Donald Trump Running for President

[russ_watters]

[You know bankruptcy is legal, right? ]

Legal, yes, but at best it tends to reflect bad business practices. At worst, it reflects unethical business practices. My understanding is that Trump would build a building, then declare bankruptcy to avoid paying the contractors.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Obama's score: A123, Abound Solar, Beacon Power, Ener1, Solyndra, Fisker.

Obama is much further removed from those companies he invested in than Trumps actual owned businesses.

 

[mr166]

You can say all the negative things you like about Trump and some of them will even be justified but his running just highlights the almost total lack of candidates that are willing to represent a conservative viewpoint. Cruz and Carson are exceptions to this.

 

[Finny]

One thing I did not see discussed: Any other candidate will certainly be the object of huge campaign contributions. Will Trump resist that temptation or will he become like all the others?? He sure can't ignore such influences totally or nobody in congress will support him if he ever did get elected; they are ALL beholding. Could be interesting...

I notice two more Russian Bear bombers were flying near California again...on our fourth of July. Think Putin would do that with a 'loose cannon' like Trump in charge? How soon do you think we'd have our bombers right next to Vlad?? Also could be interesting...

 

[Evo]

Everyone that wishes to be able to post in current events must read these rules now https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/must-read-current-events-guidelines.113181/

I will be strictly enforcing them starting now. We have problems every election year, so I want everyone to have a fair chance at participating. If you make a statement containing "facts" other than just a random opinion, you must cite valid sources. If it's a random opinion, you must state it is nothing but your opinion and be sure that it is not something that can be easily disproved, that is misinformation, we will not allow you to state misinformation and try to pass it off as "opinion". It's fine to just say "IMO". If it's something that is well known like Donald Trumps hairdo, you get a free pass, just basically use common sense when it comes to making statements. Also, think twice before posting, ask yourself, is this on topic for this thread? What value does this add? Let's stick with the rules and everyone can enjoy participating.

 

[Astronuc]

It seems that Trump overstates his wealth - http://finance.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-wealth-details-released-federal-regulators-165854286--finance.html

His income is impressive.

 

[Bystander]

Overstates? Understates? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster's_Millions_(1985_film)
Even allowing 10% inflation for the past 30 years he's in the "Brewster" bracket where there's no way of knowing.

 

[WWGD]

It seems that Trump overstates his wealth - http://finance.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-wealth-details-released-federal-regulators-165854286--finance.html

His income is impressive.

Still, a "meta" measure of his popularity is that the article on his wealth was posted yesterday at 11 p.m., and there are already 3471 comments about it.

 

[Finny]

I had forgotten just what Trump said about illegals that causes such a media kerfluffle.
Here is how CNN quotes Trump. [6/18/2015]

"When Mexico sends its people," Trump said during his presidential announcement, "they're not sending the best. They're not sending you, they're sending people that have lots of problems and they're bringing those problems. They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime. They're rapists and some, I assume, are good people, but I speak to border guards and they're telling us what we're getting."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/17/opinions/kohn-donald-trump-announcement/

From that, one presumes, the CNN political commentator Sally Kohn concludes a few paragraphs later:

"In Trump's formulation, it's not just Mexicans who are evil -- they're all rapists and drug lords."

I would be far more impressed with CNN had they focused instead on the real issue: Balancing American's right to protect their own borders against the failures of many South American governments to protect and foster their own citizens:

"Immigrants don't generally leave their families, home countries and everything they've ever known just because they want to -- it's usually because they feel they have no choice..."

Likely for reasons similar to generations of other immigrants that have come here. Immigrants are not flocking to failed states.

One can make their own list of reasons why THIS is not headline news.

It's also instructive to learn how Mexico, for example, treats illegal immigrants on its soil.

