Thread: A Trump run?

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 53
  1. #1 A Trump run? 
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,800
    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.
    Last edited by CaughtintheMiddle1990; 04-11-2011 at 04:39 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    812
    Quote Originally Posted by CaughtintheMiddle1990 View Post
    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 always say that this cant get any worse, then it does.

    But, he's probably no different than anybody else who's going to run... he may even be less establishment than people from the political realm. All of his Hollywood bullshit makes him impossible to take seriously though. He's so insufferably vain that tolerating his grandstanding from a presidential platform would be painful.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member Rebel Yell's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    South GA
    Posts
    5,181
    The best thing he has going for him is that he's not a politician. I think alot of people are really fed up politicians.
    I feel that once a black fella has referred to white foks as "honky paleface devil white-trash cracker redneck Caspers," he's abdicated the right to get upset about the "N" word. But that's just me. -- Jim Goad
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Rebel Yell View Post
    The best thing he has going for him is that he's not a politician. I think alot of people are really fed up politicians.
    I get that sense too...On both sides. A lot of people of my generation are actually either A) disinterested in politics because they feel they don't really have a voice B) Dislike politics because politicians suck and are so dramatic or C) Feel utterly cynical because they feel it's rigged and/or corrupt.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    433
    Wouldn't t be a hoot for him to be able to say.

    Obama...YOU'RE FIRED! :D
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Florida. The Cuban Part.
    Posts
    3,007
    Quote Originally Posted by Rebel Yell View Post
    The best thing he has going for him is that he's not a politician. I think alot of people are really fed up politicians.
    This pretty much.

    ~QC
    "The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. To be your own man is hard business. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." Rudyard Kipling - (1865-1936)

    Context doesn't matter to this liberal it seems/ as long as it satisfies his godless dreams/ like monkeys throwing sh!t as castles in air/ as long as he throws/that is the extent of his care.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,787
    It is schtick and with no race yet, and being bored with Palin, the Media is eating it up like the ravenous eyeball sellers they are.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,757
    I think he's serious, whether I voted for him for him or not in the primaries depends on who all enters. I'd vote for him in a heart beat over the Obaidiot.

    on another note, Romney announced his Presidential exploratory committee today.../yawn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,787
    Quote Originally Posted by fettpett View Post
    I think he's serious, whether I voted for him for him or not in the primaries depends on who all enters. I'd vote for him in a heart beat over the Obaidiot.

    on another note, Romney announced his Presidential exploratory committee today.../yawn
    I don't think he is running but if his is, seeing Ron Paul make him cry in the first debate would be worth watching.

    If he won the nomination, it would be 1984 all over again.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,757
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    I don't think he is running but if his is, seeing Ron Paul make him cry in the first debate would be worth watching.

    If he won the nomination, it would be 1984 all over again.
    hardly, more like 1980, with the incumbent getting his ass handed to him.

    I said that I think his run is serious, not that he would get the nomination. Go watch his interview with Meridith Vera. He seems pretty damn serious.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •