The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: BlueStateSaint on August 07, 2015, 08:24:10 AM
-
I saw this on RedState this morning. Pretty good.
Rating The GOP Contenders I – Will They Change America?
By: Repair_Man_Jack (Diary) | August 7th, 2015 at 07:01 AM |
(http://www.redstate.com/uploads/2015/08/Rate.jpg)
In the next few days I’ll rate the 8 leading GOP candidates for the 2016 Nomination as reported by RealClearPolitics on 6 August 2015. I will rate four criteria; potential to change our nation, electability, personal integrity, and past performance. I will score them from 0 to 3. The ratings will be color-coded as follows.
Blue = Excellent (3 pts) – Implies candidate is solidly better than most of the GOP and all of the Dems.
Green = Good (2 pts) – Implies candidate is better than GOP average and probably all Dems.
Yellow = Low Pass (1 pt) – Candidate is on the low end of the GOP and is not impressive.
Red = Terrible (0 pts) – Denotes a very nice person who does not need to serve as POTUS.
I will be rating 8 candidates based in the descending order of their 6 Aug 2015 RCP averages. I begin with Donald Trump. I rate Mr. Trump as Green. If THE DONALD becomes THE POTUS, it could be fun in a highly sadistic fashion. Like tossing a sack of teed-off scorpions into a belladonic nudist orgy sadistic. Saint's note--this is hilarious! He will at least try to really shake things up. He is genuinely mad about how things are going and isn’t a shy and gentle sparkle-pony when he’s angry. His favorite two words seem to be “You’re fired.†I only rate him below Blue because he remains a political neophyte and his conversion to my way of thinking on some issues may be too recent to be of genuine vintage. I have to rate THE DONALD higher than I’d like to on this criterion.
I now have to say unpleasant things about a genuinely likeable and decent man. I’m rating Jeb Bush, you see. I couldn’t stand by my recent posts here at RS.com if I didn’t rate Jeb as Red. He shares too many donors and political beliefs with Democrats to be a significant change after Barack Obama’s Presidency. I’ll cut this short in keeping with Ronald Wilson Reagan’s 11th Commandment.
Scott Walker currently stands 3rd and rates a Green on the change scale. He gets this rating because he has doggedly fought to change and undo Progressive priorities in Wisconsin. He has fought the high profile enemies and won. He does what is in his heart at personal risk to his career. I only hesitate to rate Scott Walker as Blue because he doesn’t seem to disagree with enough of the Democratic Party’s priorities to yank the whole thing out by the roots. When he is on your side, you will be glad he’s going to war in your fighting position.
The rest is here: http://www.redstate.com/2015/08/07/rating-gop-contenders-will-change-america/
Kudos to Repair_Man_Jack at RedState.
-
Scott Walker may be the best fixer in the crowd but after last night I don't think he can stand up to the intense verbal onslaught from the dems....sad to say. Which is why I like Cruz. He has the ideas and debating skills to win IMO.
-
I liked Huckabee's comments about Hitlary.
One of the highest campaigns priorities should be to beat up on Hitlary Clinton every at possible opportunity.
-
Scott Walker may be the best fixer in the crowd but after last night I don't think he can stand up to the intense verbal onslaught from the dems....sad to say. Which is why I like Cruz. He has the ideas and debating skills to win IMO.
I think Walker can stand up to an onslaught from the Dems as well as anyone... he's 100% proven that in Wisconsin, where they have attacked him relentlessly... Recalls, constant lawsuits, politically motivated "investigations".. and he's came out clean as a whistle.
Cruz REALLY impressed me. I felt I was pretty strongly in the Walker camp before the debate.. but I now find myself really liking 3 of the candidates.... Cruz, Walker, and Rubio. Trump and Paul came across as people who just came for a fight... which is fine... but I'd personally rather see the real drag out fights, in the Presidential debates. In the party debates, separate yourself, but keep it professional. There's a time for it, just not sure last night was it. One thing I definitely learned from this debate, this Bush will NOT be getting my vote. That dude is 100% RINO. I know very little about Carson, but he seems like a pretty nice man, and I thought his line about "being the only one to separate siamese twins" was pretty funny.
Trump's platform seems to be.. "Washington is broken, let me show you how I've manipulated the system for the last 20yrs..".. I'm not sure that's gonna sit well w/ lots of folks. While he's right, it comes across as talking out of both sides of your mouth. Paul had some good points, but he needs to tone it down just a notch... For a minute I really thought he was going to jump on Christie.. lol.
If I had to rank them in who I think won the debate:
Cruz
Rubio
Walker
Middle would be:
Trump
Carson
-
I'm sick to death of Trump. I get that he's tapping in to very real anger and that he's just as angry but the people supporting him, it's almost like the 0bama cult and we simply can't afford another president with more bluster than substance.
People keep saying, "he's a doer", "he makes a decision, tells people what to do and they do it". Okay, but what happens when the Joint Chiefs, We the People or congress disagree? 0bama ignores everyone and has made the Constitution his personal toilet paper. It doesn't matter how reasonable the other argument is. And he's forgotten, he works for us.
Trump has little understanding of sacrifice and service because his focus has always been on himself. That's not necessarily a bad thing but it does make me question his willingness to listen. Make a mistake in business and you file bankruptcy. Do the same to this country right now and it will be a cold day in hell before we ever see another United States.
Say something negative about 0bama, he lashes out and often seeks revenge because his ego bruises so easily. The Donald appears to have the same issues and I don't want another 4 years of petulance. I've yet to hear anything substantive from Trump that would make me want to vote for him over Cruz (he actually won over my husband last night), Walker, Rubio or even Fiorina. Huckabee, who I'd only vote for if someone held a gun to my head, impressed me more than Trump.
I didn't expect him to be a great debater because it's not his forte, I didn't have those expectations of Carson or Fiorina, either because they've never lived in the world of political theater. I did hope to hear something more than bluster and platitudes. Fiorina and Carson delivered, Donald did not. Our country is in serious danger and we have so many excellent, strong conservative candidates and everyone's following another Pied Piper.
What are we hearing today? Trump, Trump, Trump, Kasich, Trump, Trump, Trump, Kasich, Trump, Trump, Trump, Rubio, Trump, Trump, Trump, Carson, Trump, Trump, Trump, Fiorina, Trump, Trump, Trump, Cruz, Trump, Trump, Trump, Kasich, Trump, Trump, Trump. I'm truly scared.
Cindie
-
I am not a Huckabee fan, but I think he did very very well. I am a huge Cruz fan, but I was somewhat disappointed in his performance, though he didn't seem to get the air time that the others did.
One thing with Trump in the arena; he's taken the heat off Cruz which is a good thing.
-
Still haven't watched the debate, but on DVR. My top three remain Walker, Cruz & Carson. But it is still a fluid situation.
-
Here is the deal with Trump---he is a ringer, ruse, whatever you want to call him. I had some doubts before the debate that the talk behind the scenes was just that, talk. However after the debates I have not doubt in my mind that Trump is there to drive a massive wedge in the Republican Party and to allow Hillary to win. He is in effect her beard. When he said right out of the gate that essentially if he is not the party nominee then he mounts a 3rd party run. He is there to suck up all the oxygen in the room and when the dust settles we have a fractured party. In all honesty I wish the GOP and Pribus in particular would cut him loose now and be done with it. Remember once it gets to a certain point he does get federal funds to mount a campaign. While Trump has said that he will pay for his own campaign, and maybe he will, a 3rd party run with no exposure in Republican debates would be a huge hindrance to him. Maybe he will sink a couple of billion into a campaign. However without national exposure until October of next year it would be highly doubtful. While I'm not of the conspiracy vein aka Rand Paul, what he said with respect to Trump & the Clintons is spot on in my estimation. I do believe that he and the Clintons have/are in this together. His being in the race does not allow for other Republicans to get proper traction and make their case to the voters. I think Rubio, who I wasn't all that excited about previously made some excellent points and stands. I think if he or Cruz who I think equally did a masterful job of navigating around Trump to state their case were the two winners, if you can say anyone won with 10 candidates on the stage. I like Walker & Carson as well but because the moderators allowed Trump to have excess time to both answer and rebut it didn't give the other candidates a fair shake as well. I'm not someone easily offended. When Megyn Kelly brought up the Tweets by Trump with respect to O'Donnell I wasn't put off. However when he took the personal dig at Kelly I thought it was unwarranted. Then when he took his jab about "bleeding from wherever" I was totally disgusted. Trump will never admit he was wrong or take blame for what he says. He is beyond being a narcissist, which is what we currently have in the White House. He will not listen to advice that he does not agree with. What happens when the Joint Chiefs tell him something he doesn't agree with? Does he fire them and bring in military personnel that agree or just decides to do what he wants and be damned the consequences? The GOP has to make a decision before the next debate at the Reagan Library. Do they jettison Trump now and be done with it so that it is old news and doesn't dominate the debate or do they let him participate? Does Carly Fiorina get to participate and if so does Trump denigrate her during the debate proving he is the misogynist that everyone knows he is? I have no illusions that he would go that route thinking that it is alright because his "fan base" thinks it's ok to do so. They think any talk of having to reign in Trump as showing weakness when in actuality it shows humility something that Americans I hope still want in their president. Its time to cut fish or bait for the GOP. Whether they do or don't is the $64,000 question of the moment. I can't see how staying the course with Trump, his ego and worst of all his mouth wins any converts and more importantly independents who are sick and tired of the direction of the country these last 7 years. If the Republicans lose a large part of that group who is tired of the liberal progressive agenda then we all better get used to the title of "Madam President" because the Trump will have handed Hillary & Bill the biggest prize yet.
-
The GOP contenders might not get a chance to change America if economic reporting like AP's has it's way...
The Associated Press seems determined to become even worse at "fact-checking" politicians' statements than Politifact, the current cellar-dwellar in that regard.
At the rate things are going, the wire service, in addition to richly earning its nickname "the Administration's Press" since January 2009, appears to be in line for yet another: "Associated Politifact."
In his "fact check" following last night's Republican debates, the AP's Josh Lederman outrageously argued that Jeb Bush's indisputably true statement about job creation while he was Florida's governor needed to be qualified because of what happened during the next three years under successor Charlie Crist.
Keep in mind that Lederman prefaced his work by pretending that he was compiling "A look at some of the claims in the debate and how they compare with the facts.
" The headline claims to look for "TRUTH VS EXAGGERATION IN GOP PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE."
Here's the Bush statement, and Lederman's response:
(http://bizzyblog.com/wp-images/APonJebBushJobs080715.png)
Jeb Bush stated three facts:
He was in office for eight years.
While he was in office, 1.3 million jobs were created.
In citing that statistic, Bush used the federal government's Establishment Survey of employers.
For Florida, it shows a pickup of 1.319 million payroll jobs, the difference between the seasonally adjusted 8.034 million figure seen in December 2006 and 6.715 million in December 1998.
The former Sunshine State governor could have instead referred to the Household Survey of residents, which shows a pickup in the number of Floridians employed of 1.518 million (i.e., 200,000 more) during that same period.
Florida's job market and employment situation were "better off" at the end of 2006 compared to the end of 1998, with over 20 percent more people employed and a miniscule unemployment rate of 3.4 percent compared to 4.1 percent.
These are all indisputable facts completely free of any exaggeration, and are in fact arguably understated.
That's it.
Josh Lederman should have stopped there, and in the name of objective fact-checking was really obliged to stop there.
But, apparently, he just couldn't.
Lederman effectively contends that Bush is largely and perhaps fully responsible (there are no qualifiers in his writeup) for the 900,000 Establishment Survey jobs which were lost during the first three-fourths of successor Charlie Crist's one and only (thank goodness) term.
No, Josh.
Charlie Crist did that all by himself, turning his back on the Bush policies that worked almost as soon as he took the gubernatorial oath of office.
Among many things, he broke a no new taxes pledge by signing on to a $2.2 billion tax increase in early 2009, and changed the tone towards business coming out of state government from one of hospitality to indifference, or worse.
Construction employment during Jeb Bush's terms grew from a seasonally adjusted 456,00 in December 1998 to 669,000 in December 2006.
That increase of 213,000 works out to 46.7 percent, which Josh Lederman "cleverly" rounded way up to 50 percent.
He's only been at AP for just over three years, but he appears to have picked up most of the wire service's dishonest tricks.
Crist ruined Florida's business climate so completely that construction employment when he left office in December 2010 was only 338,000, i.e., over 25 percent lower than it was at the beginning of Jeb Bush's two terms.
Lederman also seems to want relatively uninformed readers to believe that Bush and Bush alone created Florida's housing bubble, when we know that the federal government was primarily responsble for that — particularly government-sponored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Finally, Lederman seems to think that it's Jeb Bush's fault that many Floridians borrowed heavily against their homes' equity and often frivolously spent the funds.
So not only is Bush responsible for Charlie Crist's disastrous reign as Sunshine State governor, he's also responsible for all the bad financial decisions the state's individuals and families made! How does he sleep at night?
(That's sarcasm, folks.)
As noted earlier, Lederman has demonstrated a level of fact-checking dishonesty which gives Politifact a run for its money.
Several more such reports, and the AP will indeed deserve the nickname "Associated Politifact."
If any owebumaManiaMedia reporter anywhere gets a chance to tear down a GOP candidate, they will jump at it.
Whether or not they have valid sources, methods, or factual reporting matters not to the lib establishment press.
full article...
