I can really start to see this guy as president now

[BT]

It is very possible to do something for one's own benefit and the outcome not turn out as planned.

An example would be in buying stocks.

[sirs]

and........................?

[BT]

and........................?

I think my post was very understandable.

Do you disagree with what i said?

[R.R.]

At no point did I say Trump would make it through half the primaries.

You most certainly did say that in your last post.  Are you backing off that now?

I expect Huckabee will come out ahead in Iowa, since only the ultra righties bother to show up there.

It doesn't even look like the Huck is going to run. He seems to be enjoying his tv show.

I don't see him winning in NH, that will likely go to Romney.

Probably.

Amazon lists three books available and in print by Trump.

Stupid comment. Are you suggesting that Trump is promoting his book Art of the Deal which came out in 1987? I bought that for a quarter at a thrift shop about 10 years ago. You typically promote new books that come out. He doesn't have any new books. Trump was just on O'Reilly yesterday and did not hold up or mention any books. You are a jackass.

Maybe Trump thinks he can get the nomination. But I do not.

Who cares what you think?

I expect he will sell at least a few more books because of his semi-announcement.

Dumb. How does one semi-announce, and yet make it through half the primaries?

[sirs]

and........................?

I think my post was very understandable.

Do you disagree with what i said?

Trying to figure out the pertinence.  Dodgers have blue in their uniforms.  Do you disagree with that?

[Plane]

I used to tell Plane about his spelling, but I have given up.

Plane posts interesting stuff about science and aviation, and he does not call me nasty names. I have accepted his creative spelling as a part of his personality.

I figured that you might want to know that the idiomatic expression was "toe the line", rather than "tote the line". Like "ect.", such misuse of cliches, idioms and metaphors are the verbal equivalent of a piece of spinach caught between one's front teeth.

Oh Shucks!

I think XO has a certain flair and charm , and as a man of wide experience with language and foreign mores is a real asset to the forum.

Notwithstanding that I disagree with his political opinions 90% of the time , that is what debate is all about.

[Plane]

No way at all Donald Trump is going to be a good president.

Has he been a good landlord  or casino operator?

 I really do not think so, he is far too prome to overreach , over borrow, over spend and then force his creditors into a box such that they are hurt worse by demanding payment in full on time than they are by accepting what he can dribble ......


On second thought Donald trump might indeed have the experience and skill needed to run the US Government.

[BT]

and........................?

I think my post was very understandable.

Do you disagree with what i said?

Trying to figure out the pertinence.  Dodgers have blue in their uniforms.  Do you disagree with that?

No, they even have a shade of blue named after them. Why would i disagree with that?

[Xavier_Onassis]

By semi-announce, I meant that Trump has not officially announced that he is planning to be a candidate, but that he is investigating the possibilities. There have, of course, been no primaries, and he has made it through none of them. Trump is probably trolling for rich peckerwoods to support him. If he find enough of them, he will then announce a date on which he will announce whether he will be a candidate or not.

I do not expect him to be the GOP candidate. He might win a plurality in one primary or another: it is easiest to come in first in a field of ten or twelve. He probably has enough money of his own to run as a third-party candidate, but he would have no real chance of winning that way.

[R.R.]

You're all over the map. You say Trump is not running, just hawking a book. Then you say he is just semi-announcing, and now he is going to make it through half the primaries. I guess you are covered no matter what happens. I can't imagine anybody takes you seriously.

I don't know if it is going to be Trump, Pawlenty, Romney or the Huck, but with all the damage that Dumbo, i.e. Obama, has caused, he will not be elected to a second term. You just watch and see.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Did Trump state formally that he is running? No, he did not. He stated that he is in the "investigative" phase of thinking about running. In any event, I do not see him as likely to get the GOP nomination, because that is not the way the GOP works, and I do not see him becoming president. I do not see where the Republicans have anyone who can beat Obama, especially since the economy is recovering. If Qaddaffy leaves and Libya does not become an utter mess, he could regain his popularity.

The election will not depend on teabaggers or other reactionary types, but on the independents and undecideds. Thus far, the GOP has no one that appeals to them.

[sirs]

and........................?

I think my post was very understandable.

Do you disagree with what i said?

Trying to figure out the pertinence.  Dodgers have blue in their uniforms.  Do you disagree with that?

No, they even have a shade of blue named after them.

Cool....glad we got that cleared up

[BT]

At one point you said, very clearly, "The US and the EC are doing this for their own benefit".  Quite emphatically you claimed they were.  No hemming, no hawing, no maybe yes, maybe no

Nice to watch these backpedaling exercises you're performing in this thread with RR and with "As I said earlier..." which as noted above, you actually didn't, "... it may or may not turn out to benefit the US, the EC or both, because there are factors involved in Libyan politics beyond the control of either"

Post 23 in this thread states:

This could turn out well or it could turn out poorly either way, whether they decided to attack Qaddafi or not. I do not think that how this turns out is mostly up to President Obama or NATO.

I believe that post was made prior to your suggestion that XO would get whiplash with his 'lerching" hither and yon.

[R.R.]

You've made three different predictions about trump: 1, he's not running, just selling old books; 2, he only will semi-announce; and 3, he will run and make it through half the primaries. These are very pathetic predictions. You are covered no matter what happens.

I see no reason why somebody like Trump can't get the support of the Tea Party. He's saying a lot of things that I want to hear that nobody else is saying, or has the balls to say.

Any Republican will defeat Obama. You wait and see. He only has the support of 38% of independents. He is doomed. The economy is not recovering. We are worse off now than when Obama took office. The deficit has tripled under Obama and unemployment has skyrocketed. The next president will have an R next to his or her name. Watch and see.

[sirs]

At one point you said, very clearly, "The US and the EC are doing this for their own benefit".  Quite emphatically you claimed they were.  No hemming, no hawing, no maybe yes, maybe no

Nice to watch these backpedaling exercises you're performing in this thread with RR and with "As I said earlier..." which as noted above, you actually didn't, "... it may or may not turn out to benefit the US, the EC or both, because there are factors involved in Libyan politics beyond the control of either"

Post 23 in this thread states:

This could turn out well or it could turn out poorly either way, whether they decided to attack Qaddafi or not. I do not think that how this turns out is mostly up to President Obama or NATO.

I believe that post was made prior to your suggestion that XO would get whiplash with his 'lerching" hither and yon.

Twernt my suggestion.  Very clearly "The US and the EC are doing this for their own benefit", with the then subsequent backpedaling "... it may or may not turn out to benefit the US, the EC or both"