 

[WWGD]

I had forgotten just what Trump said about illegals that causes such a media kerfluffle.
Here is how CNN quotes Trump. [6/18/2015]

"When Mexico sends its people," Trump said during his presidential announcement, "they're not sending the best. They're not sending you, they're sending people that have lots of problems and they're bringing those problems. They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime. They're rapists and some, I assume, are good people, but I speak to border guards and they're telling us what we're getting."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/17/opinions/kohn-donald-trump-announcement/

From that, one presumes, the CNN political commentator Sally Kohn concludes a few paragraphs later:

"In Trump's formulation, it's not just Mexicans who are evil -- they're all rapists and drug lords."

I would be far more impressed with CNN had they focused instead on the real issue: Balancing American's right to protect their own borders against the failures of many South American governments to protect and foster their own citizens: <Snip>

.

I would have been more impressed if Fox had addressed the fact that Trump had gone broke 4 times , possibly avoided paying his creditors. And on how well someone who had gone broke 4 times will manage the economy. EDIT : Would also like to see discussions by Fox et Al., or maybe see you address claims that an open border allows (had allowed) Mexicans the flexibility to come work when there were jobs available and return home when they were not. Now they must come and stay here for good.
https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/ecdecc/doi10.1086-662575.html
. Not everyone wants to stay here for good; some want to come in for seasonal work and return home afterwards.

And other issues, like the fact that net Mexican immigration is even negative:
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/04/23/net-migration-from-mexico-falls-to-zero-and-perhaps-less/

And that fewer Mexicans (people in general) were entering illegally recently:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...caf02c-006b-11e5-833c-a2de05b6b2a4_story.html

You may want to keep a skeptical attitude towards both CNN and Fox.

 

[Finny]

I would have been more impressed if Fox had addressed the fact that Trump had gone broke 4 times

For shame! That's exactly what EVO posted about:
"... If it's a random opinion, you must state it is nothing but your opinion and be sure that it is not something that can be easily disproved, that is misinformation, we will not allow you to state misinformation..."

I google searched: "Has fox news mentioned Trump's bankruptcies.." [A 0.7 sec search...]

Here are the first five headlines of many pages where Trumps bankruptcy is mentioned...

Trump Casino Group Files for Bankruptcy | Fox News
www.foxnews.com/.../trump-casino-group-files-for-b...
Fox News Channel
Feb 18, 2009 - CAVUTO: So, nothing has tarnished the Trump Organization or you?... Now, you mentioned the fact that this unit decided to file for bankruptcy, ...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/16/trump-sets-record-for-longest-2016-gop-announcement-speech/
www.foxnews.com/.../trump-sets-record-for-longest-2...
Fox News Channel
Jun 16, 2015 - And he mever once mentioned all his loan defaults, bankruptcies, and loans he defaulted on ... @rssjr Trump has gone bankrupt twice.

http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2015/07/05/donald-trump-punching-back/
www.foxnews.com/.../donald-trump-punching-back/
Fox News Channel
Jul 5, 2015 - Donald Trump has dominated the coverage of the presidential race this past week. ... Let me just mention that Trump put out a statement last night. ... debt, say, well, Trump's casino you need to clear bankruptcy about that.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/06/16/trump-s-in-and-2016-race-just-got-fun-could-be-right-man-at-right-time0.html
www.foxnews.com/.../trump-s-in-and-2016-race-just-...
Fox News Channel
Jun 16, 2015 - “He has business bankruptcies. ... Trump has already bravely pointed out that black unemployment is twice as high as white ... he has w/o taking money from special interest groups and lobbyists not to mention foreigners, ...

Fox News Guest Hilariously Skewers Donald Trump's ...
www.addictinginfo.org/.../fox-news-guest-hilariously-skewers-donald-tr...
Jul 5, 2015 - Usually, Donald Trump would expect Fox News to be in his corner. ...Trump has declared corporate bankruptcy FOUR times in the last 25 years. ... his broadcasting but conveniently never mention their beloved Bill Oreily who ...

For others who don't ever watch Fox News:
It is great sport to listen to any headline issue on MSNBC, CNN, any of the TV networks, read the AP or Reuters...whatever you like, then see for yourself how it's covered on Fox. Make you own comparisons.

 

[WWGD]

Good, the ones I have seen are hardly critical of Trump, just like the ones I _had_ read. Why don't you address my points?

