[[I suppose what bothers me about your “objective†remarks is their similarity to the European Way of thinking.]]
There’s nothing European about it - simple observation of past process of folks running for office suffices to come up with objective analysis- this isn’t negative- this is simply reality-
[[The French always look for all the reasons why it won’t work before they come to the conclusion it will work. By that time, it is too late.â€]]
that’s a much different issue than a pundit giving opinion- there’s nothing to ‘do’ just opinions about what could happen -thats’ the difference
[[As an example, your worry about him preparing answers for questions which will come later....when the boxing gloves come off.]]
Again, it’s not a worry, nor is it a fact- it’s simply something that could happen given his lack of political experience on a national level-
[[We do not need another politician at this point in our history, we need someone who will put America’s Economy on a sound footing.]]
Which is what Reagan and Bush did- By using proven methods of capitalism and tax breaks etc- Trump isn’t the only one running capable of a winning formula- (I’m not arguing against him being a good financial genius’s, just stating this country was doing pretty well I n the past under proven formula and showing that Trump isn’t only one capable of helping build up an economy)
[[I am a positive person by nature. Negativism annoys me!]]
There’s nothing negative about looking at both sides of the issue- and really, a good business person does exactly that- they don’t just dive in willy nilly with a ‘positive attitude’ thinking ‘it’ll all work out In the end because I’ve got positive attitude’-
[[The French always look for all the reasons why it won’t work before they come to the conclusion it will work. By that time, it is too late]]
An just for the record, smart companies pay experts huge bucks to do just that- look at all angles so they can prepare the best possible course of action- the most lucrative- many companies rely heavily on experts who’s job it is to look at all angles positive and negative-
But again- I’m not beign negative about anything- as I’ve explained- I’m not wishing for his failure, nor am I hoping anyone else wins- I’m simply stating a well known fact that later, towards the election period, people will begin demanding more specifics, and if he doesn’t provide them they will be rightfully suspicious and won’t simply take his word for it that he can get things done when he’s doesn’t say how- it will seem to them too much like nancy Pelosi saying ‘we just have to pass it to see what’s in it’ (Obviously people were very skeptical, and rightly so, of her statement because she refused to say what was in it- and please- I’m NOT comparing trump to her- I’m simply stating what pundits are saying could happen in trump doesn’t get specific, people will be ‘cautious’ even leery of him if he doesn’t explain things better- People are reserving judgment for now because he hasn’t given them much In the way of specifics- He generalizes too much right now “I’m gonna do this that and the other thing- believe me” without saying how- Now, in a previous post, I stated that could be his strategy for now, holding his cards close to vest- and that’s fine for now but I think we get closer and closer to election time, you will begin seeing people demanding more- and if they don’t get it, they will look elsewhere-
This country has seen many early leaders fade I nthe end because they didn’t have the answers- specifics that the voters demand
Havign said that- this is a different tiem in history- people are simply just really really fed up with Washington- perhaps like never before- fed up with having opur constitutional rights violated (president coming on tonight to do another gun grabbing speech)- and Trump’s business experience and lack of political insider-ness, and generalizations when speaking may just be enough to carry the day for him- and if so, more power to him- But it’s not beign negative to suggest that candidates sometimes fade because they don’t have specifics but rather simple observation of past candidates and their runs for office-
We know the media is going to be absolutely brutal to him when it comes down to debates between him and Hillary- a brutality like he’s likely not had to face yet- He’ll likely handle it fine- but again, the media is not going to let him get away with generalizations like ‘believe me, I will’ during that period
you seem to be determined to brand my remarks as negative when I’ve shown that that isn’t the case- but whatever-
The biggest words in your vocabulary seem to be “if, and but.”
Reality has many faces. What makes you think you know more about past political races than many of us on this thread?
You remind me of a lawyer arguing his case by throwing anything and everything in the pot hoping something will stick. I simply don’t believe you are anything but a Cruz supporter who is trying to cause doubts about Trump. There are indications of this, but I won’t reveal them to you as it might expose your velvet gloves technique. For the moment it’s amusing and a little bit irritating to watch you perform.
When you speak of political experience on a national level, Trump’s business experience on a national AND an international level is enough for me. He knows how the game is played already.