If American - which presidential candidate will you vote for?

[vox]

As to suits many can sue but it sounds like only one of the three suits resulted in a fine.  Also cherry picking advisors and going after there weaknesses is pretty weak also.  I have no doubt Hillary has advisors who similarly dubious backgrounds.  She herself, not one of her advisors, is being investigated over the classified e-mails.  One real test is who has created more jobs & wealth.  Trump has done this in spades.  If it was up to me I would not have chosen Trump I voted for Kasich but given the choice between Clinton & Trump, I would take Trump hands down.  The more fear mongering the Dems the more desperate they appear.

 

The other question you need to ask yourself do you want the status quo or do you want the government to provide a service and get something done.  Who do you think would get the most deals done, the guy who does it for a living or the gal whose worked in the government and uses identity politics to get elected?  We have tried the later and the only time he could get things done was when his party controlled Congress.  As to trusting what Trump vs. what Clinton says I think you can trust neither.  So, in my mind it is not a absolute standard that I measure Trump against (he would be very lacking & I chose Kasich over him in that contest) but a relative one against Clinton.   

 

Packer

 

 

If you were an investor in a company that received notice that the Justice Department had requested an injunction because the company had refused to negotiate rentals "because of race and color," would your reaction be 'anybody can sue...'? You challenged that Donald Trump's racist rhetoric was not reflected in his business record, now your claim is that we only know that he paid a fine for racist actions in one of several instances.

 

Do you think that people can create more jobs & enrich themselves in socially undesirable ways? For example if I made a lot of money running a payday lending company by rolling over loans and engaging in aggressive collection processes would that make me qualified to run for President? Why do you think Donald Trump has refused to release his tax returns if he has been so successful at creating wealth and jobs?

 

Personally, I would much prefer the status quo versus having someone as President who's depth of knowledge consists of repeating empty platitudes and who doesn't have an iota of self restraint. Frankly, I would vote for any historical Democratic or Republican Presidential nominee over Donald Trump since at least Richard Nixon, and probably as far back as Barry Goldwater.

[shalab]

I liked Kasich - thought he was the most balanced in the GOP field. Overall, some of the issues raised by Trump (and to a certain extent Bernie) resonate with a large base as successive governments for generations have focused more on being a "super power" (and all the baggage that comes with it ) than the well being of the ordinary citizens.

 

As to suits many can sue but it sounds like only one of the three suits resulted in a fine.  Also cherry picking advisors and going after there weaknesses is pretty weak also.  I have no doubt Hillary has advisors who similarly dubious backgrounds.  She herself, not one of her advisors, is being investigated over the classified e-mails.  One real test is who has created more jobs & wealth.  Trump has done this in spades.  If it was up to me I would not have chosen Trump I voted for Kasich but given the choice between Clinton & Trump, I would take Trump hands down.  The more fear mongering the Dems the more desperate they appear.

 

The other question you need to ask yourself do you want the status quo or do you want the government to provide a service and get something done.  Who do you think would get the most deals done, the guy who does it for a living or the gal whose worked in the government and uses identity politics to get elected?  We have tried the later and the only time he could get things done was when his party controlled Congress.  As to trusting what Trump vs. what Clinton says I think you can trust neither.  So, in my mind it is not a absolute standard that I measure Trump against (he would be very lacking & I chose Kasich over him in that contest) but a relative one against Clinton.   

 

Packer

 

[rb]

One real test is who has created more jobs & wealth

 

The other question you need to ask yourself do you want the status quo or do you want the government to provide a service and get something done.  Who do you think would get the most deals done, the guy who does it for a living or the gal whose worked in the government and uses identity politics to get elected?  We have tried the later and the only time he could get things done was when his party controlled Congress.  As to trusting what Trump vs. what Clinton says I think you can trust neither.  So, in my mind it is not a absolute standard that I measure Trump against (he would be very lacking & I chose Kasich over him in that contest) but a relative one against Clinton.   