 

[Finny]

The statistics headlined in post # 155 seem far off the topic of "TRUMP".

But it should be noted that with roughly 54 million Spanish US population {US Census, 2013] and about 122M total population in Mexico, {also 2013, World Bank} seems we have been rather 'open' admitting Spanish.

So I do think Trump can make a case for controlling our southern border.

 

[Finny]

Why don't you address my points?

They do not interest me.

 

[WWGD]

They do not interest me.

Right, because your outrage is selective, i.e., you are a hypocrite: you throw a tantrum when _your_ issues are not addressed to your satisfaction but you ignore the issues when _you_ are questioned . You drank the Kool Aid and you don't know what you're talking about. The links you gave, BTW, many of which I had seen, are _ softballs_ thrown at Trump to make him look good, to allow him to frame the issues in a way that makes him look good, allowing him to deflect the criticisms that will inevitably come up. Trump got more softballs from Fox than Stewart threw at Obama.

 

[Borg]

What makes you think he is being honest? Remember, he's a salesman.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/21/politics/donald-trump-lindsey-graham-cell-phone/index.html

In my mind his campaign is designed to troll us. Do whatever, say whatever that will get you in the news.

Graham seems to be taking it well.

 

[WWGD]

The statistics headlined in post # 155 seem far off the topic of "TRUMP".

But it should be noted that with roughly 54 million Spanish US population {US Census, 2013] and about 122M total population in Mexico, {also 2013, World Bank} seems we have been rather 'open' admitting Spanish.

So I do think Trump can make a case for controlling our southern border.

There are many people of Mexican descent that were not "admitted", they lived in the states that belonged to Mexico before these were taken over . And there is no post #155. If you are referring to my post #115, I am addressing points made by you in #114, which, by the way, you did not reference.
And 54 million is not the number "admitted", it includes many descendants over many generations.

And we have "admitted" millions of Germans, English, Irish, Italians, etc. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762137.html , so what is your point? Should we be less open admitting Germans, English, Italians, etc. too?

 

[WWGD]

Graham seems to be taking it well.

He's been doing it for a while : , see 0:18- 0:21. for a video
of him in his earlier days.

 

[Finny]

so what is your point? Should we be less open admitting Germans, English, Italians, etc. too?

Good idea if they are the type Trump described discussing entering our southern border:
"... they're sending people that have lots of problems and they're bringing those problems. They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime. They're rapists...[from my post # 114]

Perhaps even worse, certainly no better, unsupervised underage children are being sent from Central American maybe south American countries:
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/arti...bestia-route-dangers-and-government-responses [Don't know what if anything has been done since mid 2014.]

My point was nobody should be claiming Trump is biased against Mexicans, nor Spanish in general, nor anybody else. We have lots of many nationalities here. But WE get to pick who is granted citizenship, via congressional legislation, not foreign governments nor immigrants themselves nor an executive branch circumventing the law.

I never said we should be more...nor less... open in admitting citizens of any country. All I have said is that Trump seems to want to control our border. I like that.

What's going on now reminds me of the Mariel boat lift when a number of the Cuban government released thousands from jails and mental health facilities. Maybe it's even worse now: the 'undocumented immigrant' who recently killed Kate Steinle in California had a known record including 30 alias over 25 years and five prior deportations. And we let him out of jail!

edit:

And there is no post #155.

typo...should have been 115.]
Yes that should have been post #115 .

 

[WWGD]

Trump has provided no data AFAIK, to support his claim about Mexicans. And one murder, however despicable, is statistically insignificant. Show me 200-300 and convince me that the murder rate among illegals is higher than that of the rest of the population and then I will start paying attention. Believe it or not, many illegals pay taxes (incl. sales taxes), even social security ones which they will never get back. And they rent apartments , shop in supermarkets, etc. It is difficult to decide if _ as a whole_ they are bad for the country. Convince me they are, since you are claiming so. I have seen mixed data/studies on this.

