Trump's acceptance speech

[coldjoint]

You mean Obama tried to shut down Syrian refugees, and greatly increased immigrant vetting, and tried to start a trade war with China?

Oh, wow - and you're the only one who knew it!

No. The childish and easily manipulated part. Ask President Jarrett.

 

[Top Cat]

Is the published text not the published text?

Was there or was there not a bobble, a stumble, a crowd noise, that seemed to skip that word?

In a noisy environment it certainly a possibility.

Like I said in my earlier post, I'll go with the written transcript (link provided was a draft), which clearly states 'beginning' in there.

He said what he said. Either way, it's total bull**** anyway.

 

[eohrnberger]

No. The childish and easily manipulated part. Ask President Jarrett.

Zing! Excellent. :thumbs:

 

[Glen Contrarian]

On EOs, yes very true. Syrian refugee influx, EO stop, yes. EO to bring back blue collar jobs, true he can't do that.

Trade war with China? Taking a tough negotiation stance with them isn't starting a trade war, just as laying down and playing dead isn't negotiating. What steps to ensure intellectual property have been accomplished so far? Any? What about their currency manipulation? He's been through enough deals to know how far he can push it, get concessions, and close the deal.

If you are reading him as little more than a "spoiled schoolyard bully" I think you are underestimating Trump as much as the pundits did that asserted he'd be out after the first few primary debates.

No, I'm not underestimating him. By all accounts he's very impulsive. Why do you think he never practiced before any of the debates? His temper is also too short by half - and that, along with his demonstrated tendency to publicly make wild assumptions, makes him easily manipulated. The other nations will eat him - and by extension, us - alive.

And when it comes to China, that's why Obama's pushing the TPP...because that particular free-trade deal is America's opportunity to set the narrative on international trade on the Pacific Rim...and if it doesn't pass, then China will step in. Also, we're not exactly "rolling over" when it comes to China. We're continually transiting our Navy through the waters the Chinese are claiming (and daring them to do something about it), our military in the area has been bumped up significantly (especially in one particular way that I'm not at liberty to say, but I saw it with my own eyes - I may be retired, but my oaths hold true), and China knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that we would go to war to defend S. Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Taiwan, and (probably) Vietnam.

No, China doesn't laugh at Obama. But they would laugh at Trump, for they know that all it would take is a few false-flag attacks of the right type in the right area to get us heavily involved in someplace far away from China's sphere of influence.

 

[eohrnberger]

No, I'm not underestimating him. By all accounts he's very impulsive. Why do you think he never practiced before any of the debates? His temper is also too short by half - and that, along with his demonstrated tendency to publicly make wild assumptions, makes him easily manipulated. The other nations will eat him - and by extension, us - alive.

Appearances can be deceiving. One doesn't successfully lead a large organization such as he has by being any of those things. As you say, the opposition woul dhave eaten him alive, yet there he stands.

And when it comes to China, that's why Obama's pushing the TPP...because that particular free-trade deal is America's opportunity to set the narrative on international trade on the Pacific Rim...and if it doesn't pass, then China will step in. Also, we're not exactly "rolling over" when it comes to China. We're continually transiting our Navy through the waters the Chinese are claiming (and daring them to do something about it), our military in the area has been bumped up significantly (especially in one particular way that I'm not at liberty to say, but I saw it with my own eyes - I may be retired, but my oaths hold true), and China knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that we would go to war to defend S. Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Taiwan, and (probably) Vietnam.

No, China doesn't laugh at Obama. But they would laugh at Trump, for they know that all it would take is a few false-flag attacks of the right type in the right area to get us heavily involved in someplace far away from China's sphere of influence.

Yeah, I've been noticing ever more reports of China / US naval confrontations in the region, as well as the continued increasing the size of the artificial islands China as a means for greater land claim in the area.

The one point that I think is true, the US cannot continue to enter into trade deals that end up being disadvantageous to the US. It guts our middle class, and we can't take any more of that. Reinforcing the middle class is the path to greater wealth distribution, isn't it? Stronger positions in the trade negotiations may be a way to balance that out a bit more.

 

[PirateMk1]

No, I'm not underestimating him. By all accounts he's very impulsive. Why do you think he never practiced before any of the debates? His temper is also too short by half - and that, along with his demonstrated tendency to publicly make wild assumptions, makes him easily manipulated. The other nations will eat him - and by extension, us - alive.

