2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

JPNelsforearm

Billy86 wrote: »

That has what exactly to do with Trump's business failures, given he is running for president on the platform of being a businessman?

He's had more success then failure, its irrelevant, he'll bump it off the news cycle asap anyway.

Brian?

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

He's had more success then failure, its irrelevant, he'll bump it off the news cycle asap anyway.

I am not disputing he's had more success than failure in business, because I don't have the evidence to do so.

He is a liar though, he refuses to acknowledge he's had failures. Why can't you concede that? Or by not replying to my last post are you conceding it?

Billy86

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

He's had more success then failure, its irrelevant, he'll bump it off the news cycle asap anyway.

He has gone bankrupt on four separate occasions, to the tune of about $4.7bn worth of debt. Most puts his net worth at $2.7bn - $4.5bn but even those are questionable (see below). He has accumulated debt to the tune of more than his own net worth. Not only that, but the bankruptcies have typically come from him reaching too far out in the expectation of higher returns and better future circumstances than is likely - yet this is the guy who some feel would be best suited to take over perhaps the world's biggest and most influential national economy.

Which he plans on starting by building a very expensive wall despite the obvious reasons this would be incredibly difficult to pay back (see: reaching too far), especially if all that cheap labour gets drop kicked out of the country at the same time (see: future circumstances) and at a time when the global economy has been quite uncertain for a number of years (see: expectation of higher returns & future circumstances).

Meanwhile, he's claiming benefits of $300 for his property taxes (only eligible to those earning under $500,000 in NY). Because Donald Trump, if nothing else, is aaaallllllll about Donald Trump. And Trump is not as wealthy or successful as he wants people to think - if he were, he would not have failed in suing a guy for writing a book detailing how Trump's true worth is under $250mn, and that he exaggerates his own worth about 20 times over.

JPNelsforearm

Brian? wrote: »

I am not disputing he's had more success than failure in business, because I don't have the evidence to do so.

He is a liar though, he refuses to acknowledge he's had failures. Why can't you concede that? Or by not replying to my last post are you conceding it?

He does refuse to acknowledge his failures in this instance, his comeback was pretty weak. I do concede that.

Akrasia

Billy86 wrote: »

He has gone bankrupt on four separate occasions, to the tune of about $4.7bn worth of debt. Most puts his net worth at $2.7bn - $4.5bn but even those are questionable (see below). He has accumulated debt to the tune of more than his own net worth. Not only that, but the bankruptcies have typically come from him reaching too far out in the expectation of higher returns and better future circumstances than is likely - yet this is the guy who some feel would be best suited to take over perhaps the world's biggest and most influential national economy.

Which he plans on starting by building a very expensive wall despite the obvious reasons this would be incredibly difficult to pay back (see: reaching too far), especially if all that cheap labour gets drop kicked out of the country at the same time (see: future circumstances) and at a time when the global economy has been quite uncertain for a number of years (see: expectation of higher returns & future circumstances).

Meanwhile, he's claiming benefits of $300 for his property taxes (only eligible to those earning under $500,000 in NY). Because Donald Trump, if nothing else, is aaaallllllll about Donald Trump. And Trump is not as wealthy or successful as he wants people to think - if he were, he would not have failed in suing a guy for writing a book detailing how Trump's true worth is under $250mn, and that he exaggerates his own worth about 20 times over.

Trump values the Trump brand at almost 4 billion dollars. If that's not hubris than nothing is.

Billy86

Akrasia wrote: »

Trump values the Trump brand at almost 4 billion dollars. If that's not hubris than nothing is.

I'd say more narcissism than anything, and not narcissism in the "that @sshole loves looking at himself in the mirror" so much as "that guy is actually going to implode into a ball of violence if he can't get everyone to look at him for every minute of every day".

It's the same as Kanye West, who reportedly was very angry and unhinged that his new album got so much attention despite near universal acclaim... because the album was getting the attention and not him. Then sent around 75 angry, shouting type tweets out about a single review that wasn't negative, just not... positive enough. Ending each tweet with how he doesn't care what the critics think. Each of the 75-odd tweets.

Narcissism is a pretty serious mental illness at it's worst, and both West and Trump suffer from it way, way, way more than most with it. For all the mocking and such, the fact remains that these guys are genuinely seriously mentally ill. Which is also why neither should be anywhere near a position like President of the United States.

