Donald Trump

[Marc]

I am not fighting for The Cause with Trump. I want him to have power. Raw naked political power, the kind where he gets to determine if the government kills people or lets them live, if the government confiscates their stuff or lets them keep it, if the government wrecks people's lives or not, if the government takes from some people, keeps most of the plunder and gives the rest to others.

See? No illusions.

Nobody ever says that, but that is the game everybody plays. That is what all candidates are after.

All of them.

There's an aspect of this I want to clarify.

I never support a person who seeks this kind of power as a primary reason to live inside his or her soul.

What I'm saying is that the office of the presidency is innately as I described above and all the candidates know it.

So let me rephrase the opening paragraph in this quote and maybe that will make it clearer.

The presidency is ultimately not about The Cause. The presidency is about power. Raw naked political power, the kind where the president gets to determine if the government kills people or lets them live, if the government confiscates their stuff or lets them keep it, if the government wrecks people's lives or not, if the government takes from some people, keeps most of the plunder and gives the rest to others.

That's how I see the presidency and that's what I consider when I evaluate a person to take that job.

When I look at the past of current candidates, I either see confused signals when they have wielded power, or simple lack of experience with it on a level meaningful to the reality of the office they seek.

Apropos, that was one of Obama's main problems. In his ascension, he wielded power through getting close to people and getting their endorsements, then betraying them. He also did a lot of covert manipulation and backroom dealing. A lot of deception. And he did not have much experience in any meaningful way. Now look at how he has run his presidency. That's almost an official playbook. Look at how he has managed to get laws passed. Look at his foreign policies. And watch as the next president takes apart all his policies easily. Why? Because he built them on manipulation and deception, not deal-making for real.

Could one of the Republican candidates rise with grace under stress in the job and wield presidential power with greatness? (By greatness, I mean in a manner that makes the world more productive and wealthy and less violent.) I think it's likely in a few cases. Could one of them abuse the power inherent in the office and do crappy things? Probably all of them to some degree or another (including Trump). But which one has lots of experience with power?

As I mentioned with Trump, he has had power most of his life. He chose the good path and built stuff with it, magnificent stuff, not the evil path to rule people for the sake of ruling them and to destroy people who become inconvenient. Nor has he been inept and watched things go down the tubes as massive amounts of people get destroyed (except in the Atlanta casino market, where they went down the tubes for everybody. At least Trump got out early and intact.)

I think what people have done over their lives with power is one of the best indicators of what they will do if they get the kind of power available to a president. So Trump's my man.

That probably makes more sense than the leg and head metaphor I used.

Michael

Excellent points as usual - keeping OL objective ! Thats why I love you ! Thats why I love OL .

That being said , Trumps net worth was 2-10 billion ( I keep reading different things ) and it will be substantially more after this election cycle .

Follow the money .

He learned from greatness , God Bless Sheldon Adelson , Trump is starting to get it . How to go from $3 billion to $30 billion . Thats his only play .

Too late for the spend , DT knows this . He aint gonna spend 20 million over the next 10 weeks . No chance .

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Who gets the nomination ?

Who gets POTUS ?

Who wins the nomination ?

Who gets the Oval office ?

(raising hand)

I know, I know, I know!

Ask me!

Ask me!

Ask me!

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here's a treat for Trump-lovers to rebut those those who say he doesn't act presidential.

 

 

Notice how polite Trump was to the reporters.

 

One of them asked him about his language. She said he calls people losers and so on and asked if he would do that as president. He said no. I can't remember the exact words, but the gist was that being president is a different context than doing an election. And he aims to win the election. But as president, he would present a different demeanor. 

 

There is one thing I thought very funny. A reporter right at the end mentioned that Trump said he loves the people of Iowa. Then the reporter asked, "Does that include the stupid people of Iowa, too?" After Trump understood the question, you didn't hear him acknowledge anything else from that person. Not even a dismissal. And the change was instantaneous. He talked to other people. It was like the guy didn't ask anything, wasn't there, and had never been there. 

 

It was almost a pure Roarkian: "But I don't think of you," except in action, not words.

