$5.00
$15.00
$20.00
$30.00
Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
28 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Trump betraying most basic promise/premise of his campaign rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Professor of Pain
United States
St. Joseph
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Trump won rust belt states by decrying the establishment, railing against shady financial dealing, and telling the common working folk that life was going to be so good for them under Trump because he would focus on their needs. he campaigned this way while at the same time planning to put banksters in charge of his economic team. Bank stocks are way up and financial tycoons are salivating at the prospects of massive tax cuts coming their way.

Bankers celebrate dawn of Trump era
Quote:
A populist candidate who railed against shady financial interests on the campaign trail is now putting together an administration that looks like an investment banker’s dream.

Former Goldman Sachs banker Steven Mnuchin has been seen at Trump Tower amid rumors that he’s the leading candidate for Treasury secretary. Billionaire investor Wilbur Ross appears headed to the Commerce Department. Steve Bannon, another Goldman alum, will work steps from the Oval Office. JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon remains a possibility as Treasury secretary and will serve as an outside adviser if he doesn't get the job.

It’s a restoration of Wall Street power — and a potential flip in the way the industry is regulated — perhaps unparalleled in American history.

“You would have to go back to the 1920s to see so much Wall Street influence coming to Washington,” said Charles Geisst, a Wall Street historian at Manhattan College. “It’s the most dramatic turnaround one could imagine. That’s the truly astonishing part.”

Evidence of Wall Street’s improved prospects is everywhere.

The Dodd-Frank financial reform law that bedeviled the industry for years and cost banks untold billions could soon get burned to the ground. Bank stocks are soaring. Trump is going around Manhattan promising to lower rich people’s taxes. And industry critics led by Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren — long in ascendance — are seeing their populist power deflate.

The anti-banker culture of Washington has been turned on its head in an instant. And the industry can barely believe its good fortune. “Those of us who have been around D.C. for a long time, are we relieved that we are not going to be subpoenaed every week? Of course we are,” said Richard Hunt, head of the Consumer Bankers Association.

Bank stocks are up by around 10 percent since Trump’s win, according to the KBW Bank Index, as investors contemplate an agenda tailormade for the industry including deregulation and potentially higher interest rates sparked by significant deficit spending. Bankers themselves also stand to make a killing. Massive tax cuts, including an elimination of the estate tax and big reductions for top earners seem like slam dunks in Trump’s Washington.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
casey r lowe
United States
butte
Montana
flag msg tools
mb
when they drained the swamp there was a fat and happy trump rolling around in the muck
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kissa
United States
flag msg tools
La vie est un jeu
badge
Panem et Circenses
mbmbmbmbmb
Did anyone really expect anything different?
13 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Beaton
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
I have a cunning plan
mbmbmbmbmb
I think everyone who wasn't blinded by desperation knew that it was all a con. Seriously, a New York property billionaire was going to save middle America from the ravages of unfettered global capitalism?
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Seguin
United States
Cleveland
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Whereas I can see the point made in the article, I am curious as to what type of people (if not Wall Street bankers) would best be the type of fit to run the Treasury Department or be a primary economic adviser?

Economy theorists from local universities? Hm, probably not, they don't seem to be towards Trump's liking. Plus, they are mostly theorists, and don't see things the same way business owners do. Academia is full of people like that.

Keep Koskinen in charge of the IRS? Nah, he's got his own problems following the non-profit dust-up and destruction of documents issues.

His own children, who, having vast experience running their own businesses or having high ranking positions within the Trump Organization? Nope, people have already had brain-popping aneurysms about the false claims that Trump was trying to get high-level security clearance for his two boys.

Either or both of the Koch brothers? Nope, not those "evil" men despite their proven ability to make money and run a business.

Anyone else? Perhaps Timothy Geitner can return, since he finally paid those taxes he (intentionally) skipped out on paying the first time around.

