Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who will be the next US President?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Who will be the next US President?

    Would like your choice and bet
    Regards
    Eugene
  • #2

    Just come out and say what ya wanna say...
    Tim

    Comment

    • #3

      It's hard not to bet on your favorite horse. I like the straight shooting horse. That would be real change. Trump and Rand Paul are straight shooters. But only one is getting traction in the muddy track. Trump by a mile!

      Edit: "Change" was the rallying cry that ushered in Obama's presidency. Little really changed. The pie didn't get bigger, and the cronies thru lobbyists gamed and milked the system even more by getting an ever-larger slice of the pie. And the pie was being shared to an ever-larger population not born of the soil nor of the blood. The candidacy of Ron Paul, offering substantial changes, was quickly snuffed out by the Republican establishment, proving that it will be hard to change the status quo. Meanwhile, the country continues to see fallout from the Bush years, as the tension in the Middle East continues to escalate. There is helplessness in both the international scene, as well as on the domestic front- the economy. An ever-growing part of the populations is restless, as middle-class America dwindles. The country is losing the middle ground, and politics have become more contentious. Nothing is off the table anymore. Trump is not a perfect candidate, but he represents something that can blow up the gridlock, the second-guessing, and the revolving door between industry and government. The desperation is balanced by the hope that it will bring back a Camelot where public servants are once again serving in the interest of the common good.

      Comment

      • #4

        Originally posted by yerrag View Post
        It's hard not to bet on your favorite horse. I like the straight shooting horse. That would be real change. Trump and Rand Paul are straight shooters. But only one is getting traction in the muddy track. Trump by a mile!

        Edit: "Change" was the rallying cry that ushered in Obama's presidency. Little really changed. The pie didn't get bigger, and the cronies thru lobbyists gamed and milked the system even more by getting an ever-larger slice of the pie. And the pie was being shared to an ever-larger population not born of the soil nor of the blood. The candidacy of Ron Paul, offering substantial changes, was quickly snuffed out by the Republican establishment, proving that it will be hard to change the status quo. Meanwhile, the country continues to see fallout from the Bush years, as the tension in the Middle East continues to escalate. There is helplessness in both the international scene, as well as on the domestic front- the economy. An ever-growing part of the populations is restless, as middle-class America dwindles. The country is losing the middle ground, and politics have become more contentious. Nothing is off the table anymore. Trump is not a perfect candidate, but he represents something that can blow up the gridlock, the second-guessing, and the revolving door between industry and government. The desperation is balanced by the hope that it will bring back a Camelot where public servants are once again serving in the interest of the common good.

        Comment

        • #5

          Originally posted by yerrag View Post
          It's hard not to bet on your favorite horse. I like the straight shooting horse. That would be real change. Trump and Rand Paul are straight shooters. But only one is getting traction in the muddy track. Trump by a mile!

          Edit: "Change" was the rallying cry that ushered in Obama's presidency. Little really changed. The pie didn't get bigger, and the cronies thru lobbyists gamed and milked the system even more by getting an ever-larger slice of the pie. And the pie was being shared to an ever-larger population not born of the soil nor of the blood. The candidacy of Ron Paul, offering substantial changes, was quickly snuffed out by the Republican establishment, proving that it will be hard to change the status quo. Meanwhile, the country continues to see fallout from the Bush years, as the tension in the Middle East continues to escalate. There is helplessness in both the international scene, as well as on the domestic front- the economy. An ever-growing part of the populations is restless, as middle-class America dwindles. The country is losing the middle ground, and politics have become more contentious. Nothing is off the table anymore. Trump is not a perfect candidate, but he represents something that can blow up the gridlock, the second-guessing, and the revolving door between industry and government. The desperation is balanced by the hope that it will bring back a Camelot where public servants are once again serving in the interest of the common good.
          Sorry but it is 5am here at age 79 bathroom visit. You have have very good points . It is always nice to see a view from the outside. I have a subscription to the Bloomberg as well as faithfully watch The Charley Rose Interviews.
          President Obama did not meet my expectations. Donald Trump I would not like. Glad that I have no say
          Regards
          Eugene

          Comment

          • #6

            A non professional politician as in Reagan!

            Trump, a spade, is a spade, is a spade.

            Maybe outsiders see it how it is.

            We got third worlders running our nation these day's

            We were up with 1st worlders.

