The Future President, Donald Trump

In the 70s into the 21st Century, I associated with, particularly at work, undocumented Mexicans and others from Latin American countries. I liked and respected at least 90% of them. It's stupid to discriminate against these people. Populations shift, from time to time, in every part of the world. Welcome their energy and new blood.

Good on ya, edgar. I also worked with Mexicans and blacks during summers in Sacramento to pick fruits in Yuba City when we were young. They were hard workers. I still see Mexicans working in restaurants, auto repair shops, and other small businesses in Silicon Valley. They contribute to our community with their hard work.
I find it interesting, because we go to many cultural restaurants in our area, including Japanese restaurants, and many of the workers are Hispanics including the chefs.

So Trump got owned!

Face the Nation, Trump regarding Mexican American judge - enjoy
DICKERSON: Let me ask you about, what does <the> Mexican heritage of<the> judge in <the> Trump University case have to do with anything?

TRUMP: I think it has a lot to do with it.

First of all, I have had terrible rulings forever. I had a judge previous to him, and it would have been a very quick case. This is a case I should have won on summary judgment. This is a case -- and nobody writes this, and they all know it, but they don`t like to write it -- <the> plaintiff in <the> case was a woman.

She was so bad that, under deposition, it was over. She couldn`t have been<the> plaintiff. It was a disaster. They went before <the> judge. They said, we don`t want her to be <the> plaintiff. We want to put somebody else in. So, we said, well, that`s fine. Dismiss <the> case. You have to dismiss <the>case.

Wait a minute. She gave letters, <the> most incredible reviews of <the>college you have ever seen, of <the> university. She gave <the> most incredible. Then, on top of it, we have a tape where she`s talking about it in<the> most glowing terms. You wouldn`t speak about your college...

DICKERSON: Mr. Trump, what does this have to do with his parents before from Mexico? How is that...

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: No, no, excuse me, excuse me. I`m just saying, we`re getting terrible rulings.

We go to <the> judge, we say to <the> judge, hey, you can`t let her out of<the> case. He let her out of <the> case. We said, well, if you`re going to let her out of <the> case, she`s <the> plaintiff. If you`re going to let her out of<the> case, <the> case is over. No, <the> case isn`t over. OK?

Now, give me...

(CROSSTALK)

DICKERSON: No, no, for him, how does -- his Mexican parents have to do with him not...

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: He`s member of a club or society very strongly pro- Mexican, which is all fine. But I say he`s got bias. I want to build a wall. I`m going to build a wall.

I`m doing very well with <the> Latinos, with Hispanics, with <the> Mexicans. I`m doing very well with them, in my opinion. And we`re going to see, you`re going to see, because you know what? I`m providing jobs. Nobody else is giving jobs.

But just so you understand, this judge has treated me very unfairly. He`s treated me in a hostile manner. And there`s something going on. When a woman can be a plaintiff in a case and then say, I don`t want to be -- and you know why they don`t want to be a plaintiff? They didn`t want her. <The>lawyers asked that she not be a plaintiff because they would have lost <the>case immediately.

DICKERSON: So, I`m trying to figure out your thinking here, though.

If his Mexican heritage, <the> fact that his parents were Mexican immigrants, is a barrier to him doing his job, why would any Mexican voter vote for you? Wouldn`t they be -- <the> same barrier, <the> same problem?

TRUMP: No, no, that`s a whole different thing. No, they`re going to vote for me because I`m going to bring jobs into <the> country.

DICKERSON: But isn`t it <the> same problem, because you want to build a wall and all <the> ?

TRUMP: No.

(CROSSTALK)

DICKERSON: So, what if it was a Muslim judge?

TRUMP: By <the> way, I have so many Hispanics.

I made a speech last night. I saw hundreds of signs, Latinos for Trump, Latinos for Trump all over <the> place. And you know what? They are here legally. They don`t want their homes taken away. They don`t want their job taken away. They like what I`m doing.

Now, people can come in, but they have to come in legally.

DICKERSON: You have -- on <the> Muslim -- but what if he was a Muslim, though? You have had -- been very tough on temporary Muslim immigration ban. Would a Muslim judge be also out of <the> question here?

