Trump 2012?

[Duke Nukum]

The guy is smart about making money and that is where it stops.  His opinions, from what I recall, remind me of Bill O'Reilly:  Big on conventional wisdom short on actual wisdom.

[true_blood]

Still too early to tell, but I like what I've heard from Trump already. Run the Country like a business, not an empire. His stance on China is AWESOME! His stance on the South Koreans getting free protection from us while they should be paying for it, is AWESOME.
Still too early to tell yet.

[Janice]

Im sure that -- far, far too many will fall for what 0bama "says" to get re-elected.

Just as farrrrrr too many fell for what he said on the original campaign trail. Of course its a mighty nice "boost" when the media is rooting for you too. Which also means they are against the others.

The long and short -- talk is cheap. Im guessing the cheapest investment Trump will make along the way.

Screw the details ... lets get right to the "bullet points", right? The wet dream of every aspiring politician who happens to be a lawyer or salesman.

Not saying Trump is bad ... but what do we know? Whats his record? You say he has no record? Isnt that what got us to where we are now? C'mon folks ... think.

[Janice]

Im gonna have to scratch Chris Christie from my list at this time. I have heard it reported by Mark Levin that Christie is MIA on 0bamacare. 28 states are challenging 0bamacare. And New Jersey is sitting on the sidelines. Why?

Christie supports gun control.
He appointed a radical Islamist to a judgeship.
Refused to take a side on the Ground Zero Mosque.
He is for amnesty.
He is to some degree for the green movement (Cap & Trade).
He campaigned for Mike Castle.

While Romney needs to explain Romneycare, perhaps Christie could explain why he is sitting on the sidelines on 0zombiecare.

The guy’s still fantastic on fiscal responsibility, but he has repeatedly stated that he’s not running for higher office anytime soon. So maybe thats a good thing.

As an aside Paul Ryan is looking to be a much better match on the ticket considering the speed at which this regime is bankrupting our nation.

[Chris_]

I won't vote for Trump, and the only two in the present anticipated field that I would vote for is Newt and Palin.

But whoever the Republican nominee is I will vote for him just to be voting against the Democratic nominee.

[gurn]

Still too early to tell, but I like what I've heard from Trump already. Run the Country like a business, not an empire. His stance on China is AWESOME! His stance on the South Koreans getting free protection from us while they should be paying for it, is AWESOME.
Still too early to tell yet.

+10

I doubt he's running. But i hope he or someone else picks up his trade policy suggestions.
I think he's exactly right.

[GOP Congress]

Trump running for president would have made for an intriguing proposition except for one main factor.

The Tea Party Movement.

The Tea Party has proven that "practical" politics is about as worthless, as "political capital," which is as counterfeit as confederate money. One should realize that government should NOT be run like a business, just like NFL referees should not be game-planning one team's offense with another team's defense. That is NOT THEIR JOB, and in fact CORRUPTS the game to the point its value becomes nullified. Trump should either elect to be the referee or choose a side and play quarterback. YOU CANNOT DO BOTH.

For years, though this is the concept we have lived under. No more. And as much as I highly respect Trump and his business acumen, it is necessary to understand that such acumen depends on compromise so he can provide the best value to HIS stakeholders and customers. He knows that if he doesn't act in their interest, they will defect to Trump's competition.

Now, does this automatically disqualify Trump from being an effective president? Not in toto...BUT the problem is that we are trying to REDUCE government's influence, NOT INCREASE it. We should be pursuing policies, for instance, that reduce all tariffs, both exporting and importing, and not regulate it to protect jobs. We should be pursuing policies that unleash the economy as a whole, making sure that obvious defense measures are put in place to prevent harm to this country.

Before the Tea Party, we were stuck in an unfortunate position where we had to "compromise" our beliefs. But with the advent of the Tea Party movement, the people have FINALLY started to realize the tenets of the constitutional authority to move forward. To that end, a compromiser like Trump is doing nothing but kicking the can down the road.

At this point, Sarah Palin is still the number one candidate from a pragmatic standpoint. (Don't bother flaming away; I've actually thought her chances may have been hit hard, but she handles her media-created baggage like the rough Alaskan outdoorswoman that she is.) Others will come along; in fact they are starting to come out of the states such as Scott Walker, asserting themselves in the House like Paul Ryan, and in the Senate like Rand Paul. People look at Rand Paul vs. David Letterman and there is now no PRETENSE of reasonable debate. Trump cannot dodge his support for anti-constitutional methodologies, and this should be enough to doom him in any realistic run.

