Donald Trump

I think you’re answering your own question if you understand that people who are successful make a lot of mistakes getting there.
Given that Trump was born into a wealthy family, I hardly think he had to make any mistakes to "get there."
They learn and grown upon their mistakes. Those who do nothing never have to worry about making any mistakes.
Got any proof that he's learned from his mistakes? And what actions of his would you consider to be mistakes?
On big government, I think of it as the ones controlling the housing market and controls the military.
The housing market isn't controlled by the government. And are you for more or less military spending? Your comment seems to indicate that you're for less, but I'm not going to put words in your mouth.
God, I can’t believe you’re defending the IRS.
There is no god, and I'm not defending the IRS, I'm defending the truth. If you have evidence to the contrary, present it.
Be quite about it, Jefferson and Adams would turn over in the grave if they knew we allowed a department to operate in such a manner.
Jefferson would probably roll over in his grave if he knew that we gave women the vote, he might not be happy with the ethnicity of our current President, and I doubt that he'd be thrilled with gays being allowed to marry. He was a brilliant man, probably the brightest to ever hold the office of President, but he was also a product of his time, and shouldn't be considered the absolute authority on a world radically different than the one in which he knew. I should also point out that once Jefferson became President, he reversed a considerable number of his positions. He originally thought that the US should be an agrarian society, but helped nudge us towards an industrialized society once he became President. I should also like to point out that I'm related to one of Jefferson's closest friends, Joel Barlow, who was appointed by Jefferson to be the US ambassador to France. Jefferson loved the French, and he wasn't going to send just any jerk to represent the US in France. As for Adams, he might have been okay with giving women the vote, and he perhaps could have accepted an African-American as President, but I doubt if he'd have been thrilled with gay marriage. Again, he's a product of his time, one in which the idea of draining people of their blood was considered an acceptable medical practice. I hardly think that we should rely on such people as the absolute arbitrators of how we should conduct society in the 21st century.
And with Hillary, of course you’re joking.
Nope. Not at all.
If not, I’ll give you three guesses, and the first two don’t count.
I'm not going to guess. I have no idea what you're talking about when you say that she's "proud" of creating a "caste system" in America. So, you're going to have to spell it out.

Bill Clinton reportedly advised Trump to become more involved in Republican politics shortly before Trump announced he was running. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bill-clinton-called-donald-trump-ahead-of-republicans-2016-launch/2015/08/05/e2b30bb8-3ae3-11e5-b3ac-8a79bc44e5e2_story.html

The people championing Trump are the same types who cheered for OJ after he brutally murdered two people, including the mother of his children. There is no rationalizing such stupidity, but it is apparently an intrinsic part of too many people’s nature to get behind an ass who pricks their baser instincts. No rational thoughts ever interfere with their need to cheer on anyone they see as a leader, no matter how destructive.
Lois

Bill Clinton reportedly advised Trump to become more involved in Republican politics shortly before Trump announced he was running. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bill-clinton-called-donald-trump-ahead-of-republicans-2016-launch/2015/08/05/e2b30bb8-3ae3-11e5-b3ac-8a79bc44e5e2_story.html
Yeah, I have no idea what would be up with that. Do you think Bill was wanting Hillary to run against Trump?

Just in case, I am NOT in a Bizzarro alternate universe where Trump actually gets it together, and hires the right people who can strategically compete in the primaries, once his well financed competitors super-pacs start massive negative campaign adds to counter Trumps round the clock free publicity, that he has arranged thus far,
and if I am in my regular universe, that is just a bit off kilter, then I predict that the eventual Repub Nominee will be Marco Rubio. I have a number of reasons for thinking this and will share if anyone is interested.

