Donald Trump '12

[blackhorse]

I have to say I am really getting to like this guy. Of the current field of possible I like only 4 candidates; Chris Christie, Ron Paul, Rand Paul, and The Donald. I mean, I thought Chris Christie was direct, watching and listening to the interviews of DT - boy is he spelling it out in plain unapologetic english. What are your thoughts?

[Selene]

Roark:

The Donald can take O'biwan the diminished head to head. He has no fear, money is no object and he competes to win. He would be an excellent choice, but the entrenched Republican "Country club/old line crony capitalists" will do everything in their power to deny him. Additionally, there is some real doubt as to whether he is "sincere" about being President. Some of the polling out there indicates that a number of prime voters just do not believe he really wants the Presidency. I even have some doubts, but he sure is acting like he wants it.

Christie may not be ready yet, but his political staff is preparing, if certain openings present themselves.

Rand Paul is my kind of candidate, but I am pretty sure the entrenched Republicans would sabotage him in a heartbeat.

Ron is just unelectable.

Adam

Post Script: You should post more often. Even though we know that no one reads any old threads, I just watched the Nathan interview that you started the Pothead thread with and enjoyed it a lot.

[Peter]

Chief Blackhorse wrote:

I have to say I am really getting to like this guy. Of the current field of possible I like only 4 candidates; Chris Christie, Ron Paul, Rand Paul, and The Donald.

end quote

Those are good choices. But the Donald makes me wince. I used to listen to his 2 minute radio slots as I drove home at night. He was for a lot of government meddling and regulation. He won't be nominated, but I would truly enjoy him running.

I am watching Judge Napolitano filling in for Glenn Beck. Whoa. He is further to the right than I am. I will watch him as much as Glenn when Glenn leaves Fox.

I just got Adams jest "O'biwan," from Star Wars. I had seen it many times but it just clicked. Rush called J'Obama Pharoah the other day.

Peter

[Reidy]

Trump has some decided handicaps as a candidate.

- He's a crackpot.

- He's a repellent, charmless crackpot.

- He has said nothing about his positions - not surprising in light of the fact that he's in the race to publicize his tv show.

- He's never run for office.

So much for the electorate at large. Closer to the interests of this audience, his only known contact with libertarianism consisted of trying to throw an old woman out of her home by means of eminent domain and losing in court to the Institute for Justice, a libertarian law firm.

His current poll showings tempt me to believe that Olbermann, Maddow, Dowd and the rest of them are right about the Tea Party crowd.

[Selene]

OK.

Lesser of two (2) evils, if the election were held today, would you vote for:

1) O'bama the Democratic Party

2) Trump the Republican Party

3) Nader Independent-Ecology Party

4) the Libertarian Candidate

5) the Party of Socialism and Independence

6) the Constitution Party Candidate

7) the Green Party Candidate

8) the Socialist Party USA Candidate

9) the Socialist Workers Party

10) the Reform Party

11) the Prohibition Party

12) a write in candidate

13) I would not vote

Adam

or as some call it the evil of two (2) lessers

ah None of the Above where are you? ...asked wistfully...

Edited April 12, 2011 by Selene

[Reidy]

#13 has been my only for decades.

And while we're at it, any Paul fans might check this one out. It tempts me to think that Peikoff, Binswanger, Schwartz and the rest of them are right about libertarians.

Trump isn't going to be the nominee anyway. He'll be one of the currently also-runnings, e.g. Pawlenty.

Edited April 12, 2011 by Reidy

[Selene]

#13 has been my only for decades.

And while we're at it, any Paul fans might check this one out. It tempts me to think that Peikoff, Binswanger, Schwartz and the rest of them are right about libertarians.

Trump isn't going to be the nominee anyway. He'll be one of the currently also-runnings, e.g. Pawlenty.

Consistent position from your clear disgust with politicians. I respect it.

[blackhorse]

As cliche as it STILL sounds it still rings true; not voting IS voting...for the worst possible candidate to win.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Trump knows publicity and how to work the media. He knows how to wheel and deal. And he's good on camera.

So I think he has a shot.

I do not think he would be a good President, though.

Ironically, I think he would be the weakest on domestic issues--especially hot button items. (He also supports government health care, and I don't like that in any politician.) In terms of foreign policy, he comes off as better to me. I don't see him as a war-monger. He talks tough, but I don't feel the killer--or politician calloused to killing--in him. That's a two-edged sword, so it might not be all good. But I'm sick of needless wars over oil that everybody gets wound up over when you say they are over oil.

Who knows? A loudmouth President with a tough-guy attitude might shake things up a bit. If somehow he got the job, God knows where those things would fall, but very likely they would get a good shakin'.

Michael

[Selene]

Michael:

I agree. I am not saying he would be a good President, just that head to head, he has the will, money and power to defeat the creature from Chicago.

Essentially, and sad to say, my current feeling is anybody but O'biwan.

And that is a dangerous position to even consider because you can easily blind yourself to any O'biwan opponent's glaring faults.

Adam

[Reidy]

Today's NR Online carried three pieces that Trump admirers (or Trump considerers) should check out. One fleshes out his record on eminent domain. Another is food for anyone who says that his having run businesses and met payrolls helps to qualify him for office. "Conservative" and "free-market," as all of us here know, are not the same. But to the extent that they overlap, his record as a conservative is worth a look.

[Selene]

Folks:

Reidy you were correct. He is playing the populist game. Just a different crap sandwich. He is done, stick a fork in him.