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tom-blumer/2015/08/07/associated-politifact-aps-lederman-thinks-jeb-bush-responsible-jobs#sthash.CtaQIdQa.dpuf (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tom-blumer/2015/08/07/associated-politifact-aps-lederman-thinks-jeb-bush-responsible-jobs#sthash.CtaQIdQa.dpuf)
-
Here is the deal with Trump---he is a ringer, ruse, whatever you want to call him. I had some doubts before the debate that the talk behind the scenes was just that, talk. However after the debates I have not doubt in my mind that Trump is there to drive a massive wedge in the Republican Party and to allow Hillary to win. He is in effect her beard. When he said right out of the gate that essentially if he is not the party nominee then he mounts a 3rd party run. He is there to suck up all the oxygen in the room and when the dust settles we have a fractured party. In all honesty I wish the GOP and Pribus in particular would cut him loose now and be done with it. Remember once it gets to a certain point he does get federal funds to mount a campaign. While Trump has said that he will pay for his own campaign, and maybe he will, a 3rd party run with no exposure in Republican debates would be a huge hindrance to him. Maybe he will sink a couple of billion into a campaign. However without national exposure until October of next year it would be highly doubtful. While I'm not of the conspiracy vein aka Rand Paul, what he said with respect to Trump & the Clintons is spot on in my estimation. I do believe that he and the Clintons have/are in this together. His being in the race does not allow for other Republicans to get proper traction and make their case to the voters. I think Rubio, who I wasn't all that excited about previously made some excellent points and stands. I think if he or Cruz who I think equally did a masterful job of navigating around Trump to state their case were the two winners, if you can say anyone won with 10 candidates on the stage. I like Walker & Carson as well but because the moderators allowed Trump to have excess time to both answer and rebut it didn't give the other candidates a fair shake as well. I'm not someone easily offended. When Megyn Kelly brought up the Tweets by Trump with respect to O'Donnell I wasn't put off. However when he took the personal dig at Kelly I thought it was unwarranted. Then when he took his jab about "bleeding from wherever" I was totally disgusted. Trump will never admit he was wrong or take blame for what he says. He is beyond being a narcissist, which is what we currently have in the White House. He will not listen to advice that he does not agree with. What happens when the Joint Chiefs tell him something he doesn't agree with? Does he fire them and bring in military personnel that agree or just decides to do what he wants and be damned the consequences? The GOP has to make a decision before the next debate at the Reagan Library. Do they jettison Trump now and be done with it so that it is old news and doesn't dominate the debate or do they let him participate? Does Carly Fiorina get to participate and if so does Trump denigrate her during the debate proving he is the misogynist that everyone knows he is? I have no illusions that he would go that route thinking that it is alright because his "fan base" thinks it's ok to do so. They think any talk of having to reign in Trump as showing weakness when in actuality it shows humility something that Americans I hope still want in their president. Its time to cut fish or bait for the GOP. Whether they do or don't is the $64,000 question of the moment. I can't see how staying the course with Trump, his ego and worst of all his mouth wins any converts and more importantly independents who are sick and tired of the direction of the country these last 7 years. If the Republicans lose a large part of that group who is tired of the liberal progressive agenda then we all better get used to the title of "Madam President" because the Trump will have handed Hillary & Bill the biggest prize yet.
Hi.5 Trump is either in it to split the vote to hand it over to Clinton (as he did state he would run 3rd party) OR, he's in someone else's camp. By his recent comments he has alienated two much needed sectors for the GOP to win; Latinos and females. Secondly, he has criticized other GOP candidates and I have yet to hear him criticize Hillary. So my guess he is in it to hand the nomination to Hillary -- she can't win the vote if the GOP base is united.
-
My liberal local fish paper wasted something like 2/3 of a page, analyzing a couple of Dr. Carson's comments at some event a while back. Of course, they were trying to rip him to shreds.
It was pathetic, but typical & biased.
-
I'm sick to death of Trump.
Cindie
I agree just look into his business practices and how he made much of his money, he surely isn't a conservative. He's a yankee loud mouth that folks listen to because of the ANGER in America.
-
I agree just look into his business practices and how he made much of his money, he surely isn't a conservative. He's a yankee loud mouth that folks listen to because of the ANGER in America.
What business practices do you speak of???????? If it has to do with real estate, he has made tons of money renting condo, apartments, etc in NYC. If it has to do with high rise condos in Mexico and Panama City, Panama, he sold investors the right to use his NAME. If they went bankrupt or have fincial difficulty , that is not his fault. If you are speaking about Atlantic City, investors lost money because the whole city went to shit and the gambling industry tanked. Just ask Mr Wynn who is tops in this industry.
Investing is a gamble FYI. I lost money in the real estate crash with REITS. Don''t blame anyone but myself. That's just the way investing works. Like he said in the debate, he has made hundreds of deals and the media could only find 4 that tanked. I bet you have no idea of how many start up companies fail. Much more than 10% (his 4% for 100 companies). Damn good business man if you ask me.
As far as I know, he did not stick the taxpayers of this country for billions like Freddie, Fanny, Solandria (sp) and other give-away shysters.
-
What business practices do you speak of???????? If it has to do with real estate, he has made tons of money renting condo, apartments, etc in NYC. If it has to do with high rise condos in Mexico and Panama City, Panama, he sold investors the right to use his NAME. If they went bankrupt or have fincial difficulty , that is not his fault. If you are speaking about Atlantic City, investors lost money because the whole city went to shit and the gambling industry tanked. Just ask Mr Wynn who is tops in this industry.
Investing is a gamble FYI. I lost money in the real estate crash with REITS. Don''t blame anyone but myself. That's just the way investing works. Like he said in the debate, he has made hundreds of deals and the media could only find 4 that tanked. I bet you have no idea of how many start up companies fail. Much more than 10% (his 4% for 100 companies). Damn good business man if you ask me.
As far as I know, he did not stick the taxpayers of this country for billions like Freddie, Fanny, Solandria (sp) and other give-away shysters.
When he goes bankrupt (four times) and the bank looses BILLIONS as was said in the debates where and how do you think that money is replaced? We do thru taxes (many banks get federal money somewhere) and fees and such. He profited, took money then just walked away. That's not good. Also many of the losers were bond holders.
When he went bankrupt many hard working middle class jobs were lost, folks lost their retirement, jobs and so on. I know a few who did nothing but go to work everyday. Again he pocketed money on the backs of the working class. This isn't how I want our next POTUS to operate.
What he did in his bankruptcies is exactly what caused the last housing crash, over extending credit and walked away. I live on and little hill here on the side of a mountain and 3 of the nine houses here were empty for years because folk financed to the max took the money and left.
What will he do as president? borrow money from other countries then say oh well we aren't paying? The country can't go bankrupt.
I also remember reading that if you took his inheritance and added all the money lost from his bankruptcies and figured in for inflation he would be worth more had he sat home and watched TV.
I do applaud him bringing things into the debate about immigration and sanctuary cities.
I don't like him ripping other republican candidates endlessly though. These statements will be used against anyone whether a republican or conservative! :wink:
-
When he goes bankrupt (four times) and the bank looses BILLIONS as was said in the debates where and how do you think that money is replaced? We do thru taxes (many banks get federal money somewhere) and fees and such. He profited, took money then just walked away. That's not good. Also many of the losers were bond holders.
When he went bankrupt many hard working middle class jobs were lost, folks lost their retirement, jobs and so on. I know a few who did nothing but go to work everyday. Again he pocketed money on the backs of the working class. This isn't how I want our next POTUS to operate.
What he did in his bankruptcies is exactly what caused the last housing crash, over extending credit and walked away. I live on and little hill here on the side of a mountain and 3 of the nine houses here were empty for years because folk financed to the max took the money and left.
What will he do as president? borrow money from other countries then say oh well we aren't paying? The country can't go bankrupt.
I also remember reading that if you took his inheritance and added all the money lost from his bankruptcies and figured in for inflation he would be worth more had he sat home and watched TV.
I do applaud him bringing things into the debate about immigration and sanctuary cities.
I don't like him ripping other republican candidates endlessly though. These statements will be used against anyone whether a republican or conservative! :wink:
Other than the bankruptcies...mainly due to the real estate bust...how is he any different form most of the professional politicians that were on the stage with him? Especially when it comes to criticizing others within his party?
I mean if one of your deciding factors is ripping on other members of the GOP...where's your posts of outrage on here about what Boehner and McConnell are doing to conservative members of their own party as the GOP leaders in the House and Senate?
You don't think Hillary! isn't going to use that as fodder when it gets down to her against the GOP selection...assuming it's not (God forbid) Jeb or Krispy Kreme?
If you're gonna dislike Trump do it for legitimate reasons...like the fact he was until recently pro abortion or the fact he's donated large sums to Democrts before pulling a Bloomberg.
But for the love of God...don't say you dislike him and then state as the only reasons you dislike him...a long list of Rove-esque RNC approved talking points.
-
I agree just look into his business practices and how he made much of his money, he surely isn't a conservative. He's a yankee loud mouth that folks listen to because of the ANGER in America.
He made and lost his money in real estate and construction...more recently the gaming industry in AC.
Your point?
-
When he goes bankrupt (four times) and the bank looses BILLIONS as was said in the debates where and how do you think that money is replaced? We do thru taxes (many banks get federal money somewhere) and fees and such. He profited, took money then just walked away. That's not good. Also many of the losers were bond holders.
When he went bankrupt many hard working middle class jobs were lost, folks lost their retirement, jobs and so on. I know a few who did nothing but go to work everyday. Again he pocketed money on the backs of the working class. This isn't how I want our next POTUS to operate.
What he did in his bankruptcies is exactly what caused the last housing crash, over extending credit and walked away. I live on and little hill here on the side of a mountain and 3 of the nine houses here were empty for years because folk financed to the max took the money and left.
What will he do as president? borrow money from other countries then say oh well we aren't paying? The country can't go bankrupt.
I also remember reading that if you took his inheritance and added all the money lost from his bankruptcies and figured in for inflation he would be worth more had he sat home and watched TV.
I do applaud him bringing things into the debate about immigration and sanctuary cities.
I don't like him ripping other republican candidates endlessly though. These statements will be used against anyone whether a republican or conservative! :wink:
Agreed...and a gave you a Hi 5 for the Eastwood avatar! :cheersmate:
-
Other than the bankruptcies...mainly due to the real estate bust...how is he any different form most of the professional politicians that were on the stage with him? Especially when it comes to criticizing others within his party?
I don't think his were all due to the bust, 1991, 1992, 1994, and 2009, not all bad years. he had four and there is either another on the horizon or the one from 09 is being reopened. I think it's just his way of doing business as was said in the debates where is was wrong also about ALL businessmen in his position, it's around 5% of the top 100 businesses not all or 90%.
I mean if one of your deciding factors is ripping on other members of the GOP...where's your posts of outrage on here about what Boehner and McConnell are doing to conservative members of their own party as the GOP leaders in the House and Senate?
I just got here but I do rip both endlessly!!! Those two have done one of the biggest bait and switch cons in the history of American politics!
You don't think Hillary! isn't going to use that as fodder when it gets down to her against the GOP selection...assuming it's not (God forbid) Jeb or Krispy Kreme?
Amen there!
If you're gonna dislike Trump do it for legitimate reasons...like the fact he was until recently pro abortion or the fact he's donated large sums to Democrts before pulling a Bloomberg.
But for the love of God...don't say you dislike him and then state as the only reasons you dislike him...a long list of Rove-esque RNC approved talking points.
No talking points my thoughts, words and opinion. I mentioned homes right here on my hill where idiots did the same thing. Refied a 55,000 home for 135,000 and walked away knowing what they were doing. Many many many did the over financing before the last bust and it was wrong all the way around. Don't you think so?
Peace brother and lets get the most conservative candidate we can as the next POTUS!
-
Other than the bankruptcies...mainly due to the real estate bust...how is he any different form most of the professional politicians that were on the stage with him? Especially when it comes to criticizing others within his party?
I mean if one of your deciding factors is ripping on other members of the GOP...where's your posts of outrage on here about what Boehner and McConnell are doing to conservative members of their own party as the GOP leaders in the House and Senate?
You don't think Hillary! isn't going to use that as fodder when it gets down to her against the GOP selection...assuming it's not (God forbid) Jeb or Krispy Kreme?
If you're gonna dislike Trump do it for legitimate reasons...like the fact he was until recently pro abortion or the fact he's donated large sums to Democrts before pulling a Bloomberg.
But for the love of God...don't say you dislike him and then state as the only reasons you dislike him...a long list of Rove-esque RNC approved talking points.
I don't think anyone can dislike him. We're talking politics here, not personalities. I'm not going to bring this over because I already talked about it on other threads, but after adamantly saying he'd defund PP, he's now walking it back. Not sure if his real hardcore supporters will care or not but it bothers me a great deal for a variety of reason: we need to look at cutting the budget, not keeping the status quo, anyone who believes government funding of PP doesn't help their abortion industry and their "less crunchy" dismembering of babies is delusional and, I can see evolving on an issue over a number of years (like Reagan on abortion) but to contradict yourself just a few days later is very troublesome. http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/11/politics/donald-trump-planned-parenthood-abortion-defunding/ (http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/11/politics/donald-trump-planned-parenthood-abortion-defunding/)
Cindie
-
No talking points my thoughts, words and opinion. I mentioned homes right here on my hill where idiots did the same thing. Refied a 55,000 home for 135,000 and walked away knowing what they were doing. Many many many did the over financing before the last bust and it was wrong all the way around. Don't you think so?
Peace brother and lets get the most conservative candidate we can as the next POTUS!
You have a link to any of this stuff you're accusing Trump of?
-
No talking points my thoughts, words and opinion. I mentioned homes right here on my hill where idiots did the same thing. Refied a 55,000 home for 135,000 and walked away knowing what they were doing. Many many many did the over financing before the last bust and it was wrong all the way around. Don't you think so?
Peace brother and lets get the most conservative candidate we can as the next POTUS!
I believe that all 4 of the bankrupt happened in Atlantic City. I am happy that these shit-hole casinos and hotels went bust. One of my best friend got the gambling bug and lost his wife, his home, his business and is on the run from the gamblers. He owed thousand of dollars to the Mafia crooks in New Orleans. No one stuck a gun to his head to gamble. Same deal with investors who thought they were going to get rich. Homeowners that over leveraged their mortgage, banks that made bad loans, investors, and bond holders do NOT get any sympathy from me. Life is full of risks. You F. up and it is all on you.
Just want to remind everyone that Trump is on Hannity tonight at 9CST. I will be watching our next President. :-)
FYI, the money that the investors lost in Trump's companies is peanuts compared to the bail outs that were given to the too big to fail banks, GM and GE. The taxpayers got raped on those deals. To top it off, GM, GE, Catp. used those funds to build plants overseas. Guess what. The profits that stay overseas is not subject to taxation.
-
I believe that all 4 of the bankrupt happened in Atlantic City. I am happy that these shit-hole casinos and hotels went bust. One of my best friend got the gambling bug and lost his wife, his home, his business and is on the run from the gamblers. He owed thousand of dollars to the Mafia crooks in New Orleans. No one stuck a gun to his head to gamble. Same deal with investors who thought they were going to get rich. Homeowners that over leveraged their mortgage, banks that made bad loans, investors, and bond holders do NOT get any sympathy from me. Life is full of risks. You F. up and it is all on you.
Just want to remind everyone that Trump is on Hannity tonight at 9CST. I will be watching our next President. :-)
FYI, the money that the investors lost in Trump's companies is peanuts compared to the bail outs that were given to the too big to fail banks, GM and GE. The taxpayers got raped on those deals. To top it off, GM, GE, Catp. used those funds to build plants overseas. Guess what. The profits that stay overseas is not subject to taxation.
