Recommended Posts

Brant wrote: I'm afraid Trump might become, in power, a proto-fascist. That'd be using government to make things better--Obama is using it to make things worse--instead of cutting back on government and letting things self correct. end quote

I have wondered how a President Trump would govern and I have a hunch it would be like the mogul / CEO that he is and a bit like an Army general. Like all top brass, you don’t question what they say. It’s an order. He will be abrasive.

And he would need to put his money into a trust and not have a thing to do with business because of the conflict of interest. He would be put under a magnifying glass if any US or foreign business is involved.

Now who would a CEO like Trump pick as his running mate? Another CEO? You betcha as Sarah Palin would say. Carly would be a perfect VEEP even if Hillary implodes or gets arrested by the FBI. She’s a former CEO. She could pull in the women voters if Old Hickory Clinton is the Progressive Candidate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember, Donald Trump did not consider Obama a native born U.S. citizen and that may be brought up during the debates and in the news media if he holds onto a lead.

Whether or not he holds a lead through two Octobers, he would be consistent if he does bring up a mystery surrounding Obama's birth and citizenship. But he has not brought it up on mike since he declared, so most likely he has 'evolved' on the issue.

To the questions in the spam email chain-letter, well, hmmmm. The re-sender didn't offer any links to the (forged?) documents released by the President. The email says Negro should have been on the birth certificates, and not African-American, "how can the Obama 'birth certificate' state he is "African-American" when the term wasn't even used at that time?"

The certificates do not say "African American." The short form lists father as Race:African, mother as Race:Caucasian. Same on the long form.

The email goes on to claim "Kenya did not even exist until 1963, two whole years after Obama's birth," so ... what? It was called Kenya Colony since 1920. The insinuation is that the word on the document is a-historical. It is not.

On third, I'll just excerpt from Snopes:

At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapiolani_Medical_Center_for_Women_and_Children, it says that Kapi‘olani Maternity Home changed its name to Kapiʻolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in 1931.

About the world war two thing, it is not really connected to the documents: "Mr. Obama is a liar, or simply chooses to alter the facts to satisfy his imagination or political purposes"?

I think Trump is smart enough to know not to push a product past its sell-by date. The birth 'controversy' is a bizarre cul-de-sac for any candidate today, wholly irrelevant to the election in two Octobers. Trump is no fool. Birthers lose on logic, lose on fact, history, reason, law. They are losers.

On the other hand, if I am wrong, and out come 'questions' from Trump's camp about Obama's mystery birth, I would see it as a bizarre but irrelevant fringe-issue in a campaign, neither a negative nor a positive. It definitely will not add a bloom of freshness to any campaign that toys with it. Since Obama is not in the race, who GAF?

Or, it could come down to My Terms are Not Over Obama vs Trump on the ballot. I'd pay per view for that.

Edited by william.scherk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

William,

This actually has come up in interviews with Trump, on mike, and there are videos out there.

Trump does not say whether he believes Obama was born in the USA, but he does say people he highly respects claim the birth certificate Obama presented was fraudulent. Then he dismisses this as "old stuff" or something like that, says there are important things to talk about, and changes the subject.

I remember seeing him do that a couple of times recently.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A nice little tidbit from CNN Money:

Peace-brokering? Donald Trump, Rupert Murdoch talked by phone

:)

Murdoch had some awful things to say about Trump a little earlier. Looks like he will be blessing Trump's campaign, if not now then soon.

And that means inroads into the Republican old money circuit. This isn't interesting to Trump for the money, but it is to get them out of his way.

I smell a deal coming.

Hey! Isn't that what Trump does well? Deals?

:)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing I appreciate in this discussion, so far at least, is that they try to examine facts first without judging, then judge what they identified. That is a mental process I do on purpose.

This process makes things easy for later agreement or disagreement. We can fight over evaluations and actually get something out of it if we agree on the same facts.

Michael

Yes and it also applies to definitions of terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

William Scott Scherk wrote: The certificates do not say "African American." The short form lists father as Race: African, mother as Race: Caucasian. Same on the long form. end quote

And Brant replied” Birthers are "losers." end quote

Beam me up Scotty Scherk! Take cover. Incoming! Thank you William for your time and thought. When you write I hear thunder in the distance. Sort of.

