Trump for President. Who's hopping on the bandwagon? Who's digging a bunker?
- Thread starter PuntMeister
- Start date
And why wouldn't you believe him ???
He is believed to have something near to twice as much personal wealth as have ALL previous U.S. Presidents put together AND when adjusted for inflation (all converted to '2016 dollars' ).
Uh, Hillary has served a single term in an elected office in her life.
In 2020, she and The Donald will have served the same amount of time in elected office.
The difference being, The Donald has muuuuuuuuuuuuuuch more money.
Um, and the Senate acquitted him. Hence "broken system".Um, he was impeached...
The only reason that Hillary is even close to getting into the White House is because her husband is a former POTUS and she's been floating around these circles the past 30 years. Let's not kid ourselves.
And while the Donald may possess more money, the resources provided to Hillary to run her campaign (over $1.068 billion) were much greater through the Democratic fundraising machine than those available to Trump ($512 million). And in doing so Trump was his own largest donor contributing at least $56 million - who can afford to do that?
And the Donald should have much more money than the Clintons because he's been in the private sector the past 40 years. Its bad enough that the Clintons were able to accumulate the wealth they did while they are/were supposedly serving the country - which is one of the reasons why half of the electorate was so pissed with the Clintons.
Hillary was an accomplished lawyer for 20 years, 2 terms senator and Secretary of State. I don't think that is exactly floating around.
As for the idea they shouldn't have accumulated as much wealth as they did, they have over 80 years of combined work life between the two of them, about half of that are in the private sector. Ex-presidents make a lot of money from speaking arrangements, books, board directorships, etc. I don't think it is worse than the millions Trump made from his reality TV shows.
Oh god, please.
Hillary ran for Senate after Bill left the presidency. Hillary ran as a Democrat in New York despite that the Clintons had never lived there and Rudy Gulliani resigned after getting diagnosed with cancer - her and the Democrats were accused of sandbagging the nomination because they've had plans for her since Bill Clinton was in office. And between the moron that ran for the Republicans, Lazio, and Hillary, the two spend a combined record $90 million on their campaigns. Why? Because everyone on the planet knew that the reason the Democrats had Hillary running in the first place was with a long term goal of having her run for president eventually.
Hillary's campaign cost $50 million. Not a bad little push from her party for the first time ever running for office. In her 2006 re-election she spent $36 million - more than any other candidate for Senate in that election too.
She never got in on her own ticket. She was bought and paid for and rode Bill's coattails pure and simple.
And again - people like you completely miss the point, don't you. HILLARY WAS THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND WAS KNOWN TO HAVE AMBITIONS FOR RUNNING FOR POTUS WHILE BILL, HILLARY AND CHELSEA ARE MAKING ALL THIS INCOME FOR "SPEAKING" which is pure and utter bullshit. These two did not accumulate their massive wealth before running for office. So the idea that these foreign states and massive corporate entities are paying these people these astronomical sums of money while she is in a position of trust for not just the United States, but for the entire world, is just plain fucking wrong. When will you people get this through your heads?!?!?
Well, considering that Trump garnered 4% of the vote in the District of Columbia while Hillary got 93%, I'd suggest you might be a little off on that "belief". Seriously...that has to be the most telling statistic there is.
http://www.cnn.com/election/results/states/district-of-columbia
Because he's a bull in a china shop? And I'm not talking about what he would do to the "elite" or the "establishment". I'm talking about what he would do to just about anything.
Anyway part of the disconnect here is "elite" can mean at least two different things: it could mean "political establishment" or it could mean 1%-ers.
FYI - Hillary was involved in party politics since she was in her teens. Somewhat ironically, since she started as a Barry Goldwater (GOP) supporter, and this year got accused of the same thing as him: leaning towards a nuclear war with Russia.
History has a strange sense of humour.
History has a strange sense of humour.
Who are they?
Many people thinks Trump will be a terrible president, myself included. It has nothing to do with him being a part of the elite or not. Trump won the nomination for the Republican party. He has the support of the majority of Republican political elite.
Running for the Senator (or Governor ) before running for president? That is the rule rather than the exception. Anyways, you said Hillary was just floating around, pretty laughable when you look at her career record.
All Ex-presidents of the US make gobs of money doing speaking engagements, at least in modern history. Did you criticized George Bush Sr. making money when his son planned to run for president?
Or could it be that the overwhelming majority of voters in DC are black and voting against the racist candidate? Most of the "elite" of both parties live in other ridings in Virginia or elsewhere in the suburbs of Washington.
Doubt God will be much help... Talking about missing points....George Bush hasn't been out and about much, but after leaving office he did make some "speaking" appearances...notably, Calgary..$250,000.00 fee. I'd say foreign states and massive corporations pay to hear opinions from people like the Clinton's. They realize that Clinton had influence in shaping opinion in Democratic circles, both had success in working across the aisle....so chances are their ideas going forward have some merit. I think it's safe to say that you didn't have to be a freaking genius to figure out that if Hillary made it to the White House, Bill would have some influence on her....so an investment in his thoughts for the future would be a smart business move.
It's true:
Major government buildings and monuments aside, the District of Columbia is a very black urban environment. (How many blacks voted Trump? 8%) And that which is not is governmental and urban - either lower and middle class worker drones - are those rich DC types who are almost certainly The Establishment. Not exactly Trump's support base, is it?
Actually, so much of the de-facto US capitol is outside of DC (in Virginia and maryland), that you could justifiably expand the District of Columbia 25 miles in every direction.