Uh, it's not the casino's fault your friend developed a gambling addiction anymore than it's alcohol's fault someone is an alcoholic. Most people that go to casinos don't end up with addiction issues. My husband and I go for fun every couple of months and neither have an addiction. Your friend is the only one to blame for his situation. Period. I'm sorry for him but he did it to himself.
A good portion of those bond holders were regular working stiffs. 401k's and mutual funds are usually managed by fund managers working for companies like Fidelity. And not all workers have a choice as to what combination of stocks and bonds are in their portfolio.
Real human beings also have homes and families. And they weren't even at fault for the situation they found themselves in. Pretty sure one addict who could've gotten help, or even realized it was becoming a problem, didn't make them think, "Well, gosh, we lost our home and our family has to move, but I'm so glad Trump's casino went bankrupt. We lost the biggest investment in our future, but, hey, it's kinda like revenge for people with a gambling addiction so it's okay."
News flash: businesses exist to make a profit. It's good for their investors, too (even the little guys who invest as part of a mutual fund or 401k). Losing investors is not conducive to earning money. Companies move overseas because the taxes are lower and they don't have to deal with unrealistic demands from unions. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. Lower corporate taxes and they'll come back.
Good lord, what the hell are you doing on a site like CONSERVATIVE Cave? People who want to support Trump, good for them. We all have our favorite(s). Some of my favorite people support Trump, but damn, your lack of knowledge about how the world works is stunning. Certainly, this entire rant is not one that I'd hear out of ANY conservative, even Trump supporters. Sheesh!
Cindie
-
I, for one, will be glad when Trump finds the next shiny object and runs along to stick it up his ass. I cannot stand the man. He's a petulant, insecure worm who has no idea how to govern and no concept of the actual issues facing this country. You think 0bama is a loser at the negotiating table? Trump can't deal with MEGYN KELLY saying something he doesn't like. Do you think Putin is going to give a rat's nutsack what Trump has to say about him to the media? You think the Chinese or the Iranians would spend one moment fearing someone who runs to social media like a ****ing teenager to call an adversary a "total loser?"
Does anyone who supports Trump believe for one second that he would populate his Cabinet with people who are even remotely qualified for their position? You think 0bama's Cabnet is a joke, just wait until we have his ****ing daughter and son trying to run something. This is the greatest country in the history of the world, not a *******ed reality TV show. I would take ANYONE in the field over Trump. ANYONE. I would take LINDSAY GRAHAM over Trump. Anyone who supports that self-aggrandizing combover know-nothing grade school chump definitely needs to go sit and have a think.
-
Uh, it's not the casino's fault your friend developed a gambling addiction anymore than it's alcohol's fault someone is an alcoholic. Most people that go to casinos don't end up with addiction issues. My husband and I go for fun every couple of months and neither have an addiction. Your friend is the only one to blame for his situation. Period. I'm sorry for him but he did it to himself.
A good portion of those bond holders were regular working stiffs. 401k's and mutual funds are usually managed by fund managers working for companies like Fidelity. And not all workers have a choice as to what combination of stocks and bonds are in their portfolio.
Real human beings also have homes and families. And they weren't even at fault for the situation they found themselves in. Pretty sure one addict who could've gotten help, or even realized it was becoming a problem, didn't make them think, "Well, gosh, we lost our home and our family has to move, but I'm so glad Trump's casino went bankrupt. We lost the biggest investment in our future, but, hey, it's kinda like revenge for people with a gambling addiction so it's okay."
News flash: businesses exist to make a profit. It's good for their investors, too (even the little guys who invest as part of a mutual fund or 401k). Losing investors is not conducive to earning money. Companies move overseas because the taxes are lower and they don't have to deal with unrealistic demands from unions. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. Lower corporate taxes and they'll come back.
Good lord, what the hell are you doing on a site like CONSERVATIVE Cave? People who want to support Trump, good for them. We all have our favorite(s). Some of my favorite people support Trump, but damn, your lack of knowledge about how the world works is stunning. Certainly, this entire rant is not one that I'd hear out of ANY conservative, even Trump supporters. Sheesh!
Cindie
Ever heard of diversifying. You do not put all your eggs in one basket. My retirement fund was diversified when Enron went belly up. The fund lost 2%. However, it has gained an average of 7% a year since then. Did you know that retirement funds have elections? In other words, as a member, you can vote to install a new member or vote to kick out an old one out. Also, the board of the retirement system can change Funds. In many 401k's, you do have a choice of stocks and bonds. There is no guarantee that your money will grow.That is how a retirement system works for your information. i have investments in many areas but bonds is not one of them. Plus, I take issue with your statement that bond holders are average investors.
I have sympathy for those that lose their house due to job loss or sickness. Not so much for those that spend like crazy and piss it away on gambling, drinking and drugs. My friend was at fault and has to lie in his own bed. The same applies to those that make bad investment mistakes. Teaching the value of money and how to save should be taught in schools. People that are my age that still have a mortgage and credit card debt have been doing things wrong. Guess what..80% of people that are retired have little savings.
-
You have a link to any of this stuff you're accusing Trump of?
There's plenty on his business practices.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/joanlappin/2011/05/01/business-illusionist-donald-trump-perfect-for-president/ (http://www.forbes.com/sites/joanlappin/2011/05/01/business-illusionist-donald-trump-perfect-for-president/)
http://www.cracked.com/blog/10-stories-about-donald-trump-you-wont-believe-are-true/ (http://www.cracked.com/blog/10-stories-about-donald-trump-you-wont-believe-are-true/)
-
I believe that all 4 of the bankrupt happened in Atlantic City. I am happy that these shit-hole casinos and hotels went bust. One of my best friend got the gambling bug and lost his wife, his home, his business and is on the run from the gamblers. He owed thousand of dollars to the Mafia crooks in New Orleans. No one stuck a gun to his head to gamble. Same deal with investors who thought they were going to get rich. Homeowners that over leveraged their mortgage, banks that made bad loans, investors, and bond holders do NOT get any sympathy from me. Life is full of risks. You F. up and it is all on you.
Just want to remind everyone that Trump is on Hannity tonight at 9CST. I will be watching our next President. :-)
FYI, the money that the investors lost in Trump's companies is peanuts compared to the bail outs that were given to the too big to fail banks, GM and GE. The taxpayers got raped on those deals. To top it off, GM, GE, Catp. used those funds to build plants overseas. Guess what. The profits that stay overseas is not subject to taxation.
I agree the bailout was a farce!!! If GM, GE and the banks were allowed to go belly up we as a country would be much further ahead and have less debt. Lets not forget Solyndra and all them shovel ready jobs.
Also the last I checked GM paid back the bailout with more borrowed government money. ::)
That left $26.4 billion GM still owed the government. GM's shares have been trading around $25. The buyback will occur at a share price of $27.50, or a total of $5.5 billion for 200 million shares. But for taxpayers to get their money back, the government would have to sell at an average price of about $52
-
Ever heard of diversifying. You do not put all your eggs in one basket. My retirement fund was diversified when Enron went belly up. The fund lost 2%. However, it has gained an average of 7% a year since then.
Did you even read what I wrote? Enron was ONE company. Of course it wouldn't affect other sectors of the market. Obviously if you had investments in other sectors you wouldn't take a very hard hit. A portfolio genius like you should know this. Yes, diversifying is a wonderful thing and that's why 401ks and other investment plans usually have diverse portfolios. This was different because the housing sector is a large part of the economy. When it hit bottom it negatively affected other major sectors, some significantly because they provide a large amount of products and services to it.
Did you know that retirement funds have elections? In other words, as a member, you can vote to install a new member or vote to kick out an old one out.
Retirement funds DO NOT have elections. Companies have elections. But even then you have no say in who sits on the board. If, for instance, people have Alcoa as part of their portfolio, they will get the little prospectus in the mail and the opportunity to vote for board members. It's pretty meaningless, however, because people who own the company (that means they have most of the stock) will determine who is on the board. Even if a company that manages funds changes their Board of Directors, that really has nothing to do with the funds individual brokers manage.
Also, the board of the retirement system can change Funds. In many 401k's, you do have a choice of stocks and bonds. There is no guarantee that your money will grow.That is how a retirement system works for your information.
What the hell is the "board of retirement system"? Google it, I dare you. It doesn't exist. Like I said, did you even read my post? I actually was the one who was talking about how 401k's and the market work, that there are safer sectors and riskier sectors. And yes, most companies have some choices available but it's limited by what the company you work for is offering. Most of them use a particular investment firm (or firms) and you choose from among the ones they offer to for that particular plan. My husband's company uses Fidelity. They have a bazillion plans but we have a choice of about 30 of them.
i have investments in many areas but bonds is not one of them. Plus, I take issue with your statement that bond holders are average investors.
Again, you don't know what you're talking about. There are several bond funds available through our 401k and we have a couple for DIVERSIFICATION. Just to provide you with proof, try these links:
Best Funds for Your 401k (http://www.kiplinger.com/article/investing/T041-C000-S002-best-funds-for-your-401-k.html)
The 5 Best Funds for Your 401k (http://investorplace.com/2015/02/5-best-vanguard-funds-401k/#.VcqbqyZVhvE)
20 Best Bond Only Mutual Funds (http://www.thestreet.com/topic/19341/top-bond-only-mutual-funds.html) This one was written in June and shows both the bond rating (every single one is an A+) and the risk grade (all but one are B or better).
These are not for the Trumps of the world but for regular people.
I have sympathy for those that lose their house due to job loss or sickness. Not so much for those that spend like crazy and piss it away on gambling, drinking and drugs. My friend was at fault and has to lie in his own bed.
Who the hell was talking about people who piss their money away other than you talking about your friend? And, as I recall, you were practically giddy about Trump's casinos going bankrupt specifically because your idiot friend developed a gambling addiction and is on the run from the mob or whatever. I think the people you should be thinking about, are those THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN, lost their jobs because of Trump's bad business decisions.
The same applies to those that make bad investment mistakes. Teaching the value of money and how to save should be taught in schools.
Much like plumbers & electricians, people hire portfolio managers because they are experts in their field, thus maximizing the quality of their investments. Of the few people I know who make their own investment choices, they do a great deal of research before choosing a mutual or bond fund. I agree money management skills should be taught in schools but that sort of contradicts your point. On the one had you're saying people's bad investment choices are at fault and on the other that they aren't taught proper money management skills which would indicate they didn't learn how to make good choices.
People that are my age that still have a mortgage and credit card debt have been doing things wrong. Guess what..80% of people that are retired have little savings.
Someone who thinks one company going under has the same impact on the market as an entire sector of the economy, thinks retirement funds have elections, that there's a "board of retirement system" and that bond funds aren't for the average investor, is hardly in a position to judge choices other people make.
Whether a retired person has a mortgage is really none of your business and doesn't necessarily reflect badly on them. If they can afford the payments and don't mind having a mortgage, so what? My Nana, who died a month ago, had 2 credit cards. One she used for regular expenses, prescriptions, vet appointments for her precious little Sammy and the like, she paid off every month. The other, she used for bigger expenses, like hospital expenses that weren't paid by either Medicare or her supplement. She lived in California who probably has the shittiest Medicare supplements in the country (kinda like 0bamacare, only the available plans got worse after it was passed). Not only are the deductibles high, so are copays and there are limits to what they'll pay for during a hospital stay. Not once did she miss a payment and every single month she paid more than the monthly amount.
As for having a savings plan, there's no way in hell, I'm going to hold anyone in her generation accountable for not having one. She came of age during the Great Depression and Roosevelt's Social Security plan. People in her generation were told during their entire lives that SS WAS their retirement plan. To them, it was like investing in a 401k. Money was deducted from their paychecks so why wouldn't they think they were investing in their future? Obviously, you're a very special snowflake since you know more than many seniors of "the Greatest Generation". Yes, many companies began offering retirement plans while they were still working but my grandparents were part of "the working poor" and my grandfather didn't have the kind of jobs that provided such luxuries. They saw their purpose as working to provide a better life for their sons.
She (and many women like her) lived during a time when women simply did not make financial decisions for the family. She also stopped going to school when she was about 14. She lived on a farm with 10 brothers and sisters and was needed at home. It was more important that her brothers graduated so the girls had to help with farm chores. She went from her house to my grandfather's house and her job was keeping house and raising 3 boys. She never even learned to drive. The first time she ever had any independence was when my Pa died. It was a steep learning curve for her but, in spite of her ONE credit card with an unpaid balance, she saved enough money (with the help of a small life insurance policy) to pay off her ONE debt and pay for her cremation. Don't judge others until you've been in their shoes. You don't seem to have an ounce of compassion for anyone but yourself.
Cindie
-
Did you even read what I wrote? Enron was ONE company. Of course it wouldn't affect other sectors of the market. Obviously if you had investments in other sectors you wouldn't take a very hard hit. A portfolio genius like you should know this. Yes, diversifying is a wonderful thing and that's why 401ks and other investment plans usually have diverse portfolios. This was different because the housing sector is a large part of the economy. When it hit bottom it negatively affected other major sectors, some significantly because they provide a large amount of products and services to it.
Retirement funds DO NOT have elections. Companies have elections. But even then you have no say in who sits on the board. If, for instance, people have Alcoa as part of their portfolio, they will get the little prospectus in the mail and the opportunity to vote for board members. It's pretty meaningless, however, because people who own the company (that means they have most of the stock) will determine who is on the board. Even if a company that manages funds changes their Board of Directors, that really has nothing to do with the funds individual brokers manage.
What the hell is the "board of retirement system"? Google it, I dare you. It doesn't exist. Like I said, did you even read my post? I actually was the one who was talking about how 401k's and the market work, that there are safer sectors and riskier sectors. And yes, most companies have some choices available but it's limited by what the company you work for is offering. Most of them use a particular investment firm (or firms) and you choose from among the ones they offer to for that particular plan. My husband's company uses Fidelity. They have a bazillion plans but we have a choice of about 30 of them.
Again, you don't know what you're talking about. There are several bond funds available through our 401k and we have a couple for DIVERSIFICATION. Just to provide you with proof, try these links:
Best Funds for Your 401k (http://www.kiplinger.com/article/investing/T041-C000-S002-best-funds-for-your-401-k.html)
The 5 Best Funds for Your 401k (http://investorplace.com/2015/02/5-best-vanguard-funds-401k/#.VcqbqyZVhvE)
20 Best Bond Only Mutual Funds (http://www.thestreet.com/topic/19341/top-bond-only-mutual-funds.html) This one was written in June and shows both the bond rating (every single one is an A+) and the risk grade (all but one are B or better).
