[shameus_o'reaaly]

Don't know the first thing about Trump except what I've seen on The Apprentice and I know nothing about his worthiness for office, but he has a point: someone with independent wealth would, in theory, be ABLE to decide policy without interference from the campaign contributors who hold his markers. Isn't that what Teddy Roosevelt was about? Less receptivity to bribes, quid pro quo donations or similar would go hand in hand with wealthy politicians - if a candidate is good for nearly $10 billion, what would be an effective bribe have to be? another $10 billion?
I don't know if all Trump's money could finance a campaign without any outside support; media is fucking expensive and he would have people ranged against him. Nonetheless, it would be interesting to watch. Would he make pragmatic policy or would he try to govern according to stereotypical notions of what 'should' be done?

[bacan]

His policies aside, that was one of the worst political speeches I've ever seen, and it's even worse considering that's how he started the campaign.

Why the hell did he brag so much about the details of his wealth?

His big applause line was the exact total of his assets that his accountants added up for him?

Dude probably didn't even practice the speech.

[scorpion]

How pathetic is our political system when Donald Fucking Trump is the preferable option over the two major Presidential frontrunners?

He's a crass, arrogant blowhard with questionable ethics, but compared to the unbelievably corrupt Hillary and Jeb he's a fucking knight in shining armor.

[rpg]

Trump knows he has no chance. He is in it for the bragging rights. He will help shape direction and then bow out when the time is right.
I feel a republican will not be president until we have another huge international crisis near an election. For example, a show down with North Korea or Russia would shift the tables in favor of a republican president. Our issues are mainly domestic and that highly favors a Clinton.

[speakeasy]

I've been hearing this idiot nonstop since I was a kid. And I'm damn near 40 now. I have the feeling he's going to live past 100. That means 30 more years of hearing about this clown. I'm trying to imagine myself at age 70 still hearing about Trump in the news.

[Mike5055]

The clown car should probably upgrade to a bus... or at the very least, a large van.

[samsamsam]

The Republicans were hoping to have their nominee escape getting his ass torn apart during the primaries. Looks like that won't happen. Plenty of ammo for the Dems to use during the election.

[Uzisuicide]

That's what's great about him he didn't give a political speech. No politician in their right mind would have launched a campaign like that. Trump isn't a politician. He's exactly the type of guy America needs right now. A larger than life Teddy Roosevelt kind of figure that will bring some sense of nationalism to the country. A kind of no nonsense leader that says get on may ass and we'll restore ourselves to greatness again. Americans are cynical and dejected and desperately want to believe that the good times aren't over for good. America was lied to with the hope and change claptrap from a dunce president who's never done a thing in his life except give a speech. Straight talk from a guys who's walked it would be refreshing.
As for myself, I'm supporting Mike Huckabee. But I sure do like Trump.

[tomtud]

Maybe Romney would have been a great business minded president, but he didn't get through. Szwarzenegger won in California with no experience, who says trump couldn't,,...Ronald Reagan was a former actor turned politician.
Would trump shake up Washington if he won.... Definitely. Which lobby groups could afford to buy him out???? It would take a lot more money than to buy out some other politician. Yes he inherited a fortune, had some troublesome times in his businesses but he is standing today excuses or not.
Trump is a straight shooter. You think he would be afraid to say Islamic extremism like Obama is?
Although many won't vote for him based on his personality etc., but would his ideas help Americans prosper ? I doubt Hillary Clinton would do a better job fixing the economy.

Under Trump as a president you think countries like Pakistan, Egypt etc would still be receiving aid after seeing protests in the street if kill America etc,... Continuing of dumping money into a lost cause in Afghanistan? Building new roads and infrastructure in far away lands that hate all that Americans stand for ..democracy, freedom of speech etc.. While your own country is falling apart.

I would like to see how the debates turn out. Politicians usually aren't straight shooters. Trump will eat them alive.

[teh_skeeze]

I see him as a Ron Paul 2008 type. He's going to be in the mix spitting hot truth. However, he doesn't stand a chance. He's an obnoxious loudmouth like Christie. He just lacks the lapband and schizophrenic fascism. I just hope that he doesn't try to run as an independent after the primaries. That would pretty much guarantee Pantsuit will get into the White House.

