#Login Register
The Vigilant Citizen Forums

Trump for President?
  • 1
  • 2

06-21-2015, 04:33 PM #1
Status: Offline Posts:329 Likes Received:370

06-21-2015, 05:32 PM #2
Status: Offline Posts:747 Likes Received:982
Donald Trump's attempted run at the Oval Office is about as serious as professional wrestling.

In other words, it's a work. And besides we all know that Hillary OR Jeb is going to win this whole thing anyway.

06-21-2015, 08:24 PM #3
Status: Offline Posts:159 Likes Received:252
I'm not really taking Trump's bid seriously, and he's done it before. He's the new Pat Paulsen, but at least Pat was intentionally funny.
The following 1 user Likes DiscoStu's post:
  • Smooch

06-22-2015, 02:14 AM #4
Status: Offline Posts:732 Likes Received:1383
So votes matters? And we actually choose persons who rule?


Im not trying to insult anyone, just opinion...

Truth is precious it's guarded by God

06-22-2015, 04:16 AM #5
Status: Offline Posts:346 Likes Received:125
Eh, are you insane? In a season of The Apprentice not long ago, he had the loosing team live in the backyard of a house, in a tent without clean water and access to a toilet. I think no, fuck no.

Also, a multi millionaire WITHOUT ties to the elite? I think not. 

only love can

06-22-2015, 06:39 AM #6
Status: Offline Posts:237 Likes Received:172
Electing another Zionist president isn't gonna change much for the better.

It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired - you quit when the gorilla is tired.

06-22-2015, 09:40 PM #7
Status: Offline Posts:329 Likes Received:370
(06-21-2015, 05:32 PM)TonyVanDam Wrote:  Donald Trump's attempted run at the Oval Office is about as serious as professional wrestling.

In other words, it's a work. And besides we all know that Hillary OR Jeb is going to win this whole thing anyway.

Yeah, personally I think Hillary will "win".

06-23-2015, 11:19 PM #8
Status: Offline Posts:52 Likes Received:22
These birds are of same breed.

Unfortunately, the "goodnes" of a new leader has no value and its a myth to think we choose the president. Even my public admin textbook says so:

1.The wants and needs of the people are, by and large, manipulated.
There is no independent, popular will formation. News
media, especially the electronic media from which most of the
population gets its information, are managed more with an eye
to entertain and titillate, to grab attention and sell air time to
advertisers, than to politically inform.
2. Candidates for office rarely compete on the basis of complex
policy alternatives. Image is much more important than substance.
On campaign staffs, public relations gurus, advertising
consultants, and style coaches are more important than
policy analysts.
3. People do not vote for candidates on the basis of specific public
policies, rationally considered. Majorities of the people often
do not vote at all. Even if they did, a single-district, winner
take-all, two-party electoral system is an extremely blunt instrument
for registering the people’s specific policy preferences
(Duverger 1954; Page and Brody 1972; and see Prewitt 1970,
on voters’ ineffectiveness in municipal elections). It is highly
unlikely that a particular politician represents a particular constituent
across the entire panoply of complex issues facing the
nation. Single-issue voting further decreases the likelihood that
the daily votes of legislators are inspired by the discipline of the
electoral process. Those with more than one interest might get
what they want on abortion or gun control, but not on capital
gains or farm support. Indeed, it is mathematically impossible
for “the people” to be represented on the entire concatenation
of issues that affect their lives when choice is forced through
the binary centrist narrows of our electoral system.
4. After elections, coalitions of political entrepreneurs are more
likely to be influenced by lobbyists, special interest associations,
and close-knit policy communities; the pressure group
system is bolstered by the politician-entrepreneur’s need for
campaign contributions, speaking honoraria, or well-funded ad
campaigns (Blumenthal 1980). Nor does voting on the basis of
party assure particular policy stances. Coalitions that do momentarily
gel produce incoherent policy because they are contrived
contingently to attract a legislative majority. Ambiguous,
contradictory, and confused mandates will then plague the bureaucracy
as it tries to figure out which politically generated
command to neutrally implement.
5. If eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, only radio talk show
hosts seem willing to pay it. Americans frequently do not know
their representatives’ names, much less their positions and their
policy successes or failures. Vigilance is a thirty-second TV spot
excoriating opponents out of context.
6. It does not seem to matter that people are generally dissatisfied
with the performance of Congress; they will still reelect
their own members. Instead, calls for term limits resonate
across the electorate.

Author: Miller Book: Postmodern Public Administration

06-24-2015, 12:28 AM #9
Status: Offline Posts:691 Likes Received:1152
Trump running is a dream come true for the Democrats.  Anything that continues to water down the Republican Presidential run by letting morons like him throw their hat into the ring is gooood for Hilary & Bernie. 

Some people think Sanders is as negligible as Nader was in 2008 but he actually seems to be forcing Hilary further left in her running platform.  The reason being his points currently aren't too far behind hers. Imagine that...

Somebody better get a good bodyguard for Bernie, because I don't think Hilary is going to stand another election "stolen" away from her.
This post was last modified: 06-24-2015, 12:29 AM by SheWatches.

06-25-2015, 09:17 AM #10
Status: Offline Posts:95 Likes Received:167
Roseanne Barr ran for president during the last election. I think she and Donald have the same chances of winning... none.

  • 1
  • 2