Brant, something about that email information just did not seem right to me. There is something fishy about it. Who knows? If Trump has evolved, as William phrased his dilemma, it will be interesting how he handles his other past gaffs.

If Trump tells Fox he is going to join the five pm losers debate because the most interesting person to debate is Carly what would happen? Wall to wall coverage. The nine pm big dog debate would almost be irrelevant.

Aside. As Donald Trump might have said parenthetically, I had two cavities on one tooth which was affecting my brain, I kid you not, though my recent writing may have reflected a loss of brain power which some may have detected. I had to pay some dentist kid who went to high school with my youngest daughter to open up his office to treat me. Over three hundred bucks! He was very good. I have never seen a dentist with hands so fast. There is more human interest to the story but I will not divulge it. I think I have changed dentists, though my previous tooth cleaner was a keeper, but then my dentist of 30 years retired, sort of leaving her out in the cold. I like concierge dental care. When is Royal Pains coming back on? I like that USA show. Kentucky whisky good for tooth ache.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Trump is going to break up the Republican Party.

He might form a replacement party made up of disaffected Dems and Reps. He could even be elected that way.

But he better do better than a I-can-get-it-done businessman, or he'll end up like H. Ross Perot--without the grace of shutting up.

--Brant

I wonder if he could simultaneously faux run for the Democratic nomination, as a gimmick, next year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Trump is going to break up the Republican Party.

He might form a replacement party made up of disaffected Dems and Reps. He could even be elected that way.

But he better do better than a I-can-get-it-done businessman, or he'll end up like H. Ross Perot--without the grace of shutting up.

--Brant

I wonder if he could simultaneously faux run for the Democratic nomination, as a gimmick, next year?

Apparently, Trump has a book out there with his plans and specifics.

Also, Trump is not gimmicking this race, folks had better get used to the idea that he is serious.

A...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Trump is going to break up the Republican Party.

He might form a replacement party made up of disaffected Dems and Reps. He could even be elected that way.

But he better do better than a I-can-get-it-done businessman, or he'll end up like H. Ross Perot--without the grace of shutting up.

--Brant

I wonder if he could simultaneously faux run for the Democratic nomination, as a gimmick, next year?

Apparently, Trump has a book out there with his plans and specifics.

Also, Trump is not gimmicking this race, folks had better get used to the idea that he is serious.

A...

Time to Get Tough: Making America Great Again

"President Obama has been a disaster for this country. He’s wrecked our economy, saddled our children with debt, and gone around the world apologizing for America—as if the greatest nation in the world needed to apologize for being the land of opportunity and freedom that we were before Obama became president.

Now, America looks like a broken country—stripped of jobs, stripped of wealth, stripped of respect. And what does President Obama do about it? He plays nice with the very same foreign governments who are eager to watch America burn.

This can’t go on. And if Donald J. Trump has anything to say about it, it won’t."

Sounds good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Milk in the fridge: it's good.

Put it out in the heat for a day for a different opinion.

Each and every day: the "interesting times" get more interesting.

--Brant

"Vengeance is mine," sayeth Reality

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IBD: Trump's Appeal is GOP's Failure to Repeal

I still like Carly, hoping for VP. How about 8 years of Trump followed by 8 years of Carly? After that I'd be dead and don't care.

Thomas Sowell thinks Trump could get another Democrat (Hillary) elected. Can't discount the analysis of the great man. But he's been very pessimistic for the last few years, rightly so. Maybe we're all Pollyanna's thinking something good could happen...

F'*** the RINO's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IBD: Trump's Appeal is GOP's Failure to Repeal

I still like Carly, hoping for VP. How about 8 years of Trump followed by 8 years of Carly? After that I'd be dead and don't care.

Thomas Sowell thinks Trump could get another Democrat (Hillary) elected. Can't discount the analysis of the great man. But he's been very pessimistic for the last few years, rightly so. Maybe we're all Pollyanna's thinking something good could happen...

F'*** the RINO's.

In a certain sense, we are all facing the "Dagny Test," should I even try to stop this marxist destruction of my concept of America, or, should I just go on a "political strike" [kinda the Brantian position] and get ready to survive the collapse.

