This is the "elephant in the room" and I, for one have come to my own personal conclusion.

I have decided that as much as I do not want Clinton in the WH, I would prefer this guy start his own third party and if he steals sufficient votes to ensure a democratic victory so be it.

He is nothing but a self promoting big mouth with lots of money and no manners. He is rude and feels his money entitles him to whatever he wants.

I would prefer to maintain dignity and see him just go away. As I said, even to the point, if he wants to start a third party, so be it, but at least this process has a bit of dignity left in it.

Our candidacy process has enough flaws without the infusion of show business people interrupting to get attention.

He went to the basest kind of stuff to get headlines. He knew that talking as he has about immigration would get headlines....he knows what the concerns of the american people were at the base level, but only in nightmares do I see him as the leader of my country.

I think he will find that POLLS do not translate into votes pretty fast.

I am sure some will come after me for this, but I am embarrassed by him and his antics.

I agree he is saying what the majority want to hear but offering no real solutions. I am hoping someone get the idea and starts focusing on the on real problems of this country. If the current group continues crowing to the minority in this country I will vote for Trump no matter party he runs with. At least he is voicing and standing up for the majority in this country.

He is the only that says what I want to hear. The rest are all the same, including Hillary. They need to talk about what the US Citizen wants to hear.

Originally Posted by Guest

He is the only that says what I want to hear. The rest are all the same, including Hillary. They need to talk about what the US Citizen wants to hear.

He has touched on the "surface" of just a few things, offered not one...NONE in the way of plans to fix anyhing.

He is using our dissatisfaction for headlines.

I would rather hear from someone with plans, and not headlines. I am not looking for a great speaker, am not,looking for loud mouths...I prefer someone with solutions.

Saying we want all illigal immigrants out of the country makes some feel good, but it ain't gonna happen, and this is the tone he is using.

Let's be realistic, pragmatic and while you want to cheer his generalizations, he is distracting from people wit solutions.

Originally Posted by Golden Years

I agree he is saying what the majority want to hear but offering no real solutions. I am hoping someone get the idea and starts focusing on the on real problems of this country. If the current group continues crowing to the minority in this country I will vote for Trump no matter party he runs with. At least he is voicing and standing up for the majority in this country.

I totally disagree with your comment on "standing up for the majority" comment and do so as loudly as possible.

He is on an ego trip. He offered no solutions, which is what the majority want. He will attack anyone who criticizes him and would attack anyone who disagrees with him. DOES THAT SOUND FAMILIAR.

That tact has not worked and will not work.

Our next President better be someone who can bring folks together and not divide them. He/she better not be one that goes into a full public attack of the crassest kind because of questions he is asked. Have we not had enough of that, and this President comes in a far second to what Trump has shown thus far.

No, I totally reject that he stands for the majority. As he dismisses each group and each individual he is getting further away.

Yeah, he SAYS things that excite the masses...remember 2008 ?

Yeah, he gives you chills up and down your leg as Chris Mathews says....remember 2008.

He is taking away from a public debate that needs to happen.

Originally Posted by Guest

This is the "elephant in the room" and I, for one have come to my own personal conclusion.

I have decided that as much as I do not want Clinton in the WH, I would prefer this guy start his own third party and if he steals sufficient votes to ensure a democratic victory so be it.

He is nothing but a self promoting big mouth with lots of money and no manners. He is rude and feels his money entitles him to whatever he wants.

I would prefer to maintain dignity and see him just go away. As I said, even to the point, if he wants to start a third party, so be it, but at least this process has a bit of dignity left in it.

Our candidacy process has enough flaws without the infusion of show business people interrupting to get attention.

He went to the basest kind of stuff to get headlines. He knew that talking as he has about immigration would get headlines....he knows what the concerns of the american people were at the base level, but only in nightmares do I see him as the leader of my country.

I think he will find that POLLS do not translate into votes pretty fast.

I am sure some will come after me for this, but I am embarrassed by him and his antics.

Hate to break it to you, but Donald Trump is going nowhere. IMO the only way he would run as a third party candidate is if he does not get the republican nomination, and we won't know that until next year.

According to Trump, he is leading in the polls in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina (the first three states to vote). If he wins all three, he will have the momentum needed to win the nomination.

Besides, if he broke off now, who would he debate? He loves the attention. He said at the end of one of his interviews today that he's having fun and he loves it.

Since Florida has a closed primary, how would anybody vote for Trump if he did break off on his own before March 15th?

i posted this on another thread about Trump but apparently rather than continue that thread this one was added. so again

Trump did not get rich by not playing close to the vest and hedging his bets. And quite frankly there is nothing he says that surprises me. In fact I understand he wants the Republican Establishment's blessing and he wants the Republican nomination. He said if he did not get the nomination and liked the GOP nominee he would support that nominee, but if he did not like the GOP nominee he would go 3rd party. So is his concern for what's best for America sincere or is it political fodder? We don;t know and that is the rub. consider further

Is he the trojan horse for Hillary?