Seriously, if not bankers, who? Bill Gates? Warren Buffet? George Soros? (HAH!) Other business "leaders" who actively campaigned against him, or spent crap tons of money supporting Hillary?

Any other suggestions? Or will the creation of the cabinet and advisers be questioned as "inadequate" every time a new name is thrown out there?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Frazier
United States
West Sacramento
California
flag msg tools
A man learns little by little in battle. Take this battle experience and become a man who can’t be beaten
badge
This flag says we will fight until only our bones are left.
mbmbmbmbmb
aiabx wrote:
I think everyone who wasn't blinded by desperation knew that it was all a con. Seriously, a New York property billionaire was going to save middle America from the ravages of unfettered global capitalism?


Specifically one whose own business empire is extremely heavily dependent on its own international ties and its own agreements with large financial institutions for solvency.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Professor of Pain
United States
St. Joseph
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
chrisnd wrote:
Whereas I can see the point made in the article, I am curious as to what type of people (if not Wall Street bankers) would best be the type of fit to run the Treasury Department or be a primary economic adviser?

Economy theorists from local universities? Hm, probably not, they don't seem to be towards Trump's liking. Plus, they are mostly theorists, and don't see things the same way business owners do. Academia is full of people like that.

Keep Koskinen in charge of the IRS? Nah, he's got his own problems following the non-profit dust-up and destruction of documents issues.

His own children, who, having vast experience running their own businesses or having high ranking positions within the Trump Organization? Nope, people have already had brain-popping aneurysms about the false claims that Trump was trying to get high-level security clearance for his two boys.

Either or both of the Koch brothers? Nope, not those "evil" men despite their proven ability to make money and run a business.

Anyone else? Perhaps Timothy Geitner can return, since he finally paid those taxes he (intentionally) skipped out on paying the first time around.

Seriously, if not bankers, who? Bill Gates? Warren Buffet? George Soros? (HAH!) Other business "leaders" who actively campaigned against him, or spent crap tons of money supporting Hillary?

Any other suggestions? Or will the creation of the cabinet and advisers be questioned as "inadequate" every time a new name is thrown out there?

Sure, why not let the foxes guard the chicken coop?

Also, are you really saying that this is not a betrayal of a basic premise/promise of Trump's campaign? This isn't a matter of being inadequate, this is a matter of flying in the face of a central campaign promise.
7 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Professor of Pain
United States
St. Joseph
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
KissaTaikuri wrote:
Did anyone really expect anything different?

Presumably the disaffected working class voters who supported Trump?
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
mb
aiabx wrote:
I think everyone who wasn't blinded by desperation knew that it was all a con. Seriously, a New York property billionaire was going to save middle America from the ravages of unfettered global capitalism?
bjlillo wrote:


That's not what has ravaged the middle class there, sparky.
'clicking' HEELS unto confer "Kansas"-'role model': "Party of Responsible FOR"! whistle
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.D. Hall
msg tools
bjlillo wrote:
aiabx wrote:
I think everyone who wasn't blinded by desperation knew that it was all a con. Seriously, a New York property billionaire was going to save middle America from the ravages of unfettered global capitalism?


That's not what has ravaged the middle class there, sparky.

Yes it was and is. Not saying it was the only factor -- the shift from a production economy to an investment economy in the 1980s, the failure of American manufacturers to modernize and invest in facilities which led to the shutdown of mills and manufactories in the 1970s, and the tech explosion of the 1990s that replaced many low-skill jobs with machines. But globalism is as good for the middle class as it is bad.

What makes the appointments of Goldman-Sachs alumni et. al. look suspicious is the horrendous recession of 2007-2008, caused in large part by paper-shufflers on Wall Street.
15 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
chrisnd wrote:
Whereas I can see the point made in the article, I am curious as to what type of people (if not Wall Street bankers) would best be the type of fit to run the Treasury Department or be a primary economic adviser?

Economy theorists from local universities? Hm, probably not, they don't seem to be towards Trump's liking. Plus, they are mostly theorists, and don't see things the same way business owners do. Academia is full of people like that.