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: We are allowing tremendous numbers of people coming into this country that we know nothing about.

We are -- we have a problem in this country. We`re going to have big problems. I have been pretty good at predicting things, John. We are going to have big problems. We have people coming into this country totally undocumented. They don`t know anything about them.

They don`t have paperwork. I interviewed and talked to <the> best law enforcement people in <the> business. There`s no way of knowing where they come from. And we`re taking them in from <the> so-called migration. They are being sent all over <the> country. We have people that don`t know what they`re doing. And we have to stop it.

DICKERSON: My question is, if it were a Muslim judge, would you also feel like they wouldn`t be able to treat you fairly because of that policy of yours? TRUMP: It`s possible, yes. Yes. That would be possible, absolutely.

DICKERSON: Isn`t there sort of a tradition, though, in America that we don`t judge people by who their parents were and where they came from?

TRUMP: I`m not talking about tradition. I`m talking about common sense. OK? He`s somebody -- he is proud of his heritage. And I think that`s great that he`s proud of his heritage.

DICKERSON: But you`re saying it`s a barrier to him doing his job.

TRUMP: He`s not treating me fair. He`s not treating me fairly.

DICKERSON: And you think it`s not because -- you think it`s because of where his parents came from?

TRUMP: I have had numerous lawyers.

Look, I have a case where thousands of people have said it was a great school. They have written reviews where they say it`s a great school. Not a good school, like great. They gave it <the> highest marks. I have thousands of these papers.

It should have been a summary judgment case, meaning <the> case should have been dismissed. And I had a judge who was very fair. I have a lawyer that came in when he came in. <The> lawyer on other side sort of entered <the>case when entered <the> case. And we`re trying to figure out what that is all about.

DICKERSON: Would you have your lawyers say, hey, throw this out because<the> judge...

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: Well, I may do that now. Look, we`re finding things out now that we didn`t know before.

(CROSSTALK)

DICKERSON: Because of his Mexican heritage, though?

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: No, because of other things, I mean, because of other things.

DICKERSON: You have said you want to reopen...

TRUMP: How do you allow a case to proceed when <the> plaintiff asks to be dismissed from <the> case?

<The> plaintiff, <the> one that brought <the> suit, said, I don`t want to sue anymore. I don`t want to sue anymore. They didn`t want to sue.

You know why they didn`t want to? Because she can`t win <the> case, because she was a disaster.

DICKERSON: Yes.

TRUMP: So, <the> lawyers want her dismissed from <the> case. They go before <the> judge and he lets her out?

Well, he can let her out, but you have to dismiss <the> case.

DICKERSON: Yes, I guess I`m just confused how that -- what his Mexican parents have to do with that.

Let me...

TRUMP: Excuse me. I want to build a wall. I can -- I don`t think it`s very confusing.

DICKERSON: Well...

TRUMP: It has nothing to do with anything except common sense.

We have to stop being so politically correct in this country. And we need a little more common sense, John. And I`m not blaming. I`m proud of my heritage. We`re all proud of our heritage. And I want to build a wall.

Now, <the> Hispanics, many of them like what I`m saying. They`re here legally. They don`t want people coming and taking their jobs and taking their house and everything else. They don`t want that.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-transcripts-june-5-2016-trump/

Italy Feels Our Pain.
Rome — DURING the circuslike years of Silvio Berlusconi, Italians grew flinchingly accustomed to being the butts of the world’s jokes.

Will they have the last laugh?

They look toward America and wonder. Me, too. In Donald Trump, we have a version of their buffoonish former prime minister — a clown all our own. He baffles and appalls much of Europe.

Here in Italy he prompts an additional reaction: relief, even satisfaction, that another country is proving vulnerable to an emphatically tanned, flamboyantly randy and frequently ridiculous billionaire who makes promises that he can’t possibly keep.

The Ferragamo is on the other foot.

“We do feel, partly, ha-ha-ha,” said Maria Valentini, a professor at a university just outside Rome. “It’s your turn.”

