He seems very intelligent, he is a great speaker, and if you watch apprentice you know he commands respect and is very good at communicating his message very quickly and extremely crystal clear.
But, is he a warhawk? Or is he more libertarian?
Santa Claus would make a good President. Need a little more fiction in our leaders.
Donald Trump is all over the place with his politics. I think he has a real problem if he decides to go for the long run, which I don’t think he will given that he’s a self-promoter.
I thought this was going to literally be a joke.
I can’t believe anyone would seriously be contemplating that. The last thing that asshat needs is more power. Honestly, everything that you listed off is pretty far down on the totem pole of what would make a good president.
For a moment I thought you were talking about Adolph Hitler. He fits your description, which is of someone who can get his message across. What we need instead is someone who has the right mesaage, who knows what he is talking about. By the AE and the freedom loving yardstick, we have big time fail on our hands with Trump. Think Bozo the Clown.
But it all depends on what you mean by “good”. If good means “will hasten the country’s rush into poverty”, then yeah, he is pretty good. After all, he wants to impose a 25% tariff on all things Chinese.
Here’s why he endorsed McCain, who would make a “great president” according to the Donald:
“The Donald is supporting McCain. Supposedly, it’s because he thinks McCain will go to OPEC and “make” them lower oil prices. He then offered up an analogy. He said that if he and somebody else owned similar stores and they got together and decided collectively how much to charge for certain items, they would end up in jail.”
If you hurry, you can download Tom Woods talking about Trump and the other clowns here. That link will be working for a short time only, until the new show replaces it sometime today.
More wit and wisdom of Donald Trump:
-
Why the economy is in trouble. Short answer: greed. Everybody is to blame equally, the regular consumer included. On second thought, the blame is to be placed squarely on “the times”.
-
One can drive a business to bankruptcy and still be a great businessman.
-
Bailouts were a great idea.
-
Too bad the law does not force banks to lend money.
"Real Estate magnate Donald Trump appeared on “Larry King Live” Wednesday to discuss how the economy got to this point, how it may provide opportunities for some families and which candidate is best equipped to handle the crisis.
Larry King: Who do we blame for this, Donald?
Donald Trump: Well, there’s a lot of greed on Wall Street. And a lot of people are making crazy deals and you can blame everybody, even the regular consumer that went out and bought a house and got a mortgage that was ridiculous. You know, we call them exploding mortgages. But you can really blame a lot of people. And I guess you can maybe just blame the times.
King: Are you concerned about Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley?
Trump: Well, it would seem to be a great concern. John Mack of Morgan Stanley is a great, great man. He’s a great friend of mine, a great businessman and you see a company like that is under trouble, I know how good a man he is.
I know what a good job he does, but you look at what’s happening to Morgan Stanley. It’s very, very frightening.
Advertisement
King: What about the whole concept of bailouts?
Trump: Well, it’s a little bit different. A lot of people are not in favor of bailouts. You know, we talked about all the different things going on in this country. Let’s face it, Larry, we are in a depression.
If they didn’t do the bailout, you would be in depression No. 2 and maybe just as big as depression No. 1, so they really had to do something. The problem is they’re giving millions and billions of dollars to banks and the banks aren’t loaning it.
If you are a prime customer of a bank and if you need 10 cents, you can’t get it. The banks are out of business. They’re not loaning. Now, billions of dollars has been given. They’re supposed to be loaning out that money and they’re using it for other purposes, so it is a real mess.
King: If you were in the Senate, would you vote for the stimulus plan?
Trump: Well, I’d vote for a stimulus plan. I’m not sure that all of the things in there are appropriate. Some of the little toys that they have are not really appropriate, and they’re a little surprising that they seem to want it, because the publicity on it has been terrible.
I would certainly vote for a stimulus, but I would really vote for banks having to loan out the money because they’re not doing that.
thanks everyone for all the info…
ok, so donald is extremely ignorant about free market economics
That’s like saying Hitler was a terrible singer.
If they make Donald Trump President, then radio, television, newspaper, and the internet better deliver.
If they do not, it will be like a producer giving up on the chance to make the greatest comedy sitcom ever made. It will be like a whale walking into your office, giving you a harpoon, and telling you where to harpoon it, and then you deciding not to take it.
DON’T FAIL US!
Would Donald Trump Make a Good President?
How many brown people has he mass murdered?
