Galt's Gulch

What would Rand think of Donald J Trump?

Posted by mdk2608 9 years, 4 months ago to Politics
128 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

He is a builder of beautiful buildings. He is an American success story. He gets things done. He is his own man. He is wealthy and is an advocate of capitalism but what would Rand have to say about Trump if she were here today? I have not posted in several weeks so maybe this discussion is redundant but I am curious to see what fellow Gulchers have to say?

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • 12
    Posted by khalling 9 years, 4 months ago
    what would Rand think of Trump?
    1. He is a crony capitalist who supported TARP and the stimulus packages.
    2. He is a protectionist
    3. Use of Eminent Domain at least twice for his own casinos' use
    4. Supported Democratic candidates (as well as republican) but has said directly he thinks of himself as more of a democrat and that he feels the economy does better under democratic Presidents.
    5.His stand on immigration is not how Objectivists look at the "problem" morally speaking.

    It would seem to me that the closest you'll get to a pro-freedom, reason candidate would be a Paul or Cruz. and they both have proven they are willing to stick their necks out for property rights and freedom. [nice to see you back mdk!:edit]
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 9 years, 4 months ago
      I would definitely prefer Paul or Cruz. Do you think they have a chance? The Bush train was on a roll until Trump derailed it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 9 years, 4 months ago
        they only stand a shot if people get behind them as serious candidates. I think the democrat primary season is in shambles. there is no way a Bernie Sanders can take the general. I think it is a good election to exploit the other side's weakness in getting ready to lose Hilary. One question I have-is the media going cooperate and showcase some of these candidates.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 4 months ago
        Do you think the "race" for the GOP nomination is up to the voters? Not a chance.
        Look at facts and actions, not empty promises.
        There will not be a GOP nominee that will represent the sovereign people against the state.
        The GOP has been against liberty since 1860 (with an arguable glimmer of liberty light in 1980-1984.)
        Will Trump expose the many faults of the existing one party system and move enough people to vote for a third party in congressional and POTUS races? I wish it could happen, but since Trump is part of the elite who believe that they should rule the sovereign people, it is not in his interest, and Donny only does what he believes is best for Donny, with no consideration for any constituional, fiduciary, or public service responsibility.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by IamTheBeav 9 years, 4 months ago
          While I agree with your sentiment in general, I do think you are missing the boat on one very important factor. This is completely subjective with a very healthy dose of wishful thinking mixed in, but there is one GOP candidate who has won federal office convincingly against a much better funded and establishment supported candidate. The man I am talking about is Ted Cruz. When he ran for Kay Bailey Hutchison's Senate seat when she retired, he was an underfunded unknown versus David "Super rich, Good Ole Boy, GOP establishment handpicked, Don't rock the boat as along as you can win office" Dewhurt. What's even better is that Cruz didn't just beat Dewhurst from a crowded field with a dozen or so other challengers. He beat the crap out of him in the runoff primary heads up.

          No matter what the polls say right now, when it comes time for the votes that matter, Ted Cruz wins the GOP primary in a landslide and destroys whatever Democrat the jackass party wants to send into that slaughter.

          I suppose that you could make the argument that because he is a GOP Senator, he's technically part of the establishment, but anyone paying any attention at all knows that he will stand up loud and proud against the GOP machine when it violates or fails to fight for conservative principles.

          I guess what I am saying is that Ted Cruz (and, frankly, a couple others who I think will fall by the wayside along the primary trail) is someone who I can be very proud to vote FOR. With McCain and Romney and pretty much every other person in the 2008 and 2012 GOP primaries, at best I was voting AGAINST the other guy (Obama or some other GOP primary candidate). At worst, as with the 2008 general election, I just stayed home or voted for whatever candidate happened to be wearing the Libertarian tag at the time.

