DescentBB

While all the other candidates look only to gathering money for their campaigns, isn't it refreashing to see someone thinking beyond that (What happens when you're rich enough not to be a slave to contributors):

Donald Trump is putting his mouth where CNN’s money is, demanding that all profits from the broadcast of next week’s GOP debate go to veterans.

Following news that CNN has been capitalizing on Trump-mania by raising ad prices for the Sept. 16 debate to 40 times their normal rate, the GOP front-runner sent a letter to the news network’s president, Jeff Zucker, to insist that he share the wealth.

sounds nice on the campaign trail. What did Fox do with the profits when they did the same thing(ok, only a 12 fold jump, but still.....)

Maybe someone else should ask Fox....kinda sad seeing Trump showing actual leadership abilities and no one else does.

did you see the latest Dem to enter the race? Interesting platform from THAT corner.

No I didn't. Head cold set in so wasn't following the news.

He's some Harvard professor, whose name eludes me. The guy raised over a million bucks via small contribs online. He is running on a single platform. Essentially want to pass legislation(amendment?) that would negate Citizens United, and in some way restore the rights of The People. After that one law passes, he will resign and let his VP take over......

....edit, had to go find the link, it's priceless.
https://lessigforpresident.com/one-mission/

Well it doesn't sound like he has any real charisma or platform to garner in any votes. Kinda like Santorum saying he will end the ACLU and when he does he'll quit. Quitter's never win.

woodchip wrote:Well it doesn't sound like he has any real charisma or platform to garner in any votes. Kinda like Santorum saying he will end the ACLU and when he does he'll quit. Quitter's never win.

the fella has the personality of, well, of a professor. He did manage to get folks to pony up a million bucks. I can see him getting 5% in New Hampshire. They are a quirky lot(says the guy who went to school there).

his advocacy for free software is actually quite impressive. I've seen his pieces appear regularly on Hacker News.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Lessig

meanwhile, on the GOP side:
http://dailycurrant.com/2015/08/31/trum ... ds-lead-3/

The kitten was a allegorical representation of Hillary Clinton and how Trump is her political demise

Which one? Hillary or Fiorina?

There is only one Hag. Best to keep up better TC

woody does illustrate that there IS an audience for Trump's hateful treatment of women and others. It just isn't going to parlay into so much as 30% of the General Election voters. Ever. Thus, if he does manage to win the nomination of the Know-Nothing Party, you will see a landslide of epic proportions.

So disliking one particular woman means you are a woman hater…seems like that critical thinking you guys are always promoting is in failure mode.

And Woody, you should use terms like ‘inbred redneck’ instead of Hag, so you can be classy like TG.

Spidey wrote:So disliking one particular woman means you are a woman hater…

not at all, it is the manner in which he behaves, and the words he chooses in expressing that dislike. Oh, and at this point, there are
examples with at least 6 women that I'm aware of, so one can sense at consistent pattern.

seems like that critical thinking you guys are always promoting is in failure mode.

not at all. See above. What is in failure mode is your ability to understand complex responses to complex behavior.

And Woody, you should use terms like ‘inbred redneck’ instead of Hag, so you can be classy like TG.

both examples lack creativity and display biases which everyone maintains to some degree.

Calling people names is a “complex response” to someone calling people names….lol!!

That’s a good one.

I have never got the impression Woody dislikes women…now liberals…that’s a different story.

Spidey wrote:Calling people names is a “complex response” to someone calling people names….lol!!

That’s a good one.

I have never got the impression Woody dislikes women…now liberals…that’s a different story.

ahh, miscommunication. I thought you were asking about Trump. Woody just dislikes anyone in the Democratic Party, and referring to him, I have no opinion on what he feels about women, particularly.

woodchip wrote:There is only one Hag. Best to keep up better TC

I keep up pretty good. Maybe you think Hillary is a Hag and that's your opinion, although I've seen worse and I'm not going to comment about who, but Trump made this observation about Carly Fiorina, and you know it was about her looks.

Donald Trump wrote:"Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?! I mean, she's a woman, and I'm not s'posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?"

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/how-a- ... an-7380462
why Democrats LOVE Trump. In part.

and another:




one would THINK that Woody would be outraged at the mere suggestion, but he's too smitten, apparently.

Maybe he was a boyscout?

woodchip wrote:Maybe he was a boyscout?

Hell, I was a Boy Scout, yet, when fishing with my best friend on the planet, who scrambled out of helicopters to fix broken tanks on the ground in Vietnam, I don't pretend to act like his equal in understanding military reality. The fact that Trump would even venture toward that ought to be an insult to every veteran voting.

