true... but with Trump wanting to withdraw from NATO... and kind of withdraw from everything... that would leave Russia to walk in where they want and same with China.. Japan ahs seen this coming and starting to build a fairly large Navy/miliatary
Trump 2016 Or Hillary?
- Thread starter WhiteGuyintoThis
- Start date
well I like Clintons pick... but Trumps... hell that state wanted rid of him... he is to anti-everything... women/gays/MILIATARY...
I think just the whole email thing is getting to her... she needs to do a better job of addressing it... both the email catastrophes!
and looks like old wiki leaks is really enjoying this for some reason.... not sure what his interest is in it
my opinion is Russia is doing the hacking.... giving to him so they look clean... he is posting them as a favor for Russia in hopes of finding a home like the other traitor they have over there
Not jumping for joy at the thought of trump in charge of the country but am I'll at the thought of that vile, dishonest pandering bitch as president. So sick of my friends and female customers who don' t even know who our governor is declaring their support for that bitch because of "girl power" . And when are minorities going to quit falling for the democratic party's bullshit..
when the right quits destroying the middle class and quits pondering to the wealthy!
I agree!
just watching a thing on all the republicans voting for Hillary... one was Reagan's political advisor... he said the acceptance speech showed nothing of anything form the party and the day after when he should have been rallying the troops.. he was still spouting about Cruz's ******* may have been involved in the Kennedy assignation.... another said his slander towards minorities is not something some one seeking the highest office and represents all should be saying... they all had something to say nothing good for trump
although they go into detail about Jeb Bush's ******* going to support Trump... but he is head of republican party in texas
even with a prepared speech... to stop his blunders... he still got Boo's and people walking out and getting thrown out... trying to appease big biz... 20% tax cut for them... and a major cut for people earning over $150,000... but why isn't biz all happy.. the trade deal could ******* a lot of jobs.... more trickle down tax breaks for the wealthy... kills jobs for the workers... how is this going to work? more Reaganomics! and big biz sees it and is a little worried!
It's Trumpanomics, which is an even more absorbed philosophy than Reaganomics. Actually, I'm hoping he'll continue making these outlandish promises right up until he debates Hillary. He'll probably only debate her once, however, and that'll be THAT ... unfortunately. All he and the "party of Lincoln"
are planning to talk about is Benghazi and Hillary e-mails ... that's ALL THEY HAVE, poor babies.It's Trumpanomics, which is an even more absorbed philosophy than Reaganomics. Actually, I'm hoping he'll continue making these outlandish promises right up until he debates Hillary. He'll probably only debate her once, however, and that'll be THAT ... unfortunately. All he and the "party of Lincoln"
The speech today was pure Republican scripted for him.... intended to draw some of the fold back.... although a lot of the blue collar people that got him there saw it and booed and walked out or were thrown out!.... they said the RNC chair had been working with him all week... he is terrible at reading a scripted speech... looks like the puppet he is becoming.... but then some republicans would back a snake if they thought they could train it to bite others!
I really don't think he will debate Hillary... she knows the topics.. he doesn't
AND when he got off the scripted speech... what does he do? offends even more people!... the guy is a loser and I think he is toast!
50 GOP national security officials say Trump would be 'most reckless president in American history'
Trump delivers a foreign policy speech in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Jim Bourg/Reuters)
More than four dozen former Republican foreign policy officials have signed a letter declaring they are not voting for Donald Trump because it would put national security at risk.
“None of us will vote for Donald Trump,” reads the letter, signed by 50 veterans of the George W. Bush, George H. W. Bush and Richard Nixon administrations and published Monday by the New York Times. “From a foreign policy perspective, Donald Trump is not qualified to be President and Commander in Chief. Indeed, we are convinced that he would be a dangerous President and would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.
“Most fundamentally,” the letter states, “Mr. Trump lacks the character, values, and experience to be President. He weakens U.S. moral authority as the leader of the free world. He appears to lack basic knowledge about and belief in the U.S. Constitution, U.S. laws, and U.S. institutions, including religious tolerance, freedom of the press, and an independent judiciary.”