 

[jim hardy]

Mariel boat lift when a number of the Cuban government released thousands from jails and mental health facilities.

i lived south of Miami then. That is exactly what Castro did.
People who went down there to retrieve family were told "You'll take these people with you, too."
I have two freinds who took their boats down there, both said they brought back known criminals in addition to their family members. Local authorities in Key West were overwhelmed.
Home invasions around Miami skyrocketed within weeks.
Didn't help Carter's popularity in S Florida a bit.

So it CAN happen.

 

[WWGD]

i lived south of Miami then. That is exactly what Castro did.
People who went down there to retrieve family were told "You'll take these people with you, too."
I have two freinds who took their boats down there, both said they brought back known criminals in addition to their family members. Local authorities in Key West were overwhelmed.
Home invasions around Miami skyrocketed within weeks.
Didn't help Carter's popularity in S Florida a bit.

So it CAN happen.

But Trump's , and I believe Finny's claim is that this is what _has_ happened with the wave of Mexicans and illegal ( overall?) immigration. And I think this needs support.

 

[jim hardy]

But Trump's , and I believe Finny's claim is that this is what _has_ happened with the wave of Mexicans and illegal ( overall?) immigration. And I think this needs support.

The truth must be somewhere in between how Alex Jones and Thom Hartmann spin it for their audiences.

I no longer live near a border so can't offer firsthand observation.

 

[WWGD]

The truth must be somewhere in between how Alex Jones and Thom Hartmann spin it for their audiences.

I no longer live near a border so can't offer firsthand observation.

But given the nature of the accusation, I believe Trump has the burden of proof in making a statement of this sort, and I have not seen any actual serious evidence presented by him. It is a serious issue to accuse a whole group of people of being rapists and drug dealers. But once one (Trump) decides to make such accusation,he should be able to support it. But he hasn't yet.

 

[StevieTNZ]

I found this image I came across this morning rather amusing -- https://www.facebook.com/TheShadeRo...828.1462426734001720/1745908752320182/?type=1

 

[Evo]

I found this image I came across this morning rather amusing -- https://www.facebook.com/TheShadeRo...828.1462426734001720/1745908752320182/?type=1

I *love* that!

 

[WWGD]

I found this image I came across this morning rather amusing -- https://www.facebook.com/TheShadeRo...828.1462426734001720/1745908752320182/?type=1

Good, but it's a little corny.

 

[jim hardy]

But given the nature of the accusation, I believe Trump has the burden of proof in making a statement of this sort, and I have not seen any actual serious evidence presented by him. It is a serious issue to accuse a whole group of people of being rapists and drug dealers. But once one (Trump) decides to make such accusation,he should be able to support it. But he hasn't yet.

I haven't watched closely. Both extremes are pumping out the propaganda as usual.

In our present "news" environment one can cherry pick any headline he wants.
The name of the game is to persuade not to elucidate

his supporters put out stuff like this to convince us he's a beacon of sensibility

http://www.dcclothesline.com/2014/1...led-illegals-one-year-one-state-10th-largest/

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/12/man-who-entered-us-illegally-arrested-in-michigan-on-kidnapping-sexual-assault/?intcmp=latestnews

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/20/killed-in-her-sleep-illegal-immigrants-suspected-in-mass-grandma-death-faced/?intcmp=latestnews

and his detractors tell us he's just a raving hatemongering nutjob

myself I've got kinda immune to it all.

You are i think correct - Trump hasn't backed his claims, or if he did present statistics i wasn't paying attention and missed it.

And i don't offer the above as support just examples of the propaganda blob . Once one starts reading headlines with an eye to their intended effect he becomes circumspect .

I remember Walter Cronkite in the 70's as a paragon of integrity. I used to trust the evening news. I wonder if i'd see things the same now that I've aged forty years. What's changed - me or the world ?

 

[Finny]

Trump has provided no data AFAIK, to support his claim about Mexicans. And one murder, however despicable, is statistically insignificant. Show me 200-300 and convince me that the murder rate among illegals is higher than that of the rest of the population and then I will start paying attention.

