The Swami is in...

horselipshorselips Senior MemberPosts: 3,605 Senior Member
...waving his hands over his somewhat cloudy crystal ball - nevertheless, here's what I see as I peer through the fog and mist, and behold the signs and portents...


The Donald has slaughtered the sacred cows of customary political strategery - pulling a Captain Kirk style Kobyashi Maru maneuver, changing what many in the press and top floor of the RNC considered a hopeless, no-win clown act into a viable and even a winning campaign. Mr. Trump has, so far anyway, 'trumped' the no-win scenario by changing the rules, in effect, cheating, and the people love it. 'Nuff said.

Here comes the prognostication, and it's not about the GOP, it's about the Democrats. And what might happen will change the way campaigns are run forever more. Despite Hillary's still almost 50% approval, utterly dominating her closest competitor - the Democratic Marxist Bernie Sanders, the wizards and seers of the DNC see trouble on the horizon - a potentially devastating beat down in Representative Trey Gowdy's torture chamber, and perhaps even an indictment from the FBI over Email-gate. What's a bunch of political thugs to do?

Joe Biden has been meeting with Elizabeth "The Squaw" Warren. Not to decide who will pick up the cause if or when Hillary crashes and burns, but to present the American voter with an option even the GOP hasn't yet dreamed up - a candidate running for president with his vice president already picked out. Running simultaneously. Being in two different places at the same time. Running not as individual candidates, but as a team. A unity team - combining everything progressive liberals love about Hillary and Bernie, without the divisive competition and high cost of funding dueling campaigns. Without the voters having to choose. With Biden-Warren, they can have it all. And Biden-Warren would be strong enough to suck the oxygen out of the Democratic race, allowing them to sail into the Convention and receive the coronation once reserved for the Hildebeast Herself.

How does one Republican run effectively against 2 Democrats? Darn, he already looks small and alone. The only solution would be for the Donald and every other top tier GOP candidate to huddle with each other and decide who is gonna hafta be second banana and settle, for now, for second place. Trump might bed down with Fiorina. That would be an awesome team. What about Rubio with Carson, Cruz with Walker, Jeb with Christie, or vice versa, whatever. It's all good.

We're about to see the dawning of the Age of Team Politics - where attractive candidates select their running mates before the primaries, not afterwards, during the Convention. And it's an improvement. I wouldn't mind seeing presidential candidates run not only with their veep, but with their choices for senior cabinet members as well.
«1

Replies

  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,616 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    ...waving his hands over his somewhat cloudy crystal ball - nevertheless, here's what I see as I peer through the fog and mist, and behold the signs and portents...

    Now that's a picture I would like to see.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 17,631 Senior Member
    I don't think Trump would stoop to the level of Fiorina. One is a corporate builder, the other a corporate destroyer.
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • RugerFanRugerFan Senior Member Posts: 1,617 Senior Member
    While the Donald may be "winning" right now, there's a WHOLE lotta time before the convention next summer. or even the start of the Primaries. Donald Trump WILL say something incredibly stupid or the people and press will get tired of his schtick.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,268 Senior Member
    RugerFan wrote: »
    While the Donald may be "winning" right now, there's a WHOLE lotta time before the convention next summer. or even the start of the Primaries. Donald Trump WILL say something incredibly stupid or the people and press will get tired of his schtick.
    l
    This is my opinion only but call it food for thought. YOU BETTER HOPE HE DOESN'T! If the Donald doesn't win the nomination I would bet money he'll run third party. And looking at past history, that will be the conservative deathnell. Trump is not my favorite out there, but it's looking like he may be the nominee. I really believe there's some great potential presidents in that group, and sometimes I wish the Donald would just go away. But then I get to thinking the Donald isn't a politician and he really wants to bring the U.S. back to where it used to be.

    But the saving grace of all this, is you're right, there's a long time until the convention, much less the general election. We shall see how this plays out.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 8,205 Senior Member
    Trump and Dr Ben Carson
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 38,841 Senior Member
    RugerFan wrote: »
    While the Donald may be "winning" right now, there's a WHOLE lotta time before the convention next summer. or even the start of the Primaries. Donald Trump WILL say something incredibly stupid or the people and press will get tired of his schtick.

    He already has been saying stupid things. Yet he still leads.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • LanceLance Member Posts: 149 Member
    cpj wrote: »
    He already has been saying stupid things. Yet he still leads.

