April 29, 2011

Trump Drops F-Bombs In Full-Out Populist Tirade
— Ace

I don't know what to do about this. The problem with populism is that it divides people emotionally. You hear this crowd? They're loving it.

And an equal number of people are turned off by the vulgarity of it. And I don't mean the vulgarity of the vulgarities. I mean the vulgar tenor of it. Easy answers, resentment masquerading as policy.

There is no point in arguing over that; it is what it is.

I'm not fully anti-populist because Hey, it works. To an extent, anyway.

Although Trump's being knocked by the liberal media for offering up "Easy answers," especially easy answers premised on the idea that only Trump knows how to talk with foreign regimes and get results -- I can't help but notice that that was the sum and entirety of Barack Hussein Obama's entire foreign-policy brief for himself, that he knew how to talk to foreign powers, that the very force of his personality would make all the persistent old problems suddenly solvable.

Back then, the media didn't call this an easy answer or a fantasy. Not at all. They embraced this idea and reinforced Obama's claims that "Things will change just because I say they will" by postulating a series of reasons that all hostile/rival foreign powers would just fall in line.

Chief among them: Because of Barack Obama's strong Muslim heritage. (But oh, by the way, if anyone notes this outside of the context of praising him for it, you're a racist.)

So now Trump is similarly promising he's going to change countries' basic behavior simply by saying the right Magic Words. Whereas Obama would appeal to Reason and use his Personal Magnetism, Trump is going to employ his Business Savvy and Toughness to back them down.

I think both men are silly and vain to imagine such power to just order people about.

But the media cannot join me in criticizing Trump for that -- as they expressly and enthusiastically endorsed the idea of President as Speaker of Magic Words in the case of Barack Hussein Obama.

My worry with Trump is twofold: First, by making such a ferociously populist pitch, he's going to find himself dividing the party, maybe too much to be patched back together when it needs to be. Too many people see populism as a cheap whipping-up of emotion and so don't respect it.

Second: Let's say he wins the presidency.

What the hell does he say to China and Saudi Arabia?

If you think they're just going to be a-scared of him, well, I guess it's all to the good.

If you think they're going to be unimpressed by demagogic theater at their expense, and inclined towards payback, that's something else.

I don't even object to Trump's populist appeal to tariffs. I've never been fully sold on the idea that free trade benefits us whether our partners reciprocate or not.

But calling out the "face"-obsessed Chinese leadership as "motherf***ers" to be bossed around? Doesn't he know, at least, the conventional wisdom read on the Chinese mentality that if you back them into a corner with no face-saving escape route, they dig in their heels and will pushback as hard as they're being pushed?

Maybe he doesn't believe that. But I'm not sure if he's really even aware of it. It's one thing to Know the Rule but decide the Rule Is Wrong. It's another thing to just violate the rule because you didn't even know the rule.

Oh --one last thing. Despite the worries I have here, I have to admit, I like it.

The power of populism. It's appealing on a gut level.


Here's My Bigger Problem: A populist is well-placed to run as an independent, because populism is a high crossover voter strategy.

The country is in a more populist mood than it's been since the 30s.

If Trump wins the Republican primary -- which he just might; this is canny politics -- then we become a populist party, not a conservative one. He's already rejected the Ryan plan. (I assume he'll use "common sense" on our budget and entitlement woes, whatever that means.)

But a populist can't cross "the people." That means, if Trump wins, another eight years of simply allowing our financial situation to deteriorate into nothing.

And I wouldn't put much stock in his "Look, I said it" position on social issues, either.

And if he doesn't win, he's plausibly positioned to run as an independent, which can only hurt us. There's a 5% chance he pulls about equally from both parties, and a 95% chance he pulls mostly from Republicans.

That means, with 95%+ confidence, a second term for Obama should he run as an independent.

Longer clip, without real video, here:


Posted by: Ace at 07:24 AM | Comments (376)
Post contains 803 words, total size 5 kb.

1
Populism or common sense?

Posted by: Royal Soothsayer at April 29, 2011 07:26 AM (uFokq)

2
oh, and this proves, again, Trump and you and me are racists.

Posted by: Royal Soothsayer at April 29, 2011 07:27 AM (uFokq)

3 It's also being reported that although Trump has said he was not drafted because he had a high lottery number, the real reason seems to be he got a "medical" deferment? The truth will out and with this guy I am afraid there is a lot of truth to come out

Posted by: nevergiveup at April 29, 2011 07:27 AM (i6RpT)

4 I don't like it simply because he's trying to reach his audience on an emotional level.  Yeah, that's ok for certain things like whipping your teammates into the right mindset before the big game, but this?  He needs to be careful about blustering and calling other nations "motherfuckers".  That's not what the GOP needs right now.

Posted by: EC at April 29, 2011 07:28 AM (GQ8sn)

5 Well that's what populism always calls itself, common sense, because populism is a revolt against the idea of expertise, and postulates that anyone can answer these questions adequately, even without any experience or learning in the area, just by "common sense." That's the central appeal of it. Every man a king, every man a master of diplomacy. But is that true? Is there a populist movement as regards medicine? Does anyone postulate that just by "common sense" they can successfully treat a gall stone patient? I like part of populism, because the situation isn't like the analogy I just noted -- diplomacy is not brain surgery, while brain surgery is brain surgery. Nevertheless, while not AS experience/expertise dependent as a science or craft or art, there is a component of that to it, and it is ignored at great peril. Among the most important knocks on Barack Obama -- he had no experience, expertise, or accomplishments, and that would show during his presidency. But now we're going to embrace the old Know-Nothing sort of position that none that matters, that it's all "Common Sense"?

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 07:29 AM (nj1bB)

6 Did he flip the bird while speaking? Fo snizzle.

Posted by: Goober at April 29, 2011 07:31 AM (Q5+Og)

7

But calling out the "face"-obsessed Chinese leadership as "motherf***ers" to be bossed around? Doesn't he know, at least, the conventional wisdom read on the Chinese mentality that if you back them into a corner with no face-saving escape route, they dig in their heels and will pushback as hard as they're being pushed?

That's not really unique to the Chinese, is it?  I mean, who doesn't push back just as hard if they are in that same situation and have no other choice?

If you approach in an alley, it will run from you.  If you corner it with no escape route, it will bite.

 

Posted by: ed at April 29, 2011 07:31 AM (Y2WVW)

8 I fear Trump will crash and burn. So for those of us praying to get rid of obama at all costs, it is much better that Trump burns and crashes sooner rather than later or even worse to late

Posted by: nevergiveup at April 29, 2011 07:32 AM (i6RpT)

9

I remember being seduced by populist sentiment... when I was 16 years old.

Yes, the feel-good, simplistic pandering does appeal to a significant segment of people.  There's no question that our society (like almost all societies) value style over substance, even if most refuse to admit it.

It still drives me up the fucking wall though.

Trump is a sideshow joke, and the sooner he's thrown under the bus, the better.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 29, 2011 07:32 AM (SY2Kh)

10 Trump is a trojan toupee

Posted by: sven10077 at April 29, 2011 07:33 AM (kq1lG)

11 Obama doesn't even have common sense.

Posted by: Bloody Mary at April 29, 2011 07:33 AM (dDbkT)

12 With this i dont think he is running. You dont drop a ton of f bombs abd expect to be nominated/elected. A majority of heartland con voters are family values. This wont win them. In this speech he called for price controls and higher taxes too . Carter did price controls. He is making a lot of the candidates a whole fucking lot better. Except huck. The clintons are funny though for talking him into this

Posted by: Flapjackmaka at April 29, 2011 07:33 AM (BKfRf)

13

Every man a king, every man a master of diplomacy.

But is that true?


No. However, we're learning daily that the elites that govern us are not only bad at what they do, but they are quite dishonest and self-serving.  This gives such blustering a life it doesn't deserve.

Posted by: Blue Hen at April 29, 2011 07:33 AM (6rX0K)

14 Did he grab his crotch when uttering that word? You know, for the populist, ghetto, rap crowd.

Posted by: Camel Toe at April 29, 2011 07:33 AM (kHsdN)

15 You. Like. That!

Posted by: Donald Trump's Forehead Merkin at April 29, 2011 07:33 AM (jyGn7)

16

Re:  Comment #7

If you approach a RAT in an alley, it will run from you.  If you corner it (the rat) with no escape, it will bite.

 

Posted by: ed at April 29, 2011 07:33 AM (Y2WVW)

17
Well, the reality is we're at a point where our legislators' behavior is counter to common sense and our govt bureaucracies are out of control.

Come on, a two-thousand page health care reform bill?

If populism means calling attention to such utter nonsense, I'm all for it.

Posted by: Royal Soothsayer at April 29, 2011 07:34 AM (uFokq)

18 Obama's magic touch strikes again: Shuttle launch scrubbed due to bad weather. [No link; just heard it reported at Sun News TV.] I guess it won't be rivalling the royal wedding for viewers the way the MFM was saying.

Posted by: andycanuck at April 29, 2011 07:34 AM (Y1DZt)

19 Hillary's beard does like the limelight.

Posted by: Goober at April 29, 2011 07:34 AM (Q5+Og)

20 How many Wal-Mart conservatives are opposed to the substantial Chinese tariffs?

Wal-Mart is teh evil but huge import tariffs don't help anybody.

Posted by: Bob Saget at April 29, 2011 07:34 AM (F/4zf)

21 He is going to make it interesting.  Media needs that; public is tired of Obama and (Ryan/Mitch Daniels/T-Paw/Old Mormon guys) don't excite anyone, so they will keep the focus on him.

Maybe he should run in the Democratic primaries?

Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 07:34 AM (WkuV6)

22 I bet he does a Trojan commercial when this is all over.

Posted by: Trojan Man at April 29, 2011 07:34 AM (kHsdN)

23 "Is there a populist movement as regards medicine? Does anyone postulate that just by "common sense" they can successfully treat a gall stone patient? " But common sense tells one to make an appt with a surgeon. A leftard would drink more green tea or something.

Posted by: Bloody Mary at April 29, 2011 07:34 AM (dDbkT)

24 The Saudis are not trying to fuck America, they just hate Obama and they hope high gas prices wake up enough voters to defeat him in 2012.

Same with all our old Allies. Obama has angered all of them.

Posted by: dr kill at April 29, 2011 07:35 AM (le5qc)

25 He's useful in bashing Odumdum when no one else is willing, and he is a real barrel of monkeys (Gibbs is a Loser, Kraut is a sad fool).
But I think he's about to hang himself with his own rope or transition to Stand-up depending on the size of his audience.

Presidentin'? Not so much. 

Posted by: ontherocks at April 29, 2011 07:35 AM (HBqDo)

26 Did he flip the bird while speaking?

Posted by: Goober

 

or perhaps accuse American troops of "bombing civilians and stuff"? Or accuse doctors of hacking off limbs and ripping out tonsils to make money?

Posted by: Blue Hen at April 29, 2011 07:36 AM (326rv)

27
in b4 the lessons of Smoot Hawley


Posted by: Royal Soothsayer at April 29, 2011 07:36 AM (uFokq)

28
It's silly to be scared of Trump. He's going nowhere in a hurry.

In the meanwhile, however, he's pointing out that the Ebola has no clothes.

Relax and enjoy the show.

Posted by: Ed Anger at April 29, 2011 07:36 AM (7+pP9)

29 How very Vice Presidential of him!

Posted by: Joe Biden at April 29, 2011 07:37 AM (yxiCC)

30 F-bombs are a big fucking deal.

Posted by: Average Joe Biden at April 29, 2011 07:37 AM (bN5ZU)

31 Die Hard (the first and greatest):

Harry Ellis:

Business is business. You use a gun, I use a fountain pen. What's the difference?

Posted by: mrp at April 29, 2011 07:37 AM (HjPtV)

32 19 Hillary's beard does like the limelight.

Posted by: Goober at April 29, 2011 12:34 PM (Q5+Og)

Which beard? You mean the one blowing past her knees?

Posted by: Beaver at April 29, 2011 07:37 AM (kHsdN)

33 "I like part of populism, because the situation isn't like the analogy I just noted -- diplomacy is not brain surgery, while brain surgery is brain surgery. " Common sense tells one to immediately make an appt with a neurosurgeon. A leftard would make an appt through obamacare, see a GP in a couple of months to get the referral to a specialist who won't be able to see him for a couple on months. By that time, you're tumor is inoperable.

Posted by: Bloody Mary at April 29, 2011 07:38 AM (dDbkT)

34 I think Trump has done his job and is now getting ready to bow out.  He has shown how to defeat the armor of Obama.  He has shown that Obama is not untouchable, and that and that any Republican who wants to win, can.  As I said in another thread, the non-stop playing of the race card is a sign of weakness.  The other side knows what a dismal failure Obama has been.  He has no record to run on.  Therefore, all they have is the race card.  And it won't work.  I have lots of liberal and union friends.  None of them are happy with Obama, and they voted for him.  And they will not vote for him again, and it is not because they just realized he is black.  Nobody I have met says that $5.00 gas would be alright if Obama was white.

Posted by: chillin the most at April 29, 2011 07:38 AM (6IV8T)

35 ARE YOU READY TO RUN AMOK!?!?

Posted by: Black Faced Lucie Lawless at April 29, 2011 07:38 AM (jyGn7)

36 Trump may have just had his Yeaaaaargh!! moment. He may still get the Snookie vote but most people won't take him seriously enough to pull the lever for him. He has created some space for the rest of the candidates but his usefulness is about over.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2011 07:38 AM (TMB3S)

37 ha ha

Posted by: lol Biden at April 29, 2011 07:39 AM (bN5ZU)

38
Trump is exactly what we need right now.

Right Now = 18 Months Before The Election

Keep hammering, Donald, please. A year from now Donald will be a distant memory, but the damage inflicted on Obama and his policies will be remembered in the back of people's minds.

Posted by: Royal Soothsayer at April 29, 2011 07:39 AM (uFokq)

39 Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the flag and begin throwing F-bombs...

Posted by: Mencken's Ghost at April 29, 2011 07:40 AM (kHsdN)

40

I dunno. I'm liking him less and less. I drop F bombs all the time, so that's not it.

There's something about the money money money - that gets old. But then, he's right that libtards let the world walk all over us in the name of political correctness. The libtards would lay their heads out for the mighty sward of Allah if they thought it would give them PC brownie points.

Posted by: Lemon Kitten at April 29, 2011 07:41 AM (0fzsA)

41 Of course free trade benefits us even if other countries don't reciprocate. If some other country wants to spend their citizens money via tax dollars by subsidizing the purchases of US consumers, that's only a benefit to us, and it will continue to be so until the cost of subsidization catches up with the foreign country in question. If consumers can get the best price/quality ratio on goods from a foreign producer, what does it matter what trade policies that foreign producer has in place?

National borders are irrelevant to trade, in the same way that state borders are. It makes no more sense to say that we shouldn't be able to buy from and sell to consumers and producers in a foreign country b/c their government subsidizes or taxes something than it would to say that people in Washington shouldn't buy corn grown in Iowa, because that corn is subsidized. If the consumers get the best price at the expense of the local citizenry, whatever you want to define "local" as (a country, a state, a city, etc...), then all to the better for the consumers.

Posted by: DMXRoid at April 29, 2011 07:41 AM (tjc9E)

42 sword

Posted by: Lemon Kitten at April 29, 2011 07:42 AM (0fzsA)

43 F- you for posting this!

Posted by: The Donald at April 29, 2011 07:42 AM (kHsdN)

44

Talking risks appeals to me. when did Obama ever take a risk in business?

 

Posted by: Lemon Kitten at April 29, 2011 07:43 AM (0fzsA)

45 This is pathetic.  Carny hucksterism at its worst.

Holy shit, Trump is Babbitt.

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 29, 2011 07:43 AM (E+GWu)

46

Retarded Half-White/Brilliant Half-Black Communist v. Bad Hair Liberal "Businessman" . . . 

TO THE DEATH CAGE MATCH!!!!!

Posted by: Sharkman at April 29, 2011 07:44 AM (Orc9J)

47 Harvard men pronounce it sward

Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 07:44 AM (WkuV6)

48 The speech would have been better if Donald would have pulled back his eyes, made the buck teeth and said "ching chong ching."  Slays 'em every time.

Posted by: Rosie O'Donnell at April 29, 2011 07:44 AM (QKKT0)

49 because populism is a revolt against the idea of expertise, and postulates that anyone can answer these questions adequately, even without any experience or learning in the area, just by "common sense." SAY MY NAME, SAY MY NAAAAAME...

Posted by: Bill O'Reilly at April 29, 2011 07:44 AM (U9jjw)

50 "Despite the worries I have here, I have to admit, I like it."

And so will a majority of Americans.  Trump will end up not running, but will have done all the hard work that Repubs would have had to do in the meantime.  None of them could afford to take all the arrows.  Trump has shrugged them off as if they didn't matter.  (Which I suppose they don't.)  How many times can you be called a racist before it doesn't matter anymore?  The Dems have dealt their last 2 cards with a)killing the elderly and b)racism! They have nothing left.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at April 29, 2011 07:44 AM (ndlFj)

51

He is going to make it interesting.  Media needs that; public is tired of Obama and (Ryan/Mitch Daniels/T-Paw/Old Mormon guys) don't excite anyone, so they will keep the focus on him.

Maybe he should run in the Democratic primaries?

It's not just the fault of the media; it's the fault of us.

How many times have we seen commenters on this very site (or more commonly on HA) proclaim that they like a candidate because he's entertaining?  They may couch it in different terms, but the motivation is the same-  this candidate or that is too "boring", another is "exciting",etc.

I realize that charisma, style, and nice hair are qualities that voters are attracted to, but that doesn't mean I can't be pissed off about it with a sense of righteous indignation (and admittedly a bit of arrogance) about it.


 

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 29, 2011 07:45 AM (SY2Kh)

52 The GOP has founds its Obama.

May God have mercy on us all.

Posted by: AoSHQ's worst commenter, DarkLord© at April 29, 2011 07:45 AM (GBXon)

53 TAKE THE OIL ! TAKE THE DAMN OIL !!!

Posted by: Trump The Destoyer at April 29, 2011 07:46 AM (EL+OC)

54 This undocumented cocksucking fucktard manboy president and his cunting mangina whore of a wife have ass-raped this country and need to go. Let's do it for the children.

Posted by: Donald Trump at April 29, 2011 07:46 AM (bN5ZU)

55 You know who this helps?

Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at April 29, 2011 07:46 AM (QKKT0)

56 I don't know man. All populist appeal aside. I am struggling with it.  On the one hand, a turd sandwich would be a better president and better for this country than a second term for Obama (so what is the downside with Trump). 

And I cannot get away from the fact that we really have not put up the sort candidates that know how to shoot straight and act on principle.  In other words, we put up a bunch of no-balls squishes. 

But I really struggle with some of his positions on issues and with the notion that he is only entering the race as Perot-II as a more attractive option than the more conservative Tea Party types.

In other considerations, many hard things need doing (chiefly debt, insolvent social programs, and immigration and border control), and need doing yesterday. Can we trust a career politician to do yeoman's work?  Would it not be better to have an outsider that has no continuing political interest at stake?  Would Trump even side with my interests on these issues? 

In the end, I will vote for anything that is likely to get rid of Obama, because I will take my chances with a known unknown over a known known evil.  Bush gave us Obama in 2008.  Obama gave us ______ in 2012.