Those who signed the letter include former Homeland Security Secs. Thomas Ridge and Michael Chertoff; former NSA and CIA Director Michael V. Hayden; ex-Deputy Secretaries of State John D. Negroponte and Robert B. Zoellick; and Eric S. Edelman, who served as Vice President Dick Cheney’s national security adviser and was a top aide to Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Trump, their letter continues, has “demonstrated repeatedly that he has little understanding” of the nation’s “vital national interests, its complex diplomatic challenges, its indispensable alliances and the democratic values.” What’s more, the real estate mogul and former “Celebrity Apprentice” host “has shown no interest in educating himself” on crucial foreign policy issues.”
“He is unable or unwilling to separate truth from falsehood,” the letter adds. “He does not encourage conflicting views. He lacks self-control and acts impetuously. He cannot tolerate personal criticism. He has alarmed our closest allies with his erratic behavior. All of these are dangerous qualities in an individual who aspires to be president and commander in chief, with command of the U.S. nuclear arsenal.”
The stinging assessment of Trump’s national security proposals came on the heels of several apparent foreign policy gaffes, most notably the GOP nominee’s vow that Russian President Vladimir Putin would not invade Ukraine, despite the fact that Putin seized the Crimean Peninsula in 2014.
“He’s not going into Ukraine, OK, just so you understand,” Trump said in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “He’s not going to go into Ukraine, all right? You can mark it down. You can put it down. You can take it anywhere you want.”
“He’s already there, isn’t he?” Stephanopoulos responded.
Trump later clarified to say he was talking about Russia’s future actions under a potential Trump administration.
The Times noted that absent from the list of signatories are former Republican Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger, George P. Shultz, James A. Baker III, Colin L. Powell and Condoleezza Rice.
Earlier this year, Trump met with both Kissinger and Baker, telling the paper he “came away with a lot of knowledge” from the pair.
In March, more than 100 national security advisers signed a similar letter blasting Trump as a “fundamentally dishonest” candidate who “would use the authority of his office to act in ways that make America less safe.”
Monday’s missive was even more blunt.
“We understand that many Americans are profoundly frustrated with the federal government and its inability to solve pressing domestic and international problems,” the letter concludes. “We also know that many have doubts about Hillary Clinton, as do many of us. But Donald Trump is not the answer to America’s daunting challenges and to this crucial election. We are convinced that in the Oval Office, he would be the most reckless President in American history.”
Trump delivers a foreign policy speech in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Jim Bourg/Reuters)
More than four dozen former Republican foreign policy officials have signed a letter declaring they are not voting for Donald Trump because it would put national security at risk.
“None of us will vote for Donald Trump,” reads the letter, signed by 50 veterans of the George W. Bush, George H. W. Bush and Richard Nixon administrations and published Monday by the New York Times. “From a foreign policy perspective, Donald Trump is not qualified to be President and Commander in Chief. Indeed, we are convinced that he would be a dangerous President and would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.
“Most fundamentally,” the letter states, “Mr. Trump lacks the character, values, and experience to be President. He weakens U.S. moral authority as the leader of the free world. He appears to lack basic knowledge about and belief in the U.S. Constitution, U.S. laws, and U.S. institutions, including religious tolerance, freedom of the press, and an independent judiciary.”
Those who signed the letter include former Homeland Security Secs. Thomas Ridge and Michael Chertoff; former NSA and CIA Director Michael V. Hayden; ex-Deputy Secretaries of State John D. Negroponte and Robert B. Zoellick; and Eric S. Edelman, who served as Vice President Dick Cheney’s national security adviser and was a top aide to Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Trump, their letter continues, has “demonstrated repeatedly that he has little understanding” of the nation’s “vital national interests, its complex diplomatic challenges, its indispensable alliances and the democratic values.” What’s more, the real estate mogul and former “Celebrity Apprentice” host “has shown no interest in educating himself” on crucial foreign policy issues.”
“He is unable or unwilling to separate truth from falsehood,” the letter adds. “He does not encourage conflicting views. He lacks self-control and acts impetuously. He cannot tolerate personal criticism. He has alarmed our closest allies with his erratic behavior. All of these are dangerous qualities in an individual who aspires to be president and commander in chief, with command of the U.S. nuclear arsenal.”