    This is why:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/23/us/politics/why-donald-trump-wont-fold-polls-and-people-speak.html?mabReward=A2&_r=0

    Check out the comment section, especially the "Reader's Picks". It's a smorgasbord of the most geographically, demographically, and ideologically disparate commenters, all of whom have one thing to say in common:

    We're sick of the status quo.

    Trump and Sanders aren't going away folks. Not because of who they are, but because of what they represent.
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 38,841 Senior Member
    Lance wrote: »
    This is why:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/23/us/politics/why-donald-trump-wont-fold-polls-and-people-speak.html?mabReward=A2&_r=0

    Check out the comment section, especially the "Reader's Picks". It's a smorgasbord of the most geographically, demographically, and ideologically disparate commenters, all of whom have one thing to say in common:

    We're sick of the status quo.

    Trump and Sanders aren't going away folks. Not because of who they are, but because of what they represent.
    The bolded part. People are tired of wusses. Trumps grabbing a hand full of bag and extending a middle finger. People like that In a leader. It's something I've been saying for years. Grow a pair and take a stand. Pandering to both sides as a republican, gets democrats voted in.
    Before I thought there ain't a chance he could win. I'm not so sure of that now. He may be able to pull it off. But one thing he IS DOING is showing other candidates that you don't have to be a sissy to get support. While I seriously doubt they will take notice, once can at least hope.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,376 Senior Member
    zorba wrote: »
    I don't think Trump would stoop to the level of Fiorina. One is a corporate builder, the other a corporate destroyer.

    Dont history much? I am pretty sure that the 4 times he went bankrupt more people got laid off than when Fiorina was at HP. If the wind blows Carlys way, that is the way Trump will sail.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • TxwheelsTxwheels Member Posts: 151 Member
    I'd like to see a Trump/Cruz ticket.
    If I don't answer the phone, I'm probably in the Senate taking a POTUS and wiping my Congress
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,158 Senior Member
    I think it's an odd situation, in that Trump might actually be able to win the general election, but can't win the Republican nomination. The same hard-headed conservatives who wouldn't get up and go to the polls for Romney will not vote for Trump, and ones who favor republican establishment types, i.e. moderates, won't vote for him. At any rate, I still expect him to get blown up by his past stances, before the major primaries. Still, I like it that he is forcing the milquetoasts, like Bush, to go slightly more hard line, rather than stay politically correct on everything.

    As far as 'Plugs' and Elizabeth Warren go, that's a reasonably accurate assessment of what the Democrats might cook up. They are going to need all of their sleazy tricks, regardless, because the only possible 'good' candidate that would have a chance in the general election is James Webb, and he is way too mainstream for liberals to back.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 23,920 Senior Member
    zorba wrote: »
    I don't think Trump would stoop to the level of Fiorina. One is a corporate builder, the other a corporate destroyer.

    What killed off HP more than anything else was Texas Instruments. TI did two things that kicked HP butt every day of the week and twice on Sundays. TI was one of the companies that shipped jobs overseas and made good stuff CHEAP, while HP kept prices artificially high on their U.S. made products. HP also used RPN on their calculators that was fine for the eggheads, but not intuitive for the masses; TI used the more logical method of calculator operation. Win for TI. HP computers were also no better, and in some cases worse, than the competition, yet were sold at higher prices than the competition. HP, in a nutshell, priced themselves out of business. I remember the time well, and know that HP was its own worst enemy in the marketplace. HP had some very innovative products, but the market wouldn't bear their pricing. And add in Sharp and a few other manufacturers that flooded the market with cheaper foreign made products as good or better than HP, and the handwriting was on the wall.

    Fiorina came to HP when it was already circling the drain. She took command of a ship already taking on water and listing hard to the side. She just happened to be the one at the helm when it went under.
    I may be a Deplorable, but at least I'm not a Liberal!!!



  • N320AWN320AW Senior Member Posts: 648 Senior Member
    Dont history much? I am pretty sure that the 4 times he went bankrupt more people got laid off than when Fiorina was at HP. If the wind blows Carlys way, that is the way Trump will sail.