Posted by: Flounder at April 29, 2011 07:46 AM (Kkt/i)

57

Meanwhile - our stupid fucking leftwing media lie lie lie - all for their leftwing masters, the corrupt democrat party.

eat it, leftwingers. EAT IT. 

Posted by: Lemon Kitten at April 29, 2011 07:47 AM (0fzsA)

58 Lemmon Kitten,   they say it sward in Jersey

Posted by: yip at April 29, 2011 07:47 AM (SyLEU)

59
Who's The Racist Who Said It?

"I thought when we elected a black president, we were going to get a black president. You know, this [oil spill] is where I want a real black president. I want him in a meeting with the BP CEOs, you know, where he lifts up his shirt where you can see the gun in his pants. That's — 'we've got a motherfu**ing problem here?' Shoot somebody in the foot."

a) Rush Limbaugh
b) Ann Coulter
c) Ace
d) Bill Maher

Posted by: Royal Soothsayer at April 29, 2011 07:47 AM (uFokq)

60 33 "I like part of populism, because the situation isn't like the analogy I just noted -- diplomacy is not brain surgery, while brain surgery is brain surgery. "

Common sense tells one to immediately make an appt with a neurosurgeon. A leftard would make an appt through obamacare, see a GP in a couple of months to get the referral to a specialist who won't be able to see him for a couple on months. By that time, you're tumor is inoperable.

Well, just think of all the money the American people will save by not having to pay for that surgery.

Posted by: Lemmiwinks at April 29, 2011 07:47 AM (pdRb1)

61

Let's do it for the children.

 

Fuck the Children!

Posted by: Roman Senate at April 29, 2011 07:47 AM (jyGn7)

62 I cannot spare this man; he fights.

Posted by: Abraham Lincoln at April 29, 2011 07:47 AM (FkKjr)

63

Interesting that a "meme" is suddenly taking shape, which I share, that Trump will bow out. He said specifically that, "as soon as my NBC contract is up, I will have an announcement, one which may (likely? I'm para-ing) surprise you."

Odd phraseology. At this point, an announcement from him would be a huge story, but... surprising? Hmmmm, doesn't quite fit.

Now, no candidate goes out there "mother-f*cking" lightly, even a populist or inexperienced one, not if they are serious. He may actually have put himself out of the running here for it's terribly undisciplined nature. (and boy am *I* personally f-cking undisciplined!).

So Trump definitely is the man of the day, the day being 18 months in advance. I think this very act cuts the odds of him actually running in half. 

 

 

Posted by: Anrew X at April 29, 2011 07:48 AM (R88w/)

64 Jeebus tell me you can't see the same America who elected a pseudo-intellectual international man of mystery empty suit swinging the other way and electing a cursing blowhard meglomaniac casino owner with Ken-doll hair who doesn't give a shit.

Posted by: jeannebodine at April 29, 2011 07:50 AM (nvlAW)

65

Let's do it for the children.

 Fuck the Children!

Posted by: Roman Senate at April 29, 2011 12:47 PM (jyGn7)

 

Hey!!  That's our gig!

Posted by: The Spartans at April 29, 2011 07:53 AM (Orc9J)

66 Look, people need to realize this guy is a carnival act out for self-promotion. Just ignore him. What Trump is doing is the amazing feat of making a flaming Marxist black nationalist look moderate.

Posted by: CoolCzech at April 29, 2011 07:53 AM (kUaEF)

67

I don't think he is running!

I think he was sent out there to pound Obama over the B.C and the Transcripts.

Posted by: Jimi at April 29, 2011 07:53 AM (JMsOK)

68 Trump is on a roll.. he loves the spotlight.

His Apprentice show is losing lib viewers/voters but he doesn't care.  He looks like he's having fun.


Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at April 29, 2011 07:54 AM (f9c2L)

69 Second: Let's say he wins the presidency. Ace has lost his everloving mind! We don't want Trump even running for president. For those who think Trump is "hitting on the hard stuff" the GOP is afraid to touch, watch The Daily Show's take on the media's birther coverage. The only hard stuff being hit is by the drunkards encouraging Trump.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 07:54 AM (mHQ7T)

70 F- you and stop stealing my line!

Posted by: Rahm at April 29, 2011 07:54 AM (kHsdN)

71

Fuck the Children!

Posted by: Roman Senate at April 29, 2011 12:47 PM (jyGn7)

Now that is a proposal I can get behind.

Posted by: Safe Schools Czar Jennings at April 29, 2011 07:54 AM (7BU4a)

72 But calling out the "face"-obsessed Chinese leadership as "motherf***ers" to be bossed around? Doesn't he know, at least, the conventional wisdom read on the Chinese mentality that if you back them into a corner with no face-saving escape route, they dig in their heels and will pushback as hard as they're being pushed?

It appears that he doesn't understand our relationship with China at all. China wanted to continue industrialization and the growth of their economy, badly. We are the #1 producer of top tier industrial products in the world. China hitched it's wagon to us figuring a strategic economic partnership with the worlds largest capitalist economy would be good for them. They manufacture cheap consumer goods for us, invest in our bonds, our currency, we send them industrial gas turbines from GE, Solar, Pratt Whitney et al, industrial equipment from Caterpillar, large scale precision machined boilers from babcock and wilcox. Top tier information solutions from International Business Machines. etc etc And all they had to do to get all this neat stuff was keep Walmart stocked.

Well the match made in heaven was substantially mismanaged by the both of us. China has wasted a huge amount of it's resources over producing to the point of building empty cities with no prospects of occupation. We kept shaking the money tree, and shaking, and shaking.

Now China looks at us and undoubtedly regrets the horse they chose to hitch their wagon to. They are so bought into us, and on the downlow so economically weak themselves, that they have to keep us alive to keep themselves alive. They would *love* to cut us lose. They just can't. If we separate now we both fall apart.

They may be dirty dirty communists, whom have a history of being generally not nice to anyone including their own people, but the sooner that we realize that though we can't remember exactly when it happened, somewhere along the way while we were drunk and in Vegas, the worlds largest Capitalist economy got married to the worlds largest Communist economy; we are stuck in this quagmire together, and we need to work together to get out.

Trump looks like he doesn't get that, that we both have to succeed in order to recover enough to get a divorce and go our separate ways. Kicking our life partner in the jimmy is not a good way to start a combined recovery effort.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 07:55 AM (0q2P7)

73 So Trump definitely is the man of the day, the day being 18 months in advance. I think this very act cuts the odds of him actually running in half.

I don't really want a President Trump but I sure love what he is doing right now.  Bringing national attention to everything the media has embargoed over the last 3-6 years.  Same sentiments for Sarah Palin.  I'm not sure she would make a good president but she definitely has a purpose on this earth i.e. sticking it to Obama and the lefties.  I see these 2 as our lead blockers, now if we hand the ball off to right tail back.....TOUCHDOWN!!!

Posted by: Lemmiwinks at April 29, 2011 07:55 AM (pdRb1)

74 Huey Long would be proud.

Posted by: Socratease at April 29, 2011 07:55 AM (vaIln)

75

"What Trump is doing is the amazing feat of making a flaming Marxist black nationalist look moderate."

Wrong...........Trump has more pressure on Obama then anyone in three years. The Right should be embracing Trump, and using him to do the dirty work. If he was running he wouldn't do this, so we should be taking advantage while we can.

Posted by: Jimi at April 29, 2011 07:56 AM (JMsOK)

76

Fuck the Children!

Posted by: Roman Senate at April 29, 2011 12:47 PM (jyGn7)

I was born two thousand years too late...

Posted by: Roman Polanski at April 29, 2011 07:56 AM (FkKjr)

77

"or perhaps accuse American troops of "bombing civilians and stuff"? Or accuse doctors of hacking off limbs and ripping out tonsils to make money?"

 

Hey, that's some of my best stuff. You know its copyrighted?

Posted by: Parson Hussein at April 29, 2011 07:56 AM (Q5+Og)

78 Votes, schmotes, this is about headlines.

Posted by: nickless at April 29, 2011 07:56 AM (MMC8r)

79 Emotion is good if it resonates, which it will because people are pissed off over the state of the economy.

The problem is that the argument he's using is unbelievably stupid, as price controls will lead to inflation and/or shortages because you can't artificially reduce costs forever.  We've got Nixon and Carter to prove that over the last 40+ years and both Hoover and FDR proved it before that, though it tends to be whitewashed by the historians when it comes to FDR.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at April 29, 2011 07:56 AM (UvFnc)

80 >>> Trump will end up not running, but will have done all the hard work that Repubs would have had to do in the meantime. Why do you guys keep saying that if he's both poised to win the primary AND, even if he fails, he's plausibly poised to run as an independent? (See my update.) This is very counterintuitive of you -- he says he's running, acts like he's running, and is in fact gaining terrific traction while running. But still you postulate he won't run. Why? Why wouldn't he? Detective digging could derail him -- divorce files and all. And like I've said before, if you don't think he's got some shady investors (mobbed up) in some of his Atlantic City or Vegas casinos, I've got a bridge to sell you. But obama would wait on all that. Maybe the media would too -- note the NYT did not make its infidelity charge against McCain until he had won the nomination. Absent that -- why the hell wouldn't he run? You really think that, even though he has a realistic chance of winning the Presidency of the United States of America, he's doing this just to boost ratings on a stupid reality tv show?

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 07:57 AM (nj1bB)

81 Once the crowd sees that it's okay for some little boy with curious hair to shout "The Emperor Has No Clothes!", it becomes safe for everyone to say it. Keep going, Donald, and open the floodgates.

Posted by: t-bird at April 29, 2011 07:58 AM (FcR7P)

82 What Trump is doing is the amazing feat of making a flaming Marxist black nationalist look moderate. That is what everyone seems to miss. Obama looks sane and more trustworthy, even a victim, in all this, and the GOP looks useless, because Trump suddenly leaped ahead in the polls among Republicans. Now that the birther issue has been put to rest, and Trump has been discredited, time to break out the big hook and pull this clown off the stage.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 07:58 AM (mHQ7T)

83 >>>Now, no candidate goes out there "mother-f*cking" lightly, even a populist or inexperienced one, not if they are serious. He may actually have put himself out of the running here for it's terribly undisciplined nature. (and boy am *I* personally f-cking undisciplined!). I can't tell you how wrong I think you are. He's running. And he's winning, as of now.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 07:59 AM (nj1bB)

84 Paladino from ny droped a lot of f bombs too if i recall.

Posted by: Flapjackmaka at April 29, 2011 07:59 AM (BKfRf)

85 65 Jeebus tell me you can't see the same America who elected a pseudo-intellectual international man of mystery empty suit swinging the other way and electing a cursing blowhard meglomaniac casino owner with Ken-doll hair who doesn't give a shit.

Watch it, that's our job

Posted by: Honey Badger's Union Local #438 at April 29, 2011 07:59 AM (pdRb1)

86 "The Emperor Has No Clothes!" Except the emperor had clothes, swaddling clothes even. Obama produced the long form BC.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 07:59 AM (mHQ7T)

87

...Trump is going to employ his Business Savvy and Toughness to back them down.

I thought he would employ that blonde Honey Badger sitting on top of his head first.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at April 29, 2011 08:00 AM (d0Tfm)

88 Paladino from ny droped a lot of f bombs too if i recall. This is straight from the Dem playbook. Pick your own opponent, which Obama can do with a billion dollars.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:01 AM (mHQ7T)

89 87 TdP,

no the emperor's clothes are his transcripts, passport history etc etc etc....

the BC was the diaper....I'm glad the emperor wore at least a diaper.....

I'd really like him to put back on those nicely creased pants brooksie was so fond of.....

show me you THESIS manchild king

Posted by: sven10077 at April 29, 2011 08:01 AM (kq1lG)

90 This eerily feels like the mob gathering at the end of Stephen King's the Stand, I know it's very Ewok on Valurite, but as policy it's insane.

Posted by: Randolph Duke at April 29, 2011 08:02 AM (AYwIq)

91 This guy would take more D votes than R in a general election. He's NY Dem w a big NY chip on his shoulder.  I get that some Cons might like Trump's excoriation of the GOP elites--like ripping Sauerkraut and Rove new ones--I loved that too--but at the end of the day, he's not speaking at all to the spending insanity, or to the need to shrink government drastically. He's not talking Conservative issues AT ALL.  Ripping the Chinese--that bait for Union Dems, not cons.

Posted by: glowing blue meat at April 29, 2011 08:02 AM (K/USr)

92

Wrong...........Trump has more pressure on Obama then anyone in three years. The Right should be embracing Trump, and using him to do the dirty work. If he was running he wouldn't do this, so we should be taking advantage while we can.

Posted by: Jimi at April 29, 2011 12:56 PM (JMsOK)

I agree that Trump is providing a service to the right - he's shown how effective taking Obama head on is. And heck, cranking it to 11 will allow conservative candidates to roll it back a little bit and still land effective punches...

Now the question is, what Republican candidate is willing to follow up on this? The only two I've seen swinging at Obama are Rand Paul and Marco Rubio.


Posted by: 18-1 at April 29, 2011 08:02 AM (7BU4a)

93 Endeavor a no-go, per Fox.

Posted by: Lincolntf at April 29, 2011 08:02 AM (xMT+4)

94 i guess Trumps campaign slogan can be "Comb-Forward!"

Posted by: Bannor at April 29, 2011 08:03 AM (6AXh/)

95

You really think that, even though he has a realistic chance of winning the Presidency of the United States of America, he's doing this just to boost ratings on a stupid reality tv show?

"Realistic chance of winning the Presidency"???

Only if by "realistic" you mean "there's a realistic chance that this lotto ticket I just bought is going to be the winner".

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 29, 2011 08:03 AM (SY2Kh)

96 What the hell does he say to China and Saudi Arabia?

China: "Remember that permanent trade status we gave you when Clinton was President? It's back to a year to year decision. And I get to veto it if Congress gets it wrong."

Saudi Arabia: "Quit exporting Wahibism around the planet."

----
It's almost like you think this chess game is only two moves long.  Saudi Arabia will say, in response to your notional Trump, "fuck you, support us or what comes after us will be worse than your wildest dreams."  And they'll be right.  It's the bind we're in. Oh, also they'll stop doing us favors in w/r/t oil production with OPEC (which, don't kid yourself, they do whenever supply threatens to get too low). 

China?  China will laugh at our threats and counter-threaten to stop buying our bonds.  And we can't run that risk, because that's the Panic Button moment for American economic history.  Or maybe they'll let North Korea off the leash to make some more noise.  Or do any number of possible things. 

Trump's approach would be a debacle of the first order.

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 29, 2011 08:03 AM (E+GWu)

97 He's running. And he's winning, as of now. How is he winning with 63% of Americans saying they would not support him for president? That's Charlie Sheen winning, and you should hold Trump to the same standards which you would apply to Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:03 AM (mHQ7T)

98 But still you postulate he won't run. Why? Why wouldn't he?

Detective digging could derail him -- divorce files and all.

I think you may be on to something about that Obama fellow.

Posted by: Jack Ryan at April 29, 2011 08:03 AM (7BU4a)

99 >>But still you postulate he won't run. Why? Why wouldn't he? Because I don't really think he wants to be president. Look at his lifestyle, he has enormous wealth, power, the ability to do whatever the hell he wants whenever the hell he wants. He's going to give this up for the good of the country? Not seeing it. The presidency would be a demotion in many ways to Trump. He's at least smart enough to know the presidency isn't some Celebrity Apprentice reality show where he can just go around firing people he disagrees with. Trump is doing what Trump does best, promoting Trump and he's getting more press than he could buy. When he gets bored with this shiny he will move on to the next thing that keeps him in the public eye.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2011 08:03 AM (TMB3S)

100 91 Randolph Duke,

or the scene from demolition man's intro....yeah I'm not feeling the need to run a messiah to beat the Me$$iah either.

Posted by: sven10077 at April 29, 2011 08:04 AM (kq1lG)

101 Well Obama strikes again. The shuttle has been delayed for 3 days. If I was one of the astronauts I would have just slep in after I heard he was coming.

Posted by: robtr at April 29, 2011 08:04 AM (MtwBb)

102 >>How is he winning with 63% of Americans saying they would not support him for president? That's Charlie Sheen winning, and you should hold Trump to the same standards which you would apply to Sarah Palin.

Thank you for an injection of common sense, Mr. De Plane.

Hey, do I know your cousin "Lookboss?"

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 29, 2011 08:04 AM (E+GWu)

103 I'd prefer he say 'we're going to produce our own motherfucking oil.'

Posted by: nickless at April 29, 2011 08:04 AM (MMC8r)

104

"Obama produced the long form BC."

The fact that there was nothing unusual on the B.C. hurt Obama more than anything, because it was the fact that Democrats started asking to see it, and now everybody is saying "WTF? Why didn't you just end this two years ago." It makes him look petty and foolish.

Now round two starts with the Transcripts, and if he tries the same thing, it will hurt him even more.

Posted by: Jimi at April 29, 2011 08:05 AM (JMsOK)

105 "And whose number one in the polls? Trump"

Any politician that speaks of himself in the third  person (?) has no place in speaking for the people.

Posted by: momma at April 29, 2011 08:05 AM (penCf)

106 >>>Because I don't really think he wants to be president. Look at his lifestyle, he has enormous wealth, power, the ability to do whatever the hell he wants whenever the hell he wants. He's going to give this up for the good of the country? Not seeing it. JackStraw, you are insane. Respectfully. You want to talk lifestyle? You want to talk about the greatest gift a rich, egotistical man can give himself? The PRESIDENCY is a hell of lot more impressive a gift than a Ferrari or some gadget from Hammacher-Schlemmer.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:06 AM (nj1bB)

107 Trump is a threat........to somebody. Don't know who just yet.

Posted by: maddogg at April 29, 2011 08:06 AM (OlN4e)

108 whose = who's 

oy. sorry.

Posted by: momma at April 29, 2011 08:06 AM (penCf)

109 I agree that Trump is providing a service to the right - he's shown how effective taking Obama head on is. No, he hasn't. Scott Walker has shown how effective taking Obama head on is. Chris Christie likewise did with the tunnel debate. Trump is a loud self-promoter.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:06 AM (mHQ7T)

110 He's running. And he's winning, as of now.

And he's a real problem. I don't think we want to run with him, I personally wouldn't want him as President. But if we (the greater and lessor punditry) turn on him harshly now, he'll abandon us and run as an independent, and turn his guns on us. And right now those guns are on Obama and doing damage.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 08:07 AM (0q2P7)

111 Trump is playing the Randy Quaid role. Better to burn out than fade away.

Posted by: blaster at April 29, 2011 08:07 AM (Fw2Gg)

112 Go Populism!
Ain't nothing wrong with that.

Posted by: Robespierrie at April 29, 2011 08:07 AM (uz3hs)

113 Some of yas keep saying Trump is doing what the GOP should be doing, but I can't help but wonder why he would help the GOP?

Consider that he favored the Dems in his actual political participation up until he decided to try and run. He makes me uneasy, because it's not clear what his purpose is. It could be good, but it could be bad (for the GOP).