          This time around, there are 3 or 4 candidates that I could be happy voting for (1. Cruz, 2A. Rand Paul, 2B, Scott Walker, 4.Rubio) and another 2 or 3 that I respect and would at least listen to (5. Jindal, 6. Huckabee, 7. Kasich - that one's a stretch). There are also the usual cast of clowns who I'd never vote for (Trump, Bush, Fiorina, Patacky, Santorum, Graham and no doubt a couple others I can't remember right now). Ben Carson gets my respect but not my vote for two reasons. He doesn't hold to deeply held, Constitutionally based poltical beliefs and has some progressive leanings I dislike, AND the White House is no place for on the job training. While is may be super intelligent and accomplished in his field, he doesn't have any of the political savvy needed to get anything done from the Oval Office bully pulpit. Ted Cruz, like Ben Carson is extremely intelligent and extraordinarily accomplished in his chosen field (law). Unlike Carson, Cruz's political ideals are deeply rooted in the Constitution, he has political savvy oozing from every pore, and he has the backbone to fight for what he and I believe in.

          Anyway, the point of all this is that we FINALLY have some legitimate GOP candidates that people might actually want to vote FOR instead of simply settling for whichever establishment, hand picked unprincipled windbag is next in line. You mentioned in your post the 1980-84 thing, presumably in reference to Ronald Reagan who was the kind of candidate that you see way too rarely. He didn't move to the center and sellout his beliefs for votes. He convinced the "center" to move to him. For my money, Ted Cruz is the one and only guy that can do the same thing, and no matter what the pools say when it comes time for me to pull the lever, he gets my vote.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 4 months ago
            While I respect your opinion and acknowledge your rationale, the thing you apparently don't recognize is that the GOP is corrupt to the core. Your scenario assumes a system that is equitable and not rigged. This is not the case. The GOP never gives the people a choice that their insiders can't control, and the insiders will keep and increase their power at all costs. If Cruz (or any other candidate) can't be controlled he will either lose, drop out, or have an accident. I have no doubt that this is true of both the GOP and the Dems. I can't prove it to you but the results over the past 60 years show election of many who made claims to represent individual liberty, and only one (in con-gress, not POTUS) who consistently voted that way. He was marginalized by the GOP and the media, and never had any chance to be POTUS because of the inability of voters to recognize when they are being conned, over and oevr and over.
            The only hope for a peaceful return to liberty is to stop believing the lies of the GOP and Dems, stop wasting your votes on them. Leave the statist party. Stop giving your consent to be a slave.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by IamTheBeav 9 years, 4 months ago
              If the one you are referring to in Congress is the man I think you are referring to, he wore an R next to his name, both as a first initial and as a party affiliation.

              The point is that the GOP establishment may be (absolutely is) corrupt, that doesn't mean that individual GOP members are by association. Your cynicism is well founded, but I'd rather drain the tub than to throw the baby out with the dirty bathwater. For me, than means voting for Ted Cruz and NOT voting for Bush, Santorem, Graham, etc.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                -
              • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 4 months ago
                The individual GOP member you cite will not be allowed to be the candidate. Any candidate that runs for POTUS under the GOP banner is a party-controlled statist regardless of what he claims. The GOP will not allow anyone they can't control to run. If Cruz carries the GOP banner he will not be the Cruz you think he is.
                Nothing but dirty bathwater is allowed to carry the GOP banner for POTUS.
                Until voters recognize the truth and stop wasting votes on the GOP, the statist regime will continue and there is no chance for liberty peacefully.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  -
                • Posted by IamTheBeav 9 years, 4 months ago
                  To be clear, we agree in many more ways than we disagree. I, too, think the GOP machine is a big government, progressive (if only slightly less so than the Dems) outfit designed to perpetuate the illusion of true opposition to the other side of the aisle. In general, I have little faith in the GOP establishment. Where we differ is that I do believe the Tea Party monster victories in the 2010 and 2014 midterms is a sea change. You said, "Until voters recognize the truth and stop wasting votes on the GOP, the statist regime will continue and there is no chance for liberty peacefully." I am holding out hope that can be done with the likes of Cruz, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Rubio, and several Tea Party guys in the house. I have always understood that many of the incoming GOP candidates would revert to Good Ole Boy status, but there are some that are true to their small government, Tea Party ideals they campaigned on. Speaking specifically of Ted Cruz, I think he is the best of the best in that regard.

