President Trump - it's on!

[MDC 7,505]

As is the case with 90% of billionaires, he was rich the day he was born. It always cracks me up when people talk about how hard these guys worked for their money. The custodian at my local high school works hard for his money, too. LOL @ guys who are born on third base and think they've hit a triple.

I am not saying he didn't creat jobs but from what little I read Trump isn't an innovator and hasn't had any unusual degree of success, he just plants his name on everything.

 

Not holding being rich against him but to call the guy a job creator is a stretch.

[edjr 6,608]

If you don't think even the richest of candidates won't be pulled by the donation strings you're sadly mistaken. And just because a guy is a Billionaire doesn't necessarily make him a great business man or a visionary.

 

Daniel Snyder

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

Seems that way.

 

I think you and edjr are so hung up on the name Donald Trump you can't get past it. Lemme ask you a question this way:

 

• Person A: Is a billionaire
• Person B: is a hundred thousandaire
• It costs 10 Million to fund a presidential campain

Which person in your estimation would end up being more "in debt" to campaign donors? Which person would have more leverage to say no if a donor went against their wishes?

 

What's wrong with American Politics isn't a rich citizen. What's wrong with politics is how money buys politicians. edjr's angst is misguided.

Wow, possibly the most juvenile analysis I have seen on this board since, well not that long really. But it's bad

[KSB2424 3,148]

Wow, possibly the most juvenile analysis I have seen on this board since, well not that long really. But it's bad

 

I tried normal conversation but that didn't seem to work, so I tried speaking to edjr and MB like they were 12 in an effort for it to sink in. Sometimes you have to talk down to the audience.

 

But since you decided to drop in without giving an actual opinion, .......do you agree that a billionaire running for President:

 

proves what a complete joke the entire presidential election process is.

 

 

 

 

Or is a larger problem how outside campaign money is funneled to a politician and what that means and entails.

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

 

I tried normal conversation but that didn't seem to work, so I tried speaking to edjr and MB like they were 12 in an effort for it to sink in. Sometimes you have to talk down to the audience.

Nice try. You got owned on this. Your rudimentary understanding of modern politics was exposed. You are a naif.

[edjr 6,608]

 

I tried normal conversation but that didn't seem to work, so I tried speaking to edjr and MB like they were 12 in an effort for it to sink in. Sometimes you have to talk down to the audience.

if MB and I agree on something, you can bet you're wrong and get away while the gettins' good.

[KSB2424 3,148]

Nice try. You got owned on this. Your rudimentary understanding of modern politics was exposed. You are a naif.

 

Pretty simple question nobody seems to answer.

 

Which is more of a problem with American politics?

 

1. edjr stated it was a billionaire running for president

2. KSB stated the bigger problem was not the billionaire candidate, rather how outside campaign money is spent backing and ultimately buying politicians.

 

Simple answer.... is it number 1 or number 2? No paragraph needed, a simple 1 or 2.

And yes Worms, sometimes you have to whittle it down to multiple choice questions on this bored or else you get a bunch of question dodging, spin and nonsense.  

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

When did I say the problem was aBillionaire running? I said it doesn't matter. Question doesn't apply to me.

[KSB2424 3,148]

When did I say the problem was aBillionaire running? I said it doesn't matter. Question doesn't apply to me.

 

Go back and read the thread. edjr stated it, I quoted him and stated he was wrong and was replying to his statement. Of which you jumped into our conversation.

[Sho Nuff 720]

 

 

Pretty simple question nobody seems to answer.

 

Which is more of a problem with American politics?

 

1. edjr stated it was a billionaire running for president

2. KSB stated the bigger problem was not the billionaire candidate, rather how outside campaign money is spent backing and ultimately buying politicians.

 

Simple answer.... is it number 1 or number 2? No paragraph needed, a simple 1 or 2.

And yes Worms, sometimes you have to whittle it down to multiple choice questions on this bored or else you get a bunch of question dodging, spin and nonsense.  

Spin?

you soun what ed actually said.

 

He stated money talks was the problem. Not a billionaire running.

