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?