After I ended a telephone chat with an Italian architect I know well, he texted me an assessment from his assistant, who explained that under Berlusconi, “We felt like idiots. Now we feel better, thinking that in the U.S., they are being idiots squared.”'>>>

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/05/opinion/sunday/italy-feels-our-pain.html?

Trump is squandering his General Election head start

These are helpful developments.

But while the Democrats have been bitterly divided for the past month, Trump has mostly squandered his unexpected head start.

He continues to commit unforced errors:

He chose to insult popular Hispanic Gov. Susana Martinez (R-N.M.) while campaigning in her state. Martinez is the chair of the Republican Governors Association.
He continues to claim he is under an IRS audit and cannot release his tax returns, when his tax firm said he is not under audit and every major party candidate in the modern era has released tax returns.
He continues to defend Trump University, which is currently embroiled in two lawsuits, rather than simply settle the cases and put it behind him.
In one of the Trump lawsuits, this week Trump personally insulted the sitting federal judge, who is of Mexican heritage but was born in Indiana, claiming he could not be impartial due to his heritage. His lawyers have not filed a motion for recusal.
He continues to claim he has not said things that he has clearly said relating to nuclear weapons proliferation, the U.S. military action in Libya and even his original support for the Iraq War.
He refuses to run a targeted, data-driven campaign, instead attempting to run the same earned media campaign in the fall that he ran in the Republican primary.
He has raised a series of conspiracy theories about likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and her husband, President Bill Clinton, which are from 30 years ago and have been adjudicated already.
He continues to have only one communications aide, Hope Hicks, who does an excellent job responding to media inquiries, but who is clearly overwhelmed by the volume.
He hastily fired his national political director, Rick Wiley, an operative with close ties to the RNC.
These are errors of judgment, temperament and strategy.




http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/282296-trump-is-squandering-his-general-election-head-start

Anybody can see Trump hasn't the temperament to be CIC. Run our country? That's insane.

An observation - for your consideration.

It has been pointed out by more than one person here that Trump must be intentionally sabotaging himself, because it somewhere dawned on him that he really doesn't want this government job. I can see the logic in that assertion - if he isn't a totally incompetent imbecile (and his relative success in business would seem to discount that possibility) then he must be making a conscious choice to say things to damage his chances. There are equally viable alternative arguments - for instance, he's just so narcissistic and bigoted that he just can't help himself. But I kind of lean in the direction of those that suggest Donald is getting the cold sweats about actually being president.

Here's my observation, though - the mass media seems to be almost completely ignoring this very feasible idea. They run video loops of his inanities - they endlessly speculate and pontificate about how stupid this or that statement was, and why he said it, and what everyone thinks about it. But they don't address the possibility that his candidacy was a con that was more successful than he predicted, and he is now just trying to con his way out of a con. And why don't they address it? Because their whole machine is built on the electoral horserace. If they acknowledge the possibility that Hillary Clinton is the only actual candidate still in real contention for the presidency, how do they reconcile their multi-billion dollar operations and the vapid content with which they fill the airwaves?

It's just a thought - mass media's livelihood is at this point partially dependent on their ignoring the elephant in the room - namely that The Donald is trying to tank his candidacy.

I think the Republican save move now is to refuse to put up a candidate in the general and have the party support the Johnson/Weld ticket. Two former Republican governors, a fresh start, no more Trump. Complete win.

How does Trump's supporters know where he stands on anything? This is dated March 31, 2016.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/31/politics/donald-trump-positions-flip-flops/

Donald Trump will win the 2016 presidential election.
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/article81920737.html#fmp

Not “might” win. Not “could win under the following circumstances.” He’s going to win as surely as the sun rises in the east, as certainly as high tide follows low, and as definitively as Steph Curry laid waste to the Oklahoma City Thunder’s defense.

Ben Boychuk
Ben Boychuk Randy Pench [email protected]
What am I, clairvoyant? Of course not. Just as it’s wise to never say “never” – except maybe #NeverTrump – it’s never a good idea for somebody to make unqualified predictions in print about unknowable future events.

Bold claims had better be backed by solid reasons. Although Trump is running nearly even with Hillary Clinton in national polls, the Vegas bookmakers remain optimistic about Clinton’s chances. The online betting site PaddyPower.com currently puts the odds of Clinton winning at 1 in 2, with Trump at 7 to 4. Bernie Sanders is a 20-to-1 long shot.

