- #316
anorlunda
Staff Emeritus
- 11,308
- 8,732
Greg Bernhardt said:
No, serving their interests is more what I had in mind.
Greg Bernhardt said:Attacking voters even if they are not yours, is not a good strategy as a candidate.
russ_watters said:...and yet not endorsing one of the other candidates? So, what was the point of that? Next stop for him must be Viagra commercials.
Astronuc said:Now Meg Whitman is expressing negative sentiment on Trump and Christie.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-white-house-may-spark-142521752.html
I guess Trump is not so popular.
Rick21383 said:The blatant dishonesty and coordination of the attacks from groups that were not allies before (liberal media pundits + wall street executives + Bush era neocons for example) really makes you wonder what they're so afraid of and maybe is it the impending loss of a rigged system
Withhold foreign aid?StevieTNZ said:Fine - you're going get a wall built, but how are you going to get the money?
axmls said:How do you think Trump would have handled the Cuban Missile Crisis had he been in JFK's shoes?
and why?Rick21383 said:However, the prospect of Hillary being in charge of the U.S. nuclear arsenal is FAR more terrifying imo.
Greg Bernhardt said:and why?
axmls said:How do you think Trump would have handled the Cuban Missile Crisis had he been in JFK's shoes?
Great first hand account in George Ball's book "The Past Has Another Pattern" .Mr. President, we and you ought not now to pull on the ends of the rope in which you have tied the knot of war, because the more the two of us pull, the tighter that knot will be tied. And a moment may come when that knot will be tied so tight that even he who tied it will not have the strength to untie it, and then it will be necessary to cut that knot, and what that would mean is not for me to explain to you, because you yourself understand perfectly of what terrible forces our countries dispose.
Consequently, if there is no intention to tighten that knot and thereby to doom the world to the catastrophe of thermonuclear war, then let us not only relax the forces pulling on the ends of the rope, let us take measures to untie that knot. We are ready for this.
To have his criticism of Trump taken seriously, as opposed to a hit job on the leader on behalf of an alternate.russ_watters said:...and yet not endorsing one of the other candidates? So, what was the point of that? Next stop for him must be Viagra commercials.
Close the border to legal trade for 15 mins. Mexican economy is highly dependent on export to the US, several hundred billion dollars per year.StevieTNZ said:...
As for the US/Mexican wall, I have no clue how he is going to get the Mexican Government to pay for it. They haven't offered to pay for it, so how is that going to be achieved? Fine - you're going get a wall built, but how are you going to get the money?
jim hardy said:You are aware, are you not,
that Kruschev took the initiative and sent Kennedy a secret note asking basically "What're we going to do?" ?
To which Kennedy replied , rejecting the advice of the hawks in his cabinet.
They arranged for both leaders to save face - we removed missiles form Turkey and they from Cuba.
Here's an excerpt and you should read the whole thing at the link.
http://microsites.jfklibrary.org/cmc/oct26/doc4.html
Great first hand account in George Ball's book "The Past Has Another Pattern" .
I could only guess what Trump would do.
Which do you think he would do - accept or reject such an invitation to negotiate a deal ?
I find his publicly stated attitude toward Putin somewhat comforting.
Like Jim Westaxmls said:How do you think Trump would have handled the Cuban Missile Crisis had he been in JFK's shoes?
Yes, Vicente Fox might have looked that up first, some $40B/yr per wiki. The fence would be a one time expense, maybe as low as $6B to complete.Greg Bernhardt said:Withhold foreign aid?
StevieTNZ said:As for the US/Mexican wall, I have no clue how he is going to get the Mexican Government to pay for it. They haven't offered to pay for it, so how is that going to be achieved? Fine - you're going get a wall built, but how are you going to get the money?
That, to me, would sound like blackmail.Greg Bernhardt said:Withhold foreign aid?
We never know, because he doesn't elaborate. He needs to start doing so.gleem said:Perhaps Trumps means it more in the way of " you'll pay for it" by withdrawing US manufacturers from Mexico so some such economic maneuver.
You don't think we do it all the time?StevieTNZ said:That, to me, would sound like blackmail.
Rick21383 said:That's a great question.
The blatant dishonesty and coordination of the attacks from groups that were not allies before (liberal media pundits + wall street executives + Bush era neocons for example) really makes you wonder what they're so afraid of and maybe is it the impending loss of a rigged system
That smarmy screed from John Oliver, back to back with this Romney nonsense really put the final nail in the coffin for me.
There's a parade of libs reposting the Oliver bit, where he uses mean-spirited "humor" to point out that Trump isn't self financing, but is accepting voluntary $7.00 donations from little old ladies as some kind of dig *against* Trump, in a political environment where Goldman Sachs is shoveling money to candidates in both parties to maintain the status quo. And somehow, it's the guy with the financial support of little old ladies who is corrupt? F.U., John Oliver.
And then, these supposedly pro-immigrant libs want to use the man's grandfather's foreign-sounding name against him?
Then we have 4 days of wall to wall coverage of TRUMP REFUSES TO DENY KKK ENDORSEMENT, immediately following Trump's explicit disavowal of David Duke.
At a certain point you just have to look at the circus and be like "you people left all your principles at the door, and you are slaves to a global corporate elite that feels threatened. At this point, I may just vote for Trump. I'm done with the establishment, and I think many people are with me.
How could he or anyone force manufacturers to leave Mexico or any other country?gleem said:Perhaps Trumps means it more in the way of " you'll pay for it" by withdrawing US manufacturers from Mexico so some such economic maneuver.
anorlunda said:So Romney and everyone else (including most people on this thread) attack Trump, and fail to address the wants of Trump supporters. I don't know how many they are, 30? 40? 50? 60? 70 million? Some say they include Democrats. The point is that this a huge fraction of the voting public, and they are sick of being ignored and called stupid. Turtlemeister's comment illustrates this. IMO, it is a grave political mistake to ignore them.
Why shouldn't Trump supporters say "burn, baby, burn" to the American political system, the American democracy system, and the American government?
<Snip>
With punitive tariffs and taxes.WWGD said:How could he or anyone force manufacturers to leave Mexico or any other country?
How likely are those laws of passing, given the amount of commerce with Mexico? Would senators from states doing business with Mexico go along?Dotini said:With punitive tariffs and taxes.
Yeah, good question. I cannot calculate it. I suppose it would depend upon the magnitude of economic distress of the voters in each particular state, when the legislators are up for reelection, and so forth.WWGD said:How likely are those laws of passing, given the amount of commerce with Mexico? Would senators from states doing business with Mexico go along?