The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Donald Trump is going to be president. Not because of the quality of his ideas, or his integrity, or his leadership, rather because he's running against a bland, uninspiring, widely disliked opponent who is a rather mediocre speaker, a poor campaigner, and is surrounded by scandal. While Trump has his own inventory of scandals, they are not government related and voters seem more forgiving of that.

A second powerful reason that he will be elected is his nearly unparalleled ability to connect to and relate to many Americans. I don't plan on voting for Trump. But in my estimation he is the best communicator running for president since Ronald Reagan. I find Trump to be shallow, insincere, incendiary and self-promoting. But, he seems to be what the American people want at this point. God help us all.

^
Agree. I think he wins, and he's a dick.

I hope you are right in regards to the thread title! America first! MAGA!

seriously though, I think this is Hillary's only chance to win a presidency. The Republicans could have put anyone up there with the exception of Trump, and won the election by a large margin. Mitt Romney would have killed Hillary in a general election. Instead, they didn't have a plan and didn't have anyone ready to take the nomination and Trump filled the void. He's too divisive to get the swing voters and the republicans will lose.

I can't see Hillary winning against any human on the planet other than Trump.

What a time to be alive......

You weren't alive during the Watergate trials then........

(09-02-2016 12:11 PM)Bronc33 Wrote:  seriously though, I think this is Hillary's only chance to win a presidency. The Republicans could have put anyone up there with the exception of Trump, and won the election by a large margin. Mitt Romney would have killed Hillary in a general election. Instead, they didn't have a plan and didn't have anyone ready to take the nomination and Trump filled the void. He's too divisive to get the swing voters and the republicans will lose.

I can't see Hillary winning against any human on the planet other than Trump.

What a time to be alive......

I agree with this.

(09-02-2016 12:17 PM)Moomba Wrote:  You weren't alive during the Watergate trials then........

Watergate nothing compared to the corruption now. And I would take Nixon over these two 10 times out of 10.

Quote:Donald Trump is going to be president.

Short of Hillary having to withdraw from the race (what is Julian Assange's next move ???), I can't see this happening.

HRC's supporters continue to show unwavering loyalty despite her MANY "mistakes".

Wall Street, the political establishment (Democrats and Neocons), and the traditional media are all firmly in her corner.

And her political machine built over 25 years of seeking the presidency is massive and organized.

These things will prove too much to overcome.

That people are even considering DT having a chance to win illustrates what a poor candidate she is.

I wonder if Biden has regrets?

Anyone in the world except Donald Trump beats Hillary. The Republicans absolutely shot themselves in the head, because they are easily brainwashed and dumb.

(09-03-2016 06:20 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(09-02-2016 12:17 PM)Moomba Wrote:  You weren't alive during the Watergate trials then........

Watergate nothing compared to the corruption now. And I would take Nixon over these two 10 times out of 10.

Except they were caught, and we had scholars like you scrambling to vet the possible scenarios in the constitution. The cover up showed total disregard and hubris that tested our system. Which came out stronger as a result.

This corruption I agree seems huge, is still in progress and could possibly have much more dire results for the USA.

Wonder why Putin wants Trump to win so badly?

(09-03-2016 06:20 AM)brovol Wrote:  And I would take Nixon over these two 10 times out of 10.

Of course you would. You're a big government, authoritarian hypocrite.

(09-03-2016 09:36 AM)Charm City Bronco Wrote:  

(09-03-2016 06:20 AM)brovol Wrote:  And I would take Nixon over these two 10 times out of 10.

Of course you would. You're a big government, authoritarian hypocrite.

If I was for big government I would love Hillary. You are far too stupid to know the difference. I am for small and very limited government.

One day Charm, you ought to read a book.

I like big government. Government I so much more efficient than private business. Small business people are so inept and fail to deliver good service. I like good government workers especially those who are Union. Example our cops and firefighters and prison workers and parole officers and court recorders and the whole spectrum of social worker types. Now that is a true picture of America the way it should be run.

We need less hair stylists and dog washers and lawn care and pool guys.

Private businesses like insurance companies and these banks that pay 1% on your CD but charge 24% on their credit cards? Those are the guys that should be on probation.

Can you imagine the Russian bankers Trump would bring in? You thing Hillarys Wall Street guys are bad? Just wait.

Last two issues of NEWSWEEK have had revealing articles about Trump, first history of his business dealings and second as a person.

After reading those I find it difficult to believe that any rational human being could vote for him.