 

Packer

 

How is wealth and number of people under employment a real test? By the way there are serious doubts about how much of either Trump has created. I definitely wouldn't say it was spades.

 

If wealth creation is a real test for the presidency then why even bother to hold an election. Problem solved - Gates/Buffett 2016 and let's skip the circus. Also your test basically says that any candidate who comes from business is automatically a superior candidate. That test would basically take out all of the great presidents over the past 100 years. No FDR, no Kennedy, and definitely no Regan. But we still get to keep Hoover and Bush 2. Fantastic test that is. Oh and the president that presided over the greatest job creation in US history also didn't have a business background.

 

As for changing the status quo, what are you really saying? That as a reward for their obstructionism republicans should receive the White House so they stop keeping the government hostage? Is this the new American way? Give into extortion and pay the ransom.

[Mephistopheles]

One real test is who has created more jobs & wealth

 

 

How is wealth and number of people under employment a real test? By the way there are serious doubts about how much of either Trump has created. I definitely wouldn't say it was spades.

 

If wealth creation is a real test for the presidency then why even bother to hold an election. Problem solved - Gates/Buffett 2016 and let's skip the circus.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/12/nyregion/donald-trump-atlantic-city.html?_r=0

 

He certainly created wealth for himself...at the expense of his shareholders.

 

Having a business insight is a good skill that can be used towards running a country, for sure. I'd take a Gates/Buffett monarchy over a Clinton or Trump presidency.

 

Problem is that Trump is more like Jeff Skilling than Warren Buffett.

[rb]

I'd be careful what you wish for there buddy. I know that a Gates/Buffett monarchy sounds pretty good right about now but if a couple of things would have gone a bit differently we would get a Koch/Koch monarchy. Now think how fucking scary that is.

[onyx1]

... if a couple of things would have gone a bit differently we would get a Koch/Koch monarchy. Now think how fucking scary that is.

 

You mean the guys who want to roll back government power and restore personal liberty?  Frightening!

[Packer16]

I think if you examine the wealth created not re-distributed by Trump vs Clinton you will see Trump wins by a country mile.  What some seemed to be focused on is the re-distribution part which is fine if you have wealth to be re-distributed.  But IMO the government is focused on re-distribution as opposed to growing the pie to re-distribute.  Now both Gates/Buffett have done both created and re-distributed wealth.  Trump has done some re-distribution but not as much as Gates/Buffett.  However, to have 2 presidents in a row that are light on business experience and big on activist government can lead to consequences which hurt growth. 

 

An example is the gov't decision to remove coal from our energy mix.  If they make that decision that is fine but they then they have no relief for the folks hurt by the decision. This IMO is more of what you will get under Clinton.  The trade/illegal immigration deals are the same train of thought & if you are against any of these policies you are considered any enemy worse than ISIS (based upon the amount of rhetoric that is spent on attacking you versus ISIS.  This approach will not change under Clinton & only get worse.  With Trump you have a chance to change this endless blame game as he is focused on getting things done versus being right.  His business experience is invaluable here as if he insisted on being right versus getting things done his business would be a failure. 

 

To say that Bush and Hoover were businessmen is a stretch.  They were pols just like most other presidents, just look at the jobs they held throughout their lives. 

 

I am just surprised at how some have opinions based upon what is fed to them by the press versus examining the facts.  What the NY Times article forgets to mention is that AC casinos have all had problems and I do not think Trumps are any different.  It also compared Trump's AC only casino company to more broadly diversified casino firms & said his firm failed while others did not.  This is like comparing apples & oranges but not mentioned by the reporter.  He put alot of debt on them and I am sure he lost alot in these bankruptcies also.  What the article appears to imply is that Trump took advantage of investors who invested in Trump casinos.  The investors knew who he was and also what can happen in bankruptcy.  The article also shows a lack of understanding of bankruptcy in that the process is not do what is "right" but to do what needs to be done re-organize the company. 

