gracepoole said:
His choice to advocate for a war crime seems to indicate the opposite.
Click to expand...
Seems to? Perhaps he’s simply not done speaking on the issue as of yet. None of that changes that Hillary is a liar has a integrity and trust issue and is in fact under FBI investigation. Further are you saying two wrongs make a right? :confused:
 
Theo520 said:
grace, if I recall, you work at a university? Private enterprise is a different world.

In private enterprise, the majority of businesses fail. If you are an entrepreneur and start multiple businesses, expect half to fail within a couple years. They consider it a learning experience and a badge of honor.
Click to expand...
And if you’re a big enough business, you’ll get sued constantly no matter how hard you try to avoid it. Anybody who has ever known much about any big business knows that.
 
gracepoole said:
Um, sure.
Click to expand...
The real world intrudes.
“More than one-third of businesses today will not survive the next 10 years”. John Chambers Cisco’s CEO of 20 years
Click to expand...
There is a recent Harvard University study done by Shikhar Ghosh that claims that three out of every four venture-backed firms fail.
Click to expand...
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, about 50% of all new businesses survive 5 years or more, and about one-third survive 10-years or more.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting statistic because it shows you that a more mature business has a better chance to survive.
Click to expand...
According to the Small Business Administration – The SBA – close to 66% of small businesses will survive their first 2 years. What that means is that only about one-third of total businesses will fail during the first 2 years. The SBA also tells you that about 50% of businesses fail during the first year in business.
Click to expand...
When they fail, they go bankrupt.
 
GaryTaylor said:
Seems to? Perhaps he’s simply not done speaking on the issue as of yet. None of that changes that Hillary is a liar has a integrity and trust issue and is in fact under FBI investigation. Further are you saying two wrongs make a right? :confused:
Click to expand...
The GOP has put you in the position of voting for someone who has clearly and publicly supported a war crime. I pray to God he’s done speaking on it. Face it: both parties will be wasteland of candidates come November.
 
Theo520 said:
The real world intrudes.

When they fail, they go bankrupt.
Click to expand...
The point isn’t whether successful business people experience failures. It’s that none of this supports the claim that Trump will be strong in foreign policy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top