 

 

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

And here is Trump in his not-so-presidential mode:

 

 

And I quote: "... these politicians are all talk, no action, it is all bullshit, right? All bullshit."

 

 

Michael

[Marc]

Who gets the nomination ?

Who gets POTUS ?

Who wins the nomination ?

Who gets the Oval office ?

(raising hand)

I know, I know, I know!

Ask me!

Ask me!

Ask me!

Michael

Funny thing is is that you are literally THE ONLY POSTER to post your views !!!!!!!!

I keep asking the same question and no one mans up and we all know why . Sitting on the fence with no commitment and no balls ( yeah , I use that word cause we have already breached the topic on genitalia ) to even post a winner . The whole purpose of the thread .

But stripper videos , cat pictures and blah blah about blah blah .

Lots of comparisons to past election cycles and word games .

MSK states Trump , and Trump .

Lets follow our leader and state our beliefs on our sleeves .

[PDS]

Who gets the nomination ?

Who gets POTUS ?

Who wins the nomination ?

Who gets the Oval office ?

(raising hand)

I know, I know, I know!

Ask me!

Ask me!

Ask me!

Michael

Funny thing is is that you are literally THE ONLY POSTER to post your views !!!!!!!!

I keep asking the same question and no one mans up and we all know why . Sitting on the fence with no commitment and no balls ( yeah , I use that word cause we have already breached the topic on genitalia ) to even post a winner . The whole purpose of the thread .

But stripper videos , cat pictures and blah blah about blah blah .

Lots of comparisons to past election cycles and word games .

MSK states Trump , and Trump .

Lets follow our leader and state our beliefs on our sleeves .

Okay. I will volunteer. I think Trump will win the nomination, with Cruz as his VP pick.

They both will get trounced and the senate will be swept up and fall to the Democrats.

Then, within about 4-6 years, the Supreme Court will be changed with 3-4 Hillary picks such that there is not even the appearance of checks or balances on executive action, war-making, drone-killings, or in defense of the 'conservative" rights found in the Bill of Rights.

[Peter]

PDS wrote about Michael supporting Trump without reservation: This sounds like Nietzsche-with-a-Combover to me. I had thought we Randian-types were supposed to be against this sort of thing. You are obviously not a Moral Monster, MSK--otherwise none of us would be here. This fact is what makes your position above so perplexing.
end quote

And William noted: I get creeped out by Trump's byplay with Putin. I just don't know what it means.
end quote

Michael wrote in response over several letters which I will mash together: When you choose the lesser of several evils in a situation where no other choice is possible, that does not mean you would choose evil if good were an alternative . . . . The least I can do right now is call stuff by its right name. That may not seem like a lot, but believe me, clarity is a fundamental prerequisite of rationality . . . . Phase 2 is starting. This should have started long ago, but Trump struck paydirt with social media and Social Justice Warrior baiting. I think he, himself, was surprised at how well it worked.
end quote

Excellent thinking on everyone’s part. Very logical. As the cartoon The Donald Duck said, “I’m not bad. I’m just drawn that way. I can appear Presidential if I choose.” I saw through Michael when he seemed to go overboard in a Heil Trump way. He was slyly doing a Trump on everyone and baiting the Objectivist Social Warriors. Nevertheless I am glad for his clarification.

I have always liked comical symbolic logic. Trump is the lesser of two potential weevils.
But if we include Cruz, then Cruz is the lesser of two weevils. (The Objectivist in me says so.)
If we add Rubio who is a question mark (Rubio?) then Trump is the lesser of two weevils. Yet if we find out more from Marco I could change my mind.
As of now my choice is still Cruz on first, but Trump has moved ahead of Rubio. I no longer consider Carson or Fiorina in the running. Who’s in the ruIning? (who’s the worse?) Still Jeb, Kasich, Christie, Huckabee.
After a re-read of the above, I think I will cut back on the coffee.
Peter

[Peter]

marc noted: Trump is collecting dollars here, not spending. The ultimate capitalist.
end quote