I believe Finny's claim is that this is what _has_ happened with the wave of Mexicans and illegal ( overall?) immigration.

Both are misrepresentations of what has been stated. If you read both Trump's quote I posted [via CNN] and my own posts, you will realize that is not what is being said. I can't respond to strawmen accusations, especially ones which don't represent what I have stated. Trump said he wants to keep out criminals, drug dealers, and rapists; I said letting all those scoundrels in reminds me of the Mariel Boat Lift. The consequences unfettered borders are too obvious to discuss.

Besides, Trump has flip flopped as much as Hillary. Well, maybe, not quite that much! Anyway, some have accused Trump of being a secret representative of internationalists masquerading as a fiscal conservative. I sure don't know. He is also reported to have contributed a lot more money to democrats than republicans, Hardly an endearment. No surprise since he does a lot of business in NYC.

We'll have to see how well Trump plays out. Christie,too, sounded great then got elected in NJ and pooped out. Meantime I get to LOL at Trumps retorts to the perpetually aggrieved media busybodies.

 

[Finny]

Associated with Trump's possible Republican candidacy is of course the stodgy GOP big government elites. The party big wigs.

Here is what I thought an interesting critique of the proposed proposed debate limits to the top ten poll candidates. I'm not sure who set the rules, but never underestimate the ability of the GOP to shoot it's own candidate in the foot.

Of course with what, 16 candidates, who wants to watch so many all talking at once? In MMA, for example,the contestants listen to the referee; Political debate moderators get no such respect.

1. Every single GOP candidate who doesn't qualify to stand on the debate stage is within 2 percentage points of the last candidate to make the cut. Yet we are excluding these candidates via 1,000-sample surveys with a 3.5 percent margin of error at the 95 percent confidence level?

2. Seriously, the GOP has found a way to exclude the sitting, re-elected governor of Ohio, the sitting, re-elected governor of Louisiana, and the most serious female candidate for president the GOP has yet had (a former CEO who is smarter and tougher than most of the GOP guys running), from debates? Our adversaries would have to work hard to do us this much damage.

3. GOP contributors invest a lot of money to get candidates on television. Let me say that again: We actually pay real dollars to get them exposure on television. This year, when we have a great field of serious candidates, we have chosen to give them less free exposure? We are not exactly qualifying for MENSA with this one.

4. It is just plain wrong for the Washington elite and the news media to tell voters, at the outset of a campaign, which candidates they will fall in love in with and which they won't. That's a job for voters themselves.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/criticism-of-gop-debate-scheme-intensifies/article/2568895

With Trump likely to be sounding off, I might even listen to this.

 

[WWGD]

Both are misrepresentations of what has been stated. If you read both Trump's quote I posted [via CNN] and my own posts, you will realize that is not what is being said. I can't respond to strawmen accusations, especially ones which don't represent what I have stated. Trump said he wants to keep out criminals, drug dealers, and rapists; I said letting all those scoundrels in reminds me of the Mariel Boat Lift. The consequences unfettered borders are too obvious to discuss.
.

I was referring to Trump's claim about Mexicans. You pointed out a murder by an illegal alien, apparently (to my understanding) to bolster your case against immigration; if that was not your point, that is what I understood it to be. And I stated " I believe" in my second paragraph. So please don't accuse me of using straw men arguments just because I may not understand the points you are making. And there _is_ a case for more open borders: many Mexicans look for work seasonally, and return to Mexico when their work is done. This is possible when the borders are open, at least to some extent.
And I at least I addressed your points, you never showed the courtesy of addressing the points I made. You may want to address my claim that net immigration from Mexico is negative before continuing your rants against open borders -- a non-issue when net migration is negative.

 

[chingel]

I don't understand why Americans don't secure their border. It should be made such that known criminals don't get in the country as often as they want to (for example 5 times with the last killer).

When you don't let criminals in, the reputation of the immigrants becomes better, because there is less crime committed. This results in less friction in the society, less discrimination (good immigrants get viewed negatively because of the bad ones). Also, there are plenty of people who won't cross borders illegally, because they have ethical standards and don't want to break the law. If a significant proportion of immigrants are illegals, certain kinds of people are over-represented.

