Trump's Last Line of Defense

  • Thread starter Thread starter EasterJoy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
BoomBoomMancini said:
Were Ford and Nixon sitting atop a vast business empire? I don’t think this an apples to apples comparison here.
Click to expand...
Does it really matter except to satisfy idle curiosity and perhaps opportunities for some to attempt to interfere in his family’s business affairs? Private information is private information, and I’m sure most people guard it regardless of the size of their net worth. I personally see that all the time with people. I will grant, however, that the really wealthy are even more guarded than most. At least around here they are. Lots of reasons for that.
 
Jeanne_S said:
You miss the whole point of my comments.I said all things being equal,Trump being your nominee,would you have supported him ,as the only option to what you considered a vote against keeping out of office a repugnant and totally unacceptable candidate from the opposing party,who presumedly would win otherwise.I am guessing that yes you would.
Click to expand...
Again you missed my point that all things would not have been equal if another party with 16 other candidates as options, would not have picked someone like Donald Trump to be its nominee. That said, there were Republican voters who did not vote for him. They voted 3rd party or stayed home. Some right here on CAF voted 3rd party because of Donald Trump. Just as some voters in another party in your hypothetical case of Donald Trump having been their nominee might have voted for say Jill Stein had they found Donald Trump so repugnant and totally unacceptable, unfit and inexperienced for a political office such as President of the United States and someone not having the temperament or demeanor that they wanted in their President.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Does it really matter except to satisfy idle curiosity and perhaps opportunities for some to attempt to interfere in his family’s business affairs? Private information is private information, and I’m sure most people guard it regardless of the size of their net worth. I personally see that all the time with people. I will grant, however, that the really wealthy are even more guarded than most. At least around here they are. Lots of reasons for that.
Click to expand...
Yes, of course. First and foremost a huge part of Trump’s pitch was, “Look what a successful businessman I am.” I don’t think it’s unreasonable for people to want to dig a little bit given that Trump put it front and center in his pitch.

Second, an individual candidate and their history can make a disclosure more or less relevant. Business records are much more necessary for a candidate who has a vast network of businesses and enterprises, especially when so many of them are rumored to be shady.

Think of it this way. You have a presidential candidate who has had four brain surgeries to remove tumors that were, until removal, impeding his ability to think clearly and making him act erratically. People demand to see the MRI readouts and reports from his neurosurgeon to assess his fitness for office and to let the wider medical community weigh in on the likelihood that the tumors will reoccur. He can’t plausibly say, “Hey, look, most candidates don’t release MRI results. Why should I have to?” The obvious response is “because most candidates don’t have a record that makes us want their MRI results in the first place.”
 
Ridgerunner said:
In some ways he’s a wild card. But I don’t think he’s an ideologue at all. He’s pure function. He undoubtedly seems to some not to function well, given the occasional white house shakeup. But that’s a pattern one often sees when a new CEO comes into a company that has not been run well. It seems as if the bloodletting will never end, but then it suddenly does.
Click to expand...
When a CEO comes into a company, the bloodletting is usually not the people he just hired. Oh, and Donald Trump isn’t running a company. He is leading a free nation with a tripartite government, and he only runs one part of it. There is no need to explain that there is a vast difference between the two.

Pure function? His West Wing has been nothing but dysfunctional since he got into office. Considering his impulsive habits, we’d probably be better off if he did nothing instead of most of what he has been doing, which has been largely restricted to a) things he can accomplish with only ten minutes with an ink pen as his personal investment and b) interfering with everyone else in government trying to do their jobs without offering any positive leadership, negotiation, or even competent salesmanship for his policies.

He keeps saying things that his communications office have never heard of or contradicting things they just said. He contradicts things he previously said himself, and I don’t mean 20 years ago, but within the year prior to the election. He keeps throwing publicity at two-bit cable “personalities” instead of anything that ought to be the priority of a sitting President.

He is pure fiction, not pure function. If his chief of staff doesn’t convince him to straighten up and fly right, his tenure as President is going to be a monumental flop. Defeating Hillary Clinton, nominating Neil Gorsuch and rescinding a bunch of rules unpopular with his donors do not a legacy make.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Does it really matter except to satisfy idle curiosity and perhaps opportunities for some to attempt to interfere in his family’s business affairs? Private information is private information, and I’m sure most people guard it regardless of the size of their net worth. I personally see that all the time with people. I will grant, however, that the really wealthy are even more guarded than most. At least around here they are. Lots of reasons for that.
Click to expand...
He has done millions of dollars worth of business with foreign interests before his election and he and his family will presumably do millions more in the future.

“Most people” are not President of the United States, a person bound to avoid even the appearance of self-dealing because he occupies one of the most powerful public service jobs in any place or in any time. The desire for financial secrecy would have raised red flags even if Hillary Clinton had done it, and it certainly raises flags on someone who has pursued his own self-interest as doggedly for as many years as Donald J. Trump has.
 