Posted by: KG at April 29, 2011 08:07 AM (4L0zr)

114 You really think that, even though he has a realistic chance of winning the Presidency of the United States of America, he's doing this just to boost ratings on a stupid reality tv show? ------------ ace, think about it. It is two years out from the election. Why are you taking polls seriously? Do you imagine trump in a debate? He cant say what he is saying now. When asked on the ryan budget he said it would hurt granny and the we need to compromise. He wont win like that and we have a ton of lib material on him. He would also have to reveal a bunch of personal stuff and he wont. We know he has skeletons and he knows too. He will also have to go out and suck cock to win the nom and retail politick. It would be a hassle for the arrogant combover. He wont win family value votes through f bombs

Posted by: Flapjackmaka at April 29, 2011 08:07 AM (BKfRf)

115 He's just looking after the folks!

Posted by: B. OReilly at April 29, 2011 08:07 AM (uz3hs)

116 >>> >>How is he winning with 63% of Americans saying they would not support him for president? That's Charlie Sheen winning, and you should hold Trump to the same standards which you would apply to Sarah Palin. I don't think he's well positioned to win the presidency. I think he's currently winning the race for the primary, and if he fails that, he'd be well positioned to pull 15-20% as an Independent (and re-elect Barack Obama). I think he has the same problem as Sarah Palin -- he can win a primary, but almost certainly not an election. In case you didn't notice, I keep saying Trump *worries* me. Because I think he can win, and then lose. Or Lose, and then lose, but most importantly, win it for Obama.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:08 AM (nj1bB)

117 "Only Nixon can go to China" changes to "Only Trump can trashtalk China"?

Problem with Trump is he is Mike Bloomberg in men's clothing.

Posted by: The Robot Devil at April 29, 2011 08:08 AM (LdYLm)

118 Obama has been seriously damaged by Trump and the DNC knows it.  People do not see Obama in the same way anymore.  I don't think Trump will run, but even if he wanted to, Rove and Fox news will not let him.  What Trump has done is show people that it is possible to unseat Obama.  Personally,I bet the DNC wishes he had come out as a Dem.  I have lots of liberal friends, and even though they would not vote (again) for Obama, they probably would vote for Trump, but I think he is the only "Repub" they would be likely to vote for.

Posted by: chillin the most at April 29, 2011 08:08 AM (6IV8T)

119

They may be dirty dirty communists, whom have a history of being generally not nice to anyone including their own people, but the sooner that we realize that though we can't remember exactly when it happened, somewhere along the way while we were drunk and in Vegas, the worlds largest Capitalist economy got married to the worlds largest Communist economy; we are stuck in this quagmire together, and we need to work together to get out.

Preach it, brother. It's the next morning and we're both regretting the previous night's drunken revelry. Hey, what's Elvis doing in our bed?

What happened IMHO was that this partnership with China to make all the stuff we used to make drained us of the money we used to make when we made our own stuff.

We could, of course, make a policy decision to reinvent our manufacturing sector. We're still the largest economy in the world. Why not take advantage of that by making our own stuff again?

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at April 29, 2011 08:08 AM (d0Tfm)

120 Right now I lean toward Trump for one reason only: Poet Laureate Gary Busey.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at April 29, 2011 08:09 AM (+lsX1)

121 China?  China will laugh at our threats and counter-threaten to stop buying our bonds.  And we can't run that risk, because that's the Panic Button moment for American economic history.  Or maybe they'll let North Korea off the leash to make some more noise.  Or do any number of possible things. 

Trump's approach would be a debacle of the first order.

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 29, 2011 01:03 PM (E+GWu)

Just to update you on current events, China has already threatened to quit buying our bonds. Not because of Trump but because they know that soon the bond market is going to tank. Buying bonds at 95 cents on the dollar and watching them go to 80 isn't a good investment strategy.

As for Trump, I don't think he will run as an indy. He knows that's a loser and he doesn't like sure losers. He will roll the dice in the primarys and get his message out and take his chances winning there.

Posted by: robtr at April 29, 2011 08:09 AM (MtwBb)

122 If Trump was really interested he would run as a Democrat. As a Republican you can't randomly fuck supermodels and get away with it. Imagine what he could get away with as a pro-abortion Democrat.

Posted by: blaster at April 29, 2011 08:09 AM (Fw2Gg)

123 To a degree things have changed because Obama said they would. For example 1.8% GDP growth used to be bad, now it's good.  Unemployment at 9% used to be high, now it's normal. $4 a gallon gas used to be bad, now it's good for your portfolio.  In fact war used to be bad. There were lot's of protests and people were very upset. No war is good and nobody cares about the.  Obama is truly a miracle worker.

Posted by: kansas at April 29, 2011 08:09 AM (mka2b)

124 I don't even object to Trump's populist appeal to tariffs. I've never been fully sold on the idea that free trade benefits us whether our partners reciprocate or not.

I don't get why promising to raise prices on goods that most people want/need is considered popular.

Yes in theory it makes American made products more competitive but I think for most consumer goods the price difference (wages mostly) is more than 25%. Also, it's not like you can suddenly whip up the infrastructure to manufacture things we've stopped making because it's cheaper to let China, Vietnam, etc build it.

"I'm Donald Trump and I'm Going to Make Everything at Wal-Mart 25% More Expensive! Vote For Me Motherfuckers!"


Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 08:09 AM (2f1Rs)

125

"Obama produced the long form BC."

The fact that there was nothing unusual on the B.C. hurt Obama more than anything, because it was the fact that Democrats started asking to see it, and now everybody is saying "WTF? Why didn't you just end this two years ago." It makes him look petty and foolish.

To those of us who intensely disapprove of Obama, sure, it might look that way.  I'm not convinced that's true of the swing voters who may adopt the narrative of this showing Obama to be the "adult in the room".

I doubt it really had any significant impact either way on Obama's re-election chances.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 29, 2011 08:09 AM (SY2Kh)

126 Trump is da man for pulling off SuperO's cape, the Left's Force shield is slowly dissolving and I think we may be fortunate to have this happy warrior for a while longer. I imagine he will flame out long before the real election gets started. 

Posted by: westie at April 29, 2011 08:09 AM (3YBFV)

127

I did not think think Trump was serious. But as the weeks go by....

otoh, anybody calling out JEPOS gets a few points in my book. The media is screwing this country in ways unimaginable.

Posted by: USS Diversity at April 29, 2011 08:09 AM (7zt2W)

128 Trump is where he is because the Prez is enormously unpopular...and so is the GOP. The more attention he gets, the deader they (the GOP) look.

Posted by: glowing blue meat at April 29, 2011 08:10 AM (K/USr)

129 I hear he already has the weasel endorsement locked up, but he's keeping it under his hat

Posted by: political insider (and haberdasher) at April 29, 2011 08:10 AM (uz3hs)

130 No, he hasn't. Scott Walker has shown how effective taking Obama head on is. Chris Christie likewise did with the tunnel debate. Trump is a loud self-promoter.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 01:06 PM (mHQ7T)

Hmm, Obama was part of the coalition against Walker, but I don't remember him focusing on Obama specifically. It was a fight against the union bureaucracy, primarily.

As for Christie and the tunnel, again, I don't remember this as publicly taking on Obama. 

Trump is indeed a self promoter. As any politician needs to be to win. In fact, I would hope every serious Republican candidate is now asking themselves why they aren't publicly picking fights with Obama.

Posted by: 18-1 at April 29, 2011 08:11 AM (7BU4a)

131

mencken's ghost

 

i was just thinking the same thing

Posted by: phoenixgirl at April 29, 2011 08:11 AM (Cm66w)

132 I don't know what Trump's up to (besides being the "Trump" character), but I think if someone bitched at him about this kind of thing on the grounds Ace does here, Trump would say he's opening rhetorical space, pioneering into the forbidden zone and taking the arrows that have to be taken to move the fences out, to leave the area behind him clear for non-"Fuck!" conversations that were impossible before.

I mean, he is doing that, whether that's his plan or not. And if you asked him if that's his plan, he'd take credit for it. He's Trump.

It's unfortunate that he's doing it with this dumb Buchananite shit instead of with the right "easy answers," but he's alone out there, so it's his call.

The way to counter him, to take advantage of his gain before it takes advantage of you, is to send someone else in to knock him off and occupy his role differently. Trump's a heel; send in a babyface. RAND PAUL! seems to have offered his services—but he's offered them to the GOP, who's just not into him. So, more of this.

Narrative note: If Trump's written this story already, it ends with him turning viciously against you guys, because, he'll say, Obama took him more seriously than you did. And that's true.

Posted by: oblig. at April 29, 2011 08:11 AM (xvZW9)

133 Sigh.  OK, I give up.

Trump/Palin '12.

Posted by: AoSHQ's worst commenter, DarkLord© at April 29, 2011 08:11 AM (GBXon)

134 Ace, I have to say, you're hitting the panic button a bit early here. 

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 29, 2011 08:11 AM (FO1sk)

135 Those holding trump up but degrading palin are hypocrites too. They have similar numbers. Though palin is serious and will win by being a goog candidate and a populist through a smile. Not anger and f bombs

Posted by: Flapjackmaka at April 29, 2011 08:11 AM (BKfRf)

136 i said i'd never vote for John McCain up until i had no choice. so is that 63% solid?

Posted by: Bannor at April 29, 2011 08:12 AM (6AXh/)

137

"Trump is a loud self-promoter."

So what? That's not the point! Trump got the B.C., and without him, it would have been released right before the election. If Trump has got the Balls to show the American people the difference between Capitalism and Socialism, without worrying whaht the media has to say then leave him alone, and let him do it.

If Trump can force Obama to seriously talk about economics, and point out how Obama's agenda is bad for America this far out from the election.....how could that possibly be a bad thing.

Politics is about controlling  the debate....something Obama and the Decmorats are masters at.....up unitl Trump came along!

 

Posted by: Jimi at April 29, 2011 08:12 AM (JMsOK)

138 we send them industrial gas turbines from GE, Solar, Pratt Whitney et al, industrial equipment from Caterpillar, large scale precision machined boilers from babcock and wilcox. Top tier information solutions from International Business Machines. etc etc And all they had to do to get all this neat stuff was keep Walmart stocked.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 12:55 PM (0q2P7)

You can bet they are working like hell to reverse engineer all the shit we give them, so they won't have to buy from us anymore. They already do that with lower level shit, they steal from our companies all the time.

Posted by: KG at April 29, 2011 08:13 AM (4L0zr)

139 >>>I don't get why promising to raise prices on goods that most people want/need is considered popular. >>>Yes in theory it makes American made products more competitive but I think for most consumer goods the price difference (wages mostly) is more than 25%. Also, it's not like you can suddenly whip up the infrastructure to manufacture things we've stopped making because it's cheaper to let China, Vietnam, etc build it. Maybe I'm guilty of a bit of populism myself but I'd trade a very low price on these goods for a merely low price on these goods in order to get some productive manufacturing capacity in America. You have to view the full costs of something. Yes, in nominal price, this stuff is cheap. What does it cost us in terms of lost social cohesion and having to pay so many people unemployment because there are fewer and fewer unskilled labor jobs in manufacturing, which used to be a huge source of employment? We can't ALL migrate to the service industry. At some point, you know, a country actually needs to produce THINGS, not just services for each other.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:13 AM (nj1bB)

140 We only have our lame political class to blame for Trump.  They consistently fail to explain major issues to the American people in a meaningful way.  The Republican field are a bunch of pussies and he is talking strong, albeit nutty at times.  I can't count the times I have wanted to scream at the screen when so-called Republicans fumble questions on economic matters on TV.

Posted by: Ken Royall at April 29, 2011 08:13 AM (9zzk+)

141 I simply can't believe people are considering voting for Obama.

Posted by: kansas at April 29, 2011 08:13 AM (mka2b)

142 Maybe his best role would be to moderate the new show "GOP Candidate Apprentice."
He could berate the other repub midgets and fire anyone without the sack to attack our National Burden.

If that be racism make the most of it.


If that be Ebonics maybe it is.

Posted by: ontherocks at April 29, 2011 08:13 AM (HBqDo)

143 IMHO, this speech confirms what I always thought.Trump ain't running. He is a enjoying his right as an American (with resources) to use his voice to go after an Unamerican administration, God bless him and keep it up. Gallup shows Trump leading the pack, he is going to do what he can to stay in it but not lead it, speeches such as the one he did here are designed to make sure that he doesn't lead for long and yet still allows him to go full bore. Trump knows he has way to many skeletons in the closet to win it but he can do his part and that part is rabid pitbull, nothing more, nothing less. Think of the movie "Red Storm Rising" when the politician asks Jack Ryan to find the Russian sub. He told Ryan "The men in this room have too much to lose in taking part in this, where as you..... (Ryan says)are expendable".

Posted by: Drider at April 29, 2011 08:14 AM (HaJD9)

144

But I'm not sure if he's really even aware of it.

If he knows anything about the Chinese that doesn't involve a take-out menu, I'll eat my hat.

Posted by: Steve the Pirate at April 29, 2011 08:15 AM (W54Uh)

145

Hell, I like it , but not for President.

but It needs to be said and He is saying it.

Posted by: willow at April 29, 2011 08:15 AM (h+qn8)

146 Consider that he favored the Dems in his actual political participation up until he decided to try and run. He makes me uneasy, because it's not clear what his purpose is. It could be good, but it could be bad (for the GOP).

Posted by: KG at April 29, 2011 01:07 PM (4L0zr)

That is certainly true. If Trump pulls himself out of the race, and graciously accepts a primary loss, he's done us a lot of good.

If he runs as Perot II, he may end up causing more damage to us then he did to Obama - but even that isn't clear and it will depend greatly on who our candidate is.

It would be nice if we had more incite into his motivations, but nothing from his background really is informing us here.

And if he actually won the primary? That would be catastrophic. We need fundamental, conservative, changes NOW. At best Trump would be a repeat of Bush 2005-8.

Posted by: 18-1 at April 29, 2011 08:15 AM (7BU4a)

147

I don't think he's well positioned to win the presidency. I think he's currently winning the race for the primary, and if he fails that, he'd be well positioned to pull 15-20% as an Independent (and re-elect Barack Obama).

I just don't think you are right hear. If you ever read Trumps book Art of the Deal the main take away from his book is you have to know when to walk away. He not only wrote about it, he's conducted his life that way.

 


Posted by: robtr at April 29, 2011 08:16 AM (MtwBb)

148 OT - Zionist Hair Rays Strike Again:

Convicted RFK assassin says girl manipulated him

Convicted assassin Sirhan Sirhan was manipulated by a seductive girl in a mind control plot to shoot Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, and his bullets did not kill the presidential candidate, lawyers for Sirhan said in new legal papers.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at April 29, 2011 08:16 AM (9hSKh)

149 Ace, there is absolutely no way Trump could win the GOP nomination with the full force of the GOP pundit class and commentariat arrayed against him.  The problem with some of the Tea Party crazies (i.e. O'Donnell & Angle) is that they had the support of POPULIST guys like Rush, Hannity, Levin, etc. etc. pushing them along with the rank and file.  You think if a guy like Rush unloads full-force on Trump day after day (which he will if & when he becomes an actual threat -- right now he's a sideshow, artillery softening up Obama's defenses) that Trump could hope to succeed?  Simply put: no.  No fucking way.  Ever.  No amount of supposed demotic "populist" appeals and F-bomb-laden speeches would overcome that, plus the exposure of his record ($50,000 to Rahm Emmanuel! That'll go over well!). 

If you're worried about Trump running as an Independent, that's one thing.  I'm kinda worried about that myself.  I think that could easily reelect Obama.  But Trump will never capture the GOP nomination.

Lighten up, Francis.

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 29, 2011 08:16 AM (E+GWu)

150 The biggest problem with fucking Trump is that son of a bitch is sucking up all the oxygen. The media spends all its time on Trunp, and notta goddam thing on the other prospectives. Nada. What are the other candidadates doing and saying? Who the fuck knows, everybody is too busy reporting Trump said FUCK. Thats the problem for me.

Posted by: maddogg at April 29, 2011 08:16 AM (OlN4e)

151 In case you didn't notice, I keep saying Trump *worries* me. Because I think he can win, and then lose.

Or Lose, and then lose, but most importantly, win it for Obama.

Well if he goes into the primary our saving grace may be that no candidate can get a majority. Which means he would have to wait until the RNC convention. Which he would likely loose; and then have insufficient time to do any sort of independent run.


Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 08:17 AM (0q2P7)

152 I like the Donald. But the "Old Media" will end up choosing our weakest candidates to follow and cover like they did with McCain hence dictating the outcome. Which is for the Left to win of course.

Posted by: Jim at April 29, 2011 08:17 AM (/dRS6)

153 Any politician that speaks of himself in the third person (?) has no place in speaking for the people. The general range of Trump's critical self-assessment meter goes like this: - Refuse to put anything in my body that didn't come out of my body - Saw my face in a piece of toast - I am the greatest man ever including Jesus and Robocop - I am a golden god - I am very proud of myself for making the POTUS show his long-form birth certificate

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:17 AM (mHQ7T)

154

Seriously--has he said anything that shows he has a solid grip on critical issues?  Yeah, populism is fun--give 'em hell and all that--but Huey Long was a populist, too, and he'd have wrecked the country, tout de suite. 

Kinda like declaring a trade war on China might be fraught with consequences.

 

Posted by: Steve the Pirate at April 29, 2011 08:18 AM (W54Uh)

155 But the "Old Media" will end up choosing our weakest candidates to follow and cover Guess who they're following and covering right now?

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:18 AM (mHQ7T)

156 I think Obama has cost Trump millions and even more if he raises taxes.  This is Trump saving his 'empire'. 

He isn't running, he is protecting his investments.


Posted by: momma at April 29, 2011 08:18 AM (penCf)

157 @119 Obama has been seriously damaged by Trump and the DNC knows it.  People do not see Obama in the same way anymore.  I don't think Trump will run, but even if he wanted to, Rove and Fox news will not let him.  What Trump has done is show people that it is possible to unseat Obama.  Personally,I bet the DNC wishes he had come out as a Dem.  I have lots of liberal friends, and even though they would not vote (again) for Obama, they probably would vote for Trump, but I think he is the only "Repub" they would be likely to vote for.

- - -
Trump as D nominee?  That's what I was tossing around earlier and it sure fits the "surprise" comment from before.  Think about it.  Drum up a ton of moderate/conservative/independent support then go after the failure.  All his past positions support his D tendencies.  And it would be quite the shocker after everyone, including the MFM, has pushed him as THE ne plus ultra conservative to support against Obama.

Posted by: Flounder at April 29, 2011 08:18 AM (Kkt/i)

158 Ace -- Trump has pointed out that China is weak wrt the US, because we owe them a ton of money (so much so that if we default or simply "nationalize/repudiate" our debt we destroy the Chinese economy) and because the Communist Party of China rests entirely on economic growth.

China needs the US desperately to retain the Communist Party leadership and Red Princes. Should the US enter a trade war, its temporarily bad for the US, but will lead to the Chinese Leadership being shot by their own people (and a new crop of Red Princes rising up in China).

Trump's program is "immediate relief" by grabbing the oil in Iraq (and maybe Libya) along with drilling here. Drilling here is a ten-year payoff, seizing Muslim oil fields is immediate. That's a direct consumer and US-manufactured goods payoff. [Radically lower energy prices.] Yes the French, EUnuchs, and UN will all scream along with Muslim nations. Who cares?

His other main platform is US manufacturing revival. Which bottom line NEEDS tariff barriers to exist. Germany does it (the "Mittelstand" is heavily protected by various barriers) and has better wages AND economic growth than we do. The US MUST respond to China's use of dirt-cheap labor and NO environmental/labor/regulatory standards, by barriers in some form or another. It is worth noting that CHINA has massive barriers. We cannot sell manufactured goods there -- we have to make them over in China and hand over our intellectual property.