Is he out for Trump only and would accept the president nomination from any party affiliation who will support him?

GOP donors/Establishment are making no secret that they want him out . I suspect it was large donors and GOP Establishment that pushed Fox news to attack him Thursday.

Is he playing a huge financial game posturing positioning himself to capitalize on contacts domestically and foreign staking out strategic positions now for his future dealings?

I like Megan Kelly, Bret Baier but I believe they hit below the belt when it came to Donald Trump with what I considered tabloid journalism. if they wanted Trump they knew he is about attitude and not substance and they could have challenged him more on specificity to show that he is about bumper sticker slogans and has no detailed plans.

One thing is clear to me Hillary Clinton will been bought by foreign continue the failed policies of Obama many of which she shared responsibility. Worse yet via Clinton charitable foundation she has been bought by foreign influence. And even worse yet her dealings from the days in Arkansas to Benghazi to her private e-mail server and her Clinton Charitable Foundation speak very poorly of her character and trustworthiness which means if voters can't trust her neither will the people she deals with here and abroad

Personal Best Regards

Originally Posted by Guest

i posted this on another thread about Trump but apparently rather than continue that thread this one was added. so again

Trump did not get rich by not playing close to the vest and hedging his bets. And quite frankly there is nothing he says that surprises me. In fact I understand he wants the Republican Establishment's blessing and he wants the Republican nomination. He said if he did not get the nomination and liked the GOP nominee he would support that nominee, but if he did not like the GOP nominee he would go 3rd party. So is his concern for what's best for America sincere or is it political fodder? We don;t know and that is the rub. consider further

Is he the trojan horse for Hillary?

Is he out for Trump only and would accept the president nomination from any party affiliation who will support him?

GOP donors/Establishment are making no secret that they want him out . I suspect it was large donors and GOP Establishment that pushed Fox news to attack him Thursday.

Is he playing a huge financial game posturing positioning himself to capitalize on contacts domestically and foreign staking out strategic positions now for his future dealings?

I like Megan Kelly, Bret Baier but I believe they hit below the belt when it came to Donald Trump with what I considered tabloid journalism. if they wanted Trump they knew he is about attitude and not substance and they could have challenged him more on specificity to show that he is about bumper sticker slogans and has no detailed plans.

One thing is clear to me Hillary Clinton will been bought by foreign continue the failed policies of Obama many of which she shared responsibility. Worse yet via Clinton charitable foundation she has been bought by foreign influence. And even worse yet her dealings from the days in Arkansas to Benghazi to her private e-mail server and her Clinton Charitable Foundation speak very poorly of her character and trustworthiness which means if voters can't trust her neither will the people she deals with here and abroad

Personal Best Regards

I usually agree with you, but I do not think the moderators hit below the belt with Trump in anyway.

They asked questions of each candidate which was at some point that they considered a weak point....see Rubio on abortion for one example.

Trump has NO policies.....NO proposals and his personna is his mouth.

Women and women rights, etc have been in the news. He was famous for his attitude toward women well before this debate, thus the question was fair. If it were only based on the O'donnel thing, you might have a point but he would not shut up long enough for you to hear the follow up about other statements he made.

I think they should have been a bit rougher on him.

Tabloid ? That is the only thing to ask him about as that is what he is about.

Romney was asked about bullying in middle school....Obama was grilled on Kenya....Santorum has been grilled on his family attitude....Huckabee on his christianity....AND none of them attacked the moderator, over and over.

If you notice, if you disagree with him, you will be attacked. That is not an indicator of the question but he does not like to be put on the spot.

Someone has to put him on the spot even more and have him explain HOW he will do all he says he will do. Followups on many of the candidates were HOW. Not with him.

No...I am sorry...I think they are handling him with kid gloves.

He was asked early on for PROOF of what he says about Mexican Immigrants and proceeded to say after a lot of yelling that he talked to a border patrol and they told him and everyone is stupid.

He was asked about his wanting a single payer system in the past and he said not one word about that in his response. He went on a tirade about the middle east and at one time said the insurance companies were making millions on Obamacare (TRUE) AND that was it. No substance at all.

AND HE criticized the question..a question about his change of heart on single payer.

He was asked about the top Iranian General going to Russia and in his response he never even mentioned that. He spoke of the Iran deal with a joke about if it were a stock.

