Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

turtle777 · Apr 10, 2011, 12:36 AM

Certainly an intriguing thought:

msnbc.com Video Player

Trump: "This country is going to hell"

Right he is.

-t

subego · Apr 10, 2011, 12:41 AM

I would substitute "obnoxious" for "intriguing".

turtle777 · Apr 10, 2011, 12:51 AM

Could he possibly be a worse president than Obama ?

I'd like to see that.

-t

subego · Apr 10, 2011, 12:57 AM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Could he possibly be a worse president than Obama?

Yes.

Dork. · Apr 10, 2011, 01:00 AM

Meet your 2012 Republican Presidential ticket:

Kerrigan · Apr 10, 2011, 01:01 AM

No, he could not be a worse president than Obama.

He's a businessman and celebrity. A bit flamboyant, but he knows how to make money, and he speaks his mind.

Obama is the worst of all possible worlds-- Attorney, Academic, Activist. In other words, he has never had a real job, never earned a dollar, never cut a deal. It doesn't get worse than that..

Kerrigan · Apr 10, 2011, 01:03 AM

Originally Posted by Dork.

Meet your 2012 Republican Presidential ticket:

Don't get too excited--a pair of clowns like Trump and Palin are actually competitive against Obama. Imagine when the GOP fields a real candidate...

subego · Apr 10, 2011, 01:18 AM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

No, he could not be a worse president than Obama.

Oh, okay. That settles it then.

besson3c · Apr 10, 2011, 01:35 AM

The list of possible Republican candidates looks pretty crappy. I'm not predicting a loss, but if the Republicans win at this point it doesn't look like they will do so on the strength of a good candidate.

My favorite of the bunch might be Palenty, but pundits say that he is also pretty boring. Will boring stack up against Palin, Bachmann, Trump, and others that are the exact opposite of boring?

Kerrigan · Apr 10, 2011, 01:38 AM

Originally Posted by subego

Oh, okay. That settles it then.

Nice job, failing to attempt to rebut anything in my post. You Obama guys are masterful debaters!

Kerrigan · Apr 10, 2011, 01:39 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

The list of possible Republican candidates looks pretty crappy. I'm not predicting a loss, but if the Republicans win at this point it doesn't look like they will do so on the strength of a good candidate.

My favorite of the bunch might be Palenty, but pundits say that he is also pretty boring. Will boring stack up against Palin, Bachmann, Trump, and others that are the exact opposite of boring?

The funny thing is that the list of Republican candidates are really crappy, and yet they all have very healthy chances against Obama. What does that say about Obama?

besson3c · Apr 10, 2011, 01:49 AM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

The funny thing is that the list of Republican candidates are really crappy, and yet they all have very healthy chances against Obama. What does that say about Obama?

Nothing. There are plenty of ideologues on both sides that will vote for their guy no matter what. Kerry, a weak candidate, managed to not defeat Bush despite having ample opportunity to do so.

Kerrigan · Apr 10, 2011, 01:58 AM

Kerry was a strong candidate. A distinguished, learned, aristocratic US Senator who served in the military.

besson3c · Apr 10, 2011, 02:01 AM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Kerry was a strong candidate. A distinguished, learned, aristocratic US Senator who served in the military.

And nobody liked. You don't win over swing voters, which is the object of every election, without charisma.

Dork. · Apr 10, 2011, 02:10 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

The list of possible Republican candidates looks pretty crappy. I'm not predicting a loss, but if the Republicans win at this point it doesn't look like they will do so on the strength of a good candidate.

My favorite of the bunch might be Palenty, but pundits say that he is also pretty boring. Will boring stack up against Palin, Bachmann, Trump, and others that are the exact opposite of boring?

Don't count out Newton Leroy Gingrich, Ph.D. He's an old pro at shutting down Washington, after all. Against that group, he looks quite good!

besson3c · Apr 10, 2011, 02:20 AM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

No, he could not be a worse president than Obama.

He's a businessman and celebrity. A bit flamboyant, but he knows how to make money, and he speaks his mind.

Obama is the worst of all possible worlds-- Attorney, Academic, Activist. In other words, he has never had a real job, never earned a dollar, never cut a deal. It doesn't get worse than that..

I don't understand how knowing how to make money in the private sector translates into being a good president? You don't have to understand a whole range of economic theories or be versed in the history of economics in this country to make money in the private sector. Running a company and running the country's economy are two totally separate, virtually unrelated jobs.

Dork. · Apr 10, 2011, 02:21 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

I don't understand how knowing how to make money in the private sector translates into being a good president? You don't have to understand a whole range of economic theories or be versed in the history of economics in this country to make money in the private sector. Running a company and running the country's economy are two totally separate, virtually unrelated jobs.

Trump's also been bankrupt, which is experience we probably need in a President in the coming years.

besson3c · Apr 10, 2011, 02:22 AM

Originally Posted by Dork.