            Now we are down and out in Beverley Hills

            Garfield

            Comment

            • #7

              I am reminded of good ol' Abe Lincoln: "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

              On the last election cycle, people were not voting with their hearts, but with their minds. Funny how people as a tribe get hit with lightning, and now they are voting with their hearts. They are voting for a candidate they believe in, instead of a candidate whom they believe is likely to win. The realization that the candidate likely to win is a perception shaped by mainstream media is now creating a knee jerk reaction on both sides of the flawed two-party system, where the dark horse or nuisance candidate becomes the people's choice, against party hierarchies that are out of touch and out of sync with constituents.

              It is a good sign, as people throw out fear as basis for their choice. They have righteous anger in their hearts, yet they have hope in the future, as they will themselves to support candidates that put their comfort levels at risk. They have nothing to lose, as things look bleak with the status quo. The status quo, with their fake posturing of being brave and compassionate and proudly American, is already outed as beholden to special interests, foreign and domestic, and is seen as a fifth column, working against the principles of justice and liberty.

              Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

              Comment

              • #8

                [QUOTE=yerrag;219894]I am reminded of good ol' Abe Lincoln: "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

                Churchill said it better; You can always count on Americans to do the right thing in the end after they have tried out everything first
                Regards
                Eugene

                Comment

                • #9

                  [QUOTE=Eugeneg;219895]
                  Originally posted by yerrag View Post
                  I am reminded of good ol' Abe Lincoln: "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

                  Churchill said it better; You can always count on Americans to do the right thing in the end after they have tried out everything first
                  Regards
                  Eugene
                  Englishmen are good with back-handed compliments.

                  Comment

                  • #10

                    [QUOTE=yerrag;219896]
                    Originally posted by Eugeneg View Post
                    Englishmen are good with back-handed compliments.
                    I thought you might be an Englishman

                    I believe they are tighter than Scotsman?

                    Garfield

                    Comment

                    • #11

                      Trump Debate You May Have Missed

                      Stephen Colbert's All-Trump Debate Shows Just How Often Trump Contradicts Himself - Digg

                      He can take the two sides of an argument. How's that for "moral clarity?"

                      Not that it helped GW

                      Whose "WMD?" brought us into Iraq and Afghanistan.

                      And now Syria and Libya.

                      Pretty soon Iran and Saudi Arabia.

                      If we only listened to Bill Maher, and to Ron Paul.

                      Touche.

                      ISIS: We made a play, and they fell for it. Suckers.

                      Comment

                      • #12

                        [QUOTE=yerrag;219910]Stephen Colbert's All-Trump Debate Shows Just How Often Trump Contradicts Himself - Digg

                        Article in latest issue of Bloomberg Business week.The money behind Ted Cruz who is Robert Mercer. Article is by Zachary Milder
                        Regards
                        Eugene

                        Comment

                        • #13

                          What Kind of Man Spends Millions to Elect Ted Cruz? - Bloomberg Politics

                          Eugene, Mercer is a self-made man, making billions knowing how to use his algorithms to use arbitrage and mint money. If he favors Murray Rothbard and the Austrian school of economics, and favors a return to the gold standard, he may be seeing a future where fiat money is going to be discredited, and the world coming full circle. The current system of fiat currencies such as the dollar and the euro is a large Ponzi scheme. It is Mickey Mouse money. It is the money used to fund a generous public welfare system, which without a Ponzi scheme, will just as surely be unfunded overnight. This welfare system is what liberal Democrats hang on to with their lives, and what Libertarians know is something that can't go on forever. Not because social welfare is intrinsically unjust, it is just unrealistic given the funding is a delusion. A return to the gold standard will put sanity back into public financing, as well as private wealth-building. The longer the delusion, the harder the fall and the longer the recovery from the fall.

                          I don't know why Mercer is backing Ted Cruz though. He still appears to me an establishment politician that is only going to marginalize needed monetary policy change, and will continue to sweep dirt under a rug already too heavy with silt.

                          We will eventually stop dancing to the tune of printing currency to let the future fund the present. The wisdom of the crowds says being liberal and generous can only go so far, and as the pie shrinks, and as the sharks take an ever larger slice of it, whatever spoils left for the masses won't be enough to sustain and protect the peace. This understanding is manifested in the rejection of "the sure thing" in Hillary for the Democrats and in Jeb for the Republicans. Both Trump and Sanders are better choices, as they are both more realistic, if only slightly less delusional, than the bumper crop of presidential wannabees.

