Trump Store
 

Is anybody buying this? Where is the box marked BS?

Winners and losers from the March 8 primaries

The point is..........

Trump Doesn't Own Most Of The Products He Pitched Last Night

"It appears that the attacks on presidential candidate Donald Trump's business record seem to have touched a nerve.

Despite three more primary and caucus victories on Tuesday, Trump eschewed a traditional victory speech, adding in a press conference — and something else: a table piled high with a veritable Trump-ucopia of Trump-branded products."

read the rest here Trump Doesn't Own Most Of The Products He Pitched Last Night : NPR

Everyday I read about Trump. I think a lot of people are waiting for the melt down or waiting for we the people to say enough is enough. Rather than ignore Romney's attack on his product line he shows it off. But there are some problems. He could just ignore Romney after-all he is killing in the polls but then that's not his nature.

You have choices:

Vote for someone that is part of the establishment that has us nearly 20 Trillion in debt, and climbing.

Vote for someone that turned a 100 million dollar loan into successful businesses worth multiple Billions.

You want to pick apart the character of the individuals, please go ahead. Every President and every politician since day one has skeletons in their closets. And every poster on this political site have skeletons in their closets. If any of these skeletons turn out to be criminal or felonies then our decision will be made for us. The Democrats and Republican majorities in Congress have been useless over the last 8 years because of a President and majority leaders (on both sides) that are incapable of working together. This must change.

Waiting for the tax returns when will he release them?

Should we pick an individual who has alienated over 50% of his own party and at least 80% of the other party not even to mention the leaders of the rest the world? How will that improve our standing in the world or gridlock in Washington? Do you think little Marco or lying Cruz will assist him in making any changes in solving any of our issues in Washington?

The Republicans have had control Congress ever since taking control of the Senate. What have they accomplished? They couldn't even pass a budget bill because the so called Freedom Caucus wouldn't support it.

The only thing the Tea Party has done is cause the entire works to grind to a halt.

There's no law that says he must release them.

So, instead we should pick a person that is a liar, that does not care a bit about national security and hates the military to lead as Commander-in-Chief? One that has no loyalty to her people and left them out to dry and die? Or, a commie? I'll take any of the GOP candidates in a heart beat.

So what do the nombers prove?

What is obvious is he is a threat to the establishment and the crony politicians.
As far as the foreign countries that are sounding like democrats and establishment crony republicans it is because they fear they will get cut off the USA gravy train.

The numbers prove a great many of we the people are fed up with the politically frigid, do nothing, all for me the incumbent politicians and their pandering-sucking support groups, special interest groups, minority groups and suck the USA dry foreign countries including our enemies.

Washington needs an enema and they see Trump snapping on the rubber gloves!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Good point....:thumbup:

Although you may not have drank any of the Trump wine, it appears you have tasted some of his kool-aid. I agree he does not have the support of any special interest groups, but does have his own interest at heart as demonstrated by his past history. Would you care to take any of real estate courses or loan him some money for one of his business adventures? It appears, however, that you are a member of his minority group that does support him. That is probably why there is so much hatred since his supporters feel so left out of mainstream America.

Even though I did not vote for him, I think that I would trust him with my money more than I would trust Hillary, or even Sanders. I would not trust Hillary with my classified information, depend on her support if I was in the field overseas, or trust my daughter at a pajama party at the Clinton's home with their daughter. I believe any of those things would or could turn into a disaster. Why didn't I vote for Trump? Because I thought someone else would be a better candidate. I also don't like the guy's personality. Can he do the job? I would say so, if you consider what is in the White House right now. The bar or standard is pretty low.

Chelsea is 36 and pregnant with her second child. Time goes by so fast.

A lot of people did trust Hillary with classified material since they sent her emails. However, they did not know this information was going to be classified later by other parties. So , PLEASE!!!!!, don't send me any classified material unless it has been vetted by third parties!!! I wouldn't want be investigated by the FBI.

While pointing out why I think Trump is popular with many Americans, no where did I state I was supporting him or not for that matter.
I will ignore your opening put down statement. You should know it is for your self gratification only as it certainly adds no value. And does discredit anything that follows.

In any case....like him or not; he does resonate with a very large percentage of Americans who do not care about political correctness or any of the other discredits put forth about him.

His appeal, like it or not is he is not the establishment. It is also appealing to many that he does not need to play the game career politicians must play....quid quo pro....support group, special interest group, minority and minority group donations....to get money...votes....re-election.

Many Americans are in full agreement that what we have had for too many years has not worked. All those years the only benefactors have been the politicians and their support groups. Obama's past 7 + years have only served to throw gasoline on a fire that was already brewing.