                  Another thing you said bothers me as well. You said, "The GOP will not allow anyone they can't control to run' AND "Nothing but dirty bathwater is allowed to carry the GOP banner for POTUS." That reminds me of something from The Fountainhead. It isn't "Who's gonna let me?" The better question is "Who's gonna stop me?"

                  If only "dirty bathwater" establishment cronies who will toe the line can carry the GOP banner, then how did Ted Cruz destroy David Dewhurst so convincingly? In today's terms, Jeb Bush may have a bunch of money and establishment support, but do you really think Jeb can withstand Cruz once the crowded field is thinned out? I don't. Do you think shrill, unqualified windbag Hillary can stand up to him in a debate? I don't.

                  I guess all I am saying is that you really should give him an open mind. Your skepticism is well received, but keep your prejudices on a leash until you really get to know the guy. I think you'll like what you see if you reserve judgement for the time being.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 4 months ago
                    I have an open mind on the candidates as individuals, but not the GOP or the process. Its rigged. Note I specified "for POTUS" in my comment. They don't have to control every individual race becasue they control the overwhelming majority of sitting senators and reps within the GOP. If an individual senator becomes a problem his reputation will be smeared, his family threatened, of an accident arranged. They are the party that murdered 600,000 Americans in an unneccessary war to create the corporatocracy, and they haven't changed in 150 years.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by ChestyPuller 9 years, 4 months ago
        I think Rand Paul and or Scott Walker have a chance...the DNC is ready to pounce on Cruz, Rubio & Jindal; they are not N-B-C [Natural-Born-Citizen]. Unlike the RNC in 08 & 12 the DNC won't give up the chance to sink the GOP chances in 2016 [think October Surprise], by knocking out the candidate with no chance to get another one in time to win...

        As to 'the Donald', Ayn would most likely say he makes good comments but his actions of using junk bonds, eminent domain, bankruptcy and the fact that he was a democrat until recently make him an 'enemy' of the people...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by mdk2608 9 years, 4 months ago
      Thanks khaling. I appreciate your comments. So far I find this presidential run very entertaining. I do see some positive in Trump in that he is changing the dynamics of the campaign. I have heard Trump speak in the past a few times and remember leaving thinking this guy had some strange ideas. I can't remember what they were but the campaign will bring them out I'm sure. I believe he adds a dynamic that has been sorely missed however I have my reservations about him getting the nomination. I believe this might end up being one of the more facinating elections of our lifetime.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by overmanwarrior 9 years, 4 months ago
        I'm with you on Trump. Although I understand K's reluctance. I think Ayn Rand would like Trump. Paul and Cruz might make nice VP type people in the 2016 election, they just don't have enough in the tank to get through this toxic Washington environment. To get the clock set correctly, I think they will be needed in 2024. 2016 is all about the national debt and protecting the value of the "American" brand that has been lost to complete political stupidity for the last 16 years. Actually, the last 32 years. It will take more than one term to fix everything and playing nice from the White House just won't get the job done. For me its either Trump or something involving the Second Amendment. But something really radical has to happen to earn my support of the United States political system once again.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by mdk2608 9 years, 4 months ago
          Clearly, at least so far the dynamics of this election are changing and at a much earlier point in the election cycle that we have seen in many years. I believe the dialog is good for our country and long overdue. Trumps exploits here will only encourage the other candidates to get out of their safe zone and start thinking of more bold ideas. To that extend Trump is doing a huge service to the process.....so far. This election will be fun to watch. I think Paul and Cruz will bring out even more issues with the public that will only enhance some of the views we in the Gulch share. Lets face it they already are talking about things that have not been discussed in previous cycles. We need a strong leader to emerge that can shift the dialog of our country.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by khalling 9 years, 4 months ago
          national debt? Trump has gone through bankruptcy 4 times. I am not against bankruptcy, but I do not think a Trump is a book balancer through any means the kitchen table budget works :)
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by overmanwarrior 9 years, 4 months ago
            He learned a hard lesson about growing too fast and got caught a few times with devaluated assets. One thing that is interesting about his billions in value is that it is built on personally owned assets. He could have been worth a lot more if he had went public, like Gates, Soros, and Buffett. But he insisted on personal ownership. That did leave him vulnerable to market fluctuations, but ideologically very individualistic. I think he could do more than just move money from one bank to another, the way Kasich plans to, but will actually pay down the 19 trillion debt with real value instead of smoke and mirrors instigated with devalued currencies.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by strugatsky 9 years, 4 months ago
      Please explain why you consider his stand on immigration different from Objectivism?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by khalling 9 years, 4 months ago
        a discussion is ongoing here, strut. funny cool thing-LetShrug took one of my lines to start her new twitter account. She immediately picked up Jonathon Hoenig from Fox Business. LOL my line was this-build a big wall. you think it will be to keep people out? Don't be an idiot. It will be used to keep YOU in. happy Sunday! :)