OF COURSE China is ripping us off. Trump's program is tit-for-tat, which after about 30 years of US economic weakness, is a requirement.

Bottom line you can't beat something (Obama) with nothing (bloodless RINOs who offer only tax cuts). Little Timmy (Pawlenty) down the well (who did nothing while Franken stole his election), Paul Ryan, Mitch Daniels, all those guys are offering weak tea, spending cuts and tax reductions. Good ideas but by themselves NOTHING that will put people back to work. Germans have sky-high taxes, and high employment. Taxes and even deficit spending (up to a point) don't really matter as much (see Japan) as the fundamental question of how much a nation can sell its labor and capital abroad. America has been outsourcing BOTH to China since the 1980's and it is time to CHANGE.

Posted by: whiskey at April 29, 2011 08:18 AM (L03mw)

159 I still maintain Trump has been a stalking horse all along and has no wish to run outside of the attention. If his speech at CPAC was Flame On then this speech is his Flame Off. I guess they figure they have no shot at pushing Obama to Release The Transcripts! I think they are wrong. Folding in the end is how Obama's thinks you win an argument.

Well Donald...thanks for the laughs.

Posted by: Rocks at April 29, 2011 08:19 AM (Q1lie)

160
It is a versatile word. I hope he encourages people to use it more often.

Posted by: sTevo at April 29, 2011 08:19 AM (ufaFH)

161 155 Any politician that speaks of himself in the third person (?) has no place in speaking for the people.

Bite Bob Dole.

Posted by: Bob Dole at April 29, 2011 08:19 AM (MMC8r)

162 Hey, he said this in Vegas! Doesn't the rule "What's done in Vegas, Stays in Vegas" apply? I think you could play hardball with China, but probably leave the M-Fer comment out of it.

Posted by: sexypig at April 29, 2011 08:19 AM (UmEOs)

163 I hope that Trump's headpiece doesn't run. If it does let us remember some other great American "Populists": Theodore Roosevelt, Robert M. La Follette, Sr., and Huey Long. Yup a nice list of Conservative Small Government types there.

Posted by: jimmytheleg at April 29, 2011 08:19 AM (fdRfu)

164 Ryan vs Trump? A well thought out plan vs general vulgar bombast ?  Quiet, well mannered presentation vs hucksterism? Maybe, we'll see how intelligent the voting public really is.(I'm afraid to look)

Posted by: long toss at April 29, 2011 08:20 AM (a/9+l)

165

...but It needs to be said and He is saying it

And he's priming the preference cascade that we all know is coming. We're fed up with Obama's shit just like we were with Jimmah Cahtah. But we've got a new generation that wasn't around to witness the gas lines and malaise. It's time to edumacate them and Trump's doing just that.

And Ace, would you be willing to place a bet on whether or not Trump runs? I have this cap from a bottle of Valu-Rite I'm willing to wager for that pudding cup lid of yours.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at April 29, 2011 08:20 AM (d0Tfm)

166

Kinda like declaring a trade war on China might be fraught with consequences.

Pshaw.

Posted by: Smoot-Hawley at April 29, 2011 08:20 AM (QKKT0)

167 That's the problem. Trump is speaking to the people in language they understand. You think the hoi polloi understand or are interested in charts and facts? Like it or not, that type of charisma sells in this hollywood country, and Tim Pawlenty ain't it.

Posted by: USS Diversity at April 29, 2011 08:20 AM (7zt2W)

168 Maybe I'm guilty of a bit of populism myself but I'd trade a very low price on these goods for a merely low price on these goods in order to get some productive manufacturing capacity in America.

This is where populism leads -- to thinking that is contradicted by the laws of economics. Just about the only thing 90% of economists agree on is that free trade is good for both parties, yet tariffs are a very popular (ist) idea.

Think about it a sec. If we raise tariffs on China, production will just shift to India, or Indonesia, or wherever. So we need to raise tariffs on everyone. Well, that you get the same effect by driving the dollar into the toilet which is what we are doing. Why that is a mistake is outside the scope of this comment, but all trump is saying is to trash the dollar and raise gas and food prices.

Trade will not balance through exchange rates (or tariffs.) we have tried that for decades and sooner or later even DC will not be able to sell that snake oil. Trade can only balance by (a) lose the unions, (b) deregulate, and (c) cut the deficit.

Posted by: nine cocnuts at April 29, 2011 08:21 AM (uz3hs)

169 Any politician that speaks of himself in the third person (?) has no place in speaking for the people.

Bite Bob Dole.

Posted by: Bob Dole at April 29, 2011 01:19 PM (MMC8r)


I can assure you, The President was born in Hawaii.

Posted by: Obama at April 29, 2011 08:21 AM (penCf)

170 Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 01:13 PM (nj1bB)

True but it doesn't simply follow that if you limit cheap imports you automatically create the climate for increased domestic production (more expensive or otherwise).

Are there any highly productive, consumer driven economies that are highly protected?  Some European ones I suppose but we've generally looked down on them because of their idiotic labor rules which go along with it.

It's always going to come down to choices, there's no magic formula to get it 'just right'. Also, it's a set of value judgements that aren't empirically based (why populism works politically to the whatever extent it does).

I just don't think saying "Slap a tariff on them!" is going to get us to the promised land a guy like Trump is pretending to offer anymore than it would when a guy like John Edwards tries selling it.


Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 08:21 AM (2f1Rs)

171 Well if he goes into the primary our saving grace may be that no candidate can get a majority. No way Trump wins a single primary, but I wonder who he helps. He at least keeps some of the second tier candidates from catching fire, though their selling points are their "lack of charisma" and flame retardedness.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:21 AM (mHQ7T)

172 It would be nice if we had more incite into his motivations, but nothing from his background really is informing us here.

I think it's to feed his massive ego, nothing more.

Posted by: taylork at April 29, 2011 08:21 AM (5wsU9)

173 >>>And Ace, would you be willing to place a bet on whether or not Trump runs? Sure, with the caveat that of course he won't run *IF* there's a nasty document release. That is, left to his own devices, he'll run. If forced out by external circumstance, he won't.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:21 AM (nj1bB)

174 What does it cost us in terms of lost social cohesion and having to pay so many people unemployment because there are fewer and fewer unskilled labor jobs in manufacturing, which used to be a huge source of employment?

We can't ALL migrate to the service industry. At some point, you know, a country actually needs to produce THINGS, not just services for each other.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 01:13 PM (nj1bB)

You are right about all that and have to include the cost of our military in there as well.

If you have listened to Trump though while he said he would definitely charge a 25% tarrif he would only do so if China refused to quit the currency bullshit. He goes on to state that they will do that when confronted because they have more to lose than us.

China is dependent on selling us stuff, without our market they have some serious problems and no way to fix them. He's negotiating right now with them in the media, telling them that we can take the hit and asking them if they thing they can.

Posted by: robtr at April 29, 2011 08:21 AM (MtwBb)

175 and notta goddam thing on the other prospectives.

Because none of them have committed. (Other than Paul and Johnson do you really want them getting the face time?)

Trump may not be official official yet but at least he's campaigning hard, which the media is covering. The rest of our stable looks like they can't find their gate, the track in general, the way out of the stables, or even their own stall door. Can't blame the media for not doing full segments on milque toast.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 08:22 AM (0q2P7)

176 "136 Those holding trump up but degrading palin are hypocrites too. They have similar numbers. Though palin is serious and will win by being a goog candidate and a populist through a smile. Not anger and f bombs"   I am torn between two views of Trump's objective: (1) he is shilling for Hillary by forcing the Dem party to put spurs to the WON to shape up or ship out, or (2) he is enlarging the acceptable public personality envelope to make Sarah seem a nice reasonable alternative. Either point of view is based on the target being white, blue-collar voters in the MidWest and PA and upstate NY (aka Hillary Voters). Just sayin.   There is one other possibility: Donald is loving some Donald on us.

Posted by: Parson Hussein at April 29, 2011 08:22 AM (Q5+Og)

177 In general I still believe in the economic theory behind the all tariffs are bad theory, but there is one modern caveat that changes it at least relative to China:  their manipulation of their currency to the effect that they have already issued a kind of "reverse tariff" against us which basically give them a one way trade barrier and lessens our natural manufacturing competitive advantage.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at April 29, 2011 08:22 AM (IXLvN)

178

"Who the fuck knows, everybody is too busy reporting Trump said FUCK. Thats the problem for me."

Your missing all the beauty of this. That is exactly what we want to happend. We are still 18 months out. Think of it like a football game. You want your Lineman out there taking all the hits, so that the Quaterback can sit back in the pocket and make good touchdown passes, without any pressure from the Defense. Obama is no longer on Offense, he is on Defense!

The quaterback right now is probably Romney!

Posted by: Jimi at April 29, 2011 08:22 AM (JMsOK)

179 imagine...someone saying what you're all thinking and it upsets you........

Posted by: phoenixgirl at April 29, 2011 08:22 AM (Cm66w)

180 Oh, and by the way...for all the talk about how Obama is Carter, why wouldn't this make Donald Trump the new John Anderson?  Moderate Republican drops out to run as an Independent...tanks.

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 29, 2011 08:23 AM (FO1sk)

181 OK Donald. So where is the lock of hair from your first haircut? Hmmmm? Because there is no way that squirrel on your head is real. Liar! You were born bald- weren't you?

Posted by: Agitator at April 29, 2011 08:23 AM (CHrmZ)

182 In all seriousness, Trump doesn't stand a chance in hell of becoming the R nominee. People are saying his name in polls right now because he's the only [erson out there stirring shit up, everyone else is just doing the usual focus crowd tested crap. Once people have to actually make a choice, they'll drop him quicker than Obama broke all his campaign promises.

Posted by: booger at April 29, 2011 08:23 AM (9RFH1)

183 I said back in '08 that if a can of pork-n-beans was running against Obama, I would vote for pork-n-beans.

Trump is saying, Lemmiwinks I want to be that can of pork-n-beans.

Now I'm hungry.

Posted by: Honey Badger's Union Local #438 at April 29, 2011 08:23 AM (pdRb1)

184 Only Mitch Daniels can stand up to the chi-coms!

Posted by: D. Hopper at April 29, 2011 08:23 AM (k4x4B)

185 I'm no fan of the Donald, but I see him as a very strong possibility.

Reasoning:
1.  Name Recognition.  The Trump name = financial success (especially in the minds of anyone who remembers the 80's, or has been to Vegas.)
2.  The "Anyone but Obama" voter
3.  So he dropped an F-bomb. The only people who will be turned off by that enough to not vote for him?  Elderly prudes.  The young vote won't care.
4.  The only thing the left has come back at him with is his haircut--they can't/won't challenge him on the issues, any issues.  When push comes to shove, he'll say "I can always get a haircut, but your ideas will destroy America."
5.  The biggest reason I like him: He scares the left.  He is a successful businessman.  He will obviously be friendly towards business and capitalism.  He is, professionally, everything Obama isn't.

Posted by: Chuck Z at April 29, 2011 08:24 AM (qXWUM)

186 Trump uniquely understands the US position with China because he has been in the situation of owing ruinous sums to banks/investors and having them at his mercy - instead of vice-versa. 

You can't negotiate unless you have the option to walk and proven balls to do so.  The risk of playing hardball with China is that they might implode; and that would lead to all sorts of contingencies.

Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 08:24 AM (WkuV6)

187 Damn you Honey Badger's Union Local #438!

Posted by: Lemmiwinks at April 29, 2011 08:24 AM (pdRb1)

188

We can't ALL migrate to the service industry. At some point, you know, a country actually needs to produce THINGS, not just services for each other.

We need to invent Stuff!, too.

Posted by: Barack al aqsa Obama at April 29, 2011 08:24 AM (jyGn7)

189 I hope that Trump's headpiece doesn't run. Its motto on its presidential seal can be Ve Are Possum-ehs.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:24 AM (mHQ7T)

190 Trump may not be official official yet but at least he's campaigning hard, which the media is covering. The rest of our stable looks like they can't find their gate, the track in general, the way out of the stables, or even their own stall door. Can't blame the media for not doing full segments on milque toast.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 01:22 PM (0q2P7)

Sadly, thats a good point.

Posted by: maddogg at April 29, 2011 08:25 AM (OlN4e)

191 >>>I just don't think saying "Slap a tariff on them!" is going to get us to the promised land a guy like Trump is pretending to offer anymore than it would when a guy like John Edwards tries selling it. I think it's a popular idea among the many, many people who used to work in manufacturing (or whose parents worked in manufacturing). I'm not saying it's a good idea. This is one of those many areas where I have no strong opinion because I don't know. I know Milton Friedman believed that free trade, without tariffs, was advantageous, *even if your trading partners did not reciprocate.* I know very smart people believe this idea. Because they're smart, I give them some credence. However, I've never fully bought it in my bones. I neither oppose the idea nor support it. It's a "Whatever you guys decide on" thing for me. I note that very, very smart people are occasionally wrong. In fact, sometimes, they can be the wrongest of all.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:25 AM (nj1bB)

192

The quaterback right now is probably Romney!

Posted by: Jimi at April 29, 2011 01:22 PM (JMsOK)

Please no.

Posted by: Team America at April 29, 2011 08:25 AM (7BU4a)

193 Trump is in 4th place in the new Fox poll.  He ranks 5th or 6th on Intrade. There's almost zero chance he'll get the GOP nom.  His only potential role is as an independent spoiler. 

Posted by: Jon at April 29, 2011 08:25 AM (oB4iK)

194 I said back in '08 that if a can of pork-n-beans was running against Obama, I would vote for pork-n-beans.

Trump is saying, Lemmiwinks I want to be that can of pork-n-beans.

Now I crave some pork n beans, and it is Friday. Crap.

Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 08:26 AM (WkuV6)

195

The PRESIDENCY is a hell of lot more impressive a gift than a Ferrari or some gadget from Hammacher-Schlemmer.

Well shit. No wonder I didn't get a thank you note for the $20 Walmart gift certificate I sent to him and Melania when they got married.

I don't think he's going to run. He's just a self-promoting tool. But at the moment, he's OUR self-promoting tool and he's got a lot of people taking a different look at President Petey right now.

Face it, there is a huge segment of our population who don't pay much attention to politics...and when a celebrity like Trump speaks, their ears perk up like when you ask your dog if he wants a piece of Easter ham (at least my puppy Gonzo the Ridiculous' do).

...and with his megaphone...he is helping to get the preference cascade to start flowing beyond a drip with independents...and even some on the left

Posted by: beedubya at April 29, 2011 08:26 AM (AnTyA)

196 Maybe I'm guilty of a bit of populism myself but I'd trade a very low price on these goods for a merely low price on these goods in order to get some productive manufacturing capacity in America.

Why would you assume that the manufacturing capacity for novelty toys and t-shirts and teapots and any other type of manufacturing that is highly cost-sensitive would automatically be repatriated? Nobody is going to reopen textile factories in South Carolina when they could do the same thing in Vietnam or the Philippines at a fraction of the cost. This type of manufacturing left the country because it isn't productive and you better hope it isn't ever productive again. Being able to compete on a cost basis with stone-age shitholes would not be an indication that America had regained her former glory.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at April 29, 2011 08:26 AM (+lsX1)

197 152 The biggest problem with fucking Trump is that son of a bitch is sucking up all the oxygen. ...

Posted by: maddogg at April 29, 2011 01:16 PM (OlN4e)


There's no O2 in a vacuum.


Posted by: Barbarian at April 29, 2011 08:26 AM (EL+OC)

198 I don't think Trump is running.

I think he's going to call a presser in a few weeks and lead people to think it's when hell announce he is running. Then he'll get there and say, "You really thought I'd run and take the pay cut? You people are so gullible. In fact, you're all fired! Speaking of which...make sure to watch the new season of The Apprentice this fall on NBC! President? Yeah, right.".

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 08:27 AM (2f1Rs)

199 2. The "Anyone but Obama" voter According to current polls that show Obama with an average 3 pt lead over the GOP field, there are not too many of those. People with serious concerns are not interested in anything Trump has to say.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:27 AM (mHQ7T)

200 OF COURSE China is ripping us off.

I respectfully disagree. China is not ripping us off. We show up at their door strung out on the drugs of deficit spending, over regulation, and waste, and beg them for some unsecured cash to go on another binge.

China is only taking advantage of our stupidity, and at great risk to themselves. Just about the only thing for them to do with the money that is more risky is to invest in China.

If we cut the deficit then we would not have so much cash to spend over there. Then they would not have so much cash to lend us. That is the only way to fight back.

Posted by: nine cocnuts at April 29, 2011 08:27 AM (uz3hs)

201

That's the problem. Trump is speaking to the people in language they understand. You think the hoi polloi understand or are interested in charts and facts? Like it or not, that type of charisma sells in this hollywood country, and Tim Pawlenty ain't it.

It takes more than just raw charisma.  It needs to be paired with an impression that the candidate comes across as "presidential".  Trump, Ron Paul (and to a slightly lesser degree) Palin fail miserably in that regard.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 29, 2011 08:27 AM (SY2Kh)

202 >>>Those holding trump up but degrading palin are hypocrites too. They have similar numbers. Though palin is serious and will win by being a goog candidate and a populist through a smile We now return to our regularly schedule programming, It's All About Sarah. I'm not "holding trump up." I think he's unelectable as Palin is. In case you didn't notice, Palin is not doing anything particularly consistent with the idea of running.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:27 AM (nj1bB)

203 The quaterback right now is probably Romney!

Christ, that will cause flashbacks to when Aaron Brooks was QB of the Saints.  30-yard losses on a sack and dropping the ball while pulling his arm back to pass while having a big-ass smile on his face on the sidelines.  What a guy.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at April 29, 2011 08:27 AM (UvFnc)

204 JeffB, Whao there buddy, I'm one of those crazy Tea Party folks, you sound like you have been absolutely indoctrinated by the media in making the non existent connection between Trump and what most "crazy" Tea Party people want. I haven't seen a candidate from the GOP field that I like at the moment and as far as Trump goes, the more he can hammer this administration, the better and if it makes GOP runners sweat, thats icing on the cake. I'm not sure if your noticing how vanilla the GOP has performed so far since the last election but many have.Many are also seeing glimmers of hope in what the GOP is purposing but until the results are in, I suggest letting people like Trump run his gambit and try to turn off the "wrong" news channels who paint the people that you call crazy as anything other than the very same people who played a vital part in at least slowing down the ship to start turning it around. PS, There are more vital parts to be dealt with for the 2012 elections, would be a shame for folks to break away from the one's who brought you to the dance.

Posted by: Drider at April 29, 2011 08:28 AM (HaJD9)

205

Ace>>Second: Let's say he wins the presidency.

>>What the hell does he say to China and Saudi Arabia?

Well to be clear, like most people seeking elective office, what he's saying he's going to do while running is probably going to be different than what he's actually going to do should he take the office.

Even if Trump does believe his own bullshit rhetoric about running American foreign policy like a business, in practice (as with Obama) most of the actual foreign policy will be designed and execute by subordinates.

In the real world, what candidate Trump says now about foreign policy isn't going to be nearly so important as who President-elect Trump selects to manage his foreign policy.  If you believe that Trump actually has some skill in hiring people (which, arguably, he probably does)  then his foreign policy is likely to be reasonable, at least in the sense that it will reflect his own values.

