Trump was more qualified to be president than Obama ? ROFL
My answer to the idea that Trump was more qualified to be president than Obama.
A CEO of multiple billion dollar corporations
Six bankruptcies, sued hundreds of times for non payment of bills, association with ponzi schemes (multi level marketing), credibly accused of business fraud (Trump U.) , chronic tax cheat ( see NY Times article https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-schemes-fred-trump.html?mtrref=www.pulitzer.org&gwh=6E2962703EA25966EAD89792FFB71F5E&gwt=pay&assetType=PAYWALL, and on and on and on.
Tags
Who is online
339 visitors
On another seed the claim was made that Trump was more qualified to be president of the United States than Barack Obama. I was unable to post a response there so I am doing so here.
Yes Donald Trump made a lot of money, as if that were the determining factor. But Trump also has a long history of ethical misconduct, prior to becoming president. That misconduct more than erased any legitimacy his money gave him in terms of political qualifications.
My guess is that the argument was along the lines that Trump had much more executive experience than Obama. That certainly is true. But, of course, a crime boss also would have had more executive experience than Obama.
The far bigger issue is one of character. It used to be that our nation sought PotUS' that our children could view as role models. The election of Trump put a definitive end to that.
Just sickening that anyone still supports / defends Trump.
What good is executive experience if it involves repeated unethical behavior? The truth is the nature of Trump's executive experience should have disqualified him.
Some people, more than a few, believe that if someone makes money they are automatically qualified for just about anything. A major problem in this world.
Indeed. Did you not get that from my post?
Trump Engaged in Suspect Tax Schemes as He Reaped Riches From His Father
The president has long sold himself as a self-made billionaire, but a Times investigation found that he received at least $413 million in today’s dollars from his father’s real estate empire, much of it through tax dodges in the 1990s.
By DAVID BARSTOW , SUSANNE CRAIG and RUSS BUETTNER
President Trump participated in dubious tax schemes during the 1990s, including instances of outright fraud, that greatly increased the fortune he received from his parents, an investigation by The New York Times has found.
Mr. Trump won the presidency proclaiming himself a self-made billionaire, and he has long insisted that his father, the legendary New York City builder Fred C. Trump, provided almost no financial help.
But The Times’s investigation, based on a vast trove of confidential tax returns and financial records, reveals that Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire, starting when he was a toddler and continuing to this day.
Much of this money came to Mr. Trump because he helped his parents dodge taxes. He and his siblings set up a sham corporation to disguise millions of dollars in gifts from their parents, records and interviews show. Records indicate that Mr. Trump helped his father take improper tax deductions worth millions more. He also helped formulate a strategy to undervalue his parents’ real estate holdings by hundreds of millions of dollars on tax returns, sharply reducing the tax bill when those properties were transferred to him and his siblings.
Your guess would be wrong because no such comparrison was ever made. JR has the tendency to think other individuals are being compared to Trump simply because they are mentioned in the same discussion. That article was locked because democrats were offended. One of the isues happened to be Obama finding a sly way to call Senator Tim Scott an "uncle Tom."
Btw it was pointed out that Obama could have been a great leader.
The person who locked the article is not a Democrat.
the article was locked because the title was inflammatory
That is not true. I locked the article because it violated the CoC. It was inflammatory and also a sweeping generalization that said all of a very large class of people were bad.
But it is and you just said it again here.
Btw, as I said before if that article was a sweeping generalization of an entire class of people why isn't one that says:
Of course, that hatred of democracy is why Republicans are less worried than they should be about their ballooning unpopularity.
What happened to the piece entitled: "Voters hate Trump, hate GOP abortion politics, hate the racism, but Republicans keep doubling down?"
The only full time job Barack Obama held for four years was as a US Senator, half of which he spent campaigning for the Presidency.
While Obama was going to school and working as a lawyer and university lecturer, Trump was perfecting his existence as an unethical businessman. And you have the gall to say Trump was more qualified?
Actually, if I remember correctly, I believe he made ice cream cones for a few months as a teenager
Trump was obviously qualified, or he would not have been elected.
Tell us why you think Obama was qualified to be president. What qualifications and experience did he possess?