Would I be willing to put my money where my mouth is? Don’t be ridiculous. Gambling is a sin! But I wouldn’t bet against a Trump victory.

Here are five reasons why:

His rhetoric resonates. (Even as it appalls.)

Everyone knows that Trump is an outrage machine. What few people appreciate is that Trump is a well-calibrated outrage machine. He has fastened on to issues that other candidates couldn’t discuss without sounding like pandering flip-floppers.

Trump has departed from Republican orthodoxy on health care, taxes, free trade and immigration. Often he seems to contradict himself. He has said everything is negotiable – especially the outrageous things he’s said.

Will he build a wall on the southern U.S. border and make Mexico pay for it? Maybe, maybe not. But he’s opened up the discussion like no one has before.

TRUMP HAS RUN A NON-TRADITIONAL CAMPAIGN AND DEFIED ALL EXPECTATIONS AND EXPERT PREDICTIONS SO FAR. MEANTIME, CLINTON HAS REBOOTED HER CAMPAIGN FOUR OR FIVE TIMES SINCE APRIL.

“Trump’s selection of issues is part of his persuasion talents,” writes Scott Adams, the creator of “Dilbert” who has been blogging for months about the Trump phenomenon. “He was smart enough to pick the topics with the most emotional power. It was intentional.”

“Keep in mind,” Adams adds, “that every candidate had the same options that Trump did, but only Trump chose correctly.” Adams says that is no accident: “The public just thinks it is.”

By the way, Adams thinks Trump will win “in a landslide.”

Most Republicans are falling in line.

I’m a die-hard #NeverTrump guy, but I know I’m among a minority. Although some prominent Republican leaders have withheld their support, it’s clear that the GOP rank-and-file is rallying to the presumptive nominee. On Thursday, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, R-Wis., ended weeks of speculation and endorsed Trump, saying “the reality is, on the issues that make up our agenda, we have more common ground than disagreement.” A unified Republican Party is far more likely now.

Democrats, meantime, are divided among dedicated Clinton supporters and Sanders’ cadres of bitter-enders. The Bernie voters tend to be millennials. Clinton may not be able to count on their support in November.

Gotcha journalism doesn’t faze Trump.

Oh, that Trump is such a thin-skinned baby! Did you see his “epic meltdown” during his news conference at Trump Tower last week? He kept berating the reporters for not doing their jobs. What a buffoon!

At least, that’s what The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Chicago Tribune and the crew on “Morning Joe” said.

What my friends in the media fail to understand is the great mass of would-be readers and viewers really, really don’t like us. They certainly don’t trust us. And so when Trump calls ABC News reporter Tom Llamas “a sleaze” and Llamas responds with pained indignation, who do you suppose wins that confrontation?

“Why am I a sleaze?” Llamas protested.

“You’re a sleaze because you know the facts and you know the facts well,” Trump replied.

Trump never apologizes and never backs down. The media may despise him, but voters despise the media more. That’s why he’s winning.


Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/article81920737.html#fmp#storylink=cpy

Why in the name of god would you post something from this guy?

Because people need to see what other people are thinking.

No arguing with that, as a general principle, edgar. But that example seems to have a similar value to passing along a white supremacist tract. Did you check out the author?

If one is going to share what an "other" believes, wouldn't one post an "other" source as well?

None of us here are in danger of going "other" and those few "others" among us are already committed (or should be) in both senses of the word.

Besides the RW crap was written into an article from the Miami Herald.

Sorry, but he said what many Trump people believe.

Hmmm. So it IS possible for ethnicity to effective judgement, at least according to THIS US Supreme Court Justice.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15judge.html

Now Trump is trying to say he was just misunderstood.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/07/politics/donald-trump-mexican-judge-trump-university-racist/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Sorry, but I don't understand your point. I'm not familiar with the Herald, I confess, but it's standards don't appear to be very high.

Yes, there are lunatics in the world. Did you post it as an example of lunacy/right wing ideology taken out to right field, over the bleachers and into the swamp a mile away?