Donald Trump
- Thread starter qazplm
- Start date
I don't know if he could win or not ,but He has never been elected to any office,has he?The last man to win the Presidency with no political experience was Dwight Eisenhower ,and Ike was the great hero of WWII .What kind of hero is Trump?
I think it will in the sense that the republican nominee just lost any chance of the hispanic vote thanks to Trump. Otherwise, probably not, but given the fact he's going to be in a couple of debates, you never know what ridiculous things he will say that will force other candidates to respond in ways they aren't prepared to respond.
Of course, his "I like people who weren't captured" comment about McCain is going over about as well as you'd expect such a crass comment to go over.
In short, maybe both. I would also add you may need to delete Republican from that sentence. Take a look at his views on single payer health care-I just do not see him getting out of Republican primaries. Majority of Republicans still want ObamaCare repealed-they definitely are not going for a single payer plan then. He has had other liberal view points as well.
I have a bit of a different view on Trump though. I think part of his popularity is due to him not being micro manged by Chief of Staffs, campaign managers, getting dropped by mainstream media outlets, and not constantly reading off of teleprompters. After almost eight years of politicization of every event, extreme political correctness, I think people find it refreshing to hear someone who just says what they are thinking. Granted that McCain remark was bs. That said, I think people are intrigued by a candidate that stands up for himself when he is attacked. He also has the newness and/or it factor, people are intrigued by him, and like it or not, that worked really well for Obama.
I am not surprised you think his comments on Mexicans hurt every Republican candidate. His main point of the USA is getting whipped on the borders(through immigration and trade) is legit and stands. And when you look at the percent of illegal immigrants that comprise the amount of the prison population and are responsible for felonies-like it or not, it is an issue. I think most Americans and even Mexicans understand this. Regardless of what you think about him, I do think Rubio and Bush would do quite well with the Hispanic/Mexican/Central American demographic.
As for Republican candidates more interested Paul, Rubio, and Walker(pretty surprised you chose to attack his record on economy in WI). Not that any of them are looking great right now in the polls though.
Edited to say not reading off teleprompters
Last edited:
Yeah, I'm sure Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio will really struggle to capture the Hispanic vote now. I know you hope it's going to carry over, but by the time next November rolls around, voters will focus on whatever captured their attention that week, not comments made by one of twenty candidates before the primaries (unless, somehow, this clown gets through the primaries).
Jeb Bush might though...since the two you named have almost zero shot of winning the nomination. Jeb absolutely needs about 40 percent, if not more of the Hispanic vote to win the general election...he most definitely does not need new, young, motivated voters to come out for the Democratic party. Trump certainly has helped in that regard...that is, helped that to happen. But I know you think the guy almost sitting at 20 percent won't have any impact a year out from the general election...well, Sanders is around that mark, if not higher, and even though he isn't bound to win anything either, he certainly is impacting Hillary and her positions to some extent.
He's a clown who happens to be performing on the main stage of the Republican party circus. Trump could actually help some of the others (Cruz, Carson, Huckabee, Perry) by making them seem comparatively less crazy.
Who knows what type of long-term impact he could have, but don't discount his attraction to the xenophobes and dichotomous "thinkers".
If others in the circus attempt to acquire his base by not condemning comments like this:
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're sending people that have lots of problems. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists, and some, I assume, are good people."
The impact of the Hispanic vote could be significant.
Who knows what type of long-term impact he could have, but don't discount his attraction to the xenophobes and dichotomous "thinkers".
If others in the circus attempt to acquire his base by not condemning comments like this:
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're sending people that have lots of problems. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists, and some, I assume, are good people."
The impact of the Hispanic vote could be significant.
1. Tell us what percentage of illegal immigrants are in prison and responsible for felonies. American-born adult men are incarcerated at twice the percentage of foreign-born men. Actually, it's 2.5 times. Let's look at Cali...it's estimated that 35 percent of the population could be illegal immigrants, yet only 17% of the prison population are immigrants. So not really seeing the issue. Crime has gone steadily down in this country since the 80s.
