2016 Republican Presidential Candidates

[me]

Obama didn't do this huh?   

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/federal-reserve-printing-free-lunch/

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_12853.htm

[Exterminator]

Obama didn't do this huh?   

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/federal-reserve-printing-free-lunch/

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_12853.htm

Do you know the difference between figuratively and literally?  I'm pretty sure Trump meant literally whereas the comments about Obama were figurative.

[Y]

Everyone can relax!  Trump just said that the U.S. never has to worry about defaulting on our debt because we print the money! 

He is correct, but I'm not certain he really knows why.

I've been pointing out for years the difference between home, city, state, and federal debt/spending, and that - barring the creation of hyperinflation by printing too much money - the federal government cannot go bankrupt as it is the issuer of currency.

That is completely different than the other entities named above.

As far as the U.S. 'debt', it's primarily .gov owes .gov, with the rest held by other creditors:

http://www.facethefactsusa.org/facts/who-holds-the-note-look-in-the-mirror-infographic

[me]

Do you know the difference between figuratively and literally?  I'm pretty sure Trump meant literally whereas the comments about Obama were figurative.

You really are in your own little world aren't you. This does not look figuratively to me. Oh, and notice this isn't Fox News. Read the article, both of them.



http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/federal-reserve-printing-free-lunch/

[Palehorse]

I heard from the pie-hole of the Rump himself on NPR just this afternoon: "Debt is a good thing. I'd never be afraid to borrow money if I were President. If the bottom drops out you can always make a deal." . . .

Does nothing to alleviate my suspicions that he will run the old "turn and burn" on the U.S. and borrow a shitpot full of money and leave the peasants holding the bag. . . 

[Y]

Although I believe that the democrats are going to try to do the same thing F'ing thing if Bernie continues to gain momentum........I am starting to get a sour taste in my mouth...like the bile is backing up, But, I tend to agree ONCE again, that there is indeed a group of "elitist" GOP'ers that demonstrating assholism to it's finest!

Paul Ryan is SUPPOSED to be UNITING the party, then says he is NOT QUITE ready to support the candidate that the voters strongly indicate the next presidential nominee....Newt pretty much bitch slapped Paul Ryan....

These same ass wipes was ready to kick Trump out at the very beginning if he didn't "pledge his support" to the GOP........so, he does...........then proceeds to kick 16 nominees's asses to the curb, one by one.......takes the vast majority of the states, and gathers MILLIONS and MILLIONS of new voters to the party.........despite, these same buttcrusts trying every thing they can to keep him from winning..........

It is time to lick their freakin wounds, put on their big boy pants, and focus on winning this election................

Once again, allow me to point out how much you don't know about the political parties and our government.

First off, "The national political parties are non-profit corporations, exempt from taxes under the IRS code as 527 organizations."; "the national parties in the US are actually umbrella groups, with member parties from the 50 states, DC and the territories.  How any local party may be structured can be different, based on state laws."

As such, they are private 'clubs/associations' which can determine their own rules, platform, etc., and actually decide who is, or isn't, a member by whether they follow the party's rules and adhere to the party's platform and/or basic principles, AND can require loyalty oaths etc..

Therefore, the people voting for Trump are primarily just expressing a preference - a preference that can be ignored in the long run by the national party should they deem it necessary. 

That's why you have such an uproar by the party hierarchy over Trump.  They don't see him as adhering to the party's platform and basic principles, and yet do see him as exploiting the current rules to run as a Republican.

Secondly, the Democratic party is basically the same.  It's also a private 'club/association'.

Last, but not least, the Founding Fathers themselves place no faith in the 'masses' and deliberately organized our Federal election process to at least minimize the effect of the proletariat on elections.  That's why we have Electors and why our Presidential elections are decided by Electoral - and not Popular - votes.

You don't understand all of that for the same reasons you continue to fall for the 'Argumentum ad Populum' (Latin for "appeal to the people") - AKA: Appeal to Popularity - you think that because the masses may agree with it, or choose it, that it's 'right'.

Well, it's STILL a fallacy.

[Y]

I heard from the pie-hole of the Rump himself on NPR just this afternoon: "Debt is a good thing. I'd never be afraid to borrow money if I were President.

Federal spending using debt is one of the few ways .gov can actually stimulate the economy, and restricting spending and eliminating debt actually throttles the economy. 

For example, look at what austerity measures have done to economies world wide.

The U.S. should be spending whatever it takes on our failing infrastructure - which would in turn stimulate the national economy, a win-win.  That's a failure you can blame on both the Repugs and Toilet Paper Party idjits with their ridiculous economic policies.

[Locutus]

[Exterminator]

You really are in your own little world aren't you.

LOL!  You are truly delusional about your place in the world.

[libby]

Regarding going to public toilets: I'm sure Trump, when he is crowned king elected POTUS, will tell us what we really need to know. But in the meantime, he has more important things to deal with. The following is from 

The Washington Post, Saturday, May 14, 2016: Front Page:

"Trump's art of the spiel: Deliver it yourself


Candidate posed as own PR spokesman for years, journalists and aides say

By Marc Fisher and Will Hobson

BUSTED: Trump Caught Posing as His Own Publicist to Brag about Himself (AUDIO)
Nathan Wellman | May 13, 2016

The voice is instantly familiar; the tone confident, even cocky; the cadence, distinctly Trumplan. The man on the phone vigorously defending Donald Trump says he's a media spokesman named John Miller, but then he says, "I'm sort of new here: and I'm somebody that he knows and I think somebody that he trusts and likes" and even "I'm going to do this a little, part time, and then, yeah, go on with my life."

A recording obtained by The Washington Post captures what New York reporters and editors who covered Trump's career experienced in the 1970s, '80s and '90s; calls from Trump's Manhattan office that resulted in conversations with "John Miller" or "John Barron" -- public-relations men who sound precisely like Trump himself -- who indeed are Trump masquerading as an unusually helpful and boastful advocate for himself, according to the journalists and several of Trump's top aides. "

www.washingtonpost.com

   

[me]

And that is important because?

[Exterminator]

And that is important because?

Because he lied about it then and when asked about it last week, he lied about it again?  With all of the hoopla from conservatives about Hillary being a liar, this should raise some eyebrows.

[me]

Because he lied about it then and when asked about it last week, he lied about it again?  With all of the hoopla from conservatives about Hillary being a liar, this should raise some eyebrows.

And his lie harmed the country, or people, in what way? He was not in a government position and it did not affect lives or reputations of anyone, was not done under oath due to an investigation, plus it was 30 years ago. I do not like Trump but that's a bull shit story meant to create something to distract from Hillary's problems. Like old Hill said, "at this point what does it matter"?

[Exterminator]

And his lie harmed the country, or people, in what way? He was not in a government position and it did not affect lives or reputations of anyone, was not done under oath due to an investigation, plus it was 30 years ago. I do not like Trump but that's a bull shit story meant to create something to distract from Hillary's problems. Like old Hill said, "at this point what does it matter"?

As many times as you've been caught spreading lies here, it isn't surprising that you would so easily dismiss his lack of integrity.  You sure do defend him a lot for someone who claims not to like him!

[me]

As many times as you've been caught spreading lies here, it isn't surprising that you would so easily dismiss his lack of integrity.  You sure do defend him a lot for someone who claims not to like him!

This is a bullshit discussion which means nothing in the overall scheme of things. Now if you wish to discuss things that matter fine but this is a waste of time. I do not like Trump but given a choice, if it comes down to either him or Hillary, I will vote for Trump, grudgingly, but I would.