        http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by strugatsky 9 years, 4 months ago
          Read the discussion. Did not find an answer to my question, as to what is it specifically about Trump's approach to illegal immigration that is against Objectivism? Yes, I understand that his is not an ideal solution, but an ideal solution is not currently realistic or possible. Yet, what he is proposing has nothing against Objectivism, as I see it.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by khalling 9 years, 4 months ago
            OK> that fence-build it. It will keep you in. How do I know? I cross the border regularly. The Constitution is clear. An american citizen can pass. If you ask him a question? you are detaining him. Most do not ask if they are being detained. Ask. you proceed immediately
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by strugatsky 9 years, 4 months ago
              I admit that I do not know the details. However, this seems to be the opposite of the 2nd Amendment issue, where, if guns are outlawed, only the criminals will have them. In this case, the criminals should be slowed down (not stopped completely, I understand that). In Israel it seems to work better than no fence. As to asking an American citizen for DL or passport when crossing the border, I don't see that as either detaining or infringement. I have been through the Mexican border a dozen times or more and had no issues short of a small queue. Maybe I'm not aware of something. As to keeping Americans in, with the country steadily turning toward fascism, it may come handy, but when it comes to that, the fence will come up overnight whether we vote for it or not.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                -
              • Posted by khalling 9 years, 4 months ago
                Coming back in? seriously. a small queue? please. I know better. I cross the southern border multiple times a year. I wait HOURS in line. and then I submit to a berating that is OUTRAGEOUS. I call you on this. BS
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  -
                • Posted by strugatsky 9 years, 4 months ago
                  That was my experience. I haven't been there for over 10 years; maybe it changed. I crossed several times in Laredo in the late 80's and 2000, in Tijuana in the 90's through 2000 and a couple of times from AZ. Last time I drove from AZ to Mexico a year ago and it was perhaps 15 min. My trips to Canada had been much worse, being grilled by the Canadians very annoyingly - they wanted to know why I had weapons (in the US, not crossing the border with them), what business I had in Canada... a couple of times I drove on business for the US Navy and they essentially detained me for over an hour of waiting and grilling. Never told me what the problem was, but they were not friendly. Coming back to the US was not a problem.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by conscious1978 9 years, 4 months ago
      We're toast if he is elected. So many are so mad at the corruption in our government, they don't want to look any deeper into someone hollering at some of the same things.

      So, they fill in all of what they don't know about Trump with what they wish he could be, but is not.