2. Trump did not merely say "we've got an immigration problem," if he did, no one would say anything because that's the standard republican position...he said something a wee bit more than that, and you know it. You may not think it should hurt him with hispanics or the party...you'll be quite wrong.
3. Romney didn't even break 30 percent with Latinos. I highly doubt Rubio or Bush will break 40. Rubio is no longer pro immigration, he's touting the same party line, so one wonders why you think he would do better than...oh wait, I think I get it now.
4. The idea that you think Walker's record in Wisconsin is a success makes it rather hard to take you seriously.
It already has. I don't want it either but it started with the selection of a corporate harvester, export to Mexico, party, safe choice.
This is the R front runner.
The impact will be significant. The eventual republican nominee won't get 40 percent and I've seen some estimates that assuming an average hispanic and AA turnout (i.e. down from Obama highs) and an average Caucasian turnout, that a republican nominee would need 47 percent of the Latino vote to win...if there's a greater than usual white turnout, then it drops down to 42 percent...either way, I think Trump has pulled the party even farther to the right on immigration, and has solidified the Latino vote for the Democrats.
I see no way Trump actually wins (in fact his McCain swipe could be the start of the end of his brief time in the sun) the nomination, but I think he's already locked the republicans in to a pretty severe perception on immigration.
1. I pretty much put my emphasis on the idea that America should not be allowing people into the USA that are criminals. Freaking radical, I know. Even though out of convenience the govt does not have official statistics on it there is enough out there to know it is an issue-especially in border states.
http://www.citizensforlaws.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76&Itemid=101
http://www.constitutionparty.com/illegal-alien-crime-and-violence-by-the-numbers-were-all-victims/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/07/is-trump-right/
2.TRUMP:" When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're sending people that have lots of problems. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists, and some, I assume, are good people."
If that is the quote you are talking about, which was copied from a NPR site(linked), I just do not see all the hate speech. Worded the best-nope. Should have dropped the rapist part and said a lot are good people. But are people really arguing the rest of it? Good grief. If he said something else I am not aware of it. Might it hurt him? Sure, because of the way the media and others jumped all over it. Never said it would not hurt him. That said, that was not your point. I went back and looked. You specifically claim the "Republican nominee just lost any chance of the hispanic vote thanks to Trump."
http://www.npr.org/2015/06/29/418641198/nbc-dumps-donald-trump-over-comments-on-mexican-immigrants
Trump did not merely say "we've got an immigration problem," if he did, no one would say anything because that's the standard republican position...he said something a wee bit more than that, and you know it. You may not think it should hurt him with hispanics or the party...you'll be quite wrong.
I never said he just said what you quoted. So, not sure what to say. Never said it would not hurt him. Do not see it hurting other candidates. That would be akin to saying Clinton will be hurt by something Sanders says. Do not see that happening either.
3. Rubio is not pro immigration? That was news. He may have his own ideas about how to go about it, but would hardly call him anti immigration unless one thinks that anything besides immediate open borders, full amnesty, and the dream act is anti immigration. As for Rubio, I do not think he would dominate Mexican vote. Would do better than Romney. Keep in mind he is Cuban and from Miami. I do think he would carry Florida(due to MX/Cuban/CA vote) which is roughly half the battle in a Presidential race.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/marco-rubio-immigration-reform-118029.html
4. Walker in Wisconsin?
https://ycharts.com/indicators/wisconsin_unemployment_rate
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416300/scott-walker-wins-accountants-primary-brett-joshpe
Unemployment rate dropped three percent, lower taxes, budget has shown improvement from when he took over in 2011, not that it is in great shape right now, they are restructuring debt to take advantage of lower interest rates, pension system he inherited was strong is now in even better position. A rock star? No-but would not be attacking it either.
Last edited:
I think Trump, especially the debates will make for great TV. That said, another bomb or two in a debate like the one about McCain, which we all know is coming, will increase his downward slide. As soon as a candidate or two bring up that he is for single payer/universal care, I think he is done.
Also, to win an election now, one really needs to know how to run a campaign, get voters out, raise money, etc. Hard to see anything but Bush/Clinton at this point.
oh where to begin...you are becoming the king of moving goalposts.