 

Packer

 

 

[wachtwoord]

... if a couple of things would have gone a bit differently we would get a Koch/Koch monarchy. Now think how fucking scary that is.

 

You mean the guys who want to roll back government power and restore personal liberty?  Frightening!

 

If any 1st world country goes there I'll probably call it my home at some point.

[Cardboard]

"If any 1st world country goes there I'll probably call it my home at some point."

 

Looking at so many of the replies here it will never happen. So many who have had their brainwashed by the media is unreal. They even repeat the same lies without any due diligence. And the same people read thousand of pages, go on Zero Hedge, look at arguments from the shorts to decide if they should invest or not?

 

Then the left is forcing uncontrolled immigration calling everyone wanting to look at it, a racist. This is in order to gain permanent votes and establish total control with their policies. They are almost there in the U.S. It is everywhere around the world, in all democratic countries.

 

However, this will likely blow up in their face, literally, and they won't be able to create their 1,000 year Reich.

 

I have asked an Arab Muslim woman not that long ago why Saudi Arabia was not accepting refugees from Syria? She mentioned that they did not want to alter their culture. Then I asked, why is the West accepting them with such large difference in culture? The answer: "We don't care about our culture."

 

Doesn't says it all?

 

Cardboard

[wachtwoord]

So we will go there. One way for government to shrink and personal liberties to return is the collapse of nations.

[Cardboard]

Or for the center-South and Southern part of the U.S. to separate. The old Mason-Dixon line is not that far off.

 

Very different reasons this time around. Like I mentioned before, it is a pendulum between the right and the left.

 

 

[Mephistopheles]

I am just surprised at how some have opinions based upon what is fed to them by the press versus examining the facts.  What the NY Times article forgets to mention is that AC casinos have all had problems and I do not think Trumps are any different.  It also compared Trump's AC only casino company to more broadly diversified casino firms & said his firm failed while others did not.  This is like comparing apples & oranges but not mentioned by the reporter.  He put alot of debt on them and I am sure he lost alot in these bankruptcies also.  What the article appears to imply is that Trump took advantage of investors who invested in Trump casinos.  The investors knew who he was and also what can happen in bankruptcy.  The article also shows a lack of understanding of bankruptcy in that the process is not do what is "right" but to do what needs to be done re-organize the company. 

 

Packer

 

 

 

But that's the thing. If you're going to praise him for his business skills, then shouldn't he have a reputable business record? Even if the decline in his casinos is entirely to be blamed on the industry (which I don't think should be), well what does that say about him? It still doesn't prove how great he is. And more so, it's the shady deals that disproportionately benefited himself more than anyone else that I think is the bigger issue here. Would you tolerate that sort of behavior from a CEO of one of the stocks you own?

 

Or look at Trump University, one of his "businesses". It was a total scam, as are his never ending series of books. He's a get rich quick con man from what I see. I wouldn't put that much faith in him as a great business person, let alone as a decent & honest one.

[Cardboard]

I wonder how many people have died, are refugees, are hungry or are still being mistreated because of Hillary's actions? Even the potential destruction of the EU via Brexit is likely a consequence of her actions in Libya, Syria and Iraq.

 

And we are fixated on a business failure in Atlantic City???

 

But go ahead, vote for Hillary and feel like you are doing the right thing.

 

Cardboard

[rb]

I wonder how many people have died, are refugees, are hungry or are still being mistreated because of Hillary's actions? Even the potential destruction of the EU via Brexit is likely a consequence of her actions in Libya, Syria and Iraq.

 

And we are fixated on a business failure in Atlantic City???

 

But go ahead, vote for Hillary and feel like you are doing the right thing.

 

Cardboard

I know, I know, and the fact that I got stuck in traffic this morning is likely Hillary's fault as well and I think that she also had something to do with the super-hot coffee I got from the barista. I think that potentially she's trying to kill me. On second thought, the barista looked more like a Bernie dude. Ugh the whole democratic establishment hates me!

