Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Fat hurts wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

Fat Hurts - I really doubt very many people voted for Trump because he is rich. Has there EVER been a presidential candidate whose supporters voted for he or she SOLELY because he or she was rich? Come on.

I never said solely. But Tiny's wealth was offered as his primary qualification for office. He spent the whole campaign lying about how rich he was and lying about how he made his money.

People said, "We need government to run like a business and Trump is a great businessman."

Of course, government should NOT be run like a business and Tiny is actually a terrible businessman. He stinks at it.

For these last few years, all I have been hearing from Fat boy, libs and Trump haters is how terrible a businessman Trump is. Let's take a look.

Did you know Trump owns approximately 500 businesses? Out of those businesses, only 6 went bankrupt. Simple division puts that at a business ownership SUCCESS rate of 98.8%. Any sane human would take those odds, but you suffer from TDS- which makes you a lunatic.

Who cares how many times he declared bankruptcy, the proof is in the pudding. He is a billionaire and that speaks for itself, that’s pretty successful if you ask anyone. It wouldn’t matter if he failed 299 times out of 300 as long as that one was successful.

I know you’ve been sold one many times before, but I have a really nice bridge to sell you.

Donald Trump's net worth, according to Forbes, is $3.5 billion. Sure he inherited a few hundred million but he has obviously been a great businessman. How much are you worth? No one is buying your bridge because you are not even a millionaire. Trump is a multi-billionaire!

Flagpole wrote:

True Sweester wrote:

Sounds like you are BETTING me that it was not you.

Low class.

INCORRECT! I fail to understand how you people do not understand the meaning of words. A BET is for something that is a future event, the outcome of which is not known (now, technically, someone could put in a fix so that the outcome IS known, but that is an exception that does not apply here). What you referred to there is a past event that IS known by me...I was not that person.

INCORRECT!

A "bet" does not have to have an "unknown" outcome nor does it have to be for something that is a future event.

For instance, we can have a disagreement over how many home runs Hank Aaron hit in a career. I may know (or think) that it is 755. You may think that it is 200. It is a "known" outcome that is a past event - he already hit 755 home runs. I can still bet you on how many home runs he hit.

I agree with the OP. Given the definitions you have previously given in this thread about what constitutes a bet, your statement above DOES fit the definition.

Conundrum wrote:

Actually the discussion wasn't just about wealthy and famous people, it was the suggestion that all men just shouldn't meet lone with females in a business setting. I still find that a weird thought.

What are you neanderthals discussing in these closed door meetings with women that can't be discussed in a public or semi-private situation?

Most of those are shell companies. They are not successful.

Tiny got terrible returns on his Dad's money. He has squandered his inheritance.

Tiny got terrible returns on his wealth. From Wikipedia:

In other words, he stinks at business. He can't even beat an index fund.

Since you asked, I won't tell you exactly what I'm worth, but I started with nothing and I'm well on track to retire several years early.

I've done a lot better than our kidnapping torturer-in-chief.

Flagpole wrote:

True Sweester wrote:

Sounds like you are BETTING me that it was not you.

Low class.

INCORRECT! I fail to understand how you people do not understand the meaning of words. A BET is for something that is a future event, the outcome of which is not known (now, technically, someone could put in a fix so that the outcome IS known, but that is an exception that does not apply here). What you referred to there is a past event that IS known by me...I was not that person.

You Fail! Goodbye.

A future event for which the outcome is unknown??? What?

Where did you find this.definition?

Sally Vix wrote:

Are you in the market wrote:

I know you’ve been sold one many times before, but I have a really nice bridge to sell you.

Donald Trump's net worth, according to Forbes, is $3.5 billion. Sure he inherited a few hundred million but he has obviously been a great businessman. How much are you worth? No one is buying your bridge because you are not even a millionaire. Trump is a multi-billionaire!

Odd that a billionaire is so utterly afraid of releasing tax returns like the rest of his colleagues in office. But sure you keep drinking that kool aid and don’t ask any questions.

