TheBigGuy wrote:
LOL does this sound like the type of person we want with the nuclear launch codes??? This must have been priceless... like Hitler in the bunker realizing the war was lost.

https://spectator.org/where-was-hillary/

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

Hillary Clinton did not stiff her suppliers and sub-contractors and weasel out of contractual obligations by filing bankruptcy. I suppose all those families in central and southern New Jersey whose businesses were ruined and went without a Christmas after getting stiffed by Trump doesn't matter to you. And while plenty of other developers and contractors are guilty of doing that, they didn't run for President.

Ok, so you've completely abandoned your second point? Good to know.

Regarding your first, it's self-serving and you know it. Funny how I've never heard anyone describe the bankruptcy process as "weaseling" and implying it's a crime (you use the phrase "guilty") before Trump ever ran. The law is the law. If you don't like it, lobby for a change. So no, someone using valid legal processes doesn't bother me.

If you have a proposal as to how the bankruptcy law should be reformed, feel free to share it. Maybe President Trump would lobby for it.

No, I didn't abandon my second point but you already have your mind made up. Furthermore, it's a fact that even before filing bankruptcy, Trump was known for stiffing or underpaying contractors and vendors at his casinos and other properties. I don't really have a problem with the bankruptcy law either but if Trump had any integrity, he would at least made an effort to make good on honoring his contractual commitments and paying what he owed. Instead he got a lot of services and goods for his casinos at for far less than he said he would pay or for free, basically on the backs of a lot of family-owned businesses that ended up suffering and ended up having to go bankrupt themselves. But did he suffer? No, he continued to enjoy his limousine rides, helicopters and private planes. If you think that's alright I can't change your opinion but at the end of the day, sometimes personal integrity and a clear conscience counts for me. It obviously means nothing to Mr. Trump.

I mean, you say you don't have a problem with the bankruptcy law, but from the rest of the post it is clear that you do. You just couch the attack under the guise of having "integrity."

My understanding is that he followed all the laws. You are saying that he should go above and beyond the laws, to demonstrate "integrity" and "pay what he owed." I am not aware of any other people who have been held to this standard. Maybe the law makes it too easy for a rich person to file for bankruptcy. But that is a problem with the law and not the individual who is simply using the process laid out. I doubt others have paid more than they had to.

hero69 wrote:
yay! scumnbag is gonna give us the biggest tax cut ever and $1 billion in infrastructure spending while trying to reduce imports from china/mexico et al into the country.

can anyone tell this nasty man what is wrong with this picture?

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

Hillary Clinton did not stiff her suppliers and sub-contractors and weasel out of contractual obligations by filing bankruptcy. I suppose all those families in central and southern New Jersey whose businesses were ruined and went without a Christmas after getting stiffed by Trump doesn't matter to you. And while plenty of other developers and contractors are guilty of doing that, they didn't run for President.

Ok, so you've completely abandoned your second point? Good to know.

Regarding your first, it's self-serving and you know it. Funny how I've never heard anyone describe the bankruptcy process as "weaseling" and implying it's a crime (you use the phrase "guilty") before Trump ever ran. The law is the law. If you don't like it, lobby for a change. So no, someone using valid legal processes doesn't bother me.

If you have a proposal as to how the bankruptcy law should be reformed, feel free to share it. Maybe President Trump would lobby for it.

No, I didn't abandon my second point but you already have your mind made up. Furthermore, it's a fact that even before filing bankruptcy, Trump was known for stiffing or underpaying contractors and vendors at his casinos and other properties. I don't really have a problem with the bankruptcy law either but if Trump had any integrity, he would at least made an effort to make good on honoring his contractual commitments and paying what he owed. Instead he got a lot of services and goods for his casinos at for far less than he said he would pay or for free, basically on the backs of a lot of family-owned businesses that ended up suffering and ended up having to go bankrupt themselves. But did he suffer? No, he continued to enjoy his limousine rides, helicopters and private planes. If you think that's alright I can't change your opinion but at the end of the day, sometimes personal integrity and a clear conscience counts for me. It obviously means nothing to Mr. Trump.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

Hillary Clinton did not stiff her suppliers and sub-contractors and weasel out of contractual obligations by filing bankruptcy. I suppose all those families in central and southern New Jersey whose businesses were ruined and went without a Christmas after getting stiffed by Trump doesn't matter to you. And while plenty of other developers and contractors are guilty of doing that, they didn't run for President.