[Ballygrl]

I heard him interviewed again last night on Michael Savage's show and I like a lot of what he says. Also I heard that Justice Kennedy is supposed to retire after the 2012 election, we need to keep our advantage on the Court, can you imagine 2nd Amendment issues coming in front of the Court with Obama appointees? Free Speech issues?

[Lacarnut]

Screw Trump. How about somethin like:

Palin/Christie 2012
John Bolton at State
Thomas Sowell at Treasury
Oliver North at Defense
Mark Levin at Justice
Ted Nugent at the Dept of Interior
and Chuck Norris in charge of everything else.

 

Everyone of those picks are outstanding.

Trump's stance on tariffs would wind up causing a trade war where everyone loses. Fact..the US is #1 in the world in manufactured goods.   

[catsmtrods]

Its sad but I would vote for Bullwinkle over our current POUS!

[gurn]

Trump's got my vote.

He'd trounce Imam Barack in the General Election.

Unfortunately, I don't think he can get nominated.

I think he's exactly right on China too.
The US is subsidizing their plans to destroy us.
 
We send our jobs to them. They buy T-Bills to keep their
own currency cheap. And with those dollars, they build missiles to destroy
our aircraft carriers and launch cyber-attacks against the US Government.  

It's long past time to teach them some respect.

[Janice]

A little more background ...

Trump may be a superb businessman and very entertaining but have you heard about who else he has contributed to besides Rahm (dead fish) Emanuel? Back in 2009 and 2010?

(D)Sen ChucKy (shmucky) Schumer = $400,$1600,$2000
(I)Gov Charlie (repuke turned independant) Crist = $2400 x2
(D)Sen Hillary (the hildebeast) Clintoon = $2300,$1700
(D)Anthony (the) Wiener = $2000
(D)Sen Kirsten Gilebrand = $10,000,$2400 x2
(D)Caroline Maloney = $1000
(D)Bill Nelson = $2000
(D)Harry Reid = $2400
(r)John McCain = $1000 x3, $2300 x2, $28,450
(D)Robert Andrews = $6900
(D)Arlen Spector = $1300
Democrat Senatorial Committee = $25,000

Of course he padded his bets by contributing a little to a few republicans ... but not like he has to lib dems and repukes.

There is much more. But does this sound like a conservative? Do you think he puts his money where his mouth is or ...? How many of these do you think Ronald Reagan would have contributed to? And which positions do you suppose he agrees with these people on?

We need somebody who is tough on China but who will also be tough on liberal democrats (that he has not contributed to for political office). This is no time to go wobbily folks. And he is no conservative.

[gurn]

"We need somebody who is tough on China but who will also be tough on liberal democrats (that he has not contributed to for political office). This is no time to go wobbily folks. And he is no conservative.

Unfortunately, there are no Republicans running who fit that description.

Look at this guy, Clapper.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/03/10/director_national_intelligence_china_poses_greatest_threat_to_us.html

Lindsey Graham is screaming for his head just because he told the truth about the Chinese government.
 
China not only intends to be the mortal enemy of the US -- it IS the mortal enemy of the US.

And Republicans & Dim-O-Rats are both offended.
But Lindsey Graham appears to take it personal.

Why is Lindsey Graham defending China?

I don't think a candidate who tells the truth about China could be nominated in either party.
That candidate would sure as Hell win the General Election though.

[Janice]

Unfortunately, there are no Republicans running who fit that description.

Keep your powder dry. Its still early.

[gurn]

Keep your powder dry. Its still early.

I hope so. I'm not crazy about Trump. But right now - he's the only game in town.

[RealConservativePatriot]

Sorry, but Trump is an egotistical opportunist, and he does not have the smarts nor the judgment to lead.

[Lacarnut]

Sorry, but Trump is an egotistical opportunist, and he does not have the smarts nor the judgment to lead.

Correct. He is also not a conservative. Plus, starting a trade war with this fragile economy might lead us into a depression. We need a good negotiator to obtain fair trade but not a bull in a China closet who will wreck it. We need an outsider just not him.

[gurn]

Correct. He is also not a conservative. Plus, starting a trade war with this fragile economy might lead us into a depression. We need a good negotiator to obtain fair trade but not a bull in a China closet who will wreck it. We need an outsider just not him.