Keep Koskinen in charge of the IRS? Nah, he's got his own problems following the non-profit dust-up and destruction of documents issues.

His own children, who, having vast experience running their own businesses or having high ranking positions within the Trump Organization? Nope, people have already had brain-popping aneurysms about the false claims that Trump was trying to get high-level security clearance for his two boys.

Either or both of the Koch brothers? Nope, not those "evil" men despite their proven ability to make money and run a business.

Anyone else? Perhaps Timothy Geitner can return, since he finally paid those taxes he (intentionally) skipped out on paying the first time around.

Seriously, if not bankers, who? Bill Gates? Warren Buffet? George Soros? (HAH!) Other business "leaders" who actively campaigned against him, or spent crap tons of money supporting Hillary?

Any other suggestions? Or will the creation of the cabinet and advisers be questioned as "inadequate" every time a new name is thrown out there?


Warren Buffett. Someone who knows quite well how markets and investing work but has been on record for decades about how the system needs to be reformed in order to help middle-class America.
5 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Professor of Pain
United States
St. Joseph
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
chrisnd wrote:
Economy theorists from local universities? Hm, probably not, they don't seem to be towards Trump's liking. Plus, they are mostly theorists, and don't see things the same way business owners do. Academia is full of people like that.

If Trump really wants a shake-up, isn't that a strong point?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Seguin
United States
Cleveland
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
GameCrossing wrote:
chrisnd wrote:
Whereas I can see the point made in the article, I am curious as to what type of people (if not Wall Street bankers) would best be the type of fit to run the Treasury Department or be a primary economic adviser?

Economy theorists from local universities? Hm, probably not, they don't seem to be towards Trump's liking. Plus, they are mostly theorists, and don't see things the same way business owners do. Academia is full of people like that.

Keep Koskinen in charge of the IRS? Nah, he's got his own problems following the non-profit dust-up and destruction of documents issues.

His own children, who, having vast experience running their own businesses or having high ranking positions within the Trump Organization? Nope, people have already had brain-popping aneurysms about the false claims that Trump was trying to get high-level security clearance for his two boys.

Either or both of the Koch brothers? Nope, not those "evil" men despite their proven ability to make money and run a business.

Anyone else? Perhaps Timothy Geitner can return, since he finally paid those taxes he (intentionally) skipped out on paying the first time around.

Seriously, if not bankers, who? Bill Gates? Warren Buffet? George Soros? (HAH!) Other business "leaders" who actively campaigned against him, or spent crap tons of money supporting Hillary?

Any other suggestions? Or will the creation of the cabinet and advisers be questioned as "inadequate" every time a new name is thrown out there?


Warren Buffett. Someone who knows quite well how markets and investing work but has been on record for decades about how the system needs to be reformed in order to help middle-class America.


There you are! An direct answer to my question.

Buffet would certainly be an interesting choice, as he certainly knows about running businesses and how to make a buck. However, by the flip token, he actively worked to get Hillary elected, not Donald. It isn't like Cruz or Kasich who just said "we won't support Trump", it was "Hillary should be president", and he used his vast resources to that end.

Why then, would a president-elect chose a person who actively worked against him?

Beside, I am not a big fan of Buffet. He grandstands about complaining that his secretary pays more taxes, rate wise, than he does, but then fails to participate in the FICA system by paying his share of social security taxes (which is why his tax rate is lower than the secretary). He also pays a very low rate because he invests in quite a bit of tax-free municipal bonds. At the same time, though, he is collecting social security benefits. He also wants to continue with the estate tax, which is for purely selfish reasons because the estate tax benefits his personal wealth due to his ownership of insurance and re-insurance companies.

Regardless, that is probably ONE person that Trump could reasonably reach out to and say "hey, I know you actively campaigned against me, but your insight into economics and business may do some good for my Administration". We shall see.

