Useful Analogy?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37416457

[naomi24]

RandyMarsh, I have no idea what he inherited, but if he inherited the whole $200m, it's irrelevant. He still turned whatever he had into billions. He is no fool.

[RandyMarsh]

Are the bankruptcies irrelevant?

[Khandro]

It appears to me that there is a lot of envy, masquerading as morality on this thread. Trump is Trump; he's a big beast, he's brash and an 'American' in the extreme. Why so many Americans like him, is because he's the kind of person who actually did make America great and he's frightens the life out of some of the more timorous Brits.

[Peter Pedant]

// Surely everyone knows that refugees don't taste as sweet as Skittles and far too many can prove bad for you?//

quite right AOG and little refugees babies are far harder to drown....

[Peter Pedant]

// If a country had endemic Ebola (say), would we allow people to come from there to here without a rigorous health check. No we wouldn't. //

er we did - the experiment with Nurse McCafferkey
let her back without anything like adequate checks
and then let her travel

and surprise surprise disaster didnt occur
( but "containment" is good on wed night ch 5 )

[jim360]

I guess the point Randymarsh is making is that Trump could and should have done rather a lot more with his start-up capital than he has actually achieved. If, as has been reported, Trump could have made (far) more of his starting millions by doing exactly nothing other than allow stock index tracking to take its natural course rather than work hard to invest, then doesn't that suggest that his "clever" investments were not quite so clever as he keeps saying? I guess it's true that he could just as easily have invested badly and lost everything, and there's no way I'd describe a billionaire from any starting position as unsuccessful, but all the same it's a point worth making. Trump attempts to sell himself as basically bigger than Jesus, and makes outrageous lies about his success or net worth, or pretty much anything else about him.

And anyway, the litany of failures along the way is quite a significant list -- often overlooked by his admirers, perhaps overemphasised by his detractors, but still worth noting. Of particular import is Trump University, that is basically a fraud case waiting to explode in Trump's face assuming the wheels of American justice turn properly.

We can't let him get away with this. Maybe calling him stupid is unfair, but on the other hand he lies instead about having "one of the highest IQs" out there (even if this is true after all, who cares? IQ as a measure is overrated) -- and calling anyone who challenges him "stupid and insecure" to boot? Maybe the man is no fool, but how can you take seriously the claims of someone boasting about their vocabulary in the first place, let alone when he does so with "I know the best words"? Maybe his hands aren't tiny, but on the other hand how can a man stand up and boast about having "no problem" with the size of what's inside his pants and not think that the entire election is a joke when that becomes a part of the debate?

Put another way, Donald Trump does and says everything that TTT and others profess to hate whenever "liberal lefties" do it. He is dismissive, pompous, rude, arrogant, self-absorbed, obsessed with minutiae (literally, in the case of his hands), and contemptuous of his detractors. When left-wing people are accused of this, whether justified or not, it's as an insult. When Trump does it, they lap it up. It's sickening to see just how hypocritical Trump's supporters are about his behaviour. Even more so in America, where he shows contempt for various parts of the constitution (in particular Due Process, freedom of expression, etc etc).

I could draw more attention to it but then even in typing the above I know I'm wasting my time. TTT won't care (he has said so); others will just ignore it and/ or divert attention by focusing on Clinton's own flaws instead. I don't envy the choice America has to make in November, but in any reasonable assessment Clinton is merely a bad candidate. Trump wouldn't even register on the same scale.

[andy-hughes]

divebuddy - //If a country had endemic Ebola (say), would we allow people to come from there to here without a rigorous health check. No we wouldn't. If we did it would amount to criminal negligence.

Nobody denies that the average boat load of would be illegal immigrants could well contain a few would be future terrorists. Same situation surely. At the very least, no papers should equal no entry. //

If you think that an infectious disease which anyone can catch and be completely unaware of, equates to a murderous ideology that has to be absorbed and implemented by conscious thought are comparable, then you have a strange way of looking at your fellow human beings I would suggest.

[andy-hughes]

Khandro - //It appears to me that there is a lot of envy, masquerading as morality on this thread. //

Do you imagine I envy Donald Trump - with that hair???


Ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!!!

[naomi24]

Khandro at 16:47. Sounds about right.

[RandyMarsh]

jim360 at 17.03 sounds about right

[mikey4444]

Randy at 17:02 sounds about right !

[naomi24]

^Sounds about right! ;o)

[jim360]

db's and Naomi's response is hardly surprising. Focus on a single typo at the expense of the argument. If either of you really bothered to read into Trump -- what he has said, done, used his money for, and plans -- you wouldn't remotely be so interested in whether mikey meant 17.02 or 17.32.

As a case in point, did any of you pay attention to the "birther" conspiracy, that Trump was an active participant in and advocate of for most of the last five years? And now, in the last week, he makes this big announcement about how it was all rubbish (which we all knew already, unless we were Donald Trump or a few other nutters), but nevertheless managed to paint it as if his intervention was vital in clarifying the matter -- and, then, even more outrageously, blamed Clinton for starting it. Everything he has said about this for the last five years has been demonstrably, and absolutely, false. The man is a consummate liar, playing fast and loose with the truth -- and none of his supporters or admirers seem to care!

Naomi's right, he is clever. Clever enough to exploit the gullibility of millions, who seem to think that he's worth a shot at leader despite having not one iota of the required skills or temperament.

[mikey4444]

"Clever enough to exploit the gullibility of millions, who seem to think that he's worth a shot at leader despite having not one iota of the required skills or temperament"

Well said Jim !

[naomi24]

Jim, //db's and Naomi's response is hardly surprising. Focus on a single typo at the expense of the argument. //

What are you talking about?

[jim360]

It was a reference to db's post pointing out mikey's citing a post at 17.02 that didn't exist, and then you backing this up, as opposed to responding to anything of actual substance.

[naomi24]

Jim, I responded to randymarsh and Mikey mimicking me. What did you expect me to respond to?

[RandyMarsh]

Whether his bankruptcies were irrelevant?