ECO_Mental

There was a doc on channel 4 a few weeks back about the Donald and they were talking to an editor of Forbes magazine. Anyway they were talking about the rich list they compile every year and he said that Trump is the "only" billionaire to actually come into the office every year and spend up two days of his own time justifying his wealth to Forbes. Now that is vanity and it shows how insecure he is about his wealth.

eire4

Akrasia wrote: »

I think he'll do well in Ohio and illinois. Sanders needs to be hire Jimmy McGill to sweet talk the elderly voters in Florida

I hope your right although the polls have him down by even bigger margins then in Michigan. Time will tell I guess. Sanders did well for me in last nights Democratic debate in Miami so hopefully that gives him a nice bump.

eire4

colossus-x wrote: »

Black Swan wrote: »

Someone earlier had suggested that Trump would gain Sanders voters if the Dems did not select Sanders, which I felt was highly improbable given that the Sanders political platform was against the concentration of wealth by a tiny few multi-millionaires and billionaires like wealthy Trump. Consequently, if Sanders is not nominated, then I would suspect that many of those Sanders voters will stay home and not vote for Hillary Clinton or Trump.[/QUOTE]

This scenario is highly unlikely. There is a fervour around this particular presidential campaign where I expect high turn-outs. The idea that some voters would not vote after this highly-charged campaign doesn't ring true.

All the Sanders supporters will flip over to Clinton in a heartbeat, and go on to vote for her, when Trump is the dire alternative.

Your probably right if she wins the Democratic nomination out right. But if she needs the super delegates to get the nomination that is just the sort of rigged system that Sanders is fighting against and I can see many Sanders voters refusing to vote for Clinton and voting for someone like Jill Stein of the Green Party instead. They certainly won't vote for Trump no doubt about that.

jobbridge4life

eire4 wrote: »

colossus-x wrote: »

Your probably right if she wins the Democratic nomination out right. But if she needs the super delegates to get the nomination that is just the sort of rigged system that Sanders is fighting against and I can see many Sanders voters refusing to vote for Clinton and voting for someone like Jill Stein of the Green Party instead. They certainly won't vote for Trump no doubt about that.

Well they may as well do so if that's the case.

eire4

jobbridge4life wrote: »

eire4 wrote: »

Well they may as well do so if that's the case.

The problem with that for Democrats is they need Sanders supporters to win. Take the Democratic primaries. Clinton is consistently and even did so in Michigan winning the majority of registered Democratic voters. However Sanders is consistently winning most of the Independents who are voting in the Democratic primaries. The Democrats need a good chunk of the Independent voters in November to win. If they alienate Sanders voters by rigging the nomination in favour of Clinton via the super delegates there will be outrage with Sanders supporters and it could sink not just the presidential election for Democrats but also their hopes of winning the senate and making inroads into the Republican majority in the house.

KingBrian2

Billy86 wrote: »

He has gone bankrupt on four separate occasions, to the tune of about $4.7bn worth of debt. Most puts his net worth at $2.7bn - $4.5bn but even those are questionable (see below). He has accumulated debt to the tune of more than his own net worth. Not only that, but the bankruptcies have typically come from him reaching too far out in the expectation of higher returns and better future circumstances than is likely - yet this is the guy who some feel would be best suited to take over perhaps the world's biggest and most influential national economy.

Which he plans on starting by building a very expensive wall despite the obvious reasons this would be incredibly difficult to pay back (see: reaching too far), especially if all that cheap labour gets drop kicked out of the country at the same time (see: future circumstances) and at a time when the global economy has been quite uncertain for a number of years (see: expectation of higher returns & future circumstances).

Meanwhile, he's claiming benefits of $300 for his property taxes (only eligible to those earning under $500,000 in NY). Because Donald Trump, if nothing else, is aaaallllllll about Donald Trump. And Trump is not as wealthy or successful as he wants people to think - if he were, he would not have failed in suing a guy for writing a book detailing how Trump's true worth is under $250mn, and that he exaggerates his own worth about 20 times over.

Donald Trump has experienced bankruptcy and he knows the process first hand, many Americans are desperate, poor and underemployed they look at this guy and see his is in their corner. The other candidates have not made any convincing arguments that would benefit the lives of the majority of the nation.

People in the primaries are voting (rightly so) in their economic interests. They don't fully support Trump's wacky ideas. They do regard him as a President that will stop the federal gvt from spendthrift ventures.

Yes you have identified areas of Trump's character which are deeply flawed. This does not matter to a large proportion of his followers. He ticks all the boxes and the unhappy Republicans are having a field day supporting a candidate of the people.

Black Swan

Trump advocates violence against citizens that oppose his political views:

"So if you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of 'em, would you? Seriously. Okay? Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise. I promise," said Trump.