Anyone else? Or will the next two months be nothing more than "Trump broke campaign promises"? Perhaps because Obama did so well in breaking his promises, it will be okay that Trump does, too? (no, by the way, it will not be okay regardless that any other politician has done it).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Seguin
United States
Cleveland
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Elfbane wrote:
chrisnd wrote:
Economy theorists from local universities? Hm, probably not, they don't seem to be towards Trump's liking. Plus, they are mostly theorists, and don't see things the same way business owners do. Academia is full of people like that.

If Trump really wants a shake-up, isn't that a strong point?


Whereas I can see your point, I think the bubble that theoretical economists create around and among themselves would not really create the type of shake up that Trump was talking about.

Look at Janet Yellen - a classic "economist-theorists". No one has been able to get a straight answer from her since she became Fed Chairman, and there's a reason for that - she cannot conceivably create a "straight answer". Perhaps that is because of the effects on the markets. Or perhaps that is because she doesn't know how. Either way, I don't think that is the right person for a "shake-up".

But your point is well taken. Let's see how this whole thing shakes out and who Trump's final cabinet nominees turn out to be. Perhaps there will be enough "shake-ups" to not only satisfy the voting base that sent him to Washington, but also satisfy the naysayers watching his every move and questioning his choices.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oh my God They Banned Kenny
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Elfbane wrote:
Trump betraying most basic promise/premise of his campaign


He hasn't betrayed anything yet. He didn't promise not to put top business people in charge. In fact he repeatedly mentioned names of these same people as being excellent people would be able to do a better job for the American people than the Obama administration was doing.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
fightcitymayor
United States
Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Proprietor and Chairman Emeritus of The Naughty Palace
mbmbmb
Elfbane wrote:
Former Goldman Sachs banker Steven Mnuchin has been seen at Trump Tower amid rumors that he’s the leading candidate for Treasury secretary.
Ah, Steve Mnuchin...

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-worst-of-wall-street-m...

The Nation wrote:
Throughout presidential campaign, Donald Trump has criticized Wall Street bankers for their excessive political influence, attacked hedge fund managers for getting away with “murder” under the current tax code, and claimed that he would self-fund his campaign to avoid being beholden to special interests. “The hedge fund guys didn’t build this country,” Trump said on “Face the Nation” recently. “These are guys that shift paper around and they get lucky.”

But now Trump has tapped Steve Mnuchin, a 53-year-old Wall Street hedge fund and banking mogul, to be his campaign’s national finance chair.

Trump’s earlier rhetoric aside, it’s actually a good match. Mnuchin is CEO of Dune Capital Management, a hedge fund has had business dealings with Trump. Both Trump and Mnuchin earned their first fortunes the old fashion way: they inherited it. Trump took over his father Fred’s real estate empire and expanded it through questionable business practices. Mnuchin, also the scion of a wealthy and well-connected family, graduated from Yale in 1985 and soon wound up working at Goldman Sachs, where his father Robert had been a general partner.

Both Trump and Mnuchin have run businesses accused of widespread racial discrimination, and they both represent the excessive wealth and greed of the billionaire developer and banker class.

Dear blue-collar Trump voters: Enjoy 4 years of being ignored.
#draintheswamp indeed.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
fightcitymayor
United States
Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Proprietor and Chairman Emeritus of The Naughty Palace
mbmbmb
deadkenny wrote:
Elfbane wrote:
Trump betraying most basic promise/premise of his campaign
He hasn't betrayed anything yet. He didn't promise not to put top business people in charge. In fact he repeatedly mentioned names of these same people as being excellent people would be able to do a better job for the American people than the Obama administration was doing.
LOL! That's a good one! "Trump railed against hedge fund managers, but he never said he wouldn't appoint them to key positions!"
You Trump apologists (and sock-puppets) are hilarious.