      He's not a capitalist 'superhero'. Yeah, he would "shake things up", but most of his supporters might not like how things settle. I might not always immediately recognize them, but I learned a long time ago that the best actors are not in Hollywood.

      http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by mdk2608 9 years, 4 months ago
      I was giving some thought to your comments as I was working through the rest of my day. When one looks at the people Rand admired such as Carnegie, Rockefeller etc these men were far from nice guys and did not follow Objective concepts but rather their own self interests. Along those lines I question whether Rand might like Trump. Rand was a Democrat once to and evolved. As a businessman Trump seems to use the laws available "such as Eminent Domain" to his advantage. I am not aware of areas where he has done things illegally, We will never know the answer to my initial question but it is fun to think and compare.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by term2 9 years, 4 months ago
        Trump is pretty much the only possibly electable less bad choice out there this election. As president he could only really expose governmental stupidities. He can only pass or veto things already approved by congress.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by mdk2608 9 years, 4 months ago
          ....and rescind hundreds of executive orders and fire needless czars and enforce the laws that are already on the books rather than selecting which laws to enforce. I think a President sets the tone of our nation. I have my doubts about Trump but he is dominating and making everyone else adjust to him. I don't think Trump is dumb. We shall see how it all plays out.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Riftsrunner 9 years, 4 months ago
        But does that put him closer to a Hank Rearden or an Orren Boyle? Just because he is a capitalist doesn't preclude him from looters status. He seems quite willing to throw his lot in when it comes to looting the little guy if he uses eminent domain. This I believe would put Trump into the looters catagory as far as Ayn was concerned because she believed in a fair exchange in commerce. Eminent domain is government sponsored theft and going along with it make Trump closer to Boyle in the business world
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Unbeholden2NY1 9 years, 4 months ago
    I think Rand would admire Trump's independence and financial success and his refusal to knuckle under to political pressure. However, the POTUS is often confronted with sensitive national and international problems, US response to which may have significant long term consequences. I think Trump is a bit too much of a bull in a china shop where such situations occur, and I suspect Rand would agree.

    I have high hopes for Rand Paul - he has vast experience with our gov't and its problems, is courageous, principled and not corruptible. Our Constitution-based government is sick and we need a doctor at the helm! I also like Ben Carson (have just finished reading One Nation,) but he may be too intelligent and reasonable for our electorate...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 4 months ago
    Philosophy-wise he is a Hank Reardon type. A great man, but flawed. True, Reardon's flaws and Trump's are different, but in the end the results are similar. When he speaks extemporaneously you can't help but like the guy. Plus, he is very smart and if elected would likely learn and grow into the job. I think Rand would prefer him to at the very least, 10 or 11 of the gang running for the nomination. Also, there is no doubt she would go for Carly Fiorina. (What a pair Trump & Fiorina would make!).She often saw greatness in people others saw as unworthy. Case in point her defense of Marilyn Monroe upon her death.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by term2 9 years, 4 months ago
    There are so many issues where government is violation our rights that it's unlikely we would see a big rollback because of this election.
    BUT- so much of this is hidden in crony capitalistic laws and politicians that what we need is full disclosure of what's going on.
    If trump did just THAT and tell us when the emperor has no clothes, he has my vote. He is rich and old enough to just admit what he does and tell us like it is.
    As to crony capitalism, he admits openly expecting favors from politicians- something that is very common but is hidden from view. I think he wants it stopped by law, as it should be.
    I say if the democrats find some real dirt on him, he will just admit it and move on- unlike Hillary who would deny and evade.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jdg 9 years, 4 months ago
      Unfortunately, I don't think it will matter much if any politician or business person gets "exposed" for cronyism. Most Americans simply don't care about that (despite the phony anger Democrats conjure up once in a while about Republicans doing it).