So with respect to the question the question isn't what Trump is going to say to China and Saudi Arabia, the question is what Trump believes is in America's interest to do there.



Posted by: looking closely at April 29, 2011 08:28 AM (6Q9g2)

206 >>3.  So he dropped an F-bomb. The only people who will be turned off by that enough to not vote for him?  Elderly prudes.  The young vote won't care.

Guess which demographic doesn't vote in elections in large numbers?  On the other hand, guess which one DOES?

Fail.

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 29, 2011 08:28 AM (E+GWu)

207 Trump is in 4th place in the new Fox poll. He ranks 5th or 6th on Intrade. There's almost zero chance he'll get the GOP nom. His only potential role is as an independent spoiler. Posted by: Jon at April 29, 2011 01:25 PM (oB4iK) Winner winner chicken dinner.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:28 AM (mHQ7T)

208 God..that man has some great looking hair.

Posted by: James Traficant at April 29, 2011 08:29 AM (AnTyA)

209 There are mechanisms short of tariffs thru the US Trade Representative, EXIMbank, etc. to put a little stick into the relationship with China.  The Chinese don't believe we have the balls to do it - and except in certain industries (Aerospace, Defense, maybe others) - they are right.

Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 08:29 AM (WkuV6)

210 3.  So he dropped an F-bomb. The only people who will be turned off by that enough to not vote for him?  Elderly prudes.  The young vote won't care.
Posted by: Chuck Z at April 29, 2011 01:24 PM (qXWUM)

You know I really don't get this dismissing of vulgarities in public. It has nothing to do with age. You know who swears in public? Stupid people swear in public. Swearing in public gets you attention on a reality show not win you the presidency. Many a politician has given an impassioned speech without ever uttering so much as a Darn. Swear in public and you just look stupid. Look at Joe Biden and he thought he couldn't be heard.

Posted by: Rocks at April 29, 2011 08:29 AM (Q1lie)

211 201  People with serious concerns are not interested in anything Trump has to say.

52% of voters, however are not the ones with serious concerns for our country.

Posted by: Chuck Z at April 29, 2011 08:30 AM (qXWUM)

212 >>>I don't think he's going to run. He's just a self-promoting tool I still don't know why people think a man who says he's running and acts like he's running and is actually leading in current polls is not running. I keep saying this: No celebrity in America say's he's pro-life or a conservative unless 1, he really believes it passionately or 2, he's running for office. As I know that 1 does not apply to Trump, that leaves me with 2. And as that post last night showed, you can't say this is to "increase ratings on the Apprentice." The Apprentice has an EXTREMELY liberal/Democrat audience and he's losing viewers, not gaining them.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:31 AM (nj1bB)

213 #151

Nail on the head.

Does anyone really think that Donald Trump is actually going to win the SC State Republican primary?

Not only can I not see it, I wouldn't even put him at second place.  

The only issue is whether or not Trump is going to run as an independent becoming the "Ross Perot" of 2012.   Even there, he's probably going to have to self-finance, and that might act as a disincentive for him to try.

Posted by: looking closely at April 29, 2011 08:31 AM (6Q9g2)

214 This type of manufacturing left the country because it isn't productive and you better hope it isn't ever productive again

The problem is that that is not the only type of manufacturing that has left the US. I am in high tech electronics, and it is scary how much advanced manufacturing is leaving the states and going to China. Semiconductors (US is too regulated) Machining (unions) plastics, circuit boards, wire, machine tools, heavy equipment, etc. etc.

Posted by: nine cocnuts at April 29, 2011 08:31 AM (uz3hs)

215

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 01:27 PM (2f1Rs)

I'm thinking more and more that hes serious. He is expending a huge amount of personal time, energy, and money just to take a powder at the moment of truth. He may not miss the money, but the personal energy and time he will never get back.

Posted by: maddogg at April 29, 2011 08:31 AM (OlN4e)

216 I'm not "holding trump up." I don't remember any posts saying we shouldn't be too quick to write off Sarah Palin. Every time her name is mentioned, a laundry list (and a legitimate one) of why she will never win follows. Can't say the same for Trump.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:31 AM (mHQ7T)

217 Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 01:24 PM (WkuV6)

Yeah but a guy like Trump can at some point walk away from a single company that is part of his larger venture. It doesn't work for a country because where are you going?  There's no walling it off from the rest of your wealth/ventures.

We and China definitely have each other by the short hairs because we have a gun pointed at each others heads but for it to really work, we have to be willing to shoot ourselves first.

If Trump truly thinks a country's options are the same as a businesses, he's even more dangerous than he seems.

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 08:32 AM (2f1Rs)

218 Trump looks like he doesn't get that, that we both have to succeed in order to recover enough to get a divorce and go our separate ways. Kicking our life partner in the jimmy is not a good way to start a combined recovery effort.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 12:55 PM (0q2P7)

Your entire post was excellent, Moose.  Thank you.

Posted by: kathysaysso at April 29, 2011 08:32 AM (ZtwUX)

219

There's no O2 in a vacuum.

Posted by: Barbarian at April 29, 2011 01:26 PM (EL+OC)

(boom-tish)

THIS!

Posted by: beedubya at April 29, 2011 08:32 AM (AnTyA)

220 1. Name Recognition. The Trump name = financial success (especially in the minds of anyone who remembers the 80's, or has been to Vegas.) Have to disagree on that one. To me his name says spectacular bankruptcies.

Posted by: t-bird at April 29, 2011 08:32 AM (FcR7P)

221 I think you could play hardball with China

China *wants* to see us succeed. Because if we do they dig out of their hole. They are giving us good advice on *how* to succeed with our capitalist economy. They are telling us BE LESS SOCIALIST!! I'm sure they are secretly wondering the hows and whys of why the country that essentially invented free market economics is turning away from the system that made them (us) the most powerful economy in the world. Anyway....

We play hardball with China.

China dumps our bonds for a loss.

US Currency collapses.

US and China lapse into a depression.

This is mutually assured economic destruction at this point.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 08:32 AM (0q2P7)

222 If this was months away from the real election it would be awful for sure.   t-18 months, I am leaning toward those saying he is making the left waste whatever race card ammo they have left.  Everyone outside of hardcore leftists are pretty tired of hearing it played.  Even they must be hoping this Obama album has more then the one song.

Could be wrong this could be disastrous but hey we Americans are if nothing else high stakes gamblers.  If this is all still going on 3-6 months from now we have to shut it down  *I think Trump should offer  Obama free bankruptcy advice. 

I know this Americans like balls out fighters willing to skewer government and big business in the same breath. Do we have anyone like that?

Posted by: Shiggz at April 29, 2011 08:33 AM (mLAWK)

Posted by: Chuck Z at April 29, 2011 08:33 AM (qXWUM)

224 So now Trump is using dirty words.  Next up, The Trump Sex Tape (1.0).

Posted by: mrp at April 29, 2011 08:33 AM (HjPtV)

225 He is expending a huge amount of personal time, energy, and money just to take a powder at the moment of truth. Trump would not take that risk. Not if he pays off Rahm for real estate contracts. He is being bankrolled by the Democrats, because he helps them more than the GOP. He swore he had information that would be revealed -- just like Paladino. He lied. Move on.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:33 AM (mHQ7T)

226

I don't remember any posts saying we shouldn't be too quick to write off Sarah Palin. Every time her name is mentioned, a laundry list (and a legitimate one) of why she will never win follows. Can't say the same for Trump.

LIES AHOY (!) 

Posted by: PALINISTO! in 2 x 4 at April 29, 2011 08:34 AM (jyGn7)

227 218

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 01:27 PM (2f1Rs)

I'm thinking more and more that hes serious. He is expending a huge amount of personal time, energy, and money just to take a powder at the moment of truth. He may not miss the money, but the personal energy and time he will never get back.

I don't know.  Trump is the kind of guy who, if you told him you were writing a tell-all book that will destroy him, would say "Be sure you spell my name right."

I wouldn't put it past him to be using this as a case of "There's no such thing as bad publicity" writ large to push his businesses and/or TV show, which will end up with him profiting one way or another.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at April 29, 2011 08:34 AM (UvFnc)

228 >>JackStraw, you are insane. Respectfully Possibly. But I'd like you to explain how a guy as recently as a year ago was touting his belief in a universal single payer healthcare system, a guy who tosses out F-bombs, a guy who threatens to steal other countries oil, a guy who gave more money to Dems than he ever did to Republicans, a guy who threatens a trade war with China, a guy who's lifestyle would never be considered conservative, particularly in NH, SC or Iowa, and on and on and on, thinks he is going to have any shot of winning the Republican primary when people really start looking at his record. Trump pulled the same shit in 2000 when he threatened to go Indie and it never went anywhere. Trump has one overriding product, Trump. He needs to stay in the press and he's a master at doing it. And yes, given his freewheeling lifestyle where he jets around wherever and whenever he wants, plays even more golf than Obama, never negotiates with anyone he just sues them or gets sued (got a couple going right now for fraud.. not real good during a presidential race), the presidency would be confining and a step back for him.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2011 08:34 AM (TMB3S)

229 >>>I don't remember any posts saying we shouldn't be too quick to write off Sarah Palin. Who said don't write him off? I don't think he can win the election. That is a different question than whether he is actually running or whether he can win a primary. A lot of people just seem to want to answer all questions, including unrelated ones, the same way, because it's easier or something. You seem to assume that my answer to the questions "Is he running?" and "Can he win the primary?" must be the same as "Can he win the election?" or "Is he a good candidate for us?" In a post where I talk about the danger of populism, you come away with the notion that I'm embracing an explicitly, over the top populist appeal.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:34 AM (nj1bB)

230 Posted by: nine cocnuts at April 29, 2011 01:31 PM (uz3hs)

Indeed, if the GOP wins in 2012, they absolutely MUST rollback all the shit the Dems have done, and make America a better, or hell, the best, place to do business. Only then can we possibly stop, and maybe reverse, the bleed.

Posted by: KG at April 29, 2011 08:34 AM (4L0zr)

231 My thought is that he either wins the primary, but then can't win the election OR runs as an ideologically moderate populist (such that we don't really "win" anything with him, except for taking out Obama), or he loses the primary, then runs as an I, and gets Obama elected president. I don't know how you see my posts on him as boosterism.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:36 AM (nj1bB)

232

And yes, given his freewheeling lifestyle where he jets around wherever and whenever he wants, plays even more golf than Obama, never negotiates with anyone he just sues them or gets sued (got a couple going right now for fraud.. not real good during a presidential race), the presidency would be confining and a step back for him.

+1. ...Respectfully.

Posted by: beedubya at April 29, 2011 08:37 AM (AnTyA)

233 Populism or common sense?

Good question...but we all remember the last time this happened...and I, for one, didn't like the outcome at all.

Let me give you a hint - "You hear that giant sucking sound?"

Now. Name that tune...

Posted by: Gunslinger at April 29, 2011 08:37 AM (Zi+FQ)

234

Indeed, if the GOP wins in 2012, they absolutely MUST rollback all the shit the Dems have done,

Even with a win, little or no chance.

Posted by: USS Diversity at April 29, 2011 08:37 AM (7zt2W)

235 The problem with trying to run the government like a business is that most businesses produce a product--the only product a government produces is regulation.  If the government produces regulation, it is running well--like a business.  If the government is not over-regulating, then businesses run well--like businesses.

Posted by: Chuck Z at April 29, 2011 08:38 AM (qXWUM)

236 I can't see Trump agreeing to put his businesses into blind trusts. I can see him hoping to become the next Administration's GE, GM, or GS.

Posted by: t-bird at April 29, 2011 08:38 AM (FcR7P)

237 If I'm not giving him the full "Do not vote for this man" treatment it's because right now I have a fear that he actually could win the primary and then I'll wind up having to support him, if I want to boot out Obama. Which I do. And yes, in case it isn't clear (I thought it was), i think he's guilty of the same poltical sin Palin is, of playing strongly just to one non-majority coalition while alienating everyone else. Different coalition, but still the same problem. You can't go after 20% of the people at the expense of the other 30% you need to win an election.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:39 AM (nj1bB)

238 Yeah but a guy like Trump can at some point walk away from a single company that is part of his larger venture. It doesn't work for a country because where are you going?  There's no walling it off from the rest of your wealth/ventures.

We and China definitely have each other by the short hairs because we have a gun pointed at each others heads but for it to really work, we have to be willing to shoot ourselves first.

If Trump truly thinks a country's options are the same as a businesses, he's even more dangerous than he seems.

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 01:32 PM (2f1Rs)

I really don't understand what you just said there and I am not sure you do either.

Trump has never walked away from Trump. There were times when it may have been easier to for him but he hung in there and renegotiated deals with the his banks. He even hung in on deals where he declared chapter 11 and ended up making money. He hasn't declared chapter 7 that I know of.

He has walked away from several deals that he decided weren't good for him. You have to do the same thing as a country dealing with wars, trade deals etc. Although we haven't been doing that in some time, I think that is his point. 

Posted by: robtr at April 29, 2011 08:39 AM (MtwBb)

239 Trump has one overriding product, Trump. He needs to stay in the press and he's a master at doing it.


^^^This. That's what this is, it's Trump promoting Trump. Sure, he's serious about running, but he's serious because he's one of those guys who thinks that if he just puts himself out there people will flock to him, Charlie Sheen syndrome i shall dub it. He's running because it's who he is, he's an egotistical attention whore.

Posted by: booger at April 29, 2011 08:39 AM (9RFH1)

240 So  trump says a couple F you's  and  talks  tough  and the betamales fall all over themselves.   Got it.  Remind me to never take their opinion  with a straight face again.  This isn't populism,  this is WWE.      

Posted by: unseen at April 29, 2011 08:39 AM (Dwxhp)

241 237 USS Diversity,

I can see us hamstringing BuryCare, rolling back the federal workforce through contracting for another set of savings but yeah Bury rammed through legacy spending pretty hard..

Posted by: sven10077 at April 29, 2011 08:39 AM (kq1lG)

242 Going back to my point about Trump just 'protecting his investments', he knows that the shit he is saying could not be said by any of our front men.  He knows the media would rip them apart.  He also knows that a few more D years and he can kiss his wealth good-bye. 

Nobody on our side would get away with the in your face attitude he is giving the media and Obama right now.

He has to do this if he wants a pro-business, lower taxes Republican in the Big House.

He's not running.  He is just clearing away the underbrush so a Republican can run and be successful.

Posted by: Obama at April 29, 2011 08:39 AM (penCf)

243 You can put aside the pay cut. Trump might take that, for 4 years, maybe. What he will never live with is people second guessing him and crawling up his ass 24/7. This guy owned casinos remember? It wasn't just for the money. There's a ready supply of desperate women in the gambling industry and Trump has taken full advantage over the years you can bet on that.  His private life would make Teddy Kennedy's look like a choir boy's. He probably has a bottle of Viagra and a waitress sandwich scheduled for Friday nights. He's not given that up. Schwarzenegger could get away with "massages" in California. You ain't pulling that crap in DC. It's the main reason Obama has become so bitchy since winning the Presidency I think. He probably had a frickin' harem back in Chicago.

Posted by: Rocks at April 29, 2011 08:40 AM (Q1lie)

244 >>>I can't see Trump agreeing to put his businesses into blind trusts. He has groomed his daughter to be an acceptable (if not superior) steward of the business.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:40 AM (nj1bB)

245 239 I can't see Trump agreeing to put his businesses into blind trusts. I can see him hoping to become the next Administration's GE, GM, or GS.

Posted by: t-bird at April 29, 2011 01:38 PM (FcR7P)

I can. I don't think Trump gives a shit about his businesses or his money. I think he cares about victory. And I think that is all he cares about.

Posted by: maddogg at April 29, 2011 08:40 AM (OlN4e)

246

"People with serious concerns are not interested in anything Trump has to say."

This is the Classic of all Classics'. You lived in the most powerful and wealthy country that planet had ever seen, the majority of it's citizens just voted in a Collectivist who believes America is the problem in the world, and her economic system doesn't work!

"People with serious Concerns?"

My ASS! Too Late for that Kindergarten Crap. This is about stopping the bleeding, it's a free-for-all, and in this case I agree with Liberals....The Ends do Justify the Means in this Case! 

Posted by: Jimi at April 29, 2011 08:41 AM (JMsOK)

247

More than anyone else, I think Trump helps Romney and Huckabee. Whether he runs or not, he is taking up so much media space that no outside or second-tier candidate is going to run to the top unless he backs out relatively soon. He may run or not, but it is clear that Trump loves the attention and publicity. I can't imagine him giving it up anytime soon.

I don't think he can win the Republican primary, and I really would only put him at a 30% chance of running an independent bid. I don't think he really has the stamina for it. I do think he greatly reduces the chances of a 'None of the Above' candidate on the Republican side, though.

Posted by: Paper at April 29, 2011 08:41 AM (VoSja)

248

I think Trump is a buffoon.

But I disagree with AceÂ’s premise that Trump and Obama have the same foreign policy message.  I would paraphrase ObamaÂ’s message as “Do as I ask or you will hurt my feelings (and itÂ’s not nice to hurt black peopleÂ’s feelings).”  TrumpÂ’s is “Do as I ask or IÂ’ll nuke you!”   If Trump meant it, he would not be a buffoon and he would be fit to be president (of Iran or North Korea).

Posted by: Dennis at April 29, 2011 08:41 AM (sb8LP)

249 Rocks, you can put aside the pay cut. Pay is not measured in dollars alone. What price would you put on your desk being the Resolute Desk, and your office being the Oval Office? The emoluments of the presidency are priceless.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:41 AM (nj1bB)

250 Did the guys get shirts? That's all I want to know.

Posted by: Donald Fucking Trump at April 29, 2011 08:42 AM (4Kl5M)

251

JeffB,
Whao there buddy, I'm one of those crazy Tea Party folks, you sound like you have been absolutely indoctrinated by the media in making the non existent connection between Trump and what most "crazy" Tea Party people want.

Posted by: Drider at April 29, 2011 01:28 PM

The MFing MBM knows there are many who are easily still influenced by their bullshit. That's why continue with it.

Posted by: beedubya at April 29, 2011 08:42 AM (AnTyA)

252 >>Trump pulled the same shit in 2000 when he threatened to go Indie and it never went anywhere. Trump has one overriding product, Trump. He needs to stay in the press and he's a master at doing it.

Again, everything JackStraw is saying here is correct and honestly, Ace is off his rocker a bit (get more sleep!) with panic.   Ace, you never responded to my #151, pointing out how it is FUNCTIONALLY impossible for Donald Trump to win the GOP primaries.  In fact, I'll point out that he is not, in fact, leading all the polls anymore (he's slipping in the newest Fox one to 4th place).  What this is about is, as JackStraw said, Trump promoting Trump.  He's doing it more heavily now, with more 'investment', because he's a OBVIOUS NARCISSIST who is hugely enjoying the attention and public microphone he's been given.  But he will not win a GOP primary if he runs (again: the logic is fucking ironclad -- you are, I think, subconsciously projecting a GOP electorate that is more open to Trump's appeal than it is, in part because YOU ARE, as you admitted, somewhat open to it).  If he runs as an independent, we may be well and truly boned, but I have little reason to think he will.