And when it comes to China, that's why Obama's pushing the TPP...because that particular free-trade deal is America's opportunity to set the narrative on international trade on the Pacific Rim...and if it doesn't pass, then China will step in. Also, we're not exactly "rolling over" when it comes to China. We're continually transiting our Navy through the waters the Chinese are claiming (and daring them to do something about it), our military in the area has been bumped up significantly (especially in one particular way that I'm not at liberty to say, but I saw it with my own eyes - I may be retired, but my oaths hold true), and China knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that we would go to war to defend S. Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Taiwan, and (probably) Vietnam.

No, China doesn't laugh at Obama. But they would laugh at Trump, for they know that all it would take is a few false-flag attacks of the right type in the right area to get us heavily involved in someplace far away from China's sphere of influence.

I sincerely doubt Trump would be rolled by the Chinese so easily. This guy plays with the sharks in Manhattan and Wall Street for a living, deceit and deception are par for the course there.

 

[Top Cat]

CNN is absolutely freaking out. They're incensed.

He must have just knocked it out of the park.

They suddenly know Hillary is in serious trouble.

Other than lying his ass off with a vapid speech it was spectacular.

 

[Top Cat]

I sincerely doubt Trump would be rolled by the Chinese so easily. This guy plays with the sharks in Manhattan and Wall Street for a living, deceit and deception are par for the course there.

The biggest single line of bull**** ever. Trump's negotiations have led to 4 bankruptcies. So let's be real.

 

[justabubba]

I was scared listening to that speech.

then it had its intended affect

 

[Top Cat]

The great uniter...

"I alone can fix it"

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Appearances can be deceiving. One doesn't successfully lead a large organization such as he has by being any of those things. As you say, the opposition woul dhave eaten him alive, yet there he stands.

The difference being that other nations aren't bound by the same laws and ethics regulations that Trump's business competition must follow. The other nations won't care - and they won't have to care. If the world's nations worked with the same sets of laws and regulations as America's businesses do, then you'd have a point.

But they don't. Business is one thing...but international diplomacy dealing with those who wouldn't mind watching your nation burn is something else entirely.

Yeah, I've been noticing ever more reports of China / US naval confrontations in the region, as well as the continued increasing the size of the artificial islands China as a means for greater land claim in the area.

The one point that I think is true, the US cannot continue to enter into trade deals that end up being disadvantageous to the US. It guts our middle class, and we can't take any more of that. Reinforcing the middle class is the path to greater wealth distribution, isn't it? Stronger positions in the trade negotiations may be a way to balance that out a bit more.

The thing about trade deals is that it's wrong to think that any trade deal would ever be completely advantageous to us - it's a matter of give and take...and sometimes we do wind up giving more than we initially take in order to win in the long term.

For instance, you know I don't like Reagan's economics, right? I really, really despise Reaganomics. But there's something I noticed along the way, how globalization so greatly benefited the third-world nations...and almost certainly paid dividends in the long term. It's an interesting article I wrote way back 2009 - I hope it helps.

 

[Fiddytree]

then it had its intended affect

I don't think the speech was intended to make the hairs of my neck stand at the thought of this man in power.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

I sincerely doubt Trump would be rolled by the Chinese so easily. This guy plays with the sharks in Manhattan and Wall Street for a living, deceit and deception are par for the course there.

Business is one thing...and diplomacy between nuclear-armed nation-states is something else entirely. Trump has zero experience in this area. A career in business - no matter how successful - does not a skilled diplomat make.

 

[eohrnberger]

Other than lying his ass off with a vapid speech it was spectacular.

The biggest single line of bull**** ever. Trump's negotiations have led to 4 bankruptcies. So let's be real.

The great uniter...

"I alone can fix it"

OK Now. Take it easy. Deep slow breaths. Lower your core pressure before your head explodes. No one wants to see that.

 

[Erod]

The biggest single line of bull**** ever. Trump's negotiations have led to 4 bankruptcies. So let's be real.

This is so weak. Successful business people generally have bankruptcies. Businesses fail for a myriad of reasons.

There's plenty to criticize him for, but that's not one odd them.

 

[Erod]

Business is one thing...and diplomacy between nuclear-armed nation-states is something else entirely. Trump has zero experience in this area. A career in business - no matter how successful - does not a skilled diplomat make.

Which is why someone like Newt Gingrich will be Secretary of State.

 

[FluffyNinja]

I'm just glad he's going to end crime forever. Finally, yay! The human race has been waiting thousands of years for someone to come along and do it. Apparently Trump is the man who will accomplish it..........How?.........because he says he will. Don't question it. Just follow. "These are not the droids you're looking for...." {waves hand in front of face}

 

[justabubba]

This is so weak. Successful business people generally have bankruptcies. Businesses fail for a myriad of reasons.