 

You seem to talk down to people often when you dont even understand what is being said.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

I tried normal conversation but that didn't seem to work, so I tried speaking to edjr and MB like they were 12 in an effort for it to sink in. Sometimes you have to talk down to the audience.

 

But since you decided to drop in without giving an actual opinion, .......do you agree that a billionaire running for President:

 

 

 

Or is a larger problem how outside campaign money is funneled to a politician and what that means and entails.

I absolutely agree that the corrosive influence of money in politics is a very bad thing, made much worse by the Supreme Court's awful decision in Citizens United.

 

Where I disagree is that a billionaire will be less influenced. A presidential campaign costs at least a billion dollars these days. Nobody is throwing in a billion of their own money. They will be just as beholden to the money interests as anyone else.

 

I'm also extremely concerned about the implication of your view, which would appear to be that billionaires are more qualified to run for the presidency. Well that sure limits your pool of candidates quite a bit and basically makes this an official aristocracy. Not cool.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

Spin?

you soun what ed actually said.

 

He stated money talks was the problem. Not a billionaire running.

 

You seem to talk down to people often when you dont even understand what is being said.

Not a good outing for KSB. Usually he covers up his BS a little better than this

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

 

Go back and read the thread. edjr stated it, I quoted him and stated he was wrong and was replying to his statement. Of which you jumped into our conversation.

Oh, I didn't know it was a closed conversation. Disregard the pearls of wisdom I bestowed on your naive self then. Continue to wallow in your self imposed ignorance.

[KSB2424 3,148]

I absolutely agree that the corrosive influence of money in politics is a very bad thing, made much worse by the Supreme Court's awful decision in Citizens United.

 

Where I disagree is that a billionaire will be less influenced. A presidential campaign costs at least a billion dollars these days. Nobody is throwing in a billion of their own money. They will be just as beholden to the money interests as anyone else.

 

I'm also extremely concerned about the implication of your view, which would appear to be that billionaires are more qualified to run for the presidency. Well that sure limits your pool of candidates quite a bit and basically makes this an official aristocracy. Not cool.

 

Go back and read the thread as it was written. I was replying to edjr who stated that a billionaire running is what is wrong with politics. I disagreed with that and said it wasn't the amount of money the person running had, it was outside influences of donor money that is the true problem. Seems like we agree so you and MB could've saved us all some time and just put a under my post to edjr.

 

So edjr, you're out. Nobody agrees with you.

 

Seems the disagreement is here.......

 

I also stated common sense would say that a billionaire would be LESS apt to become beholden to donors. I didn't say it wouldn't happen or couldn't happen, rather common sense states they'd be less inclined to if they didn't want to. The basic difference between need and want. A Billionaire would have to WANT too (which could happen), but a hundred thousandairre or even millionaire would NEED too.

 

So I disagree with your bolded above. "Just as" is not correct in my opinion.

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

 

Go back and read the thread as it was written. I was replying to edjr who stated that a billionaire running is what is wrong with politics. I disagreed with that and said it wasn't the amount of money the person running had, it was outside influences of donor money that is the true problem. Seems like we agree so you and MB could've saved us all some time and just put a under my post to edjr.

 

I also stated common sense would say that a billionaire would be LESS apt to become beholden to donors. I didn't say it wouldn't happen or couldn't happen, rather common sense states they'd be less inclined to if they didn't want to. The basic difference between need and want. A Billionaire would have to WANT too (which could happen), but a hundred thousandairre or even millionaire would NEED too.

 

So I disagree with your bolded above. "Just as" is not correct in my opinion.

Doubling down on the stupid. Your whole contention: Billionaire good/ won't be swayed by donors. Proven wrong. Admit it.

[edjr 6,608]

This board is like a bunch of politicians.

 

No one ever admits when they are wrong and no one ever disagrees with their party line,

 

Focking christ.

[KSB2424 3,148]

 

Campaign Finance Reform is totally different than a citizen being rich. And common sense says they'd actually be less apt to be swayed by campaign donor dollars.

