The Donald for President

mrussel1

InHiding80 said:

mrussel1 said:

xhausted1 said:

I am surprised there is so much hate for Trump. Who do most want to see as the Republican nominee? Are there Cruz supporters here? Some here sound as if they are.

I doubt it. There are real concerns about Trump's narcissism, demagoguery and general lack of tangible solutions.
Of the GOP, I could live with Rand. I have Libertarian sympathies and generally agree with his foreign policy. I am not an Ayn Rand admirer though. My libertarian streak has limits.

I read in that Rolling Stone cover issue of Rush that even Ayn fan, Neil Peart, isn't too fond of Rand. I prefer his dad, to be honest, especially since he voted against Monsanto in the past.

Ayn Rand was essentially for the individual, regardless of the impact to those around you. She was an atheist, which is fine, but she eschewed the things that I support about Christianity (peace, fellowship, charity, etc.) Others may disagree, but that's my problem with Ayn. I agree that I like Ron P. more. But the lack of social consciousness and the recognition that capitalism breeds inequality turns me off. It's where my libertarian streak ends.

Gern Blansten

mrussel1 said:

I don't blame Kat for stepping in because we are all getting a little agitated. And I'm in the same boat regarding not knowing what's real and what's not considering whenever I pose a policy question, it's generally answered with an internet meme. Therefore, I'm not even going to address it any more. I'd love to have a real policy discussion with a Trump supporter but it's not happening anytime soon. So for now, I'll just ignore those comments and we can keep preaching to each other. For whatever that's worth.

I commend you for having enough faith in humanity that you could have an actual policy discussion with a Trump supporter.

rgambs

mrussel1 said:

InHiding80 said:

mrussel1 said:

xhausted1 said:

I am surprised there is so much hate for Trump. Who do most want to see as the Republican nominee? Are there Cruz supporters here? Some here sound as if they are.

I doubt it. There are real concerns about Trump's narcissism, demagoguery and general lack of tangible solutions.
Of the GOP, I could live with Rand. I have Libertarian sympathies and generally agree with his foreign policy. I am not an Ayn Rand admirer though. My libertarian streak has limits.

I read in that Rolling Stone cover issue of Rush that even Ayn fan, Neil Peart, isn't too fond of Rand. I prefer his dad, to be honest, especially since he voted against Monsanto in the past.

Ayn Rand was essentially for the individual, regardless of the impact to those around you. She was an atheist, which is fine, but she eschewed the things that I support about Christianity (peace, fellowship, charity, etc.) Others may disagree, but that's my problem with Ayn. I agree that I like Ron P. more. But the lack of social consciousness and the recognition that capitalism breeds inequality turns me off. It's where my libertarian streak ends.

Yeah, her entire philosophy of objectivism is built on total and complete rationality from all of society in union. It's ridiculous really, it all makes perfect sense under conditions which could never exist.

mrussel1

rgambs said:

mrussel1 said:

InHiding80 said:

mrussel1 said:

xhausted1 said:

I am surprised there is so much hate for Trump. Who do most want to see as the Republican nominee? Are there Cruz supporters here? Some here sound as if they are.

I doubt it. There are real concerns about Trump's narcissism, demagoguery and general lack of tangible solutions.
Of the GOP, I could live with Rand. I have Libertarian sympathies and generally agree with his foreign policy. I am not an Ayn Rand admirer though. My libertarian streak has limits.

I read in that Rolling Stone cover issue of Rush that even Ayn fan, Neil Peart, isn't too fond of Rand. I prefer his dad, to be honest, especially since he voted against Monsanto in the past.

Ayn Rand was essentially for the individual, regardless of the impact to those around you. She was an atheist, which is fine, but she eschewed the things that I support about Christianity (peace, fellowship, charity, etc.) Others may disagree, but that's my problem with Ayn. I agree that I like Ron P. more. But the lack of social consciousness and the recognition that capitalism breeds inequality turns me off. It's where my libertarian streak ends.

Yeah, her entire philosophy of objectivism is built on total and complete rationality from all of society in union. It's ridiculous really, it all makes perfect sense under conditions which could never exist.

Well said and couldn't agree more.

jeffbr

rgambs said:

mrussel1 said:

InHiding80 said:

mrussel1 said:

xhausted1 said:

I am surprised there is so much hate for Trump. Who do most want to see as the Republican nominee? Are there Cruz supporters here? Some here sound as if they are.

I doubt it. There are real concerns about Trump's narcissism, demagoguery and general lack of tangible solutions.
Of the GOP, I could live with Rand. I have Libertarian sympathies and generally agree with his foreign policy. I am not an Ayn Rand admirer though. My libertarian streak has limits.