The people championing Trump are the same types who cheered for OJ after he brutally murdered two people, including the mother of his children. There is no rationalizing such stupidity, but it is apparently an intrinsic part of too many people's nature to get behind an ass who pricks their baser instincts. No rational thoughts ever interfere with their need to cheer on anyone they see as a leader, no matter how destructive. Lois
Losi, you’re tell us that the black people are champing Trump and they all have very low IQ’s.
The people championing Trump are the same types who cheered for OJ after he brutally murdered two people, including the mother of his children. There is no rationalizing such stupidity, but it is apparently an intrinsic part of too many people's nature to get behind an ass who pricks their baser instincts. No rational thoughts ever interfere with their need to cheer on anyone they see as a leader, no matter how destructive. Lois
Losi, you’re tell us that the black people are champing Trump and they all have very low IQ’s. If I can read your poorly written post, no, she isn't. OJ being black has nothing to do with her statement. Can we get a moderator on this guy?
Just in case, I am NOT in a Bizzarro alternate universe where Trump actually gets it together, and hires the right people who can strategically compete in the primaries, once his well financed competitors super-pacs start massive negative campaign adds to counter Trumps round the clock free publicity, that he has arranged thus far, and if I am in my regular universe, that is just a bit off kilter, then I predict that the eventual Repub Nominee will be Marco Rubio. I have a number of reasons for thinking this and will share if anyone is interested.
Rubio will get the pro-life vote, but I can’t see it happening. Yeah, I want your view points. No hurry, will be gone till evening.
The people championing Trump are the same types who cheered for OJ after he brutally murdered two people, including the mother of his children. There is no rationalizing such stupidity, but it is apparently an intrinsic part of too many people's nature to get behind an ass who pricks their baser instincts. No rational thoughts ever interfere with their need to cheer on anyone they see as a leader, no matter how destructive. Lois
Losi, you’re tell us that the black people are champing Trump and they all have very low IQ’s. If I can read your poorly written post, no, she isn't. OJ being black has nothing to do with her statement. Can we get a moderator on this guy? I'm a bit confused myself and I'm not sure what OJ or even Black people have to do with Donald Trump. I haven't seen evidence of Blacks supporting Trump any more than Whites are supporting him. I'm not even sure what OJ has to do with anything nor did I see evidence that Lois brought up IQ's either. Unless statements can be clarified with reliable non-racial sources to back up states then I suggest not going in that direction.
Bill Clinton reportedly advised Trump to become more involved in Republican politics shortly before Trump announced he was running. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bill-clinton-called-donald-trump-ahead-of-republicans-2016-launch/2015/08/05/e2b30bb8-3ae3-11e5-b3ac-8a79bc44e5e2_story.html
Yeah, I have no idea what would be up with that. Do you think Bill was wanting Hillary to run against Trump?I can't think of a better way to get the Democratic base fired up than to have Trump running for President. They'll definitely be more inclined to show up and vote for Hillary with Trump in the race.
The people championing Trump are the same types who cheered for OJ after he brutally murdered two people, including the mother of his children. There is no rationalizing such stupidity, but it is apparently an intrinsic part of too many people's nature to get behind an ass who pricks their baser instincts. No rational thoughts ever interfere with their need to cheer on anyone they see as a leader, no matter how destructive. Lois
Losi, you’re tell us that the black people are champing Trump and they all have very low IQ’s. If I can read your poorly written post, no, she isn't. OJ being black has nothing to do with her statement. Can we get a moderator on this guy? I remember the OJ murder trial. All the people cheering OJ were black. What other types were backing OJ? I am not making is a race thing. The OJ trial was very much a race thing at the time for the people cheering him. I am just dealing with the facts. I brought it up so Lois could clarify the statement. The point trying to be made was, Trump is stupid as hell and the only people more stupid are the people who get behind the ass. Who she said were the same type who backed OJ. Now, give me the number of people on this site that have backed Trump. I would have to say if anything needs a moderator it would be the slam taken at me. This went way beyond calling someone dumb, or irrational, it was calling anyone who liked Trump, a person who promoted and backed a person who could murder their own children’s mother. Pretty close to the bottom of the barrel when it comes to morels. Lausten, you seem to be backing that logic by not bring up that fact in your post. Lausten you’re just fishing for something to get back at me because I disagree with you on the fact that you want the schools to teach the kids in the language that is native to the kids. Even though the kids are here illegally from other countries. Which would be nice, but I was against the local taxpayers having to pick up any of the costs. I thought the costs should be covered at the federal level. If I had to guess why Lois made the post that way would be because the polls don’t show any drop in Trump’s numbers and she thought that his stupid statements would be the end of his running, as a lot of people did. When that didn’t happen, she realized that there is a lot of people that are thinking differently than her. And she use me to blow off some steam. And I have no problem with that. But I was not going to let her do it without clarifying herself. So I ask a simple question. That could be answered with a simple “no". You on the other hand should understand, that earth can be heaven, it is our actions that make it hell.