 

I said he'd (or any Billionaire) would theoretically be LESS inclined. I never said he wouldn't or couldn't happen. You're trying to deal in absolutes.

[KSB2424 3,148]

This board is like a bunch of politicians.

 

No one ever admits when they are wrong and no one ever disagrees with their party line,

 

Focking christ.

 

I agree, just admit it and move on.

[NewbieJr 541]

If Trump was a Democrat, KSB and the rest of his brood would be saying he's a certifiable whack job.

[Sho Nuff 720]

This board is like a bunch of politicians.

 

No one ever admits when they are wrong and no one ever disagrees with their party line,

 

Focking christ.

Disagree.

i disagree with both parties and some others too.

[Sho Nuff 720]

 

I agree, just admit it and move on.

Going to admit you spun his words of money talks yet?

 

Psst, you all are saying some very similar things....you just dont want to admit that.

[KSB2424 3,148]

If Trump was a Democrat, KSB and the rest of his brood would be saying he's a certifiable whack job.

 

I already said in this thread:

 

 

he's doing this for publicity

 

 

 

that he has zero chance

 

 

 

he is a dooshbag.

 

 

 

Read the thread.

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

 

I said he'd (or any Billionaire) would theoretically be LESS inclined. I never said he wouldn't or couldn't happen. You're trying to deal in absolutes.

But theoretically he would NOT be less inclined. You are wrong in that statement. He needs and would take just as much as anyone.

[KSB2424 3,148]

But theoretically he would NOT be less inclined. You are wrong in that statement.

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.

Well, we had one Billionaire candidate recently, and he took gobs of loot. And the Bush family ain't exactly paupers, doesn't stop them, nor did it stop John Kerry. HTH.

[MDC 7,505]

I get what KSB is saying in theory - a candidate who is able to find more of his campaign will owe fewer favors. In practice though I think candidates are paying off favors of the political variety even moreso than the outright $$$ and it doesn't matter much either way.

 

The other thing about a billionaire candidate: I question whether a guy like Trump who is orally isolated from everyday Americans and has never shared their concerns is really the best guy to lead the country?

 

That same perception hurt Kerry to some extent so it's not a GOP vs Dem thing. I just don't like the idea of a president who grew up fabulously wealthy and never had to work or pay bills. That to me is focked up.

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

I get what KSB is saying in theory - a candidate who is able to find more of his campaign will owe fewer favors. In practice though I think candidates are paying off favors of the political variety even moreso than the outright $$$ and it doesn't matter much either way.

 

The other thing about a billionaire candidate: I question whether a guy like Trump who is orally isolated from everyday Americans and has never shared their concerns is really the best guy to lead the country?

 

That same perception hurt Kerry to some extent so it's not a GOP vs Dem thing. I just don't like the idea of a president who grew up fabulously wealthy and never had to work or pay bills. That to me is focked up.

And when is the last time we had a President that ever worked? Doesn't happen that way. Never really has, maybe excepting the Military men who have been president.

[MDC 7,505]

And when is the last time we had a President that ever worked? Doesn't happen that way. Never really has, maybe excepting the Military men who have been president.

Reagan, Clinton and Obummer were all self made men. Reagan was the son of a shoe salesman, the other 2 grew up fatherless and poor.

[Voltaire 5,322]

Hopefully he makes the top ten come debate time.

[Sho Nuff 720]

this proves what a complete joke the entire presidential election process is.

 

if you vote you a complete donk for participating in this chicanery.

 

 

 

 

It is all that is wrong with american politics.

 

Money talks and that's all anyone gives a sh1t about.

 

open your eyes

 

 

 

Go back and read the thread as it was written. I was replying to edjr who stated that a billionaire running is what is wrong with politics. I disagreed with that and said it wasn't the amount of money the person running had, it was outside influences of donor money that is the true problem. Seems like we agree so you and MB could've saved us all some time and just put a under my post to edjr.

 

So edjr, you're out. Nobody agrees with you.

 

Seems the disagreement is here.......

