Donald Trump for President of the USA

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Diemen, please don't ruin it for the rest of us.

Back on topic:

donald-trump-bad-hair-day.jpg
 
If Arnold can be the governor then Trump can be the president. Say what you will, Trump has proven that he's an incredibly capable business man. That has to mean something. Still... not saying I'd ever vote for him.

That said I'd choose him over Obama.
 
An interesting possibility, and a very knowledgeable guy. He'd never get his feet off the ground in a GOP primary, though.
 
What kind of qualities does he have that would make him a good president, besides being a good businessman? What are his ideas on human rights, climate change, the middle-east, healthcare etc. You know, stuff that goes beyond running a business?
 
The idea of Trump storming DC yelling "You're Fired!!" in every direction in the political establishment is pretty appealing.
 
What kind of qualities does he have that would make him a good president, besides being a good businessman? What are his ideas on human rights, climate change, the middle-east, healthcare etc. You know, stuff that goes beyond running a business?

i'm not saying he would be, i'm saying he could be but we'd never know because he's turned himself into a running punchline.

i'm all for successful businesspeople running for public office, especially ones with enough disposable income to finance their own campaigns, thus avoiding heavy influence from special interest groups.

career politicians, for the most part, all suck.
 
Plus there we'd get to see it all via the video cameras that will follow the action up and down the halls reminiscent of The West Wing.

Also, he's gone bankrupt running casinos then bounced back financially. He could be Washington's version of Sully's Miracle on the Hudson.

And who doesn't want to see his hair turn grey within 18 months?
 
If it has to be one of the super-rich - which I'm against in theory - Bloomberg has a much broader depth of experience. What has Trump done with his life anyway, developed a few hotels and casinos, and hosted a tv show - so what.
 
financeguy said:
If it has to be one of the super-rich - which I'm against in theory - Bloomberg has a much broader depth of experience. What has Trump done with his life anyway, developed a few hotels and casinos, and hosted a tv show - so what.

Obviously my post about non political types who can't be bought out was referring to bloomberg. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat.
 
I may have mentioned this before, but Trump running for president made me have second thoughts about my steadfast opposition to constitutional monarchy. Would I rather have a head of state that is part of an unfair hereditary position, but is bred to have noble, aristocratic values or one that is duly elected, but based on glossy narcissism and a money-fuelled popularity contest with little regard for qualifications?

Prime ministers (and the theoretically equivalent position with the Speaker of the House) at least have to put in a lot of hard work with very little status or love; that would put off most of the narcissists like Trump who see political office as on par with being crowned "Miss America" or being named the next "American Idol."

Trump as president? No way and no thanks.
 
Prime ministers (and the theoretically equivalent position with the Speaker of the House) at least have to put in a lot of hard work with very little status or love; that would put off most of the narcissists like Trump who see political office as on par with being crowned "Miss America" or being named the next "American Idol."

Idealistic...but not realistic.

It sort of is American Idol.
People audition and the judges (respective power brokers in each party) select a pool of contestants (throw their money and support behind preferred candidates) and then 'let' America vote on the 'chosen few'.

Sure, some independent could run...but to make a viable run there are a LOT of qualifiers. Most of us have only seen one viable independent candidacy in our lifetime. Maybe all of us...I struggle to think of someone besides Perot.

Current Speaker of the House, John Boehner is a self-made man who eventually became another cog in the corporate-lobby-fueled exclusive 'two-party machine'. As they ALL eventually have to become. In fact, his background makes absolutely no difference at this point. Even if he were raised an 'aristocrat' of some sort, it would be the same outcome. He would be required to act as if he in fact WAS the same as anyone else. Principles be damned, you have to play the game to win the game.

Other than delusional idealism, what is the difference between Romney, Obama or anyone else and Trump?

They are all self-involved enough to go through the excruciating process of running for President, and for what reason? Granted, Bush 43 wasn't coming from the same place as Clinton, but as they sit in the Oval Office, their required interests render them (essentially) the same.

Obama spent a few years in the Senate. He knew exactly what the game was.
It is (more or less) the sole reason he chose the controversial/difficult Rahm Emanuel as his COS. To push through that HC reform bill by massaging all the corporate interests = and what happened? A handjob to insurance corporations. I wonder how many of the delusional idealists in the "yes we can" brigade threw up in their mouth a little bit when that happened.

Trump is no less plausible as a theoretical 'leader' of this corrupt two-party stranglehold than Obama was in 2007. Period. And that says it all about our system. We don't elect leaders in a battle of ideas. We choose the 'prettiest girl' in a popularity contest. End of story. We just have to hope for competence and enough principle from that person.

Granted, I'm not saying I'd vote for or support the guy, but everything that dismisses Trump over...(insert name here) is largely and ironically just as superficial as Trump himself.
 
Apparently being educated is a large obstacle when it comes to winning votes from some people. :doh:

You left out the next part of that quote. All that education is meaningless if you spend your whole career in politics and spend no time in the private sector.

We've had extremely well-educated people in charge for a while now, and things have only gotten worse. I'll take the "uneducated" mind of a Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Grover Cleveland or Harry Truman over Bush, Obama, and all the degrees money or pedigree can buy any day. They really are becoming irrelevant.
 
Back
Top Bottom