Trump Announces His Run For POTUS

[Bann]

I'm amused by the folks who are so adamently opposed to The Donald even being in the race.

He's not a career politician and while he identifies himself as a Republican, he is not in lockstep with the (so-called) party, much less the party "elders".

Wish I had a nickel for everyone who has said they didn't want a career politician as POTUS, and yet, when they run -they're picked apart like buzzards on roadkill.

 

[Hijinx]

I'm amused by the folks who are so adamently opposed to The Donald even being in the race.

He's not a career politician and while he identifies himself as a Republican, he is not in lockstep with the (so-called) party, much less the party "elders".

Wish I had a nickel for everyone who has said they didn't want a career politician as POTUS, and yet, when they run -they're picked apart like buzzards on roadkill.

Wasn't The Donald in the race once or twice before? Fool me once shame on you--fool me twice shame on me.
What ever happened to Trumps private detectives who were going to Hawaii and investigate Obama?---never heard from them again.

I have nothing against Donald Trump running for President, but his past performances have convinced me that he just likes receiving the attention, and has no full intent of actually running.When the media tires of Donald---Donald will tire of the candidacy. IMO

 

[Larry Gude]

How many of us believe if our ideal candidate won they'd be able to do most, or even some, of what they say that appeals to you?


Trump used bankruptcy protection to fix messes in the past and I am a BIG believer we need to write off ENORMOUS amounts of debt to fix the economy. I wonder if he sees that, agrees, would mean to do it and how?

To me, the simplest thing in the world is to allow folks who have to eat the write offs to be able to loan new money at 7%.

 

[Midnightrider]

If it's several times, it should be easy for you to find a time I said anything like I'm a 'vote for whoever the GOP tells you to vote for' kind of person and link it here. I'll wait.....

you have been arguing for days if not weeks that you have two choices, vote for the GOP candidate or vote for the democrat, either directly or indirectly (by your logic). Since you are not advocating voting for the democrat the only other choice you give yourself is to vote for the candidate the GOP tells you to.
You can pretend that isn't your position, but you have hammered us over the head with it in numerous threads.

Are you going to vote for the GOP candidate or are you going to cast your ballot for hillary (either directly or indirectly by voting for anyone other than the GOP candidate, again using your logic)?

 

[Bann]

Wasn't The Donald in the race once or twice before? Fool me once shame on you--fool me twice shame on me.
What ever happened to Trumps private detectives who were going to Hawaii and investigate Obama?---never heard from them again.

I have nothing against Donald Trump running for President, but his past performances have convinced me that he just likes receiving the attention, and has no full intent of actually running.When the media tires of Donald---Donald will tire of the candidacy. IMO

He didn't actually run in the past. He talked about running, but never declared his candidacy.

 

[Gilligan]

Since you are not advocating voting for the democrat the only other choice you give yourself is to vote for the candidate the GOP tells you to.

That's rich. The self-proclaimed master of creating myriad false options claiming someone else has naught but two. False dilemma much?

 

[This_person]

you have been arguing for days if not weeks that you have two choices, vote for the GOP candidate or vote for the democrat, either directly or indirectly (by your logic). Since you are not advocating voting for the democrat the only other choice you give yourself is to vote for the candidate the GOP tells you to.
You can pretend that isn't your position, but you have hammered us over the head with it in numerous threads.

Are you going to vote for the GOP candidate or are you going to cast your ballot for hillary (either directly or indirectly by voting for anyone other than the GOP candidate, again using your logic)?

I'm not going to be limited by your choices I'm going to do exactly as I stated repeatedly:

I'm just saying I would vote for him if he got the nomination from the Republicans because (while I think I would never find a reason to vote for him in the Republican primary) he would do a better job than any Democrat out there. That doesn't mean a good job, just a better job.

Why would you not vote for the person you think would do a better job?

No.

If the only two people running were Hillary and Biden, I'd likely vote for Biden. If the only two people running were Hillary and Clem Kaddidlehopper with zero experience and really stupid ideas, but an (R) after Clem's name, I'd vote for Hillary.
Why would you not vote for the person you think would actually do a better job?

The primaries are out there to get two choices you think your side and the other side would each support, and then support the better of those two choices. If I thought Graham would do a worse job overall than any of the Dem candidates, I would vote (D).
I don't think that.

Why would you not vote for the person you think would do the better job?

That would depend. If I believed the (I) meant they had an infinitesimal chance of winning the race, no. That would be stupid, because I would not have a voice in choosing between the two that have a chance. If I thought the (I) had a chance, I'd definitely go for that person.

As I said, if there is an independent I think could do a better job than other candidates and that independent has a chance of winning, I would vote for that candidate. You seem to want to argue with me for agreeing with you

It's really not that hard to understand for the normal person. Why is it hard for YOU to understand?

 

[Midnightrider]

I'm not going to be limited by your choices I'm going to do exactly as I stated repeatedly:

​

It's really not that hard to understand for the normal person. Why is it hard for YOU to understand?

other than your intellectual dishonesty?
you wont vote for an I because you have already determined that no I could possibly win, yet you will vote for a R even though an R could never win in MD. we have been over it before.

Like i said every other time you accused me of wasting my vote or indirectly voting for the D by voting independant, so did you if you voted for an R in MD, plus you are asking the GOP for another ####ty candidate.