Ok, so you've completely abandoned your second point? Good to know.

Regarding your first, it's self-serving and you know it. Funny how I've never heard anyone describe the bankruptcy process as "weaseling" and implying it's a crime (you use the phrase "guilty") before Trump ever ran. The law is the law. If you don't like it, lobby for a change. So no, someone using valid legal processes doesn't bother me.

If you have a proposal as to how the bankruptcy law should be reformed, feel free to share it. Maybe President Trump would lobby for it.

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

Hillary Clinton did not stiff her suppliers and sub-contractors and weasel out of contractual obligations by filing bankruptcy. I suppose all those families in central and southern New Jersey whose businesses were ruined and went without a Christmas after getting stiffed by Trump doesn't matter to you. And while plenty of other developers and contractors are guilty of doing that, they didn't run for President.

third_street_hats wrote:
I have no problem with Politifact giving a "False" rating. They give that rating with a ton of caveats and make it clear that the math could work out.

From the article, they show that if the assumed value of Trump's share of his father's business was $40m in 1974, and it was delivered liquid he would be at parity with his estimated current wealth ($3-4B).

Quote:

We used $40 million as the starting point for 1974. Honghui Chen, associate professor of finance at the University of Central Florida, told us the account would have grown to $3.94 billion by November 2015 if the money had followed the S&P 500 index and all dividends had been reinvested.

This is a rough calculation that ignores taxes owed on dividends, but it?s on the same scale as what the National Journal reported.

It then goes on to say that if his $200m share of the company was again liquid in 1982, that he would have $6.7-9B.

Quote:

"Because the stock market in 1982 was quite volatile, the current value of $200 million investment in 1982 would depend on the time at which it was initially invested," Chen said.

If it went in right at the end of 1981, it would be worth $6.7 billion. Invested in June 1982, the value today would be $8.3 billion. Invested at the end of 1982, it would be worth $9 billion. Again, in the neighborhood of what the Journal said.

Their summary:

Quote:

The only way to hit the $8 billion mark is to start with $200 million in 1982, and it's wrong to say that was Trump's father's money. While the father's business put Trump on the path to have $200 million in 1982, Trump himself had been running the company for eight years.

We rate this claim False.

So I'm not sure what you're arguing here. If Trump had the cash value of his business at two different times in history (granted he did not have the option for the first case but could have easily liquidated in 1982), he could have invested in a mutual fund and ended up with the same or more money.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

We used $40 million as the starting point for 1974. Honghui Chen, associate professor of finance at the University of Central Florida, told us the account would have grown to $3.94 billion by November 2015 if the money had followed the S&P 500 index and all dividends had been reinvested.

This is a rough calculation that ignores taxes owed on dividends, but it?s on the same scale as what the National Journal reported.

"Because the stock market in 1982 was quite volatile, the current value of $200 million investment in 1982 would depend on the time at which it was initially invested," Chen said.

If it went in right at the end of 1981, it would be worth $6.7 billion. Invested in June 1982, the value today would be $8.3 billion. Invested at the end of 1982, it would be worth $9 billion. Again, in the neighborhood of what the Journal said.

The only way to hit the $8 billion mark is to start with $200 million in 1982, and it's wrong to say that was Trump's father's money. While the father's business put Trump on the path to have $200 million in 1982, Trump himself had been running the company for eight years.

We rate this claim False.

I finally found a Trump supporter ? this morning when I went to buy coffee. (I noticed a Trump bumper sticker on his car.)

?Hi,? I said. ?Noticed your Trump bumper sticker.?

?Yup,? he said, a bit defensively.

?I hope you don?t mind my asking, but I?m curious. Why are you supporting him??

?I know he?s a little bit much,? said the Trump supporter. ?But he?s a successful businessman. And we need a successful businessman as president.?

?How do you know he?s a successful businessman?? I asked.

?Because he?s made a fortune.?

?Has he really?? I asked.

?Of course. Forbes magazine says he?s worth four and a half billion.?

?That doesn?t mean he?s been a success,? I said.

?In my book it does,? said the Trump supporter.

?You know, in 1976, when Trump was just starting his career, he said he was worth about $200 million,? I said. ?Most of that was from his father.?

?That just proves my point,? said the Trump supporter. ?He turned that $200 million into four and a half billion. Brilliant man.?