"I'd like to punch him in the face," Trump said about a man that was being escorted out of his rally that had shown his opposition to Trump.

When a Black Lives Matter protester was punched and kicked by attendees at a Trump rally last fall, Trump remarked the next day that "maybe he should have been roughed up."

"That will never happen with me," Trump said after Sanders, a Democratic presidential candidate, let Black Lives Matter activists take over one of his events. "I don't know if I'll do the fighting myself, or if other people will," Trump said.

Trump encourages the crowd to vent its fury at the protestors. “See, in the good old days this didn’t use to happen, because they used to treat them very rough,” Trump said.

Akrasia

eire4 wrote: »

I hope your right although the polls have him down by even bigger margins then in Michigan. Time will tell I guess. Sanders did well for me in last nights Democratic debate in Miami so hopefully that gives him a nice bump.

Ohio is an open primary, so independent voters will be eligible to vote which is an advantage to Sanders.

Illinois is more tricky but I have a feeling that the extra attention Sanders is receiving now following the Michigan win, and his clear victory in Wednesday night's debate against Hillary, combined with the trend throughout the mid-western states of the polls under estimating sanders's support, I think he will push it close. Maybe a win is hoping too much, but I would be shocked if Hillary wins by the 30 points she was recently polling at.

LuckyLloyd

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Trumps entire campaign is a fiction. Nearly every position he has ever held, he has also held the opposite opinion. Even if you are a mexican-hating, torture loving, protectionist promoter how can you vote for him? Why would you?

Because your standard of living is reducing gradually year on year; the party you trusted to represent your views has long before told you to disregard "facts" about why that may be the case; your government was stolen by a Kenyan Muslim; and Trump is flat out saying for the first time that the Browns and Blacks are probably responsible for all of this and he'll be able to fix it as an outsider to the system. And you believe him because he's funding his own campaign and he humiliated Bush and Fox News and anyone else who has gone after him thus far.

This is the politics of opportunism and some of the posts above trying to dismantle his record or platform on a university educated level of discourse spectacularly miss the point. You need to understand white angry America 2016 before you can understand why it's voting for TRUMP.

Fr Tod Umptious

I think this from last nights GOP debate sums up the whole thing

From Boston.com

“I know that a lot of people find appeal in the things Donald says because he says what people wish they could say,” Rubio said

And he went on to say this which is why Trump is such a problem for a lot of folks.

The problem is presidents can’t just say anything they want. It has consequences—here and around the world.”

Billy86

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Donald Trump has experienced bankruptcy and he knows the process first hand, many Americans are desperate, poor and underemployed they look at this guy and see his is in their corner. The other candidates have not made any convincing arguments that would benefit the lives of the majority of the nation.

People in the primaries are voting (rightly so) in their economic interests. They don't fully support Trump's wacky ideas. They do regard him as a President that will stop the federal gvt from spendthrift ventures.

Yes you have identified areas of Trump's character which are deeply flawed. This does not matter to a large proportion of his followers. He ticks all the boxes and the unhappy Republicans are having a field day supporting a candidate of the people.

But the other candidates also - to the best of my knowledge - do not have a history of costing people their jobs through mismanagement and overly aggressive, spendthrift ventures. Trump does.

Trump does not tick all the boxes by a long shot, he just says he does and people are willing to get behind that despite all the evidence to the contrary because they want a sitcom in the White House. But then again Trump says a lot of things, he is a pathological liar with 7% 'true/mostly true' on politifact.com, compared to 15% 'half true' and a whopping 78% 'mostly false/false/pants on fire lies'.

But of course, a lot of people are completely willing to overlook this because... Love and marriage, love and marriage, goes together like a horse and carriage, aaaaask the local gentry, and they will tell you it's... elementary. Love and marriage, love and marriage.

Paleface

If the current state of governent in the US is broken because the Republicans won't work with Obama, then wouldn't the situation be worse with Trump as POTUS as neither side would be willing to work with him?

JPNelsforearm

Billy86 wrote: »

But the other candidates also - to the best of my knowledge - do not have a history of costing people their jobs through mismanagement and overly aggressive, spendthrift ventures. Trump does.

Trump does not tick all the boxes by a long shot, he just says he does and people are willing to get behind that despite all the evidence to the contrary because they want a sitcom in the White House. But then again Trump says a lot of things, he is a pathological liar with 7% 'true/mostly true' on politifact.com, compared to 15% 'half true' and a whopping 78% 'mostly false/false/pants on fire lies'.

