Some writer or pundit (can't remember which) made the comment when it was coming down to probable final contenders: "The Democratic party has a candidate problem, the Republican Party has a party problem." Pretty accurate.
A new low?
Donald Trump says that women who are sexually harassed in the workplace should just quit: "I would like to think she would find another career or find another company if that was the case," he told USA Today.
He son Eric doubled down on "CBS This Morning" while discussing former Fox News head Roger Ailes alleged sexual harassment of women employees, essentially blaming women who are sexually harassed for not being strong enough to avoid it: "Ivanka is a strong, powerful woman, she wouldn't allow herself to be objected [sic] to it. And by the way, you should take it up with human resources, and I think she would as a strong person, at the same time, I don't think she would allow herself to be subjected to that."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/02/politics/eric-trump-ivanka-trump-harassment/
For a woman of privilege and means like Ivanka Trump, this might be fantastic advice; better to abandon ship then to deal with the psychological and professional consequences of having your ass swatted by a leering colleague during a company meeting, or to be extorted for a blowjob by your supervisor during performance reviews.
But for women who have faced sexual harassment in the workplace, it is decidedly bad advice. It can be difficult, if not impossible, to leave a job after experiencing sexual harassment in the workplace — and telling them to do so in the first place is a form of victim blaming akin to telling a woman she shouldn't wear a short skirt at a bar or walk alone on a dark street.
I'm sure it won't matter much at all to his supporters given their predominant demographic makeup, but dammit this guy is setting us back as a country every time he opens he freakin mouth and I am getting pretty tired of it. 
[Edited on 8/2/2016 by gondicar]
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/02/politics/donald-trump-ashburn-virginia-crying-baby/index.html
Trump: 'You can get the baby out of here'
By Ashley Killough, CNN
Updated 2:37 PM ET, Tue August 2, 2016
Ashburn, Virginia (CNN)Donald Trump, trying to reassure a distressed mother with a crying baby, said Tuesday that he loves hearing babies cry at his rallies and told her not to worry -- only to change his mind just a moment later.
"I love babies. I hear that baby cry, I like it," Trump said at a campaign event here as a baby could be heard crying in the audience. "What a baby. What a beautiful baby. Don't worry, don't worry. The mom's running around, like, don't worry about it, you know. It's young and beautiful and healthy and that's what we want."
But less than two minutes later, as the baby continued to wail, Trump took back his words.
"Actually I was only kidding, you can get the baby out of here," he said to laughs. "I think she really believed me that I love having a baby crying while I'm speaking. That's OK. People don't understand. That's OK."
I think there are enough other things to show he is unquestionably unqualified for the office of President.
Really? He seems like charlatan to me. And a an arrogant blowhard.
Name three things that show he is unquestionably unqualified for the office of President.
You just named two so I only have to add three, right? OK, here they are:
1. He has absolutely no regard for how the Constitution limits the power of the federal government. He does not understand that the federal governments powers are limited to those enumerated in the Constitution.
2. He does not understand the concept of checks and balances. He thinks that "he alone" can enact policies by edict.
3. He has no regard for the rights of individuals guaranteed by the Constitution. He thinks it is OK to discriminate based upon religion, gender, or ethnicity.If you need more let me know, but I think you get the idea.
[Edited on 7/30/2016 by bob1954]
The first two suit Obama perfectly. Executive orders on immigration. Delaying the implementation of the ACA even though he signed it into law so the voters wouldn't get whacked with premium increases right before the election. That stufffs ok though.
Obama is not running for office. What do you think of these points as they apply to Trump?
I think he will try to get away with as much as possible. I would think he would need a top notch legal team.
Looking at the way Trump operates, he would turn to his most trusted & loyal insiders - his kids and son in law. Of course they are more than qualified to advise on presidential issues :P.
It's all a moot point because Trump will not be elected. Do you really believe he will win?