Enjoy tying yourselves in knots for 4 years attempting to deflect from this con-man's greed-based agenda.
12 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
mb
Yeah, he'll 'partake' "vows too impoverish" YOU, since; ""dupes "B" duped!" whistle
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul W
United States
Eugene
Oregon
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
I thought the most basic promise of his campaign was to build a wall.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
mb
"Make America Great-"Cash Cow" Again!"
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
non sequitur
United States
Elk Point
South Dakota (SD)
flag msg tools
Mandelbrot/Simurgh hybrid etc etc
badge
I made both of these fractals, hurray!
mbmbmbmbmb
chrisnd wrote:
GameCrossing wrote:
chrisnd wrote:
Whereas I can see the point made in the article, I am curious as to what type of people (if not Wall Street bankers) would best be the type of fit to run the Treasury Department or be a primary economic adviser?

Economy theorists from local universities? Hm, probably not, they don't seem to be towards Trump's liking. Plus, they are mostly theorists, and don't see things the same way business owners do. Academia is full of people like that.

Keep Koskinen in charge of the IRS? Nah, he's got his own problems following the non-profit dust-up and destruction of documents issues.

His own children, who, having vast experience running their own businesses or having high ranking positions within the Trump Organization? Nope, people have already had brain-popping aneurysms about the false claims that Trump was trying to get high-level security clearance for his two boys.

Either or both of the Koch brothers? Nope, not those "evil" men despite their proven ability to make money and run a business.

Anyone else? Perhaps Timothy Geitner can return, since he finally paid those taxes he (intentionally) skipped out on paying the first time around.

Seriously, if not bankers, who? Bill Gates? Warren Buffet? George Soros? (HAH!) Other business "leaders" who actively campaigned against him, or spent crap tons of money supporting Hillary?

Any other suggestions? Or will the creation of the cabinet and advisers be questioned as "inadequate" every time a new name is thrown out there?


Warren Buffett. Someone who knows quite well how markets and investing work but has been on record for decades about how the system needs to be reformed in order to help middle-class America.


There you are! An direct answer to my question.

Buffet would certainly be an interesting choice, as he certainly knows about running businesses and how to make a buck. However, by the flip token, he actively worked to get Hillary elected, not Donald. It isn't like Cruz or Kasich who just said "we won't support Trump", it was "Hillary should be president", and he used his vast resources to that end.

Why then, would a president-elect chose a person who actively worked against him?


Because he isn't petty and would rather have the best person for the job?

Why indeed.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
chrisnd wrote:
GameCrossing wrote:
chrisnd wrote:
Whereas I can see the point made in the article, I am curious as to what type of people (if not Wall Street bankers) would best be the type of fit to run the Treasury Department or be a primary economic adviser?

Economy theorists from local universities? Hm, probably not, they don't seem to be towards Trump's liking. Plus, they are mostly theorists, and don't see things the same way business owners do. Academia is full of people like that.

Keep Koskinen in charge of the IRS? Nah, he's got his own problems following the non-profit dust-up and destruction of documents issues.

His own children, who, having vast experience running their own businesses or having high ranking positions within the Trump Organization? Nope, people have already had brain-popping aneurysms about the false claims that Trump was trying to get high-level security clearance for his two boys.

Either or both of the Koch brothers? Nope, not those "evil" men despite their proven ability to make money and run a business.

Anyone else? Perhaps Timothy Geitner can return, since he finally paid those taxes he (intentionally) skipped out on paying the first time around.

Seriously, if not bankers, who? Bill Gates? Warren Buffet? George Soros? (HAH!) Other business "leaders" who actively campaigned against him, or spent crap tons of money supporting Hillary?

Any other suggestions? Or will the creation of the cabinet and advisers be questioned as "inadequate" every time a new name is thrown out there?


Warren Buffett. Someone who knows quite well how markets and investing work but has been on record for decades about how the system needs to be reformed in order to help middle-class America.


There you are! An direct answer to my question.