      From there it's only a small step to the banana-republic view of not caring that you have to bribe cops and bureaucrats all the time, routinely -- and as soon as the public accepts that, we ARE a banana republic.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ allosaur 9 years, 4 months ago
    I've been picking up on snippets that indicate that Trump and Cruz have had chats and have respect for each other.
    Old Dino smells a Trump - Cruz ticket in the making.
    Rush predicts that the Broom Hillary campaign will cook up scandals against The Donald to divert attention from out-and out criminal conduct of The Hag.
    Old Dino predicts it will all get very ugly.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by mdk2608 9 years, 4 months ago
      Watching the dynamics between these two is very interesting. Cruz has been one of the few to actually compliment Trump in certain areas. You could be right. The two could find themselves together at some point. I would not be shocked.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 9 years, 4 months ago
    Ayn Rand did not support Ronald Reagan. She certainly would not have supported Donald Trump.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ CBJ 9 years, 4 months ago
      Rand did not support Reagan, but she did support Nixon both times because of what she regarded as the much worse alternatives. If she were alive today she might support Trump if the major-party alternative was Hillary or Bernie Sanders.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by mdk2608 9 years, 4 months ago
      She did not support him initially but died before the fall of communism and other parts of his legacy could were formed. It would be interesting to see if her opinion of him would have changed in anyway had she not died.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by philosophercat 9 years, 4 months ago
        I believe she would never support him because of his mixed premises and her personal knowledge of him as the head of the anti communist film group she belonged to. Ayn Rand's support was only won by meeting her standards. Reagan was American in essence and she was in principle. He broadcast baseball and she never attended a game. She saw us as we ought to be and he saw us as we are.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Carolinawahine 9 years, 4 months ago
    After reading so many comments, it strikes me that nobody really knows Mr. Trump personally. I do. He presents a public face, which so many find disagreeable; however, in business he is smart, educated and well spoken. He is a negotiator and one cannot succeed in high powered negotiations without being able to present the facts and rewards in such a way as the other side wants it badly. That is not done by making the other side of the table hate you. With friends and family there is a totally different side. Any Rand admired the titans of industry and they were not perfect. They found a way to get what they wanted; so does Mr. Trump. This is truly a man I would "jump through hoops for", and probably will in the coming months of campaigning.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 4 months ago
      "He presents a public face, which so many find disagreeable; however, in business he is smart, educated and well spoken."
      What you say rings true to me. I wonder why his public persona is a gruff buffoon. I agree you generally don't build that kind of wealth coming off that way to investors, employees, customers, and vendors. I'm sure there is more to him than how he comes off on TV.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wmiranda 9 years, 4 months ago
    One thing I think Rand would like about Trump is that he doesn't worry much about political correctness. Neither did Rand in her times. They both said what they thought was right and damn the PC police.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by JBW 9 years, 4 months ago
    She would approve of him. We need somone to fix our foreign policy, as discussed in Winninning the Unwinnable War, and I think he could do it. Jim W.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ProfChuck 9 years, 4 months ago
    The Trump phenomena puts me in mind of the Chinese curse; "May you live in interesting times." Trump is a thoroughly mixed bag of seeming contradictions. He is clearly a capitalist but is not above "capitalizing" on his ability to buy politicians (whom he obviously considers weak). He says he evolved from being a Democrat to being a Republican but I suspect that his personal ideology does not fall into either camp. He obviously has the ability to get things done and is not particularly concerned about anyone that gets run over in the process. He has an extraordinarily high opinion of himself and his accomplishments which, while annoying, is justifiable and accurate. I think the word that best applies to Trump is "Pragmatist". He evaluates a situation and uses what ever resources he finds at his command to gain control of it. His "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" approach to life is engaging but may be a bit too exciting for many voters. One thing is for sure, we do live in interesting times.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by GaryL 9 years, 4 months ago
    The GOP and all of us here are having a round table duel! Who will be standing after the last bullets are fired is yet to be seen. I just hope there is at least one who is not so damaged that he/she can carry it to the finish line. At this point in the game I keep saying we all have to speak our minds and pick our primary candidate. Right after that race is decided we then must, and I do mean MUST, stand behind the chosen one or we will surely loose again. We, The GOP, tend to enjoy shooting our own feet right off once the candidate has been chosen and we have no one to blame but our own selfishness because your candidate did not get the nod. I have no clue if it will be Bush, Trump, Carson, Cruz, Fiorina or any one of the others but I know for absolute certain I will support who ever it is over any democrat and I will read what is posted here in complete disgust as we destroy even the one we pick. The name of this game is Divide and Conquer and the Dems have that all over us.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ CBJ 9 years, 4 months ago
      "We, the GOP?" I'm a proud lifetime member of the Libertarian Party. I might vote for certain Republican candidates under certain circumstances, but I wouldn't vote for, say, a Huckabee or a Santorum under any circumstances. If this is selfishness, so be it. In this forum the word is usually considered a compliment. :-)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by GaryL 9 years, 4 months ago
        Yes and I do agree but there is the other side of the story. Standing on your principals and only voting for one republican you can stand and no others such as Huck or Santorum means that you might not vote at all and that in itself is a vote for the democrat. I see it the same as you but a bit different, my vote goes where it will do the most good even if I have to pinch my nose going in!
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by $ CBJ 9 years, 4 months ago
          How does not voting at all become magically transformed into voting for the Democrat? To reach that conclusion you have to assume that my "default" position is Republican, which is not the case. My vote also goes to where I think it will do the most good, and currently I plan to cast my 2016 Presidential vote for the likely Libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by IamTheBeav 9 years, 4 months ago
            I'm with CBJ on this on. Voting for an incredibly sorry establishment windbag because you are against the even sorrier Democrat windbag is not way to ever get the change that we need so badly in DC. If a progressive Dubya, McCain and Romney will tax and spend this country into oblivion a little slower than an even more progressive Gore, Obama or Hillary, is that really a good thing? Suddenly we go from destroying our childrens' futures to destroying a grandchildrens' futures, and we pat ourselves on the back for it? I don't think so.