I do not feel he made any attempt to answer any questions and I think he is a total embarrassment. I also, while I understand how his rhetoric is popular, think people better start thinking about hearing from people who can do things and not a bragging big talking guy who has not a clue about anything.

Originally Posted by Guest

i posted this on another thread about Trump but apparently rather than continue that thread this one was added. so again

Trump did not get rich by not playing close to the vest and hedging his bets. And quite frankly there is nothing he says that surprises me. In fact I understand he wants the Republican Establishment's blessing and he wants the Republican nomination. He said if he did not get the nomination and liked the GOP nominee he would support that nominee, but if he did not like the GOP nominee he would go 3rd party. So is his concern for what's best for America sincere or is it political fodder? We don;t know and that is the rub. consider further

Is he the trojan horse for Hillary?

Is he out for Trump only and would accept the president nomination from any party affiliation who will support him?

GOP donors/Establishment are making no secret that they want him out . I suspect it was large donors and GOP Establishment that pushed Fox news to attack him Thursday.

Is he playing a huge financial game posturing positioning himself to capitalize on contacts domestically and foreign staking out strategic positions now for his future dealings?

I like Megan Kelly, Bret Baier but I believe they hit below the belt when it came to Donald Trump with what I considered tabloid journalism. if they wanted Trump they knew he is about attitude and not substance and they could have challenged him more on specificity to show that he is about bumper sticker slogans and has no detailed plans.

One thing is clear to me Hillary Clinton will been bought by foreign continue the failed policies of Obama many of which she shared responsibility. Worse yet via Clinton charitable foundation she has been bought by foreign influence. And even worse yet her dealings from the days in Arkansas to Benghazi to her private e-mail server and her Clinton Charitable Foundation speak very poorly of her character and trustworthiness which means if voters can't trust her neither will the people she deals with here and abroad

Personal Best Regards

After my tirade on Trump, let me agree with your comments on Clinton.

But since the thread is about Trump, I just will warn that he is hurting the GOP with all of his bravado...I am embarrassed by it being tolerated. Let him take his big mouth and run on 3rd party if he wants. I still think Clinton loses and by a lot. IF she survives and gets the nomination

Donald Trump will self destruct.

The two GOP candidates that have tapped into voters frustration and appear to have solution to are Marco Rubio and Carly Fiorina. These are quality candidates with a good message, down to earth, logical, intelligent and a good stage presence. There is no doubt that with the proper donor backing they will be at the fore front.

GOP big donors and GOP Establishment are making a mistake supporting Bush and i am afraid that they will do what they did in 2012 which resulted in white voters staying home and Obama being elected.

Personal Best Regards:

Originally Posted by Guest

Donald Trump will self destruct.

The two GOP candidates that have tapped into voters frustration and appear to have solution to are Marco Rubio and Carly Fiorina. These are quality candidates with a good message, down to earth, logical, intelligent and a good stage presence. There is no doubt that with the proper donor backing they will be at the fore front.

GOP big donors and GOP Establishment are making a mistake supporting Bush and i am afraid that they will do what they did in 2012 which resulted in white voters staying home and Obama being elected.

Personal Best Regards:

I am VERY strong on these two and would LOVE a ticket like that. Young, vibrant, smart, while young experienced, untarnished by scandal (so far), and by pure accident, hispanic and female together.

Originally Posted by Guest

I usually agree with you, but I do not think the moderators hit below the belt with Trump in anyway.

They asked questions of each candidate which was at some point that they considered a weak point....see Rubio on abortion for one example.

Trump has NO policies.....NO proposals and his personna is his mouth.

Women and women rights, etc have been in the news. He was famous for his attitude toward women well before this debate, thus the question was fair. If it were only based on the O'donnel thing, you might have a point but he would not shut up long enough for you to hear the follow up about other statements he made.

I think they should have been a bit rougher on him.

Tabloid ? That is the only thing to ask him about as that is what he is about.

Romney was asked about bullying in middle school....Obama was grilled on Kenya....Santorum has been grilled on his family attitude....Huckabee on his christianity....AND none of them attacked the moderator, over and over.

If you notice, if you disagree with him, you will be attacked. That is not an indicator of the question but he does not like to be put on the spot.

Someone has to put him on the spot even more and have him explain HOW he will do all he says he will do. Followups on many of the candidates were HOW. Not with him.

No...I am sorry...I think they are handling him with kid gloves.

He was asked early on for PROOF of what he says about Mexican Immigrants and proceeded to say after a lot of yelling that he talked to a border patrol and they told him and everyone is stupid.

He was asked about his wanting a single payer system in the past and he said not one word about that in his response. He went on a tirade about the middle east and at one time said the insurance companies were making millions on Obamacare (TRUE) AND that was it. No substance at all.