 

Btw, people aren't fixated with the business failure in Atlantic City. That is just a very public and well documented case in a string of business ventures that paint a picture of Donald Trump as someone who's only looking out for himself and wants doesn't care how many people he has to cheat or step on as long as he makes a buck. Not exactly what people are looking for in a leader. Reminds me of that WB saying. When you're looking for a manager you're looking at three qualities integrity, intelligence, and energy. The first one is the most important because if they don't have integrity you really want them to be stupid and lazy.

[Cardboard]

"When you're looking for a manager you're looking at three qualities integrity, intelligence, and energy. The first one is the most important because if they don't have integrity you really want them to be stupid and lazy."

 

Now, can you apply this to Hillary?

 

Cardboard

[onyx1]

And we are fixated on a business failure in Atlantic City???

Cardboard

 

Here's a business failure to fixate on:  Whitewater Development Corp., Hillary's bankruptcy that sent 15 people to jail.

[DTEJD1997]

And we are fixated on a business failure in Atlantic City???

Cardboard

 

Here's a business failure to fixate on:  Whitewater Development Corp., Hillary's bankruptcy that sent 15 people to jail.

There is some argument to be made that Bill & Hillary are MUCH better businesspeople than Mr. Trump.  Look at how much money they've made since leaving the Whitehouse.  Remember, they claimed that they were "dead broke" when they left.  Now look at them!  They are worth billions.  Further, how much capital did they need to get that money?  Almost nothing!  No buildings, no factories, no huge amounts of inventory or R&D.  All they've needed are a few handlers/secretaries, private jets, servers, cell phones and private jets.  An absolute incredible return on assets...

 

At this point in time, Mr. Trump is likely richer than the Clinton's...but the Clintons should easily surpass Mr./ Trump's wealth, ESPECIALLY if Hillary is elected and stays out of jail.

[onyx1]

And we are fixated on a business failure in Atlantic City???

Cardboard

 

Here's a business failure to fixate on:  Whitewater Development Corp., Hillary's bankruptcy that sent 15 people to jail.

There is some argument to be made that Bill & Hillary are MUCH better businesspeople than Mr. Trump.  Look at how much money they've made since leaving the Whitehouse.  Remember, they claimed that they were "dead broke" when they left.  Now look at them!  They are worth billions.  Further, how much capital did they need to get that money?  Almost nothing!  No buildings, no factories, no huge amounts of inventory or R&D.  All they've needed are a few handlers/secretaries, private jets, servers, cell phones and private jets.  An absolute incredible return on assets...

 

At this point in time, Mr. Trump is likely richer than the Clinton's...but the Clintons should easily surpass Mr./ Trump's wealth, ESPECIALLY if Hillary is elected and stays out of jail.

 

 

Bill charged 750k for an hour long speech when Hillary was Secretary of State.  What will he get when she is President?

[Eye4Valu]

Have not read this whole thread, so this might have been pointed out already, but...Gary Johnson is a libertarian candidate who used to be the governor of New Mexico I believe. Although he likely doesn't stand a chance, he appears to be a good candidate.

[Edward]

But that's the thing. If you're going to praise him for his business skills, then shouldn't he have a reputable business record?

"reputable" is irrelevant here, he's done business and he's done it well. The guy is a self made billionaire which means he's pretty amazing. He has started thousands of companies during his life, and some of these have to fail and go bankrupt. That's the way business works.

 

And more so, it's the shady deals that disproportionately benefited himself more than anyone else that I think is the bigger issue here. Would you tolerate that sort of behavior from a CEO of one of the stocks you own?

Be more specific please.

 

Or look at Trump University, one of his "businesses". It was a total scam, as are his never ending series of books. He's a get rich quick con man from what I see.

Writing best sellers is not a crime. Even if some of the advice kinda sucks.