 

[This_person]

other than your intellectual dishonesty?
you wont vote for an I because you have already determined that no I could possibly win, yet you will vote for a R even though an R could never win in MD. we have been over it before.

Like i said every other time you accused me of wasting my vote or indirectly voting for the D by voting independant, so did you if you voted for an R in MD, plus you are asking the GOP for another ####ty candidate.

Please READ the posts quoted in the post to which you responded. I said "If I believed the (I) meant they had an infinitesimal chance of winning the race, no. That would be stupid, because I would not have a voice in choosing between the two that have a chance. If I thought the (I) had a chance, I'd definitely go for that person." What that means is, and I know this higher order conceptual deep reading into it, but.... there are (I)s who could win, and if I liked them better, I'd vote for them. I know that's really a stretch from "If I thought the (I) had a chance, I'd definitely go for that person." but, it's what those words mean.

You have this weird belief of me that is just not founded in the facts. Why do I live in your head so differently from reality? Why am I in your head at all?

 

[Midnightrider]

Please READ the posts quoted in the post to which you responded. I said "If I believed the (I) meant they had an infinitesimal chance of winning the race, no. That would be stupid, because I would not have a voice in choosing between the two that have a chance. If I thought the (I) had a chance, I'd definitely go for that person." What that means is, and I know this higher order conceptual deep reading into it, but.... there are (I)s who could win, and if I liked them better, I'd vote for them. I know that's really a stretch from "If I thought the (I) had a chance, I'd definitely go for that person." but, it's what those words mean.

You have this weird belief of me that is just not founded in the facts. Why do I live in your head so differently from reality? Why am I in your head at all?

We have already had this discussion. Your 'chance of winning' argument is a distraction from the fact that you will only vote for who the GOP puts up there. If you really believed the 'no chance of winning' argument you could only vote democrat in Maryland. No one else had a chance in the last two presidential elections. No one.

 

[Hijinx]

He didn't actually run in the past. He talked about running, but never declared his candidacy.

I suppose we will wait and see what he does this time.
I wonder how he will finance his candidacy?
Will he finance himself or have fund raisers.
I wonder how many will send money to a Billionaire to finance him?
I wonder how much he is willing to spend?

It's wait and see I suppose, but if I wee a betting man I would be putting my money on him dropping out.

 

[LibertyBeacon]

I suppose we will wait and see what he does this time.
I wonder how he will finance his candidacy?
Will he finance himself or have fund raisers.
I wonder how many will send money to a Billionaire to finance him?
I wonder how much he is willing to spend?

It's wait and see I suppose, but if I wee a betting man I would be putting my money on him dropping out.

He will be gone by February.

 

[Hodr]

Well judging from what I have seen over the years:
Trump is definitely pro-immigration, has he ever dated or married an American born woman?
Trump is probably not "family values" given his 5 children with three different women, and of course his current wife is 25 years younger than him.
Trump will probably rename the USA to "Trump Presents The United States of America, brought to you by Trump Enterprises, a wholly owned Trump Inc. Subsidiary", or TPTUSABTYBTEAWOTIS for short.
Trump will move the Whitehouse to Long Island cover every surface with either gold or mirrors.

 

[This_person]

We have already had this discussion. Your 'chance of winning' argument is a distraction from the fact that you will only vote for who the GOP puts up there. If you really believed the 'no chance of winning' argument you could only vote democrat in Maryland. No one else had a chance in the last two presidential elections. No one.

You're certainly welcome to your opinion, regardless of how inaccurate it may be regarding my position.

 

[Larry Gude]

Well judging from what I have seen over the years:
Trump is definitely pro-immigration, has he ever dated or married an American born woman?
Trump is probably not "family values" given his 5 children with three different women, and of course his current wife is 25 years younger than him.
Trump will probably rename the USA to "Trump Presents The United States of America, brought to you by Trump Enterprises, a wholly owned Trump Inc. Subsidiary", or TPTUSABTYBTEAWOTIS for short.
Trump will move the Whitehouse to Long Island cover every surface with either gold or mirrors.

I'd laugh if that didn't sound about right.

 

[GWguy]

oops....

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/16/politics/donald-trump-2016-neil-young-song/index.html

"Donald Trump was not authorized to use 'Rockin' In The Free World' in his presidential candidacy announcement," said a statement from Young's management company. "Neil Young, a Canadian citizen, is a supporter of Bernie Sanders for President of the United States of America."

 

[Midnightrider]

You're certainly welcome to your opinion, regardless of how inaccurate it may be regarding my position.

We can revisit this when the election gets closer and the futility of voting for a republican for POTUS in Maryland is quantifiable. Then maybe you will see the obvious flaw in your 'logic'.

 

[Hijinx]

"Donald Trump was not authorized to use 'Rockin' In The Free World' in his presidential candidacy announcement," said a statement from Young's management company. "Neil Young, a Canadian citizen, is a supporter of Bernie Sanders for President of the United States of America."

Mr. Young should stick to music. His political acumen sucks.

 

[Bay_Kat]

View attachment 108627

I'm so stealing this.

 

[NextJen]

Just saw that Trump would love Oprah to be his VP. If he wasn't doomed before.......