AND HE criticized the question..a question about his change of heart on single payer.

He was asked about the top Iranian General going to Russia and in his response he never even mentioned that. He spoke of the Iran deal with a joke about if it were a stock.

I do not feel he made any attempt to answer any questions and I think he is a total embarrassment. I also, while I understand how his rhetoric is popular, think people better start thinking about hearing from people who can do things and not a bragging big talking guy who has not a clue about anything.

Good post. I agree totally. Trump is loud and gets folks excited, but a poor choice for the White House. However, he didn't get where he is now, but totally running amok. We don't know what he would do if elected. But, do we want to take the chance when we have so many others to choose from? I won't voter for him, and if he decided to run a third party, it will be a big mistake. The Dems win. But, I only fear clinton and sanders. If we have to lose, then Biden is the lesser of several evils.

Trump is obnoxious. He never thinks that he has ever done anything wrong. Joe Scarborough was right, when he said, "you could agree with him 95% of the time, but Trump would argue forever about the 5%. The only way you could stop him from talking about the 5% is to hang up."

With this in mind, everytime he is tv from now on, I will hit the mute button. I don't want to listen to another thing that he has to say. It is always the same, "I am the greatest." A fighter has to go into the ring with this on his mind. A politician should have this on his mind, "I am the greatest compromiser". You don't compromise your principals. However, Trump doesn't have any principals expect promoting himself.

How Trump can think that he did nothing wrong with the "blood coming out of her whatever" comment, speaks volumes about him. He defended himself by saying, "everybody knows that I meant either ears or nose. Anyone, who thinks otherwise, is a deviant."

How many deviants do we have out there? I certainly am one. When you are mad, fire comes out of your eyes, or smoke out of your ears. That was always what I was lead to believe. I don't ever remember blood ever being mentioned coming out of anything, when you are angry.

Originally Posted by Guest

I usually agree with you, but I do not think the moderators hit below the belt with Trump in anyway.

They asked questions of each candidate which was at some point that they considered a weak point....see Rubio on abortion for one example.

Trump has NO policies.....NO proposals and his personna is his mouth.

Women and women rights, etc have been in the news. He was famous for his attitude toward women well before this debate, thus the question was fair. If it were only based on the O'donnel thing, you might have a point but he would not shut up long enough for you to hear the follow up about other statements he made.

I think they should have been a bit rougher on him.

Tabloid ? That is the only thing to ask him about as that is what he is about.

Romney was asked about bullying in middle school....Obama was grilled on Kenya....Santorum has been grilled on his family attitude....Huckabee on his christianity....AND none of them attacked the moderator, over and over.

If you notice, if you disagree with him, you will be attacked. That is not an indicator of the question but he does not like to be put on the spot.

Someone has to put him on the spot even more and have him explain HOW he will do all he says he will do. Followups on many of the candidates were HOW. Not with him.

No...I am sorry...I think they are handling him with kid gloves.

He was asked early on for PROOF of what he says about Mexican Immigrants and proceeded to say after a lot of yelling that he talked to a border patrol and they told him and everyone is stupid.

He was asked about his wanting a single payer system in the past and he said not one word about that in his response. He went on a tirade about the middle east and at one time said the insurance companies were making millions on Obamacare (TRUE) AND that was it. No substance at all.

AND HE criticized the question..a question about his change of heart on single payer.

He was asked about the top Iranian General going to Russia and in his response he never even mentioned that. He spoke of the Iran deal with a joke about if it were a stock.

I do not feel he made any attempt to answer any questions and I think he is a total embarrassment. I also, while I understand how his rhetoric is popular, think people better start thinking about hearing from people who can do things and not a bragging big talking guy who has not a clue about anything.

Dear Guest: None of what you say was lost on me. I seem to be the only one that believes Megan hit below the belt given the disagreement I get with people I know in The Villages including my wife. Although I did say if they wanted Trump at that debate they knew he was all about attitude and not substance so they should have stayed with questions that demanded specificity. But knowing his methods Megan hit him with a personal assault and he assaulted back. Perhaps that was what she and others wanted?

I say this because Rush Limbaugh wrote that he believed big GOP donors got to Fox News and hence the Kelly, Baier and Wallace???

I am not defending Trump. I do not like Trump. I believe he will self destruct. I like Megan Kelly because she is good at firing away at hard fisted questions but that one question disappointed me especially since he has a good reputation in his dealings with women who work with and/or for him .

Its one thing to ask a candid about their belief system ( abortion, religion, family, etc) quite another to attack their character .

Again I really like Carly and Marco and suspect that Carly will be a very formidable candidate against Hillary Clinton.

Personal Best Regards: