Phred wrote:

Brantt wrote:I'm not necessarily looking for someone to tear the system down, rather would just like to have a President in my lifetime who is not on the take from big money and actually governs the country based on what he genuinely thinks is best for the country and the citizens.

I try to stay out of the politics thread because, quite frankly, I rarely know enough to be able to verbalize a defense of my positions. However...

Barak Obama:

AMA went against the insurance companies
2015 Executive Actions on Gun Control goes against the NRA (and gun manufacturers)
Got marriage equality passed

He certainly seems like he is trying to do what he genuinely thinks is best for the country and the citizens and not based on the big money.

slugsrbad wrote:

SK790 wrote:

Brantt wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Brantt wrote:....name calling and throwing tantrums...

why so down on Youseff, when this is essentially the governing 'platform' (and the essence of every one of his "policies", for that matter) of your candidate of choice?

Nah, Trump's go to market strategy, and my message board strategy for years is always throw the second punch. That way outbursts are completely justified since you didn't start the altercation or deterioration of the argument and you can always fall back on playing the victim if need be.

Simple stuff. But you also have to come hard at all times. That's where Youseff falters. My vision of him is the kid from the "leave Brittany alone" videos.

Sounds like some great presidential qualities.

No turning the other cheek like that Pussy Loser Jesus.

Brantt wrote:Nah, Trump's go to market strategy, and my message board strategy for years is always throw the second punch. That way outbursts are completely justified since you didn't start the altercation or deterioration of the argument and you can always fall back on playing the victim if need be.

Brantt wrote:

Phred wrote:

Brantt wrote:I'm not necessarily looking for someone to tear the system down, rather would just like to have a President in my lifetime who is not on the take from big money and actually governs the country based on what he genuinely thinks is best for the country and the citizens.

I try to stay out of the politics thread because, quite frankly, I rarely know enough to be able to verbalize a defense of my positions. However...

Barak Obama:

AMA went against the insurance companies
2015 Executive Actions on Gun Control goes against the NRA (and gun manufacturers)
Got marriage equality passed

He certainly seems like he is trying to do what he genuinely thinks is best for the country and the citizens and not based on the big money.

The insurance companies have made a windfall off of Obamacare. Their stocks have never been higher than at times in the last year. Obama was anti-gay marriage until it became politically convenient for him, so propping him up as a Champion of gay rights is disingenuous IMO. The gun stuff regulations from him are pretty weak IMO and will accomplish nothing.

But, I can see your point here.

These are just not big issues for me, so it doesn't resonate.

Brantt wrote:-In terms of Trump, I think you are stereotyping him a bit. He is obviously uber rich, but in general he despises the elite. The best description I've ever seen of him is he is Rodney Dangerfield's character from Caddyshack. He has so much money that he cannot be ignored, but he absolutely love to mess with and poke the elite who despise him in general (I would compare Jeb to Judge Smails). If nothing else, he is a deal maker and master negotiator. His book The Art of the Deal is a fantastic read and a must read for anyone in a leadership position. I think he's a highly intelligent guy who would run the country like it's a business.....a mindframe that is badly, badly needed IMO. I also think he's a very moderate candidate overall. He's far right on immigration and homeland security, but most of his economic policies are moderate to liberal. He's going right to try to win this nomination, but if he gets it, he'll immediately start coming back to the middle and be probably even more fiscally liberal than I would prefer. Obviously he is a master salesman who has manipulated the media brilliantly. I have no idea how he would do as President, but given what we've seen in the last 15 years, I'm ready to take the plunge.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

Brantt wrote:-In terms of Trump, I think you are stereotyping him a bit. He is obviously uber rich, but in general he despises the elite. The best description I've ever seen of him is he is Rodney Dangerfield's character from Caddyshack. He has so much money that he cannot be ignored, but he absolutely love to mess with and poke the elite who despise him in general (I would compare Jeb to Judge Smails). If nothing else, he is a deal maker and master negotiator. His book The Art of the Deal is a fantastic read and a must read for anyone in a leadership position. I think he's a highly intelligent guy who would run the country like it's a business.....a mindframe that is badly, badly needed IMO. I also think he's a very moderate candidate overall. He's far right on immigration and homeland security, but most of his economic policies are moderate to liberal. He's going right to try to win this nomination, but if he gets it, he'll immediately start coming back to the middle and be probably even more fiscally liberal than I would prefer. Obviously he is a master salesman who has manipulated the media brilliantly. I have no idea how he would do as President, but given what we've seen in the last 15 years, I'm ready to take the plunge.