Would I vote for him? Only if he is the republican nominee. And most certainly Trump or any other candidate if Clinton is the democratic nominee.

I believe in the end your percentages will be off quite a bit in his favor. As far as alienating the leaders of the world we need a President that can turn around the disrespect the leaders of the world have for the USA after the last 8 years of the Obama administration. There are a number of other nations leaders that need to be alienated at the very least, a number that need to understand we will not put up with their BS, and a number of others that he will be happy to work with as long as they are friends of the USA. Unfortunately Congress is so divided that only a leader that can bring them together will get anything accomplished. Hillary, Bernie, Marco and Ted plus the other assorted useless politicians will not blend these differences. Trump may not be able to bridge this great divide but to elect another politician who is beholding to his financial backers just solidifies that the next 4 years will be political BS as usual. For myself I choose to give Trump the chance to work on a new Washington. I know many will disagree with my opinion so I would like to state here that though I don't share your opinion, I do respect your right to share your beliefs.

Thank you!! Although I do not agree with most of your analysis as I think this country has improved immensely during the last 7 years. But that is what elections are for. No name calling or ridicule. Too bad we do not this type of discussion during the Republican debates!

This is me crying for you..............:cryin2:

You must not have kept up with current events in the last seven years, or you wouldn't make ludicrous comments like that. Unless you are seeking derision.

Dude, she was the Secstate. I don't expect you to realize that it is under her name that a lot of State Dept material is subject to classification. She SENT classified information and she did not use the proper equipment or storage for that information. Just the small fact that she was transmitting (CLASSIFIED) movement and Itinerary information on Ambassador Stevens is enough to charge her. Why they haven't only serves to cause suspicion that she is being protected by the radical administration.

Sorry that you don't find that our current state of affairs meet with your approval. I know for one that I am happy that my current economy, my health care, fewer American soldiers dying, recognition of climate change, jobs increasing, and living with my friends in The Villages who are also benefiting from the fruits of their labor. Are you having of tough time that makes you feel things are not so well? I am also pleasantly surprised that a white women is getting more of the black vote than a biracial man in past elections. Another example of a nation coming together.

I agree.

You must have a mental block of the previous eight. W was a nightmare.

Nope, not really CHI. YOu seem to have a mental block regarding the fact that up until the Dems took over control of congress in Bush's last two years, the country was doing fairly well. YOu also conveniently avoid the fact that Bush attempted several times to get Fanny/Freddy audited and it was denied by Barney Frank. And then the bubble burst. YOu also avoid the facts regarding Clinton's involvement and partial responsibility in the whole issue. But, you do seem to "avoid" a lot of things.

You live in a world of denial. It must be nice to live in a smoke induced delusion of Obama's Utopia. Just about everyone else has had their standard of living decreased. 46 million on food stamps, a record. Higher poverty level, higher black unemployment, less respect from foreign governments, increased terrorism, higher racial tension, lower respect for the military and law enforcement. But, you live inside that bubble.

Nice try. Now avoid this.....

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...3f1513a555.gif

And has lost money on CASINOs!!!!! How do you lose money on casinos and have to go bankrupt 4 times. There are consequences to bankruptcy. Some one gets screwed who provided a service and does not get paid due to one.

your mention of turning 100 million dollars into a company worth billions is like saying when I was 5 my grandpa gave me 5 dollars when I and now I have 5000 dollars. You made no mention on how he started out with $$$ from just being born into a certain family.

The story reminds me of the Steve Martin joke on how to make a million dollars ... First you get a million dollars.

Bad stuff happens when your administration cooks the books on intel just to invade a country. Call it a war on terror, but it was simply a war to make defense contractors even richer and to make the energy companies happier. People caught on but unfortunately not until many US lives were lost.

You don't know what you are talking about. And if you ever served in the military, you would have some inkling of how intel works. Lie all you want but look at Bush's popularity now and then compare it with Obummer's. SLOWEST recovery in history, thanks to that inept loser in the White House.

But the fact is that regardless of your stupid little kid graph, which has nothing to do with the comment you replied to, Bush had NO unemployment until the Dems took over congress. That's a fact. The economists said that his unemployment was so low that it was deemed "no unemployment." And the rest of the points I made are history. Divert all you wish, but facts are there for you to check. If you have the guts to look at them. Probably not because then you would be reduced to diverting again, to hide the truth.

Kept the graph simple and easy to understand. Or so I thought. What part troubles your comprehension?

And now a lot of people are bragging they were against the war. Why was Bernie the only one to speak out against the wars and deal with the backlash?

And if I'm wrong, I will change this position.