[samsamsam]

(06-16-2015 05:48 PM)Uzisuicide Wrote:  

That's what's great about him he didn't give a political speech.

He gave a PT Barnum speech.

[Belgrano]

As a foreigner I always wonder about something.
If we assume that Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same coin and the people who hold the real power largely remain the same, no matter which of the two wins: Why always vote for them again and legitimize their grip on American politics, or not vote at all and throw the last bit of power the government allows you to wield away?

It´s not like there aren´t any alternatives. Stop making excuses and put your money where your mouth is. Vote for a Third party, such as (2012 election):

The Libertarian party:

Quote:

2012 presidential nominee Gary Johnson states that the party is more socially liberal than the Democrats, but more fiscally conservative than the Republicans. The party has generally promoted a classical liberal platform, in contrast to the social liberal and progressive platform of the Democrats and the more conservative platform of the Republicans. Current policy positions include lowering taxes, allowing people to opt out of Social Security, abolishing welfare, ending the prohibition of illegal drugs, legalizing same-sex marriage, and supporting gun ownership rights.

The Green party:

Quote:

The party promotes environmentalism and social justice with policy principles in nonviolence, grassroots democracy and participatory democracy, gay rights, gender equality, and anti-racism.

The Justice party:

Quote:

The party was designed with the intention of shifting government back to a focus on the Constitution by removing corporate influence in politics. The Justice Party supports campaign finance reform; and does not accept any corporate funding. The Justice Party supports a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood through Move To Amend. The party is in favor of a financial transaction tax, pro-progressive tax structure and wants to end the Bush tax cuts. They support green jobs and infrastructure programs. The Justice Party wants to bolster social security by raising the cap on payroll taxes. It wants to require that banks work with homeowners to stop foreclosures. It is pro-immigration reform, pro-breaking up large banks, pro-reinstating Glass-Steagall, pro-government funded higher education,and against subsidies to oil and gas companies.
The party is for aggressive climate protection.
The Justice Party supports a universal single payer health system, an equal rights amendment for women, marriage equality, ending wars of aggression, closing many military bases, reducing the budget, immigration reform, repealing the Patriot Act, protecting and rewarding whistleblowers, and ending the War on Drugs. The party also seeks to prosecute individuals whose illegal conduct led to the 2008 financial crisis.

The Constitution party:

Quote:

The party advocates a platform which reflects the Party's interpretation of the principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, the Bible, and the Bill of Rights.
The Constitution Party supports reducing the role of the United States federal government through cutting bureaucratic regulation, reducing spending, and replacing the income tax with a tariff-based revenue system supplemented by excise taxes. The party also takes the position that the "imposition … of Federal income, payroll, and estate taxes … is an unconstitutional Federal assumption of direct taxing authority."
The Constitution Party calls for the eventual end of social security.
The Constitution Party favors a non-interventionist foreign policy. It favors withdrawal of the United States from most current treaties, such as North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), and the World Trade Organization. The party takes mercantilist positions in supporting protectionist policies on international trade. The party also believes in exercising a tariff system to counteract the United States' increasingly negative balance of trade.
The party opposes illegal immigration and seeks stricter controls on legal immigration. The party opposes welfare subsidies and other taxpayer-supported benefits to illegal immigrants. It rejects the jus soli.
The party is against abortion, euthanasia, same-sex marriage and pornography. It supports the right to bear arms.

Now there should be something for everyone. All of those had ballot access in almost all or most states.
Most people don´t consider voting for those parties as right now they are far too small to play a role in the elections and they´d rather not throw their vote away like that. But if everyone keeps thinking that, nothing will ever change, and Democrat/Republican supremacy, and that of the military-industrial and corporate complex behind them, is engraved in stone. It´s a vicious circle. People love to complain about the current political system and the establishment politicians, only to ensure every four years that everything will stay exactly the same as it is.
The only way to change the minds of the masses on this would be if the Third parties reach a critical amount of votes to show that they are a viable alternative. But for this to happen, somebody has to show some balls and make the first step. Voting for a Third party won´t change anything in 2016, or 2020, perhaps not even 2024. But if more and more people decide not to vote for the lesser evil, but for a party and program they actually believe in, there will come a day when the two party system will crumble.
If you vote Republican and a Democrat wins, it could be argued that your vote was also worthless and vice versa. Why not say fuck it, give them the finger and sleep with a clean conscience by voting for a Third you agree more with. At least there´s a slight, however small, chance for a change and you made it possible. You tried to stop the decline when they asked you for your opinion, and if the majority of your fellow citizens decided not to, so be it. Let them reap what they sow. You did what you could this time. Now go on with living your life to the fullest and developing an exit strategy.