There's plenty to criticize him for, but that's not one odd them.

no
the presence of repeated bankruptcies with the same person at the helm is an indication of weak management skills and/or a willingness to manipulate the bankruptcy laws

 

[Moon]

no
the presence of repeated bankruptcies with the same person at the helm is an indication of weak management skills and/or a willingness to manipulate the bankruptcy laws

I think its a legitimate issue, but the details of each bankruptcy would really need to be looked at. Might be some interesting patterns and revelations in there.

 

[PirateMk1]

The biggest single line of bull**** ever. Trump's negotiations have led to 4 bankruptcies. So let's be real.

You have never been in business. That much is obvious. Most business fail. Read that last sentence again. Most business fail. His is 4 failures out of hundreds of successes, a track record more than a few would sell their own mothers for.

 

[eohrnberger]

The difference being that other nations aren't bound by the same laws and ethics regulations that Trump's business competition must follow. The other nations won't care - and they won't have to care. If the world's nations worked with the same sets of laws and regulations as America's businesses do, then you'd have a point.

But they don't. Business is one thing...but international diplomacy dealing with those who wouldn't mind watching your nation burn is something else entirely.

I'm not going to disagree with your point that there are a different set of rules to the road in US business vs. international. Does not Trump's experience include international? I think it does. Does it include nation to nation? No, it doesn't. But then how many POTUS are? It's legitimately arguable that Trump's experience in business will serve him well in this area.

The thing about trade deals is that it's wrong to think that any trade deal would ever be completely advantageous to us - it's a matter of give and take...and sometimes we do wind up giving more than we initially take in order to win in the long term.

So how come it's always seems so advantageous to the party(s) opposite the US at the trade negotiations?

I used to work at a tier 1 supplier. We hated dealing with the domestic OEMs. They always tried to, and did, screw us out of what we deserved. We had a much better time dealing with the Germans. One of them once said, 'It's not good business if it's not good for you or it's not good for me'. In the trade deals we need less of the former, and more of the latter. On this I agree.

For instance, you know I don't like Reagan's economics, right? I really, really despise Reaganomics. But there's something I noticed along the way, how globalization so greatly benefited the third-world nations...and almost certainly paid dividends in the long term. It's an interesting article I wrote way back 2009 - I hope it helps.

Interesting article. “If you’ve just got to f*** up, then at least f*** up in the right direction!”, perhaps that's exactly what Trump is doing.

 

[PirateMk1]

Business is one thing...and diplomacy between nuclear-armed nation-states is something else entirely. Trump has zero experience in this area. A career in business - no matter how successful - does not a skilled diplomat make.

No, you are correct a business career, a diplomat does not make. That said more than a few skills are transferable and applicable. Like I said he wont get rolled that easily. He plays in the big leagues in international business, he should be just fine in the big league politics and diplomacy.

 

[PirateMk1]

The difference being that other nations aren't bound by the same laws and ethics regulations that Trump's business competition must follow. The other nations won't care - and they won't have to care. If the world's nations worked with the same sets of laws and regulations as America's businesses do, then you'd have a point.

But they don't. Business is one thing...but international diplomacy dealing with those who wouldn't mind watching your nation burn is something else entirely.



The thing about trade deals is that it's wrong to think that any trade deal would ever be completely advantageous to us - it's a matter of give and take...and sometimes we do wind up giving more than we initially take in order to win in the long term.

For instance, you know I don't like Reagan's economics, right? I really, really despise Reaganomics. But there's something I noticed along the way, how globalization so greatly benefited the third-world nations...and almost certainly paid dividends in the long term. It's an interesting article I wrote way back 2009 - I hope it helps.

I don't think you are writing about Goldman Sachs and et al., They are amongst the least trust worthy companies to deal with. They are double dealing backstabbing bastards of the first order with no ethical restraints whatsoever. They do it with a smile. When dealing with them it is par for the course to expect to be screwed by them in some way you didn't see. Many companies that have had their IPO's set up with them found out the hard way they should have kept a very close eye on them. Many companies on Wall street are very much the same ruthless pitiless sharks.

 

[Top Cat]

This is so weak. Successful business people generally have bankruptcies.

Link?

 

[Hawkeye10]

First impression is that it was OKish but no where near great. A lot of people are talking about how this was Nixonian which is true, but Nixon did it so much better:

Transcript
Richard Nixon: Address Accepting the Presidential Nomination at the Republican National Convention in Miami Beach, Florida



Too bad Trump could not/would not do some humor, and warmth. Crime is going to get bad but it has not yet, I dont think that the exaggeration will go unnoticed. Did this really need to Batman dark? Did this speech need to be near Putin length?

Maybe I will like this speech better in the morning.