He gets an A from me.
I don’t like his health care plan or his fondness for pet projects (ie, high speed rail), but overall he’s doing the things I want. If he gets serious and engages in real entitlement reform, I’ll consider him the best president since at least Reagan.
Remember, people: it’s okay if you defraud people for millions as long as you pay it back when you get caught.
Ah, he promised not to touch entitlements. Are you suggesting he wasn’t serious about that either?
Link to a news source you’re probably more comfortable with using.
Oh, OK! So, really, he was just borrowing the money! Creative financing! I mean, its not like he ever intended to keep it! 'Course, legally they have to call it “fraud”, but they didn’t really mean it.
Well, maybe not.
It’s a minor thing, but I do find it odd that you repeatedly use the title “Mr.” for one of these two men and never use it for the other. Either choice applied consistently would not have struck me as all that noteworthy, but why use such a title selectively?
Can you name some? Can you explain how eliminating regulations could have any effect in just a few days?
Regulatory “excess” is generally the result of corporate excess.
As an example, you wouldn’t need regulations prohibiting the dumping of toxic waste wherever you please without corporations dumping toxic wastes wherever they pleased.
Can you be a little more specific?
Any concern over the cases of non-payment to various contractors he used to build his properties?
The charitable donations he claims to have made but didn’t?
I know you’ve stated as a disclaimer that Trump wasn’t running for the office of Pope, but the fact that Trump seems to have one of the longest track records of dishonest, dishonorable, and anti-intellectual behaviors, even when compared to the low bar typically set in politics - does it still not give you any pause as to his character and qualifications for the position which you’ve helped to put him?
I would appreciate a response that doesn’t include, “But Clinton…”, because it’s a tired and unsupportable excuse.
Our new friend is probably a little young to remember what happened at Love Canal.
What about his half-billion (or more) debts to the Chinese and the Russians, and the conflicts of interest and violations of the Emoluments Clause arising therefrom?
What about his fraudulent claims regarding his golf course in Ossining, NY? Should he be forgiven his crimes, just because he’s POTUS?
It’s been a matter of speculation that he has debts to Russian oligarchs/banks and the Chinese but has that been confirmed as fact?
Wouldn’t surprise me in the least but I thought it would have been widely reported.
Trump has donated to dozens of charities, including many Jewish charities over the years. He didn’t have to do that. One time, he even sued the city of Palm Beach for discriminating against his club because he allowed Jews and blacks to congregate there, for which his efforts were pointedly acknowledged by Abraham Foxman,the then-director of the Anti-Defamation League. See more here:Reddit - Dive into anything
His charitability is far less than he’s claiming credit for, credit you’re willing to grant.
Want a life-sized painting of him?
Not only did he not have to do that, he didn’t do that.
If I remember correctly, every one of his claims about donating to charity was shown to be a lie. And in fact his so-called Trump Foundation was illegally funnelling “charitable” donations for his private benefit.
Probably part of the reason that he doesn’t want to release his tax returns is that they’ll show that he’s illegally claiming huge charitable donations which he actually hasn’t made, and would result in him getting convicted for tax fraud.
Alright, he hasn’t donated to as many philanthropies as he said he has, but he’s still donated to a good many more than some other smug liberal celebrities have (Trump used to be a liberal, so I’m including him in that group). Maybe he just… deployed a little truthful hyperbole, y’know? 
You didn’t answer my question.
I asked about charitable donations he claimed to have made and didn’t. And the unpaid contractual obligations.
I made no claims one way or the other about the events in link you provided.
So you’re on record in admitting that Trump is dishonest?
That’s not correct either.
The Jewish Week—a reputable, weekly New York newspaper serving the city’s Jewish communities—ran a story about how he’s donated generously to Jewish groups over the years, money that has been over six figures. (http://jewishweek.timesofisrael.com/trumps-jewish-giving-rubs-against-tenor-of-his-campaign/)
Yes, sometimes he’s is. That a part of “The Art of The Deal”. He calls it “truthful hyperbole”.
I mean, what other politician doesn’t stretch the truth sometimes? We Trump supporters are at ease with the fact that the vast majority of the time he is in fact telling the truth, but that at times he’s being obviously facetious and that his critics take him too literally, rather than figuratively, for example.
Claiming you donated to a charitable group you didn’t for political points is of course below the pale, but he did in fact eventually pay (http://www.dailywire.com/news/6029/trump-called-reporter-nasty-guy-nasty-guy-just-hank-berrien), and his dishonesty there is more than made up for the by the many other real donations he’s made to good causes around the world.