But of course, a lot of people are completely willing to overlook this because... Love and marriage, love and marriage, goes together like a horse and carriage, aaaaask the local gentry, and they will tell you it's... elementary. Love and marriage, love and marriage.

Leaving aside all the actual lives Clinton has cost through her warmongering, lets see how many jobs NAFTA alone has cost.

According to the Economic Policy Institute's study, 61% of the net job losses due to trade with Mexico under NAFTA, or 415,000 jobs, were relatively high paying manufacturing jobs

http://www.epi.org/publication/heading_south_u-s-mexico_trade_and_job_displacement_after_nafta1/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jW4XPRA2jIk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySYYHzj3evY

Inquitus

Carson endorses Trump

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35787356

Billy86

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Leaving aside all the actual lives Clinton has cost through her warmongering, lets see how many jobs NAFTA alone has cost.

According to the Economic Policy Institute's study, 61% of the net job losses due to trade with Mexico under NAFTA, or 415,000 jobs, were relatively high paying manufacturing jobs

Trump is not running again Clinton, he is running against Rubio, Cruz & co (and discussing something like NAFTA, an international agreement which has had it's pros and cons, is a poor comparison to simply running a business into the ground). Again, this has "yeah but she said..." approach has nothing to do with Trump's mismanagement of businesses by overreaching, resulting in the loss of many jobs on multiple occasions. The same overreaching he is talking about as a platform for running for president.

You never did get back to me about the monumental size of these failures by the way - if he runs the USA like he runs his businesses, he is going to spend more than they can afford, then have to go looking for loans from abroad, and will struggle to get anything resembling favourable terms. That would be terrible for their economy, and you can bet your ass when it comes to cuts, tax raises etc as a result of these that he will make sure to look after himself (e.g. the mega rich) at the expense of everyone else. Kind of 'business as usual' for US politics, but with the parts people seem to hate most being amplified a lot.

If people like where US politics have been going the last 20-30 years (lobby groups, corporate interests, wealth disparity, squeezing out of the middle class, stagnant-to-regressive disposable income levels, etc) and would like to see that kicked into overdrive then Trump is 100% who they should vote for. But the thing is... he's trying to paint himself as the opposite of that. And the rubes are lapping it right up, because electorates (as a whole) are stupid. If people ever want to know why politicians seem to think of them as idiots, all they need to do is look at the Trump paradox in the US.

Colonialboy

Billy86 wrote: »

Trump is not running again Clinton, he is running against Rubio, Cruz & co (and discussing something like NAFTA, an international agreement which has had it's pros and cons, is a poor comparison to simply running a business into the ground). Again, this has "yeah but she said..." approach has nothing to do with Trump's mismanagement of businesses by overreaching, resulting in the loss of many jobs on multiple occasions. The same overreaching he is talking about as a platform for running for president.

You never did get back to me about the monumental size of these failures by the way - if he runs the USA like he runs his businesses, he is going to spend more than they can afford, then have to go looking for loans from abroad, and will struggle to get anything resembling favourable terms. That would be terrible for their economy, and you can bet your ass when it comes to cuts, tax raises etc as a result of these that he will make sure to look after himself (e.g. the mega rich) at the expense of everyone else. Kind of 'business as usual' for US politics, but with the parts people seem to hate most being amplified a lot.

If people like where US politics have been going the last 20-30 years (lobby groups, corporate interests, wealth disparity, squeezing out of the middle class, stagnant-to-regressive disposable income levels, etc) and would like to see that kicked into overdrive then Trump is 100% who they should vote for. But the thing is... he's trying to paint himself as the opposite of that. And the rubes are lapping it right up, because electorates (as a whole) are stupid. If people ever want to know why politicians seem to think of them as idiots, all they need to do is look at the Trump paradox in the US.

The US national debt is over 19Trillion.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

You couldnt be further from the truth

Billy86

Colonialboy wrote: »

The US national debt is over 19Trillion.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

You couldnt be further from the truth

Everyone knows the US has large national debt, and has had for quite some time - it tends to go up when Republicans are in office and/or during times of war, and down when Democrats are in power, Obama being an exception for obvious reasons. All Trumps business career points to is him taking this to higher, even less sustainable levels and the party he is going to be representing don't exactly have a track record to fill one with confidence either.

If he has gone bankrupt from trying to expand his reach too soon and mismanagement on four separate occasions, to the tune of billions of dollars - more than his own worth - costing huge amounts of jobs in the process of making sure he (financially and as a brand) gets looked after first and foremost, what makes you think this time is going to be any different?

eire4

Akrasia wrote: »

Ohio is an open primary, so independent voters will be eligible to vote which is an advantage to Sanders.

