OPRAH FOR PRESIDENT ?????
- Thread starter SnakeTom
- Start date
Honestly don't know enough about him, but have liked what I saw to date.
Could see him joining a ticket (depending on who is the nominee)
You're not wrong, but both sides sell identity politics. I don't believe the parties are much different in that regard.
Both parties play it, but that was THE strategy for the Democrats in the last election. I remember going on HRC's website and you can buy T-shirts that said African-Americans, gays, Hispanics, even Pan-Asian's for Hillary.
Why were you on Hillary's website? lol.
The Trump campaign handed out posters that said blacks for Trump, Hispanics for Trump. Not like they weren't trying.
Politics is an ugly game, but they will all play the game. They all do it and will continue to do so.
Probably less apparent because the GOP panders to a whiter base than the democrats pander too.
lol...Actually went on all the candidates sites to see how they were messaging, etc. It really striking that everything on her site was about identity politics. Trump had those signs but it was window-dressing pandering, not THE strategy.
.Right. The strategy was to pander to white working class Christian voters.
Turns out it was a great strategy but it was still identity politics.
Absolutely agree on this. She presents the wrong image for a party who needs younger leadership.
Tom K
IMO, Dem favorites are Biden and Bernie. Outsiders are Sherrod Brown and Joe Manchin. Problem that the Dems have is that their leaders are old and in their 70's. Although Trump is in his 70's as well so it won't hurt as much.
He won't be on the ticket though...
A lot would still need to happen for him to not make it through the full term.
I still do not believe he will especially with all signs pointing towards an obstruction charge in the near future.
Either way though, I think he is done after 1 term. He will have his tax bill, and potentially an immigration deal. He would bow out and start Trump TV or whatever he was going to do if he lost.
It's interesting. Based on what he's done to date, I'd probably vote for him in 2020. Of course, that could always change in the next 2 years.
I'm probably one of the rare few who didn't vote for him in 2016 but have been satisfied overall with his performance.
I'm probably one of the rare few who didn't vote for him in 2016 but have been satisfied overall with his performance.
I don't think he runs for a second term either. Trump understands timing and if he continues to get his agenda through, there is no upside for a second term. How ironic will it be for the "racist, Xenophobic, sexist" Who Single-handedly removed the Confederate flag from her state capital, to hand the ball over to a female of immigrant parents from Pakistan to be the next President.
Last edited:
Here is my choice for next Pres. If you click on this link go three pages forward to read the article on Nikki Haley https://clemson.world/
Trump appealed to voters who wanted.
- Comprehensive immigration reform, with the forefront being secure borders.
- A viable energy policy
- Tax Reform for citizens and corporations
- A free market health insurance structure
- Protection of the 2nd amendment
- SCOTUS that follows the constitution and does not legislate
- Fair trade that is favorable to the US
- Jobs
- Support for Law Enforcement
- Strong Military
- Eradication of terrorism and ISIS
- Suppression of violent gangs.
- Suppression of lobbyist
We are making progress on all those fronts.
Dems are crapping their pants because he is getting it done and the they realize they will have a hard time convincing voters that they will be better off voting for a dem candidate.
My bet is that Trump will not run for a second term. He will get enough done and then turn the reins over to Pence. America will get their statesman along with having the benefits of the impact of the above items.
In the next three years the dems and the MSM will do anything they can to discredit him but if his progress continues, it will be futile.
Trump is learning the political game and is now beginning to school them.
He schooled Chuckie.
He schooled Davos
So keeping talking about Trump saying dirty words, talking about firing Muller, believing that he colluded, lamenting that he talked about pu__y on a bus, yada yada.
Gotta go now. I need to meet with my broker to discuss my asset allocation in my 401K and IRAs, which are up handsomely.
Thank you Mr. President.
My middle daughter who is 29, lives in Brooklyn and has hit her professional stride, called me today to let me know the start-up she joined last year has made a 401K plan available. I told her to take the max (they can contribute up to 10%) as long as she could pay her bills and then some. Then I told her to run the numbers for the new tax plan and my bet is that she already has new found money as a start....then I told her to thank President Trump (she voted for Jill Stein...).
Nice list, but most of those points would have been satisfied by any republican candidate. The difference with Trump in the primaries was his stance on immigration and isis.
He found his path to victory, played to it and won.
I’m not criticizing him for it, all I am suggesting is that he played as much of a political calculation as anyone else did.
There is a reason Trump won the white vote by a larger margin than previous presidents. His messages were Pro-white, Pro nationalism.
Trumps message was pretty simple. Jobs and security, two things that resonate the most with working lower and middle-class Americans. Typically the one of the strengths of the Democratic base.
You’re not suggesting her new 401k plan is a result of the tax plan, right?
Yes, most people will pay slightly less tax under the new plan. Doesn’t mean it is good policy. Will I take an extra $20 per week? Sure.
Was the tax bill good economic policy? I don’t believe it was.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...s-economy-moodys-says-2018-01-25?link=sfmw_tw
Wasn't suggesting that at all. She's a hard working Millenial that now has the opportunity to save more money. Will it be a good long term policy? Remains to be seen.
Yeah I don't disagree it was simple, just being honest on what happened
Hillary hired people who had a model that showed that it would benefit her by targeting a certain crowd.
Trump hired people who had a model that said they could reach working class white voters to win.
Politicians look at data and target their message based on what the data showed. Trump wasn't any different. He is a politician, and ran a great campaign.
Unless you really think Trump is religious and cares about illegal immigrants who built many of his buildings? His America first message was a nationalist message - and then he applies (and wins) the ability to hire 70 H1B workers for Mar-a-Lago. The request to hire the workers was during Trump's "made in America" week.
It's obvious Hillary's biggest failure was a lack of message to working-class Americans. In fact for some odd reason she actually chose to insult them… "Basket of deplorable".
You have to credit Trump for running a brilliant campaign. He had a message that resonated with working Americans and found a path to victory. No political experience, no help from the RNC, MSM feverishly working against him.
Indeed, it will an incredibly effective campaign... thanks to a little help from his "friends"
Your not suggesting that you cannot see that the thank you was directed at the fact that the 401K appreciated 40% since Trump was elected., largely do the street's reaction to his actions, right?
No it wasn't. The thank you was because she will pay less in tax.
Know how I know? Because why would she be thanking someone for a return of 40% in a 401k plan which she didn't have yet?
Correct.
Ann Coulter was one of the early predictors of Trump's victory. She was laughed at.
I had read her book, "Adios America", perhaps a year so before the election. In that book she laid out the rationale for such a prediction. The gist of it was that Trump's stance on immigration would get him the win. I tend to think she was researched and correct as opposed to lucky.
As an aside,she used the term "hell-hole". As we all know now, Trump took that to the next level. lol
... debate the points then.
I posted a link which shows analysis from Moody's that the cut will not trickle down.
It is bad policy. I was on board with a corporate rate cut. I was on board with a middle class cut. I was not on board with a cut for the wealthy, and I am not on board with a program that will cost a trillion dollars so the wealthy can keep more money.
Nobody really keeps money. It simply gets moved around. I'd rather see it move under the guidance of the free economy rather than the government.
