The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > The BBQ Pit

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #7451  
Old Yesterday, 06:22 PM
Jack Batty Jack Batty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Regardless, how many of Trump's ventures went bankrupt? Six, seven, something like that? To continue the analogy of microcosming things down here, I grew up in a small town - there was a guy who opened a new restaurant every year. Every other year that restaurant went bankrupt. Somehow he kept opening up restaurants and they kept failing. Oh, he had a nice house and a nice car and his kids had cool shit but his reputation as a stand up guy in town was for shit.

Somehow that doesn't macrocosm back up to the yutz who can't seem to make money running a casino, ferchrissakes. That's the guy we're supposed to be impressed with.

Last edited by Jack Batty; Yesterday at 06:22 PM..
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #7452  
Old Yesterday, 06:26 PM
Blank Slate Blank Slate is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Batty View Post
Regardless, how many of Trump's ventures went bankrupt? Six, seven, something like that? To continue the analogy of microcosming things down here, I grew up in a small town - there was a guy who opened a new restaurant every year. Every other year that restaurant went bankrupt. Somehow he kept opening up restaurants and they kept failing. Oh, he had a nice house and a nice car and his kids had cool shit but his reputation as a stand up guy in town was for shit.

Somehow that doesn't macrocosm back up to the yutz who can't seem to make money running a casino, ferchrissakes. That's the guy we're supposed to be impressed with.
That is exactly the point. The rubes were sold on Trump being some wizard businessman. But why? Any casual examination of his track record reveals the obvious.

This New York real estate mogul couldn't get a single American bank to back his disastrous projects because they all learned the hard way. So he turned to overseas banks. And the Russians.
Reply With Quote
  #7453  
Old Yesterday, 08:53 PM
D_Odds D_Odds is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Queens
Posts: 11,707
Quote:
Originally Posted by duality72 View Post
So you're saying that you're okay with it being a corrupt system because you get to benefit from it? Not being snarky, but you seem to think that Trump should be held accountable when he uses a legal entity to amass debts he can't pay back, but that your hypothetical case of accruing debt in a legal entity shouldn't be held similarly accountable. This is the kind of thinking that keeps corrupt systems in place. Wouldn't insurance against lawsuits be a simpler way to protect your investments?
First, it is not a corrupt system. It is a system that fosters entrepreneurship and small business. Unscrupulous actors corrupt the system, but the system isn't corrupt. This not only goes for limited liability and asset protection for small business, but Medicare, Medicaid, insurance, and any other number of systems and programs. Just because some people abuse the system doesn't mean the system is bad. The lenders are quite smart - most wouldn't lend to my own legal entities without a personal guarantee, and those that might lend would charge me higher interest and probably points. That any let DT get away without one for so long, especially after the first default, is beyond me.

Second, I do have insurance, and it should cover 95%+ of situations, because I don't want to lose any assets to a lawsuit. It's the rare, hopefully never, situations that spending money up front on asset protection is for.

Lastly, Atlantic City casinos only had a brief heyday. That whole city is a confluence of corruption from every corner. And as we all should know, DT was too corrupt for Las Vegas, and if that didn't tell voters enough about him, nothing would.
Reply With Quote
  #7454  
Old Yesterday, 10:35 PM
ThelmaLou ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 10,341
"A Time Magazine with Trump on the cover hangs in his golf clubs. It’s fake."
http://wapo.st/2sO8Uq3

Follow the link to see it.
Quote:
The framed copy of Time magazine was hung up in at least five of President Trump’s clubs, from South Florida to Scotland. Filling the entire cover was a photo of Donald Trump.

“Donald Trump: The ‘Apprentice’ is a television smash!” the big headline said. Above the Time nameplate, there was another headline in all caps: “TRUMP IS HITTING ON ALL FRONTS . . . EVEN TV!”

This cover — dated March 1, 2009 — looks like an impressive memento from Trump’s pre-presidential career. To club members eating lunch, or golfers waiting for a pro-shop purchase, it seemed to be a signal that Trump had always been a man who mattered. Even when he was just a reality TV star, Trump was the kind of star who got a cover story in Time.

But that wasn’t true.

The Time cover is a fake.

There was no March 1, 2009, issue of Time magazine. And there was no issue at all in 2009 that had Trump on the cover....
Everywhere you turn...another Trumpism to be disgusted by.
Reply With Quote
  #7455  
Old Yesterday, 11:02 PM
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
And yet, Nate says his disapproval rating is still only 55.6%. What is truly disturbing, when you add the numbers together, you end up with 5.7% who have/express no opinion. How is that even possible? I cannot wrap my head around it.
Reply With Quote
  #7456  
Old Yesterday, 11:44 PM
Sunny Daze Sunny Daze is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 6,195
Having worked in research at one point, I have to wonder about how some of these surveys are set up. If the questions aren't worded well, you can get wonky results. If the groups aren't selected well, you can get wonky results. Looking at Nate's article, I can see he's trying to account for that but we're still in fuzzy territory. For example, he's adjusting the model to take 6 points off of Rasmussen. I agree with him that they're problematic, ditto on anything with SurveyMonkey, but it's looking SWAG-ish.

The resulting model shows the Bane of Our Existence at 38% approval. That's terrible. It would be nice if it was lower, but hey, we're only on day whatever this is. (Who am I kidding? This is like dog years, but much, much worse.)