1. First, you make a wide ranging statement "And when you look at the percent of illegal immigrants that comprise the amount of the prison population and are responsible for felonies-like it or not, it is an issue." I show, no not really. You respond with three links:
The first says nothing about felonies. It has no links for it's claim that 25% of the prison population are illegal immigrants. Let's pick a recent year, 09-10. In Federal and state prisons there was a total of about 350K prisoners who were illegal immigrants. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/30/business/30leonside.html?_r=0 don't like the NYT? http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d11187high.pdf
At any one time, we have about 2 million people in prison/jail. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States
Now my math isn't great, but 350K/2 million is decidedly not 25 percent. And not all of that 350K were for "felonies" in fact, a lot of them weren't and some of them were there because they were illegal immigrants, i.e. the only crime committed was being here illegally. There are roughly 11-12 million illegal immigrants in this country. 350K isn't about 3 percent.
Your third link you need to read again, it doesn't even remotely support your argument.
So all in all, boy swing and a miss on that first one. Out of 11-12 million illegal immigrants, about 350K even make it into the criminal justice system, and less than that for felonies.
2. The vast majority of them are NOT bringing crime, nor are they bringing drugs. A small percentage of them do that, just like a small percentage of any population does that. From your own third link, as well as from wikipedia:
"According to the Immigration Policy Center, an advocacy group for illegal immigration:
mmigrants are less likely to commit crimes or be behind bars than the native-born, and high rates of immigration are not associated with higher rates of crime. This holds true for both legal immigrants and the undocumented, regardless of their country of origin or level of education."
So yes, pretty much everything he said was inaccurate.
3. Do you realize what a small portion of the Latino population Cubans are? Do you realize that Cubans no longer are predominately republican in Florida? Do you realize that Latinos would not vote for Rubio simply because he's Latino? Do you realize the enmity between Cubans and Mexican-Americans, Puerto Ricans and other Latinos thanks to the special treatment they get from the government (dry foot policy)? Do you realize that Rubio just spoke today about his plan for immigration and it's little different from the rest of the party line. He USED to talk more liberally about immigration, but he quickly figured out that won't fly if he wants the nomination.
4. The unemployment rate dropped for the entire country. Compare Wisconsin's rate to Minnesotas. https://ycharts.com/indicators/minnesota_unemployment_rate
Compare their debt rates. Minnesota has a 1 billion dollar surplus, Wisconsin has a 2 billion dollar deficit.
But let's talk more info:
http://www.nationalmemo.com/wisconsin-economy-falls-to-49th-in-economic-outlook-under-scott-walker/
The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia has ranked the Badger State 49th in its 50-state Leading Index report for April. With an index rank of -0.74 percent, Wisconsin was one of only five states to show contraction.
Since he took office, his state has fallen from 11th to 44th in job creation. It's a little more than half the national level ( 2.6 percent v. 1.5 percent). He promised to create 250K jobs, and he hasn't come anywhere close to that.
Wisconsin’s wages are also declining at nearly twice the national level.
Yeah, nothing to attack there.
So what if he's the front-runner in say October, or November?
No way he wins the nomination, but if he's still in the lead at that point, his impact won't be remotely overblown...and if nothing else, his impact on the Latino communities relationship with the republican party is already toxic.
1&2. That third link backs up one of my points exactly that there is no clear cut process or organization that is responsible for illegal incarceration crime data. Here is another link that shows data from GAO. A lot higher numbers. And really, now one does not want to count some of them as criminals because they were here illegally. Sorry but still a criminal. And you have your stats which are different yet. Fair enough. Showed my point. Sometimes you are so quick to argue you do not realize you make the other persons point.
Anyway you look at it it is an issue. That is all I ever said-and come to think of it-that was all Trump said too albeit in a real crude way. Even when you take your real low end numbers-325,000 illegals are in jail. Way to many. I would encourage one to ask themselves why the government has no official data, or one source that combines all the full data, on illegals/incarceration/crimes committed. And realize how it is possible for both sides to come to completely different conclusions. I can cherry pick stats and data interpretation too citing the GAO-
http://www.americanthinker.com/arti...t_a_much_higher_rate_than_us_citizens_do.html
Boy hit it out of the park on that one!