Michael wrote in response: Billionaires like Trump who got their money the hard way don't spend it on mere speculation and vanity press. They want data and target profiles. They want a return on investment . . . . . As I mentioned with Trump, he has had power most of his life. He chose the good path
end quote

Wow. As Jerry Lewis said about Trump, “We’ve never had a showman in the President’s chair.” Thanks for the link, Adam. The interview in his personal jet did make him seem Presidential and I think he has cut back on the carbs. I hope he continues to look younger and more vibrant than Old Hickory. She should try dripping tea bags under her dark, eye bags.
Peter

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I saw through Michael when he seemed to go overboard in a Heil Trump way. He was slyly doing a Trump on everyone and baiting the Objectivist Social Warriors.

Ah, shit!

I promised myself to never do this.

And the first time I succumb to temptation, I get busted.

Michael

EDIT: That's playfulness, by the way. I didn't really do that on purpose. I almost wish I did, but alas, I did not.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Interesting thoughts on Ivanka at the end.

 

 

Drip... drip... drip...

 

 

Michael

[Peter]

I knew it! Trump and Michaels are bear baiting. We accept the gaffs, (were they mis-spoken words?) personal responses, (was MSK only half kidding or did he mean that?) calculatedly invented insults, because so much is at stake. Is that much at stake on OL? It’s not the whole nation here on OL, but it might feel that way if you consider this one of your must-see sites and a way of life. Seriously. People quit a site or a campaign in a snit so Michael and Donald are risking their cherished values when they play the social justice warrior card. I have no doubt Michael’s support of Trump has driven some contributors away. Is Reidy back yet? Yet for those of us who don’t want to give OL up we give Michael the benefit of the doubt. In the meantime, Trump makes trouble, fun. Michael invites trouble and feistiness but also engagement.
Ensign Crusher, engage! We boldly go where no one has gone before.
Peter

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Food for the soul:

 

"@TruthisAll1: @realDonaldTrump @CharlesHurt @seanhannity Good morning, Mr. Trump. You're so AWESOME. #Trump2016 pic.twitter.com/LljQbi4fdP"

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

December 30, 2015

 

How's that for Randian.

 

 

I know, I know, but I can't help it. It's bigger than me.

 

When the urge comes on to push the envelope on "benefit of the doubt..." it's like a different me takes over.

 

 

Michael

[william.scherk]

Lets follow our leader and state our beliefs on our sleeves .

Okay. I will volunteer. I think Trump will win the nomination, with Cruz as his VP pick.

They both will get trounced and the senate will be swept up and fall to the Democrats.

Then, within about 4-6 years, the Supreme Court will be changed with 3-4 Hillary picks such that there is not even the appearance of checks or balances on executive action, war-making, drone-killings, or in defense of the 'conservative" rights found in the Bill of Rights.

I took an early sounding with the now-locked poll Who will be on the GOP ticket in 2016? which was posted July 20th, almost a full year out from the festivities in Cleveland. We got a sample of eight (8). Four of us picked Jeb Bush, what fools, and I am going to look again at our eight (8) guesses next July 20th, and give prizes to all. Some will be sort of gamey and bony.

Going in to that convention this coming July, if Donald Trump can maintain his highest mark in the polls, let's say 40%, then let's say he goes in with four out of ten delegates (this is only if we think of strict proportionality, 'pledged' votes, and don't heaven forbid look at the details).

In the Canadian election, the thumping majority of Trudeau was brought by roughly forty percent of the total vote. First past the post wins. This is rough template for the winner-take-all primary states.

But the mix of proportional, hybrid, winner-take-most, winner-take-all state tallies means it is not all cut and dried as with Trudeau's schlonging of the Tories. We have to factor in the actual incremental delegate count as they tick in to the tables of results. We then have to think about 'uncommitted,' structural set-asides if any, those percentages of state delegate counts that are free to be 'bought' further on in the process.**

For example, here comes the snooze-fest Iowa. Twenty three delegates to be allocated. And a week later New Hampshire's 30. How many of those will the front-runner win? The allocation game is going to be interesting for me -- and I hope to get more informed on each state delegation's allocation rules and when and if delegates are allowed to 'drift.' I also want to find out more about if/when/where the party itself inserts 'open' delegates and in what numbers.