    Trump has never been bankrupt. It was some of his holdings in Atlantic City, NJ that had a financial restructuring. That's what I call good business.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 14,344 Senior Member
    N320AW wrote: »
    That's what I call good business.
    Filing bankrupt is good business? "Financial restructuring" through the courts is the same thing as bankruptcy. General Motors underwent a financial restructuring. It is acknowledgment that their business as it was, is a failure, plain and simple.
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,376 Senior Member
    N320AW wrote: »
    Trump has never been bankrupt. It was some of his holdings in Atlantic City, NJ that had a financial restructuring. That's what I call good business.

    His holdings. Ahhh yep. Thats like the kid saying that he didnt hit the other car, the stupid car that he was driving hit the other car. He has never entered personal bankruptcy, however the train went off the rails 4 times while he was conductor. His holdings are Trump LLC of which he is the major stockholder and CEO. He is in charge of his holdings. If he isnt, then that isnt a good thing either. He is responsible and doesnt take responsibility, it is a window on his soul.

    Again, more people were hurt by the CEO of Trump LLC's poor decisions than Carly Fiorina's getting fired from HP. AND if the wind was blowing her way, the Donald would be under full sail in formation with her.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • N320AWN320AW Senior Member Posts: 648 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    Filing bankrupt is good business? "Financial restructuring" through the courts is the same thing as bankruptcy. General Motors underwent a financial restructuring. It is acknowledgment that their business as it was, is a failure, plain and simple.

    So what? General Motors a failure? Come on, get real. You act as if the failure of a business, no matter how large or small, is a disgrace to the person that owns it. Ridiculous! Some businesses just don't work. It could be a reflection on the owner/operator making a wrong decision, but so what? Are you going to chastise this individual who has invested a lot of money in something and it just didn't work out? Of course not.

    I take it you don't like The Donald.
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,497 Senior Member
    I don't like Donald Trump, never have, never will.
    People don't understand business, you can run a business at a loss, and it's good business practice, just as currency values vs trade, make US products a better buy in the World market economy.
    Trump may own the limousine, someone else is the driver, so he can say, I didn't wreck the company !
    Lots of folks bad mouth Microsoft's policies regarding Windows, and routinely curse Bill Gates as the spawn of Satan, when in fact, anyone is free to popularize another OS and steal their thunder, it just ain't happened yet.........
    I may dislike Donald, simply because his attitude towards his fellow man is abnormal, not his business practices.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,158 Senior Member
    N320AW wrote: »
    So what? General Motors a failure? Come on, get real. You act as if the failure of a business, no matter how large or small, is a disgrace to the person that owns it. Ridiculous! Some businesses just don't work. It could be a reflection on the owner/operator making a wrong decision, but so what? Are you going to chastise this individual who has invested a lot of money in something and it just didn't work out? Of course not.

    I take it you don't like The Donald.

    Trump started businesses in Atlantic City, with full intention of declaring bankruptcy, when the market flags showed that his profits were about to drop below his acceptable limits. He admits this, saying that is good business and everybody does it. That would be true, except that the people whose money he uses very often go belly up when he doesn't keep his agreement to pay their money back. His defense is that they aren't 'nice people.'

    The good news is that he made money while it was there to make, and cut his losses before losing all of his profits. The bad news is that he screws the people who help him, whenever it suits him, with absolutely no remorse.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 12,832 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    The good news is that he made money while it was there to make, and cut his losses before losing all of his profits. The bad news is that he screws the people who help him, whenever it suits him, with absolutely no remorse.
    Not sure if this is a good characteristic or a bad one to have in a POTUS. The money the President has some influence over (I know the legislature sets the budget) is the people's money, after all.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,158 Senior Member
    Not sure if this is a good characteristic or a bad one to have in a POTUS. The money the President has some influence over (I know the legislature sets the budget) is the people's money, after all.

    It might mean that he will balance the budget and not squander our tax payments, but it also might mean that he will get even richer. Who knows? He has made huge sums of money with brilliant, gutsy investments, but he has also trampled people in the process. I don't trust him, personally. I can't tell when he is lying, and that bothers me a lot.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 12,832 Senior Member
    Balanced budget is okay, I guess, but I'm more interested in paying down the debt. With his grandiose and outlandish claims I just figure he's always lying.

    So he's becoming more and more of a politician every day.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 14,344 Senior Member
    N320AW wrote: »
    You act as if the failure of a business, no matter how large or small, is a disgrace to the person that owns it. Ridiculous! Some businesses just don't work. It could be a reflection on the owner/operator making a wrong decision, but so what? Are you going to chastise this individual who has invested a lot of money in something and it just didn't work out? Of course not.