The Opinion Pages | OP-ED COLUMNIST
Stop Indulging Trump
Frank Bruni AUG. 2, 2016
John McCain, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell and the rest of you: It’s time to stop saying or suggesting that Donald Trump doesn’t represent you, because he does represent you. He’s your party’s nominee, with your endorsements. Until you withdraw those, he has your blessing. Your permission.
And if you keep forgiving him and prioritizing your political survival over the country’s stability, he could wind up representing all of us.
Tell me that doesn’t scare the bejesus out of you. Say it with a straight face.
Right now you’re all twisting and turning and trying to justify your support of him in the face of his petulant, gratuitous attack on the Muslim parents of a soldier who died fighting for America. Yesterday you were all twisting and turning because of his petulant, gratuitous attack on a Mexican-American judge. Tomorrow you’ll all be twisting and turning over something else. I promise you.
Trump isn’t slouching toward gravitas. He’s having a tantrum, and to threaten him with timeouts that never come only encourages it. Spare the rod, spoil the Trump.
This isn’t a normal presidential election, he isn’t a normal political candidate, and you know it. We all do. And it’s well past time to reckon fully with that.
Not just you but all of us keep according larger historical sense to his candidacy and trying to fit it into pre-existing frames, but I fear that when we do that, we minimize the outright outrage and singular farce of it.
We throw around terms like demagogue and fascist, but I’m not sure he’s coherent, consistent or weighty enough for either.
We label him anti-establishment, and that’s a howler. He grew up affluent. Went to an Ivy League college. Sent his kids to posh boarding schools. Mingled with Bill and Hillary Clinton at his (third) wedding. He is the power elite, albeit an ostentatiously gold-tufted version of it.
In presidential races past, we’ve seen protectionists, nativists, even racists. What we haven’t seen, not in my lifetime, is a major-party nominee who is such an unabashed and unrepentant fabulist, with so little control over his temper and a worldview shaped entirely by what and who flatter him.
Never has a nominee pouted with his grandeur. Never has one bragged with his abandon.
He’s best described not in political terms but in developmental ones. He’s a toddler. I’d say “infant” but infants are pre-verbal, and he has a few words, most of them monosyllabic.
Only a toddler could be so self-justifying and tone-deaf that he’d compare the sacrifice of Humayun Khan — the soldier I mentioned who was killed in Iraq — to his own professional work of erecting tall buildings and simultaneously enriching himself.
Only a toddler would respond to Michael Bloomberg’s digs at him by saying that when they golfed together, “I hit the ball a lot longer.” Yes, Donald, everything about you is longer. We haven’t forgotten that G.O.P presidential debate.
Over the last few days, the word “decency” has popped up a lot, and it’s on target and overdue.
“There’s just no sense of decency from this man,” Rick Tyler, a Republican strategist who worked for Ted Cruz, told Politico.
“He has no decency,” Khizr Khan, the fallen soldier’s father, told ABC News.
Trump isn’t just uninformed, as his recent comments on Ukraine reaffirmed. He’s a repository of almost every character trait that we warn children against and reprimand them for.
And the examples of his indecency get lost in the sheer volume of them. Any one might end another candidate’s quest. But they’re the white noise of his bid. He’s redeemed by his own repulsiveness.
I appreciate that for many conservatives, a Supreme Court shaped by Hillary Clinton would be an abomination. But can they really elevate that concern above national security and entrust the country to a tyrant-loving, Putin-flirting, NATO-dissing novice?
I understand that renouncing him means abetting her, which hurts, given her considerable flaws and their genuine qualms.
But there are bigger things at stake. That’s why a staggering number of loyal Republicans have already bolted, to regroup and find a more worthy adversary for her over the next four years. She can’t possibly do as much damage in that span as he could.
I get it: If McCain and many other Republicans in Congress turn off Trump’s supporters, they might get turned out themselves.