            I'd rather destroy the GOP as it stands now (Democrat Lite) than to support it simply because it's a slightly tastier pile of manure than the Democrat Party. Instead, I will vote only FOR the candidates that I believe in, regardless of how it impacts the election results. Give me a Tea Party/Libertarian guy any day of the week. If that guy happens to wear a GOP label as my chosen candidate, Ted Cruz, does, then that's all the better.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by GaryL 9 years, 4 months ago
            I won't argue this with you! Either a dem or rep. candidate will win the WH and any third party will simply detract. No rocket science here!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by $ CBJ 9 years, 4 months ago
              The theory that an R or D will win the White House is not a slam dunk. Ross Perot had a decent chance for a while in 1992. Trump could conceivably win as an Independent. Votes for minor parties send a message to the major parties not to take their constituents for granted. Votes for major parties endorse "business as usual," and provide those parties with no incentive to change.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by GaryL 9 years, 4 months ago
                Once again we do agree but at this point in time I just don't see a third party with enough backing to win the prize and I dam sure do not want 4 or 8 more years of the destruction the dems will cause. I know what you are saying and we certainly don't want to support the RINOS as they are but do the math and there just are not enough of us who feel as we do to carry the ball to the goal. I want my vote to first go against the dems and the only way I see that as a viable option is to vote in the R line unless some wild thing happens on the way to the polls. Sending a message that is never received is a wasted effort and a wasted vote IMHO.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by RealtorJudithAnnNew 9 years, 4 months ago
    I agree with the 'warrior'....

    "2016 is all about the national debt and protecting the value of the "American" brand that has been lost to complete political stupidity for the last 16 years. Actually, the last 32 years. It will take more than one term to fix everything and playing nice from the White House just won't get the job done. For me its either Trump or something involving the Second Amendment. But something really radical has to happen to earn my support of the United States political system once again. "
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 9 years, 4 months ago
    I'm sure she would realize Trump is a facade and narcissist, not a man of conviction.

    The people supporting him are casino-going, Walmarters, who watch reality TV for news.

