Donald Trump

[Errata]

My observation is that conservative Republicans have been down on Hillary since she was the First Lady, back in Bill's days as POTUS.

Yes, presidents and other high-level cabinet leaders should be smart enough to follow security protocol and keep things secret, but mistakes happen.

Do any of you think that whoever wins the election is in danger of being assassinated? Would either candidate's VP nominee make a better President in case that happens (God forbid, of course)?

Well they just released Hinkley apparently... just in time for assassination season.

[Ginger]

So far as I'm able to tell, Hillary's motivation is that it's her turn to be President. She wants the glittering prize of having America judge her worthy to be President, not the ability to use the office to advance her agenda. She's looking for an affirmation of her worth.

Trump wants to save us from ourselves, because he's sure that he knows better than anyone who has ever lived in the entire history of the world what needs to be done, and how things ought to work. The Presidency is a tool for him.

I have a rather cynical view of both of them, but I'm solidly behind Trump. He's aware that things need to change, and change big time. He may make mistakes, but he will at least try. Hillary will simply rearrange the furniture while the house burns.

[Karl]

I have a rather cynical view of both of them, but I'm solidly behind Trump. He's aware that things need to change, and change big time. He may make mistakes, but he will at least try. Hillary will simply rearrange the furniture while the house burns.

Which is precisely why Hillary is the best choice. Most presidents will not do much to upset the status quo. That's not just in the US, that's everywhere. Whenever someone comes along to really change the status quo, it is rarely for the better. Wars, big wars, have started that way.

The thing is, times change anyway, no matter who's behind the helm. Everybody is crying for change, this has always been the case no matter when, and no matter where. But everybody wants to change the world: nobody wants to change themselves.

Trump tries very hard to convince people that he knows best, but I'm not entirely sure if he even buys it himself. It seems that his one and only playing card is, "if I put on an air of confidence, people will trust me". He has demonstrated, however, that not only is he mediocre at best when it comes to domestic policy, but he knows absolutely nothing - and I do mean absolutely nothing - about foreign policy, and he has not one diplomatic bone in his body. Consequently, it would be a miracle if he were able to actually improve things. On top of everything else, I have never seen anyone else his age that immature, and that is not very presidential - to use a word he seems fond of.

Hillary may be no picnic either, but at least she's smart enough to realize foreign relations aren't going to improve simply because she wants them to. Even if her motivations for being president are selfish, it's not like she wants to make the world a worse place. She will want to do as good a job as possible, precisely because she cares about what people will think of her time in office.

It may sometimes be tempting to clean one's room with a flame thrower - but while the solution is admittedly dead simple, the results are not likely to be to one's liking.

[Beowulf]

...
Yes, presidents and other high-level cabinet leaders should be smart enough to follow security protocol and keep things secret, but mistakes happen.

"Mistakes happen?" She was Secretary of State for years. Her lack of security protocol went on for years.

Gross negligence and incompetence.

[Karl]

"Mistakes happen?" She was Secretary of State for years. Her lack of security protocol went on for years.

Gross negligence and incompetence.

Was she in charge of security?

[Karl]

Say, what was so damning in her leaked emails, anyway? That she considered using Bernie Sanders' alleged atheism against him in the run for the nomination? If we look through Bernie's emails, is anyone really suggesting we wouldn't find similar items against Hillary? Or in Trump's emails, regarding Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush? If Hillary had given away Bernie's private mobile number to the public and encouraged people to harass him, is that something the Sanders lot - or even the Republican lot - would forgive? I guess it's "cute" when Trump does something unethical, but "criminal" when it's Hillary.

[Abby Normal]

So far as I'm able to tell, Hillary's motivation is that it's her turn to be President. She wants the glittering prize of having America judge her worthy to be President, not the ability to use the office to advance her agenda. She's looking for an affirmation of her worth.

Trump wants to save us from ourselves, because he's sure that he knows better than anyone who has ever lived in the entire history of the world what needs to be done, and how things ought to work. The Presidency is a tool for him.

I have a rather cynical view of both of them, but I'm solidly behind Trump. He's aware that things need to change, and change big time. He may make mistakes, but he will at least try. Hillary will simply rearrange the furniture while the house burns.

Hi ginger
Great analysis.
And I love the way you write. While I'm not solidly behind trump, nor if I know if I'll be voting for either, if someone held a gun to my head and forced me, at this point I would vote for trump.