Illinois is more tricky but I have a feeling that the extra attention Sanders is receiving now following the Michigan win, and his clear victory in Wednesday night's debate against Hillary, combined with the trend throughout the mid-western states of the polls under estimating sanders's support, I think he will push it close. Maybe a win is hoping too much, but I would be shocked if Hillary wins by the 30 points she was recently polling at.

If I had to pick states he has a shot in next Tuesday I would probably go Ohio, Missouri and Illinois as a very long shot. North Carolina and Florida I cannot see him even been close.
Fact is though based on current polls if he wins any states next week that is an even bigger upset then Michigan was and that was a big one. As I said elsewhere to stay alive in the contest with the states more favourable to Sanders mostly still to come he needs to win one state next week. If somehow he could win 2 then he is very much in contention still.

eire4

Paleface wrote: »

If the current state of governent in the US is broken because the Republicans won't work with Obama, then wouldn't the situation be worse with Trump as POTUS as neither side would be willing to work with him?

To be fair the current system of government in the US is corrupt, broken and dysfunctional but the blame for that does not rest on one party. The 2 parties have set up for themselves a nice cartel on power and they both work hard to make sure no other voice is ever allowed to emerge as a valid challenge to them nationally. The dreadful citizens united and mccutcheon decisions which have allowed wealthy individuals and big corporations to buy politicans has lead to a congress that is bought and paid for and a government that simply has no interest in representing the vast majority of Americans and doing whats in the best interests of the vast majority of Americans. It can be argued that American is currently an Oligarchy rather then a Democracy.

LuckyLloyd

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-03-04/ted-cruz-rejects-contested-convention-warning-of-revolt

Cruz arguing fiercely against a brokered convention. Obviously because he thinks he can still win. But we're trending towards one of two possibilities:

- TRUMP wins
- The GOP rip the nomination away from the two candidates with the vast majority of delegates between them

Either way the Republican Party as we know it is soon to explode into tiny pieces. Can't wait.

Black Swan

Scuffles and fights broke out between Trump supporters, protesters, and police that were so bad that Trump's Chicago rally was cancelled today (Friday, 11 March 2016). "Violent clashes continued outside the venue, with helicopter footage showing chaotic scenes as police attempted to control the large crowds."

Several Trump violence advocacy quotes had been posted earlier in this thread, making me wonder if there is a relationship between Trump's violent statements and the violent Chicago outcome? Of course, this is only anecdotal and not research based:

"I'd like to punch him in the face," says Trump at 23 February 2016 Nevada rally referring to a protester (which is nationally telecast), and later in Chicago a wide spread face-punching brawl occurs between both sides. Is this a glimpse of what it will be like if Trump is elected president 8 November 2016; a Trump America where other forms of violence are advocated including "Torture works...and much worse?"

K-9

Trump wonders "what has happened to free speech" tonight, after saying he wanted to punch a protestor in the face, a couple of weeks ago.

511

K-9 wrote: »

Trump wonders "what has happened to free speech" tonight, after saying he wanted to punch a protestor in the face, a couple of weeks ago.

'Cause that protester was also disrupting free speech. People protesting Trump and disrupting his rallies are initiating the censorship.

12Phase

The way US politics is headed is, frankly, more than a bit worrying.
The rise of Trump just says a lot about the way political debate in a certain part of American society has gone over the last couple of decades.

I'm glad to see that the international media is seeing that there is another side to America though. The entire country is not exclusively populated by gun-toting, far right types and christian fundamentalists. They just have been the ones shouting most loudly for the last while...

Trump's legacy looks like it might be to drive a wedge down the middle of the Republican Party. I wouldn't be surprised if the GOP splits into two rumps at this stage. There's only so much more of this that can happen before the party ends up moving in two directions.

None of his plans seem to be costed either. For example, his tax cuts were being projected to cost $9.5 trillion by the Tax Policy Centre (non partisan think tank). Meanwhile he'd be starting a trade war with China...

His rhetoric also flies in the face of what are supposedly Republican core values. Many of his policies smack of enormous state overreach and in some cases are basically fascism.

Also how's he going to pay for all this extra security and border controls with no tax revenue and general economic destruction?

This is also the guy who was calling on Americans to boycott Apple, one of the most successful businesses in the US at present ...

If this guy gets in and actually does what he's saying he's going to do, there's a fair risk of the US rapidly becoming an economic basket case, if he doesn't start a civil war first!