3. Well I would say is do yourself a favor and do not call Cuban person Latino/Hispanic/Mexican. So yes, sure I get it, lived in south FL for awhile. I would also say that Cubans are roughly 7% of the FL population, and yes I think that can turn the tide in FL if he is on the ballet. On the ballet as either President or VP. That is all.
4.MN is really fortunate to have received part of the boom from their neighbors to the north and west from that oil boom. Hypocritical/disingenuous of dems/libs to take that type of credit as they are against fossil fuel energy. nothing to do with them. Not sure why you focus on MN so much. I can turn around and compare WI to IL and MI.
Oh heck, I will just copy and paste what I posted above:
Unemployment rate dropped three percent, lower taxes, budget has shown much improvement from when he took over in 2011, not that it is in great shape right now, they are restructuring debt to take advantage of lower interest rates, pension system he inherited was strong is now in even better position. A rock star? No-but would not be attacking it either.
So far he has left it better than he found it. BTW, those articles you linked sad that China is doing well-how is that panning out? And I am interested in Walker, but really, for me, taxes are to high in WI for me to really take him to seriously.
If that happens, it is still one year from the election. It'll be overblown unless he is the nomination.
So I'm clear...your point was that there are a significant number of illegal immigrants in jail/prison, for felonies no less, and you think the link that, in part because it does more than you claim it does, suggests difficulties in determining incarceration rates/numbers helps prove your point?
And you didn't say "they are all criminals because they are here illegally" (which is a really silly argument), you said "felonies" and you said they were committing crimes. Their being here illegally is a neutral act. It can either help us (if they do low-pay jobs no one else does that reduce our costs for food, construction, pay taxes without getting benefits, and stay out of trouble) OR it can hurt us (if they actually do commit drug or violent felonies). The debate centers on which one of those is more prevalent. It's pretty clear it's the former, not the latter.
325K in jail out of 12 million is just over 3 percent. No that's not "way too many." If a population is 97 percent law-abiding, I think that population is doing just fine.
Your link plays with numbers. It switches back and forth between "Federal" and total prison populations as if those are interchangeable. MOST prisoners and criminals in this country are handled by the states. The Feds only deal with situations that involve interstate, special issues or...wait for it...immigration issues. So yes, it's hardly unsurprising that a large chunk of FEDERAL prisoners are immigrants since the biggest reason they would be there involve immigration issues. Anytime someone "fact-checks" the "fact-checkers" it's usually an attempt to spin.
Your park is about the size of a port-a-john.
3. Cubans are no longer solely republican or even majority in Florida.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/then...-hispanics-in-florida-by-a-landslide-20121109
"Fox News and the Pew Hispanic Center reported that Cuban-Americans favored Obama 49 to 47 percent." (I guess the Pew Hispanic Center didn't get your memo on not calling Cubans Hispanic).
4. Yes, yes...excuses. Minnesota was "fortunate" otherwise those liberal policies would have doomed it. MN and WI are compared because they are geographic neighbors with similarities in many areas. They are about as directly comparable as you can make two states.
WI's tax rate is middle of the road, the fact you think it too high says a bit about your economic politics.
http://www.wisconsinbudgetproject.org/budget-toolkit/comparison-to-other-states
A bit black and white thinking there. It's overblown unless he's the nominee? No meaningful impact otherwise? He's already had a negative impact with Hispanics. Not that they were prone to vote republican anyways but someone like Bush might have had a chance to scrape together 40 percent if he could avoid talking about the subject too much during the primaries and then moved to the center during the GE. Trump made that impossible. Immigration is now going to have even larger importance in the first debate, Trump will make sure of that.
Right. My thinking is black and white, but yours isn't. No republican candidate can get 40% now because of another candidate. Got it. Disagree, but got it. Nothing more to discuss here.
Republicans are choosing Donald Trump. Your party is choosing Trump.
POWs are pussies.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ublican-frontrunner-donald-trump-actually-win
"My" party? I'm not registered, sport. I don't fall in line with whatever the idiot masses of this country decide, regardless of party. I can evaluate based on my own thoughts and opinions. Trump won't be the nom. If he is, I'll evaluate against Hillary and pick one.