    One benefit he has provided is to expose Walker as another flip-flopper, now running to the right to seek votes in the primary at the expense of the general election...the main reason republicans struggle to win.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by mdk2608 9 years, 4 months ago
      Trump does appeal to the dock worker, the truck driver, the blue collar guy because he tells it like it is. This fact could bring together some of the old Reagan Democrats to make for an even more interesting journey through the primaries. I am going to look back at these posts a year from not and ask this question again and see how peoples opinions have changed. I agree with you on Walker. He appears out of his league with many of the others. Then again I believe Trump has helped expose this.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Thoritsu 9 years, 4 months ago
        Good idea. Love to see how these comments look in the rear view mirror.

        Boy would I like to see John C Dvorak be required to stand on a pedestal and read the nonsense he wrote in the late 80's regarding the Macintosh vs PC! He'd have to choke on every word while any crowd the bothered would laugh his ego away.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by RonJohnson 9 years, 4 months ago
    I think she would like Trump's sense of life, but I think she would oppose his crony capitalism. As with the murderer with whom she was fascinated, she understood that sense of personal power, of ability, of confidence, can be misapplied to evil ends. Trumps bravado shows a non-tragic view of human existence, which she would argue is necessary for humans to reach their fullest potential, but it is not sufficient by itself. It must be coupled with a valid philosophy of life...or it is self-defeating. A murderer is wrong. A murderer with a strong ego and non-tragic sense of life is still wrong, though certain traits might be admirable. Adopt the admirable, despise the despicable.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by philosophercat 9 years, 4 months ago
    Dangerous pragmatic jackass who cannot integrate any two or more ideas coherently. Make him commander in chief and its chaos. Note that he has many behind him but none as allies standing beside him.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by helmsman5 9 years, 4 months ago
    Dam the torpedoes may well be too exciting for voters, but many here are fed up the statism monster that grows bureaucracy regardless of party. At least we know what will likely happen to PC disinformation..
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 9 years, 4 months ago
    I can't speak for Rand, but I think she respected Rockefeller, Carnegie, Vanderbilt...none were nice people and all used the law to their fullest benefit. If she would respect those men, she would respect Trump.

    Trump has always been a business man and has always conducted his life to make profit. Moving hotels, casino's and properties its not a surprise that he used the tools available. The bigger question is did he break the law? If yes, then it should be scrutinized - like Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Vanderbilt in their day. If no, then there is nothing to say except he's shrewd, not nice, and opportunistic.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Danno 9 years, 4 months ago
    Trump is the King of bankruptcy abuse. That is a form of corporate welfare. Where I live there is local magnet well thought unless you were his creditor at one time.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 4 months ago
      "Trump is the King of bankruptcy abuse."
      I don't understand this claim. Creditors are free to make a personal guaranttee a condition of doing the deal. Maybe they won't get the deal in that case, but it protects them from that one entity bankrupting on their loan. It should be the lenders' and borwers' choice whether the business entity alone is liable or whether the owners personally guarantee the loan.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by TomSwift 9 years, 4 months ago
    Ayn Rand would be appalled at the entire lineup of candidates. Can you imagine her reply if any one of those statists told her that she would not be allowed an abortion if she so desired?

    Trump is an embarrassment to the American people. If he is the best the Republicans can come up with, they are giving the election got the Democrats.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by IamTheBeav 9 years, 4 months ago
    I think Ayn Rand would be disgusted by Donald Trump.

    Has Donald Trump ever earned a single dollar that didn't involve greasing the wheels of some politician or another with a bribe? Is Donald Trump the living embodiment of the politics of pull? Does Donald Trump want to use his power to impose his will on to others?

    While she may have respected his forthrightness and unabashed candor, you could say the same thing for Hugo Chavez or Kim Jong Un. He may have the balls to come out and say what he means (which I actually respect), but at the end of the day, Donald Trump is nothing but a self promoting windbag with a lot of bought and paid for political muscle behind him.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by tdechaine 9 years, 4 months ago
    One of those dangerous "capitalists": not truly a capitalist, crony statist, nationalistic, irrational. She would likely despise him, albeit with a positive note on entrepreneurial success (offset by his means of succeeding).
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo