He has zero chance of winning. The fact that it is the loud angry idiots that support him is the reason he can’t win. There is a reason neither party has any plans to ever listen to the loud angry idiots in any issue ever, they are wrong about everything. Republicans will continue to try to milk them for their money and votes but actually listening to them would destroy the party, they know this, Democrats know this, Trump knows this. People like Trump will continue to rile them up because it’s beneficial to them, just as Palin did before him to great (monetary, not political) success.
We’re not debating the size of the blip, we’re debating whether this sort of thing is good. You suggest that it’s not a problem because it’s jobs. I’m not saying it’s a lot of jobs, I’m saying it’s human activity that could be spent toward more productive means, that it’s a waste of effort, and therefore a problem.
Claverhouse, you say that you’re a divine-rights royalist (“no joke!”). I disagree. If the alternative is that I’m supposed to take your philosophy seriously, it’s absolutely a joke.
What’s making you giggle isn’t a contradiction in democracy, it’s your fundamental misunderstanding of the benefit of democracy. Nobody proponent of democracy with two brain cells to rub together believes that everyone ought to be pleased with the result of every election. That’s not what democracy is about.
You may do well to read more about political systems.
There is an enormous amount of human activity that is not “productive” (which is subjective, anyway, so what is “productive” to me may not be so to you) and is a “waste of effort” (also subjective). Political campaigns are a tiny, TINY portion of that amount.
That’s funny, I was positing the stealth Democrat theory to a friend of mine last week. It would be a rather cunning plan, and kind of funny, but would surely backfire. Would be just one more in the lengthening list of sad commentaries on our government these days.
I have absolutely no problem with you eschewing activities you don’t consider “productive”. I also have absolutely no problem with people pursuing activities I don’t consider “productive”.
The main area of conflict was Marla Maples, the 26 year old Donald began “dating” while he was married to Ivana. I read him opine that women became less attractive as they age–but men do not. Ivana practically went bionic trying to achieve the look of youth–but he preferred a new model.
Men & women both age. Some age better than others–Donald’s ridiculous “hair” & weird makeup show the sort he is. His wealth is the only reason he’s been able to keep trading in women for younger ones…
What nonsense. Is there any reason I should value your opinion, or you mine ? Yours is temporarily on top, but death equals everything out.
Again, pure stupidity. I did not claim the losers should be pleased; I claimed that if sincere in their belief the People should decide, then they ought to accept any outcome the People decided.
If in my system the wicked old King tyrannically decides; and if in yours you say the People are the source of power and government — just as do the communists, the fascists and the Palinites — then when you reject the People’s decision you are doing violence to your innermost values and am left with mere oligarchy.
No, that’s not what you claimed. Indeed, if you look at democracy, all its major proponents DO accept the outcome people decide, except as limited by a belief in a constitutional structure adjudicated by the judicial branch.
At this point, however, I’m no more convinced that you’re going to keep goalposts still than I’m convinced that Terr will.
I should correct myself - in the beginning, he took at most a few $mil from his father. He did inherit $100 to $200mil, but that was in 1999, way after he made a lot more than that already.
That 10B number is according to him, which no one believes. Forbes lists it as 4B. His inheritance was 200 million. Turning 200 million into 4 billion given a few decades, in the very industry that your daddy laid the groundwork, is not all that challenging.
Not a particularly impressive rate of return even if he wasn’t just following in daddy’s footsteps.
Trump Tower and Trump’s palatial apartment in it, The Art of the Deal and his purchase of Adnan Khoshoggi’s yacht all occurred more than a decade before Trump got that inheritance.
Correction: It was $10 billion (or to be more precise TEN BILLION DOLLARS) on his press release. The FCC disclosure docs gave something under $2 billion, which the press release emphasized was due to some investments being capped at $50 million. Fair enough. The best estimate is probably that of Forbes, which is about $4 billion. Doesn’t really change the thrust of your argument, but still.
That only applies when the economy has excess capacity. Which it does. But it may not a year from now: the Fed is aiming to raise rates within the next 6 months. At any rate in a year it will roughly be a case of the GOP billionaires giveith, while the Fed taketh away. In other words the crowding out of investment. Which is sort of a bummer as I prefer interest rate sensitive things like cars, housing and capital investment over robo-calling. Then again, nails on blackboards are also better than robocalling, so there’s that.