The number one rule for a National Party in selecting a presidential nominee is to select a candidate that can bring their party victory in the national election. If the powers that be in the RNC are thwarted by the success of a populist candidate, who will not likely win the national election, (and in Trump’s case might, also, take the Party in unpredictable directions) they will do whatever they can to advance the chances of one of their candidates who is more predictable and more importantly, will have a better chance of winning the national election.
The RNC, in doing this, still is bound, however, by the extent to which its constituency will go along. The current constituency is made up of at least a few very important components. One component is a very strong anti-establishment bent. Thus we see the anti-establishment candidates doing relatively well (quite well in Trump’s case). But the RNC will always prefer backing an establishment candidate. Another very strong component of Repub constituency is the hard-right crowd, who prefer candidates that express hard-right stances across a broad range of issues. The RNC will often prefer a more moderate candidate, as the more moderate candidate would be more likely bring a better chance of victory in the general election. But they can’t get a moderate candidate nominated if the constituency is too hard-right. The other strong component is the religious one. It is very important to many Repubs that the candidate have a strong Christian orientation, of some sort.
So one of the reasons, I think that the RNC will prefer Rubio is that he represents the establishment, even if it may be less so than Jeb or Scott or John. (less, simply because he has been in the system not quite as long as those guys).
Also, Rubio is very religious, which will satisfy the eaten up with religion part of the constituency but will not represent as much of a liability in the general election as someone like Huckabee, who is all religion.
Also, in regards to, at least appearing moderate, Rubio has vastly polished his game, so that he will be able to present himself, to some, as moderate, despite taking hard right stances in actuality.
The RNC will prefer someone from a swing state, if they can get one. Rubio is from Florida. If they can win Fla. in the general, that will be significant. Kasich with Ohio, might be better, but he is too moderate for the constituency.
Also, to win the general, the Repub candidate needs to appeal to not only independent and casual voters but, additionally who can get some portion of populations that predominately vote Democratic.
As to the latter point, Rubio is physically attractive. That counts for something. Some women (both young and old) will vote for him because he is a sweet looking handsome man. (He could leach off even more of the women vote by selecting someone like Fiorina as a running mate. She would have the additional advantage of being a viable attack dog on Hillary who could not be accused of being sexist, because she is a woman.)
Also, being Hispanic, Rubio might leach off some of the Hispanic vote from the Democrats.
Anything, could happen, but if Walker and Bush continue to go nowhere, big money will eventually switch its allegiance to Rubio. And if Trump hasn’t extraordinarily upped his organizational and substance game, by then, (or if he is forced out of the Repub race, in some way), then I think that Rubio will get the nomination. He will need to win in Iowa, because he probably won’t win in New Hampshire, but I think Iowa is do-able for him.

As far as I am concerned, no one is being moderated at this point. I’m just asking people to clarify their statements, using sources with links, if possible, without sounding racist. No one is being accused of racism either. As a moderator, I would like to figure out where people are going with this before any action is taken with anyone, if any.

TimB, I think that the strategy you outlined is well-reasoned and well-thought out. There’s just two problems with it:
1.) The GOP leadership has demonstrated that they’re incapable of reason or thought. They’ve glommed onto both the religious nutters and the Tea Partiers because they saw an opportunity to lock in a loyal base, without realizing that there’s a chance (and as it turned out, a certainty) that they wouldn’t be able to control the two movements. Instead of controlling those movements, they’re now controlled by them.
2.) Trump has the means, unlike the other potential GOP nominees, of making a credible third party run. If he does that, then its almost certain to hand the election next November to the Democrats. Will he? I don’t know, but Fox seems so concerned with keeping Trump in the fold, that they’re promising to treat him “fairly” from now on: Donald Trump and Roger Ailes Make Up — for Now