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 29, 2011 08:42 AM (E+GWu)

253 Hmm, Obama was part of the coalition against Walker, but I don't remember him focusing on Obama specifically. It was a fight against the union bureaucracy, primarily. The fleebaggers went to IL for a reason. Obama sent his Soros-funded campaign arm Organizing For America. Even if he was in the wings, it was show down between Walker and Obama with the 2012 election hanging in the balance. The debate with Christie was even more blatant. Obama tried to bully Christie into a union project that was no longer feasible, and Christie stood firm.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:42 AM (mHQ7T)

254 Then those 90% of economists should pay the societal costs......

Posted by: Downscaled Upscale at April 29, 2011 01:40 PM (IhHdM)


You have the wrong idea of how this works.

Posted by: The Scrooge McDuck Society at April 29, 2011 08:43 AM (H+LJc)

255

"We play hardball with China.

China dumps our bonds for a loss.

US Currency collapses.

US and China lapse into a depression.

This is mutually assured economic destruction at this point."

 

And we all know the solution to depressions don't we? Yep, world wars.

 

Trump is pushing buttons daring Mr. Bumbles to respond on the trade imbalance. Remember, the target of all Trump's actions to date is the "Hillary Voters". Yep, those miserable clingers that gave Hillary a 10 point victory in the PA primaries. Trump is a stalking horse for Hillary. It is possible he is breaking ground for Sarah. Sarah has the magnetism and personal history to collect these voters as well. That is why the Dem's are bat shit scared of her. I know ACE is convinced she is unelectable, but my math says any Pubbie that can take PA will win huge. So far, I don't see any pubic on the PA radar.

The one thing we have to avoid is the "safe" button down grey flannel party candidate. Pull a Dole in this one and we can pretty much kiss our children's future away.

Posted by: Parson Hussein at April 29, 2011 08:43 AM (Q5+Og)

256

The emoluments of the presidency are priceless.

Especially if you save the dress as proof!

Posted by: Linda Tripp at April 29, 2011 08:44 AM (jyGn7)

257 Let. Him. Rant. He is landing punches on Obama and inflicting damage, all good. Any Republican nominee will have benefited from Trump's attacks and they can pretend to take the high road and distance themselves from him if they so choose.

Posted by: Ken Royall at April 29, 2011 08:44 AM (9zzk+)

258 Wow, ace!  I'm completely on the polar opposite side of you on this one.  I think it's going to cost him dearly.  Dooms him, in fact.

Posted by: Damn Dirty RINO at April 29, 2011 08:44 AM (hSwL0)

259 Ace...(or one of the cobs) you need to do a post on the article that Shiggz linked in the thread you did about President Petey's big achievement.

Posted by: beedubya at April 29, 2011 08:44 AM (AnTyA)

260 Trump has a history as a chance taker. He will put everything he has on the line if he thinks he has a good chance of winning.

Posted by: maddogg at April 29, 2011 08:44 AM (OlN4e)

261 Whether he runs or not, he is taking up so much media space that no outside or second-tier candidate is going to run to the top unless he backs out relatively soon. I hope someone can seize the narrative by actually debating policy with Trump and humiliating him.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 08:45 AM (mHQ7T)

262 Shoot - the lame ass post at 245 is mine.  Sorry, I hate wearing socks because I always forget to take them off.

Posted by: momma at April 29, 2011 08:45 AM (penCf)

263

If I'm not giving him the full "Do not vote for this man" treatment it's because right now I have a fear that he actually could win the primary and then I'll wind up having to support him, if I want to boot out Obama.

I like reading and citing polls as much as the next guy, but I get the impression that you're taking these pre-campaign early polls a bit too seriously.



 

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 29, 2011 08:46 AM (SY2Kh)

264
I wish Trump were running as a democrat because it would be fun a hell to watch Obama get primaried out of office. Then if Trump wins or loses, America is no worse off.

Posted by: Theory Slut in Action at April 29, 2011 08:46 AM (ufaFH)

265 Let. Him. Rant. He is landing punches on Obama and inflicting damage... Republican(s) can...take the high road and distance themselves from him if they so choose.

Posted by: Ken Royall at April 29, 2011 01:44 PM (9zzk+)


That's how it's already working.

Posted by: Beto at April 29, 2011 08:47 AM (H+LJc)

266 You can bet they are working like hell to reverse engineer all the shit we give them, so they won't have to buy from us anymore. They already do that with lower level shit, they steal from our companies all the time.

Knowing how something is made doesn't mean you can make it. The US has techniques in advanced machining and metallurgy that cannot be duplicated anywhere else in the world. Simply knowing how we put a turbine together,  or a microprocessor design, or the exact composition of Inconel, doesn't get you any closer to being able to manufacture them yourself.

When you get to this level of technology, it would be easier to design stuff  that used manufacturing techniques that you had, rather than steal a design then try to replicate all the manufacturing processes that you haven't developed let alone perfected.

Sure you can steal some design ideas while you are coming up with a design. But without the advanced industrial techniques that yield complex precision machined parts, and advanced materials, whatever product you come up with will not perform to near the level of its more advanced counterparts.

Better and cheaper to use your more primitive industrial technology to manufacture needed goods for a country that already has developed advanced industrial techniques, to get the top performing equipment now, while you invest decades in research needed to upgrade your own industrial capability.


Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 08:47 AM (0q2P7)

267 a guy who threatens to steal other countries oil

Actually, this is an interesting question.

If America started threatening to get serious about really enforcing its national interests to the extent it can, how would things play out?

Compare the world in 2003 vs now. Saudi Arabia was grudgingly allowing small scale political reforms, Libya gave up its WMDs, etc...

While Trump is not being smart about it in his rhetoric, I think getting back to more of a Big Stick philosophy on foreign policy would be a good idea.

.

Posted by: 18-1 at April 29, 2011 08:47 AM (7BU4a)

268


I hope someone can seize the narrative by actually debating policy with Trump and humiliating him.

 

I wonder who that 'someone' might be?

Posted by: tattoo de answers on my hand at April 29, 2011 08:47 AM (jyGn7)

269 #215

He's running.   The question is what's his motivation for doing so.

Is is because and only because he really wants to be President, or is his candidacy purely another Trumpian act of self-promotion?

I have no doubt that Trump would be happy to be President, though its unclear to me if that's really his main motivation here.

Obviously his "stock" has gone up since he announced this run, and maybe that is all there is to this.

At this point he may not realize he's not going to win the Republican nomination, but after a few primary losses (or maybe not even that many) it will eventually sink in.   Trump may have the biggest ego on the planet, but I think even he realizes that you eventually fold a losing hand. 

At that point he's got only two choices:  drop out, or run as an independent.

Running as an independent would effectively kill any political prospects he'd have ever afterwards, and he'd have to know it.   After running for President as a Republican, he could never run again as a Democrat, and if he acted as a "spoiler" he could never so much run for dog-catcher again as a Republican.   He's also have to know that the likelihood of actually winning the election as an independent was negligible, and that his only role there would be as a "spoiler".

So rather than permanently pissing off every Republican in the country, the smarter move for Trump after losing the primaries would be to drop out, and then try to back the likely winner in exchange for future political favors or maybe some appointment.

Posted by: looking closely at April 29, 2011 08:48 AM (6Q9g2)

270 Posted by: robtr at April 29, 2011 01:39 PM (MtwBb)

Trump doesn't have to walk away from an entity like his casinos because the banks will renegotiate with him. Why will they do that? Because he could just say, "Fuck it, you won't take $.75 on the dollar? Fine, I'll shut it down, walk away and you'll get nothing". The banks then cut a deal and his debt gets written down and refinanced.

If he did walk away from the casino business, it wouldn't impact his real estate or other ventures. The threat to walk away from a debt means he gets a better renegotiated rate.

The problem is a country can't just walk away from it's debts so the threat is empty. That's why he can't use his business strategy for renegotiating debt as President.

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 08:48 AM (2f1Rs)

271 246 His private life would make Teddy Kennedy's look like a choir boy's.

I beg to differ.

Posted by: Mary Jo Kopechne at April 29, 2011 08:50 AM (qXWUM)

272 Lots of leftists are looking for a good excuse to sit out 2012 and lots of blue collar dems are looking for a good excuse to jump ship.  Lets be smart about it but above all 2012 white house aside,

-More good tea partiers in congress from safe red seats (seniority is power)
-Hold/expand House
-Expand/control Senate
-Put Obama on defense constantly
-Keep dismantling leftist media complex
-Expand conservative media across the board from Ace to NRO to Fox

Win or lose the white house 2012 we do those things well be sitting better then we are now.  To think that barely NRO alone existed when Reagan ran.  He was literally a one man army.

Posted by: Shiggz at April 29, 2011 08:51 AM (mLAWK)

273 @123 You know who swears in public? Stupid people half of AoSHQ commenters swear in public.


Posted by: Flounder at April 29, 2011 08:52 AM (Kkt/i)

274 @277 @123213 You know who swears in public? Stupid people half of AoSHQ commenters swear in public.

FIFM

Posted by: Flounder at April 29, 2011 08:52 AM (Kkt/i)

275 The problem is that that is not the only type of manufacturing that has left the US. I am in high tech electronics, and it is scary how much advanced manufacturing is leaving the states and going to China. Semiconductors (US is too regulated) Machining (unions) plastics, circuit boards, wire, machine tools, heavy equipment, etc. etc.

I agree, but you can't fix it through a punishing tax on China. All the products you mention are consumed both domestically and by foreign customers. Making this output more expensive for domestic consumption doesn't help you compete in other parts of the world. I'm old enough to remember when "Made in Japan" was shorthand for shitty quality and was subject to many of the same criticisms that China is now. You may have noticed that Japan (and Germany, Korea, Sweden, etc.) has been exporting manufacturing jobs to the US for the last couple of decades. Government mandated inefficiency is not the key to fixing the economy.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at April 29, 2011 08:52 AM (+lsX1)

276

>>>And Ace, would you be willing to place a bet on whether or not Trump runs?

Sure, with the caveat that of course he won't run *IF* there's a nasty document release.

That is, left to his own devices, he'll run. If forced out by external circumstance, he won't.

OK, caveat and terms accepted, my furry friend. I say he won't. And understand I think he's doing a great service to the country by getting into The Vapid One's® head and by saying things that any other candidate can't.

The winner also gets to shave LauraW's hump.

Incentives...

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at April 29, 2011 08:52 AM (d0Tfm)

277 he's said that if he runs and doesn't win the primary he WON'T run as an independent....his goal is for obama to lose.............not split the party.........this election is HUGE.......the GOP has to win or the country is lost............

Posted by: phoenixgirl at April 29, 2011 08:52 AM (Cm66w)

278 #277

Fuck you.
We're not running for public office.

Posted by: Half of AoSHQ commentators at April 29, 2011 08:53 AM (6Q9g2)

279 >>>Whether he runs or not, he is taking up so much media space that no outside or second-tier candidate is going to run to the top unless he backs out relatively soon. Alas, yes. I think our best shot is with a broadly-acceptable non-threatening experienced, sober hand like Pawlenty. (Despite his bullshit about ethanol subsidies.) I would say "Romney" except that a large part of the base has decided he is entirely unacceptable (for, oddly, a bunch of reasons Trump is given a pass on). Trump's consumption of all the oxygen keeps others from being heard. Someone like Pawlenty is going to have to come out expressly as the "anti-Trump." This will create a media dynamic of DRAMA, which they'll cover, because they like that. It will also of course raise the name recognition of whoever's doing it. Of course, whoever does this can't just be the anti-Trump -- he also has to match Trump punch for punch in being the anti-Obama, too. But his punches need to be a little defter. Not this birther crap.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:53 AM (nj1bB)

280 The problem is a country can't just walk away from it's debts so the threat is empty. That's why he can't use his business strategy for renegotiating debt as President.

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 01:48 PM (2f1Rs)

That's all true, at least partially but I haven't heard him threaten to walk away from our debts. When did he say that?

If you are using it as some sort of parrallel for negotiating trade with china I'm not getting it. He didn't say he wouldn't honor our bonds with China, he said if you don't quit manipulating your currency I am going to tax your stuff.

 

Posted by: robtr at April 29, 2011 08:54 AM (MtwBb)

281 The likely scenario:

 Trump can be bought and/or threatened.  Trump is building up street cred for an independent populist run.  The sole purpose of the presidential candidacy is to split the anti-Obama vote.  A lethal play if the GOP selects an establishment candidate.

Posted by: mrp at April 29, 2011 08:54 AM (HjPtV)

282 You know who this benefits? Paul Ryan. Among the few circumstances that would cause him to run would be someone he considers unacceptable, and who has already rejected his plan as "too extreme."

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 08:54 AM (nj1bB)

283

Let. Him. Rant. He is landing punches on Obama and inflicting damage, all good. Any Republican nominee will have benefited from Trump's attacks and they can pretend to take the high road and distance themselves from him if they so choose.

Until Trump goes one insult too far. Which, with him, I would wager is a 50/50 proposition. Then, the conversation will no longer be about the economy, or gas rices, or whatever but instead, do you (generic Republican X) agree with what Trump said?

And then all the oxygen gets taken out of the room. And Obama gets a bounce from the inevitable backlash that arises.

Now, I hope Trump has enough common sense to know where that line is ---- but again, that is a 50/50 proposition.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at April 29, 2011 08:55 AM (OWjjx)

284 #281

If that's true, then I'm just going to sit back and eat the popcorn.

Having Trump as the "bomb thrower" is great entertainment.


Posted by: looking closely at April 29, 2011 08:55 AM (6Q9g2)

285 What's really disappointing is that there's basically two extremes in the available candidates...they either seem to be the "figghty-fight" Trump types or the bland Daniels/Pawlenty types.

It would be nice to have an option or two that combined serious, conservative approaches to problems with some fire and emotional appeal.

To me, Christie best exemplifies that but alas...not running.

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 08:56 AM (2f1Rs)

286

drew

 

alan west

Posted by: phoenixgirl at April 29, 2011 08:57 AM (Cm66w)

287 Until Trump goes one insult too far. Which, with him, I would wager is a 50/50 proposition. Then, the conversation will no longer be about the economy, or gas rices, or whatever but instead, do you (generic Republican X) agree with what Trump said?

No, of course I don't agree with Mr. Trump on this issue.

Next question.



Posted by: Generic Republican candidate at April 29, 2011 08:57 AM (6Q9g2)

288

The only reason I doubt Trump would risk a run is that his entire career and his success depends on the brand 'Trump'.  He brings nothing else to the table other than the brand - where the perception of brand 'Trump' = perception of 'Success'.

If he gets his clock cleaned the brand suffers and his power, as a developer / buisnessman, reflects that.  This happened when he went through the bankruptcy.  It took him a while to get the brand back to where it was.

The question I have is:  how can he run, risk loss, while furthering the brand 'Trump'? 

If you can figure out a benneficial boost to brand 'Trump' that comes from a run and a loss, then you can hope to see his path.

Posted by: garrett at April 29, 2011 08:57 AM (jyGn7)

289

"286 You know who this benefits?

Paul Ryan.

Among the few circumstances that would cause him to run would be someone he considers unacceptable, and who has already rejected his plan as "too extreme." "

 

Ace c'mon. I am already tired of the reluctant warrior meme Ryan's people are playing. I think this template is more appropriate for Hillary. "Yes, if you really think I have to, I will run to save the party oh wait the country".

Posted by: Parson Hussein at April 29, 2011 08:57 AM (Q5+Og)

290

.......the GOP has to win or the country is lost............

Even then....

Posted by: USS Diversity at April 29, 2011 08:57 AM (7zt2W)

291 Trump/Sheen 2012
FULL OF WIN!!!1!!11!!!!!

Posted by: chemjeff at April 29, 2011 08:58 AM (czcue)

292 Not for nothin', but Paul Ryan is getting standing O's at the end of his town hall events..and word is that he's saying privately that he's mulling about throwing his hat in the ring

Posted by: beedubya at April 29, 2011 08:58 AM (AnTyA)

293 "That's not really unique to the Chinese, is it? I mean, who doesn't push back just as hard if they are in that same situation and have no other choice?" Some pantywaist wanker named Obama comes to mind.

Posted by: Tom Servo at April 29, 2011 08:59 AM (ZqMXG)

294 typical gop candidate......trump is not helping us reach across the aisle..

Posted by: phoenixgirl at April 29, 2011 08:59 AM (Cm66w)

295 Paladino from ny dropped a lot of f bombs too if i recall Exactly. It never hurts. That, and NY's love of his racist animal porn e-mails, brought him within 70% of defeating Cuomo in a crushing landslide.

Posted by: Average Joe at April 29, 2011 08:59 AM (bN5ZU)

296 Rocks, you can put aside the pay cut.

Pay is not measured in dollars alone.

What price would you put on your desk being the Resolute Desk, and your office being the Oval Office?

The emoluments of the presidency are priceless.

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 01:41 PM (nj1bB)

Ace, you think like a regular schlub. If the Oval Office and Resolute Desk is so great why is  Obama bitching about how low tech they are? If it's so priceless then why have so few of America's rich and powerful actually run for the office let alone won it? Yes, it's the most powerful office in the world but none of that power is exercised for personal pleasure or gain. Why do rich people work and fight so hard to get and stay that way? Freedom, that's why. The President is the least free person on the planet. Even the Queen of England has more freedom that the President.


Listen to Trump's speech. Is that a guy running for chief bureaucrat? What in that speech bears any relation to the actual workings of the Presidency? Trump isn't stupid. He knows that. Which is how you know he was purposely torpedoing himself. It's why Perot suddenly starting seeing people in the bushes the moment his candidacy looked serious. Guys like Perot and Trump don't want to be President. They want to influence the process to their advantage.


Posted by: Rocks at April 29, 2011 08:59 AM (Q1lie)

297 The only way the GOP can win the 2012 presidential  election is if the Republican candidate can make a credible argument that this is a Main Street vs. a K Street + Wall Street election.

Posted by: mrp at April 29, 2011 09:00 AM (HjPtV)

298 Remember how teh dixie chicks destroyed the democratic party?

This complaining about Trump,  the left has successfully  been doing this for years with celebrities saying inflammatory things party leaders couldn't.

Dixie Chicks
Matt Damon
Tina Fey
Tom Hanks

Lots of other examples but I don't follow celebrities so those are about the only names I know.

Posted by: Shiggz at April 29, 2011 09:00 AM (mLAWK)

299 That's all true, at least partially but I haven't heard him threaten to walk away from our debts. When did he say that?
Posted by: robtr at April 29, 2011 01:54 PM (MtwBb)

I never claimed he said that. You jumped in on something I wrote in response to this comment from Jean at Comment 188...

"Trump uniquely understands the US position with China because he has been in the situation of owing ruinous sums to banks/investors and having them at his mercy - instead of vice-versa. 

You can't negotiate unless you have the option to walk and proven balls to do so."

I was simply arguing we don't have the option to walk away and balls have nothing to do with it.




Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 09:01 AM (2f1Rs)

300 We could, of course, make a policy decision to reinvent our manufacturing sector. We're still the largest economy in the world. Why not take advantage of that by making our own stuff again?

That would be effectively cutting China off. We still need them to support our currency. They still need us to support their economy. The quicker we can get our monetary policy back on the level the sooner we won't need them and we can get a divorce.

Until then we have to keep propping them up so they will keep propping us up.

They need to restructure their economy to be less dependent on exports, and more self sufficient. But they have grown their industry way beyond what their internal markets can support.

So they have way too much production and not enough buyers; we have too much spending.

We go through austerity get our budget under control, China's financial situation stabilizes. They progressively get out of our bonds, we progressively re-grow our industry and GDP. They progressively grow their internal markets. We become less co-dependent.