But isn’t there a point at which principle must kick in? Aren’t there bounds to partisanship and personal interest? I ask that not in favor of Clinton or the Democrats but out of concern — no, alarm — for America, which needs a grown-up who honors our values, not a brat who shreds them.
It's all a moot point because Trump will not be elected. Do you really believe he will win?
I never believed he would make it past the first few primaries. Then I never thought he'd get the delegates needed. Then I never thought the GOP would allow him to be their nominee. Nothing has slowed him down. Do I believe he will win? Probably not, but it is possible.
Far Out
Trump isn't backing Paul Ryan, John McCain
or this
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/02/politics/maria-comella-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/index.html
Longtime Chris Christie aide Maria Comella says she plans to vote for Hillary Clinton -- saying that after Donald Trump's nomination, Republicans are "at a moment where silence isn't an option."
"As someone who has worked to further the Republican Party's principles for the last 15 years I believe that we are at a moment where silence isn't an option. We are here today in part because as a party in the past we have remained silent when things have made us uncomfortable. Instead of speaking out against instances of bigotry, racism and inflammatory rhetoric whether it's been against women, immigrants or Muslims, we made a calculus that it was better to say nothing at all in the interest of politics and winning elections. For me, if our party has a future, we have to change that trajectory and lead by example.
"We have to stop thinking that winning at any cost is more important than governing principles. It should be the job of the Republican Party's nominee to set a tone worthy of being the leader of the free world and not give into our worst instincts. I don't care if it's good politics or not."
[Edited on 8/2/2016 by LeglizHemp]
[Edited on 8/2/2016 by LeglizHemp]
I'm beginning to think that Trump may have joined the race just to mock the Republican Party. I keep expecting that at anytime he could call a press conference and shout "Punked". Maybe that's not it, but I seriously do think he is not as interested in being President as he is running for President. Once the competition is over he may just walk away, win or lose.
LOL he claimed a Vet gave him his real Purple Heart today too......turns out the Vet told him it was a copy.
OK, I think I figured it out. Trump knows he's probably going to be charged with a major felony (rape, bribery, hell maybe even murder) so even though he doesn't want to be President he decides to run hoping to get elected. After inauguration he plans to immediately resign so his hand-picked VP will become President and grant Trump a pre-negotiated Presidential pardon for his crimes. Hey, it wouldn't be the first time (Nixon/Ford). Better keep your eyes on Pence.
I'm beginning to think that Trump may have joined the race just to mock the Republican Party. I keep expecting that at anytime he could call a press conference and shout "Punked". Maybe that's not it, but I seriously do think he is not as interested in being President as he is running for President. Once the competition is over he may just walk away, win or lose.
If one looks at the last couple weeks of Trump, one wonders if he is imploding. If this is so, is he setting the stage for his eventual loss?
The attacks on the Kahn family
Criticisms of fire marshals (how f'ing petty on his part)
Accusations of rigged presidential debates
Claims of a letter from the NFL re: the debates. NFL disputed him.
Inaccurate statements on the Ukraine
Today - refusing to endorse Ryan & McCain
etc.
The biggest indicator - very little defense from those on the right on a band's web site.
Far Out
Trump isn't backing Paul Ryan, John McCain
or this
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/02/politics/maria-comella-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/index.html
Longtime Chris Christie aide Maria Comella says she plans to vote for Hillary Clinton -- saying that after Donald Trump's nomination, Republicans are "at a moment where silence isn't an option."
"As someone who has worked to further the Republican Party's principles for the last 15 years I believe that we are at a moment where silence isn't an option. We are here today in part because as a party in the past we have remained silent when things have made us uncomfortable. Instead of speaking out against instances of bigotry, racism and inflammatory rhetoric whether it's been against women, immigrants or Muslims, we made a calculus that it was better to say nothing at all in the interest of politics and winning elections. For me, if our party has a future, we have to change that trajectory and lead by example.