I don't know how one would have no opinion, unless someone just doesn't want to talk about it. It could also be people who were pro-Trump, are disappointed but can't admit it.
Reply With Quote
  #7457  
Old Today, 01:22 AM
Monty Monty is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 20,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
I don't know how one would have no opinion, unless someone just doesn't want to talk about it. It could also be people who were pro-Trump, are disappointed but can't admit it.
Or it can be--and this is quite sad, really--people who really have no opinion whatsoever on political issues. Some folks are actually proud of "having no interest in politics". I'm wondering, myself, how they manage to keep that up with what's happening to everyone thanks to political issues (laws, finance, etc.).
Reply With Quote
  #7458  
Old Today, 06:05 AM
Kobal2 Kobal2 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blank Slate View Post
That is exactly the point. The rubes were sold on Trump being some wizard businessman. But why? Any casual examination of his track record reveals the obvious.

This New York real estate mogul couldn't get a single American bank to back his disastrous projects because they all learned the hard way. So he turned to overseas banks. And the Russians.
Ask Starving Artist. He's on the record proclaiming Trump's yuge business acumen on this very board, against all relentless (and repeated, ad nauseam) evidence. Some people know what they know, and ya can't make 'em know otherwise.
Reply With Quote
  #7459  
Old Today, 07:48 AM
ThelmaLou ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 10,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
Having worked in research at one point, I have to wonder about how some of these surveys are set up.

...<snip>...

I don't know how one would have no opinion, unless someone just doesn't want to talk about it. It could also be people who were pro-Trump, are disappointed but can't admit it.
Some people may just refuse to participate in surveys on principle.

Prior to this election, I didn't have much of an opinion on politics, because, frankly, it didn't matter all that much. Even if you didn't like the President for one reason or another, there wasn't the sense that the person was going to drive the bus over a cliff. One believed that "checks and balances" still operated. If the President went TOO far in one direction, course correction was possible from sensible heads and voices in Congress and the Supreme Court. One had faith that the government would function as it was designed to.

That changed with Trump. This man will absolutely drive the bus over a cliff out of sheer ignorance and refusal to listen to anyone else about anything else. There are no voices of moderation THAT CAN BE HEARD on the Republican side. And the Democrats are like the guy who ran around in ever-decreasing concentric circles until he disappeared up his own asshole.

The Tea Party-->Freedom Caucus dovetailed perfectly with Mitch McConnell's bitter hatred of Obama and refusal to cooperate with him on anything. Cooperation and compromise--the very foundation of a successful political process--became dirty words. I detest that destructive, evil man.

This situation is exacerbated by the fact that so many Congressmen [sic] are weekend warriors and don't even move their families to Washington anymore. So there's no collegiality outside of the Senate and House chambers. People's kids don't go to school together; the families don't get to know each other. Members don't meet on weekends, because on weekends they're back in their home districts. There are few, if any, hands across the aisle.

What we have is a shambles, with the biggest Shambler of all sitting on top of the heap.
Reply With Quote
  #7460  
Old Today, 08:19 AM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
The Tea Party-->Freedom Caucus dovetailed perfectly with Mitch McConnell's bitter hatred of Obama and refusal to cooperate with him on anything. Cooperation and compromise--the very foundation of a successful political process--became dirty words. I detest that destructive, evil man.

Absolutely. I'll believe to my last breath that if Obama had been white, McConnell would not have been nearly so obstructionist. The sad truth is that McConnell is a racist motherfucker who simply could not stomach the idea of a black president and did everything he could to de-legitimize him. The transformation of Republicans that began with Nixon's Southern Strategy is now complete, they are the party of racism and bigotry.
Reply With Quote
  #7461  
Old Today, 08:22 AM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 41,898
Well, it's hard to see how much more obstructionist the party could have been when Bill Clinton was president. They didn't try to impeach Obama, remember.
Reply With Quote
  #7462  
Old Today, 08:40 AM
jsc1953 jsc1953 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
The Tea Party-->Freedom Caucus dovetailed perfectly with Mitch McConnell's bitter hatred of Obama and refusal to cooperate with him on anything. Cooperation and compromise--the very foundation of a successful political process--became dirty words. I detest that destructive, evil man.
It's my firmly held belief that virtually all the ills of American society -- and many of the world's -- can be traced back to the following:

Ronald Reagan
Newt Gingrich
Roger Ailes
Bush's Neo-con cabal
Mitch McConnell

But that's a rant for another day.
Reply With Quote
  #7463  
Old Today, 09:09 AM
ThelmaLou ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 10,341
I'm liking this.

"Who’s afraid of Trump? Not enough Republicans — at least for now."
http://wapo.st/2sOL5OH
Quote:
History suggests that presidents who have governed successfully have been both revered and feared. But Republican fixtures in Washington are beginning to conclude that Trump may be neither, despite his mix of bravado, threats and efforts to schmooze with GOP lawmakers.

...

“This president is the first president in our history who has neither political nor military experience, and thus it has been a challenge to him to learn how to interact with Congress and learn how to push his agenda better,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who opposes the current health-care bill.

...

In private conversations on Capitol Hill, Trump is often not taken seriously. Some Republican lawmakers consider some of his promises — such as making Mexico pay for a new border wall — fantastical. They are exhausted and at times exasperated by his hopscotching from one subject to the next, chronicled in his pithy and provocative tweets. They are quick to point out how little command he demonstrates of policy. And they have come to regard some of his threats as empty, concluding that crossing the president poses little danger....
Ooooo..."anonymous sources"!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.