These are not for the Trumps of the world but for regular people.
Who the hell was talking about people who piss their money away other than you talking about your friend? And, as I recall, you were practically giddy about Trump's casinos going bankrupt specifically because your idiot friend developed a gambling addiction and is on the run from the mob or whatever. I think the people you should be thinking about, are those THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN, lost their jobs because of Trump's bad business decisions.
Much like plumbers & electricians, people hire portfolio managers because they are experts in their field, thus maximizing the quality of their investments. Of the few people I know who make their own investment choices, they do a great deal of research before choosing a mutual or bond fund. I agree money management skills should be taught in schools but that sort of contradicts your point. On the one had you're saying people's bad investment choices are at fault and on the other that they aren't taught proper money management skills which would indicate they didn't learn how to make good choices.
Someone who thinks one company going under has the same impact on the market as an entire sector of the economy, thinks retirement funds have elections, that there's a "board of retirement system" and that bond funds aren't for the average investor, is hardly in a position to judge choices other people make.
Whether a retired person has a mortgage is really none of your business and doesn't necessarily reflect badly on them. If they can afford the payments and don't mind having a mortgage, so what? My Nana, who died a month ago, had 2 credit cards. One she used for regular expenses, prescriptions, vet appointments for her precious little Sammy and the like, she paid off every month. The other, she used for bigger expenses, like hospital expenses that weren't paid by either Medicare or her supplement. She lived in California who probably has the shittiest Medicare supplements in the country (kinda like 0bamacare, only the available plans got worse after it was passed). Not only are the deductibles high, so are copays and there are limits to what they'll pay for during a hospital stay. Not once did she miss a payment and every single month she paid more than the monthly amount.
As for having a savings plan, there's no way in hell, I'm going to hold anyone in her generation accountable for not having one. She came of age during the Great Depression and Roosevelt's Social Security plan. People in her generation were told during their entire lives that SS WAS their retirement plan. To them, it was like investing in a 401k. Money was deducted from their paychecks so why wouldn't they think they were investing in their future? Obviously, you're a very special snowflake since you know more than many seniors of "the Greatest Generation". Yes, many companies began offering retirement plans while they were still working but my grandparents were part of "the working poor" and my grandfather didn't have the kind of jobs that provided such luxuries. They saw their purpose as working to provide a better life for their sons.
She (and many women like her) lived during a time when women simply did not make financial decisions for the family. She also stopped going to school when she was about 14. She lived on a farm with 10 brothers and sisters and was needed at home. It was more important that her brothers graduated so the girls had to help with farm chores. She went from her house to my grandfather's house and her job was keeping house and raising 3 boys. She never even learned to drive. The first time she ever had any independence was when my Pa died. It was a steep learning curve for her but, in spite of her ONE credit card with an unpaid balance, she saved enough money (with the help of a small life insurance policy) to pay off her ONE debt and pay for her cremation. Don't judge others until you've been in their shoes. You don't seem to have an ounce of compassion for anyone but yourself.
Cindie
I know nothing of 401K's and retirement funds, I do know about home and property investments though. I don't think there was a sane person in the entire world who didn't see the housing crash coming! I sold what I could a few years to soon but did well, I didn't think the boom was going to last nearly as long as it was. When I was buying houses for 129000.00 and less then a year selling for 169000.00 I KNEW it was coming. I watched houses worth 35000.00 selling for over a hundred thousand and folks financing 110% whose payments were 50-60% of their salary.
You obviously know more then me about stocks and such. In my opinion the stock market is way over valued, companies buying their own stocks back, federal money dumped in, super low interest rates and so on.
What's your opinion?
-
I know nothing of 401K's and retirement funds, I do know about home and property investments though. I don't think there was a sane person in the entire world who didn't see the housing crash coming! I sold what I could a few years to soon but did well, I didn't think the boom was going to last nearly as long as it was. When I was buying houses for 129000.00 and less then a year selling for 169000.00 I KNEW it was coming. I watched houses worth 35000.00 selling for over a hundred thousand and folks financing 110% whose payments were 50-60% of their salary.
You obviously know more then me about stocks and such. In my opinion the stock market is way over valued, companies buying their own stocks back, federal money dumped in, super low interest rates and so on.
What's your opinion?
Our house is slightly under water but since we plan living her until we're too old to take care of it, I don't really care. By then the value will have gone up anyway and we pay extra each month to bring down the principal. I actually don't know all that much about the market but I do a ton of research on the mutual & bond funds in our 401k and try to keep on top of general news about the market. FOX Business News is a really great resource. And I keep track of what's going on with our particular funds. I don't think it's ever NOT over valued.
Cindie
-
There's plenty on his business practices.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/joanlappin/2011/05/01/business-illusionist-donald-trump-perfect-for-president/ (http://www.forbes.com/sites/joanlappin/2011/05/01/business-illusionist-donald-trump-perfect-for-president/)
http://www.cracked.com/blog/10-stories-about-donald-trump-you-wont-believe-are-true/ (http://www.cracked.com/blog/10-stories-about-donald-trump-you-wont-believe-are-true/)
So taking the only serious link...Forbes into consideration...how is he any different than any other entrepreneur who has failed...rebuilt...lost and bounced back?
Shareholders in these companies are warned six ways from Sunday about the risk of investing...by their brokers...by the wording in the documents they sign etc etc.
That's why there is the term "high risk, high reward". No one forced these people to invest. And what's not being said is that the rich people that invest in these ventures...and lost money...simply use it as a write off on their taxes.
At the end of the day...other than just your own blather and an opinion piece in Forbes...you haven't shown why Trump is disqualified from being President.
Try harder next time.
-
So taking the only serious link...Forbes into consideration...how is he any different than any other entrepreneur who has failed...rebuilt...lost and bounced back?
Shareholders in these companies are warned six ways from Sunday about the risk of investing...by their brokers...by the wording in the documents they sign etc etc.
That's why there is the term "high risk, high reward". No one forced these people to invest. And what's not being said is that the rich people that invest in these ventures...and lost money...simply use it as a write off on their taxes.
At the end of the day...other than just your own blather and an opinion piece in Forbes...you haven't shown why Trump is disqualified from being President.
Try harder next time.
I think I made it pretty clear. I said I don't want someone who will just rape the system then just walk away by claiming bankruptcy. How will this equate to his running the government? So he will continue to spend just like his businesses did, OK. Then just walk away when things get tough and say well we aren't paying our bill. This always like his businesses screw those on the bottom, the blue collar guy barely making it. The government doesn't and can't work like that. Also it's not how MOST or many entrepreneurs work as he said, I think last year only 3% of businesses filed bankruptcy.
I see you are mimicking his talking point he used in the debate.
-
I think I made it pretty clear.
What you made clear is that you like to use opposition research as your basis/talking points to bash Trump.
I said I don't want someone who will just rape the system then just walk away by claiming bankruptcy.
And you know for a fact that's what he's done how exactly?
How will this equate to his running the government?
So he will continue to spend just like his businesses did, OK. Then just walk away when things get tough and say well we aren't paying our bill.The government doesn't and can't work like that.
No what the Government does is worse than anything you could ever try to tie Trump to. If the Government were run under the rules of corporate America they'd have been forced to file for Chapter 11 a long time ago and most of the people running the goverment would have been put in jail.
Instead the Government gets to print money as it wishes and continue to spend like a drunken sailor on shore leave. To compare how someone runs a business in Corporate America to how the government handles it's affairs is apples and oranges and shows you don't really understand how things work.
The Federal Government hits the debt ceiling...no worries...we'll just raise it. Need money for the General budget fund...hey we've got that covered...we'll raid the Social Security trust fund.
Need $$$$ for Obamacare? We'll raid the VA budget of $700 million to make it work.
Tell me how many people you know that would be able to get away with that kind of fiscal malfeasance in the real world? None. Just ask Jon Corzine how well his trying to run an investment firm like the Dems ran Congress worked out for him?
Need to mask just how bad your fiscal policies are until you can get out of office? Have your Finance chief pump $800 billion into the stock market every quarter and give it a fancy term like "Qualatative Easing".
Also it's not how MOST or many entrepreneurs work as he said, I think last year only 3% of businesses filed bankruptcy.
You don't know much about business do you? How many business start ups fail before they hit onthe one that is successful?
I've seen small business owners...oilmen with companies of 200+ employees...bar owners..banks...file bankruptcy on several occasions.
Were they trying to screw customers...stockholders or employees?
No. It's all about economics and market forces and bubbles and all kinds of stuff that you seem to not take into consideration in your unabashed hatred of Donald Trump.
You just know you hate Trump and that's all you need to know.
This always like his businesses screw those on the bottom, the blue collar guy barely making it.
Wish you were that outraged at how the Democrats and the Federal government are screwing everyone.
I see you are mimicking his talking point he used in the debate.
Really? That's news to me The debate was in the middle of the night here in Germany and I had to work the next day and I didn't get to watch the rebroadcast on AFN either. What I know of the debates I've read on Breitbart...listened to on Rush and Levin and picked up snippets here and there on Gateway Pundit and Red State.
So your little attempt at a "gotcha"...just crashed and burned.
Like I said before...try harder next time.
-
What you made clear is that you like to use opposition research as your basis/talking points to bash Trump.
And you know for a fact that's what he's done how exactly?
How will this equate to his running the government?
No what the Government does is worse than anything you could ever try to tie Trump to. If the Government were run under the rules of corporate America they'd have been forced to file for Chapter 11 a long time ago and most of the people running the goverment would have been put in jail.
Instead the Government gets to print money as it wishes and continue to spend like a drunken sailor on shore leave. To compare how someone runs a business in Corporate America to how the government handles it's affairs is apples and oranges and shows you don't really understand how things work.
The Federal Government hits the debt ceiling...no worries...we'll just raise it. Need money for the General budget fund...hey we've got that covered...we'll raid the Social Security trust fund.
Need $$$$ for Obamacare? We'll raid the VA budget of $700 million to make it work.
Tell me how many people you know that would be able to get away with that kind of fiscal malfeasance in the real world? None. Just ask Jon Corzine how well his trying to run an investment firm like the Dems ran Congress worked out for him?
Need to mask just how bad your fiscal policies are until you can get out of office? Have your Finance chief pump $800 billion into the stock market every quarter and give it a fancy term like "Qualatative Easing".
You don't know much about business do you? How many business start ups fail before they hit onthe one that is successful?
I've seen small business owners...oilmen with companies of 200+ employees...bar owners..banks...file bankruptcy on several occasions.
Were they trying to screw customers...stockholders or employees?
No. It's all about economics and market forces and bubbles and all kinds of stuff that you seem to not take into consideration in your unabashed hatred of Donald Trump.
You just know you hate Trump and that's all you need to know.
Wish you were that outraged at how the Democrats and the Federal government are screwing everyone.
Really? That's news to me The debate was in the middle of the night here in Germany and I had to work the next day and I didn't get to watch the rebroadcast on AFN either. What I know of the debates I've read on Breitbart...listened to on Rush and Levin and picked up snippets here and there on Gateway Pundit and Red State.
So your little attempt at a "gotcha"...just crashed and burned.
Like I said before...try harder next time.
I don't debate with those who twist what I say. I have said these were my opinions. You on the other hand just make things up saying I said things i didn't. :banghead: The only folks who do this are those with nothing.
It's pretty obvious Trump took money from the businesses he ran then walked away(claimed bankruptcy). That's how I know.
I'm sorry you know so many businesses that fail, maybe you should try new friends. I had my own business for more then a decade and did pretty well, ran another for 5 of seven years before that and another for 5 years after that.
The vast majority of bankruptcies are now filed by consumers and not by businesses. In 1980, businesses accounted for 13 percent of bankruptcies. Today, they account for about 3 percent. (https://www.debt.org/bankruptcy/statistics/)
Anyway you put it he condemns the government and it's spending yet much of his money came from the government as well as government protection. This is not conservative in my opinion.
Peace my brothern in conservatism. :wink:
-
Businesses fail at a rate of about 50% in the first 5 years.
After 10 years about 30% are still viable.
Quoting the personal bankruptcy rate, and pointing out it's very often medically related... is a liberal talking point.
Very often a lib will jump from medical bankruptcy to single payer.
-
Businesses fail at a rate of about 50% in the first 5 years.
After 10 years about 30% are still viable.
Quoting the personal bankruptcy rate, and pointing out it's very often medically related... is a liberal talking point.
Very often a lib will jump from medical bankruptcy to single payer.
This dyke looking reporter hates Trump. Looks like she needs to get laid. She has a mug on her that would make a freight train take a dirt road. I seriously doubt that she has ever ran a business. Another Ivy League grad in journalism that is in her own little world of liberal fruitcakes.
I lost money in the real estate crash along with a lot of other people. However, I have made up for it and more with my rental beach front condo in Florida. That is how many people operate. They lose on one deal and make it up on another deal. Real estate investing is a great way to make money. No one makes money on every deal. Investing is a risk. Just wanted Stranger to understand that fact.
-
Did you even read what I wrote? Enron was ONE company. Of course it wouldn't affect other sectors of the market. Obviously if you had investments in other sectors you wouldn't take a very hard hit. A portfolio genius like you should know this. Yes, diversifying is a wonderful thing and that's why 401ks and other investment plans usually have diverse portfolios. This was different because the housing sector is a large part of the economy. When it hit bottom it negatively affected other major sectors, some significantly because they provide a large amount of products and services to it.
Retirement funds DO NOT have elections. Companies have elections. But even then you have no say in who sits on the board. If, for instance, people have Alcoa as part of their portfolio, they will get the little prospectus in the mail and the opportunity to vote for board members. It's pretty meaningless, however, because people who own the company (that means they have most of the stock) will determine who is on the board. Even if a company that manages funds changes their Board of Directors, that really has nothing to do with the funds individual brokers manage.
What the hell is the "board of retirement system"? Google it, I dare you. It doesn't exist. Like I said, did you even read my post? I actually was the one who was talking about how 401k's and the market work, that there are safer sectors and riskier sectors. And yes, most companies have some choices available but it's limited by what the company you work for is offering. Most of them use a particular investment firm (or firms) and you choose from among the ones they offer to for that particular plan. My husband's company uses Fidelity. They have a bazillion plans but we have a choice of about 30 of them.