Trump in reality is a siren, who will lead men to their doom. What else explains a man who insults everyone and puts the blame on those he insults, including our vets who fought and died for the sad likes of him to have the opportunity to run for president, never gives concrete or realistic plans to solve our problems and has an ego the size of Mt. Everest and the gall to go along with it and is STILL wanted as the leader of the U.S. by a sizeable percentage of our voters.

if you want a guy to give you 'straight talk' and actually have a brain behind the thought, here's your fellow:

never could see where that camp would ever support Trump. He has no real positon on any of their core issues, and when side issues have come up, he doesn't support their positions at all.

I heard a term concerning Trump on CNBC this morning that I'd never heard of before, a "three comma president". Took me a moment to figure what it was. Trump, if elected, would be the first one. Scary thought for all of us lowly peons.

[youtube]VvzoaUmyUFg[/youtube]

Curious how 2 national polls show trump has 25 % of the black vote. Considering that the gop has stated they'd be happy with 5% of that vote, one has to wonder how trump can be doing so well. Even more interesting the number Latino supporters were at his hugely successful Texas rally.

you realize he's been paying for 'supporters' at some of those rallies, right, Woody? Don't know if that is a factor in what you saw, but strongly suspect it, as scripted as his 'campaign' has been. As for 25% black vote, that is merely name recognition at this point. Keep wishing, along with me, that Trump is the GOPs selection. That should make it quite easy for the Dems to take back both houses of Congress, along with the White House, in 2016.

callmeslick wrote:you realize he's been paying for 'supporters' at some of those rallies, right, Woody? Don't know if that is a factor in what you saw, but strongly suspect it, as scripted as his 'campaign' has been. As for 25% black vote, that is merely name recognition at this point. Keep wishing, along with me, that Trump is the GOPs selection. That should make it quite easy for the Dems to take back both houses of Congress, along with the White House, in 2016.

Paying for supporters is something that the Dems need to do. Keep thinking that Trumps only is getting support at rally's because he is paying for them. The Dems are petrified of Trump and they need people like you to naysay to keep their spirits up. Take a look at yours and the Dems commentary of Trump back when he first threw his hat in the ring. Flash in the pan with approval ratings continually on the upswing? Comments on illegal immigration would be his down fall? Heh. Keep floundering around because Trump is like Obama was in 2008, he's sucking all the oxygen up and the anointed crowd in the DC news media just don't get it.

The Dems are petrified of Trump and they need people like you to naysay to keep their spirits up

You're kidding right? Look man, I hate to break it to you, but Trump cannot be seriously considered a viable candidate to win a general election. I mean, c'mon really? Donald Trump? I enjoy the fact that he's not beholden to any groups and says what's he's thinking, but to think of him as the leader of the free world would be the greatest punchline to any joke except for the fact that he's actually being taken seriously. And you've bought it, hook line and sinker.

I know you'll respond with some retort about Hillary or Sanders, it's a routine with you, but for the time being we're going to sit here and watch you lose every ounce of the small amount of political credibility you might've had. I mean, you really typed out and expect us to believe that Trump has 25% of the african american vote in this country?

Z.. wrote:
but to think of him as the leader of the free world would be the greatest punchline to any joke except for the fact that he's actually being taken seriously. And you've bought it, hook line and sinker.

Funny, that's how I felt in 2008 when Obama was running

Z.. wrote: I mean, you really typed out and expect us to believe that Trump has 25% of the african american vote in this country?

Not me my friend but 2 national polls:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the- ... ck-voters/

http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/09/07/sh ... on-matchup

and for slick:
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollRep ... c0cdab26c6

credibility? Woody has none, as do a few other folks:





but, keep on looking a dubious polling(1000 sample poll cited to me, and linked earlier by me, when it came out), or anything you want to, Woody. Donald Trump will not be President in 2016(or ever, likely). I stand ready to wager $5000 to the charity of your choice versus only $500 of your cash to a similar choice by myself if you are wrong, that Trump will not be elected POTUS in 2016. Feel free to put money where mouth is.

oh, and Woody, I'm off to the mountains in a few hours, so feel free to ponder the offer and I'll return to see how confident you really are next Monday.

callmeslick wrote:Donald Trump will not be President in 2016(or ever, likely). I stand ready to wager $5000 to the charity of your choice versus only $500 of your cash to a similar choice by myself if you are wrong

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us- ... 016/winner

... there are sites giving 4/1 on Trump winning? If I was in a spot where I could tolerate leaving money in escrow that long, I'd love to lay* those odds.

* meaning, take the Trump loses side of the bet, at 1/4. Easy money.