Neither of us has to crash over this.

That is why the Chinese are all but begging us to stop spending. They know the road to recovery for the both of us starts with US austerity.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 09:02 AM (0q2P7)

301 Posted by: Rocks at April 29, 2011 01:59 PM (Q1lie)

Power is not a means to an end.  It is an end.  The President is the most powerful man on earth, and even a bad president gets more historical recognition than a successful businessman.


Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at April 29, 2011 09:02 AM (FkKjr)

302 Primary challengers to incumbent presidents only serve to weaken the party and the president. It is a doomsday device that blows up the presidentÂ’s party.

I see no problem here, after all, it is doomsday.

Posted by: Theory Slut in Action at April 29, 2011 09:02 AM (ufaFH)

303

 Trump can be bought and/or threatened.  Trump is building up street cred for an independent populist run.  The sole purpose of the presidential candidacy is to split the anti-Obama vote.  A lethal play if the GOP selects an establishment candidate.

O.K. - so let me see if I follow your logic. 1. Trump is going to run as an independent so 2. the battle will be for the anti-Obama vote so 3. the GOP can't nominate an "establishment" candidate (which, I would guess would be Romney, Huckabee) so 3. the GOP must nominate an non-establishment candidate (which, I guess mean Herman Cain or Alan Keyes or, dare i say...I do RON PAUL !!11!1ALLCAPELEVENTY!!!) cause nominating this anti-establishment candidate will either result in a) Trump not running because he is clearly scared of the populist street cred of Alan Keyes or b) Trump becoming irrelevant because all the cool kid populist will flock to a non-establishment candidate to be named later?

Yea - ahh, either case, bullshit. Trump will be nothing more than the excuse of anti-Obama voters who, for whatever reson, can't get over their butt hurt feelings that their particular candidate of choice didn't win the primary and give them their much needed excuse to do something else other than vote for a boring establishment Romney or whoever. And while I believe a Trump candidacy would be bad for the GOP, a fair amount of Trump supporters would be your non-traditional voter who generally doesn't participate in politics (see, Ventura, Jesse).

And if Trump can be bought, as you suggest,  --- who is in a better position to buy him, a Romney (or anyother generically boring establishment) or a non-establishment?

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at April 29, 2011 09:03 AM (OWjjx)

304 You may have noticed that Japan (and Germany, Korea, Sweden, etc.) has been exporting manufacturing jobs to the US for the last couple of decades. Government mandated inefficiency is not the key to fixing the economy.

Yep they realized what Henry Ford figured out back in the early 1900's.  He didn't need  lower manufacturing costs, he needed more customers.  Ford created more customers by paying his employees enough that could afford to buy his cars and demand/production went through the roof (this was pre-union by the way).  Foreign companies are opening divisions/plants in the US because they are starting to realize that they need a market here (people need jobs to buy our shit)

Posted by: Lemmiwinks at April 29, 2011 09:03 AM (pdRb1)

305
That is what everyone seems to miss. Obama looks sane and more trustworthy, even a victim, in all this, and the GOP looks useless, because Trump suddenly leaped ahead in the polls among Republicans.

Oh PUL-EEZE! And people call  ME an Eeyore!

Most people vote from their gut emotions and Trump is giving voice to them. It doesn't matter if tariffs on Chicom stuff is good or bad, whether the "birther" issue is settled (BTW, it's not) or any of the other objections I see people post.

I look at some of the Obama campaign videos recently posted here and I'm amazed at the energy levels they show. And you know what? As much of that energy was anti-Bush as it was pro-Obama.

Simply put, we need to gin up high levels of Obama dissatisfaction. The Donald is doing just that.

Remember how Obama was never going to release his long form birth certificate? Trump made him CAVE. A president caving, especially to someone like Trump, is a humiliating. Remember how the MFM constantly pressed Bush to tell us what mistakes he had made? That was because they wanted W to cave. They knew the psychological effect it would have. Trump's making Obama cave is a huge psychological victory.

Why is Obama losing the independents? Not because of birtherism, but because he's fucked up everything he's touched. So it's natural to question his smarts. Asking for Obama's transcripts is the next logical attack. He probably won't cave on the transcripts but he'll be constantly haunted by the question, just like how Bush was constantly haunted by questions about what mistakes he had made.

Trump is using the left's tactics against Obama and it's working.

I'm amazed that this place is near unanimous that Republicans should fight the left as hard and dirty and nasty as they fight us -- yet when someone actually DOES IT they condemn him for it!

Get a fucking grip. It's starting to sound like half the posters here care more about what the women on The View are going to say than ripping Obama a new asshole.

The birth certificate was a big victory in round 1. Gas prices have Obama backpedaling in Round 2. If the transcripts are Round 3 they're gonna leave Obama with a busted lip. Round 4 will be when consumer inflation becomes intolerable. That will be a sure knockdown.

We have to fight hard and nasty, attacking from every angle and without letup. That will create a synergy that our typical namby-pamby (political) sniping never achieves.

We have no Reagan and none of our candidates right now have knock out power. We have to get Obama's knees wobbly before the primaries even begin.

I welcome Trump to the fight.

Posted by: Ed Anger at April 29, 2011 09:03 AM (7+pP9)

306 I mean, who doesn't push back just as hard if they are in that same situation and have no other choice

ahem *cough* EU *cough*

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 09:04 AM (0q2P7)

307 Without reading the comments yet:

1. He is a walking negative ad campaign against Obama.

2. He is not who 98.5% of us really want to win the nomination.

3. He already told Hannity...Hey, stop laughing...that he would not run as an independent.

I don't see the downside here of him going full retard.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at April 29, 2011 09:04 AM (oDMwn)

308

Drew,

No actually I jumped on what you said to me. Which was.

The problem is a country can't just walk away from it's debts so the threat is empty. That's why he can't use his business strategy for renegotiating debt as President.

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 01:48 PM (2f1Rs)

But whatever.

Posted by: robtr at April 29, 2011 09:04 AM (MtwBb)

309

somewhere along the way while we were drunk and in Vegas, the worlds largest Capitalist economy got married to the worlds largest Communist economy; we are stuck in this quagmire together, and we need to work together to get out.

 

Wasn't that the backstory in Serenity?

Posted by: trainer at April 29, 2011 09:05 AM (Rojyk)

310 bedub, I had meant to link that, but thank you for spurring me on. The "private talk" he might run is something I have reported, did you see that?

Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 09:05 AM (nj1bB)

311 I can't help but think the whole thing with Trump and Obama is contrived theater meant to distract and manipulate.  Maybe diluting the vote to ensure Obama's second term was the goal all along?

Posted by: Bonnie at April 29, 2011 09:05 AM (8JPpC)

312

No, of course I don't agree with Mr. Trump on this issue.

Next question.

And then the media repeats the question 200 times. And that becomes all the story is. And entire days are spent discussing the insult.

But that wouldn't happen with our media - their sole obsession on one story.

Lets turn to our panel, welcome with me Natelle Holloway, O.J. Simpson and Lindsey Lohan.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at April 29, 2011 09:06 AM (OWjjx)

313

Back then, the media didn't call this an easy answer or a fantasy. Not at all.

They called it "Hope and Change" from the Messiah.

There is a difference between easy anwers, though.  Some easy answers are obviously incorreect - like the Indonesian's claim that he could deal with aggressive, violent, belligerent regimes through appeasement.  That is an wasy answer (the easiest, frankly) that is just terribly wrong and stupid.  Trump's "easy answers", however, are not of that character.  They are answers that say that the correct way to go is easy to identify, but the process is not.  There are many situations where many are aware of what is, obviously, the correct way to go (as much of what Trump is saying) but whether that yields the desired outcomes is the question.  Of course, not changing course guarantees us a terrible outcome, so there's not much to lose in that comparison.

Obama smirks and giggles as he pronounces the easy answer to 2+2 is 28.517.  Trump says that it's 4, and anyone who thinks differently is an idiot.  He's correct and thank G-d he is saying it - as no one else among our politicians or official pundits will.

 

Posted by: Henry Harold Humphries - you can call me 'H' at April 29, 2011 09:07 AM (/CMAw)

314  I can't help but think the whole thing with Trump and Obama is contrived theater meant to distract and manipulate.  Maybe diluting the vote to ensure Obama's second term was the goal all along?

Posted by: Bonnie at April 29, 2011 02:05 PM (8JPpC)

 

The strap on your tin foil hat might be on a little too tight............

Posted by: Joe Biden at April 29, 2011 09:08 AM (yxiCC)

315 Drew - Yeah but a guy like Trump can at some point walk away from a single company that is part of his larger venture. It doesn't work for a country because where are you going?

Yes, we can walk away, the current policy is very close to doing that - after a QE3, will the Chinese even want to paid in dollars? 

Hell, the President submitted a budget to Congress without debt payments - what if Pelosi was still in charge and passed it - would that destroy the "full faith and credit of the US Government".  Don't get locked on the current system, it can change radically and quickly -- esp. in this era of digital currency where paper and metals are meaningless.  Soros didn't fund that little conference out of the genorosity of his cold, dark heart. 

Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 09:09 AM (WkuV6)

316

Neither of us has to crash over this.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 02:02 PM (0q2P7)

Agreed. My point was not to inflict any harm upon the Chinese or their economy. Everybody has enough problems today as it is.

I also meant to say that any policy change would be internal in nature, due to the political backlash that would probably ensue, the cries of protectionism and all that.

I remember when I was in manufacturing. While I was highly skilled, the shops I worked in also employed folks who weren't such as assemblers, shipping clerks, painters, truck drivers, and the like. There was room for everybody, plus we had the chance to train them ourselves, thus adding to their resumes. Everyone was well paid and provided for their families with a chance to move up the ladder as the business improved.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at April 29, 2011 09:09 AM (d0Tfm)

317 And then the media repeats the question 200 times. And that becomes all the story is. And entire days are spent discussing the insult.

If you live your life afraid of what the media is going to say, you become John Boehner and you wind up cutting 350 million from the budget.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at April 29, 2011 09:09 AM (FkKjr)

318

"Ford created more customers by paying his employees enough that could afford to buy his cars and demand/production went through the roof (this was pre-union by the way)."

 

So let me get this straight, all you have to do is pay your employees more than they are worth and a business is successful? Man that Ford guy really knew his stuff. BTW, how is Detroit these days?

Posted by: Parson Hussein at April 29, 2011 09:10 AM (Q5+Og)

319 Trump deserves an emmy for nothing more than pure political theater. I think if he really wanted to make a name for himself in politics, he should primary obama, that would be fun to watch.

Posted by: biscuiteater at April 29, 2011 09:10 AM (VDsbO)

320

Second: Let's say he wins the presidency.

What the hell does he say to China and Saudi Arabia?

"Best friend, worst enemy.  Take your pick.  Because we are done being tread on.  The America-hating retard is out of office.  You'll have to deal with someone who loves America and will defend it, now."

Posted by: Henry Harold Humphries - you can call me 'H' at April 29, 2011 09:10 AM (/CMAw)

321 They [China]need to restructure their economy to be less dependent on exports, and more self sufficient. But they have grown their industry way beyond what their internal markets can support.

In other words, its time start paying their people enough that they can afford to buy the shit they make (see my post about Henry Ford)

Posted by: Lemmiwinks at April 29, 2011 09:10 AM (pdRb1)

322 I was simply arguing we don't have the option to walk away and balls have nothing to do with it.




Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2011 02:01 PM (2f1Rs)

What? Ok then, if we have to go along with whatever anyone else in the world wants us to then what is the point in having a country?

If we are negotiating from a position that we can't say no then we aren't negotiating. We're stenographers writing down the terms of the deal someone else is dictating to us.

Posted by: robtr at April 29, 2011 09:10 AM (MtwBb)

323 The whole thing is funny really. Just imagine you were stuck in a cryo chamber since 1983.

China to US: Pls Pls Pls start acting like the capitalist bastards you are!!!! Stop the entitlements, let the greedy build your economy, common!!! Richest country in the world? Get rid of the big socialist government and get back to being greedy!!!!!

US to China: Pls Pls Pls keep propping up our monetary system!!!! Please buy our debt and keep our monetary system from collapsing!!!! We'll give you whatever you want just keep buying our money!!!!!

Wait!!??
Wha!!??

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 09:12 AM (0q2P7)

324 Power is not a means to an end.  It is an end.  The President is the most powerful man on earth, and even a bad president gets more historical recognition than a successful businessman.


Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at April 29, 2011 02:02 PM (FkKjr)


Really? Go to any town in America and talk to the average guy on the street. I doubt he would recognize more than 10 names of Presidents but he'll know the name Rockefeller and there hasn't been one of national importance in 40 years. He'll know the name Cartier. He'll know who the Colonel is. Power ain't shit if the only time you ever get to wield it is to do others bidding. 


Posted by: Rocks at April 29, 2011 09:13 AM (Q1lie)

325

Well, call me a conspiracy nut but I still think there is a chance that Trump is doing this on behalf of the Dems.  There is so much talk about his "plain talk" and no talk about this guys record you can't help but wonder why the kid gloves treament by the MSM.  This guy could very well be headed for an independent run (what he said on Hannity doesn't mean a damn thing) which would split enough votes off the GOP candidate (whoever they are) to give Obama another 4 years.  So whether he runs as a real independent (this would be the case if his ego was inflated past the design spec because of all the attention he's getting) or a Dem catspaw it would still be a disaster for the GOP and boon for the Dems.

Posted by: scr_north at April 29, 2011 09:15 AM (JQ7kW)

326 @Ed the angry,  for all my "smirts" I have a huge blindspot with how regular people think, feel, and respond to things they don't understand.   I really appreciate that you have a solid handle on that stuff and made a mental note to keep reading your insights. later gater

Posted by: Shiggz at April 29, 2011 09:15 AM (mLAWK)

327 For everyone who thinks they know how China would react to real threats ... you should look at Chinese history.  They are insular and will curl up into a little ball at the first touch.  China's first major project, after unifying the nation, was to build the Great Wall, to put a strict limit on their expansion and turn the world off.  That's how the Chinese react.  But, we have been letting them run wild in the global economy, so they run wild and cheat.  The minute there's a little pushback, they'll start building a great economic wall and keep to themselves.  It's important to push them into this as Man is just getting into space, as that is the real race for the future.

Posted by: Henry Harold Humphries - you can call me 'H' at April 29, 2011 09:15 AM (/CMAw)

328 The problem is a country can't just walk away from it's debts so the threat is empty.

Countries have been defaulting on sovereign debt since the history of sovereign debt. Latin America has made a hobby of it over the last 200 years. There are consequences, but it can and has been done by countries from every continent on the planet. France has defaulted eight times, Spain six times. It's not some abstract unthinkable possibility, it happens.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at April 29, 2011 09:16 AM (+lsX1)

329 In other words, its time start paying their people enough that they can afford to buy the shit they make (see my post about Henry Ford)

And because they are communist, that all links in to the county's monetary position. One that right now has their largest investment in

Drumroll!!!!

US Debt they can't sell.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 09:17 AM (0q2P7)

330 Drew - if you aren't prepared to walk away, then your not negotiating your begging. 

I'm not advocating walking, but if you want China to play fair then you gotta have that option ready.  At this point, we aren't even poking them a little with existing options for trade dispute resolution; somewhere within our marbled halls the decision has been made that currency manipulation isn't part of the trade resolution process -- and that has to change.

We broke the world at Bretton Woods, we did again by going off of the gold standard, we can do it again.

Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 09:17 AM (WkuV6)

331 Sure, it's Ooh a trade war with China, look at the tariffs.
Then there's the invasion of Taiwan and the running and the screaming.

Posted by: Jeff Goldblum's sock at April 29, 2011 09:17 AM (mQqdV)

332

"He'll know who the Colonel is."

 

The power of fried chicken is scary big. Harland Sanders was a giant among men. Original recipe is the finest gift to man since, well, cold beer. He could have improved the cole slaw though.

Posted by: Goober at April 29, 2011 09:18 AM (Q5+Og)

333 The problem is a country can't just walk away from it's debts so the threat is empty.


Yeah you can. It's kind of like declaring bankruptcy. You get to keep most your money but good luck getting a loan any time in the future.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 09:19 AM (0q2P7)

334 And if Trump can be bought, as you suggest,  --- who is in a better position to buy him, a Romney (or anyother generically boring establishment) or a non-establishment?

How badly does Obama and his followers want to win the 2012 election.  What are they willing to do to win the election?  How much regulatory scrutiny can the administration employ against Trump?  Would the administration and its supporters offer Trump a blank check?   Romney ain't broke but he isn't within an order of magnitude of Soros' wealth.

The 2012 election will be a Main Street vs. (K Street + Wall Street) knife fight.   As for your guess as to whom I support for the nomination,  well, none of your above, pal.


Posted by: mrp at April 29, 2011 09:19 AM (HjPtV)

335 Now I want fried chicken and pork n beans, crap.

Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 09:20 AM (WkuV6)

336 329

Well, call me a conspiracy nut but I still think there is a chance that Trump is doing this on behalf of the Dems.  There is so much talk about his "plain talk" and no talk about this guys record you can't help but wonder why the kid gloves treament by the MSM.  This guy could very well be headed for an independent run (what he said on Hannity doesn't mean a damn thing) which would split enough votes off the GOP candidate (whoever they are) to give Obama another 4 years.  So whether he runs as a real independent (this would be the case if his ego was inflated past the design spec because of all the attention he's getting) or a Dem catspaw it would still be a disaster for the GOP and boon for the Dems.


The downside to this strategy is that Trump, by forcing the birth certificate issue, has already hurt Obama and forced the Dems to discard something they could have used to discredit opponents much closer to 2012.

They're acting like this is some big coup to make a bombastic TV impresario look like an idiot and discrediting him as a candidate.  That's unbelievably short-sighted if that was their actual plan.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at April 29, 2011 09:20 AM (UvFnc)

337 Back when I wuz a worker bee, I did a stint with an outfit that wuz a major subcontractor on a Trump project in central Manhattan. Trump's building team was headed up by a female manager, and she, along with her entire entourage of supers, bosses, and tagalongs were the most foulmouthed people I ever encountered. And she outscored them all, if you were keeping score. The speech, I'm sure, all came from the top. Right from The Donald's lips.

Posted by: I'mWithStupid at April 29, 2011 09:21 AM (xhNbo)

338

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at April 29, 2011 02:16 PM (+lsX1)

That's right.  Countries defaulting on debt is one of the oldest stories there is.  They've been defaulting on debt with great regularity over the past decades, too.  The difference is, of course, that we bail most of them out and that their currencies were essentially insignificant worthless bits of IOU paper, to begin with.  The difference with the dollar is that it is the only global trade and reserve currency that has ever existed and cannot be replaced by anything.  But, we would still be much better off to default on our debt than to destroy our monetary system through the politically expedient (though immensely stupid) act of inflating the debt away .  That never works, anyway, as there is always new debt that need sto be taken on, so the inflated old debt gets turned into new, uninflated debt, which needs more inflation to take care of.  A downward spiral with no escape - not for the world's only trade and reserve currency, at least.

Posted by: Henry Harold Humphries - you can call me 'H' at April 29, 2011 09:21 AM (/CMAw)

339 Really? Go to any town in America and talk to the average guy on the street. I doubt he would recognize more than 10 names of Presidents but he'll know the name Rockefeller

Outside of Trump and maybe Rupert Murdoch I doubt most people could name too many other billionaires from today, let alone wealthy people from a hundred years ago.  Definitely not from before that.  Not too many people get mentions in history books just for being wealthy.  Presidents get mentioned.

