I Will NEVER Vote For Donald Trump

[dogtowner]

Trump is interested in fiscal responsibility. That's the sort of conservative we badly need.
How do we know he is ?
Look at how freaked out the cronie capitalists are. The GOP is seriously considering throwing out the will of the people to hold their racket together. (Same going on in the donkey camp.)
You think Trump is buy able but you don't offer how. With the grumbling going on in the rich guy fraternity I'd say they believe he can't be bought and so are sitting on their money.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Trump is interested in fiscal responsibility. That's the sort of conservative we badly need.
How do we know he is ?
Look at how freaked out the cronie capitalists are. The GOP is seriously considering throwing out the will of the people to hold their racket together. (Same going on in the donkey camp.)
You think Trump is buy able but you don't offer how. With the grumbling going on in the rich guy fraternity I'd say they believe he can't be bought and so are sitting on their money.

No, I actually did offer the reason as to how, you just couldn't comprehend it due to your political blindness. Trump tries to inflate his actual wealth with a claim that his name alone is worth 3 1/2 to 4 Billion dollars, something which cannot be proven. And yet virtually every deal he gets involved in the partners he deals with soon want out of the deal. It turns out that the only one who makes any money is Trump, and he screws over his partners, or even his students as is shown by the three lawsuits filed against him over Trump University. All one has to do is appeal to his vanity, and he will sell out the country, or anyone else. Just ask an ex-wife of his:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...-s-global-deals-exposes-trouble-in-many-spots

 

[dogtowner]

No, I actually did offer the reason as to how, you just couldn't comprehend it due to your political blindness. Trump tries to inflate his actual wealth with a claim that his name alone is worth 3 1/2 to 4 Billion dollars, something which cannot be proven. And yet virtually every deal he gets involved in the partners he deals with soon want out of the deal. It turns out that the only one who makes any money is Trump, and he screws over his partners, or even his students as is shown by the three lawsuits filed against him over Trump University. All one has to do is appeal to his vanity, and he will sell out the country, or anyone else. Just ask an ex-wife of his:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...-s-global-deals-exposes-trouble-in-many-spots

So if Trump makes a deal that results in a great return for the country that's a bad thing ? I prefer it to the ones that bleed our tax dollars.
And you still don't show how Trump gets bought.

 

[PLC1]

So if Trump makes a deal that results in a great return for the country that's a bad thing ? I prefer it to the ones that bleed our tax dollars.
And you still don't show how Trump gets bought.

and if he makes a deal that is great for Trump but not so good for the country, then what?

 

[Old_Trapper70]

So if Trump makes a deal that results in a great return for the country that's a bad thing ? I prefer it to the ones that bleed our tax dollars.
And you still don't show how Trump gets bought.

Well, I am constantly showing you have a definite weakness for comprehension, or understanding.

Out of all the things Trump has claimed he will do can you name one that would benefit the country, or how he is going to pay for it, or even get it done?

 

[dogtowner]

and if he makes a deal that is great for Trump but not so good for the country, then what?

As you know, he cannot. At best he can make deals that favor his donors. Like BO and all his donors in Big Green (Solindra etc).
Trump has no such donors.

 

[dogtowner]

Well, I am constantly showing you have a definite weakness for comprehension, or understanding.

Out of all the things Trump has claimed he will do can you name one that would benefit the country, or how he is going to pay for it, or even get it done?

So time to move goalposts ?
Out of control immigration. While fixing this might make some in the welfare class to go back to work havin them become taxpayers instead of tax takers would be good.
Requiring fair trade agreements be adhered to or even made more fair would be good.
There is so much that is just returning to enforcing laws we stopped enforcing it's doable (we did it before) we still have money budgeted for it that is being diverted.
Iran is already violating that agreement, we can walk away of we choose.
Are you boys scared of success ?

 

[Jason76]

There might be some hypocrisy with Trump. Are we sure he doesn't hire illegals at his casinos etc..? If he does, then why doesn't his opposition bring the topic up?

 

[PLC1]

As you know, he cannot. At best he can make deals that favor his donors. Like BO and all his donors in Big Green (Solindra etc).
Trump has no such donors.