I think that's been tried. Dunno if you've negotiated with mainland Chinese* much. I have.

Nothing happens. Even with an agreement - nothing happens.

Walk away silently. And don't come back.
That is how you successfully negotiate with the PRC.

But I don't see this as a trade or negotiating issue. I see it as a threat to US National Security.
Look at this guy, Clapper. He's being crucified for telling the truth about China.

But if stuck you're negotiating with mainland Chinese*, another good strategy is to not show up at all.
Inform the other side what you are going to do and then -- do it. Or don't inform them at all.
Just do it.

They'll believe you the next time around. But good faith negotiations? Fuggedaboudit.
As soon as you sit down with them -- you're just another noodle in the soup.

The Donald:


Trump would also tell him he should not hire “diplomats to negotiate with the Red Chinese, because we’re dealing with people who truly are not only smart, they’re great natural negotiators. They’re not our friends. They’re looking to strip us of everything they can strip us of.

“I would say go out and get the great business leaders. We have great business leaders, great minds, tough, smart, brilliant. Use those people to negotiate with these countries.  Don’t use a diplomat, whose training is to be a nice person.I don’t want nice people. I want people that are going to bring this country back.

“This country is in serious trouble. It’s not going to be a great country for long. It may not be a great country now. This country has to be brought back. Go out and get the toughest, smartest guys, because that’s what you need if you’re going to beat China and other countries.”

Assuming what Lacarnut says is true about Trump's policies leading to a depression -
America's depression will be a piece of cake compared to what unfolds in China.

And they are very aware of that. In fact - that is something their leaders are obsessed with.
What happens if the growth stops?

So far, it's been easy to fleece the Americans. But what happens if the gravy train leaves the station?
***

And in fact, Chinese people inside the PRC are some very nice, respectful people. But do not be as
stupid as the Senate Intelligence Committee. Clapper was right. Trump is right.

The PRC intends to destroy the United States. It no longer respects the United States.  
But it's not the greatest enemy the American people face. America's greatest enemy appears
to be its own government in Washington DC .

If the Senate Intelligence Committee does not see China as a mortal threat,
we're in deep, deep doo doo.

**(Note - when I write "Chinese", I'm specifically referring to the PRC Chinese Government.
What I'm saying here doesn't apply so much to Wah-Chao Chinese who live outside China,
or Taiwanese. They're civilized. Their frame of reference is not a warped, paranoid society.)

[Lacarnut]

I think that's been tried. Dunno if you've negotiated with mainland Chinese* much. I have.

Nothing happens. Even with an agreement - nothing happens.

Walk away silently. And don't come back.
That is how you successfully negotiate with the PRC.

But I don't see this as a trade or negotiating issue. I see it as a threat to US National Security.
Look at this guy, Clapper. He's being crucified for telling the truth about China.

But if stuck you're negotiating with mainland Chinese*, another good strategy is to not show up at all.
Inform the other side what you are going to do and then -- do it. Or don't inform them at all.
Just do it.

They'll believe you the next time around. But good faith negotiations? Fuggedaboudit.
As soon as you sit down with them -- you're just another noodle in the soup.

Assuming what Lacarnut says is true about Trump's policies leading to a depression -
America's depression will be a piece of cake compared to what unfolds in China.

And they are very aware of that. In fact - that is something their leaders are obsessed with.
What happens if the growth stops?

So far, it's been easy to fleece the Americans. But what happens if the gravy train leaves the station?
***

And in fact, Chinese people inside the PRC are some very nice, respectful people. But do not be as
stupid as the Senate Intelligence Committee. Clapper was right. Trump is right.

The PRC intends to destroy the United States. It no longer respects the United States.  
But it's not the greatest enemy the American people face. America's greatest enemy appears
to be its own government in Washington DC .

If the Senate Intelligence Committee does not see China as a mortal threat,
we're in deep, deep doo doo.

**(Note - when I write "Chinese", I'm specifically referring to the PRC Chinese Government.
What I'm saying here doesn't apply so much to Wah-Chao Chinese who live outside China,
or Taiwanese. They're civilized. Their frame of reference is not a warped, paranoid society.)