Biden told us he was a nice looking black guy, well spoken, and clean.
Sounds like a racist statement from Joe.
Not as bad as Bubby Clinton saying he should have been carrying their bags.
I'm not telling you shit as long as you post laugh provoking crap like that.
So you admit that he was elected only on the basis of his skin color?
I admit that you dont know what you are talking about.
B leave that will change abruptly if sent to prison, but doubt he gets what he deserves. Luv ta see old Trump waiting for Baron to put some cash on his prison meal plan, as Trump barters his phat asz to gain a piece of the lucrative Lucy trade allegedly practiced. Next he'll want a Rock Hammer...
Yeah, Greg, he met the constitutional requirements. I think JR is speaking of qualification in terms of successful experience, knowledge, and character.
Trump is the main example one would use in the argument that the USA electorate is sadly capable of electing an individual who is wholly unfit to be PotUS.
That would have to include Bubba Bill Clinton and of course mumbling, stumbling, fumbling old man Joe.
They wised up by the time Hillary came begging
It’s amazing that winning more popularity contests than anyone else makes people think they are qualified to run the country. Congressman and Senator do not prepare you for running a country.
You have a very odd understanding of the phrase "wholly unfit". Was serial womanizer JFK "wholly unfit"? How about racist LBJ? Was elderly Reagan "wholly unfit"?
I say no.
"Wholly unfit" designates an individual whose character and competence are grossly insufficient to properly serve as PotUS. Trump is the primary example of this.
Trump' character sucked, I agree. I have no problems with his actions and programs while president, but I do have a big problem with his behavior after losing the election. That's why we need a decent and well qualified person as our next president. My choice is Ron DeSantis. There are several well qualified and experienced Republicans that will make excellent VP's.
All the left has is Joe Biden....if they don't shove him aside, they're going to lose big time.
DeSantis is qualified. I think Sununu would be a vastly better choice. Too bad the good ones tend to not run.
Are you aware that the Ds are not all 'the left'?
The Ds will lose if the GOP puts forth a better candidate. If the GOP puts forth Trump, the Ds will win.
You continue to underestimate President Biden. He easily won the Democratic nomination in 2020 plus hexearned the endorsement of a dozen challengers. Like Truman he stepped into the breach when he was mist needed and served with honor and dignity exceeding all expectations...
Challenge those who are unfairly attacking Biden. Note what I wrote. I stated that the Ds will lose if the GOP puts forth a better candidate. Seems to me that this is nearly a tautology.
Stated from a D perspective, the Rs will lose if the Ds put forth a better candidate.
Biden is a strong candidate against all the gop candidates. I cannot see a way for the gop to win any of the states Biden won in 2020. The states that Biden won closely are trending to vote more Democratic...
Plus, the economy keeps getting better!
Whooping Putin is Joe's ace in the hole.
Fox News viewers are so hammered by negativity about Biden they forget that to many he is seen as the experienced leader who navigated our ship of state through the convulsive endings of Trumpism.
Exactly, and with a 41% approval rating, he also leads Bud Light.
Biden would have a hard time against someone like Sununu. Depending on how things shape up, he might be challenged by Haley or (possibly but a long shot) Christie. And, of course, DeSantis is quite likely but would need to become more inclusive if he hopes to win the general.
Biden has some very serious drawbacks and they are:
And I say this while acknowledging his good which includes:
Note, I did not start off saying anything negative about Biden but rather made the observation that a superior GOP candidate could beat Biden. If you want this to turn into a debate where I take the anti-Biden side, we can do that. But frankly I am far more concerned about Trump.
A lot of real, genuine, biological, female women are not happy with the way the Dems have gone all in on the transgender issue and its intended or unintended consequences. This rivals the abortion issue, where most American women favor some kind of common sense restriction on abortion.
The abortion issue is of concern to a much greater portion of the electorate and has a substantially harsher impact than the transgender (and related) debates.
And don't let us forget about all this Pride nonsense. A large portion of the electorate rejects it.
Again, no comparison to the abortion issue. Offering cartoons does not change that.
Who do you have in mind? Do you really think DeSantis or Pence would be a more appropriate president than Biden?