"We have to stop thinking that winning at any cost is more important than governing principles. It should be the job of the Republican Party's nominee to set a tone worthy of being the leader of the free world and not give into our worst instincts. I don't care if it's good politics or not."[Edited on 8/2/2016 by LeglizHemp]
[Edited on 8/2/2016 by LeglizHemp]
Maybe she got tired of wiping the brown off of Christie's nose.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/carter-page-trump-russia_us_57a0f329e4b0693164c2fb41?section=&
Trump Foreign Policy Adviser Traveled To Russia Prior To Changes In GOP Platform
Carter Page expressed a wish for a closer relationship between Washington and Moscow.
what i find the most strange is that damn near everytime Trump says something.....the interpreters come out in force. how come we can't understand what he means when he speaks? why does someone else always have to interpret or clarify his statements? how come we don't understand english or why does his use of english not make sense to us?
Does Obama follow the Whipping Post?
ok ok....do i quote myself much? lol no.....in this case though....yes
[Edited on 8/3/2016 by LeglizHemp]
George W. Bush Takes A Question On Cindy Sheehan - 8/11/2005
Uploaded on Feb 10, 2012
In Crawford Texas.
[Edited on 8/3/2016 by LeglizHemp]
i can do without the commentary at the start and the end......but this is how you address the issue as a responsible leader
[Edited on 8/3/2016 by LeglizHemp]
oh and watch out for Trumps new news strategy.....local news interviews
So, Trump wants to spend double what his democratic opponent plans to spend on infrastructure projects, paid for by some vague mix of private and public funding and more debt ("we'll make a phenomenal deal") all while reducing debt. Republicans in congress have been blocking this kind of government spending and ridiculing similar plans from the dems. If Obama proposed something this massive and vague today, the negative reaction from the GOP would be immediate. How will they react when the proposal is from their own nominee?
George W. Bush Takes A Question On Cindy Sheehan - 8/11/2005
Uploaded on Feb 10, 2012
In Crawford Texas.[Edited on 8/3/2016 by LeglizHemp]
i can do without the commentary at the start and the end......but this is how you address the issue as a responsible leader
[Edited on 8/3/2016 by LeglizHemp]
Holy sh!t! Trump makes Dubya look presidential! And I thought the Republican Party could not be more of a sty and slop trough than it was under Bush.
Trump favors school choice, kind of a weird position to take for a racist. Seems like a racist would
want to keep black kids shackled to a failing public school system....Oh well.
Trump favors school choice, kind of a weird position to take for a racist. Seems like a racist would
want to keep black kids shackled to a failing public school system....Oh well.
Keeping black kids shackled is exactly what "school choice" is all about.
I think there are enough other things to show he is unquestionably unqualified for the office of President.
Really? He seems like charlatan to me. And a an arrogant blowhard.
Name three things that show he is unquestionably unqualified for the office of President.
You just named two so I only have to add three, right? OK, here they are:
1. He has absolutely no regard for how the Constitution limits the power of the federal government. He does not understand that the federal governments powers are limited to those enumerated in the Constitution.
2. He does not understand the concept of checks and balances. He thinks that "he alone" can enact policies by edict.
3. He has no regard for the rights of individuals guaranteed by the Constitution. He thinks it is OK to discriminate based upon religion, gender, or ethnicity.If you need more let me know, but I think you get the idea.
[Edited on 7/30/2016 by bob1954]
The first two suit Obama perfectly. Executive orders on immigration. Delaying the implementation of the ACA even though he signed it into law so the voters wouldn't get whacked with premium increases right before the election. That stufffs ok though.
Obama is not running for office. What do you think of these points as they apply to Trump?
I think he will try to get away with as much as possible. I would think he would need a top notch legal team.
And that would make him a good president in your eyes, showing disregard for the constitution while trying "to get away with as much as possible"? Is that what you are saying?