The US has gotten the short end of the stick with China, Japan, Korea, etc. for many, many years.  Trump has identified the problem and I agree this can not go on. Our politicans do not have the guts to change it. Correct me if I am wrong but it is Congress who has to make changes in trade agreements. The President can place a tariff on this product or that product. When he does the other side will retaliate. Then you will have business like GM, GE, Deere screaming bloody murder.

I was a golf pro back in the 70's and a top notch set of woods and irons sold for around $350. In Japan that set cost $1000. They did not manufacture golf clubs back then. We have allowed ourselves to get totally screwed by countries all over the world who put high tariffs on our products or ban products all together. At one time rice from LA was banned from being improted to Japan even though ours was superior to theirs. Buy an American car in Europe and that $30k car becomes 40k. We need to put an end to this crap. I just do not want to start a trade war in the process. No one wins if that happens.     

[gurn]

I mostly agree with you.

But unfortunately, I think politicians (GOP & the Dim-O-Crap Party) are too cowardly to do anything.
Look at how Intelligence Chief Clapper is being crucified just for stating the obvious.

On the + side, I think Hu got rattled during his recent trip to the US. By what?

Both Boehner & Reid refused to attend the State Dinner the Imam Obamao gave for him.
That is the sort of thing that rattles PRC leadership. That just doesn't happen anywhere else in the world.
To refuse to honor the emperor of the Middle Kingdom is a huge affront and a loss of face.

I've read that Hu feared Nancy Pelosi too - believe it or not.

But right now, AFAIC, Trump is the only game in town.
If another candidate takes it and runs with it, great. The more the merrier.
But I don't think that can happen in Washington.

But I think it will take a pissed-off outsider who is also a multi-billionaire.
Politicians are too in hock to American importers like Wal-Mart & exporters
like GM who rely on out-sourcing American jobs to China.

(GM BTW, makes money in China. I see a lot of Buicks on the road there.)

What I like about Trump, he takes the same approach to negotiating with China I would.
You don't negotiate - period. You just do what you are going to do.

Then they will be whining, begging, pleading to get back to bargaining.
Trump says China would cave once the tariff was put in place.
That's how I read it too.  

Despite all the boasting and chest-thumping, the PRC leadership understands
it's sitting on top of a volcano.

Chinese have two modes - boasting & whining.

American Presidents have allowed them to boast & thump their chests for too long.
I think it's time to make them whine.

[FreeBorn]

The Donald doubts the Long legged Mac Daddy is legit American-
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/17/trump-says-he-has-doubts-about-obama%E2%80%99s-birth-place/

[TVDOC]

I pretty much see Trump as the Ross Perot of the 21st century.......and he'll get just about as far......

doc

[docstew]

I pretty much see Trump as the Ross Perot of the 21st century.......and he'll get just about as far......

doc

Hopefully he won't decide to run as an independent like Perot did...

[gurn]

Hopefully he won't decide to run as an independent like Perot did...

[youtube=425,350]0gR7iBZhbLE[/youtube]

He sounds like he's running. And it wouldn't surprise me if he goes 3rd Party.
He's not joined at the hip with the GOP.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=42268

Trump on when he would announce:

I have to wait till June because I have a very successful television show. Unfortunately you have certain little rules and regulations in this country that I can’t do anything right now because of air time.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=42269

Trump on Korea:

“Let me give you an example,” Trump says. “South Korea. We send our ships to protect them.  Do they pay us?  They don’t pay us. Why are we protecting them, and if we’re going to protect them, why aren’t they paying us?”

Trump on Iraq:

Trump also believes we should be reimbursed by Iraq for liberating that country.  â€œThey have $15 trillion worth of oil.  Why aren’t we taking our money back?  Why aren’t we getting it back?”

I''d hate to see him run as a third-party candidate. And I don't think America can survive four more years of Obama.

But where do Pawlenty, Gingrich, Huckabee, Romney, Santorum, Palin, Bachmann, Barbour, Daniels, et al stand on the above issues?

Trump at least, has laid his positions out there. And I agree with everything he says.
The other candidates look gutless by comparison. I think he would be a nightmare scenario
for them in a televised debate situation.

[BlueStateSaint]

I heard a telephone interview that Trump gave to either Savage or Hannity, about a week or so ago.  He said that he would not run as an independent if he didn't get the nomination, because he realizes that the problem is Obama.  The problem can't be solved by running a third-party ticket and siphoning off votes from the Republican challenger, and he knows it.