What's the difference between Trump and Nixon

5rtytry56

I'll start with my own opinion:

Trump is more intelligent, bit too loud but still. But he can deal with that.
You won't see Trump coming out with a speech like "I am not a crook!".

Remember too that before his presidency, Nixon was quite a respectable looking figure.

What do you think? Or was Nixon just unlucky with the turn of events? Nixon did'nt cause the Vietnam war either - that was more Johnson's fault.

Overheal

Nixon ended the draft.

Trump dodged it.

Manach

Well the obvious is that Nixon was a career politician whilst Trump is not. However two obvious similarities would be both were demonised by the left and both have used outside talent to bolster their own weaknesses; Kissenger in the former when dealing with foreign affairs and Guliani & Gingrich in the latter when dealing with Washington.

johnp001

5rtytry56 wrote: »

I'll start with my own opinion:

Trump is more intelligent, bit too loud but still. But he can deal with that.
You won't see Trump coming out with a speech like "I am not a crook!".

Remember too that before his presidency, Nixon was quite a respectable looking figure.

What do you think? Or was Nixon just unlucky with the turn of events? Nixon did'nt cause the Vietnam war either - that was more Johnson's fault.

The US was involved in the Vietnam war long before Johnson was president. US involvement started under Eisenhower (when Nixon was vice-president) was escalated by Kennedy and towards the end of Johnson's term the ceasefire and end to the war that had been negotiated was undermined by Nixon for political reasons (probably treasonously) but this only became public long afterwards as Johnson did not say anything publicly at the time.
Nixon betrayal far worse than GOP Iran letter

Cookie_Monster

Trump won't get re-elected in 3000

ARROOOOOO!

RobbingBandit

Trump is the second coming of Ronald Regan, Nixon was a crook.

Bass Reeves

The question you have to ask about Trump is why did he want to become the President of the US.

To make money for himself..... hardly the truth is that he must be fairly wealth and have as much money as he ever needs.

To change US policy to benefit himself......again hardly he could have funded( and he did fund previous presidents) other politicians for to enact policy that may have benefited him or his companies.

Just for the sake of for his ego......maybe this is a possibility but hardly.

What we do know is that nobody can pull his strings he dose not need money as far as we know and he could have got other to do his political bidding.

So you ask what is the difference between Trump and Nixon. To begin with Nixon was a professional politician like Hillary and many other. The thing about Trump was that he was a Democrat supporter of Bill Clinton and I think funded Hillary Senate campaign's.

Maybe like the famous English politician the Blackadder he has a cunning plan more cunning than a fox.

Peregrinus

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Maybe like the famous English politician the Blackadder he has a cunning plan more cunning than a fox.

I think if you're after a Blackadder simile you want Prince George, not Blackadder.

5rtytry56

To stir up the thread once again, the scandal that was "Watergate" occurred and was President Nixon's other claim to fame.
This is dramatized in the movie "All the Presidents Men" starring Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford as 2 brave and intrepid journalists.
But with subsequent scandals like the aforementioned "Irangate", Watergate pales into insignificance no?

CMOTDibbler

Bass Reeves wrote: »

To make money for himself..... hardly the truth is that he must be fairly wealth and have as much money as he ever needs.

We don't know that. He's been bankrupt a number of times and refused to release his tax returns. Among the reasons for that could be that he's not as wealthy as he makes out. He has the trappings of wealth, sure. But that could be entirely on borrowed money. And the source of those borrowings could also be troubling.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

To change US policy to benefit himself......again hardly he could have funded( and he did fund previous presidents) other politicians for to enact policy that may have benefited him or his companies.

And would be lobbyinig against competing interests with perhaps deeper pockets and more influence. Not a given that he'd get what he wants.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Just for the sake of for his ego......maybe this is a possibility but hardly.

Why hardly? You've admitted it's a possibility, so it has to have some merit. Especially when you consider the vanity of his projects like the Apprentice and Miss Universe etc. And then there's the inability to resist reacting to the smallest insult. Does that speak of a man without a ballooning ego?

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Maybe like the famous English politician the Blackadder he has a cunning plan more cunning than a fox.

Maybe.

5rtytry56

almost forgot Nixon took the opportunity to visit China, when the Chinese Premiere Mao Zedong retorted to the Soviet Union, that they were only afraid of a 'paper tiger'.

So far, Mr Trump seems to be more occupied in "burning bridges".

5rtytry56

Nixon did'nt have opposition quite like Branson when entering office:

http://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/world/richard-branson-business-leaders-must-rally-together-to-make-sure-people-do-not-suffer-as-a-result-of-this-presidency/ar-AAkc0Mm?li=BBr5KbJ&ocid=UE09DHP


I'm also a fan of Branson.