The stinging assessment of Trump’s national security proposals came on the heels of several apparent foreign policy gaffes, most notably the GOP nominee’s vow that Russian President Vladimir Putin would not invade Ukraine, despite the fact that Putin seized the Crimean Peninsula in 2014.
“He’s not going into Ukraine, OK, just so you understand,” Trump said in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “He’s not going to go into Ukraine, all right? You can mark it down. You can put it down. You can take it anywhere you want.”
“He’s already there, isn’t he?” Stephanopoulos responded.
Trump later clarified to say he was talking about Russia’s future actions under a potential Trump administration.
The Times noted that absent from the list of signatories are former Republican Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger, George P. Shultz, James A. Baker III, Colin L. Powell and Condoleezza Rice.
Earlier this year, Trump met with both Kissinger and Baker, telling the paper he “came away with a lot of knowledge” from the pair.
In March, more than 100 national security advisers signed a similar letter blasting Trump as a “fundamentally dishonest” candidate who “would use the authority of his office to act in ways that make America less safe.”
Monday’s missive was even more blunt.
“We understand that many Americans are profoundly frustrated with the federal government and its inability to solve pressing domestic and international problems,” the letter concludes. “We also know that many have doubts about Hillary Clinton, as do many of us. But Donald Trump is not the answer to America’s daunting challenges and to this crucial election. We are convinced that in the Oval Office, he would be the most reckless President in American history.”
Anyone watch the Trumpster give his teleprompter Economic Plan today?
His "Reaganomics On Steroids" Plan I think I'll call it.
One thing about the Republicans, by god when they commit to a platform, they stick to it regardless of how many times the frik'n thing fails. Cut Taxes for the Wealthy & Corporations- DeRegulate .... yeah, Trickle Down has served this country so well ...
His "Reaganomics On Steroids" Plan I think I'll call it.
One thing about the Republicans, by god when they commit to a platform, they stick to it regardless of how many times the frik'n thing fails. Cut Taxes for the Wealthy & Corporations- DeRegulate .... yeah, Trickle Down has served this country so well ...
he was a republican puppet on strings for that speech... and had trouble even reading it!... RNC chair spent the week with Trump to help get him out of trouble... so the scripted speech!
looks to me like it was a ploy to bring back so many of the republicans that are jumping ship
but then got off the speech at the end... and managed to offend another minority group!.... the guy can't open his mouth without spewing hate and discontent!
The one thing that nobody is getting is that real economic recovery comes from small business. And nobody is doing a damn thing the encourage small business. The millennials have a very low rate of business start up due in large part to the hostile position the current administration has. It gets scary when one of the growth industries is one that helps small business negotiate it's way through the bureaucracy
.....What is your definition of a "small business" Torp? That it employs a certain number of employees? Or that it is home based? Or Revenue/Sales based?
.....Everyone, including the Small Business Administration, have their own definitions of what a small business is ... and that even changes based upon the type of industry it is. For example, to the SBA some companies that employ over a thousand employees are still considered small businesses. And the thing is, the problems, issues, and needs of businesses change as their # of employees change.
.....In my industry (company paid insurance benefits) we consider companies under 50 lives small businesses, 50-500 lives medium size businesses, and over 500+ considered large, and the sophistication of the products/services we can provide these companies is based upon their size. Self-funded health/dental plans can only be provided to companies where the number of employees is large enough to predict claims usage.
.....Our Washington representatives can't possibly "help" the small businesses until they, themselves, have collective understanding of what the small business looks like, and that's not ever been done. Still, according to the SMA over 74% of all businesses are sole proprietor type businesses, and 50%+ are home based.
Last edited:
you keep bring that up... because you are biased... maybe they do need some kind of help I don't know... but for the country... the only thing that makes the economy grow is when you have well paid workers paying taxes on those wages and out spending that money in the economy
I have heard him talk about several things trying to help small biz.... maybe it's just not what you want... out of my league there
Similar threads