    I take it you don't like The Donald.
    You are right. I can't stand Trump.
    Trump didn't file bankruptcy once, but four freaking times!!! And don't give me that "he invested a lot of money" crap. Yes he did-- other peoples. If it was his own money, he wouldn't be seeking protection from his creditors. The whole idea of bankruptcy is to seek protection from all the people you owe money to.

    If I borrowed $200 each from you, CPJ, Bream, and Bisley, then chipped in $5 from my own pocket and promised to pay you guys back-- heck even make you a few bucks, screwed around, pissed away all your money, then hid behind my lawyers while telling you that you need to take $30 in place of that $200 I promised to pay you back, would I be an honorable man? In your world, apparently so. You call it good business. In my world, it makes me a deadbeat.

    Now do that four times in a row!
  • N320AWN320AW Senior Member Posts: 648 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    You are right. I can't stand Trump.
    Trump didn't file bankruptcy once, but four freaking times!!! And don't give me that "he invested a lot of money" crap. Yes he did-- other peoples. If it was his own money, he wouldn't be seeking protection from his creditors. The whole idea of bankruptcy is to seek protection from all the people you owe money to.

    If I borrowed $200 each from you, CPJ, Bream, and Bisley, then chipped in $5 from my own pocket and promised to pay you guys back-- heck even make you a few bucks, screwed around, pissed away all your money, then hid behind my lawyers while telling you that you need to take $30 in place of that $200 I promised to pay you back, would I be an honorable man? In your world, apparently so. You call it good business. In my world, it makes me a deadbeat.

    Now do that four times in a row!

    Where do you come off saying Trumps investments were other peoples money? You know nothing of his finances. Could the OTHER PEOPLE be a large bank, insurance company, mutual funds, hedge funds, etc.? Of course they were involved and none of them lost a dime thanks to Trump. You arbitrarily consider someone who has filed for bankruptcy a DEADBEAT. Wow, are you way out on left base.

    Your narrative is not about Donald Trump . . . it's about our society. Hundreds of thousands of people file for bankruptcy here every year. That's called PROTECTION from ruthless loan companies, credit card issuers, and others who couldn't care less if they put a family on the street just to get back their money. You better be damned proud that you live in the USA and can possibly avail ourselves of remedies that other countries don't provide.
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 38,841 Senior Member
    N320AW wrote: »
    Where do you come off saying Trumps investments were other peoples money? You know nothing of his finances. Could the OTHER PEOPLE be a large bank, insurance company, mutual funds, hedge funds, etc.? Of course they were involved and none of them lost a dime thanks to Trump. You arbitrarily consider someone who has filed for bankruptcy a DEADBEAT. Wow, are you way out on left base.

    Your narrative is not about Donald Trump . . . it's about our society. Hundreds of thousands of people file for bankruptcy here every year. That's called PROTECTION from ruthless loan companies, credit card issuers, and others who couldn't care less if they put a family on the street just to get back their money. You better be damned proud that you live in the USA and can possibly avail ourselves of remedies that other countries don't provide.

    That's likely one of the dumbest things I've ever heard here. Ruthless loan companies? So, if I'm a loan company and I give you 100,000 for a house, I'm some how ruthless for expecting that money to be paid back? What The French, toast?
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,497 Senior Member
    That is what brain dead Democrats crow non stop, oh those ruthless companies, tax the rich, all manner of stupid stuff.
    They suggest all kinds of stuff but no one has an idea of how to pay for anything except by taxing the rich.
    Penalize the rich.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • coolgunguycoolgunguy Senior Member Posts: 6,034 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    That's likely one of the dumbest things I've ever heard here. Ruthless loan companies? So, if I'm a loan company and I give you 100,000 for a house, I'm some how ruthless for expecting that money to be paid back? What The French, toast?


    That's what you get for loaning out money. As one of those rich, ruthless loan companies, you should know better.