 

And Trump university is a total joke to get focused on. Trump basically started a small business that provided some short seminars to about 6,000 people. That's 1,500$ for a 3 day seminar. Around another 1,000 elected to pay more and get a more luxurious experience. Very doubtful this insignificant operation made any real money after expenses. He did over-hype it somewhat. Big whoop.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I wonder how many people have died, are refugees, are hungry or are still being mistreated because of Hillary's actions? Even the potential destruction of the EU via Brexit is likely a consequence of her actions in Libya, Syria and Iraq.

 

And we are fixated on a business failure in Atlantic City???

 

But go ahead, vote for Hillary and feel like you are doing the right thing.

 

Cardboard

 

Um - my response was specifically directed at the idea that Trump is a great businessman, therefore he will make a great President.

 

It has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton or anything else.

[Mephistopheles]

But that's the thing. If you're going to praise him for his business skills, then shouldn't he have a reputable business record?

"reputable" is irrelevant here, he's done business and he's done it well. The guy is a self made billionaire which means he's pretty amazing. He has started thousands of companies during his life, and some of these have to fail and go bankrupt. That's the way business works.

 

 

Well that goes back to the point, is wealth the only and definitive indicator of success?

 

How about the Clintons? Making hundreds of millions by giving speeches to banks who want to buy their influence. Great business people?

 

 

And more so, it's the shady deals that disproportionately benefited himself more than anyone else that I think is the bigger issue here. Would you tolerate that sort of behavior from a CEO of one of the stocks you own?

Be more specific please.

 

 

Check out that NYT article, it goes into great detail.

 

Writing best sellers is not a crime. Even if some of the advice kinda sucks.

 

And Trump university is a total joke to get focused on. Trump basically started a small business that provided some short seminars to about 6,000 people. That's 1,500$ for a 3 day seminar. Around another 1,000 elected to pay more and get a more luxurious experience. Very doubtful this insignificant operation made any real money after expenses. He did over-hype it somewhat. Big whoop.

 

 

Well if it didn't make money, why would he do it? And if it didn't make money, surely that wasn't his intention. Who knows how much money he made with it? Whether he made a million bucks or 10 million, the point is that it's a dirty business and dirty product; to sell people on false hopes and dreams - it's not much different than a pyramid scheme.

 

And in regards to the books - of course they are #1 best sellers: he's good at selling crap (his Candidacy for instance), I'll give him that.

 

I think Charlie Munger's principle can be applicable here: "Only sell something that you would buy yourself"

[SwimmingNaked]

Hillary is one of the best candidates America has ever had. Sad most Americans can't realize this. She has done and said many things that I disagree with, but this is about as rational, informed and intelligent a candidate as you can expect. The relentless attacks from the right (for decades now) have turned a flawed person (and every one of you is flawed, and is guilty of lying from time to time to come of as better than you actually are) into a monster. Hillary has told her share of lies, but every other sentence out of Trump's mouth is a lie, misrepresentation or a self-serving boast, but his supporter base is full of morons who can't seem to realize this or don't seem to care. It's the Dunning-Kruger effect in its full, depressing glory. If Hillary told half the bullshit that comes out of Trump's mouth on a daily basis, she would not be a serious candidate, and I think that tells you a lot about the voter base of each candidate.

 

Amazing that some people here are even taking Trump seriously. This isn't even a political thing, where I'm just trying to bash the Republican guy (I think much of the republican party is repulsive, dangerous and backwards but I wouldn't criticize say...Romney, if he were the candidate), but it's on the basis of the fact that Trump is a moron, and the worst kind of a moron, the kind of pompous moron who walks into every room thinking he is actually the smartest person. This guy sounds uninformed on just about every issue he touches. We have people here who seem to associate richness with goodness and competence, so I guess there's some truth to the saying "a rich man's folly passes for good judgement". How much money he has, how many times he went bankrupt, why he is hiding his tax returns, this is all irrelevant, just pay attention to what he is actually saying and realize that he knows nothing and is proposing one reckless thing after another, and that's the scary thing about him.

[writser]

End of thread.

[boilermaker75]

End of thread.

 

+1