Again, you don't know what you're talking about. There are several bond funds available through our 401k and we have a couple for DIVERSIFICATION. Just to provide you with proof, try these links:
Best Funds for Your 401k (http://www.kiplinger.com/article/investing/T041-C000-S002-best-funds-for-your-401-k.html)
The 5 Best Funds for Your 401k (http://investorplace.com/2015/02/5-best-vanguard-funds-401k/#.VcqbqyZVhvE)
20 Best Bond Only Mutual Funds (http://www.thestreet.com/topic/19341/top-bond-only-mutual-funds.html) This one was written in June and shows both the bond rating (every single one is an A+) and the risk grade (all but one are B or better).
These are not for the Trumps of the world but for regular people.
Who the hell was talking about people who piss their money away other than you talking about your friend? And, as I recall, you were practically giddy about Trump's casinos going bankrupt specifically because your idiot friend developed a gambling addiction and is on the run from the mob or whatever. I think the people you should be thinking about, are those THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN, lost their jobs because of Trump's bad business decisions.
Much like plumbers & electricians, people hire portfolio managers because they are experts in their field, thus maximizing the quality of their investments. Of the few people I know who make their own investment choices, they do a great deal of research before choosing a mutual or bond fund. I agree money management skills should be taught in schools but that sort of contradicts your point. On the one had you're saying people's bad investment choices are at fault and on the other that they aren't taught proper money management skills which would indicate they didn't learn how to make good choices.
Someone who thinks one company going under has the same impact on the market as an entire sector of the economy, thinks retirement funds have elections, that there's a "board of retirement system" and that bond funds aren't for the average investor, is hardly in a position to judge choices other people make.
Whether a retired person has a mortgage is really none of your business and doesn't necessarily reflect badly on them. If they can afford the payments and don't mind having a mortgage, so what? My Nana, who died a month ago, had 2 credit cards. One she used for regular expenses, prescriptions, vet appointments for her precious little Sammy and the like, she paid off every month. The other, she used for bigger expenses, like hospital expenses that weren't paid by either Medicare or her supplement. She lived in California who probably has the shittiest Medicare supplements in the country (kinda like 0bamacare, only the available plans got worse after it was passed). Not only are the deductibles high, so are copays and there are limits to what they'll pay for during a hospital stay. Not once did she miss a payment and every single month she paid more than the monthly amount.
As for having a savings plan, there's no way in hell, I'm going to hold anyone in her generation accountable for not having one. She came of age during the Great Depression and Roosevelt's Social Security plan. People in her generation were told during their entire lives that SS WAS their retirement plan. To them, it was like investing in a 401k. Money was deducted from their paychecks so why wouldn't they think they were investing in their future? Obviously, you're a very special snowflake since you know more than many seniors of "the Greatest Generation". Yes, many companies began offering retirement plans while they were still working but my grandparents were part of "the working poor" and my grandfather didn't have the kind of jobs that provided such luxuries. They saw their purpose as working to provide a better life for their sons.
She (and many women like her) lived during a time when women simply did not make financial decisions for the family. She also stopped going to school when she was about 14. She lived on a farm with 10 brothers and sisters and was needed at home. It was more important that her brothers graduated so the girls had to help with farm chores. She went from her house to my grandfather's house and her job was keeping house and raising 3 boys. She never even learned to drive. The first time she ever had any independence was when my Pa died. It was a steep learning curve for her but, in spite of her ONE credit card with an unpaid balance, she saved enough money (with the help of a small life insurance policy) to pay off her ONE debt and pay for her cremation. Don't judge others until you've been in their shoes. You don't seem to have an ounce of compassion for anyone but yourself.
Cindie
I will put my portfolio up against yours any day of the week. Unlike you, I do not have a mortgage or credit card debt. I own my home and paid cash for a beach condo in FL. I paid cash for the 2 late model cars that I own. I have done quite with oil royalties and real estate. Stock market is for suckers IMO. Compared to you I am a financial genius.
My parents grew up in the depression. My mom and dad did not go to high school. My dad was a printer who made a moderate income and my mom stayed home. They did not buy anything on credit with the exception of a house. They also purchased 3 rental house. My mom was very astute in financial affairs unlike you and your family.
You have got one thing right and that is a private corporations, the company rather than the employees, decide on the officers of a 401k. That is not how it works for civil service employees. They have a choice of 2 different savings accounts (401A & 457). Our Lasers Retirements plan has elections for officers every couple of years.
As far as having compassions on others, I give to 6 charities including 2 foods bank. So you are full of shit and your eyes are brown (not red). :lmao:
-
I agree the bailout was a farce!!! If GM, GE and the banks were allowed to go belly up we as a country would be much further ahead and have less debt. Lets not forget Solyndra and all them shovel ready jobs.
Also the last I checked GM paid back the bailout with more borrowed government money. ::)
GM gave their employees large bonus's rather than pay down the debt owed to the government. What made it even worse was that the bailout money was used to build plants in China and close ones in the US. GM is also keeping those China profits overseas which entitles them to pay zero income tax. The law needs to be changed, and that is one of Trump's pet peeves. We are getting ripped off coming and going by our stupid legislators in DC.
-
This dyke looking reporter hates Trump. Looks like she needs to get laid. She has a mug on her that would make a freight train take a dirt road. I seriously doubt that she has ever ran a business. Another Ivy League grad in journalism that is in her own little world of liberal fruitcakes.
I lost money in the real estate crash along with a lot of other people. However, I have made up for it and more with my rental beach front condo in Florida. That is how many people operate. They lose on one deal and make it up on another deal. Real estate investing is a great way to make money. No one makes money on every deal. Investing is a risk. Just wanted Stranger to understand that fact.
You have to be talking about Candy Crowley.
The most heinous TV "journalist" in nearly every respect.
A face for radio.
A voice for print.
A figure that would make infinity nauseous, and a Toledo scale yell "Holy Toledo".
The most inaptly named TV news personality in history.
-
You have to be talking about Candy Crowley.
The most heinous TV "journalist" in nearly every respect.
A face for radio.
A voice for print.
A figure that would make infinity nauseous, and a Toledo scale yell "Holy Toledo".
The most inaptly named TV news personality in history.
H5
-
I will put my portfolio up against yours any day of the week. Unlike you, I do not have a mortgage or credit card debt. I own my home and paid cash for a beach condo in FL. I paid cash for the 2 late model cars that I own. I have done quite with oil royalties and real estate. Stock market is for suckers IMO. Compared to you I am a financial genius.
My parents grew up in the depression. My mom and dad did not go to high school. My dad was a printer who made a moderate income and my mom stayed home. They did not buy anything on credit with the exception of a house. They also purchased 3 rental house. My mom was very astute in financial affairs unlike you and your family.
You have got one thing right and that is a private corporations, the company rather than the employees, decide on the officers of a 401k. That is not how it works for civil service employees. They have a choice of 2 different savings accounts (401A & 457). Our Lasers Retirements plan has elections for officers every couple of years.
As far as having compassions on others, I give to 6 charities including 2 foods bank. So you are full of shit and your eyes are brown (not red). :lmao:
Sounds like you have done well. Yes real estate is a risk. Being invested in the market is a risk. There is no investment without risk. I reside in Florida as well and own my own home. I saw my property value triple and was considering buying the vacant lot next door; when I called for the price, the property alone was selling for over $225,000! The property sits on a canal with access to the gulf but is only a normal sized lot. Well, we decided at the time not to buy because prices had gotten so ridiculously high. Soon after, the market fell and we had to call the owner of the property as one of his trees had fallen on to our property. We learned that the guy was broke and upside down on the vacant property. He's still upside down. They say you shouldn't "time" the markets but, timing is everything it seems.
Logic would indicate to me that the stock market (just like the dot.com market) cannot continue to rise. Real estate is starting to make a comeback, but I see if a DEM getting in office, that will be short lived.
-
I will put my portfolio up against yours any day of the week. Unlike you, I do not have a mortgage or credit card debt. I own my home and paid cash for a beach condo in FL. I paid cash for the 2 late model cars that I own. I have done quite with oil royalties and real estate. Stock market is for suckers IMO. Compared to you I am a financial genius.
My parents grew up in the depression. My mom and dad did not go to high school. My dad was a printer who made a moderate income and my mom stayed home. They did not buy anything on credit with the exception of a house. They also purchased 3 rental house. My mom was very astute in financial affairs unlike you and your family.
You have got one thing right and that is a private corporations, the company rather than the employees, decide on the officers of a 401k. That is not how it works for civil service employees. They have a choice of 2 different savings accounts (401A & 457). Our Lasers Retirements plan has elections for officers every couple of years.
As far as having compassions on others, I give to 6 charities including 2 foods bank. So you are full of shit and your eyes are brown (not red). :lmao:
You must be a democrat because they're the only people I know who brag as much as you.
Good for you and your portfolio. I'm not the least bit interested in comparing gun calibers with you. My comments were general, not directed at you personally and you DO NOT have basic understanding of some very important aspects of the market. Retirement funds DO NOT have elections. Period. There is NO "board of retirement system" and bonds ARE often part of the small investors portfolio and many of them are quite safe. If you'd gone to any of the links I posted, especially the last one, there was a list of excellent bond funds with excellent safety ratings. I'm not an expert by any stretch of the imagination and I knew these things.
As far as debt goes, we don't have any credit cards ON PURPOSE, I was talking about my nana because your snide comments about any old person who wasn't like you or chose to manage their money differently than you are "doing it wrong". You're not an expert on everyone else's lives so you have NO business deciding how other elderly people choose to manage their retirement. It's not even any of your business.
You have NO idea about my family's financial situation so back the **** off! I used examples from my own life to illustrate that other people's circumstances might be different than yours but that doesn't make them irresponsible. My Pa died when my Nana was in her 70's. That was the first time in her life she ever had to manage her affairs. Having credit cards did not make her irresponsible. In her 70's, she established her own (excellent) credit. For someone who had never done her family finances, I think that's spectacular.
Personally, I have no interest in buying rental property. My mom and stepfather had a couple of duplexes and the work and money you have to put into maintenance, the clean up when tenants move isn't worth it. As for my house being under water, I live in Oregon in the heart of timber country. My very small town is/was a logging town. Most were 3rd or 4th generation logging companies. When the housing market tanked, it was a twofer for us. We constantly battle city liberal tree huggers in addition to the housing market tanking. This affected nearly every business in this town from banks to barber shops to grocery stores to the real estate and rental market to banks. That's why houses in this were/are underwater. Granted, if you'd been here, since everything you or your family touches turns to gold, you would've known a several years in advance that you needed to close your logging operation and move onto another career, even though this was all you've known your entire lives. Obviously you're better than everyone else (or at least think you are) and know how everyone else should live and manage their finances.
Government retirement plans are not like private sector plans. Government workers are paid and their retirement funds funded by people like me whose tax dollars go to pay your salaries and your cadillac benefit plans so instead of being an ass you might want to be grateful that money was confiscated out of our paychecks with no say from us to pay for your ass. When you guys go on strike, those of us who pay your salaries and benefits (don't even try to tell me we don't because you'd be lying, especially workers who are already retired) are held hostage, never once have we had a say whether you get your damn raise or more benefits.
What the hell does contributing to charities have to do with anything? Having compassion was related to judging other people for not making the same choices as you, not whether you gave to charities. Comprehension is your friend. Read a post more than once to make sure you understand it. Man, you're an asshole!
Cindie
-
Sounds like you have done well. Yes real estate is a risk. Being invested in the market is a risk. There is no investment without risk. I reside in Florida as well and own my own home. I saw my property value triple and was considering buying the vacant lot next door; when I called for the price, the property alone was selling for over $225,000! The property sits on a canal with access to the gulf but is only a normal sized lot. Well, we decided at the time not to buy because prices had gotten so ridiculously high. Soon after, the market fell and we had to call the owner of the property as one of his trees had fallen on to our property. We learned that the guy was broke and upside down on the vacant property. He's still upside down. They say you shouldn't "time" the markets but, timing is everything it seems.
Logic would indicate to me that the stock market (just like the dot.com market) cannot continue to rise. Real estate is starting to make a comeback, but I see if a DEM getting in office, that will be short lived.
My house doubled in value after Katrina. Several years later, I saw an opportunity to buy one of the best beach front condos in Perdido Key as an investment. I rent it out, can use it for 30 personal days a year, depreciate it, and wind up paying little or no income taxes on the profits. Probably never sell it because I love going to the beach.
It is my understanding that if a owners tree damages your property that it is considered an act of god, and your are responsible for the damage. An exception to that is if the owner knew the tree was decayed or dead limbs needed pruning.
-
You must be a democrat because they're the only people I know who brag as much as you.
Good for you and your portfolio. I'm not the least bit interested in comparing gun calibers with you. My comments were general, not directed at you personally and you DO NOT have basic understanding of some very important aspects of the market. Retirement funds DO NOT have elections. Period. There is NO "board of retirement system" and bonds ARE often part of the small investors portfolio and many of them are quite safe. If you'd gone to any of the links I posted, especially the last one, there was a list of excellent bond funds with excellent safety ratings. I'm not an expert by any stretch of the imagination and I knew these things.
As far as debt goes, we don't have any credit cards ON PURPOSE, I was talking about my nana because your snide comments about any old person who wasn't like you or chose to manage their money differently than you are "doing it wrong". You're not an expert on everyone else's lives so you have NO business deciding how other elderly people choose to manage their retirement. It's not even any of your business.
You have NO idea about my family's financial situation so back the **** off! I used examples from my own life to illustrate that other people's circumstances might be different than yours but that doesn't make them irresponsible. My Pa died when my Nana was in her 70's. That was the first time in her life she ever had to manage her affairs. Having credit cards did not make her irresponsible. In her 70's, she established her own (excellent) credit. For someone who had never done her family finances, I think that's spectacular.
Personally, I have no interest in buying rental property. My mom and stepfather had a couple of duplexes and the work and money you have to put into maintenance, the clean up when tenants move isn't worth it. As for my house being under water, I live in Oregon in the heart of timber country. My very small town is/was a logging town. Most were 3rd or 4th generation logging companies. When the housing market tanked, it was a twofer for us. We constantly battle city liberal tree huggers in addition to the housing market tanking. This affected nearly every business in this town from banks to barber shops to grocery stores to the real estate and rental market to banks. That's why houses in this were/are underwater. Granted, if you'd been here, since everything you or your family touches turns to gold, you would've known a several years in advance that you needed to close your logging operation and move onto another career, even though this was all you've known your entire lives. Obviously you're better than everyone else (or at least think you are) and know how everyone else should live and manage their finances.
Government retirement plans are not like private sector plans. Government workers are paid and their retirement funds funded by people like me whose tax dollars go to pay your salaries and your cadillac benefit plans so instead of being an ass you might want to be grateful that money was confiscated out of our paychecks with no say from us to pay for your ass. When you guys go on strike, those of us who pay your salaries and benefits (don't even try to tell me we don't because you'd be lying, especially workers who are already retired) are held hostage, never once have we had a say whether you get your damn raise or more benefits.
