he would be at the helm of a bankrupt nation, so his experience might be good.

Say what you want about Donald Trump, but if elected, he'd be the best President to take office this century.

Then again, so would Donald Duck. . .

Unfortunately, to find out if he's going to make good on his words, you have to trust him enough to vote for him. Then when you see the deeds he does in office, it'll be too late. I don't trust him that much. This is kind of like when Nazi Pelousi said "we'll have to pass the Health Care bill to see what's in it."

The guy has every right to run for the presidency. He is a born and raised in the usa person and he has lots of money to promote /himself. In the event that he wins the job which is thankless he may be good at it, we don't know. What will be good is to see how the weasels of d.c. react to his presidency if that were to happen. We all know it matters not what the candidate says because once elected as in the case of 0 other things are done. Except in the case of 0 he said he was going to fundamentally change america and that was not a lie.

Correct about the narrowing field. Trump is benefitting tremendously from the 17 person field. After the culling begins the supporters of the former candidates will realign and it won't be to Trump who is nobody's second choice. Once it gets down to about 4 candidates, Trump will be toast. You heard it here first.

Draft Coolidge!

So, if you see a $100 bill laying on the ground, you will not pick it up, right? Because you know that it is not yours. Right.... The government's policies make it profitable to steal and loot, and you expect people to simply stop, move out of the way and let someone else loot and steal? We all do what Trump does, only on a smaller scale. Show me a person who pays more taxes than he is required to, just because he thinks others deserve it more. However, Trump is honest about this sickness and willing to stop it. Is there a Republican candidate who has done anything in this regard? Yes, perhaps Rand Paul, but then he also brings his religious baggage, which is really just more statism.

For a guy who claims to be such a genius at business, ANY bankruptcy is too many.
You want to trust a guy to run the entire country who has 4 bankruptcies in his business?
What are you thinking?

Entertainer, not a serious candidate. The only item of interest is how he affects the real republican candidates with his show.

Trump has given money to both sides. He's hedged his bets. I don't really fault him for that. The more disturbing donations are to the Clinton Foundation, imo.

The fact that he praised Kelo vs New London is enough for me. It would of course be way worse if he personally had benefited from the decision, but his agreement with the decision is a strike in my book.

Four bankruptcies, 3 marriages, etc... No, there's nothing illegal at all about it. But it is very revealing about his morals. I can deal with one bankruptcy, but four takes it to where he's actually comfortable with the process. And if one reads about the details of the process and all those who were left high and dry in the process, one comes out with a very bad taste in the mouth. It doesn't necessarily make him a bad person, but it sure allows one to question his motives. This one is a strike in my book.

I don't really buy the gun control support thing either, as he's done interviews with the NRA and he and his sons are avid hunters. It isn't to say that he has never uttered a word endorsing magazine capacity limits, etc., because he has. But I'm looking at the "body of work" and I'm just seeing more to support gun rights than to oppose them. Is he perfect or ideal? No. But I don't see enough to give him a strike here.

Verdict: two strikes, one ball, one no-call. Far from the ideal candidate, but not going to rule him out completely.

Great points woodlema.
Plus he's willing and able to bring up the issues the career politicians have huge incentives not to - many of which a Gulch dweller would love to see brought up for debate.

Do you have a link to the book on Amazon? It keeps directing me to "quiet"... :S

For Nancy Pelosi, gave to hundreds of politicians, Dem and GOP. Was in business so what.


For Eminent Domain-Praised the Kelo Decision, he may have praised it, but I cannot find anyplace he actually USED it.

For Single Payer HEalthcare, according to Trump back in the 1990's he said that would have been the time, but has said years ago since then, that not today,, and indicated the problem is the invisible state lines and no free market competition.

4 Bankruptcies, 3 marriages, 4 Chapter 11's, and there is nothing illegal about that...and you you complain about that then you better complaint at anyone filing bankruptcy for any reason then. 3 marriages. and your point 50% of ALL marriages fail...and let's face it...there are tens of millions of people who have more than 3 marriages,..how does that make you a bad person?

For Gun Control ; Not really...have you watched his interviews? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSmbY... This was from over a year ago...

Ok, aside from the fact I am a Trump supporter, I read both articles.

I then went to the Puclic Records in the New York Civil court records, the New Jersersy records, even Arizona and California civil court records, and cannot find ANY cases where Trump or his organization used Eminent domain and the courts to do what is claimed.

I do know that one such "occurrence" was the Trump Casino in New Jersey but Carl Icon owned that and Trump only leased his name to the building as a branding tool. Trump did not actually "own" any of it.

But even that story was a bit wonky because the people who filed suit were offered, if I remember right, 5.3 million dollars for their property which they then refused, they also won their lawsuit, against Carl Icon and his attempt at eminent domain, then complained when their property only sold recently for 600K

Jackson is not looked upon kindly in history because a) he had a belligerent personality, and b) he opposed statism, particularly from the bankers, and c) he opposed Henry Clay (whom history's authors in the last 100 years have liked). Those who have rewritten the history in the last hundred years have written it from the statist perspective.

Yes, Jackson had some bad moments, most notably The Trail of Tears, but overall he was one of our finest presidents.

And Lincoln is a saint. Big surprise.
Cui Bono.

Jackson is not looked on kindly in History

Yes, the two that closed down the central banksters.
Even dead they are more capable for POTUS than the current crop of looters, er, candidates.
They would never be able to sign new bills, and would not create any new Executive orders.
They would not rush into any "free trade" treaties or start any wars.

+1 for the "inaccurate believers" accuracy.

I know. I wish Mr. Mamut had seen the light BEFORE I went to college and had to read all of his plays. I also had to immerse myself in Brecht. It's a wonder db ever was able to save me. Oh the shark has lovely teeth dear and he keeps them pearly white...:)

Jackson?

Goldwater-Reagan 2016.
Heck, might as well go for broke.
Jefferson-Jackson 2016.

For us, yes. For the inaccurate believers that support him? I wonder.

I will have to do that in a few days when I am done.