Personally, I would vote Libertarian, mainly because of Gary Johnson. Not the president America deserves (that´s probably Hillary) but the one it needs.

[teh_skeeze]

delete.

[Lord_Perseus]

Trump is a fucking clown. I cannot help but wonder if this "candidacy" isn't more than just a vehicle for his trademark attention whoring that this isn't some Manchurian Candidate type situation & he's being put up to this by the Dems to sabotage the GOP at a moment when things have been going well for them. Trump did use to be chummy with the Clintons back in the day.

Some wise words on Trump

[teh_skeeze]

(06-16-2015 06:01 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

(06-16-2015 05:48 PM)Uzisuicide Wrote:  

That's what's great about him he didn't give a political speech.

He gave a PT Barnum speech.

I disagree. He's genuine in wanting to do what he wants to do. The problem is the POTUS doesn't wield the same dictatorial powers that the Chairman of the Board does. It's getting there, but it's not quite yet.

Quote:

It´s not like there aren´t any alternatives. Stop making excuses and put your money where your mouth is. Vote for a Third party, such as (2012 election)

The game is rigged my friend. Not all candidates are on all ballots in all states. Some states won't even allow write ins. As I recall, a candidate has to get 3% of the overall vote for a party to get on all ballots in the next election. I voted for Gary Johnson last time around for that purpose. He didn't even come close, getting less than 1%.

[Dismal Operator]

(06-16-2015 06:15 PM)Celtic_Austrian Wrote:  

As a foreigner I always wonder about something.
If we assume that Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same coin and the people who hold the real power largely remain the same, no matter which of the two wins: Why always vote for them again and legitimize their grip on American politics, or not vote at all and throw the last bit of power the government allows you to wield away?

....

That's the fatal flaw of a pure democracy where everyone votes - the electorate is so vast and diverse that the only way to gain traction is to appeal to the lowest common denominator. This turns elections into popularity contests in which the most charismatic candidate offering the most promises is likely to win. If the wrong path is chosen, the simple fact that most people are resistant to change, as well as the difficulty in getting everyone on board with the idea that the wrong option had been taken means that change is slow and parties tend to have power for a decade or more.

The level of discourse necessarily has to fall to meme level (politics has been doing memes way before they were cool), any message that can't fit on a bumper sticker won't play well. Short term thinking prevails over longer term consequences, because, hey I probably won't be around when it hits the fan.

All of this was incorporated into the way the government was set up, with varying levels of terms to balance out the need for change and the virtue of stability when required. The 2 year House term meant that legislators were directly beholden to 'the people' and swift change could take place if things went awry. The 6 year Senate term allowed for more stability and typically represented a more 'elite' point of view, and balanced out the House. The 4 year presidential term allowed for an executive style 'setting of the tone,' although the powers that could be wielded were not absolute. The lifetime term of the Supreme Court is the ultimate in stability, upholding the legal foundation of the country whenever it was called into question.

The framers felt they had to set things up this way even when voting was restricted because they understood the inherent dangers of total democracy. Now that everyone can vote, that efficacy of that system has vanished, and is now beholden to the whims of popular opinion. Even the Supreme Court, ostensibly the most conservative and rock like part of government is succumbing to the masses.

In short, small parties will never do anything because power is meted out by the mob of popular opinion, which a small party has no bearing on by definition.

[Gmac]

Haven't had the chance to do the research but I heard on the radio this morning that Trump is only worth a minuscule $9M USD? No wonder he's running for prez.

[samsamsam]

(06-16-2015 06:26 PM)teh_skeeze Wrote:  

[quote] (06-16-2015 06:01 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

That's what's great about him he didn't give a political speech.

He gave a PT Barnum speech.

I disagree. He's genuine in wanting to do what he wants to do. The problem is the POTUS doesn't wield the same dictatorial powers that the Chairman of the Board does. It's getting there, but it's not quite yet.