                          Comment

                          • #14

                            Originally posted by yerrag View Post
                            What Kind of Man Spends Millions to Elect Ted Cruz? - Bloomberg Politics

                            Eugene, Mercer is a self-made man, making billions knowing how to use his algorithms to use arbitrage and mint money. If he favors Murray Rothbard and the Austrian school of economics, and favors a return to the gold standard, he may be seeing a future where fiat money is going to be discredited, and the world coming full circle. The current system of fiat currencies such as the dollar and the euro is a large Ponzi scheme. It is Mickey Mouse money. It is the money used to fund a generous public welfare system, which without a Ponzi scheme, will just as surely be unfunded overnight. This welfare system is what liberal Democrats hang on to with their lives, and what Libertarians know is something that can't go on forever. Not because social welfare is intrinsically unjust, it is just unrealistic given the funding is a delusion. A return to the gold standard will put sanity back into public financing, as well as private wealth-building. The longer the delusion, the harder the fall and the longer the recovery from the fall.

                            I don't know why Mercer is backing Ted Cruz though. He still appears to me an establishment politician that is only going to marginalize needed monetary policy change, and will continue to sweep dirt under a rug already too heavy with silt.

                            We will eventually stop dancing to the tune of printing currency to let the future fund the present. The wisdom of the crowds says being liberal and generous can only go so far, and as the pie shrinks, and as the sharks take an ever larger slice of it, whatever spoils left for the masses won't be enough to sustain and protect the peace. This understanding is manifested in the rejection of "the sure thing" in Hillary for the Democrats and in Jeb for the Republicans. Both Trump and Sanders are better choices, as they are both more realistic, if only slightly less delusional, than the bumper crop of presidential wannabees.
                            Yerrag I differ from you on nearly all counts; How can it be possible to go on the gold standard when at $2000 an ounce and blowing of tops of mountains the total gold produced was not even the GDP of Cuba
                            Neither can I imagine Donald Trump getting a daily briefing and paying attention to it. US is still the largest military power as well as industrial power. As to Sanders he is just too old and idealistic. The whole world depends on who is chosen.
                            Regards
                            Eugene

                            Comment

                            • #15

                              Originally posted by Eugeneg View Post
                              Yerrag I differ from you on nearly all counts; How can it be possible to go on the gold standard when at $2000 an ounce and blowing of tops of mountains the total gold produced was not even the GDP of Cuba
                              Neither can I imagine Donald Trump getting a daily briefing and paying attention to it. US is still the largest military power as well as industrial power. As to Sanders he is just too old and idealistic. The whole world depends on who is chosen.
                              Regards
                              Eugene
                              Hi Eugene, in the absence of something better, gold is a more objective storehouse of value. It is easier to carry around than sacks of rice or salt. A large part of Rome's downfall is due to its debasement of its coins with cheaper metals such as copper. When paper currency came into vogue, it was backed by gold. Until the mid-70's, the US currency was still backed by gold. Nixon, seeing how continuing with the gold-backed regime could undermine the United States, by driving it into indebtedness from which it could never recover, stopped honoring unliaterally this system, thereby freeing itself of debts it has incurred. Since the United States was the world's judge, jury, and executioner, it got away with this heist. Since then, we have been living on this illusion of fiat currencies, which is arbitrary and whose relative weightings are based who can control the narrative with politics, diplomacy, military superiority, and the control of public opinion. The US dollar continues to be seen as a bulwark against world instability and tension, a perception it sells though does not deserve. The problem with this thinking is that it reinforces instability in the world, as instability feeds the strength of the US dollar. Hence, in the aftermath of the cold war after the disintegration of the USSR, there was this surreal talk about the "peace dividend." It was not to be, and we are now living proof of a world with new dangers, and new enemies. But equilibrium will seek its own place, and the whole world will adjust. Slowly would be the best way, as peoples will gradually adjust to new realities. But their is no slow way to go about it as forces are arrayed to reinforce the status quo, no matter how tenuous the hold is. When the spring snaps, it will already be so wound up the blowback will be unexpected for many, and it will be strong.

                              Here is what Japan has been trying to do since the start of the 90's, when Japan Inc. unraveled, and it still continues to do so, because of Japan's penchant for following Keynesian "black hole" economics, the very one upheld and defended by Paul Krugman, the "esteemed" Nobel Laureate:

                              The Bank Of Japan - Ringing In The Endgame? | Seeking Alpha

                              Cheers,

                              Mike

                              Comment

                              All content and images copyright of: Koi-bito.com
                              Working...
                              X