I cannot comprehend how any sane, rational human being could support this monster.

There, I said it. 

 kurtster wrote:  
Depends on what you consider being run like a business. I'm all in favour of government making a small profit to fund priorities, maintain a bit of surplus in case of unexpected expenses, unexpected revenue drop, and a rainy-day fund. Yes I said small profit, I'm generally anti huge profit for government or business. So yes to responsible decision making.

Run like a business could also mean screw everyone who works for you, your suppliers, and maybe even the world economy. I'm not in favour of that. Government here seems to want to sell off any and all assets for short term gains in an effort to try to get elected again. That's a very business-like strategy in the current global economy. If they can make the bottom line look better, even if it costs the populace a lot more in the long run, well that's business, eh? They also (all parties) get into some dodgy public-private partnerships where money for large works comes from both the tax base and from private investment. They almost always negotiate really bad deals, lose control over the outcomes, and end up covering private cost overruns. In actuality it is a form of deficit spending but instead of floating a bond that you eventually pay off, you give private industry profits for perpetuity. For example Melbourne has large toll roads run by private business. Instead of paying off the construction, the populace/shareholders/citizens end up paying tolls forever. It's business but bad business. And don't get me started on the corruption that enters into things when the government sees their role to support their cronies (business, labour unions or whoever).

So I'd be far more impressed with the Republican platform if they had demonstrated that trickle down economics could lead to increased tax revenue. Instead they showed it leads to blowing out the debt.

 black321 wrote: 
Just casinos in Atlantic City.  I don't think anyone did well in AC.  It was doomed before starting.

How is Donald Trump Able to File for Bankruptcy So Many Times?

Everything you want to know about Donald Trump's bankruptcies

He stiffed Carl Icahn for a cool $400 mil, yet they are still friends.  

Its a lot more than just real estate deals.  He builds things, big things that must have a budget, employ many people, coordinate resources, work properly and last.  And all over the world in many different economic, ethical and political situations.  You do not get repeat business if you aren't good at it.  In international business, a US company must adhere to US ethical standards and practices regardless of local customs.  A US business and its employees can be prosecuted if they violate US standards in these circumstances.  I am not aware of any such actions against Trump in any of his dealings.

No one running understands finance and global trade better than he does.  He understands that currency manipulation is the problem that it is.  It is a way to violate trade agreements and have tariffs without having tariffs.  He understands what corporate inversion is and wants to stop it.  He is against the TPP, the only repub against it.  He has a plan to repatriate the at least $2 trillion dollars in cash sitting offshore and get it back and put it to work.  It belongs to the corporations and can be invested without government strings.  How about a real $2 Trillion dollar stimulus to our economy that comes not from the gov, but the private sector ?  Imagine what that would do for our economy.  Sure would generate a lot of jobs, and wages that pay taxes to finance other things.  We would grow our way out of this mess very quickly.  

This would certainly stimulate domestic manufacturing.  Our domestic market is so big that we don't need to export what we make in order to prosper.  We can consume what we make and keep recirculating our own money through our economy, keeping it here.  Energy independence also keeps our money at home and working for us instead of our enemies who will use it to destroy us given the opportunity.

And Trump does not invest in equities aka the stock market.  He is not beholden to the Wall Street powers.  Real estate is just that, tangible assets, not paper certificates that are only worth what they are printed on.  Its a whole different world than Wall Street.  It deals more with Main Street.  He is his own man and cannot be bought out.  I have believed that he was serious since day one and is doing this for the good of our country and for no other reason.  He has no other reasons to do this.  He needs no other reasons to do this.

Those that can do ... those that can't teach ...  Trump can do ...

These are just my observations.  I have a recent degree in Bus Admin (2007) and grew up in the building biz to build my perspective with.  It is for the reasons I have outlined above that I support Trump and many more discussed elsewhere.  It ain't no dogwhistle that I listen to as some others here (not you) say that I do.

Regards ...

ymmv 

 islander wrote: 
As someone who has supported a loved one through more than year of chemotherapy, I agree about 300%. Quality heath care has absolutely nothing to do with profit.

 kurtster wrote: 
Uh, I do. And lots of others also. Business has some specific goals. Government has some too. They are very different and take very different methodologies to accomplish.  We certainly can fire people in government, but there are reasons why it may be pragmatic to make that more difficult than in the private sector. I also don't want the group that is responsible for our health and welfare to be looking to maximize profits and cut corners for expediency.

 kurtster wrote: 
I agree, but disagree Trump is capable of the job.  Contrary to what seems to be the perception among his supporters, Trump was not particularly good at running a business.  Doing real estate deals, yes, but not running a business (see his 4 bankruptcies). 

 steeler wrote: 
If political experience is the only criteria, then yes, this is true.