Who said I was voting for Trump? I didn't. You assumed that. I'm leaning towards Gary Johnson. I am registered Libertarian. These are two most unelectable candidates ever. They are both morally challenged but Hillary is far more corrupt. Watch her interview with Chris Wallace. She is delusional. What a choice between these two.
I think there are enough other things to show he is unquestionably unqualified for the office of President.
Really? He seems like charlatan to me. And a an arrogant blowhard.
Name three things that show he is unquestionably unqualified for the office of President.
You just named two so I only have to add three, right? OK, here they are:
1. He has absolutely no regard for how the Constitution limits the power of the federal government. He does not understand that the federal governments powers are limited to those enumerated in the Constitution.
2. He does not understand the concept of checks and balances. He thinks that "he alone" can enact policies by edict.
3. He has no regard for the rights of individuals guaranteed by the Constitution. He thinks it is OK to discriminate based upon religion, gender, or ethnicity.If you need more let me know, but I think you get the idea.
[Edited on 7/30/2016 by bob1954]
The first two suit Obama perfectly. Executive orders on immigration. Delaying the implementation of the ACA even though he signed it into law so the voters wouldn't get whacked with premium increases right before the election. That stufffs ok though.
Obama is not running for office. What do you think of these points as they apply to Trump?
I think he will try to get away with as much as possible. I would think he would need a top notch legal team.
And that would make him a good president in your eyes, showing disregard for the constitution while trying "to get away with as much as possible"? Is that what you are saying?
Who said I was voting for Trump? I didn't. You assumed that. I'm leaning towards Gary Johnson. I am registered Libertarian. These are two most unelectable candidates ever. They are both morally challenged but Hillary is far more corrupt. Watch her interview with Chris Wallace. She is delusional. What a choice between these two.
Fair enough, but when you respond to criticism of Trump by bashing Obama it was a logical assumption. Disagree entirely that HRC is "far more corrupt" but I don't plan on voting for her either so that's neither here nor there I guess.
Ignoring Advice, Donald Trump Presses Attack on Khan Family and G.O.P. Leaders
By ALEXANDER BURNS AUG. 2, 2016
Donald J. Trump’s unabashed and continuing hostility toward the parents of a slain Muslim American soldier, and his attacks on Republican leaders who have rebuked him for it, threaten to shatter his uneasy alliance with the Republican Party at the outset of the general election campaign.
Ignoring the pleas of his advisers and entreaties from party leaders in Washington, Mr. Trump only dug in further on Tuesday. He told a Virginia television station that he had no regrets about his clash with Khizr and Ghazala Khan, the parents of an Army captain killed in Iraq. And in an extraordinarily provocative interview with The Washington Post, Mr. Trump declined to endorse for re-election several Republicans who had criticized him, including the House speaker, Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, and Senator John McCain of Arizona, who both face primaries this month.
He also belittled Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, who had criticized his treatment of the Khans, for not being supportive of his campaign.
For days, Mr. Trump’s top advisers and allies have urged him to move on from the feud, which erupted when Mr. Khan criticized him at the Democratic convention, and focus instead on the economy and the national security record of his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. Yet, facing outcry on the left and right, Mr. Trump has insisted to associates that he has been treated unfairly by Mr. Khan, the news media and some Republicans, said people familiar with the campaign’s deliberations who insisted on anonymity to discuss them.
Republicans now say Mr. Trump’s obstinacy in addressing perhaps the gravest crisis of his campaign may trigger drastic defections within the party, and Republican lawmakers and strategists have begun to entertain abandoning him en masse.
Trump favors school choice, kind of a weird position to take for a racist. Seems like a racist would
want to keep black kids shackled to a failing public school system....Oh well.Keeping black kids shackled is exactly what "school choice" is all about.
Sure it is. Giving them other alternatives is all about keeping them locked down.
What was i thinking?
"These are the two most unelectable candidates ever"
Remember George McGovern?