A...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(BaAuH2O= barium gold water) The Barry M. Goldwater (and soon to be Trump) Effect on Liberals and the electorate. Go to You Tube and watch what is called The Daisy attack ad against Barry Goldwater! And LBJ had another one with a little girl eating an ice cream cone with a woman’s voice saying children should get plenty of vitamin A and Calcium but no strontium 90 but Barry Goldwater voted against the test ban treaty . . . Brrrr. Are we are in for that propaganda again?

Mike wrote: I still like Carly, hoping for VP. How about 8 years of Trump followed by 8 years of Carly? . . . . Thomas Sowell thinks Trump could get another Democrat (Hillary) elected. Can't discount the analysis of the great man. But he's been very pessimistic for the last few years, rightly so. Maybe we're all Pollyanna's thinking something good could happen... end quote

The only one who can sooth our fears about Trump, is Trump. In the debate tomorrow he is going to sound smart, reasonable, and like Ronald Reagan. Once again, consider how the American Traitor Class tried to portray Reagan as a maniac who might just lob a nuke at Iran or Russia, just like LBJ did against Goldwater? It is the same in the case of Trump but up to now the Progressives have not thought of him SERIOUSLY. But that could change if he does well during and after the debate and after his first primary win.

And I must also say we Objectivists, conservatives, and libertarians are doubting his suitability too. To win the big one - to simply get one more electoral vote than his opponent - Trump will need us and the Charles Krauthammer’s and Thomas Sowell's of the world. Hannity is on board with Trump and I think O’ Reilly will be a Trump Trooper. Will you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(BaAuH2O= barium gold water) The Barry M. Goldwater (and soon to be Trump) Effect on Liberals and the electorate. Go to You Tube and watch what is called The Daisy attack ad against Barry Goldwater! And LBJ had another one with a little girl eating an ice cream cone with a woman’s voice saying children should get plenty of vitamin A and Calcium but no strontium 90 but Barry Goldwater voted against the test ban treaty . . . Brrrr. Are we are in for that propaganda again?

Is this your statement Peter?

You could be a lot clearer, more effective and less confusing if you used the quote button on the lower right.

Do you seriously believe that this type of ad would be effective against Trump?

Goldwater was a great man and he realized that his friend's assassination sealed his defeat and also took his heart out of the election to a serious level.

A...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one could have beat Johnson in 1964 as he was only one year into his presidency off the assassination. The assassination grossly distorted American politics that let all kinds of crap get through Congress the next two years, even some I had to support like civil rights legislation though it was a wrong to correct a greater wrong. I held my nose. BG voted against it, on principle. I don't see Kennedy doing Johnson's massive Vietnam intervention. That was simply countered by the North Vietnamese sending more troops and material into South Vietnam. But Kennedy was into some intervention. It wasn't only an anti-communist thing; Catholicism seemed mixed in also. Kennedy was Catholic. Buckley for the conservatives was also. This doesn't mean championing war so much as championing Diem--until they decided to coup him out. That weakened the South Vietnamese government to the extent it became a total welfare client of the United States and gave to the US an implicit obligation to take up the slack. The Vietnam War was a welfare war. If it had been a proper war, qua war, it would have been expanded to the US conquering and defeating North Vietnam. That idea would have deescalated the amount of American intervention for no way was the US going to fight that way for that, not with China right next door. So the US made war on lies starting with a particular lie about some supposed minor crap in the Gulf of Tonkin (and John McCain was on his way to POW glory).

But Goldwater did not run a good campaign. When he selected Miller for the veep nomination one had to know it was hopeless, but Barry was my hero so I even bet on him to win even up. That's what you do when you're only 20.

Barry hated the Daisy ad and effectively sued some scumbag publisher who defamed him with a screed of psychiatric analysis.

--Brant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daisy Ad [wiki]

Johnson: "These are the stakes. To make a world in which all of God's children can live, or to go into the dark. We must either love each other, or we must die."

Of which the last bit was plagerized from W. H. Auden's poem "September 1, 1939". The left went into moral free fall after JFK, resulting in the community organizer B.O. and the likes of Nancy Pelosi. I piss on Johnson's grave.