Adam

[Backlighting]

Anyone who has contributed to Chuck Schummer's re-election campaign can't be considered a "conservative", by any stretch. Trump is all over the Board. A real "me-tooer" as AR would say. He hedges his bets across the entire political spectrum.

Edited April 20, 2011 by Las Vegas

[Peter]

Peter Reidy wrote:

Today's NR Online carried three pieces that Trump admirers (or Trump considerers) should check out.

End quote

Thanks for the links. I briefly looked for some links showing his Fascist leanings earlier today and could not find any, though I have heard him sounding like Benito Mussolini on his brief, two minute, talk radio snippets.

It was fun for a while, but let’s get rid of this guy. The useful idiots and State Run Media are burying his anti-Tea Party credentials, almost like Rush Limbaugh during his Operation Chaos in 2008, when he supported Hillary over Barrack, to create havoc.

Let the voters decide. It would be nice to receive some political donations, and some sound bites from Trump, so I would not trash the guy. He “appears” to be distancing himself from The Dark Side (progressives.)

Whoopie on “The View” today gave Obama the best birther defense I have seen. Way back then Hawaii gave out the document Obama has, (letters of live birth?) and not “birth certificates.” I would still like to have this cleared up.

Trump is a good publicity hound, so a quick rejection from many notables and not just Karl Rove would move him out the revolving door a bit quicker.

Ka poa ae,

Peter Taylor

[Selene]

Why would you cite Whoppie in support of any political or legal argument?

[Peter]

Sadam wrote:

Why would you cite Whoppie in support of any political or legal argument?

end quote

Er? Because of her name, "Whoopie!" It's supposed to have an exclamation point after it.

Er? Because when asked for the 100th time about her role as "Guinan" on Star Trek The Next Generation, by a Trekker, she snapped, "Why don't you get a life, you motherf$%^^&?

Er? Because it WAS the best "rational" defense given so far? Before her statement the leftist State Run Media were just looking at Trump's comment and derisively saying, "Duh!"

Peter Taylor

[Selene]

Ah...so you use a foul mouthed moron who is a leftist as support for your argument.

Got it.

Quite wise of you.

So you missed the federal filings by the US Military Officer in regards to his not being the Commander in Chief because of certain documentation and therefore could not order his reassignment to a different post.

Or, you thought that her babble was more credible than a US Military Officer.

You are quite astute.

Saddam [at least spell the name correctly]

possessor of weapons of mass argumentation

[jriggenbach]

Ah...so you use a foul mouthed moron who is a leftist as support for your argument.

Suppose he supported his argument by quoting or referring to a moron who was a rightist? Let's say this rightist moron was equally "foul mouthed," i.e., given to using words that were regarded as crude and uncouth in the court of King William (the Conqueror) in the 11th Century because they were of Anglo-Saxon rather than French origin.

Would that somehow be better?

JR

[Selene]

Ah...so you use a foul mouthed moron who is a leftist as support for your argument.

Suppose he supported his argument by quoting or referring to a moron who was a rightist? Let's say this rightist moron was equally "foul mouthed," i.e., given to using words that were regarded as crude and uncouth in the court of King William (the Conqueror) in the 11th Century because they were of Anglo-Saxon rather than French origin.

Would that somehow be better?

JR

Not at all. Might even be worse.

Edited April 20, 2011 by Selene

[Brant Gaede]

Michael:

I agree. I am not saying he would be a good President, just that head to head, he has the will, money and power to defeat the creature from Chicago.

Adam

I question whether he has any of these three, which I find a relief.

--Brant

crash and burn time coming up

[Selene]

Michael:

I agree. I am not saying he would be a good President, just that head to head, he has the will, money and power to defeat the creature from Chicago.

Adam

I question whether he has any of these three, which I find a relief.

--Brant

crash and burn time coming up

Brant:

I definitely jumped the gun/shark on the Trump "candidacy." It was pure wishful fantasy now that I get a clear look at him. The rose colored glasses never work.

Adam

[caroljane]

Ah...so you use a foul mouthed moron who is a leftist as support for your argument.

Suppose he supported his argument by quoting or referring to a moron who was a rightist? Let's say this rightist moron was equally "foul mouthed," i.e., given to using words that were regarded as crude and uncouth in the court of King William (the Conqueror) in the 11th Century because they were of Anglo-Saxon rather than French origin.

Would that somehow be better?

JR

You're referring to William le Batard here, right?

[Peter]

Adam wrote:

Saddam [at least spell the name correctly]

End quote

It’s a play on names. Saddam is too dissimilar to Adam, while a misspelled Sadam is Adam with an ‘ess’ on the front. Everyone still knows I am talking about and comparing you to Saddam while giving “The Butcher of Baghdad’s” name George Bush the First’s pronunciation which rhymes with Adam. Now say the names the same while imitating Dana Carvey playing George Bush the senior: Adam – Sadam, while if I were parodying your name and wrote Saddam your name would be pronounced Addam. Get it? One’s funny and one’s not, to everyone but you, and a couple of “empaths.”

Empaths Angela and Carol just chirped, “Isn’t that special” in unison, using their superior emotions.

I can’t resist.

Why don’t you at least spell your name correctly, Allen Cappellazzi?

Adam, I was as surprised as you (though apparently not socialist, communist, left-libertarians) that I was using Whoopie as a source. Yet, she was the first person I had heard since 2008, who spoke the local (Hawaiian time) truth. Trust me. I’ve been there. They do things differently in the Aloha State. Whether her factoid is the whole truth or not, is still very debatable.

Peter Taylor

[Selene]

So where is the funny part?