A couple of questions for my CU friends--
1) Is a Trump run really on the table--is he serious about a run in 2012?
2) If he did run, would you vote for him?
I have to say, I know several people already who have said they'd vote for him, and not just because he's "Donald Trump"--the brand name--but because he's a businessmen. My mother, who usually votes Democraic and is a generally Liberal person (she voted Dem in '92, '96, GOP in 2000 and Dem in 2004) has said she'd vote for Trump because he's a "straight shooter" and wouldn't take any crap from anyone and he'd actually be on top of things, unlike Obama.
I have to say--At times, I have often considered that we should have someone who was a businessman or at least truly worked in the private sector in the White House. I mean for the large part, since Eisenhower, most of the Presidents were either Lawyers or Senators. I think the last President who knew what ordinary American, middle class life was was Truman--He had several businesses, failed on his own, then suceeded on his own--He wasn't a Harvard lawyer or the son of a President but a self made man, and there is a part of me which feels a man like that--a self made man, who has known immense struggle, whose known what it's like to fail, and to succeed, whose worked in business--could be a good President.
My only worry on that is that someone who was formerly a CEO would kind of pander to the corporate interests of this country a bit too much--I do feel regulation on businesses are needed.
I'm really so conflicted to be frank with you. I consider myself a Liberal but I try to frame the present through the past. I'm 20, and throughout the course of my life, outside of Obama, there wasn't really a truly Liberal President. Regardless of what Clinton's personal views were and what role the GOP congress played, in the end of his term of office, the government was smaller; Welfare as it had existed for decades was kaput; the size of the federal government had shrunk. But there was prosperity, just as there was under Reagan in the '80s, Coolidge in the '20s.
However, I look at the other side and see that the economy began to rebound from the Depression under FDR and Truman---And their Presidencies made America into the premier player on the world stage that it remains today. We went from being one of several superpowers to being one against the USSR. Similarly, TR and Wilson took us from being just another country to being a major player on the world stage, a voice that was listened to by other nations. I mean there has to be a reason why people kept re-electing FDR. I look at their policies and Presidencies and see short term struggle which is punctuated with long term success. The period from 1945 until 1973 is generally called the "Golden Age of Capitalism" for America due to a general period of prosperity.
On the other hand, I look at Presidents who governed as Conservatives, or Centrists--Harding, Coolidge, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Reagan, Bush I and Clinton--and see a common factor: All of their terms of office led to great prosperity during their terms and for a few years after, but the economy went into a slump not long after. For example, the 1920s was a time of great prosperity economically, but just months after Coolidge left office in 1929, we entered the Great Depression--After 8 years of the most economically Conservative presidencies of the 20th century, even more conservative than Reagan.
Similarly, when Eisenhower left office, it was in the midst of a mild recession; He had two while in office. Kennedy's tax cuts, which were put into place by LBJ after JFK's murder, made the 1960s a time of economic boom, but by the mid 1970s we entered stagflation under Gerald Ford; Reagan's term brought America out of the stagflation and the 1980s were a massive, continuous boom, but the end of his term was punctuated by the S&L Crisis and the the 1991-1992 recession under Bush I.
Similarly, under Clinton and the GOP Congress, we had an economic boom for most of the mid-late 90s, but as he left office, there came a recession and arguably his own policies in the long run caused our current economic problems.
It just seems at times like economic conservatism or moderation is GREAT for short term prosperity--massive short term prosperity--but boomerangs for whatever reason into recessions in the long run, and the opposite rings true for economically Liberal Presidents--short term pain, long term prosperity.