BoomBoomMancini said:
Yes, of course. First and foremost a huge part of Trump’s pitch was, “Look what a successful businessman I am.” I don’t think it’s unreasonable for people to want to dig a little bit given that Trump put it front and center in his pitch.
Click to expand...
Yep. Egg-zactly.
 
This “last line” of defense sounds like the Syrian red line…😃
 
ProVobis said:
It’s more of a name brand. He actually gets paid when the name Trump is used.

Why couldn’t I do that with my name?
Click to expand...
You need some casinos and a university. Stiff some people and get some lawsuits, manufacture products overseas, and then get yourself on a Reality TV show. Come up with a catchy phrase to use on the show. Don’t worry about what you want to say on an Access Hollywood tape. Just say it. And who knows. You could be President.
 
Sy_Noe said:
You need some casinos and a university. Stiff some people and get some lawsuits, manufacture products overseas, and then get yourself on a Reality TV show. Come up with a catchy phrase to use on the show. Don’t worry about what you want to say on an Access Hollywood tape. Just say it. And who knows. You could be President.
Click to expand...
No. That could never happen. :eek:
 
EasterJoy said:
When a CEO comes into a company, the bloodletting is usually not the people he just hired. Oh, and Donald Trump isn’t running a company. He is leading a free nation with a tripartite government, and he only runs one part of it. There is no need to explain that there is a vast difference between the two.

Pure function? His West Wing has been nothing but dysfunctional since he got into office. Considering his impulsive habits, we’d probably be better off if he did nothing instead of most of what he has been doing, which has been largely restricted to a) things he can accomplish with only ten minutes with an ink pen as his personal investment and b) interfering with everyone else in government trying to do their jobs without offering any positive leadership, negotiation, or even competent salesmanship for his policies.

He keeps saying things that his communications office have never heard of or contradicting things they just said. He contradicts things he previously said himself, and I don’t mean 20 years ago, but within the year prior to the election. He keeps throwing publicity at two-bit cable “personalities” instead of anything that ought to be the priority of a sitting President.

He is pure fiction, not pure function. If his chief of staff doesn’t convince him to straighten up and fly right, his tenure as President is going to be a monumental flop. Defeating Hillary Clinton, nominating Neil Gorsuch and rescinding a bunch of rules unpopular with his donors do not a legacy make.
Click to expand...
Oh, I have certainly seen “new” people fired by a CEO, and sometimes quickly. And the bigger the company, the more likely it is to happen. I’m not saying it’s the kindest thing in the world, but apparently many think it’s effective to cull the team immediately upon seeing something one doesn’t like.

His acts so far might not be that much of a “legacy”, but it’s not a bad start. And, of course, with 100% opposition from the Dems and a chaotic Repub party in congress, and the entire mainstream media putting out negative commentary on him daily, there certainly is a lot of obscuring going on.

The DOW at 22,000 makes it fairly plain that a lot of the “smart money” does not believe of Trump what the left believes of him. And how much of Raqa does ISIS still control? Half isn’t it? And how many American planes have been shot down by Russians? Putin can bluster all he wants, but he’s honoring the “you keep to your side” agreement. Trump withdrew from the ridiculous Paris agreement; one of the biggest frauds ever perpetrated on the gullible. it’s more than just Gorsuch and hundreds of regulations.
 
Sy_Noe said:
You need some casinos and a university. Stiff some people and get some lawsuits, manufacture products overseas, and then get yourself on a Reality TV show. Come up with a catchy phrase to use on the show. Don’t worry about what you want to say on an Access Hollywood tape. Just say it. And who knows. You could be President.
Click to expand...
And some of the people on here took umbrage when others called it “Trump hate”. The left absolutely hates the man. If words could kill, he would be cold in his grave, the left’s tongues are so vicious.

But I guess one can’t blame the left too much. He isn’t pushing abortion like Hillary would have. Anymore, that’s all there is to the left; that and power for its own sake.
 
Sy_Noe said:
You need some casinos and a university. Stiff some people and get some lawsuits, manufacture products overseas, and then get yourself on a Reality TV show. Come up with a catchy phrase to use on the show. Don’t worry about what you want to say on an Access Hollywood tape. Just say it. And who knows. You could be President.
Click to expand...
Think I’ll call Deutsche Bank tomorrow. 🙂
 
The left absolutely hates the man.
What business fo have no business proclaiming what they imagine is in the hearts of others?
 
Ridgerunner said:
And some of the people on here took umbrage when others called it “Trump hate”. The left absolutely hates the man. If words could kill, he would be cold in his grave, the left’s tongues are so vicious.

But I guess one can’t blame the left too much. He isn’t pushing abortion like Hillary would have. Anymore, that’s all there is to the left; that and power for its own sake.
Click to expand...
What did Sy say that is false?
 
Ridgerunner said:
The left absolutely hates the man.
Click to expand...
Were they the left when the man was cheating on his first wife and running up bankruptcies?

“I am not a crook” - Nixon

“I did not have sex with that woman.” - Bill Clinton

“Fake news” - Donald J Trump
 
MaryT777 said:
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.
My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.

Catechism of the Catholic Church
Click to expand...
👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top