I don't see why he can't. Trump is, after all, all about Trump.
Moreover, his "self funded" campaign is really funded by a "loan" he's making to himself. He fully intends to pay himself back from donations during the general election. If we don't want him to have donors, then we'd better not send him to the general election. Come to think of it, I like that idea. Let him just sit out the general election.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

So time to move goalposts ?
Out of control immigration. While fixing this might make some in the welfare class to go back to work havin them become taxpayers instead of tax takers would be good.
Requiring fair trade agreements be adhered to or even made more fair would be good.

Republicans have been promising a "wall" since 1986, and when they had the chance to do so under Bush they supported amnesty instead.

As to the trade agreements, Obama is the only one that has done anything about that matter at all. And most Democrats opposed the agreements from the beginning. I know the majority of the people did, and they were ignored by the Republicans in control of both Houses under Clinton.

Now, ask yourself just how Trump has benefited from those agreements, and do you really think he is going to give up anything to repeal them?

There is so much that is just returning to enforcing laws we stopped enforcing it's doable (we did it before) we still have money budgeted for it that is being diverted.

Where is your source for that?

Iran is already violating that agreement, we can walk away of we choose.

Violating it how? Give a source.

Are you boys scared of success ?

No mother, we are just pissed at "success" that only includes a few, and is at the expense of the many. Obviously you aren't. You think that the bailouts were for the many, and the illegal wars were fought by the wealthy.

 

[dogtowner]

I don't see why he can't. Trump is, after all, all about Trump.
Moreover, his "self funded" campaign is really funded by a "loan" he's making to himself. He fully intends to pay himself back from donations during the general election. If we don't want him to have donors, then we'd better not send him to the general election. Come to think of it, I like that idea. Let him just sit out the general election.

It's common to use loans. It's uncommon to shun lobby money. It's really uncommon to be the front runner on a shoestring budget. Dave Brat did that and made Eric Cantor go away. Behold the power of ideas.

 

[dogtowner]

There might be some hypocrisy with Trump. Are we sure he doesn't hire illegals at his casinos etc..? If he does, then why doesn't his opposition bring the topic up?

Do they want to highlight that they do nothing to create jobs ? Probably not.

 

[dogtowner]

Republicans have been promising a "wall" since 1986, and when they had the chance to do so under Bush they supported amnesty instead.

As to the trade agreements, Obama is the only one that has done anything about that matter at all. And most Democrats opposed the agreements from the beginning. I know the majority of the people did, and they were ignored by the Republicans in control of both Houses under Clinton.

Now, ask yourself just how Trump has benefited from those agreements, and do you really think he is going to give up anything to repeal them?



Where is your source for that?



Violating it how? Give a source.



No mother, we are just pissed at "success" that only includes a few, and is at the expense of the many. Obviously you aren't. You think that the bailouts were for the many, and the illegal wars were fought by the wealthy.

Trump makes for a bad republican, no argument there. Not sure that's a bad thing.
Being principally in real estate I doubt he benefits nearly as much as Gates Buffet or the auto biz.
Read the paper.
BO has made that income inequality soar. Giving Wall St 85 bilion a month year after year will do that.
Maybe something different is exactly what we need. The same old same old isn't working out that well.

 

[Jason76]

Do they want to highlight that they do nothing to create jobs ? Probably not.

The casinos created construction jobs. However, it may be debatable whether they created jobs later. Well, they do need people to work in the casino. There are cleaning people, entertainers, cooks, security etc..

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Trump makes for a bad republican, no argument there. Not sure that's a bad thing.
Being principally in real estate I doubt he benefits nearly as much as Gates Buffet or the auto biz.
Read the paper.
BO has made that income inequality soar. Giving Wall St 85 bilion a month year after year will do that.
Maybe something different is exactly what we need. The same old same old isn't working out that well.

Trump makes a bad anything, and his real estate deals have been largely a farce. Read a report the other day, you can look it up, if Trump had taken the 200 million he inherited, and invested it in the stock market, he would have made 13 Billion more then he has now.

As to the bailout of the stock market, that was not an Obama deal. That was the Federal Reserve buying back bonds which propped up the stock market. However, since Obama is a corporatist, as are the Republicans, he certainly did not object.

We do need something different, Trump is not it.

BTW, have you seen this:

http://www.ibtimes.com/new-fed-official-warns-biggest-banks-still-too-big-fail-2309322