And Trump gets elected (even though it would probably take a fatal heart attack by Hillary to have that happen).

But suspending reality, what if he does get elected...what does he do with his business holdings?

Typically, situations like this would call for them to be put in a blind trust whereby he could not have anything to do with them while he was in office.

BUT, does anyone (even you avid Trump supporters) believe that he could keep his hands off and would trust anyone else to make the decisions...that he has always made by himself?

Trump's 500 businesses would pose 'unprecedented ethical dilemma' - Mar. 16, 2016

CNNMoney interviewed ethics lawyers who worked for President George W. Bush, presidential candidates Bob Dole, John Kerry, John McCain and Mitt Romney, and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. They all said that Trump would have more potential business conflicts than any former president.

Trump has not committed to selling his businesses, and instead he has said many times that his children and executives would manage them.

"This is certainly going to present an unprecedented ethical dilemma if Trump wins," said Kenneth Gross, a partner at Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom, who provided legal assistance to several presidential candidates during their campaigns. "He can't just get amnesia. He's stuck with the knowledge of what he owns."

CNM

Originally Posted by Guest

And Trump gets elected (even though it would probably take a fatal heart attack by Hillary to have that happen).

But suspending reality, what if he does get elected...what does he do with his business holdings?

Typically, situations like this would call for them to be put in a blind trust whereby he could not have anything to do with them while he was in office.

BUT, does anyone (even you avid Trump supporters) believe that he could keep his hands off and would trust anyone else to make the decisions...that he has always made by himself?

Trump's 500 businesses would pose 'unprecedented ethical dilemma' - Mar. 16, 2016



CNM

Like Obama has for the past 8 years?

It would be a very strange set of circumstances to put Donald Trump in office. He seems more likely to end up in the Bellevue Psychiatric Ward.

Let's say the impossible happens???

There is a SUNY Stony Brook professor with a predictive model for presidential elections based on several factors including primary results and historical trends. The model has called the winner every election since 1860 except 1, and it gives Trump an 87% chance of winning. So much for fatal heart attacks (except yours, when he wins)

Originally Posted by Guest

Let's say the impossible happens???

There is a SUNY Stony Brook professor with a predictive model for presidential elections based on several factors including primary results and historical trends. The model has called the winner every election since 1860 except 1, and it gives Trump an 87% chance of winning. So much for fatal heart attacks (except yours, when he wins)

I too have a secret methods of predicting every election up until this one.

They're called...history books.




Besides, your boy Norpath has not only never submitted his supposed 'model' for peer review...he made the prediction back in February.

Which of course, was long before Trump has continually put his small feet....in his big mouth.

Thanks for the guffaw though.






CNM

Originally Posted by Guest

It would be a very strange set of circumstances to put Donald Trump in office. He seems more likely to end up in the Bellevue Psychiatric Ward.

Yep, exactly.

I'll bet his children are more prepared to take over his businesses then he is prepared to be president. Besides all he has to do is Make America Great again, Pence gets to do the rest.

Originally Posted by Guest

I'll bet his children are more prepared to take over his businesses then he is prepared to be president. Besides all he has to do is Make America Great again, Pence gets to do the rest.

That's just about what happened in House of Cards and Spacey even has a hot wife.

Anyway, back to the dribble.

Originally Posted by Guest

Let's say the impossible happens???

There is a SUNY Stony Brook professor with a predictive model for presidential elections based on several factors including primary results and historical trends. The model has called the winner every election since 1860 except 1, and it gives Trump an 87% chance of winning. So much for fatal heart attacks (except yours, when he wins)

There is one problem with basing a prediction on history. Has there ever been another candidate like Trump in history? He is running as an outsider. Who is the last outsider that won the presidency?

Listen to him! All he did in the primaries was spout how well he was doing in the polls. The polls were his best friend.

Now, what is he saying, when the polls go against him, They are wrong. The system is rigged. A week ago when the polls had it as a toss up, he was sighting the polls. What a difference a week makes.

Trump is a con man and a out and out liar. It will be kind of hard to find a historical match for him in the US. In Russia, no problem his best friend Putin. maybe we should adopt the Russia electoral process one name on the ballot.

Here's a problem. What if you adopt a hero that turns out to be a con artist? How do you not lose face? You throw the human card. The rest of us are soft touches. We're open minded. We're old, we're parents and grandparents. Knowing how to walk away from everything that is predictable, safe and secure is how we got here.

Most importantly, we're forgetful.

And Helliary isn't a con artist?? Not to mention a lying sack of crap.

The master baiter is at it again/yet!

Originally Posted by Guest

I too have a secret methods of predicting every election up until this one.

They're called...history books.




Besides, your boy Norpath has not only never submitted his supposed 'model' for peer review...he made the prediction back in February.

Which of course, was long before Trump has continually put his small feet....in his big mouth.

Thanks for the guffaw though.






CNM

Better take that into consideration before you put your money on the betting you have been discussing on the other thread. NO ONE predicted Trump's winning the nomination.

I ignore polls because they are skewed to fit their predictions. I ignore pundits of every kind because they are pushing a narrative that favors their choice. I ignore nominees because they will tell you anything you want to hear.

voters have had to pick the best of a bad lot for some time now. However we are now confronted with worse of a bad lot.

Many of us prefer a do over except it plays into the hands of the worse of the worse Obama. Its extraordinary when you consider that either of the VP picks are better than the presidential nominees

Its sad to see that voters seem so disengage or delusional that these are the two choices to lead America. We get the government we deserve.

I read with a furrowed brow as voters describe the reasons for their choice. Neither of these candidates are worthy of this office and to place one of them in it is insane

If voters had unified in the sole purpose of refusing either candidate and demanded better candidate be offered by the parties we wouldn't be in this mess....So what happened? that's a rhetorical question.

Personal Best Regards:

Originally Posted by Guest

I ignore polls because they are skewed to fit their predictions. I ignore pundits of every kind because they are pushing a narrative that favors their choice. I ignore nominees because they will tell you anything you want to hear.

voters have had to pick the best of a bad lot for some time now. However we are now confronted with worse of a bad lot.

Many of us prefer a do over except it plays into the hands of the worse of the worse Obama. Its extraordinary when you consider that either of the VP picks are better than the presidential nominees

Its sad to see that voters seem so disengage or delusional that these are the two choices to lead America. We get the government we deserve.

I read with a furrowed brow as voters describe the reasons for their choice. Neither of these candidates are worthy of this office and to place one of them in it is insane

If voters had unified in the sole purpose of refusing either candidate and demanded better candidate be offered by the parties we wouldn't be in this mess....So what happened? that's a rhetorical question.

Personal Best Regards:

You only get what you pay for.