Don't count out Newton Leroy Gingrich, Ph.D. He's an old pro at shutting down Washington, after all. Against that group, he looks quite good!

True! His opponent better not try getting a blowjob and lying about it either!

smacintush · Apr 10, 2011, 02:25 AM

But does Trump care about The Children?

smacintush · Apr 10, 2011, 02:28 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Running a company and running the country's economy are two totally separate, virtually unrelated jobs.

For one, he may understand that the government doesn't and should not try to actually "run the economy".

Also, they are not totally unrelated, one is just a more complicated version of the other. The idea that a national economy is fundamentally different than a private one is a falsehood spread by those who prefer central controls.

hyteckit · Apr 10, 2011, 02:33 AM

I thought conservatives hate rich celebrity elitist who brag about their college education? Isn't that what Trump is?

Number of Trump bankruptcies.

1991
1992
2004
2009

Yup, Trump does have lots of experiences with bankruptcies. He can sell off the US to the banks and China.

besson3c · Apr 10, 2011, 02:43 AM

Originally Posted by smacintush

For one, he may understand that the government doesn't and should not try to actually "run the economy".

If you really believe that any savvy politician thinks that the government can micromanage the economy, I think that this rhetoric can be deemed as successful in convincing you accordingly. I hope you realize that this is just rhetoric?

Also, they are not totally unrelated, one is just a more complicated version of the other. The idea that a national economy is fundamentally different than a private one is a falsehood spread by those who prefer central controls.

Does a private company receive taxes, print money, or have to regulate stuff outside of that company? I don't know how you would define "fundamentally", but they are radically different. The strawman about preference to central controls was not necessary, I'm just making a pretty obvious objective point here.

subego · Apr 10, 2011, 03:06 AM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Nice job, failing to attempt to rebut anything in my post. You Obama guys are masterful debaters!

I don't give a shit about whether Obama was an activist, or whether Trump can make money, I care about their policy.

Trump hasn't presented any policy. Your claim he could not be worse isn't based on anything relevant.

smacintush · Apr 10, 2011, 04:04 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

If you really believe that any savvy politician thinks that the government can micromanage the economy, I think that this rhetoric can be deemed as successful in convincing you accordingly. I hope you realize that this is just rhetoric?

I didn't say micromanage. I said "run".

Yes, I believe that there are many in office and who would aspire to run who believe that the government does and should "run" the economy.

Like Obama said: "Only government can fix this..."

I don't know how you would define "fundamentally", but they are radically different.

It's not how I would define fundamentally, it has a specific definition. As in, underlying principles. They are no different, one is just more complicated.

The fundamental principles concerning the effects of spending, savings, credit, profits etc. do not change. The only real difference is how many variables there are.

Wiskedjak · Apr 10, 2011, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Could he possibly be a worse president than Obama ?

I'd like to see that.

-t

There are MANY conservatives who would be better presidents than Obama. I don't think Trump is one of them.

OldManMac · Apr 10, 2011, 11:03 AM

It's going to be irrelevant as to who runs on the Republican side. People are waking up and realizing they're being sold down the drain for the benefit of a select few.

Wiskedjak · Apr 10, 2011, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by OldManMac

It's going to be irrelevant as to who runs on the Republican side. People are waking up and realizing they're being sold down the drain for the benefit of a select few.

Perhaps true, but the wrong Republcan president will sell the people down the drain for the benefit of a different select few.

OldManMac · Apr 10, 2011, 11:19 AM

Maybe this will be Trump's platform.

Trump laments: Birther is a 'negative word' - POLITICO Live - POLITICO.com

Wiskedjak · Apr 10, 2011, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by OldManMac

Maybe this will be Trump's platform.

Trump laments: Birther is a 'negative word' - POLITICO Live - POLITICO.com

So far, that certainly seems to be the case.

turtle777 · Apr 10, 2011, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by OldManMac

It's going to be irrelevant as to who runs on the Republican side. People are waking up and realizing they're being sold down the drain for the benefit of a select few.

Wow, sudden realization that Obama is not the Messiah?

-t

OldManMac · Apr 10, 2011, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Wow, sudden realization that Obama is not the Messiah?

-t

Please pay attention; I said a long time ago that I'm very disappointed in him. He's not progressive enough!

turtle777 · Apr 10, 2011, 03:16 PM

Oh hell, in what kind of parallel universe do you live in?

Obama failed because of his stupid progressive ideas that don't work. You really think that more FAIL would have made him better?

-t

OldManMac · Apr 10, 2011, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Oh hell, in what kind of parallel universe do you live in?

Obama failed because of his stupid progressive ideas that don't work. You really think that more FAIL would have made him better?

-t

Please. He's just another George Bush, and has no progressive ideas at all. He's surrounded himself with the same people that got this country into a mess, and it isn't there because of progressivism. I often wonder what universe you live in as well.

turtle777 · Apr 10, 2011, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by OldManMac

Please. He's just another George Bush, and has no progressive ideas at all. He's surrounded himself with the same people that got this country into a mess, and it isn't there because of progressivism. I often wonder what universe you live in as well.

I don't disagree with what you say. In some areas (foreign wars, Guantanamo), Obama has been nothing but a clone. And I don't think the Republicans have the right ideas about there either.

In other areas (economy), more progressive would be a huge disaster.
I don't want the Republican "idea" of capitalism either, since both parties have long been corrupted by Wall Street and big banks. Both parties have no f*cking clue about how to balance the budget and to create a government hat lives within its means.

-t

besson3c · Apr 10, 2011, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Both parties have no f*cking clue about how to balance the budget and to create a government hat lives within its means.

-t

You've said this a few times, you know.

turtle777 · Apr 10, 2011, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

You've said this a few times, you know.

So what ?

-t

besson3c · Apr 10, 2011, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

So what ?

-t

So, I'm entertaining as hell, and I work hard at it. I feel it is my moral responsibility to this community. Yours, is to at least attempt to entertain me, the most important member here.

You fail at being entertaining. Try harder next time.

freudling · Apr 10, 2011, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

So, I'm entertaining as hell, and I work hard at it. I feel it is my moral responsibility to this community. Yours, is to at least attempt to entertain me, the most important member here.

You fail at being entertaining. Try harder next time.

pretentious |priˈtenCHəs|
adjective
attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed

besson3c · Apr 10, 2011, 04:33 PM

freudling: dictionary definitions are not very entertaining. You too need to work a little harder, I think.

turtle777 · Apr 10, 2011, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

So, I'm entertaining as hell, and I work hard at it. I feel it is my moral responsibility to this community. Yours, is to at least attempt to entertain me, the most important member here.

You fail at being entertaining. Try harder next time.

Why don't YOU entertain us by performing an anatomically impossible act on yourself.

-t

besson3c · Apr 10, 2011, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Why don't YOU entertain us by performing an anatomically impossible act on yourself.

-t

You would make a horrible Care Bear.

Kerrigan · Apr 10, 2011, 04:45 PM

What is everyone's favorite Van Halen song?

lpkmckenna · Apr 10, 2011, 05:07 PM

Trump: "This country is going to hell"

No, you moron, the US has been in much worse shape many, many times before. Anyone who so ridiculously catastrophizes the current situation is too fncking stupid to be president.

Anyone who is a birther is too fncking stupid to be president.

Any silver-spoon blue-blood who has driven several businesses into the ground has no claim whatsoever as an authority on economic matters. If that's his entire claim to being a competent leader, he has no claim at all.

Kerrigan · Apr 10, 2011, 05:21 PM

Give credit where it is due. He has amassed several billion dollars (Forbes put it at a bit over $2bn). How does a stupid person do that?

Supposing he were stupid, and all of those billions just came to him by mistake, doesn't that put his level of economic know-how on an equal footing with Obama, who has never run a business?

turtle777 · Apr 10, 2011, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Give credit where it is due. He has amassed several billion dollars (Forbes put it at a bit over $2bn). How does a stupid person do that?

I wish our past presidents would have been that stupid

-t

el chupacabra · 12:46 AM

… .

Kerrigan · Apr 10, 2011, 05:36 PM

It's not like Democrats care about the strength of the economy anyways, so this is a non-issue.

If we could create a society with 90% unemployment, where everyone smoked medical marijuana, lived on welfare, drank Boone's Farm, and was a member of a Mexican cartel or gang, only then would Democrats be happy. Until that day comes, they will continue to to expand the government indefinitely while claiming to care about deficits and spending. [/jokes] [but seriously..]

turtle777 · Apr 10, 2011, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Does a private company receive taxes, print money, or have to regulate stuff outside of that company? I don't know how you would define "fundamentally", but they are radically different.

LOL, unfortunately, yes.

E.g., the TBTF banks.

They receive tax money (Bailouts), print money (reserve banking) and regulate stuff outside by influencing how the governments sets up all kinds of laws and regulation to put smaller banks to a disadvantage.

-t

imitchellg5 · Apr 10, 2011, 06:04 PM

At least Trump's honest about America only giving a shit about the Middle East because of oil and not "freedom for all" bullshit.

ebuddy · Apr 10, 2011, 06:38 PM

As hyteckit pointed out, Trump's Achilles' Heel is his multiple bankruptcies. He may counter by claiming the only thing dumber than government safety nets is not using them, but I'm not sure that's going to work. His personal relationships will get demagogued to death by both sides of opposition.

He makes excellent points and has a wealth of policy ideas as put forth in numerous sources of media outside the Daily Show, but some of them are too drastic for the masses and his "no bs" style will quickly come off as merely gaffe-prone.