If you would secure the border, not let in criminals, but let in the same number of people legally as currently come illegally, you would have the same amount of workers for the economy, you would give Mexicans a fairer chance (by giving a chance to those who won't do illegal stuff and by not filing up the immigration tolerance of the American people with illegals), the image and reputation of immigrants would improve and everybody would be better off.

Also you would give a chance to the rest of the world. Why is it that Mexicans can come illegally as much as they want to instead of good people from around the world (including Mexico), who want to come legally?

 

[WWGD]

I don't understand why Americans don't secure their border. It should be made such that known criminals don't get in the country as often as they want to (for example 5 times with the last killer).

When you don't let criminals in, the reputation of the immigrants becomes better, because there is less crime committed. This results in less friction in the society, less discrimination (good immigrants get viewed negatively because of the bad ones). Also, there are plenty of people who won't cross borders illegally, because they have ethical standards and don't want to break the law. If a significant proportion of immigrants are illegals, certain kinds of people are over-represented.

If you would secure the border, not let in criminals, but let in the same number of people legally as currently come illegally, you would have the same amount of workers for the economy, you would give Mexicans a fairer chance (by giving a chance to those who won't do illegal stuff and by not filing up the immigration tolerance of the American people with illegals), the image and reputation of immigrants would improve and everybody would be better off.

Also you would give a chance to the rest of the world. Why is it that Mexicans can come illegally as much as they want to instead of good people from around the world (including Mexico), who want to come legally?

1) No actual evidence has been presented to the fact that a large percentage of those coming in are criminal.

2) The net migration of Mexicans is negative. Assuming there is a large percentage of criminals among them, the negative migration means that the net inflow of criminals is also negative.

3) Both countries benefit from open borders: workers come for seasonal work and then go back home when seasonal work is over. Harder to do with tight border controls.

4) Poor Mexicans from remote towns do not have access to lawyers, or, if they do, rarely have the money to pay for them, in order to go through the official "ethical " channels. Following the law makes you law-abiding, not (necessarily) ethical.

 

[Finny]

You pointed out a murder by an illegal alien, apparently (to my understanding) to bolster your case against immigration;

No. Never posted that. I posted, if you read what I wrote, as an example why convicted criminals, drug dealers and rapists should be excluded. Open borders enable criminals to leave their home country and start their mischief anew. In fact it encourages them to do so.

"negative migration" is irrelevant to the point Trump is making. If good hard working, tax paying people leave and a smaller number of criminals continue to enter our country, that can't be good. Well it's good for Mexico, maybe.

No actual evidence has been presented to the fact that a large percentage of those coming in are criminal.

Why should we admit even a 'small percentage' of convicted drug dealers, cartel members, gang members, rapists, criminals? I advocate we exclude all such ne'er-do-wells.

 

[chingel]

Isn't the point of the border not to let any criminals in, even if most of the people are not criminals? Like at the airport, most people won't bring bombs on board, but the point is not to let any bombs on board at all, even if it would happen rarely.

Surely it would be better not to let criminals cross borders as they wish? Surely you would agree to a system that would let the same number of good people through, but would stop the criminals?

You say the net flux is negative. But why should new criminals be let in? It would be even better to keep all criminals out. You don't have to stop Mexican citizens from going back to Mexico. You just check that the new people who come aren't criminals and you let more people in around the world, not just Mexico. That sounds reasonable to me. Letting in new criminals because criminals are also leaving doesn't make sense.

To the point that it is easier for them if they can come and go as they wish, rules and regulations are for a reason. If you are running a business and have workers and you haven't registered anywhere, there is no control over whether you pay taxes, how you conduct your business, do you follow laws and standards etc. Laws have to be applied fairly, I am sure local workers and businesses would also want all sorts of regulations not to apply to them. You can make temporary and seasonal working visas easier to get, to lessen regulations to the level that you think is acceptable. Didn't know you needed a lawyer to work in the USA, if that's true then I agree the regulations are too much.