At some point the wonks and I can deliver an analysis of the early results. It might go something like this, around February 24, when Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina are decided:

Trump....................63

Cruz.......................43

Others....................27

Total.....................133

Needed to win.....1237

Click on the image to go to the full FHQ blog post which puts all the numbers and ratios in graphic and tabular form over the calendar. Below the image is an excerpt from a Time magazine primer on the 2016. It shows where I need to do some research, to fully understand implications of the revised procedures.

________________________

** from TIME Guide to Official 2016 Republican Nomination Calendar

In addition to its three national party representatives, each state is awarded 10 delegates, plus three for each congressional district. Additional ‘bonus’ delegates are awarded for the share of the Republican vote in the previous presidential election and for electing Republican governors, Senators, Representatives, and legislatures. Territories are awarded a set number of delegates according to the party rules.

Who determines how each state awards its delegates?

Each state party sets its own rules in consultation with the Republican National Committee.

What’s different from 2012?

First off, the sheer number of candidates (15!). Second, the RNC moved to condense the calendar, keeping the Iowa caucuses from encroaching on New Years and moving the convention into July, and the last primaries to early June. The thinking was this would prevent the drawn-out primary fight that weakened Mitt Romney last cycle. Additionally, more states moved their primaries and caucuses into early March in an effort to play a more significant role in the nominating process, and thereby receive more attention from candidates. But all states voting before March 15 must award their delegates proportionally (though each state interprets that to their own liking), a measure instituted by the RNC to keep the race competitive into March.

What does that mean?

The 2016 primary calendar is technically shorter, but more importantly, it will be way more intense than the 2012 race.

So, when will there be a nominee?

That depends. Senior RNC officials will only say they predict the race being decided sometime in the spring, but many Republican operatives believe that a nominee won’t be determined until May or perhaps later. The concern is that with so many delegates up for grabs on a proportional basis—more than in any other cycle—that it will take longer for any one candidate to get the requisite number.

You mean a contested convention?

That’s still very unlikely, but for all the reasons above is more likely to happen this year than at any point in recent memory.

But that sounds like fun.

It sure is exciting to game out. If no candidate secures the required number of delegates by the first ballot in Cleveland (through a combination of bound and unbound delegates), all bets are off, as most states release their pledged delegates at that point.

[Marc]

I knew it! Trump and Michaels are bear baiting. We accept the gaffs, (were they mis-spoken words?) personal responses, (was MSK only half kidding or did he mean that?) calculatedly invented insults, because so much is at stake. Is that much at stake on OL? It’s not the whole nation here on OL, but it might feel that way if you consider this one of your must-see sites and a way of life. Seriously. People quit a site or a campaign in a snit so Michael and Donald are risking their cherished values when they play the social justice warrior card. I have no doubt Michael’s support of Trump has driven some contributors away. Is Reidy back yet? Yet for those of us who don’t want to give OL up we give Michael the benefit of the doubt. In the meantime, Trump makes trouble, fun. Michael invites trouble and feistiness but also engagement.

Ensign Crusher, engage! We boldly go where no one has gone before.

Peter

First of all , if anyone left this site has left due to MSK stating what he actually believes - then I say fare-freaking-well !

Ain't no second of all .

[Marc]

marc noted: Trump is collecting dollars here, not spending. The ultimate capitalist.

end quote

Michael wrote in response: Billionaires like Trump who got their money the hard way don't spend it on mere speculation and vanity press. They want data and target profiles. They want a return on investment . . . . . As I mentioned with Trump, he has had power most of his life. He chose the good path

end quote

Wow. As Jerry Lewis said about Trump, “We’ve never had a showman in the President’s chair.” Thanks for the link, Adam. The interview in his personal jet did make him seem Presidential and I think he has cut back on the carbs. I hope he continues to look younger and more vibrant than Old Hickory. She should try dripping tea bags under her dark, eye bags.