This morning, Trump tweeted that Ailes called to assure him that Fox will cover him “fairly" going forward. According to two high-level Fox sources, Ailes's diplomacy was the result of increasing concern inside Fox News that Trump could damage the network. Immediately following Thursday's debate, Fox was deluged with pro-Trump emails. The chatter on Twitter was equally in Trump’s favor. “In the beginning, virtually 100 percent of the emails were against Megyn Kelly," one Fox source, who was briefed on the situation, told me. “Roger was not happy. Most of the Fox viewers were taking Trump’s side." Things got worse for Ailes over the weekend. In a phone conversation, Trump told Sean Hannity that “he was never doing Fox again," according to one person with knowledge of the call. The anti-Kelly emails, and threat of a boycott by Trump, seem to have pushed Ailes to defuse the war. One Fox personality told me that Fox producers gave instructions to tell in-house talent not to bring up Trump’s controversial comments that Kelly had “blood coming out of her wherever" during the debate. According to one count, Fox only aired Trump’s comment once since Friday, while CNN mentioned it at least 50 times.
If I were Reince Priebus, I'd be losing a lot of sleep right now. Its early days and the odds of Trump remaining the leader aren't certain, but so long as he's getting the most media attention by saying crazy, inflammatory things, the other candidates are going to have to try to match him, if not out-crazy him, if they want to keep their names in the news, and donations rolling in. (Rick Perry's already reported to have money troubles, and we haven't even gotten to the first primary yet.) That's going to make shifting to a more centrist stance in the runup to the general harder. Then there's Trump's raging ego. How will he handle not getting the nomination? If he feels that the party shafted him, which they might be inclined to do, as they really don't want him in charge, then I wouldn't put it past him to go the third party route. That's bad for them. And to be honest, I don't know if Trump's the kind of guy who can lose gracefully, so if somebody else takes the lead and beats him handily in the primaries, he might just decide to go third party out of spite. Trump also has charisma and has passionate supporters, I can't see any of the other candidates in the current GOP slate doing the same. The most recent poll I've seen has Trump in the lead, and Scott Walker in second place, I don't see Walker as being able to ignite passions like Trump can. I don't even think that Rubio can. Both Hillary and Bernie Sanders have wildly passionate supporters, and that's likely to continue, no matter which one of them gets the nomination. Passion is what gets people to the polls.

Thanks for your analysis, Coldheart. If I were Rubio’s campaign adviser, I would demand that he, not only, strenuously avoid saying anything bad about Trump, I would, also, want him to be a champion for Trump, by saying that it is critical that the Party treat him fairly. And Rubio should occasionally give a positive shout out to Trump about “tapping in to an energy” of a significant portion of the Repub constituency. This would serve Rubio well, I think, when Trump’s negatives eventually catch up with him. Trump would, then, not have an excuse to go third party, and Rubio could benefit greatly from inheriting Trump’s followers. (This is a tactic that the wily Ted Cruz, is already employing.)
Trump’s performance is truly amazing. Today, he made what I thought was a quite believable (at least for his followers) excuse for never having any well thought out plans re: any particular issue. He said that negotiations and business deals, etc., require flexibility, thus it is nonsense to come up with 20 point plans about given issues. Hence he just expects (and so far is getting) rather unconditional trust in regard to his statements about how effective and successful he will be in dealing with every issue. Oh, and he has already named a “killer” (his word) businessman that he knows, to conduct our dealings with China and Japan.
I think you’re right about none of the other repub candidates even approaching Trump’s level of charisma. I don’t think that the RNC leadership and established powers, are completely devoid of reasoning, at least not on the basic level of being able to react strategically to try to get their best possible candidate nominated. This will be no easy task, however, this time around, as Trump is some kind of idiot savant charismatic populist political candidate, who is on the scene at the right time, i.e., when so many are so fed up with the established way of politics. So if Trump’s negatives do not catch up with him before going very deep into the primaries, they will likely be stuck with him.
I still think that his negatives will catch up with him. But everyone who has predicted Trump’s demise, has, so far, been wrong.