I read in that Rolling Stone cover issue of Rush that even Ayn fan, Neil Peart, isn't too fond of Rand. I prefer his dad, to be honest, especially since he voted against Monsanto in the past.

Ayn Rand was essentially for the individual, regardless of the impact to those around you. She was an atheist, which is fine, but she eschewed the things that I support about Christianity (peace, fellowship, charity, etc.) Others may disagree, but that's my problem with Ayn. I agree that I like Ron P. more. But the lack of social consciousness and the recognition that capitalism breeds inequality turns me off. It's where my libertarian streak ends.

Yeah, her entire philosophy of objectivism is built on total and complete rationality from all of society in union. It's ridiculous really, it all makes perfect sense under conditions which could never exist.

Yup, this is why I'm not an objectivist, although I am a small 'L' libertarian. Utopia isn't an option, and too many of Ayn Rand's premises require something approaching those perfect conditions you mention can't exist. I voted for Ron Paul a couple of times. I was less infatuated with Rand Paul because of his pandering to the tea party a while ago, but thought he was the best option the Republicans had. He was one of the only rational thinkers on the crazy train, and was the only one I trusted with foreign policy. Sorry to see his voice gone from the debates and policy discussions. That leaves me voting for Gary Johnson once he announces.

mrussel1

jeffbr said:

rgambs said:

mrussel1 said:

InHiding80 said:

mrussel1 said:

xhausted1 said:

I am surprised there is so much hate for Trump. Who do most want to see as the Republican nominee? Are there Cruz supporters here? Some here sound as if they are.

I doubt it. There are real concerns about Trump's narcissism, demagoguery and general lack of tangible solutions.
Of the GOP, I could live with Rand. I have Libertarian sympathies and generally agree with his foreign policy. I am not an Ayn Rand admirer though. My libertarian streak has limits.

I read in that Rolling Stone cover issue of Rush that even Ayn fan, Neil Peart, isn't too fond of Rand. I prefer his dad, to be honest, especially since he voted against Monsanto in the past.

Ayn Rand was essentially for the individual, regardless of the impact to those around you. She was an atheist, which is fine, but she eschewed the things that I support about Christianity (peace, fellowship, charity, etc.) Others may disagree, but that's my problem with Ayn. I agree that I like Ron P. more. But the lack of social consciousness and the recognition that capitalism breeds inequality turns me off. It's where my libertarian streak ends.

Yeah, her entire philosophy of objectivism is built on total and complete rationality from all of society in union. It's ridiculous really, it all makes perfect sense under conditions which could never exist.

Yup, this is why I'm not an objectivist, although I am a small 'L' libertarian. Utopia isn't an option, and too many of Ayn Rand's premises require something approaching those perfect conditions you mention can't exist. I voted for Ron Paul a couple of times. I was less infatuated with Rand Paul because of his pandering to the tea party a while ago, but thought he was the best option the Republicans had. He was one of the only rational thinkers on the crazy train, and was the only one I trusted with foreign policy. Sorry to see his voice gone from the debates and policy discussions. That leaves me voting for Gary Johnson once he announces.

Gary Johnson is far too rational to run for president. Kidding.. I do like him and although I don't agree with some positions on the 2nd amendment and lowering the drinking age, I could get behind a lot of his ideas. Now I haven't heard him speak much at all, but I'm in line with many of his policy positions and just disagree around the edges.

usamamasan1

Trump's advisers say they're happy to be perplexing. The Washington foreign policy establishment has no idea what to make of Trump's string of declarations, such as his promises to "take" the Islamic State's oil, force Mexico to pay for a wall on the southern U.S. border, or bar all Muslims from coming to the U.S.

"This whole notion that he is devoid of advisers is wrong. We have a lot of smart guys around us and a lot of smart people helping us," Sam Clovis, Trump's chief policy adviser, told me in an interview. "There's a lot more to this than what our opponents and the pundits think. We play them like a five-string banjo because at the end of the day, they are going to look stupid. We don't mind doing that."

WOOT

Trump's advisers also claim that Trump's wide-ranging foreign policy proposals, which include renegotiating the U.S.- Japan alliance treaty and outsourcing the Syria problem to the Russians, all fit into an easily understandable set of three "organizing principles" that form Trump's governing doctrine on foreign policy.

"One, we want to take a very clear worldview in our foreign policy, dealing with the national interest, and let that be our organizing principles. Two is that we want to make sure that we engage in free markets, but we want those markets to be fairer as well. And three, if we do not have strong economic recovery, we can't do the other two," said Clovis. "If that's not a Trump doctrine, I don't know what is."

WOOT

Trump wants to deal with states and governments, not non-state actors or international organizations. That, according to his advisers, is why he sometimes seems to praise strongmen who lead their states as executives with absolute power. Trump sees Putin and other dictators as businessmen doing what any CEO would do, fighting for their organization.

WOOT

Trump's foreign policy doctrine may be undecipherable from his public statements, and once articulated by his advisers it may be somewhat unsatisfying to experts. But it does exist. And it shows that as president, he would alter America's global role in major way.

WOOT

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/02/the_trump_foreign_policy_doctr.html

HughFreakingDillon

great, he admires a corrupt dictator. that'll go over well.

usamamasan1

The Art of the Deal

usamamasan1

http://www.trumpnationallosangeles.com/

Great course, tuff, but great.

WOOT

HughFreakingDillon

You're Fired.

mrussel1

Who give a shit about his golf course. A great poet once said, "born on third, thinks he hit a triple".

usamamasan1

ha. He has turned a million dollar loan into billions. If you doubt his ability as a businessman and discount what he has done simply by having a father who could and did give him a loan to get started, you have got blinders on. Oh, wait...duh

usamamasan1

the don'ts have don't a clue

eddiec

usamamasan1 said:

ha. He has turned a million dollar loan into billions. If you doubt his ability as a businessman and discount what he has done simply by having a father who could and did give him a loan to get started, you have got blinders on. Oh, wait...duh

His inheritance was somewhere between 40 and 70 million based on his father's net worth at the time. Based on inflation that would be worth 176 million today if he got the low end figure of 40 million.

HughFreakingDillon

usamamasan1 said:

ha. He has turned a million dollar loan into billions. If you doubt his ability as a businessman and discount what he has done simply by having a father who could and did give him a loan to get started, you have got blinders on. Oh, wait...duh

ha. being a good businessman does not necessarily translate into being a good president. especially how he seems to conduct business.

usamamasan1

eddiec said:

usamamasan1 said:

ha. He has turned a million dollar loan into billions. If you doubt his ability as a businessman and discount what he has done simply by having a father who could and did give him a loan to get started, you have got blinders on. Oh, wait...duh

His inheritance was somewhere between 40 and 70 million based on his father's net worth at the time. Based on inflation that would be worth 176 million today if he got the low end figure of 40 million.

I guess you didn't go to Wharton. Do a what inflation rate are you using? Hilarious.

Besides the erroneous math, he was well on his way when his father died in 1999. Chump Change.

BTW, Trump wants to get rid of the death tax. SMART AND FAIR

WOOT

eddiec

usamamasan1 said:

eddiec said:

usamamasan1 said:

ha. He has turned a million dollar loan into billions. If you doubt his ability as a businessman and discount what he has done simply by having a father who could and did give him a loan to get started, you have got blinders on. Oh, wait...duh

His inheritance was somewhere between 40 and 70 million based on his father's net worth at the time. Based on inflation that would be worth 176 million today if he got the low end figure of 40 million.

I guess you didn't go to Wharton. Do a what inflation rate are you using? Hilarious.

Besides the erroneous math, he was well on his way when his father died in 1999. Chump Change.

BTW, Trump wants to get rid of the death tax. SMART AND FAIR

WOOT

I'm judging it by when he took over his father's company in the mid 70's.

From 1999 it would be close to a 100 million.

With his inheritance he has done no better than if he had invested the money in an S&P 500.

Saying he only inherited a million is way, way off.

Jason P

PA: Wrigley and Fenway tix are up for sale the lottery

mrussel1

usamamasan1 said:

eddiec said:

usamamasan1 said:

ha. He has turned a million dollar loan into billions. If you doubt his ability as a businessman and discount what he has done simply by having a father who could and did give him a loan to get started, you have got blinders on. Oh, wait...duh

His inheritance was somewhere between 40 and 70 million based on his father's net worth at the time. Based on inflation that would be worth 176 million today if he got the low end figure of 40 million.

I guess you didn't go to Wharton. Do a what inflation rate are you using? Hilarious.

Besides the erroneous math, he was well on his way when his father died in 1999. Chump Change.

BTW, Trump wants to get rid of the death tax. SMART AND FAIR

WOOT

You're wasting your time in this argument. Either way, his financial success can't be disputed. But that has nothing to do with being an effective president. We can look at our first CEO president as evidence of that fact. My point is that it's a waste of time to try having an intelligent discussion with someone who uses memes as a communication or argument technique.