Buffet would certainly be an interesting choice, as he certainly knows about running businesses and how to make a buck. However, by the flip token, he actively worked to get Hillary elected, not Donald. It isn't like Cruz or Kasich who just said "we won't support Trump", it was "Hillary should be president", and he used his vast resources to that end.

Why then, would a president-elect chose a person who actively worked against him?

Beside, I am not a big fan of Buffet. He grandstands about complaining that his secretary pays more taxes, rate wise, than he does, but then fails to participate in the FICA system by paying his share of social security taxes (which is why his tax rate is lower than the secretary). He also pays a very low rate because he invests in quite a bit of tax-free municipal bonds. At the same time, though, he is collecting social security benefits. He also wants to continue with the estate tax, which is for purely selfish reasons because the estate tax benefits his personal wealth due to his ownership of insurance and re-insurance companies.

Regardless, that is probably ONE person that Trump could reasonably reach out to and say "hey, I know you actively campaigned against me, but your insight into economics and business may do some good for my Administration". We shall see.

Anyone else? Or will the next two months be nothing more than "Trump broke campaign promises"? Perhaps because Obama did so well in breaking his promises, it will be okay that Trump does, too? (no, by the way, it will not be okay regardless that any other politician has done it).


Your statement about buffett's taxes is incorrect.

Buffett pays a lower federal income tax rate than the other 19 people in his office. In the year being discussed he paid a tax rate of 17.4%. He also paid FICA. His FICA was also a low portion of his total income. The largest reason for this is that his income is mostly non-salary.

Anyone who's income isn't from salary pays a low fica rate.
Anyone who's income exceeds the cap pays a lower and lower fica rate.

The reason his federal income tax rate was low was most of his income is taxed at 15% long term capital gains and some of it receives an even lower net rate after deductions.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Terwox wrote:
chrisnd wrote:
GameCrossing wrote:
chrisnd wrote:
Whereas I can see the point made in the article, I am curious as to what type of people (if not Wall Street bankers) would best be the type of fit to run the Treasury Department or be a primary economic adviser?

Economy theorists from local universities? Hm, probably not, they don't seem to be towards Trump's liking. Plus, they are mostly theorists, and don't see things the same way business owners do. Academia is full of people like that.

Keep Koskinen in charge of the IRS? Nah, he's got his own problems following the non-profit dust-up and destruction of documents issues.

His own children, who, having vast experience running their own businesses or having high ranking positions within the Trump Organization? Nope, people have already had brain-popping aneurysms about the false claims that Trump was trying to get high-level security clearance for his two boys.

Either or both of the Koch brothers? Nope, not those "evil" men despite their proven ability to make money and run a business.

Anyone else? Perhaps Timothy Geitner can return, since he finally paid those taxes he (intentionally) skipped out on paying the first time around.

Seriously, if not bankers, who? Bill Gates? Warren Buffet? George Soros? (HAH!) Other business "leaders" who actively campaigned against him, or spent crap tons of money supporting Hillary?

Any other suggestions? Or will the creation of the cabinet and advisers be questioned as "inadequate" every time a new name is thrown out there?


Warren Buffett. Someone who knows quite well how markets and investing work but has been on record for decades about how the system needs to be reformed in order to help middle-class America.


There you are! An direct answer to my question.

Buffet would certainly be an interesting choice, as he certainly knows about running businesses and how to make a buck. However, by the flip token, he actively worked to get Hillary elected, not Donald. It isn't like Cruz or Kasich who just said "we won't support Trump", it was "Hillary should be president", and he used his vast resources to that end.

Why then, would a president-elect chose a person who actively worked against him?


Because he isn't petty and would rather have the best person for the job?

Why indeed.


Isn't petty... whistle
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
KissaTaikuri wrote:
Did anyone really expect anything different?


Dumb angry white people in the rust belt.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oh my God They Banned Kenny
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
she2 wrote:
Dumb angry white people in the rust belt.


Wow. You really are becoming more and more pathetic. You really should step back and take a break.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.