PDA

View Full Version : One major advatage if Trump is elected President



Little-Acorn
08-14-2015, 11:11 AM
I know, he's rude, boorish, and speaks off the cuff too much.

But... until now, every man who has been elected President, got there as a direct result of people, and companies, and political parties, etc., giving millions of dollars to causes that support him. So when he gets elected, they can all say, "We helped you, now you help us." And he has little choice but to toe the line and do things they want.

Trump would be the first person in my lifetime to NOT have that problem. Sure, people who like him would still donate to him. But he can (and no doubt would) tell them, " I'm going to do what I want. If you don't like it, tough. You can leave, and take your money with you. I don't care, I've got plenty."

And when he's President and contemplating a run for a second term, some might tell him, "We don't like what you're doing, better change your ways, or we won't give you and your Superpac a penny in contributions." Trump can simply reply, "Tough titty. You don't like it, leave. I don't need your money, I've still got plenty, plus lots of people who DO like me and are contributing."

Bottom line, Trump would be the first president who has NO incentive to change what he's doing simply because he owes somebody.

Some people might say, "Oh, that's terrible, the man is out of control, we can't have that."

No, he isn't "out of control". He can only sign into law, things Congress has passed. (Someone might want to notify Barack Obama of this fact, he'll be surprised). Campaign contributors were never supposed to be the President's "checks and balances". Congress is his "check and balance". And no one else should be.

NightTrain
08-14-2015, 11:46 AM
Yep, agree.

I remember having a similar conversation way back when about Ross Perot when my brother told me he was going to vote for him... and that was his biggest argument, that he couldn't be bought. Maybe it was true, but the 3rd party vote was folly. Still, he couldn't be dissuaded along with many other Americans and we all know what that got us.

I think that's a valid point, since he's already monstrously wealthy there would be much less leverage applied to him with a financial carrot... but I don't know what kind of greed factor he has. Some very wealthy people are still doing everything they can to accumulate even more wealth. I don't know if that inner drive for more money ever diminishes in some people, regardless of how much they already have. Others love the game for it's own sake.

red state
08-14-2015, 11:55 AM
His background proves that he will jump sides and support the worse of the worse (evenly according to Trump) so that whomever wins will look favorable to HIM and his greed. Sometimes you have to take a stand on one side of the fence......he's straddled it and continues to do so.

We need someone who will choose a side and say the hell with supporting others.......just to spread HIS wealth by spreading the 'support funds' around to both dim and Republican.

*See my comment on Trump in the other thread....

red state
08-14-2015, 11:57 AM
As far as I know, this was the first time I've disagreed with Little-Acorn. I may be wrong on this BUT I do not believe I'm wrong on Trump at ALL & if he somehow wins the nomination or election (which I don't see happening) we will ALL see sides of him come out that we may or may not have known was there. For one thing, I see all of his HOT AIR being exactly that when it comes down to actually following through with all his promises.

fj1200
08-14-2015, 12:20 PM
Trump would be the first person in my lifetime to NOT have that problem.

You expect that he would only spend his own $500 million?

gabosaurus
08-14-2015, 01:23 PM
Trump's new Secretary of Labor:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c6/f5/c4/c6f5c4726b0cac56d4578e88d5702b6e.jpg

Little-Acorn
08-14-2015, 05:58 PM
You expect that he would only spend his own $500 million?

Didn't even read the OP, did we?

fj1200
08-15-2015, 01:54 PM
Didn't even read the OP, did we?

Of course I did. That's why I dispute your premise.