This is almost always one of the most insipid things that I hear from "fiscal conservatives." Government is NOT a business and should not be run like one, unless you're talking about a 501(c)(3), which Trump has never run in his life. Government is not for-profit, and should never be run as such. Government should rarely be at the forefront of business innovation due to the increased risks and higher costs typically associated with treading fresh ground. I wholeheartedly agree that Government should be efficient and should always strive to be more efficient (in fact, my new job next month is in the department tasked with exactly that in a major state agency). That is why there is not a single government entity anywhere in this country that does not have people with business degrees and business experience trying to cut costs and promote efficiency. It is quite difficult to balance the stability needed within government agencies with the need for new efficiencies and careful innovation.

It is incredibly damaging over the long-term to squeeze every single extra cent out of government budgets. Flint, Michigan, is the most obvious example of that, but nearly every government has an example of a bad situation arising out of government acting like a business. Here in Virginia, we dumped over two billion into Northrop Grumman to improve our state agencies' IT infrastructure through a highly-touted "Public Private Partnership." It did... poorly, at least until our state IT agency got a new chief and took a more active role to right the ship.

Government services are an investment in your populace. Maybe some should be eliminated while others should be expanded, but Trump is not the guy who can or should be making those decisions. Your post is a great conservative talking point, but it reveals a complete ignorance with the inner workings of government agencies.

Soren wrote:There's a politician who isn't disingenuous?

drsmooth wrote:

Brantt wrote:Nah, Trump's go to market strategy, and my message board strategy for years is always throw the second punch. That way outbursts are completely justified since you didn't start the altercation or deterioration of the argument and you can always fall back on playing the victim if need be.

it appears you are unaware that Turnip starts stuff. Stupid stuff. Rancid stuff. Lies. And that's pretty much all he's got.

Despite your insistence, he has no "policies". He has no ideas. He has bellowing, and whining, and self-congratulation.

Your lack of awareness of these things makes you a low information voter. Possibly low energy as well.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

Brantt wrote:-In terms of Trump, I think you are stereotyping him a bit. He is obviously uber rich, but in general he despises the elite. The best description I've ever seen of him is he is Rodney Dangerfield's character from Caddyshack. He has so much money that he cannot be ignored, but he absolutely love to mess with and poke the elite who despise him in general (I would compare Jeb to Judge Smails). If nothing else, he is a deal maker and master negotiator. His book The Art of the Deal is a fantastic read and a must read for anyone in a leadership position. I think he's a highly intelligent guy who would run the country like it's a business.....a mindframe that is badly, badly needed IMO. I also think he's a very moderate candidate overall. He's far right on immigration and homeland security, but most of his economic policies are moderate to liberal. He's going right to try to win this nomination, but if he gets it, he'll immediately start coming back to the middle and be probably even more fiscally liberal than I would prefer. Obviously he is a master salesman who has manipulated the media brilliantly. I have no idea how he would do as President, but given what we've seen in the last 15 years, I'm ready to take the plunge.

This is almost always one of the most insipid things that I hear from "fiscal conservatives." Government is NOT a business and should not be run like one, unless you're talking about a 501(c)(3), which Trump has never run in his life. Government is not for-profit, and should never be run as such. Government should rarely be at the forefront of business innovation due to the increased risks and higher costs typically associated with treading fresh ground. I wholeheartedly agree that Government should be efficient and should always strive to be more efficient (in fact, my new job next month is in the department tasked with exactly that in a major state agency). That is why there is not a single government entity anywhere in this country that does not have people with business degrees and business experience trying to cut costs and promote efficiency. It is quite difficult to balance the stability needed within government agencies with the need for new efficiencies and careful innovation.

It is incredibly damaging over the long-term to squeeze every single extra cent out of government budgets. Flint, Michigan, is the most obvious example of that, but nearly every government has an example of a bad situation arising out of government acting like a business. Here in Virginia, we dumped over two billion into Northrop Grumman to improve our state agencies' IT infrastructure through a highly-touted "Public Private Partnership." It did... poorly, at least until our state IT agency got a new chief and took a more active role to right the ship.

Government services are an investment in your populace. Maybe some should be eliminated while others should be expanded, but Trump is not the guy who can or should be making those decisions. Your post is a great conservative talking point, but it reveals a complete ignorance with the inner workings of government agencies.

Gimpy wrote:One of the places where we spent wildly inefficiently is the military. You think Trump's going to do anything that could look like he's decreasing military spending after all of his blustering and insistence that he'll be the best thing ever for the military?

My only hope is they take a look at the defense budget and start cleaning it up.