[quote]

His speech was comedy - I am not sure if he really cares about the country or his goal is just to feed his narcissism.

He supposedly has this great idea to solve the ISIS problem, but he is keeping it to himself. Granted if you tell everyone about it the ISIS knows what is coming but he could at least quietly share it with the military. If you truly love this country and want to keep US citizens out of harm's way. But he won't say a word. But if he doesn't care about politics, then just spill the beans.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/28...feat-ISIS#

He tries to make it seem like he isn't petty, that he is somehow above it all and classy. He has engaged in a lot of juvenile disputes.

I mean he sued Bill Mahr over a bet that Mahr would pay $5 million to a charity of Trump’s choice if the businessman provided a birth certificate proving that he’s not “spawn of his mother having sex with orangutan.”

Anyway, Trump has 120 days to complete the actual filing to run.

I bet he drops out before having to file.

[Pontifex Maximus]

He has my vote.

Trump is definitely not the sharpest man, but his poor reputation is a blessing. Trump is a wealthier Mitt Romney plus a more popular Ron Paul. Mitt Romney had business acumen, but no charisma and pop culture allure. Ron Paul's brutal honesty condemns him to eternal disfavor towards him and his son. Trump is portrayed as an abrasive, but his trademark narcissism and snark make him an adorable asshole. It's so ridiculous it might actually work on the American public. Most Americans vote based on name recognition anyway, because they're too lazy to care about politics.

Legion of Doom, Assemble!

[Easy_C]

(06-16-2015 02:21 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

(06-16-2015 02:13 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  

I'd rather have a ruthless businessman in charge who understands the brutal reality of the global economy, and the tough choices that need to be made to cut the deficiet and make America more competitive.

Hasn't that been pretty much every American president since WWII? And look where it's gotten us.

Nope. Most of them have been lawyers.


There are a lot of "ruthless businessmen" pulling strings behind the scenes but the problem with them is that they identify more with each other than they do as Americans. Remains to be seen with Trump. He's bombastic as hell but some of the things they've caught him saying off the cuff should strike a chord with RedPillers.

[TheWastelander]

The easy explanation is that both parties are two sides of the same coin and the game is rigged by corporations, shadowy elites, or whatever. That's not to say they don't hold influence, they do, but it's not total and too often they're used as an excuse to justify political apathy.

The terrible truth no one wants to hear is that both parties and the candidates are a reflection of the electorate and what they're willing to put up with.

Thousands (and millions in some cases) of people somewhere voted most of these turds into political office and they're now trying to float all the way to the top.

[Tex Pro]

[Kickb]

Why does everyone call him a clown?

Clowns don't have a net worth of 8.5 billion.

[Foolsgo1d]

(06-16-2015 02:13 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  

He's right, it would be alot harder to buy favors from a guy as wealthy as him.

Unlike career politicians like Obama or Rubio, he doesn't need to get along with everyone so he can get bullshit lecture fees (chelsey clinton) just for being associated with him. He's not desperate like a talentless 'community organizer' who has no other options than government.

Is this the same guy who couldn't get his way with a golf course in Scotland?

You want this limp dick as your president, a rich and influential man who was beaten by people power in some country few in the US can pin point on a map?

This guy doesn't have the clout the people behind a US President have.

[It_is_my_time]

(06-17-2015 07:05 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(06-16-2015 02:13 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  

He's right, it would be alot harder to buy favors from a guy as wealthy as him.

Unlike career politicians like Obama or Rubio, he doesn't need to get along with everyone so he can get bullshit lecture fees (chelsey clinton) just for being associated with him. He's not desperate like a talentless 'community organizer' who has no other options than government.

Is this the same guy who couldn't get his way with a golf course in Scotland?

You want this limp dick as your president, a rich and influential man who was beaten by people power in some country few in the US can pin point on a map?

This guy doesn't have the clout the people behind a US President have.

The only people I see running, who would be better are...

Rand Paul - Much of the same beliefs, maybe not as logical/real world as Trump, but as close as it gets and far more PC.

Gary Johnson - No chance as a 3rd party candidate. If he even runs again.

Everyone else running is far worse. They will be more of the same failed policies of the last 15 years.