What I don't quite understand is why all the new hypothetical war tough talk. I don't know who to trust in a tight situation. It just seems like it's an inconsistent personality trait. I think it's just pandering for votes from hawks, doves and vets.

OK we will humor you and pretend it was a cooked package.

What does that say about our lofty congressional members that would have apparently done no homework on what was presented (as usual) and just went along with the president because they liked him.....including Clinton.

BS!

Obama approval since inauguration. Compare that with GWBush's ski slope ride into the low 30's. Or compare to Bill Clinton's ratings. By the way, Gallup has asked the same question all through the years "Do you approve or disapprove of the way (.) is handling his job a President"

Would you find it helpful to see graphs of the job losses under Bush vs under Obama or are kid graphs too complicated for you? Hint.. private sector jobs created under Bush -462,000 Under Obama +9,517,000 thru Nov 2015
Read all about it https://ourfuture.org/20141208/bush-...-simple-charts

Bush had no unemployment according to economists, UNTIL the last two years of his term, which had a democrat controlled congress. There are still more folks, NOT working and not seeking employment than when Bush was in charge. So, argue all you wish, but the thread is about Trump. So, get over it, not everything in the past seven years is Bush's fault and isn't it time for you liberals to grow up and take some responsibility? You elected a FAILURE for your experimental president. Don't blame Bush for Obama.

Actually a lot of Democrats voted against the approval of the invasion of Iraq in 2002. In the House the pro/con vote was GOP 215/6 and Dem 82/126. Thus in the House more Dems voted against the war by a large margin. Bernie was in the House in 2002 as an Independent and voted against the war joining the 126 Democrats. In the Senate it was GOP 48/1 and Dems 29/21, plus one no from independent Jeffords-VT.

So it is inaccurate to say that Bernie was alone opposing the invasion. Most of the no votes from Democrats centered on the issue that we should allow the UN inspectors more time to verify or refute the claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and as per the presentation of the President, a nuclear attack was around the corner. (or Nucular)
Attempts to amend the resolution to only give authorization for that mission were defeated.

you are correct
What I meant to say was that Bernie is the only one running for office that was against the wars.
Is that wrong too?

I have no desire to argue the failures of GWB vs Obama. I simply am responding to wrong information. You can again say "according to economists" but it is really according to you unless you can post real numbers. I already posted the job creation numbers, real numbers. Here are the unemployment figures.
When Bush became President the unemployment rate was 4.2 Bush had both a GOP house and Senate until 2007. In the years 2001 - end 2006 all under GOP control the rate was in the 4's 22/72 months = 31%, in the 5's 42/72 58% and in the 6or above 8/72 = 11%

From 2007 to the end of 2008 in the 4's 12/24 = 50%, in the 5's 7/24 29% and 6 or above 5/24 =21% all as the lead up to the recession.

I will happily take responsibility for preventing the next world Depression, I will happily take responsibility for insuring millions upon millions that were never going to insured by the GOP, I will happily take responsibility for equal pay legislation, for increasing acceptance of gays, for lower gas and electric rates without gutting clear air or water, for continued allowance of private gun ownership but having a discussion of whether we need to use the background checks to screen all sales not just at gun stores, for continued investment in science and education not just more bombs and jets and for the fact that my party is still sane enough not to be arguing about whose got a bigger hands and resorting to referring to each other as Lying Ted and Little Marco. I take responsibility for all of that and much more. and that the both U6 and U5 unemployment rate is now lower under President Obama than it was under Bush in 2003 (don't you hate it when the facts disagree with your beliefs?)

The problem with your data is that you skewed it to best agree with your argument. I have provided again and again, the information that you keep asking for, on other threads. I am not going to run around in circles for a liberal to get his jollies with it. Your unemployment numbers are bogus because you never take into consideration the real numbers, of those that quit looking.
"In August, according to BLS, the nation’s civilian noninstitutional population, consisting of all people 16 or older who were not in the military or an institution, reached 251,096,000. Of those, 157,065,000 participated in the labor force by either holding a job or actively seeking one.

The 157,065,000 who participated in the labor force equaled only 62.6 percent of the 251,096,000 civilian noninstitutional population -- the same as it was in July and June. Not since October 1977, when the participation rate dropped to 62.4, has the percentage been this low." Sept 2015

So, there's some facts for you to consider. Unemployment rates are all relative to the size of the work force computed as percentage of the total population.
(don't you hate it when the facts disagree with your beliefs?)

The only source I can find with the quote were from right wing websites. What is your source? I always give a source so people can decide for themselves if their is a bias.

Do you remember the climate back then?

What does that say about our lofty congressional members that would have apparently done no homework on what was presented (as usual) and just went along with the president because they liked him

This speech is worth listening to then and now.