Jeb Bush: The man who killed Trump's casino dreams

cnn.com ^ | September 2, 2015 | Jeremy Diamond

[Berlin_Freeper]

Donald Trump openly boasts that he donates to politicians so he can exact favors from them after they reach office.

He did so for Jeb Bush in 1998, holding a high-dollar fundraiser for the gubernatorial candidate in Trump Tower and shelling out $50,000 to the Florida Republican Party. But when Bush took office in 1999, Trump didn't get the political help he needed to make his casino dreams a reality in the Sunshine State.

[BobL]

Sounds like Jeb as a LOT MORE CONSERVATIVE 15 years ago in standing up to the casino industry. Today he would call a casino that wipes out the wealth of thousands of people “an act of love”.

Sounds like he’s well past his due-date.

[okie01]

Contrary to the conventional wisdom pumped out by GOP pundits and the mainstream media, I actually do think Trump would be a strong candidate in the general election precisely because he would draw in moderates and working Dems.

I certainly would agree that such is conceivable. Fact is, I believe any non-establishment Republican is capable of winning in this particular cycle.

Which, of course, includes Cruz. Who, I would submit, is currently the 2nd choice for just about everybody who has Trump as a 1st choice. And a man whose appeal and campaign is far more fundamentally conservative than Trump's.

Plus, I believe Cruz' dismissal of the GOP Senate leadership indicates that he's up to breaking just as much Washington china as Mr. Trump might be.

[RFEngineer]

“what happens when the man is elected and starts doing things his ego persuades him to do that are utterly repugnant to conservative constitutional values? Do we call that corruption? Do we call that tyranny?”

What about this statement makes him any different than Obama, or GW Bush, for that matter?

Trump admitted paying politicians for help he needed. How many politicians admit that they provide “help” for money? They ALL do. They are as crass as to say “I’ll do this for you, or I’ll do something that will actually help you for a donation of $5k, or something really useful for $25k.

You should be concerned about the politicians we have NOW (not just Obama).

There is something refreshing about someone who admits using the system within the bounds of the law (such as it is) to get things done that they need done.

I’m not “all in” for Trump, but I sure as hell trust him to do the things he says more than ANY other person running right now.

I’m also a “single issue” voter - Illegal immigration is my single issue. If I don’t vote for Trump, where am I going to go?

If you are saying we risk “tyranny” and “corruption” if we elect Trump, I’ll say you are a fool who wouldn’t know “tyranny and corruption” if it bit you in the ass. I’d also wonder if you could find your ass with both hands - because you surely have been bitten there by existing tyranny and corruption, yet, you seem more concerned about Trump than the venomous snakes that are affixed to your posterior right at this very moment!

[nathanbedford]

I do mean by asking this question to personalize the discussion or to put you on the spot, I mean to illustrate a point, where do you stand on the Article V movement?

I do not accuse you of this but I sense that there are many conservatives who resist the constitutionally approved method of realigning our government to make it conform to its original vision because they fear they will lose control, in effect, they fear the devil they do not know more than the devil they know.

Yet when it comes to Trump, people are willing to overlook a biography that should empty the bowels of every conservative with fear, they are willing to overlook a manner that is repulsive to a huge portion of the electorate (read females), they are willing to buy Trump as a demigod but, as I have said, they might very well get a demagogue.

The power of Trump as president will be, as John F. Kennedy ruefully remarked, limited by the bureaucracy as well as the Congress and the courts. This will be doubly true for Trump who will not have the support of the establishment wing of the Republican Party, who will not have any cooperation from Democrats, who will be unremittingly opposed by the media, all contrary to the facts in Kennedy's era and all, not incidentally, contrary to the facts in the Obama era.

If our system has been so distorted by the Supreme Court and by Obama that it cannot be used for effective conservative governance, maybe Trump is not the answer, maybe no candidate is, maybe Article V is.

[BobL]

Well, like it or not, DEMOCRATS control most levers of power in the places where Trump likes to build things, and you either play by their rules or find your building permit applications in the shredder.

The part I like about Trump is that he is MAKING IT CLEAR TO THE COUNTRY that this goes on. I suspect most people have no clue just how bad it is. I also expect President Trump to unload the Justice Department on these people, so as to put an end to it.

[nathanbedford]

If you are saying we risk “tyranny” and “corruption” if we elect Trump, I’ll say you are a fool who wouldn’t know “tyranny and corruption” if it bit you in the ass. I’d also wonder if you could find your ass with both hands - because you surely have been bitten there by existing tyranny and corruption, yet, you seem more concerned about Trump than the venomous snakes that are affixed to your posterior right at this very moment!