Caveman Lawyer wrote:

Conundrum wrote:

Actually the discussion wasn't just about wealthy and famous people, it was the suggestion that all men just shouldn't meet lone with females in a business setting. I still find that a weird thought.

What are you neanderthals discussing in these closed door meetings with women that can't be discussed in a public or semi-private situation?

Try performance ratings or confidential matters, want other examples? Why are you Neanderthals so afraid of your wives and of your own male anxiety that you can’t handle speaking to someone of the opposite sex in private?

Mr Pot wrote:

Caveman Lawyer wrote:

What are you neanderthals discussing in these closed door meetings with women that can't be discussed in a public or semi-private situation?

Try performance ratings or confidential matters, want other examples? Why are you Neanderthals so afraid of your wives and of your own male anxiety that you can’t handle speaking to someone of the opposite sex in private?

Those can be done in a room with glass walls or a large window. Or you can have the meeting via video conference. Or you can have a member of HR present. Or you can have another manager present. There are lots of options.

I can't think of any situation where it's totally necessary to have a one-on-one in person private meeting.

Fat hurts wrote:

Mr Pot wrote:

Try performance ratings or confidential matters, want other examples? Why are you Neanderthals so afraid of your wives and of your own male anxiety that you can’t handle speaking to someone of the opposite sex in private?

Those can be done in a room with glass walls or a large window. Or you can have the meeting via video conference. Or you can have a member of HR present. Or you can have another manager present. There are lots of options.

I can't think of any situation where it's totally necessary to have a one-on-one in person private meeting.

How about when two people want to or simply feel more comfortable not being watched by others? Is that not ok?

He's a billionaire, hello? Look, I get it, you hate the guy, but don't let it blind you to the facts. Trump is loaded financially with plenty of fine golf courses and real estate - hardly "squandered." The Trump Organization is now run by Don Jr and Eric and they are easily keeping the Trump Jet fueled and ready to go.

Just stick to your "Orange man, bad" psychosis. Or better yet, do the Runningart pledge and risk a self ban from LR.

No guts, no glory.

KAG2020

Caveman Lawyer wrote:

Conundrum wrote:

Actually the discussion wasn't just about wealthy and famous people, it was the suggestion that all men just shouldn't meet lone with females in a business setting. I still find that a weird thought.

What are you neanderthals discussing in these closed door meetings with women that can't be discussed in a public or semi-private situation?

yawn

Watch closely as Pence makes zero visual contact with any of the detainees. He looks above, below, to the sides, but not at them.. this Christian doesn’t have a shred of decency.

https://twitter.com/petebuttigieg/status/1149868476682649600?s=21

Pence has his arms crossed which are classic psychological signs of extreme defensiveness and insecurity. The other person who uses the arms crossed all the time is Trump.

Yay VP wrote:

Watch closely as Pence makes zero visual contact with any of the detainees. He looks above, below, to the sides, but not at them.. this Christian doesn’t have a shred of decency.

https://twitter.com/petebuttigieg/status/1149868476682649600?s=21

Conundrum wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

The difference is that you were not famous, wealthy, and/or powerful.

Are you sure?

Nope. Tell me your real name, real wealth, or position of power/influence, and I will tell you if you qualify or not.

You make a good point, and I would be VERY close to conceding the point here, but the problem is that the future event is the discovery of the truth for both parties.

The situation I presented to Wejo is NOT a bet, because Wejo isn't the one who is disputing me. I did not make a bet with that person or with Wejo.

NOT a bet.

Mr Pot wrote:

Caveman Lawyer wrote:

What are you neanderthals discussing in these closed door meetings with women that can't be discussed in a public or semi-private situation?

Try performance ratings or confidential matters, want other examples? Why are you Neanderthals so afraid of your wives and of your own male anxiety that you can’t handle speaking to someone of the opposite sex in private?

What’s up with all these men insisting that they NEED to have private meetings with women.

Weird.