Trump is all those things you say Hillary is, and worse. Much, much worse (IMO of course, but it is a strong case based on everything he has said and done since he announced his run last year). He's ignorant on foreign affairs and his rhetoric is already doing damage to US interests abroad, his tax plan will cost trillions and he has not explained how it will be paid for, and his economic policy will set the US back a hundred years. His relationship with Putin and Russia in general is highly suspect and has not been properly vetted. He has been shown to have lied to the American people more than any other POTUS candidate this cycle, and still does it daily...he takes the American public as suckers and fools and a good portion of the electorate is lapping it up.
And to top it all off, no one here has yet to make a compelling case for him based on him, it is only about being anti-Hillary. So go ahead and make an anti-Hillary case, there is plenty of fodder there. But don't try to make a pro-Trump case that is nothing but anti-Hillary and then try to tell us he'd make a good POTUS.
I disagree with you , I think Hillary is much worse. Her crimes are on full display. The dishonest media likes to cover for her. CNN is a joke. They are like a get away driver.
Why won't she hold a press conference?
I think politicians are the problem not the solution. Time for someone outside the political ranks to get in there. Hillary represents the status quo. Both the republican and democrat establishment are against Trump , Did you ever think of that? I also disagree with you about the tax plan. Reagan did it , lowered taxes for all. It worked. The economy is no where near what it could be. Less taxes and less regulation equals more opportunity for all. I believe in the free market, it IS what made this country great. . Clinton believes in crony capitalism.
Look at the Clinton foundation. 80% for "admin cost"
And to think we should not secure our boarders is insane and suicidal.
And Trumps relation with Putin and Russia is suspect
Really?
Clintons is not? She gave them 25% of USA uranium and got $145 million from those investors into the Clinton foundation.
And Clintons campaign manager sat on a board of a company that got $35 million from a Putin connected government fund.
Now why is the dishonest press not vetting that.
Again why won't Clinton hold a press conference?
And Why is the media refusing to hold her accountable?
And to top it all off, no one here has yet to make a compelling case for him based on him, it is only about being anti-Hillary. So go ahead and make an anti-Hillary case, there is plenty of fodder there. But don't try to make a pro-Trump case that is nothing but anti-Hillary and then try to tell us he'd make a good POTUS.
Somebody needs to go back and read the threads. I'll repeat this AGAIN to save you the trouble..
Trump:
1. Is used to making huge decisions under pressure
2. Knows how to build a team
3. Has created thousands of jobs, all of which he has been responsible for the payroll
4. Has made a career turning vision into reality
5. Has immense administrative skills
6. Cut his teeth in a real-world business environment, not in a law library or in politics
7. Is a skilled negotiator
So he's not an Ivy League elite or a lawyer. If that was a recipe for success in leading this
nation, we wouldn't be in the sorry shape were in.
Time to move in a different direction. Past time...
And to top it all off, no one here has yet to make a compelling case for him based on him, it is only about being anti-Hillary. So go ahead and make an anti-Hillary case, there is plenty of fodder there. But don't try to make a pro-Trump case that is nothing but anti-Hillary and then try to tell us he'd make a good POTUS.
Somebody needs to go back and read the threads. I'll repeat this AGAIN to save you the trouble..
Trump:
1. Is used to making huge decisions under pressure
2. Knows how to build a team
3. Has created thousands of jobs, all of which he has been responsible for the payroll
4. Has made a career turning vision into reality
5. Has immense administrative skills
6. Cut his teeth in a real-world business environment, not in a law library or in politics
7. Is a skilled negotiatorSo he's not an Ivy League elite or a lawyer. If that was a recipe for success in leading this
nation, we wouldn't be in the sorry shape were in.Time to move in a different direction. Past time...