    Frankly, Jerm's argument against Trump is BY FAR the best I've heard, and better than anything I've come up with. The fact that those 'evil rich' banks have investors who largely are not rich, and who lost money due to rich man's (or corporation's) actions, coupled with the fact that some folks look at that as 'just good business' absofreakinlutely astounds me. The fact that he bettered himself while walking away from debts owed others is unethical, even if not criminal.
    "Bipartisan" usually means that a bigger than normal deception is happening.
    George Carlin
  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Moderator Posts: 27,815 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    You are right. I can't stand Trump.
    Trump didn't file bankruptcy once, but four freaking times!!! And don't give me that "he invested a lot of money" crap. Yes he did-- other peoples. If it was his own money, he wouldn't be seeking protection from his creditors. The whole idea of bankruptcy is to seek protection from all the people you owe money to.

    If I borrowed $200 each from you, CPJ, Bream, and Bisley, then chipped in $5 from my own pocket and promised to pay you guys back-- heck even make you a few bucks, screwed around, pissed away all your money, then hid behind my lawyers while telling you that you need to take $30 in place of that $200 I promised to pay you back, would I be an honorable man? In your world, apparently so. You call it good business. In my world, it makes me a deadbeat.

    Now do that four times in a row!
    coolgunguy wrote: »
    That's what you get for loaning out money. As one of those rich, ruthless loan companies, you should know better.


    Frankly, Jerm's argument against Trump is BY FAR the best I've heard, and better than anything I've come up with. The fact that those 'evil rich' banks have investors who largely are not rich, and who lost money due to rich man's (or corporation's) actions, coupled with the fact that some folks look at that as 'just good business' absofreakinlutely astounds me. The fact that he bettered himself while walking away from debts owed others is unethical, even if not criminal.

    Sorry guys, it is NOT unethical or even remotely criminal to do business using the rules your government has given you. And Jerm, sorry buddy and with all due respect your example is like comparing apples to a Buick. BIG business is all about making sure YOU WIN, not about your "friends" feelings. I try to be as fair as I can in my deals so everyone wins but I am NOT naive enough to think I'm negotiating with "friends" and at the first taste of someone potentially screwing me I will burry them with every tool I have, financial or legal. I don't have a conversation with my global business partners without at least one lawyer by my side and sometimes as many as 5.

    Good business partners have a BIG gun pointed at each other's head. THAT is the way it way it works when the deals are worth hundreds of millions if not billions. There is NO ONE in that league that has not left a pile of bodies in their wake. Where the big boys play is truly survival of the fittest and it's called capitalism and it is naive to think otherwise. Pretty much the way you need to deal with the rest of the world if you are a U.S. President because EVERYONE wants to screw you. Reagan defeated the Soviet Union without firing a shot because he out maneuvered them and sent them into bankruptcy, not because him and Gorbachev where buddies.

    If you want a harmonious business environment where everyone is protected you need to live in China.
    "Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching." General George S. Patton
  • coolgunguycoolgunguy Senior Member Posts: 6,034 Senior Member
    I don't want an environment where everybody is protected, but I would like one where everybody is accountable. I understand there is always risk, but to the uninitiated this doesn't look like 'risk', it looks like 'scam'. Multiple times. And he benefitted from each one. Now, for the folks that came along after #2, I guess I'd have to say stupid is as stupid does, (at least for the folks handling the transactions...'little' guys usually have no say) but I still think there should be more accountability. I don't blame him for doing all he was able to legally do, I just think that 'legal' is a nebulous term far too often, and usually depends on who has the larger/tougher team of lawyers.

    Again, I'm reasonably certain he didn't do anything illegal, just that 'wrong' and 'illegal' are sometimes two very different things.



    Edited to add: I realize the disconnect from some of my other postings, and I'm okay with that.
    "Bipartisan" usually means that a bigger than normal deception is happening.
    George Carlin
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,141 Senior Member
    Screw me once shame on you- - - -screw me twice, pick out your gravesite! That's particularly true if I'm building you a rifle that will dot your eye at half a mile! Most people I do business with don't risk the first screwing- - - -sometimes I mis-count between "one" and "two".

    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,497 Senior Member
    Reagan had absolutely nothing to do with the bankruptcy of the former Soviet Onion, the Communist system of the Soviets was doomed to failure by obsolescence of practices and lack of incentives for individual and group or collective efforts.
    Capitalism is supposed to reward individual hard work, so the harder you work, the better you will fair, in theory anyway.
    The quota system of the Soviets never worked, it merely became mathematically unfeasible as farmers figured out how to manipulate the outcome and seem like they were meeting even exceeding quotas.

    The same results were mirrored in Soviet industrial development, politics being the governing factor, not efficient practices or work ethics or machines.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.