I still don't buy that only a politician can be POTUS though.   It is politicians who got us into all this trouble in the first place.

This is the 21st Century and these are times never seen before.  Time for a paradigm shift.  Who says that the government can't or shouldn't be run like a business ?  Bad people need to be fired.  Can't move forward and improve on things without doing that.  It is impossible.  Politicians just ask people to resign, they don't say "you're fired", cuz they are afraid to.  Its part of the DNA ...

 steeler wrote: 
I'm assuming all these candidates have at least an undergraduate degree, but did they skip kindergarten?

All I Really Need To Know I Learned In Kindergarten

 by Robert Fulghum

Most of what I really need
To know about how to live
And what to do and how to be
I learned in kindergarten.
Wisdom was not at the top
Of the graduate school mountain,
But there in the sandpile at Sunday school.

These are the things I learned:

Share everything.
Play fair.
Don't hit people.
Put things back where you found them.
Clean up your own mess.
Don't take things that aren't yours.
Say you're sorry when you hurt somebody.
Wash your hands before you eat.
Flush.
Warm cookies and cold milk are good for you.
Live a balanced life -
Learn some and think some
And draw and paint and sing and dance
And play and work everyday some.
Take a nap every afternoon.
When you go out into the world,
Watch out for traffic,
Hold hands and stick together.
Be aware of wonder.

 black321 wrote: 

In this environment, being "reasonable" is seen as a deficit.  Certainly not the marker of a leader.   

Edit:  Kasich also has the most relevant experience of any of the remaining GOP candidates.

 kurtster wrote: 
Likely that he saw an opening when GOP establishment donors and big shots were not quickly coalescing around Jeb! last summer, and decided he'd take a stab at being the moderate, "electable" candidate.

 black321 wrote:

 kurtster wrote: 
OK, thanks.  From what little i have seen of him in debates...he seems like the only reasonable candidate to present. 

 rotekz wrote: 
If democrats believed in God, they'd call him the antichrist.

 rotekz wrote: 
Sent by God. To punish us for our sins: celebrity worship, shallow thinking, short attention spans, susceptibility to demagoguery.

An angry God, who must be appeased.

Quick, find another eastern European beauty pageant contestant to sacrifice!

 black321 wrote: 
I'll try, since he is my Gov and voted for him twice.  

He has been a good gov, fixed a lot of things.  If Trump was not running, he would be my default establishment guy, especially over the other choices left.  Friends who are bleeding heart D's here in Ohiya have said that they could and actually would like to vote for Kasich over all the original candidates back when there were 5 D's and 17 R's running.

But I don't really know why he is running.  He waited until the last minute to announce.  Is campaigning here and there, not everywhere.  He just does not come off as strong on the kind of leadership needed at the top level.  

I could go deeper on what he's done with taxes here that doesn't sit well with me.  Such as he thinks that he did a great job lowering income taxes, but in doing so, he raised the sales tax to compensate.  That screws people on fixed incomes like Social Security who don't get that break and end up paying more in taxes.  He doesn't get that.  In fact he has not said one word about what he would do with Social Security or Medicare after going to his website.  Just vagueries about a tax plan.  Nothing about a flat tax or a VAT.  Me, I'm a flat taxer.  Consumption taxes are not fair (they screw the little guys) and too unpredictable for forecasting purposes.

I already know his immigration / border plan and he is just plain too soft.  Does not even address it on his website.

He's a good guy and a decent governor and I could vote for him a third time if we didn't have term limits in Ohiya, but he just ain't prezidential timber. 

The 5 Stages of Trump.

So why don't republicans like Kasich?  Not angry enough? 

Relevant:

http://www.independent.com/news/2016/feb/20/dont-take-my-stuff-ism/ wrote:  

 black321 wrote: 
Oops. Sorry/thanks/fixed.

 sirdroseph wrote: 
Traditionally, liberals were the rude type...it's kinda part of their description, to break up the old way of doing things.  But over the last decade or so, conservatives have found a way to be equally rude, if not more (Trump).