What the hell does contributing to charities have to do with anything? Having compassion was related to judging other people for not making the same choices as you, not whether you gave to charities. Comprehension is your friend. Read a post more than once to make sure you understand it. Man, you're an asshole!
Cindie
Calm down Queenie. I would not want you to have a heart attack and croak.
Don't have time for your stupidness. Going to the beach in the am. Always wonder what the little people like you are doing! :lmao: Better start watching S. Orman on how to get out of debt and manage your finances.
BTW, it takes an asshole to know an asshole.
-
Calm down Queenie. I would not want you to have a heart attack and croak.
Don't have time for your stupidness. Going to the beach in the am. Always wonder what the little people like you are doing! :lmao: Better start watching S. Orman on how to get out of debt and manage your finances.
BTW, it takes an asshole to know an asshole.
Yes, you have done well and are enjoying life while us "little people" are struggling to get by. Some have more than most. I enjoy living on the water, warm weather, and taking a dip in my pool, but I am also faced with the same struggles (more than most) as others. I consider myself rich in faith and family. At the end of the day, you really need to remember that you put on your big boy pants and tie your shoes just like everyone else and are no better than the unfortunate soul who doesn't know where his/her next meal is coming from. To brag about your lifestyle and how much money you have is really revealing and speaks volumes.
-
Yes, you have done well and are enjoying life while us "little people" are struggling to get by. Some have more than most. I enjoy living on the water, warm weather, and taking a dip in my pool, but I am also faced with the same struggles (more than most) as others. I consider myself rich in faith and family. At the end of the day, you really need to remember that you put on your big boy pants and tie your shoes just like everyone else and are no better than the unfortunate soul who doesn't know where his/her next meal is coming from. To brag about your lifestyle and how much money you have is really revealing and speaks volumes.
Yes, you have done well and are enjoying life while us "little people" are struggling to get by. Some have more than most. I enjoy living on the water, warm weather, and taking a dip in my pool, but I am also faced with the same struggles (more than most) as others. I consider myself rich in faith and family. At the end of the day, you really need to remember that you put on your big boy pants and tie your shoes just like everyone else and are no better than the unfortunate soul who doesn't know where his/her next meal is coming from. To brag about your lifestyle and how much money you have is really revealing and speaks volumes.
I understand where you are coming from. My post was directed only at Dellahoussie; she rained on my parade so I was giving it back to her. If my post offended anyone, else I am sorry.
After my split up with my ex, I did not have a job, no place to live, a beat up Pinto and a few dollars in my pocket. So, I know hard times. Enjoying my first day at the beach even though it rained cats and dogs.
-
Calm down Queenie. I would not want you to have a heart attack and croak.
Don't have time for your stupidness. Going to the beach in the am. Always wonder what the little people like you are doing! :lmao: Better start watching S. Orman on how to get out of debt and manage your finances.
BTW, it takes an asshole to know an asshole.
No matter what I try to explain to you, you come back with some shitty response. You're judging people for not living up to your standards and not even comprehending what I've been trying to discuss. Not everyone places the same importance on money as you do or bases their self worth on thinking they're better than everyone who hasn't made the same choices or been as lucky as you.
You're hostile to everyone on this board who doesn't agree with you. Don't you get tired of being angry and a braggart all the time? Why are you even here? I'm not being facetious, I seriously don't understand why you'd want to be in a place where you have so many negative encounters with people. There are other places where you'd fit in better.
You have no desire to have any kind of a conversation . You don't respond to the points people make. Half the time you respond with rambling crap that has nothing to do with the discussion. I don't need Suzy Orman because we're doing Dave Ramsey's course. I have no desire to engage with you again, it's an effort in futility and a waste of my time.
Cindie
-
I know it can be hard to do, but as conservatives we should find areas of agreement with those who have conservative principles.
Then we should focus as much of our attention there as possible.
-
I understand where you are coming from. My post was directed only at Dellahoussie; she rained on my parade so I was giving it back to her. If my post offended anyone, else I am sorry.
After my split up with my ex, I did not have a job, no place to live, a beat up Pinto and a few dollars in my pocket. So, I know hard times. Enjoying my first day at the beach even though it rained cats and dogs.
I hear that ****ing off is a great way to increase the value of your portfolio. You should try it.
Cindie doesn't need me to defend her, but seriously: trying to win an argument with your portfolio is bush league.
-
Bringing the conversation back to the primaries, I really liked Trump's immigration plan. Cruz had the same plan before it was cool, though.
Cindie
-
Bringing the conversation back to the primaries, I really liked Trump's immigration plan. Cruz had the same plan before it was cool, though.
Cindie
I heard some lib attacking the anchor baby part by saying that there aren't that many. 1 is too effing many.
-
I hear that ****ing off is a great way to increase the value of your portfolio. You should try it.
Cindie doesn't need me to defend her, but seriously: trying to win an argument with your portfolio is bush league.
She was the first one to mention finances. So I rubbed her nose in mine. The post was meant for her ONLY. If you do not like it, tough shit.
-
I know it can be hard to do, but as conservatives we should find areas of agreement with those who have conservative principles.
Then we should focus as much of our attention there as possible.
AMEN to that!!!!!
I agree but when you have a clear RINO bragging to be conservative this must be pointed out and explained when possible!
-
She was the first one to mention finances. So I rubbed her nose in mine. The post was meant for her ONLY. If you do not like it, tough shit.
Posts meant for her only are called PMs, asshole. If I can see it, I can respond to it. If you're so ****ing rich, take your sanctimony back to your yacht and go live it up.
-
I heard some lib attacking the anchor baby part by saying that there aren't that many. 1 is too effing many.
An example of a "Dreamer" that 0bama (and Jeb) wants to keep in this country out of compassion. The first time I heard this, I cried. I have no idea how to post facebook videos but here's the link.
Laura Wilkerson Testimony on the Death of Her Son (https://www.facebook.com/CSPAN/videos/10153681020355579/)
-
I know it can be hard to do, but as conservatives we should find areas of agreement with those who have conservative principles.
Then we should focus as much of our attention there as possible.
Yeah, gotta say reading this was quite depressing. I'd much rather beat up on the Democrats. And I do love Trump and will vote for him. We've tried the old way, elected the same old politicians spewing the same old shit and they've given us heartburn while they sat around on their yachts sipping martinis and laughing their asses off at all us dumbasses who voted for them (both parties). Trump may be, hell, he is proud of, being an asshole, but he could be America's asshole. I really think he could turn this sinking ship of State around before we're all taking a dive overboard. Maybe I'm wrong, but God knows he couldn't be half the disaster that Obama was. I get that he did business dirty tricks (I guess?) as do all business people. Hubby and I have been in the market since 1981 (me) and 1984 (when we married both of us) and we've lost tons of money (to us) several times. You have to get back up and rebound as best you can. I see Trump as doing this, on a vastly more grand scale. Never dabbled in real estate because we saw too many military friends lose their shirts over a PCS move and an unsold/unrented domicile at the old duty station. So we're 56 and have another 10 years on our mortgage. C'est la vie. We are extremely blessed and damn well know it that he has a 30-year vested military pension, yeah, funded by the taxpayer (including us), but I like to think he did earn it with wartime deployments and countless peacetime field exercises. Those suck, by the way. I never got to shower and smelled almost as bad as Bill Clinton's jock strap by the time I came out of the field. :-)
Although I do admire Trump for the negotiating braggart but truly fascinating character that he is, I will hold my nose and vote for almost any other Republican candidate. I may as well chalk up a third loss after McCain and Romney. But, for once since Reagan, I'd like to be a winner who could ALSO be proud of my president. I'm really tired of waiting. For all of Trump's bad points, duly noted, I find that I just don't care if only he can do one fourth of what he promises to deliver and makes my nation one I can be happy to live in again instead of breaking down and crying over the utter stupidity of our misrepresentatives in DC and their futility in helping America. And if he's all bark and no bite, well, there's four years down the road from now. We were SUPPOSED to heave Obama overboard in 2012 but everyone was too fixated on playing nice and see where that got us. Some times just call for a real ****ing asshole.
One last note, I don't think Hilarity will be the next Dim candidate because even O's corrupt DoJ can't ignore an FBI investigation. And thank God for Trey Gowdy and I hope he runs for something higher than Representative next time. If not for his dogged attempts to get some sort of justice for the murders of those four wonderful, brave Americans, Hitlery probably would be waddling full steam ahead towards the nomination.
-
^Yeah, I hope Hitlary(or Hilarity, I don't know which is better), pays dearly for her role in Benghazi.
Her flippant as usual remark of "what difference, at this point...does it make?" seemed at the time to be the departing salvo that would exonerate her.
-
^Yeah, I hope Hitlary(or Hilarity, I don't know which is better), pays dearly for her role in Benghazi.
Her flippant as usual remark of "what difference, at this point...does it make?" seemed at the time to be the departing salvo that would exonerate her.
Well if there's any truth to the Biden/Warren meeting, she won't be the nominee. 0bama's got her over a barrel. If the Dems end up with that combo, they left will go literally ga-ga with the fake Indian on the ticket. You will see the same level of enthusiasm they had with 0bama. We better make sure we provide a candidate the rest of the country can vote FOR and who won't insure half (or more) of the base staying home. The problem with cult figures like 0bama & Warren (and even Trump to a certain extent, though I hope we're a little smarter than the left), people end up more devoted to them than principles. It scares me because this may very well be our last chance to right this sinking ship.
One of the biggest problems I have with Trump and it's a huge hurdle for me to get over, is his 3rd party threat. Not just that he made it, but he made it so early, when nothing had happened yet. And it's conditional, not on principles: "I'll run 3rd party if amnesty is part of the GOP platform" or "I'll consider a 3rd party run if repealing 0bamacare isn't on the GOP agenda". His threat is conditional depending on how the party treats HIM! Only he knows what that is. Considering how the party treats Cruz (and has treated him since he became a senator), Trumps bar better be pretty fricking high.
I wouldn't even have a problem voting for him. I just don't like threats. We have great conservatives in this party, some who've been working like dogs from the inside to change things. It's slow but I see it happening, especially where it matters, at local and state levels. That's where real, sustainable change happens. Someone with Trumps charisma and personality could and should be a driving force behind this change. I don't see how he can do that if he's more concerned about how he's being treated.
cindie
-
Yeah, gotta say reading this was quite depressing. I'd much rather beat up on the Democrats. And I do love Trump and will vote for him. We've tried the old way, elected the same old politicians spewing the same old shit and they've given us heartburn while they sat around on their yachts sipping martinis and laughing their asses off at all us dumbasses who voted for them (both parties). Trump may be, hell, he is proud of, being an asshole, but he could be America's asshole. I really think he could turn this sinking ship of State around before we're all taking a dive overboard. Maybe I'm wrong, but God knows he couldn't be half the disaster that Obama was. I get that he did business dirty tricks (I guess?) as do all business people. Hubby and I have been in the market since 1981 (me) and 1984 (when we married both of us) and we've lost tons of money (to us) several times. You have to get back up and rebound as best you can. I see Trump as doing this, on a vastly more grand scale. Never dabbled in real estate because we saw too many military friends lose their shirts over a PCS move and an unsold/unrented domicile at the old duty station. So we're 56 and have another 10 years on our mortgage. C'est la vie. We are extremely blessed and damn well know it that he has a 30-year vested military pension, yeah, funded by the taxpayer (including us), but I like to think he did earn it with wartime deployments and countless peacetime field exercises. Those suck, by the way. I never got to shower and smelled almost as bad as Bill Clinton's jock strap by the time I came out of the field. :-)
Trump/Cruz would make a great ticket. I think they would beat the pants off Hillary, Biden or Sanders.
Although I do admire Trump for the negotiating braggart but truly fascinating character that he is, I will hold my nose and vote for almost any other Republican candidate. I may as well chalk up a third loss after McCain and Romney. But, for once since Reagan, I'd like to be a winner who could ALSO be proud of my president. I'm really tired of waiting. For all of Trump's bad points, duly noted, I find that I just don't care if only he can do one fourth of what he promises to deliver and makes my nation one I can be happy to live in again instead of breaking down and crying over the utter stupidity of our misrepresentatives in DC and their futility in helping America. And if he's all bark and no bite, well, there's four years down the road from now. We were SUPPOSED to heave Obama overboard in 2012 but everyone was too fixated on playing nice and see where that got us. Some times just call for a real ****ing asshole.
One last note, I don't think Hilarity will be the next Dim candidate because even O's corrupt DoJ can't ignore an FBI investigation. And thank God for Trey Gowdy and I hope he runs for something higher than Representative next time. If not for his dogged attempts to get some sort of justice for the murders of those four wonderful, brave Americans, Hitlery probably would be waddling full steam ahead towards the nomination.
Well if there's any truth to the Biden/Warren meeting, she won't be the nominee. 0bama's got her over a barrel. If the Dems end up with that combo, they left will go literally ga-ga with the fake Indian on the ticket. You will see the same level of enthusiasm they had with 0bama. We better make sure we provide a candidate the rest of the country can vote FOR and who won't insure half (or more) of the base staying home. The problem with cult figures like 0bama & Warren (and even Trump to a certain extent, though I hope we're a little smarter than the left), people end up more devoted to them than principles. It scares me because this may very well be our last chance to right this sinking ship.
One of the biggest problems I have with Trump and it's a huge hurdle for me to get over, is his 3rd party threat. Not just that he made it, but he made it so early, when nothing had happened yet. And it's conditional, not on principles: "I'll run 3rd party if amnesty is part of the GOP platform" or "I'll consider a 3rd party run if repealing 0bamacare isn't on the GOP agenda". His threat is conditional depending on how the party treats HIM! Only he knows what that is. Considering how the party treats Cruz (and has treated him since he became a senator), Trumps bar better be pretty fricking high.
I wouldn't even have a problem voting for him. I just don't like threats. We have great conservatives in this party, some who've been working like dogs from the inside to change things. It's slow but I see it happening, especially where it matters, at local and state levels. That's where real, sustainable change happens. Someone with Trumps charisma and personality could and should be a driving force behind this change. I don't see how he can do that if he's more concerned about how he's being treated.
cindie
As much as I like Trump, I would NOT vote for him as a 3rd party candidate. That would be like giving the election to the Democrats. The coverage of Trump has been overwhelming. So, he will run as a Repub. and his threats at this stage is just for show.
-
As much as I like Trump, I would NOT vote for him as a 3rd party candidate. That would be like giving the election to the Democrats. The coverage of Trump has been overwhelming. So, he will run as a Repub. and his threats at this stage is just for show.
I don't see Trump making idle threats. IF Trump runs 3rd party and neither the GOP or DEMS get enough votes then it is up to the House to decide who is seated in the oval office. Somehow I just don't feel that Biden/Warren would be the winning ticket in that case. Then again, the GOP has a lot of RINO's who may just vote them in.
I think we are going to see some extraordinary circumstances surrounding this election.
-
One of the biggest problems I have with Trump and it's a huge hurdle for me to get over, is his 3rd party threat. Not just that he made it, but he made it so early, when nothing had happened yet. And it's conditional, not on principles: "I'll run 3rd party if amnesty is part of the GOP platform" or "I'll consider a 3rd party run if repealing 0bamacare isn't on the GOP agenda". His threat is conditional depending on how the party treats HIM! Only he knows what that is. Considering how the party treats Cruz (and has treated him since he became a senator), Trumps bar better be pretty fricking high.
Cindie, I don't actually see what Trump answered as a threat. He was asked a simple question, along with all the others on stage, and he answered it. He was being honest. I find that refreshing. Blind adherence to the party hasn't gotten us very far along these past dismal decades. And I remember watching the coverage of Donald Trump when he announced and yeah, he was treated with much disdain and disrespect from conservative commentators I generally agree with and admire. I don't know why he, or anyone, should have to smile and take that kind of shit, especially from those who are supposed to be unbiased.
My son stopped by this afternoon. He's been on my case these past 12 years or more about getting involved in politics, passionate in discussing issues, in short, the sort of disengaged 20-something year old who doesn't even bother to vote. HE is actually listening to Trump and said he's considering voting for him. I know that doesn't mean jack squat to anyone, but for me that's about as explosive a statement as any I've ever heard from my family, since my husband and kids tend to abhor politics and :runaway:
whenever I try to bring up issues. Even though they're all fairly conservative and agree with me. Love him or hate him, Trump resonates with alot of people.
Maybe I'm naive, or stupid, or both. But I can't remember getting this energized by someone since Reagan...who was also disrespected and marginalized by his party in the beginning. If nothing else, having to deal with Trump is injecting a bit of spine into many current contenders. And of course, there are those who already had a spine, but they don't tend to be the mainstream pols either. I probably will vote Republican, but there are some candidates who won't get my vote. I refuse to be pigeonholed into voting for any old RINO any more than some so-called minorities refuse to stay on the D reservation.
-
I don't see Trump making idle threats. IF Trump runs 3rd party and neither the GOP or DEMS get enough votes then it is up to the House to decide who is seated in the oval office. Somehow I just don't feel that Biden/Warren would be the winning ticket in that case. Then again, the GOP has a lot of RINO's who may just vote them in.
I think we are going to see some extraordinary circumstances surrounding this election.
I think Trump or Cruz will win the nomination. Trump clarified his threat to run as a 3rd party candidate by stating that he wanted to be treated fairly, and that the Repub candidate be someone who he could totally support. Jeb Bush would not meet that criteria.
-
Cindie, I don't actually see what Trump answered as a threat. He was asked a simple question, along with all the others on stage, and he answered it. He was being honest. I find that refreshing. Blind adherence to the party hasn't gotten us very far along these past dismal decades. And I remember watching the coverage of Donald Trump when he announced and yeah, he was treated with much disdain and disrespect from conservative commentators I generally agree with and admire. I don't know why he, or anyone, should have to smile and take that kind of shit, especially from those who are supposed to be unbiased.
Then you'd have to consider Reagan someone with "blind adherence to the party". He wasn't treated fairly either time he ran. In fact, up until the moment he set foot in the White House he was mocked and scorned. Then all those same people wanted to be part of the revolution. Walker has never received any acclaim or support for all he's done in Wisconsin. Never gotten kudos for standing up to the unions or sticking to his principles. Cruz was blamed for the entire government shut down. He's a constant scapegoat because his loyalty is to his country and his constituents instead of the GOP. Ben Carson is considered a buffoon by the party establishment, as is Jindal. Perry & Fiorina they just try to ignore but if it looks like either of them are going any higher you can expect the powers that be to start in on them. I wouldn't consider any of these people blind or followers.
As I said, I don't think Trump's reason for going 3rd party is principled. Cruz, Walker, Perry, Carson, Fiorina, all have been slighted by the GOP. For Cruz it's become a daily occurrence. None of them has threatened to go 3rd party. Of course Trump's going to get more flak than anyone else, he's the front runner. The establishment is going to be especially hard on him. Anyone on top who isn't named Bush is going to be treated to a shit sandwich every single day. But, the best revenge is winning. It's having enough honor, if you don't get the nomination to walk away knowing you gave it everything you had, not skulking off and taking votes away the nominee. What if the candidate was Cruz or Walker, principled, solid conservatives but he still feels he was treated "unfairly" by the party?
And it's not because he refused to commit to the party at the debate. It was a loaded question and a stupid way to start out. It's that he said it again with what sounds like an even bigger threat: The Hill (http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/248910-exclusive-trump-threatens-third-party-run)
Pressed on whether he would run as a third-party candidate if he fails to clinch the GOP nomination, Trump said that “so many people want me to, if I don’t win.â€
“I’ll have to see how I’m being treated by the Republicans,†Trump said. “Absolutely, if they’re not fair, that would be a factor.â€
He's at the top of the heap. He may stay there, he may not but what's his criteria for being treated "fair"? Is it being treated as shitty as Cruz? Because he really hasn't experienced that kind of viciousness and vitriol. A 3rd party would split his own supporters and there would be resentment among those that stayed, those that followed and resentment from those who backed a different candidate who didn't win the nomination but didn't leave in a huff. All we've been through the past few cycles, the good and the really, really terrible while sticking to our guns and electing as many congresspeople and conservatives at other levels of government, would it be worth it to slow that momentum?
I just don't know how to trust him because he's spent a lifetime doing what feeds his ego. Heck, he's even run for president before and bowed out when it wasn't fun anymore (he even threatened 3rd party back then). I truly understand the reasons for his threat at the debate, I do. He didn't allow it to be a gotcha question. Good for him. I'd just like to know under what circumstances he might believe he's being slighted. Politics is hard and dirty and requires strength & fortitude. How is bolting for a 3rd party because he thinks hes not being treated "fair" an illustration of either?
As a side note, I also thinks he needs to start acting like an adult. Megyn Kelly came back from vacation today and he immediately started in on her with nasty comments and insults. He got his supporters all worked up again, hurling their bullshit. This is the behavior of a schoolyard bully (or 0bama when he gets his ego bruised). I get it, she was unfair. It pissed him off but it's over! It was over a few days after the debate. She's not a gold digging ex wife. She's one woman with a TV show. There are more pressing issues but he's rehashing something that happened a month ago for a couple hours of his life. Sore losers, I get, as ridiculous as they are. But a sore winner, that's just childish. By all accounts he won. He should've let it go weeks ago. This is 0bama behavior. We deserve better than this.
Cindie
-
One of the biggest problems I have with Trump and it's a huge hurdle for me to get over, is his 3rd party threat. Not just that he made it, but he made it so early, when nothing had happened yet. And it's conditional, not on principles: "I'll run 3rd party if amnesty is part of the GOP platform" or "I'll consider a 3rd party run if repealing 0bamacare isn't on the GOP agenda". His threat is conditional depending on how the party treats HIM! Only he knows what that is. Considering how the party treats Cruz (and has treated him since he became a senator), Trumps bar better be pretty fricking high.
Cindie, I don't actually see what Trump answered as a threat. He was asked a simple question, along with all the others on stage, and he answered it. He was being honest. I find that refreshing. Blind adherence to the party hasn't gotten us very far along these past dismal decades. And I remember watching the coverage of Donald Trump when he announced and yeah, he was treated with much disdain and disrespect from conservative commentators I generally agree with and admire. I don't know why he, or anyone, should have to smile and take that kind of shit, especially from those who are supposed to be unbiased.
My son stopped by this afternoon. He's been on my case these past 12 years or more about getting involved in politics, passionate in discussing issues, in short, the sort of disengaged 20-something year old who doesn't even bother to vote. HE is actually listening to Trump and said he's considering voting for him. I know that doesn't mean jack squat to anyone, but for me that's about as explosive a statement as any I've ever heard from my family, since my husband and kids tend to abhor politics and :runaway:
whenever I try to bring up issues. Even though they're all fairly conservative and agree with me. Love him or hate him, Trump resonates with alot of people.
Maybe I'm naive, or stupid, or both. But I can't remember getting this energized by someone since Reagan...who was also disrespected and marginalized by his party in the beginning. If nothing else, having to deal with Trump is injecting a bit of spine into many current contenders. And of course, there are those who already had a spine, but they don't tend to be the mainstream pols either. I probably will vote Republican, but there are some candidates who won't get my vote. I refuse to be pigeonholed into voting for any old RINO any more than some so-called minorities refuse to stay on the D reservation.
What's aggravating to me is how the question was phrased.
Essentially the question was targeted directly at Trump.
The 2 assumptions being made by the question is Trump wouldn't support the nominee, and that the nominee wouldn't be him.
The better question would be, will everyone on the stage support the nominee whomever that may be.
Or, even better...would each of the other 9 support Trump if he was the nominee.
-
What's aggravating to me is how the question was phrased.
Essentially the question was targeted directly at Trump.
The 2 assumptions being made by the question is Trump wouldn't support the nominee, and that the nominee wouldn't be him.
The better question would be, will everyone on the stage support the nominee whomever that may be.
Or, even better...would each of the other 9 support Trump if he was the nominee.
I think that Trump should bury the hatched with the reporters and questions asked. It does him no good to keep bashing Kelly since women make up a majority of the electorate. I am a Trump supporter but like Kenny R. sang "there is a time to hold them and a time to fold them". Time to let this feud die.
-
What's aggravating to me is how the question was phrased.
Essentially the question was targeted directly at Trump.
The 2 assumptions being made by the question is Trump wouldn't support the nominee, and that the nominee wouldn't be him.
The better question would be, will everyone on the stage support the nominee whomever that may be.
Or, even better...would each of the other 9 support Trump if he was the nominee.
Obumazombie, I agree with you. As for the nomination, I think I'll let the voters decide but I WILL say that FOX News is definitely losing its fair and balanced reputation and I've been disappointed in quite a few of them. Bill O'Reilly has been a pompous asshole for a long time and let's hope he doesn't weigh in about Trump being sexist, not after having to settle a lawsuit brought against him some years back by a young lady who didn't care for his loofah/shower comments. Actually, Brett Baier asked the pledge question and Rand Paul accused him of buying politicans and hedging his bets/to which Trump told him, yeah, I gave you money and Rand shut up pretty much. No one seems to attack Rand Paul for being less than statesmanlike. :shrug:
I've actually begun watching NewsMax more and FOX less since all this began.
Cindie, guess I wasn't clear about the blind adherence comment because I was speaking about we the voters, not candidates past and present. As for how everyone else reacts and reacted in the past re bias, we're all accountable for how we handle ourselves and Trump is obviously not for everyone, although he sure has resonated with alot more primary voters than the rest of them thus far. I do think it's true what Trump told Kelly during the debate re her question, that we don't have time for this stuff when the country has real problems. I don't care what anyone says, I care what they do.
-
What's aggravating to me is how the question was phrased.
Essentially the question was targeted directly at Trump.
The 2 assumptions being made by the question is Trump wouldn't support the nominee, and that the nominee wouldn't be him.
The better question would be, will everyone on the stage support the nominee whomever that may be.
Or, even better...would each of the other 9 support Trump if he was the nominee.
But I'm not talking about the debates. I acknowledged that was shitty. I'm talking about the interview he gave to The Hill. What does he mean by being treated "fairly"? If he's given the same treatment as Walker has gotten over the years? Is he unable the kind of unfair treatment Cruz has experienced for years? Is that too much for him? Somewhere in between? Because the GOP establishment treats everyone who's not one of them with the same unfairness and contempt and anyone with half a brain knows if anyone on either side goes 3rd party it guarantees the other side will win. No candidate currently running can pull the kind of support they'd need to win as a third party candidate. He or she would have to pull at least half from both candidates and about every single independent in the country. If he does that because he THINKS he's being treated unfairly it will prove what everyone who's been put off by his attitude believes: it's more about him than the country.
I don't expect humility from him, he's not capable of it and the lack of it is not a bad thing. But I've had my fill of having an egotistical, pouty, name calling president who's such a special snowflake he can't take any push back or criticism. In one of his interviews Trump was proud of the fact that he whines until he gets what he wants. That's not going to work with ISIS and it will wear very thin on the American people because it's what 0bama does and if whining doesn't work, 0bama just does it anyway.
Donald Trump has the EXACT same personality, he's just talking about things we care about. The left thinks nothing about the boy king using illegal executive orders to make changes to 0bamacare & allow illegals to flood this country and stay here. Are Trump's supporters going to accept that from him if he has a congress that won't go along with what he wants exactly the way he wants? Will we accept whatever extra-constitutional act he does? If not, how the hell is anyone going to stop him.
A recent example of his childishness: he's still playing the equivalent of "I'm rubber, your glue" with Megyn Kelly. Honestly, I can remember bullies getting all their sycophants to call whomever was their latest target. Followers try so hard to impress the instigator that they're over the top vicious. I expect people to knock that shit off when they become adults. As president it's not going to go your way all the time. Maybe not even most of the time. His continued attacks on Kelly, long after everyone else (including her) has moved on is the equivalent of continuing to call people who don't agree with your Iran policy just like the Mullahs. Today, 0bama's still calling us names. Today, The Donald is still calling a woman with a one hour talk show names.
I love that he's talking about things no one else is. I love his fearlessness. I certainly don't expect him to act like other candidates. All of them are unique actually, if you pay attention. But I do expect him to act like an adult. I do expect him to be more concerned with the country than whether his ego gets bruised. Ask him today whether he'd go 3rd party and he'd give the same answer as he did to The Hill. When he walks a couple of years in Cruz's shoes then he might have reason to complain. Until then he needs to suck it up and be a man.
Cindie
Cindie
-
What's aggravating to me is how the question was phrased.
Essentially the question was targeted directly at Trump.
The 2 assumptions being made by the question is Trump wouldn't support the nominee, and that the nominee wouldn't be him.
The better question would be, will everyone on the stage support the nominee whomever that may be.
Or, even better...would each of the other 9 support Trump if he was the nominee.