Peter

Lets not talk content of character , or policy . Tea bags , pant suits , etc etc etc .

[Brant Gaede]

First of all , if anyone left this site has left due to MSK stating what he actually believes - then I say fare-freaking-well !

Ain't no second of all .

I'm back! I'm back!

[Marc]

First of all , if anyone left this site has left due to MSK stating what he actually believes - then I say fare-freaking-well !

Ain't no second of all .

I'm back! I'm back!

Yayyyyyyyy !!!!

Come on my man , its late and only you and I are awake .

Whisper to me softly

Who gets the nomination and who gets the chair ?

You can edit it before anyone in O Land even awakes

[Selene]

The ever imbecilic Don Lemon, this moron actually wondered whether that Asian airliner that was lost over the Indian Ocean may have been pulled into a black hole...

And he knows what his nieces are being taught about Juanita Broderick, who has charged that William Jefferson Clinton raped her twice, and hit her causing her lip to bleed and then as he put his sun glasses on, murmured that she should put some ice on that!

All he wanted to blow away was the Monica Lewinsky story.

However, as the very bizarre looking Hugh Hewitt clearly explained to the moron, Don Lemon, that in the Lewinsky situation, it was consensual.

Don Lemon will have to go look that up.

A...

[Selene]

[william.scherk]

Great poll- thank you Nevada! #MakeAmericaGreatAgain #Trump2016 pic.twitter.com/9Lr1v6vjJb

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

December 30, 2015

[Selene]

William, you have to be a little cautious with the Gravis folks...

I have not had time to check in depth on them, however, these "suspicions" have been out there for a while...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/15/1144688/-Gravis-Marketing-Exposed-AND-Eviscerated

A...

[Marc]

Great poll- thank you Nevada! #MakeAmericaGreatAgain #Trump2016 pic.twitter.com/9Lr1v6vjJb

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

December 30, 2015

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Congrats DT !!!!

Iowa is Cruz , all but done now

NH ain't going Trump ( drip drip . dripity drip )

South Carolina ( more done than done )

Zero for the first 3 states . Nevada is a non issue .

Its beginning to feel a lot like Deal time ,

La di da di da

[Marc]

William, you have to be a little cautious with the Gravis folks...

I have not had time to check in depth on them, however, these "suspicions" have been out there for a while...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/15/1144688/-Gravis-Marketing-Exposed-AND-Eviscerated

A...

Friendly reminder my man, 20,078 posts

give me a quick post , who gets the nomination , who gets POTUS ?

You are the post man , bring me a letter Mr.Postman

[Selene]

William, you have to be a little cautious with the Gravis folks...

I have not had time to check in depth on them, however, these "suspicions" have been out there for a while...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/15/1144688/-Gravis-Marketing-Exposed-AND-Eviscerated

A...

Friendly reminder my man, 20,078 posts

give me a quick post , who gets the nomination , who gets POTUS ?

You are the post man , bring me a letter Mr.Postman

Sandler rule:

Don't spill your candy in the lobby...

Long way from me making a call ...

A...

[Peter]

Marc asked, “. . . . who gets the nomination , who gets POTUS ?”
end quote

I would also want to know what evidence bolsters their prediction. A lot of people have been saying no way Jose, can’t happen, but how do they know? Are they Nostradamus? I wish there were a ticker tape pollster that continually counted all the polls and facts (like endorsements and what they mean,) and then gave you the standings. But no fantasy football BS gambling type of predictions.

I am leery of polls but polls are evidence. I would also go by what your personal acquaintances say about the candidates, bumper stickers and their reaction, (honk and a thumps up, or a honk and a finger stuck up) the size of rallies, and what a few TRUSTED experts say.

I just looked at an article that said some of Trump’s strongest supporters are lower income, registered democrats who swear they will vote for Trump but that group is statistically notorious for NOT voting.

Thanks to William and others for their compilations of polls. My best prediction for the Republican nominee for POTUS: Trump. Who is chosen as Veep? Cruz and Rubio tied for second.

Question. Who brings in the most electoral votes for Trump if they are chosen for VP?
Peter