(09-05-2016 08:05 AM)Dirty Ernie Wrote:  I like big government. Government I so much more efficient than private business. Small business people are so inept and fail to deliver good service. I like good government workers especially those who are Union. Example our cops and firefighters and prison workers and parole officers and court recorders and the whole spectrum of social worker types. Now that is a true picture of America the way it should be run.

We need less hair stylists and dog washers and lawn care and pool guys.

Private businesses like insurance companies and these banks that pay 1% on your CD but charge 24% on their credit cards? Those are the guys that should be on probation.

Can you imagine the Russian bankers Trump would bring in? You thing Hillarys Wall Street guys are bad? Just wait.

Putin is hacking for Trump because he's afraid Hillary will win. I have a hard time going with the guy Putin wants for anything.

Quote:I like big government. Government I so much more efficient than private business.

Ernie?

Hello?

Putin, heck - China practically owns him because of all the money he owes them.

(09-05-2016 10:05 AM)ESSSS Wrote:  

Quote:I like big government. Government I so much more efficient than private business.

Ernie?

Hello?

He's got a point, seems big or small, that businesses are always fighting the triple constraint, money, time and energy. Under resourced, up against the wall. No wonder quality is such a foreign concept to the American consumer right now.

Only time you see a job well done is when a road is getting repaved, or the fire department enforces new code laws. THEY take the time and do it RIGHT.

Otherwise is just seems that everywhere you go, their give a chit is broke.

(09-05-2016 10:25 AM)Moomba Wrote:  He's got a point, seems big or small, that businesses are always fighting the triple constraint, money, time and energy. Under resourced, up against the wall. No wonder quality is such a foreign concept to the American consumer right now.

Only time you see a job well done is when a road is getting repaved, or the fire department enforces new code laws. THEY take the time and do it RIGHT.

Otherwise is just seems that everywhere you go, their give a chit is broke.

It depends what his point is.

Small businesses that provide poor service don't last long (assuming no government intervention) due to the "discipline" of the market.

And consumers have the ability to simply go elsewhere.

Government has to contend with none of the constraints you mention (money, time, and energy) because it legislates monopolies unto itself.

There can be no lack of capital when the government can borrow and tax endlessly, or simply create new money.

Time doesn't matter when there are no meaningful deadlines.

Energy? You run a business. Do you want your employers to to work with the energy, motivation, and innovation of a "gubment" (your term) bureaucrat?

Given that you DO run your own business, I have to wonder if you are taking this position for "banter's sake", or if you really believe what you are saying?

I know Ernie believes what he is saying.

(09-05-2016 10:48 AM)ESSSS Wrote:  

(09-05-2016 10:25 AM)Moomba Wrote:  He's got a point, seems big or small, that businesses are always fighting the triple constraint, money, time and energy. Under resourced, up against the wall. No wonder quality is such a foreign concept to the American consumer right now.

Only time you see a job well done is when a road is getting repaved, or the fire department enforces new code laws. THEY take the time and do it RIGHT.

Otherwise is just seems that everywhere you go, their give a chit is broke.

It depends what his point is.

Small businesses that provide poor service don't last long (assuming no government intervention) due to the "discipline" of the market.

And consumers have the ability to simply go elsewhere.

Government has to contend with none of the constraints you mention (money, time, and energy) because it legislates monopolies unto itself.

There can be no lack of capital when the government can borrow and tax endlessly, or simply create new money.

Time doesn't matter when there are no meaningful deadlines.

Energy? You run a business. Do you want your employers to to work with the energy, motivation, and innovation of a "gubment" (your term) bureaucrat?

Given that you DO run your own business, I have to wonder if you are taking this position for "banter's sake", or if you really believe what you are saying?

I know Ernie believes what he is saying.

My tongue was planted firmly in my cheek. :)

I don't blame gubment nearly as much as I do other peeps. Our businesses are at the mercy of Wall Street these days, and the Fed. Not to mention the symbiotic relationship between Pennsylvania Avenue and Wall.

Example? You open a burger stand? A killer one, ramp up on quality (good luck getting a food supplier though, different discussion, see; "Rodney in Back to School).

Well a Wall Street backed company will come into your neighborhood (Red Robin, yum), do penetration pricing, give away beer (illegal), put you out of business, bk you, and then back off on quality, and raise prices. All the while some analyst on Wall will be telling his "retirement investors" what great inroads said firm is making with market share, and to keep those fees coming!

Those same banks that we backed, they're all in this model. It's not very capitalistic is it?