Sununu. Too bad he is not running (currently).
Most of us leave Prom Queen/King behind when we graduate from high school.
Never underestimate the stupidity of the American voter.
You, Just Jim and Texan all agree that Trump would be a stupid choice. Why is this sentiment not reflected in the GOP as a whole?
Why would you think I can tell you why people do as they do? I only speak for myself.
That is like me asking why do democrats as a whole think minorities are inferior? I don’t expect you to understand their thinking anymore than I understand why people still support trump, it baffles me how that is still possible.
I have asked you to engage in political analysis. Is that something you never do?
Only about what I think, I wouldn’t want to even speculate on why people do the stupid things they do. My undergraduate degree is in social ecology. I gave up on predictive analysis. I was almost always disappointed in how my fellow man behaved.
That then pretty much rules out doing any political analysis. It is difficult to engage constructively on a news site without political analysis.
Thanks for proving my point, anybody here that thinks they are doing something constructive with maybe the exception being A Mac’s weekend column or Digs garden is fooling themselves. This place is case study in tribalism, little more. It’s entertaining enough, but constructive is laughable. Sorry but that is my opinion, others may fell differently.
You are a part of that tribalism.
I admit I am bias. It is clear for all to see.
A vague cliché. What point is that?
I was speaking of being constructive in a debate or discussion (which is what forums do). I was NOT suggesting that opining on a forum is a constructive use of time in general.
Some of us do own our biases. Too bad the ones that are constantly telling us that we are biased (uh...HELLO? we know that already!) won't own up to their own
if they won't they should, as it is the lease they could do to not appear so biased. Hell Trump got indicted for Buy Ass, and still won't admit his guilt of in NO Sense.
Nobody that I know of doesn't own up to it that I see since, as Ender put it, it is clear for all to see and no admission is necessary..
Imo what people refuse to see is the subtleties. Have one view that leans left and are labeled as a leftist. Have one view lean right....
Some people want to squeeze others into a small box when most people are more complex.
they seem to want to squeeze me into a small pine box
yeah it is because there people here who will tell you emphatically that they are not biased even tho it's as plain as the black and white text on the screen
I know the feeling. Haha
So thinking both Trump and Biden is unfit is which tribe exactly? I think the term you are looking for is Klanish, in that you are right, I’m not part of your klan.
....
Not even worth it.
I agree, defending the party that created the klan is indefensible, supporting politicians that make racist statements is indefensible. Deflecting and denying what they are is indefensible. But Trump isn’t a defense, it is a deflection of what you support. So I understand why that conversation won’t be one many want to have.
say WHAT
I can only write it, I can’t help you understand it. Which part confused you?
the sum of your purposefully deceptive manipulations and or denial, of that which the clear majority around here know to be queer. Cause it ain't NO secret where the racists congregate, in a pathetic a tempt to spread their Hate.
you claim you can only write it, as you wrong it
Did the democrats start the Klan?
Did Biden not say we should send social workers to help African American women raise their children? "Because they just don't know what to do"
The racism of democrats is engrained in the party, From telling African Americans that they need help getting into college to their ability to get employment.
The only change in the parties is Geography, the republicans moved south and the south is now less racist than it ever was under the democrat, and the democrats moved north, which explains why 9 out of 10 of the most racist cities are now in the north.
Facts aren't hate, they are simply facts and everyone of those statements are facts.
The Constitution has minimal, specific requirements for president, but that’s never what anyone means when they talk about who is qualified for the job. I think it’s important to remember that is a job - one that is done better with an identifiable skill set, knowledge, and experience.
When I consider what those qualities are, I did find Obama lacking in what I would generally prefer, but not nearly as much as Trump was lacking. Trump had zero experience and training in law or legislating. He had zero experience in public service. He had not had to broker compromise between opposing factions (one of the reasons I prefer former governors for the job). And clearly, he has never been held accountable to the public.
No candidate is perfectly qualified, but Trump is probably the least qualified to be president in the history of the Republic. Perhaps the worst part is, he remains so even after having been president for a full term. I see no evidence that he learned anything about how to do the job.
That is likely because he does not care about doing the job.