 

I also stated common sense would say that a billionaire would be LESS apt to become beholden to donors. I didn't say it wouldn't happen or couldn't happen, rather common sense states they'd be less inclined to if they didn't want to. The basic difference between need and want. A Billionaire would have to WANT too (which could happen), but a hundred thousandairre or even millionaire would NEED too.

 

So I disagree with your bolded above. "Just as" is not correct in my opinion.

 

Looks like you need to go and read the thread "as written" rather than your spin.

So edjr is back in...since you have basically restated what he said...other than the part where Trump is what set him off about money.

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

Reagan, Clinton and Obummer were all self made men. Reagan was the son of a shoe salesman, the other 2 grew up fatherless and poor.

Actor, Harvard. Harvard. Not exactly breeding ground for working men. No one said anything about how they grew up, it was about working. You stand corrected. You're welcome.

[KSB2424 3,148]

 

 

 

 

 

Looks like you need to go and read the thread "as written" rather than your spin.

So edjr is back in...since you have basically restated what he said...other than the part where Trump is what set him off about money.

 

Let me ask you this question....

 

If the title of this thread was: <insert another person who isn't known to be rich> is running for President!

 

Do you think edjr's first response would be:

 

this proves what a complete joke the entire presidential election process is.

 

The answer is an obvious: No. Trump is known for being rich and that is exactly what edjr was referring to, which is why it was his first and initial post and reaction. Trump being personally rich and running for President is what he was saying proves what a joke the election process is. Anything else is spin or backpeddling. He wouldn't have said that if it was a Rand Paul announcing or somebody not a billionaire.

 

My point was simply that was dumb statement. That the biggest problem isn't a candidates individual wealth its more to do with how much money they garner from outside influences. Did you know that Obama out spent Rich ass Romney in 2012? Being independently wealthy has little to do with how much one spends on the campaign and even less with how much they accept in outside donations and all that comes with it.

 

Now the separate argument with MB is different, I was speaking in theoretical terms and can't really prove it as it would be hard to find out if a Romney or a Trump or a Kerry ever turned down donations (that they morally opposed) since they don't "need" funding as bad as others. So I will just have to agree to disagree with him and Worms. In practice they may be right even if theoretically my logic is sound.

[wiffleball 4,790]

How many times has Trump and/or one of his businesses/properties declared bankruptcy again?

[KSB2424 3,148]

How many times has Trump and/or one of his businesses/properties declared bankruptcy again?

 

Every book he reads, he immediately skips to Chapter 11.

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

Reagan, Clinton and Obummer were all self made men. Reagan was the son of a shoe salesman, the other 2 grew up fatherless and poor.

And I don't think you would hear Clinton or Obama claim they were self made men. Scholarships and government jobs aren't the hallmark of self made men. Not that there is anything wrong with either.

[wiffleball 4,790]

 

Every book he reads, he immediately skips to Chapter 11.

[MDC 7,505]

Actor, Harvard. Harvard. Not exactly breeding ground for working men. No one said anything about how they grew up, it was about working. You stand corrected. You're welcome.

What I meant was that a self-made man who grew up working class is going to have more understanding if how most Americans live than a trust fund legacy millionaire. And yes I consider someone who grew up poor and became president to be "self-made" even if they earned scholarships.

 

HTH chief.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

So anyone who gets a scholarship isn't self-made?

[Sho Nuff 720]

More spin ksb...read his statements.

it was the tipping point and it was clear he was talking about money all money is what speaks in elections.

 

Trump is only getting in because he has money and it will give him more publicity (you even agree with that.

 

But you have apent two pages arguing with someone who agrees with you.

 

Well, not really cause ed hasnt even been arguing with you.

[KSB2424 3,148]

More spin ksb...read his statements.

it was the tipping point and it was clear he was talking about money all money is what speaks in elections.

 

Trump is only getting in because he has money and it will give him more publicity (you even agree with that.

 

But you have apent two pages arguing with someone who agrees with you.

 

Well, not really cause ed hasnt even been arguing with you.

 

Nope, my last post was spot-on.

 

I refuse to get in some Shonuff vortex of semantics, talking in circles and double talk. So have a good one. Enjoy the NBA game.