Obumazombie, I agree with you. As for the nomination, I think I'll let the voters decide but I WILL say that FOX News is definitely losing its fair and balanced reputation and I've been disappointed in quite a few of them. Bill O'Reilly has been a pompous asshole for a long time and let's hope he doesn't weigh in about Trump being sexist, not after having to settle a lawsuit brought against him some years back by a young lady who didn't care for his loofah/shower comments. Actually, Brett Baier asked the pledge question and Rand Paul accused him of buying politicans and hedging his bets/to which Trump told him, yeah, I gave you money and Rand shut up pretty much. No one seems to attack Rand Paul for being less than statesmanlike. :shrug:
I've actually begun watching NewsMax more and FOX less since all this began.
Cindie, guess I wasn't clear about the blind adherence comment because I was speaking about we the voters, not candidates past and present. As for how everyone else reacts and reacted in the past re bias, we're all accountable for how we handle ourselves and Trump is obviously not for everyone, although he sure has resonated with alot more primary voters than the rest of them thus far. I do think it's true what Trump told Kelly during the debate re her question, that we don't have time for this stuff when the country has real problems. I don't care what anyone says, I care what they do.
If he believed that he wouldn't keep piling on long after the rest of us have moved on. Look at his Twitter feed. It's a grade school bitch slap festival over there.
Cindie
-
...
As a side note, I also thinks he needs to start acting like an adult. Megyn Kelly came back from vacation today and he immediately started in on her with nasty comments and insults. He got his supporters all worked up again, hurling their bullshit. This is the behavior of a schoolyard bully (or 0bama when he gets his ego bruised). I get it, she was unfair. It pissed him off but it's over! It was over a few days after the debate. She's not a gold digging ex wife. She's one woman with a TV show. There are more pressing issues but he's rehashing something that happened a month ago for a couple hours of his life. Sore losers, I get, as ridiculous as they are. But a sore winner, that's just childish. By all accounts he won. He should've let it go weeks ago. This is 0bama behavior. We deserve better than this.
Cindie
Just my two cents on the situation, if I may. Trump is playing by "Big Bidnezz Rules", not "Same Ol' Politics Rules". She attacked. He responded and said what he wanted. She refused. That's not what he's used to, just because that's how business is. He's not used to political kiss and make up. He's Tarzan. He's lived by the law of the jungle. Can he adapt to the laws of politics. Maybe a lot of the people who like him don't want him to change.
I could be wrong.
-
What is Trump going to do if he is one of 2-3 left come next summer or if he does get the nomination and they start to question his business dealing and how he's going to take oil from the m-e?
-
What is Trump going to do if he is one of 2-3 left come next summer or if he does get the nomination and they start to question his business dealing and how he's going to take oil from the m-e?
This will be a softball question. Trump is in the real estate business. He filed bankruptcy on his assets in NJ because of the downturn in the economy and casino revenues. Many of the business along the Boardwalk went bust. The gambling industry in the US is struggling even in L.V. 4 bankruptcies out of hundreds is not too shabby.
He sells his name to developers to build buildings. Not his fault if the contractors mismanages the project like the ones that went under in Mexico and the one struggling in Panama. His concern is getting a fee for the use of his name. His charges a tidy sum for the usage of the Trump name.
He has purchased 17 quality country club golf courses like Doral in Miami FL. One or more of the 17 will go under because of the economy, decrease in memberships and new clubs being built. That is just how business works. If someone has a better product, they will put you out of business.
He will get the oil by telling M.E. countries like S.A. and Kuwait that they they have to pay in oil or cash for protection. Kuwait wanted to pay the US soldiers that were killed money but Bush said no. How sorry is our government for protecting these rag heads when we can not even get some form of compensation. Trump will demand that if elected President and our hostages will be on their way back home.
-
Just my two cents on the situation, if I may. Trump is playing by "Big Bidnezz Rules", not "Same Ol' Politics Rules". She attacked. He responded and said what he wanted. She refused. That's not what he's used to, just because that's how business is. He's not used to political kiss and make up. He's Tarzan. He's lived by the law of the jungle. Can he adapt to the laws of politics. Maybe a lot of the people who like him don't want him to change.
I could be wrong.
He didn't even have to kiss and make up, just let it go. She came back from vacation, wasn't bothering anyone, didn't make any comments about him, just did her job. He started insulting her and then some of his more rabid supporters did as well. He made sure to retweet the more vicious ones. This is the part that really bothers me. Just take the high road, it's not that hard. There are plenty of people who deserve his vitriolic wit, but his beef with her is over. There's no reason to keep this going, especially since he won.
I get a kick out of him and I think he's serious about his love for this country. I just love how he tweaks the establishment (both parties), the media and the entire left. I like him. If he's the nominee, I'll do everything I can to help him get elected, make phone calls, pass out fliers, whatever. I love his sense of humor but this rehashing of something that, in the whole scheme of thing is pretty minor just to unleash fresh insults is immature and disgusting. It's not like Kelly changed the channel and then hid the remote!
Cindie
-
When Rep. Mia Love ran for the House the 1st time, I recall reading some articles questioning her conservatism. She was helped by Tea Party support. Now that she's a Rep. we may question them again. (http://hotair.com/archives/2015/11/19/video-mia-love-endorses-rubio/)
-
When Rep. Mia Love ran for the House the 1st time, I recall reading some articles questioning her conservatism. She was helped by Tea Party support. Now that she's a Rep. we may question them again. (http://hotair.com/archives/2015/11/19/video-mia-love-endorses-rubio/)
Rubio can get all the endorsements he wants. Doubt the American people give a shit what some small time pol thinks, except for it confirming their suspicions that all politicians are alike in that they stink. I just read through this thread for the first time in months. All Trump has done thus far is trounce his opponents. Apparently I wasn't the only one who really fell in love with his candidacy from Day One.
My HVAC service guy showed up this morning (cuuute, btw, Belle, lol) and we had barely started on a conversation when he popped up with his gonna vote for Trump. He thinks America OUGHT to be run like a business and would like to get ahead financially for once. Plus, he was as pissed about our porous borders as me.
I would think he was angling for a tip, but it only took a very mild comment from me "D and I went to Mexico this past February and now that I've seen Chichen Itza I could care less if I ever get back there" for him to launch into his little rant.
Cute and smart. LOL, too bad he's married or I'd hunt him down for my daughter. :-)
-
Rubio can get all the endorsements he wants. Doubt the American people give a shit what some small time pol thinks, except for it confirming their suspicions that all politicians are alike in that they stink. I just read through this thread for the first time in months. All Trump has done thus far is trounce his opponents. Apparently I wasn't the only one who really fell in love with his candidacy from Day One.
My HVAC service guy showed up this morning (cuuute, btw, Belle, lol) and we had barely started on a conversation when he popped up with his gonna vote for Trump. He thinks America OUGHT to be run like a business and would like to get ahead financially for once. Plus, he was as pissed about our porous borders as me.
I would think he was angling for a tip, but it only took a very mild comment from me "D and I went to Mexico this past February and now that I've seen Chichen Itza I could care less if I ever get back there" for him to launch into his little rant.
Cute and smart. LOL, too bad he's married or I'd hunt him down for my daughter. :-)
You got a daughter? :-)
-
You got a daughter? :-)
Yes, dutch, and she's young enough to be yours as well! :hammer: :lmao:
-
#1 Ted Cruz I can IMAGINE A Ted Cruz Presidency. Can You?
Imagine instead of economic stagnation, booming economic growth.
Instead of small businesses going out of business in record numbers, imagine small businesses growing and prospering. Imagine young people coming out of school with four, five, six job offers.
Imagine innovation thriving on the Internet as government regulators and tax collectors are kept at bay and more and more opportunity is created.
Imagine America finally becoming energy self-sufficient as millions and millions of high-paying jobs are created.
Instead of the joblessness, instead of the millions forced into part-time work, instead of the millions who’ve lost their health insurance, lost their doctors, have faced skyrocketing health insurance premiums, imagine in 2017 a new president signing legislation repealing every word of Obamacare.
Imagine health care reform that keeps government out of the way between you and your doctor and that makes health insurance personal and portable and affordable.
Instead of a tax code that crushes innovation, that imposes burdens on families struggling to make ends met, imagine a simple flat tax...... that lets every American fill out his or her taxes on a postcard....Imagine abolishing the IRS.
Instead of the lawlessness and the president’s unconstitutional executive amnesty, imagine a president that finally, finally, finally secures the borders.
Instead of a government that works to undermine our Second Amendment rights, that seeks to ban our ammunition...
... imagine a federal government that protects the right to keep and bear arms of all law-abiding Americans.
Instead of a president who boycotts Prime Minister Netanyahu, imagine a president who stands unapologetically with the nation of Israel.
Imagine a president who says “I will honor the Constitution, and under no circumstances will Iran be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon.â€...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YurHI-d3Dk
-
#1 Ted Cruz I can IMAGINE A Ted Cruz Presidency. Can You?
Imagine instead of economic stagnation, booming economic growth.
Instead of small businesses going out of business in record numbers, imagine small businesses growing and prospering. Imagine young people coming out of school with four, five, six job offers.
Imagine innovation thriving on the Internet as government regulators and tax collectors are kept at bay and more and more opportunity is created.
Imagine America finally becoming energy self-sufficient as millions and millions of high-paying jobs are created.
Instead of the joblessness, instead of the millions forced into part-time work, instead of the millions who’ve lost their health insurance, lost their doctors, have faced skyrocketing health insurance premiums, imagine in 2017 a new president signing legislation repealing every word of Obamacare.
Imagine health care reform that keeps government out of the way between you and your doctor and that makes health insurance personal and portable and affordable.
Instead of a tax code that crushes innovation, that imposes burdens on families struggling to make ends met, imagine a simple flat tax...... that lets every American fill out his or her taxes on a postcard....Imagine abolishing the IRS.
Instead of the lawlessness and the president’s unconstitutional executive amnesty, imagine a president that finally, finally, finally secures the borders.
Instead of a government that works to undermine our Second Amendment rights, that seeks to ban our ammunition...
... imagine a federal government that protects the right to keep and bear arms of all law-abiding Americans.
Instead of a president who boycotts Prime Minister Netanyahu, imagine a president who stands unapologetically with the nation of Israel.
Imagine a president who says “I will honor the Constitution, and under no circumstances will Iran be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon.â€...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YurHI-d3Dk
Wowser, guess I am not as gaga over Trump as I first thought! :lmao:
-
Ted Cruz not only "talks the talk" but "walks the walk". His conservative voting record and his refusal to back down to the Washington cartel not only makes him a Washington outsider but a serious alternative to the GOPe. He is now tied in many polls for 3rd place along with Rubio. In addition to his experience as a Senator, he was the longest serving solicitor general in Texas; winning several cases that he presented to the Supreme Court, (D.C. v. Heller) he is extremely well educated, a Princeton debate champion, knows the Constitution by heart and he has an audiographic memory.
Incidentally, when Trump was asked who he would pick for his VP he chose Cruz.
-
Ted Cruz not only "talks the talk" but "walks the walk". His conservative voting record and his refusal to back down to the Washington cartel not only makes him a Washington outsider but a serious alternative to the GOPe. He is now tied in many polls for 3rd place along with Rubio. In addition to his experience as a Senator, he was the longest serving solicitor general in Texas; winning several cases that he presented to the Supreme Court, (D.C. v. Heller) he is extremely well educated, a Princeton debate champion, knows the Constitution by heart and he has an audiographic memory.
Incidentally, when Trump was asked who he would pick for his VP he chose Cruz.
Yep, and I am on record, earlier in this thread I believe, in advocating for 16 years of Trump/Cruz and then Cruz/? Went back to check this thread. I musta said the 16-year remark somewhere else; I do remember it. However, I did state I was for Trump/Cruz back there.
Nearly as important as our national security, in which Trump has been prescient on several occasions and in which, past records aside (Rubio dredged some shit up on Cruz and it can go on ad infinitum) I don't care about anything said before the current political season although I DO very much care about actions, like the Gang of Eight.
Almost as much as America needs a president focused on safety, she needs her economic footing back on terra firma, and I believe Trump is best positioned as a player in the money arena. Together they make a formidable pair, and if you go back to all their public statements you will not find them taking potshots at one another. Trump seems to have about taken out Carson and particularly Jebbie at this point and it looks like Cruz is hitting Rubio harder in tandem with Trump.
Politics is fascinating and it wouldn't surprise me at all to find out they are already functioning as a team, although no presidential candidate is going to admit anything of the sort. In any event, I want both physical and economic security and that's the ticket I see best qualified to make America great again.
Bonus, if those two win, both will go after Hilarity with the full force of the federal law. I can't see Jeb or Rubio doing likewise? :shrug:
-
Yep, and I am on record, earlier in this thread I believe, in advocating for 16 years of Trump/Cruz and then Cruz/? Went back to check this thread. I musta said the 16-year remark somewhere else; I do remember it. However, I did state I was for Trump/Cruz back there.
Nearly as important as our national security, in which Trump has been prescient on several occasions and in which, past records aside (Rubio dredged some shit up on Cruz and it can go on ad infinitum) I don't care about anything said before the current political season although I DO very much care about actions, like the Gang of Eight.
Almost as much as America needs a president focused on safety, she needs her economic footing back on terra firma, and I believe Trump is best positioned as a player in the money arena. Together they make a formidable pair, and if you go back to all their public statements you will not find them taking potshots at one another. Trump seems to have about taken out Carson and particularly Jebbie at this point and it looks like Cruz is hitting Rubio harder in tandem with Trump.
Politics is fascinating and it wouldn't surprise me at all to find out they are already functioning as a team, although no presidential candidate is going to admit anything of the sort. In any event, I want both physical and economic security and that's the ticket I see best qualified to make America great again.
Many feel that a deal was made between Cruz and Trump long ago and certainly both of them are savvy enough to do so. They are different in many ways, but similar in others and they do compliment each other well. Trump has the business smarts and Cruz has the constitutional/political smarts. I'm not so sure that this is the case, but certainly Trump has not gone after Cruz. Either he has deep admiration and respect for him, or they have both been in this from the beginning.
There are two concerns though that I have. First of all, both are loathed by the GOPe. If one of them were to get the nomination would the RNC/GOPe stand behind them? If they were to run together against Hillary would they get the GOPe votes? Would the GOPe voters simply stay home; thus handing the victory to Hilary. My second concern is Trump has again announced he is not ruling out a 3rd party run if he is treated unfairly.
Bonus, if those two win, both will go after Hilarity with the full force of the federal law. I can't see Jeb or Rubio doing likewise? :shrug: