American Politics

[xi0]

There was some headline I saw on CNN yesterday about how Trump said he received a "small" loan of $1 million from his father....totally relatable

 

[Charlie]

There was some headline I saw on CNN yesterday about how Trump said he received a "small" loan of $1 million from his father....totally relatable

Ofc for millionaires that "small" 1 - mil is a total piss in the water.

 

[kkck]

Sad but true. He's the most moderate of all of them. Beyond just his brother though, the family political dynasty issue is also a problem (a third Bush!). His nomination would help Democrats neutralize Republican attempts to attack Clinton on the basis of dynasty as well. (That said, Romneycare sure didn't stop anybody from attacking Obamacare.) Anyway if he can rise above these issues somehow he would probably have a better shot at the general election vote than anyone else running on the Republican side.

I've been thinking about Trump's claims of being good at making money, and recently I came across where people had analyzed what he could have made based on how much he began with. Compared with those in his income bracket, he didn't do that great. (Note: I only care about this because he is campaigning on what a great businessman he supposedly is. I mean that's silly enough when you consider that business and government are two completely different things, but if his argument is just that he knows how to manage money then it's all the worse that he's full of hot air in that area as well.)

Spoiler: 2 quotes

These two articles reference another one with analysis that is behind a paywall:

http://mic.com/articles/124840/heres-the-real-reason-donald-trump-is-so-rich


http://www.vox.com/2015/9/2/9248963/donald-trump-index-fund

Well, the political dynasty is annoying... but just that. Being completely fair to good old jeb he is the best republican candidate even considering the dynasty thing. Unless someone thinks trump or carson are legitimately better alternatives (personally I think carson's position as a scientist who is a creationist could do a fair bit of damage to US school policy).

That is an interesting point. It seems a tad weird that his opponents do not point this out more. I guess the issue is the uncertainty regarding his wealth as he is claiming a solid 10000 mil in which case he would have outperformed the market. And there is very little room to really question here, every actual number around the matter is speculation. If he can actually afford to do what he claims, to fund his own campaign, and not go bankrupt doing it then he would probably even have more money than he is claiming.

 

[kannazuki]

Yup. I mean we just elected our pretty-faced first dynasty prime minister here in Canada. It isn't that big of a deal to people to see that happen now and then, but I suspect that the public in general is going to be more forgiving of a first woman candidate who happens to be married to a previous president (though I guess you could spin that as worse, I'm not sure how believable it will be when she simply counters that she gained valuable knowledge from it) than they will be a son and brother of two previous presidents. That and the fact they are both probably the most establishment-affiliated candidates of their respective parties is probably going to cause a lot of people to feel disenfranchised-- like their vote doesn't mean anything. (Of course if less people vote, that tends to work in reactionary parties' favour though, so maybe it would be a wash.)

Did you read the full second quote? Granted how much money he actually had in 1988 may well be up for question, but if the Associated Press or Standard & Poor's assessments are moderately accurate, then Trump still underperformed against the market even if he is telling the truth about his 10 billion.

 

[M3J]

Trump is gaining steam? He has been losing steam.

Also Mr Obama is finally putting COIN SpecOP troops in terrorist strongholds going against his word. Further proof that democrats are unable to correctly ascertain military needs of protecting America until its years late.

Likely because republicans (Bush) getting America into unnecessary wars made democrats think twice before doing anything?

Didn't Trump's poll results go down to number #2 in a couple of places (though still #1 among Republicans overall)? I thought Ben Carson (another non-establishment candidate who speaks in outrageous ways) was gaining on him. The one who seems most out of touch with the base is Jeb Bush; the most establishment of establishment candidates. It appears he won't go anywhere as long as he has enough money for attack ads.

I think Cruz is one of the worst, actually. Far more out of touch than ole Jebby.

 

[SharkBait]

Oh yes Rubio is still in this game. http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/rubio-rising-in-the-polls/

 

[kannazuki]

I think Cruz is one of the worst, actually. Far more out of touch than ole Jebby.

I was talking about him being out of touch with the Republican base of Tea Party types and Evangelicals. As I also said above, sadly he is probably not only the most moderate candidate but also the one who would have the best chance with the general public of all the Republican candidates.

 

[M3J]

I was talking about him being out of touch with the Republican base of Tea Party types and Evangelicals. As I also said above, sadly he is probably not only the most moderate candidate but also the one who would have the best chance with the general public of all the Republican candidates.

Most likely. But how many people believe Bush Jr. protected us during and after 9/11? I'd like some of their weed.

 

[SharkBait]

Most likely. But how many people believe Bush Jr. protected us during and after 9/11? I'd like some of their weed.

But we were protected by competent homeland security and the capturing of numerous terrorists, meanwhile the ringleader was constantly on the run.

 

[M3J]

Yet so many lives were lost, and apparently Bush was warned about the attacks. And if that's the case, then Obama did a better job protecting us as Osama and Saddam were killed during his tenure.

Oh, and unnecessary wars due to "weapons of mass destruction," even though Bush had support.

 

[SharkBait]

Yet so many lives were lost, and apparently Bush was warned about the attacks. And if that's the case, then Obama did a better job protecting us as Osama and Saddam were killed during his tenure.

Oh, and unnecessary wars due to "weapons of mass destruction," even though Bush had support.

They werent unnecessary they aided the people in those countries being able to finally experience the democratic way of life. Are you against the pursuit of everyone living a free life?

 

[xi0]

They werent unnecessary they aided the people in those countries being able to finally experience the democratic way of life. Are you against the pursuit of everyone living a free life?

I think the sooner Republicans (and some Democrats) realize that imposing a "democratic way of life" on the inhabitants of other countries isn't always the most democratic thing to do, the better.

More often than not, the "choice" doesn't exist. These governments are merely put in place as our puppet.

If we give them the choice and they choose the exact same thing that they had before, then what? Is choosing to do so any less democratic than anything else?

 

[kkck]

I am pretty sure non of the countries involved in this whole thing really feel any freer than they were before. Through its intervention the US is directly responsible for the very existence of alqaeda and ISIS and through its continuing intervention it will remain as propaganda fodder for those groups (along with the ones the US will inevitably create in the future).

 

[SharkBait]

My state is going to be more challenging for the democratic candidates.

 

[Newkerzy]

Y'know what guys? In the end, Trump will still come out of it unscathed no matter what. Why? Because he'll just spin the whole thing as a gambit Lelouch-style to get everyone to gang-up on him and claim it was to see America truly united as one once more. Yeah, no questions about it.

 

[SharkBait]

Where did Ted Cruz love come from. In any case that margin of error is way too high, so Trump could very well still be on top.

 

[xi0]

I don't know, but I think I'd prefer Trump...

 

[kkck]

Well, the choices so far are Ted Cruz, a Cuban who hates Cubans (stressing the hate part, not the Cuban part), Donald trump, a man to whom no insult do neither harm or justice, Marco Rubio, prototype of all things republican, Ben "I DID TRY TO HAMMER MY MOTHER" Carson and Jeb "At least I am not as bad as those other guys" bush and rand "Libertarianism will totally be a thing" paul. I am surprised with how adversarial they are to one another.

 

[M3J]

ugh, nearly all of the republican candidates are cancer.

 

[Newkerzy]

Y'know, I recently read an article comparing Trump to when Henry Ford ran for president. Ford built his platform on anti-semitism, but lost the bid. But his rhetoric eventually inspired Hitler's Mein Kampf and the rest is history. What do you guys think? Trump may or may not win, but either way we might be screwed. If he loses, there could be a Hitler waiting to be born out there to carry on his rhetoric and in the next ten or so years we'll have WWIII.