It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

President Trump - I Thought Being President Would Be Easier Than Running a Business Empire.

page: 8
22
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs


The guy never quits and always succeeds. If that isn't a good resume for a Pres.
what is? And I bet he has just as much experience as Obama going in.


Its good to have as a part of your resume, but its not enough. I'd say he has more business/international business experience than most anyone, and more life experience since he's pushing 70. But that life experience is strictly a wealthy man's experience since he was born rich...and he has zero experience in politics/governing.




posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 12:56 PM
link   
There is no training to be President of the United States of America



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: underpass61




Losers quit jobs they can't handle. The rest of us step up their game and see it through. And I don't see Trump quitting any time soon.


The guy never quits and always succeeds. If that isn't a good resume for a Pres.
what is? And I bet he has just as much experience as Obama going in.


Define "always succeeds."



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: randyvs

Obama was a US senator for only 3 years before he started running at the age of 45. Experienced? Not much I would say.


Exactly my fellow member.
edit on Rpm42817v04201700000015 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: EvanB


There is no training to be President of the United States of America


Disagree. Of course moving up the political ladder, from local to state to federal, better prepares one for the next step up. At the very least being Vice President would be considered training...too bad for most VPs the sitting Pres spoils any chance they might have for using any of that training as POTUS



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   
I do believe some of you are taking his statement out of context...
Like usual...
From my personal experience working with immature ignorant people just means I have to work extra hard. I don't expect most liberals to really understand that statement seeing as 90% of the time they are the problem...

Surely that can't be what he was referring to?
Surely he didn't think both sides would work together for the benefit of the nation rather than self interests?



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: fleabit




Define "always succeeds."


google it



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs
a reply to: allsee4eye

Serving as an elected State Senator (1997-2004) and then as an elected federal Senator (2005-2008) doesn't matter? You 2 don't think that more than 10 years of legislative experience would help a President understand how to get laws passed?
O_o



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Obama was a senator. That's in the legislative branch. And being a senator does not imply being a leader. Being a senator doesn't really prepare well for being president. The president is in the exec branch, not the legislative branch. Being president is more about being a leader. That's what a CEO basically is. A leader.



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: RedParrotHead




Its good to have as a part of your resume, but its not enough. I'd say he has more business/international business experience than most anyone, and more life experience since he's pushing 70. But that life experience is strictly a wealthy man's experience since he was born rich...and he has zero experience in politics/governing.


Born rich yes but the guy is hardly the "Little lorde fontleroy" that Bush
will always be.

(notice my lack of political affiliation)



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: randyvs
a reply to: allsee4eye

Serving as an elected State Senator (1997-2004) and then as an elected federal Senator (2005-2008) doesn't matter? You 2 don't think that more than 10 years of legislative experience would help a President understand how to get laws passed?
O_o


You mean more laws passed? I just don't think I like the sound of that
any way. I do believe he's trying to govern by the laws we already have tho.
As much as that displeases liberals.
edit on Rpm42817v19201700000026 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: randyvs

Obama was a US senator for only 3 years before he started running at the age of 45. Experienced? Not much I would say.


Exactly my fellow member.


But he's been involved in politics since he graduated from college...you can't just ignore the 20 years of his voluntary civil services and accomplishments just because they weren't elected positions



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Krazysh0t


. . . a blind squirrel could do a better job than Trump, but Hillary was actually qualified. She had experience in politics. At the very MINIMUM she would have been able to navigate the politics of the office and wouldn't have been utterly surprised by the depth required of the job.


YES! I think Hillary would have done an excellent job.

I keep getting called a Trump hater.

NO, I said he was unqualified.



Agreed Hillary would have done an excellent job.

And I most definitely a Trump hater. And agreed, he is unqualified... and a mentally snicketed narcissist... and a fraud... and a fake president who called on Russia for help in the election and seemingly surrounded himself with secret foreign agents... so I'm also going to just add... treasonous to the pile of reasons I'm a Trump hater.



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

LOL You clearly don't understand the federal govt and the system of "checks and balances". A President would do well to understand how the legislative process actually works behind the scenes because only the legislatures can pass budgets & other legislation. And every single federal spending bill has to start in the House of Representatives.

So if a President wants to know which members of Congress to pressure, flatter, "make totally amazing deals with", etc, it would help if the President actually knew who was in the congressional positions that matter. Piss off the members of the "Ways and Means" committee and your budget is DOA. Reject party leadership in favor of members who aren't on the appropriate committees & sub-committees and your agenda literally won't even get voted on.

Meh. I feel like I'm wasting my time here because these are literally the basics. I'll just agree to disagree.



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: RedParrotHead




But he's been involved in politics since he graduated from college...you can't just ignore the 20 years of his voluntary civil services and accomplishments just because they weren't elected positions


I can if there is nothing of value there. And by the looks of Chicago these days/
get a grip?



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I'm sure he understands how laws are passed. Even kids know how that's done. I'm sure he's sick of the infighting between the two parties in congress these days.



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

Did you seriously just ignore the failed replacement of the ACA/Obamacare? Repealing or replacing the ACA would require new laws which is why Congress (aka the legislative branch) was involved in the first place. The willful ignorance is inexcusable.



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Well clearly he doesn't because the fool keeps attacking the very members of Congress that he needs to get his agenda passed.



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t


He had a bunch of ideas that SOUNDED good in his head, but he never did any research to check out if they were practical or realistic. Then he assumed that the Presidency is the same as a kingship (likely thanks to years of Republican media pretending like Obama treated the Presidency like one) and the rest if history.



The guy's been around through several Presidencies and I'm sure actually met more than few, but his entire opinion on how the job works is based on 8 years of Republican slanted(?) media? You, my friend are the king of rash generalizations (generally speaking).



posted on Apr, 28 2017 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Krazysh0t


. . . a blind squirrel could do a better job than Trump, but Hillary was actually qualified. She had experience in politics. At the very MINIMUM she would have been able to navigate the politics of the office and wouldn't have been utterly surprised by the depth required of the job.


YES! I think Hillary would have done an excellent job.

I keep getting called a Trump hater.

NO, I said he was unqualified.



Agreed Hillary would have done an excellent job.

And I most definitely a Trump hater. And agreed, he is unqualified... and a mentally snicketed narcissist... and a fraud... and a fake president who called on Russia for help in the election and seemingly surrounded himself with secret foreign agents... so I'm also going to just add... treasonous to the pile of reasons I'm a Trump hater.






I can't say I'm fond of him. But, my main point is we don't need an amateur as leader of America. He is unqualified.

He hasn't a clue what he is doing. Yet, his supporters (blindly) still cheer him on.

So many said they voted for him because he wasn't a professional politician.

Duh! If you had a business - - would you hire an unprofessional? Don't think so.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join