A very poetic friend of mine recently said-trump speaks foul yet tries fair, Hillary speaks fair, but does foul.

I don't know. Well see. I'm not jazzed about either of them. Nor our political leaders on either side.

[Abby Normal]

Well they just released Hinkley apparently... just in time for assassination season.

: 0


: (

[Abby Normal]

"Mistakes happen?" She was Secretary of State for years. Her lack of security protocol went on for years.

Gross negligence and incompetence.

Hi wolf

You got that right.

Hillary Clinton on Bengazi-

"It was a youtube video". "what does it matter now".

[Mayerling]

Say, what was so damning in her leaked emails, anyway? That she considered using Bernie Sanders' alleged atheism against him in the run for the nomination? If we look through Bernie's emails, is anyone really suggesting we wouldn't find similar items against Hillary? Or in Trump's emails, regarding Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush? If Hillary had given away Bernie's private mobile number to the public and encouraged people to harass him, is that something the Sanders lot - or even the Republican lot - would forgive? I guess it's "cute" when Trump does something unethical, but "criminal" when it's Hillary.

Hi Karl,

For me the thing about this crap that makes me angry is

1) Trump got aided in this by illegal hacking by Russians (probably with the unwritten assent of Vladimir Putin).
2) Trump has been getting financial assistance on many of his projects from rich Russians who are pals of Putin.
3) One of these friends financed the Moscow centered "Miss Universe" pageant that Trump owns only a few years back.
4) Trump has openly let it be known he admires Putin - and thinks Putin likes him.

I don't care if Trump is politically naive or not - he is accepting highly questionable foreign assistance by a threatening person in power abroad, who has no right to interfere through his underlings in our election process.
This (in many eyes) might be the pot calling the kettle black, but if we have been accused of it, it does not mean the others would be right in doing it back - we should simply stop doing it. Moreover, these hackers have threatened national security on many occasions. I'm sorry we don't send them false information that might fatally injure their economy or their defenses, to teach them a valuable lesson about cyber spying.

The last time a foreign power tried to enter the process and tip an election was 1940, when the Nazis sent money to various Republican candidates who were isolationists, so they'd win the Republican nomination, and possibly defeat FDR. Instead a figure (on the surface like Trump, as he was a rich businessman) named Wendell Wilkie won the nomination, and he was another internationalist.

Jeff

[GUT]

Some strange comments out of the Trumpster today.

[Ginger]

Hi ginger
Great analysis.
And I love the way you write.

Thank you! You have made a good night even better!

[Karl]

So Trump "speaks foul yet tries fair", that's a hoot. Considering the innumerable charges against Trump throughout his career relating to fraud, blackmail, money laundering, countless breaches of contract and what have you... Yes, he has managed to stay mostly afloat, but why anyone would think he plays fair is utterly beyond me. Hillary is a saint next to him.

Also, he was a big enough idiot to state at a press conference that he hopes Russia manages to find Hillary's missing emails. Why would he want Russia to acquire sensitive information? He cares less about national security than beating Hillary. I am honestly amazed that people are still going to vote for this guy.

[Pcdunn]

Trump's wife's degree is in question-- and her website stating she has a university degree in design & architecture has been "scrubbed."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/melania-trump-biography-deleted_us_57990c1ae4b02d5d5ed3fed9

Apparently she attended one year, then dropped out to continue modeling.

[John G]

So far as I'm able to tell, Hillary's motivation is that it's her turn to be President. She wants the glittering prize of having America judge her worthy to be President, not the ability to use the office to advance her agenda. She's looking for an affirmation of her worth.

Trump wants to save us from ourselves, because he's sure that he knows better than anyone who has ever lived in the entire history of the world what needs to be done, and how things ought to work. The Presidency is a tool for him.

I have a rather cynical view of both of them, but I'm solidly behind Trump. He's aware that things need to change, and change big time. He may make mistakes, but he will at least try. Hillary will simply rearrange the furniture while the house burns.

Trump, like Sanders, appeals to voters who have become disillusioned with mainstream politicians. Nothing wrong in that per se. However, it doesn't mean that his alternative solutions, whatever they may be (he keeps contradicting himself)) will be any better. In fact, they may be a great deal worse.