?But if he had just put that $200 million into an index fund and reinvested the dividends, he?d be worth twelve billion today,? I said.

The Trump supporter went silent.

"And he got about $850 million in tax subsidies, just in New York alone,? I said.

More silence.

?He?s not a businessman,? I said. ?He?s a con man. "Hope you enjoy your coffee.?

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

Would you hire a CEO who bankrupted his companies many times and stiffed his suppliers? I guess if he told you what you wanted to hear, you would.

If that same CEO had a long track record of success? Sure.

Again, context is everything. Trump has created over 500 businesses and only a minute fraction of them failed. In the aggregate, the successes of his businesses employed tens of thousands of people, and increased his wealth from an initial loan of a couple million dollars to many billions of dollars.

Compare that to Hillary's legacy of failure. Failed the Bar Exam. Largely failed as First Lady (she wanted healthcare reform but got nowhere). Was a completely ineffective senator. And was a total disaster as Secretary of State.

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Monroe wrote:
I'm sure some of the same people here who oppose Trump because of his lack of experience will vote for Murphy in the gov race-a guy with no political experience!

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

Would you hire a CEO who bankrupted his companies many times and stiffed his suppliers? I guess if he told you what you wanted to hear, you would.

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

Would you hire a CEO who bankrupted his companies many times and stiffed his suppliers? I guess if he told you what you wanted to hear, you would.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

Trump will demonstrate to you how instincts and judgment are far more important than experience in a President.

More importantly, all of Hillary's experience is bad. She's like a CEO who ran her former company into the ground. Think of the election as picking the CEO of a new company. While it's true to say that Hillary was the only candidate with CEO experience, she sucked, so it's not like her experience is much of a positive factor when you put it into proper context.

He's surrounded by the best people and that suffices.

SOS wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

SOS wrote:
I'm willing to give Trump a chance - but the Steve Bannon appointment as a top adviser validates our worst fears.
Reince Priebus on the other hand is a solid pick. I may not agree with his politics, but he's not an alt right racist/fascist like Bannon.

Losing the popular vote=no mandate. If Trump keeps it up we can expect more protests...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/09/us/gall ... across-america/index.html

Wrong. Losing the popular vote = completely irrelevant.

Both parties knew the rules of the game going in. If the final score were determined by the popular vote, it would have completely changed the way they campaigned. Further, Trump voters in many populous deep blue states (CA, NY, etc.) would have been more likely to come out and vote if they knew their vote counted. We simply have no idea what the popular vote totals would have been if those were the rules of the game.

An analogy is found in football. If the outcome was determined by who had the most yards, instead of the highest score, play calls and formations would be completely different.

When I hear someone point to the popular vote, I know they are just bitter and can't be taken seriously.

Come on do you really believe that? If it was the other way around, Clinton winning the electoral college but losing the popular vote, Republicans would be crying no mandate. And I would agree to some extent. Trump has the power to govern but the support of a minority of voters. Choosing Bannon is an egregious error. If he keeps it up it will tear the country apart.

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

Regarding the stiffed contractors and bankruptcies, I've been to a few friends' BBQs in central and southern Jersey, and I met more than one family who went without a Christmas after the Taj Mahal filed bankruptcy, because their family run businesses had been sub-contractors or vendors for that property. Most got around 33 cents on the dollar of what they were owed if they were lucky. Many long-time family owned small contractor businesses were simply ruined after Trump used the bankruptcy process to weasel out of paying what he rightfully owed. Despite all those families being ruined and going to work for other contractors or any menial job they could get, do you think Trump ever stopped riding around in his limousines, yachts and helicopters after the Taj's three separate bankruptcies? I doubt it. His lifestyle was not affected.

It's not just this that matters though - Trump has zero elected experience. He is as qualified to run this country as Jesse Jackson was when he ran in 1984. If you're going to run for the most powerful elected office in the world, you should have *some* lower office experience first - you don't need to be a career politician like Bernie Sanders, but at least one lower level elected office would be nice.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

Some of us judge him by what he has done, like leaving a trail of stiffed contractors, bankruptcies, and molested women, rather than what he says he will do.

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Scumbag wants top security clearance for his children. wtf

So someone says he wants to make America great and you call him a scumbag.

They've been brainwashed by the hateful media they consume.

The man wants to secure our borders, help out Americans, and provide jobs. He's a true patriot, and we will see him in action soon enough.