Get over myself? I'm not the one with the issue with black and white thinking who then makes black and white statements. Yep. I made a black and white statement. So have you and then called me out for it. But somehow I need to get over myself? LOL. Explain that one. Wait don't. I don't give a shit.
Trump will have the same impact on the election as Bernie Sanders.
Do you recall who was leading the Republican candidates exactly 4 years ago today? She had 21% of the vote.
Crap, I just gave it away.
Oh, and you were trolling for crazies--I was attempting to lure them out into the open so that they could be beaten over the head with a 2x4. Trolling vs. chumming, I suppose.
So everyone voting for Bachmann was crazy? I don't think so. Unless you think literally 1/5th of Republican primary voters are crazy.
When you get that high, there are enough people who want you who aren't "trolls" or "crazies" that you can just dismiss it.
PS, he's at 24 percent now in a Washington Post poll...although I will say the polling after his comments showed a drop.
I was curious to see what folks on here thought since most of the folks on this board are right of center to extreme right.
Last edited:
Not as happy as you appear to be up on the cross...come on down, we could use the wood.
It is going to be interesting to see what happens. I read a story, think it was on realclearpolitics or yahoo, that a poll released Monday, that was tabulated Thursday thru Sunday, still had Trump in the lead with 24% of the vote. That said the pollster also stated that Trump had been polling about 28-30% until Saturday evening. If that is accurate, that 4-6% quick of a drop, with one day of a 4 day poll being responsible for it after his remark, his end could be quicker than we all think.
In short, that was an interesting read on WI. That said, here is a link, that has it rated 40th or maybe even higher. Especially on business climate-and it is business that hires people. Never said MN liberal policies would have doomed it. What I said was they were/are fortunate to have some economic runoff from oil shale boom.
http://taxfoundation.org/state-tax-climate/wisconsin
As far as my comments about Rubio and Florida. Not sure what you do not see. Obama(who I will mention is not running in 2016 so it is somewhat irrelevant) won the state by less than 1% point in 2012. Romney did horrible with that demographic. Cubans make up 7% of the FL population. Yeah, I am saying that Rubio could do better(VP or P), specifically in that 7%, to make up that difference. So could Bush imo. Nothing more. Nothing less. Agree or disagree that is fine. Actually have a poll that supports that. And you were right that Trump did take a hit in the Latino demographic, but that was not argued. His comments as of now seem to have little negative carry over, and in a year, IMO, will likely be a non story. Keep in mind, presidential election, national numbers do not mean as much as a few states numbers.
I never said Cubans were soley Republican or a majority. They do not have to be. I did say they were 7% appx.
Rubio is pro immigration but anti mega bill. He said 1) Mega bills have largely been disastrous 2) Quite simply, there are not the votes for it. Just because he has a different way to go about it, did not like all the crap attached to immigration bill, and does not support complete amnesty does not make him anti immigration.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/poll-hillary-clinton-hispanic-voters-2016-120223.html
Here were my main two points on immigration:
"And when you look at the percent of illegal immigrants that comprise the amount of the prison population and are responsible for felonies-like it or not, it is an issue."
That is two different groups, You seemed to want to group them as one in your point. I will say, could have written sentence better. Either way, the USA has an issue with illegals.
"That third link backs up one of my points exactly that there is no clear cut process or organization that is responsible for illegal incarceration crime data."
And after this was said, you put up numbers, and I had plenty of links that showed numbers that dwarfed what you linked-especially in border states. Also had a link up there that stated how different sides come to their numbers. Anyway one looks at it, it is an issue. Second, I will go ahead and say if/when immigration reform gets done, if it is a lenient amnesty plan expect the President to tout your numbers. If it is a step by step plan that takes time, expect the President to spin my numbers.
Anyway, you "quoted" some things in your reply that I did not write-so not going to bother with a reply.
Maybe as much of a Clown as Hillary who has deleted files and has Bengazi on her resume yet has a following
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
OT: Sports writer's opinion of "Top 10" programs.....- Latest: KentuckyBoiler
-