posted on May, 25 2016 @ 06:38 PM
Let's talk about Honest Politics, and by that, let's talk about the flaws of the candidates. I'll begin with Donald Trump, and hopefully someone
else can follow up with the foibles of Clinton and Sanders, and then we can step back objectively, and discuss the impact of living with each set of
First of all, Donald Trump. He wants to sell you some over priced steaks. He likes charging large amounts of money for golf courses. He operates
casinos and his businesses often fold, declaring bankruptcy. His hair is a mess, and natural or not, it looks fake. He squints a lot, at almost every
person at every event. He uses the term "HUUGE" a lot. He shamelessly promotes himself, is a 20th century business style womanizer, and has more in
common with a mafia crime family than a game show host, but only marginally so.
He makes grown men, and women cry. He intimidates people to get his way and cries foul when cornered with the reality of his bullying or foolishness.
He lacks so much guile as to be a flawed person when discussing delicate issues that traditionally require more diplomacy to resolve without war,
riots, or vast lost of employment or net worth.
He flip flops on issues he isn't interested about, and claims to be interested in many issues he is not. While he is honestly obsessed with American
Jobs, Trade, and the principles of Populism (which most mistake for democracy), he is otherwise indifferent in matters of abortion, gun control, and
church v state - although he does feel very strongly about pre-established Holdays like Christmas, which some also find offensive. Trump is famous
for setting of pyramid schemes, and scams, and proudly claims some odd 500 different businesses, of which some fail, and some disenfranchise people.
Although it could be argued his fake university is directly a product of his will, and therefore he can be liable directly, it is more accurate to say
his fake university is just one of hundreds of projects that he signed on to, but had little actual involvement in, compared with more heavily
invested projects like the Apprentice. In fact, the probability that he could be seriously affiliated and thus convicted as a person, rather than a
brand in the university case, is paradoxical, though a legal argument - the people are suing him for his non involvement in the project, while the
press is trying to attack him for his involvement in the same project. Obviously, if he showed up and was as involved in the University as often as he
made appearances in the Apprentice, there would likely be far less to litigate. Sadly, Universities are actually relatively cheap to set up compared
with the assets of a billionaire. It only takes a few million dollars to set up an accredited specialized business school with instructors, which
makes the whole thing seem even more ridiculous, but not necessarily sinister.
Trump University, like his Trump Steaks, and his phrasing of why people Need the Wall, attest not to the malevolence of a candidate, but the lack of
care and competence in approaching issues. His self promotion scandal, and the recent plan to attack Clinton on Whitewater being leaked by an
incorrectly sent email are samples of a Bafoon, not a wolf in sheep's clothing or a diabolical monster.
Apologies if I missed something, but let's hear about the other candidates next.