Added: the fact they pulled the ad and then aired it continuously in the media made it more effective (by design no doubt).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was 17 in '63, no this is not a Billy Joel song, and an early operative in the campaign. Miller was not as bad a choice as you think Brant.

Those were different years with a totally different electoral map.

http://www.270towin.com/1960_Election/

Look at the 1960 race.

NY was still in play and Miller was the logical NY Congressman to make it happen.

1962 Rockefeller was the Governor of NY - won by 500,000+ votes.

A...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Miller didn't have enough substance to be the veep candidate, not that it really mattered.

About that time Buckley wrote a proposal in The National Review that Goldwater should run with Eisenhower as the veep candidate. That's when I decided Buckley wasn't a serious thinker or intellectual, so I switched to Rand. I remained a war-monger of sorts. Goldwater himself seemed to be one in a book on foreign policy published after The Conscience of a Conservative under his name. I didn't know it was ghost written, probably by the same guy who did the previous one, L. Brent Bozel. The US and the USSR were totally into Cold War time with MAD as the idea to prevent MAD. So the liberals came up with that horrible film Seven Days In May showing moral equivalency through each country blowing up one of the other's major cities. The US city was NYC and the President had to let his own wife be blown up in it too. Ugh, ugh, ugh.

--Brant

so I went to Vietnam to kill communists--and run medical patrols--much better than General Thermonuclear War (GTW)

I wonder if young people today know what that would have meant back then (or understood the acronym GTW as a stand alone) or the general background fear on normal human existence that sharpened minds--today it's penny ante (for Americans) and so today is also a time of great danger from nuclear warfare precisely from lack of concern, unless you're an Israeli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was 17 in '63, no this is not a Billy Joel song, and an early operative in the campaign. Miller was not as bad a choice as you think Brant.

Those were different years with a totally different electoral map.

http://www.270towin.com/1960_Election/

Look at the 1960 race.

NY was still in play and Miller was the logical NY Congressman to make it happen.

1962 Rockefeller was the Governor of NY - won by 500,000+ votes.

A...

Vote fraud in IL and TX gave Kennedy the election. Vote fraud was a Chicago specialty and if vote fraud got Johnson into the US Senate a 1960 TX repeat was guaranteed for the national election. The vote fraud in this last election was much more problematic. It happened but how much and to what effect has yet to be found out.

--Brant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adam, I think attack ads can doom just about any candidate.

I clipped some debate points from Yahoo and ABC news. This Andrew Romono guy is pretty sharp. Can anyone elucidate on any of the five points below? Katie Couric just wondered Who will go from zero to hero? How will the debaters attack Hillary Clinton? And the hateful Katie also wondered will some of the lesser candidates spew green vomit like in The Exorcist to get noticed?
Peter

From Andrew Romano, West Coast Correspondent, ‎August‎ ‎06‎, ‎2015
Thursday’s lineup — Donald Trump, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Chris Christie and John Kasich.
1. The Trump killer: Someday Republicans will say “you’re fired”
2. The meme: Unlike their collegiate counterparts, presidential debates have long been decided not by who scores the most points but by who delivers the most memorable lines — for better or for worse. Who will that be?
3. The big issue: immigration?
4. The backlash?
5. The Cinderella story (or the comeback kid)

Katie Couric asked, Who will go from zero to hero? And let us include the debate coming from the kids table.
From ABC news: Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry just missed the stage by 1.4 percent and is sitting in 11th place, according to an ABC News analysis of the five national polls used by Fox News. Notably, Rick Santorum, the 2012 winner of the Iowa caucuses and runner-up to eventual nominee Mitt Romney, will also be missing from the stage. The former Pennsylvania Senator says that national polls shouldn't be used because it strips early states like Iowa and New Hampshire from their influential role.

Other candidates who didn’t get enough support include Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, businesswoman Carly Fiorina, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, former New York Gov. George Pataki and former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore. These seven candidates will participate in a separate, one-hour forum at 5 p.m. on Thursday. End quotes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adam, I think attack ads can doom just about any candidate.

Based on that "insight" the attack ads should begin against Evita now, correct?

Then she will be "doomed?"

According to your analysis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...