Thanks for your analysis, Coldheart. If I were Rubio's campaign adviser, I would demand that he, not only, strenuously avoid saying anything bad about Trump, I would, also, want him to be a champion for Trump, by saying that it is critical that the Party treat him fairly. And Rubio should occasionally give a positive shout out to Trump about "tapping in to an energy" of a significant portion of the Repub constituency. This would serve Rubio well, I think, when Trump's negatives eventually catch up with him. Trump would, then, not have an excuse to go third party, and Rubio could benefit greatly from inheriting Trump's followers. (This is a tactic that the wily Ted Cruz, is already employing.)
I wouldn't called Ted "wily," but you're right in that he's doing it. I'm not sure if he's hoping to be tapped as Trump's VP, or if he thinks that it'll get him some cred if/when he takes the lead in the polls. Cruz recently held a rally in my state, in an area where he should have drawn a massive crowd, but he only got about 1,000 people. http://wkrn.com/2015/08/10/texas-senator-ted-cruz-to-make-middle-tennessee-appearances/
Trump's performance is truly amazing. Today, he made what I thought was a quite believable (at least for his followers) excuse for never having any well thought out plans re: any particular issue. He said that negotiations and business deals, etc., require flexibility, thus it is nonsense to come up with 20 point plans about given issues. Hence he just expects (and so far is getting) rather unconditional trust in regard to his statements about how effective and successful he will be in dealing with every issue. Oh, and he has already named a "killer" (his word) businessman that he knows, to conduct our dealings with China and Japan.
IMHO, Trump is only saying openly what the rest of the GOP has been hinting at.
I think you're right about none of the other repub candidates even approaching Trump's level of charisma. I don't think that the RNC leadership and established powers, are completely devoid of reasoning, at least not on the basic level of being able to react strategically to try to get their best possible candidate nominated. This will be no easy task, however, this time around, as Trump is some kind of idiot savant charismatic populist political candidate, who is on the scene at the right time, i.e., when so many are so fed up with the established way of politics. So if Trump's negatives do not catch up with him before going very deep into the primaries, they will likely be stuck with him. I still think that his negatives will catch up with him. But everyone who has predicted Trump's demise, has, so far, been wrong.
My hope is that Kaisch will get the GOP nomination, as I've met Kaisch,and can say that he's not crazy, so that way, I don't have to worry so much about who wins the election. I'm not optimistic, however, and am planning on leaving the US if we wind up with a GOP President in 2017. If I have to be homeless, I'd rather do it in Canada, where I don't have to worry about being locked up simply for the "crime" of being poor.
Lausten, you seem to be backing that logic by not bring up that fact in your post. Lausten you’re just fishing for something to get back at me because I disagree with you on the fact that you want the schools to teach the kids in the language that is native to the kids. Even though the kids are here illegally from other countries. Which would be nice, but I was against the local taxpayers having to pick up any of the costs. I thought the costs should be covered at the federal level.
I didn’t bring up that “fact", because it isn’t a fact. I’m wondering if you have OJ confused with Rodney King. And I’m not looking for anything to “get back at you". I feel we came to a very nice conclusion on that conversation. Not “nice" as in agreeable, but as in understanding where we disagree. Oh, and morels are mushrooms.

<![CDATA[

Thanks for your analysis, Coldheart. If I were Rubio’s campaign adviser, I would demand that he, not only, strenuously avoid saying anything bad about Trump, I would, also, want him to be a champion for Trump, by saying that it is critical that the Party treat him fairly. And Rubio should occasionally give a positive shout out to Trump about “tapping in to an energy” of a significant portion of the Repub constituency. This would serve Rubio well, I think, when Trump’s negatives eventually catch up with him. Trump would, then, not have an excuse to go third party, and Rubio could benefit greatly from inheriting Trump’s followers. (This is a tactic that the wily Ted Cruz, is already employing.)
I wouldn’t called Ted “wily,” but you’re right in that he’s doing it. I’m not sure if he’s hoping to be tapped as Trump’s VP, or if he thinks that it’ll get him some cred if/when he takes the lead in the polls. Cruz recently held a rally in my state, in an area where he should have drawn a massive crowd, but he only got about 1,000 people. http://wkrn.com/2015/08/10/texas-senator-ted-cruz-to-make-middle-tennessee-appearances/

Trump's performance is truly amazing. Today, he made what I thought was a quite believable (at least for his followers) excuse for never having any well thought out plans re: any particular issue. He said that negotiations and business deals, etc., require flexibility, thus it is nonsense to come up with 20 point plans about given issues. Hence he just expects (and so far is getting) rather unconditional trust in regard to his statements about how effective and successful he will be in dealing with every issue. Oh, and he has already named a "killer" (his word) businessman that he knows, to conduct our dealings with China and Japan.
IMHO, Trump is only saying openly what the rest of the GOP has been hinting at.
I think you're right about none of the other repub candidates even approaching Trump's level of charisma. I don't think that the RNC leadership and established powers, are completely devoid of reasoning, at least not on the basic level of being able to react strategically to try to get their best possible candidate nominated. This will be no easy task, however, this time around, as Trump is some kind of idiot savant charismatic populist political candidate, who is on the scene at the right time, i.e., when so many are so fed up with the established way of politics. So if Trump's negatives do not catch up with him before going very deep into the primaries, they will likely be stuck with him. I still think that his negatives will catch up with him. But everyone who has predicted Trump's demise, has, so far, been wrong.
My hope is that Kaisch will get the GOP nomination, as I've met Kaisch,and can say that he's not crazy, so that way, I don't have to worry so much about who wins the election. I'm not optimistic, however, and am planning on leaving the US if we wind up with a GOP President in 2017. If I have to be homeless, I'd rather do it in Canada, where I don't have to worry about being locked up simply for the "crime" of being poor. Ted Cruz is wily and intelligent, IMO, but that doesn't make him a good person. I think that he is a very bad person. I agree that Kasich is the best of all of the very bad options. But even he is moving to the hard right, in some respects. e.g., He recently said that climate science is debatable. My hypothetical projections about Rubio winning the nomination, do not reflect any desire, on my part, for him to win. But one other thing that he should be doing, in order to win, as should any of the candidates (on either side), and which only Trump is doing effectively (at least for his believers) and that is to project a picture of a positive future for our country. Trump is doing this, with success, in the most simplistic of ways, by asserting that everything is terrible, but with him, everything will be great. In a nation of people who believe what they want to believe regardless of facts, it is a very effective strategy. Obama projected how our nation could be greater. His assertion was that "yes, ]>

What is this “charisma” I keep hearing people mention.
Is it that he’s absolutely self-certain, without an ounce of thought for anything beyond his own self interest?
Does that convey power to a room full of sheople dreaming of finding a leader?
I know even at the best of times “charisma” is a tough thing to put a finger on -
just curious if anyone’s though about what it is about Trump that convey’s that mystique to so many.
When I see the man I’ve always seen an unintelligent (even if possessing excellent predatory business skills and complete disregard for others) self-centered jack ass, with a mouth and hair only a cartoonist could dream up - in other words the only charisma that I’ve noticed is the low wattage charisma of a clown entertaining a crowd. What gives?

What is this "charisma" I keep hearing people mention.
I do think about that a lot. Trump has a vile form of charisma, based on money. He depends on people not knowing how he got rich and believing that his confidence is related to his success. People like confidence. He's confident that he'll screw you over in a heartbeat if it suits him. But you have to know that, he won't tell you. He'll tell you that he will be your champion and screw someone else over. The "good" kind of charisma is someone who doesn't have riches or doesn't mention them. They'll come to your door begging and if you give them food they'll leave $100 under the plate. They'll also listen to your story and maybe leave you with some words of wisdom. They command the room with a smile and a laugh, not that turned up nose and judgmental lower lip that Trump has. They lift people up by acknowledging their qualities. Trump made an entire show out of putting people in difficult situations for entertainment and then arbitrarily rewarding and punishing them.