Power ain't shit if the only time you ever get to wield it is to do others bidding.

Um, yes it is, and throughout history men have done the bidding of other more powerful men just to gain power.  It kind of explains everything that's ever happened.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at April 29, 2011 09:21 AM (FkKjr)

340 @282 #277

Fuck you.
We're not running for public office.

---
Point taken.  But my point was simply this.  There are a lot of conservative voters out there that could give a F about whether an F-bomb was let slip (intentionally or otherwise), and independents.  Hell, Clinton was busy dipping his wick in the company ink while jihadis were busy plotting the next USS Cole attack.  How'd that play?  It ended up making the conservative cause look like a bunch of whining ninnies hopped up on Jesus-juice.

Sure it's not very presidential.  Neither is a blame America first world apology tour.  I can forgive the former.

Posted by: Flounder at April 29, 2011 09:21 AM (Kkt/i)

341 And Fuck the Saudis.

"fuck you, support us or what comes after us will be worse than your wildest dreams."  And they'll be right.  It's the bind we're in.

I don't buy this anymore than the "But Iran will make Iraq" worse line from 5 years ago.  They are already fucking up covertly every way they can and they got nothing overt.  We take the oil fields for "stability", the Shia there take Mecca and the Wahabbis go back to their camels.

Posted by: Dave at April 29, 2011 09:21 AM (mQqdV)

342 The threat isn't default - its devaluing the currency.  We can pay it off with worthless electron of phantom fiat 'money'.  The price is high gas prices to US consumers -- if Obama is willing to pay that price, QE3 and QE4 will ruin China. 

He is already on record saying we need $6 gas - we just assumed he was going to tax or regulate us to that price, not deflate our money.

Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 09:23 AM (WkuV6)

343 Yeah you can. It's kind of like declaring bankruptcy. You get to keep most your money but good luck getting a loan any time in the future.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 29, 2011 02:19 PM (0q2P7)

Meh.  The US would hold no credit risk after a default.  And they have to do business with the largest economy (that consumes) in the world.

Posted by: Henry Harold Humphries - you can call me 'H' at April 29, 2011 09:24 AM (/CMAw)

344 Go back and read #287 again.

That is a very good point, I agree with it and it gives me pause, as I am otherwise perfectly willing to use Trump to clear the PC minefield surrounding Preznit Easy Bake.

nicely stated, Mallamutt you effin RINO

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at April 29, 2011 09:24 AM (oDMwn)

345 Trump is not going to run for President at least not past the first primary and debate. He will never allow the public release of his financial dealings which include what his populist suppoters would consider unethical. Second pundits are wrong on about 90% of their predictions. I consider ace a member of the punditry.

Posted by: polynikes at April 29, 2011 09:25 AM (205iq)

346 No business ever went bust by betting on the stupidity of the American consumer, and most presidents get elected based on the gullibility of the American voter.  (Except the dems, who get elected by the dead.)

Posted by: Chuck Z at April 29, 2011 09:29 AM (qXWUM)

347 The difference with the dollar is that it is the only global trade and reserve currency that has ever existed and cannot be replaced by anything.

The dollar can fail, and the sun will rise again, the financial world adjust, and some people will get richer, while others get busted.  (You can bet on the very rich taking advantage, and the rest of us getting the hook.)

Change is coming, the current system relied on growth - I don't see growth in the near future, nor do I see people willing to settle for crushing debt burdens. So something has to give.

Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 09:30 AM (WkuV6)

348 It would be nice to have a thread about Boeing. Nikki Haley has an oped in the WSJ. Of course, there wasn't a picture of her kneeling to find a dropped contact, but it would be nice to talk about her without blowjob jokes for a change.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at April 29, 2011 09:31 AM (mHQ7T)

349

Let. Him. Rant. He is landing punches on Obama and inflicting damage, all good. Any Republican nominee will have benefited from Trump's attacks and they can pretend to take the high road and distance themselves from him if they so choose.

Until Trump goes one insult too far.

Sister Souljah worked out pretty well for Billy Jeff.

Posted by: Ken at April 29, 2011 09:31 AM (hBOZg)

350 Tatoo - Co-blogger Will Folks will have to post it.

Posted by: Jean at April 29, 2011 09:33 AM (WkuV6)

351

So let me get this straight, all you have to do is pay your employees more than they are worth and a business is successful? Man that Ford guy really knew his stuff. BTW, how is Detroit these days?

How did this...

"Ford created more customers by paying his employees enough that could afford to buy his cars and demand/production went through the roof (this was pre-union by the way)."

...get transmogrified into "more than they are worth?" You're doing a good job of playing that game "Telephone" all by yourself.

Problems processing information, mayhaps? And just so you know, Detroit was ruined by the unions and their increasingly costly demands, along with about 50 years of Dims leadership with that same mindset.

 

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at April 29, 2011 09:35 AM (d0Tfm)

352 The difference with the dollar is that it is the only global trade and reserve currency that has ever existed and cannot be replaced by anything.

Oh bullshit, how did the world ever trade anything before the dollar came along? This idea that the world absolutely must have the dollar or nothing can be traded across a border is an overblown, paper-thin fantasy. If I want to exchange euros for zlotys, it would take about 5 seconds to make the transaction. If Aramco wants to sell a vessel of crude to China, they can make the transaction a hundred different ways that don't include a dollar. The business of business isn't quite as unimaginative as you're making it out to be.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at April 29, 2011 09:37 AM (+lsX1)

353
Yep they realized what Henry Ford figured out back in the early 1900's.  He didn't need  lower manufacturing costs, he needed more customers.  Ford created more customers by paying his employees enough that could afford to buy his cars and demand/production went through the roof (this was pre-union by the way).  Foreign companies are opening divisions/plants in the US because they are starting to realize that they need a market here (people need jobs to buy our shit)

Posted by: Lemmiwinks at April 29, 2011 02:03 PM (pdRb1)

That's a bunch of leftist bullshit pap.

Do you think Ford was successful because he sold a car every one of his employees? That tiny market made him a success? HAH!

Or do you think his higher wages in Detroit drove up wages nationwide, from Wilmington, Delaware to Burbank, California? Including the wheat farmers in the midwest?

Henry Ford became a success like many other businessmen -- by lowering production costs enough to earn a large market share. Did you know that Ford specified the construction of the crates used by his suppliers? He did it so he could dismantle them and use them in his automobiles.

Simply paying higher wages to increase demand which in turn creates more, higher paid jobs is left wing wet dream circular argument. Look at how well it has served GM and Detroit. Hell, let's just spend lots of money everywhere, putting lots of money in lots of pockets. We could call it a stimulus. That would surely fix our economy.

Increasing efficiencies and innovations drive real, long term  economic growth for everyone. You don't make the pie bigger simply by topping it with buckets of meringue.

Posted by: Ed Anger at April 29, 2011 09:38 AM (7+pP9)

354
And then the media repeats the question 200 times. And that becomes all the story is. And entire days are spent discussing the insult.

If you live your life afraid of what the media is going to say, you become John Boehner and you wind up cutting 350 million from the budget.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at April 29, 2011 02:09 PM (FkKjr)

+1,000

Posted by: Ed Anger at April 29, 2011 09:44 AM (7+pP9)

355 <> Manifold very separate ideas, Ace. . I see two problems with your analysis. Populism RULZ! That and Eleventy!!!! It is very "Popular" and fucking mouth-breathers who watch shows like Dancing With or Hoesewives of ---, prove this ! Shit. I'm not all against watching a reality TV show, once and again, myself. I fucking love, Top Chef! Also, never forget Omarosa. So what? These people don't fucking VOTE! So, fuck them! I was shocked to find, that in addition to all of the personally shameful information, I had to provide to get on my State's version of Medicaid, the computer system just about locked up when I answered "Yes" to the question, "Are you registered to vote?". Seriously? Are you really using Medicaid to get registrations? I don't WANT "people like me" to vote! We are poor, sick, ignorant and make very bad life choices! Some of "us" don't even speak English! SRSLY? Motor Voter needs to go! Last fucking people who need to be prodded into registering to vote for the first time in their lives are fucking losers who need to turn to Medicaid. Jeebus!

Posted by: Deety sucks and is asking for Help at April 29, 2011 09:46 AM (mMv0h)

356 I guess Trump is the bomb-thrower I suspected him to be after all. 

Clubber Hussein is taking some vicious overhand rights to the ears and is feeling a bit wobbly if not temporarily punch drunk, - and we haven't seen a roundhouse or a haymaker yet!

This is going to get good.  Let's get ready to rumble!©

Posted by: Fritz at April 29, 2011 09:52 AM (AN8d5)

357

Trump as D nominee?  That's what I was tossing around earlier and it sure fits the "surprise" comment from before. 

Hmmm.

Posted by: Mama AJ at April 29, 2011 09:52 AM (XdlcF)

358

--Oh bullshit, how did the world ever trade anything before the dollar came along?

Not very well. For the last regime, there were currency regions that it was almost impossible to trade outside of.

--This idea that the world absolutely must have the dollar or nothing can be traded across a border is an overblown, paper-thin fantasy.

That wasn't my argument.  There are many things possible, but not everything that is possible can be gotten to from where we are and the major situation and investment that has been put into the current system.  We have the system with the US dollar as the world trade and reserve currency.  For that to change, much else has to change. And the dollar would not live through that change, BTW, as the repartriated dollars (no longer needed for reserve or trade duties) would crush us.

--If I want to exchange euros for zlotys, it would take about 5 seconds to make the transaction. If Aramco wants to sell a vessel of crude to China, they can make the transaction a hundred different ways that don't include a dollar. The business of business isn't quite as unimaginative as you're making it out to be.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at April 29, 2011 02:37 PM (+lsX1)

It's not that simple.  If it were, there never would have been any obstacles to global trading, before. 

Posted by: Henry Harold Humphries - you can call me 'H' at April 29, 2011 09:54 AM (/CMAw)

359

"...Barack Obama's strong Muslim heritage. (But oh, by the way, if anyone notes this outside of the context of praising him for it, you're a racist.)"

Funny thing about that is - and correct me if I'm wrong - but if you're raised as a Muslim and then reject it, as Obama has, I think that makes you an apostate. And being an apostate is about as bad a crime as you can get in Islam - one that definitely requires punishment by death.

So I don't see how "Obama's strong Muslim heritage" would be a big plus in the Muslim world. It's like saying Benedict Arnold would have made an ideal Brirtish ambassador to the US.

Posted by: Optimizer at April 29, 2011 09:54 AM (F56VB)

360 #363 Jesus was an apostate too.

And a socialist.

Posted by: Stupid Fucking Libtard at April 29, 2011 10:01 AM (oDMwn)

361 It's not that simple.  If it were, there never would have been any obstacles to global trading, before.

It's exactly that simple. Most of the obstacles to global trading have been eliminated by a 24/7 exchange traded Forex market that makes swapping any traded currency for any other traded currency as simple as buying a stock on etrade. Technology and active futures markets have dramatically simplified price discovery of any currency.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at April 29, 2011 10:05 AM (+lsX1)

362

Funny thing about that is - and correct me if I'm wrong - but if you're raised as a Muslim and then reject it, as Obama has, I think that makes you an apostate. And being an apostate is about as bad a crime as you can get in Islam - one that definitely requires punishment by death.

Posted by: Optimizer at April 29, 2011 02:54 PM (F56VB)

The story seems to be that there is no death penalty for a minor who has left islam (under 16, or something). It is only apostacy for an adult that requires death.  So, if Barky left islam when he was still a kid, there would be no problem, but if he left later (which seems sort of the way it would have been, seeing that Pakistan trip when he was already an adult) then it's stones to the head.

Posted by: Henry Harold Humphries - you can call me 'H' at April 29, 2011 10:10 AM (/CMAw)

363
Technology and active futures markets have dramatically simplified price discovery of any currency.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at April 29, 2011 03:05 PM (+lsX1)

Based on the dollar.

Posted by: Ed Anger at April 29, 2011 10:11 AM (7+pP9)

364

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at April 29, 2011 03:05 PM (+lsX1)

Sure, but just exchanging currency is nto the be-all and end-all of international trade.  There is a much larger mechanism operating beneath.

And again, my point was not that the world HAS TO KEEP the dollar as the trade and reserve currency.  It doesn't, obviously.  But the pain that will be experienced in that change is such that I don't think any sentient person would want to go through it - and what comes emerges from such a change would likely be far worse.   On top of that, I was speaking about US and the pain that we would experience, which would be biblical (since our currency is distributed around the world working as the trade and reserve currency fro everyone else).

Posted by: Henry Harold Humphries - you can call me 'H' at April 29, 2011 10:15 AM (/CMAw)

365 Trump is a smart guy.  He has his finger on the "we have had enough of you simpering, useless, venal douchbags" better than anyone else in the country.

Americans are tired of getting fucked with.  Fucked with by our government, fucked with by the aclu, fucked with by opportunistic lawyers and fucked with by third world pissant shithole countries.

And above all, we are tired of getting fucked with by some pos inner city neophyte and his friends.

This has all the hallmarks of a tidal wave.

Posted by: george at April 29, 2011 10:43 AM (y0VOX)

366 The Right seems to be more afraid of Trump than Barack, that's for sure. Of course, the Repubics cower from their own shadow, so this is just one more beast in the night to flee from.


Posted by: sartana at April 29, 2011 10:44 AM (7Xm5b)

367

If you live your life afraid of what the media is going to say, you become John Boehner and you wind up cutting 350 million from the budget.

And if you stumble around completely unaware of the media and what it can do you become, in the future, the "one time candidate.........."

See, e.g. Clayton Moore. See also, Sharon Angle.

But here is the deal, Bevel. You don't want a candidate who can win. You just want someone who will start his or her campaign off by calling Obama a cocksucker. That may make you happy. That may make you put up a Trump sign in your yard. You may even give him 50 bucks. He won't win.

And the last time I checked, politics was about winning.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at April 29, 2011 10:45 AM (OWjjx)

368 Based on the dollar.

Wrong.


Sure, but just exchanging currency is nto the be-all and end-all of international trade.  There is a much larger mechanism operating beneath.

So, what exactly is this larger mechanism? I've personally conducted hundreds of transactions with trading partners in Japan, Korea, Singapore, India, China, Malta, Egypt, Pakistan and others. These same customers will buy from suppliers in Australia, Canada, South Africa and various European nations. They can pay any of us in the currency of their choosing, which is part of the negotiation. Being paid in euros or yen is no different than being paid in dollars, it's all a matter of price.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at April 29, 2011 10:47 AM (+lsX1)

369

Considering this is the most mendacious motherfucker we have ever elected to anything, it is no surprise if he is practicing taqiyya.


http://www.islamreview.com/articles/lying.shtml


Posted by: george at April 29, 2011 10:50 AM (y0VOX)

370

Well, call me a conspiracy nut but I still think there is a chance that Trump is doing this on behalf of the Dems. There is so much talk about his "plain talk" and no talk about this guys record you can't help but wonder why the kid gloves treament by the MSM.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at April 29, 2011 02:20 PM (UvFnc)

I've been thinking that more and more.

Though the kid gloves in the MBM could also be because *they* want him to run as an indy and get Obammy re-elected, not because *he* does.

But I don't think he's that stupid. His long-term business-running props are not as good as you'd think, but his negotiating and people-skills are top-rate. He's not some ignorant fool being bamboozled into something.

(sigh) I guess I had better start that Trump-Soros research project after all.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 29, 2011 10:58 AM (bxiXv)

371 But here is the deal, Bevel. You don't want a candidate who can win.

Ah so? Well, it seems to me, it's the Repubicans want a candidate who can't win- they want Mitt Romney. Now they're screaming like stuck pigs because Trump has overturned the apple cart.

And Ace began this post by castigating Trump for his foul language. Now that's rich. He goes on to link probably the gayest rock band ever. I hope he's wearing an assless wetsuit while he typed it. I'll take this post by Ace to be the official PussyCon Manifesto.

Apparently we can throw our best at the Middle East and suffer life and limb for zero, count that ZERO return- but talking hard to our enemies is beyond the pale. They might bite back.

Got it.

Posted by: sartana at April 29, 2011 11:03 AM (7Xm5b)

372 Right now, the establishment republicans have about as much voter confidence as does Janet Napalitano  - and for the same reason.

Unless they trot out new blood, they are toast.  We see what Boehner and Cantor are capable of and it aint pretty.

There is no way on earth these scum should be re-elected.

Posted by: george at April 29, 2011 11:38 AM (y0VOX)

373 Aww, Crap! I already put photos of Bill and Hillary ca.1995 in my gigantor Webser's 3rd New, under the title "meretricious". S'welp me! I so called that wrong. So where to move Bill? Venal perhaps?

Posted by: Deety likes owning gigantic books at April 29, 2011 11:56 AM (mMv0h)

374 <> I suppose so... Really Drew M? Eh, I suppose it is beneath the dignity of regular commenters to go after such low hanging fruit...

Posted by: Deety is read by Brietbart! at April 29, 2011 12:06 PM (mMv0h)

375 I think he would hurt the Democrats more if he ran as an independent. My feeling is, he would draw a lot of the Hillary faction from 2008. Those are the mostly Reagan/Clinton Democrats, middle of the road to conservative dems who are more easily swayed by populist demagoguery than are staunch liberals or conservatives. They tend to distrust the Chinese more than anyone, as well as the Saudis. And it was that faction who actually first called into question Barry Soetoro's US citizenship credentials. I still hope he doesn't run, because I'm not that sure of what I'm saying, but I do tend to, well, hope that would be the case.

Posted by: ThePaganTemple at April 29, 2011 05:33 PM (L13Dq)

376 That's the central appeal of it. Every man a king, every man a master of diplomacy. But is that true? Is there a populist movement as regards medicine? Does anyone postulate that just by "common sense" they can successfully treat a gall stone patient? Posted by: ace at April 29, 2011 12:29 PM We're not talking about medicine, we're talking about self-rule government. Isn't that the whole basis of our nation's founding? That We, the People, can rule ourselves? Isn't this also the opinion of William F. Buckley, whom I think said that taking the first 535 names in the phone book and electing them to Congress would do a better job than the elitists actually elected? Elected government positions were not always reserved for elitists and 'experts'. What you (and many others) seem to be saying is that we now have our own form of 'royalty' here in America, where only certain people are deemed worthy of elected office. Would I want the average shmoe from the 'hood or from the trailer park to be in elected office? Of course not. But this attitude that only Ivy League-educated people have the intelligence and knowledge to govern is ridiculous. Just take an obvious example: Barack Obama. Ivy League-educated, supposed Constitutional Law educator, yet he possesses about the least common sense about pretty much anything of any of our elected leaders. And that's saying something with regards to the buffoons we have in Congress. On the flip side, take the examples of OIF Veterans running for Congress. Most of them did not have Ivy League degrees, but we supported them whole-heartedly, because we could tell they had integrity, principles and common sense. Eventually, one of those OIF Congressmen might run for President. Would we deny him that chance, denigrating him saying that since he doesn't have an Ivy League education, then he's not acceptable?

Posted by: Clyde Shelton at April 30, 2011 06:04 AM (NITzp)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
323kb generated in CPU 0.32, elapsed 1.5047 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.2434 seconds, 612 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.