Do you really expect me to respond in good faith to the merits of your arguments after that?

[DaveA37]

:.........he has needed favors and cooperation and he has demonstrated that he was willing to go to corrupt lengths to get it.”..........

And the news media is saying that Trump is not a politician? The opening statement quoted above tells me he is INDEED an experienced politician, its what they do.

[nathanbedford]

Clearly Cruz will have to step up his game and move up in the polls. Equally clear, he has plenty of time to do so.

[billyboy15]

I always believed the country should be run as a business with an eye toward a profit (budget surplus).

[RFEngineer]

“When moral relativists pretending to be conservative show en’masse they have no more discernment or conservatism than a Democratic Underground poster”

Any conservative who has voted for the Republican nominee for president during the past 25 years is most certainly a “moral relativist”. How else could you vote for Bod Dole, GW Bush, John McCain, or Mitt Romney? One can argue the GHW Bush could have fooled conservatives, but after that?

“Moral Relativism” has been the GOP establishment strategy the past 25 years.

If not for Trump, we’d be coronating the latest “moral relativist” from the GOP establishment - Jeb Bush.

If you cannot see this, you are morally blind.

[billyboy15]

Never did see a quote from Trump claiming he donated to pols so he could extract favors if they were elected.

[RFEngineer]

“Do you really expect me to respond in good faith to the merits of your arguments after that?”

You do not appear to be able to be honest with yourself, and face the ridiculous arguments you posit, nor deal with the contradictions present in such arguments.

So no, I do not expect you to respond. I expect you to continue deluding yourself that somehow a future possibility of “Trump Tyranny” is of more concern than the tyranny you are apparently unable to see in front of your face.

I’m sorry I’ve hurt your feelings, but you actually have spouted epic foolishness, and somebody has to let you know - maybe you can recover.

[Dr. Sivana]

Your post reminded me of what G.K. Chesterton stated about a rich man not being able to be bought: “He already has been.”

[RFEngineer]

“Never did see a quote from Trump claiming he donated to pols so he could extract favors if they were elected.”

Of course that’s why he did it. That’s an indictment of present pols more than Trump. There is no other reason to donate to politicians than that.

[peyton randolph]

the country should be run as a business with an eye toward a profit (budget surplus).

---

A budget surplus is a sign that taxes are too high. The government's "profit" is de facto theft from the private sector.

The solution is a refund to those who actually paid the taxes rather than reallocating to buy (bribe) those who did not pay them.

[RFEngineer]

“I always believed the country should be run as a business with an eye toward a profit (budget surplus).”

Oh this country HAS been run as a business for a few decades, and it has been VERY profitable and yielded many budge surpluses.

The politicians of both political stripes have done very well from the “business of politics” and will continue to do so.

I realize that’s probably not what you meant, but you also have to realize that the folks we elect do it not out of patriotism or love of Constitution. They do it for profit, and they make impressive profits.

[9YearLurker]

Cruz isn’t the answer if he’s not electable. And like the others, he’s not perfect either—from his ardent and misleading defense of TPA/TPP to the repeated boast that he is against amnesty—while quietly saying he’d legalize illegals.

[Bryanw92]

>>Clearly Cruz will have to step up his game and move up in the polls. Equally clear, he has plenty of time to do so.

yep. We might see the polls upset as people change their minds once they get inside the voting booth. To make that happen, he needs to create some buzz so that he becomes the “safe” choice for people who are in the booth.

[nathanbedford]

RFEngineer, you misunderstand me, is not my feelings which are at issue here but our (both yours and mine) values.

I do not know how we can refine our understanding of those values or identify the person who best reflects our values if we are distracted by ad hominem attacks on fellow conservatives.

I am willing to defend what I say on the merits I just don't have time to defend my "feelings" or my "ass"against unsupported characterizations. If you have an argument to make on the merits let's have at it or you can consider yourself as having won your latest pissing contest.

[Norm Lenhart]

I there a mouse in your pocket? Because ‘we’ would not be corinated bush any more than ‘we’ corinated Romney. Maybe ‘YOU’ did. “I” didn’t.

You post that moral relativism is what ‘we’ did for 25 years and bemoan the state of America. You might want to make a connection that is pretty obvious. Or is your own moral blindness preventing what even Stevie Wonder sees clearly?

I get that people don’t like admitting that they caused their own problems. I caused them right along with you until McCain. I learned my lesson. I suggest you learn yours.