Seriously, he’s a marketer and a self promoter. He’s using this presidential stuff to increase his brand and profile.
How Does Donald Trump File For Bankruptcy and Still stay on Top?
I think it’d be pretty fitting if he became US pres, country goes bankrupt - he personally benefits.
Do you really want anyone in charge of a big business to run the government?
I don’t know. What the hell is a “good” president?
This I say as I perform the dance of Mutual Exclusivity.
I hope that’s the extent of it. Otherwise, I’m convinced he got his democrat friends to get him to try to run for the nomination to make the republicans look bad.
He’s tried and succeeded in using eminent domain to kick people off their property so he can ‘develop’ it. All you need to know really.
I think the possibility of “The Trumpster” running for President is comical and most likely just a publicity stunt. I find even more amusing and interesting that Trump has the highest poll numbers of all candidates including Ron Paul (Don worry an honest man like Ron Paul could not possibly get elected as the entire USA is living in a government propaganda sponsored financial fantasy and likes it that way.).
The amazing thing about Trump is that he is against the stated platform of the Republican Party. Not that the platform has stopped the Bushes from enacting monsters like Medicate-Prescription Drugs or staring expensive wars and going on massive spending binges that resulted in the expansion of government in all areas to the detriment of the mass majority of the people living in the USA.
So my only conclusions are that Republican survey respondents like the current system and want a candidate who can espouse much of the same fantasy that is rampant in the voters listed as Democrats.
I think it might be a good idea for an entrepreneur to become president. Rather remove the fake idea that the current president is some how independent from the private sector. The whole idea that the government is impartial and is some sort of external entity is a bit ridiculous. The amount of contributions they accept and the amount of people that work in the public sector that used to work in the private sector, it is one big happy family already. So it would be better at least from a realistic perspective, for the government to just come out with the truth that the government is already completely controlled by the interests in the private sector.
Not that i could personally recommend trump, don’t know anything about him. But someone like Richard Branson i think might do a better job of at least running some good services and “getting your money worth” with regards to taxation. But no one ever goes in to being a president with a motive of getting people’s money worth when it comes to tax, but even if they did, they probably would never stand a chance against the resistance from public sector employees.
I would much prefer if they run government with a surplus and they started reducing taxation and i think the only way to do that would be to run it like a business.
There is no good president, but I think Trump would be a horrible one.
The problem is that they can’t just run the US government like a business. Without a market for the goods that governments have a monopoly on, there is no rational way to figure out how much these programs should be costing. There is no way to know how much money they should tax to fund these programs. Any attempt to actually run a government like a business ultimately means the demise of the state.
Likes of Trump: tells it like he sees it; wants to bring America back to being number one in the world; wants to run the country like a business, not like an empire.
Dislikes of Trump: donated $50k to Rahm Emanuel’s mayoral campaign; has considered running in the past but never seriously followed through.
Trump makes a hell of a lot of good points, but…alas, as people have pointed out, he is technically part of Hollywood. I wouldn’t be surprised if this was all just an act.
IMO, it’s great that he’s (sort of) in the race right now. He’s bringing up a lot of things nobody wants to, similar to Sarah Palin, and the left can’t change their tampons fast enough. They hate anyone that would dislike and contradict Obama, God damned statists.
Now my concern is the Republican party. The Republican party hates Donald Trump. Is it because he would only consider himself a Republican to run as president? This would be smart since, as Michael Savage says, “You have to be part of the machine to have a chance winning.” However, he doesn’t play the whole left/right ping pong game. Of course he knows the left are idiots; but the Republicans have that good ol’ boy system that he poses a threat to.
I like Trump being involved. He poses a lot of good questions, and even if he doesn’t run, that’ll do some good.
When people suggest a ‘business man’ or an ‘entrepreneur’ would be better in office I think they’re missing a fundamental point, and that is the government will fail even if competent management is moved from the private sector into the public. Even granting them the power to make massive changes somehow, what they’ll end up doing is gutting the obvious waste and duplication and that might lead to short term improvements in the overall balance of things in general. But the bottom line is after a few years in the public sector divorced from the normal market signals and market generated information, they’ll be guessing and/or responding to the same perverse incentives that all politicians respond to. It’s not that the government has incompetent managers, though it does. The real problem is the government creates incompetent managers even if you feed it the most competent, because you’re cutting them off from the very feedback mechanism that let them make good decisions in the first place. The problem isn’t the people, it’s the system they’re in.