I can't disagree with the "time to move in a different direction" part, but I think the different direction should include some knowledge of foreign affairs, respect for the Constitution, and an ability to give thoughtful consideration to all aspects of issues. I wouldn't mind seeing someone from the business world, but it should be someone who knows that they do not know everything, has a willingness to learn, and the ability to inspire. You can't run a free nation the same way Trump has run his privately owned companies. It's not surprising that he has no concept of division of power and checks and balances based upon his business experience. I wish someone like Alan Mulally would run. He has the experiences you value but with a management style that is just about the opposite of Trump's. There are plenty of top businessmen more suited to be President that Trump. So why are we stuck with him? (rhetorical question)
Steve Wynn is another that comes to mind. He's a Democrat I could see myself supporting.
[Edited on 8/3/2016 by alloak41]
And to top it all off, no one here has yet to make a compelling case for him based on him, it is only about being anti-Hillary. So go ahead and make an anti-Hillary case, there is plenty of fodder there. But don't try to make a pro-Trump case that is nothing but anti-Hillary and then try to tell us he'd make a good POTUS.
Somebody needs to go back and read the threads. I'll repeat this AGAIN to save you the trouble..
Trump:
1. Is used to making huge decisions under pressure
2. Knows how to build a team
3. Has created thousands of jobs, all of which he has been responsible for the payroll
4. Has made a career turning vision into reality
5. Has immense administrative skills
6. Cut his teeth in a real-world business environment, not in a law library or in politics
7. Is a skilled negotiatorSo he's not an Ivy League elite or a lawyer. If that was a recipe for success in leading this
nation, we wouldn't be in the sorry shape were in.Time to move in a different direction. Past time...
I can't disagree with the "time to move in a different direction" part, but I think the different direction should include some knowledge of foreign affairs, respect for the Constitution, and an ability to give thoughtful consideration to all aspects of issues. I wouldn't mind seeing someone from the business world, but it should be someone who knows that they do not know everything, has a willingness to learn, and the ability to inspire. You can't run a free nation the same way Trump has run his privately owned companies. It's not surprising that he has no concept of division of power and checks and balances based upon his business experience. I wish someone like Alan Mulally would run. He has the experiences you value but with a management style that is just about the opposite of Trump's. There are plenty of top businessmen more suited to be President that Trump. So why are we stuck with him? (rhetorical question)
Now we are getting somewhere! Thank alloak for stepping up and offering some pro-Trump reasons (even if we disagree on the substance of them), you're the first and only so far to do so here, I think.
I do agree with bob1954's reply. I would add that I'm not sure that #1, 3, and 6 translate to POTUS as we are talking two very different worlds and decision making process and priorities are going to be much different than running a private company (especially the way he runs it, based on what I have heard and read and seen with my own eyes). #2 might be true, but again a totally different environment from the boardroom to the situation room and I don't think he knows the kind of team he needs or that I trust him to bring in the right people (Paul Manafort is a good example of questionable team building, IMO). As for #4, he's had some success but also come colossal failures, so that one is a two-edged sword. I don't know/accept that #5 is true at all. And lastly #7...Trump is the first one to tell you he is a skilled negotiator but that doesn't make it true...there are many stories circulating from people that have done business with Trump and his companies that raise a lot of questions in this space.
Obviously I think there are some valid counter points to pro-Trump traits that alloak raised, and so I do remain unswayed in my opposition to Trump over all others (don't look so shocked, ha ha). As bob pointed out, his lack of even basic knowledge of foreign affairs, lack of respect for the Constitution (except the 2nd amendment I guess), and an inability to give thoughtful consideration to all aspects of complex issues are all things that remain gravely concerning to me. Add to that the questions that have been raised regarding his Russia connections and relationships, his xenophobic/racist/sexist rhetoric, his potentially disastrous economic "plan", his unethical business practices, his outright disdain and disrespect toward people who are different from him (women, the disabled/handicapped, muslims, and anyone who has different political views, to name a few) and it all adds up to a potential POTUS that would damage our country and the world in ways that we can't even fathom yet.