Gyroscopic Investing

MachineGhost wrote:

MediumTex wrote: 8. Trump - Typical political novice with the attitude of: "How hard could this be?"  Congress chews up and spits out people like this (see current White House occupant for fine example), as do other world leaders like Putin, who are NOT political novices.  Clownish sideshow.  Wouldn't be surprised if Hillary is behind this simulation of a Presidential campaign because she wants an easy opponent in the general election.

Well said, except for Trump.  He's not a novice.  He's been campaigning in different political parties for President since the late 90's.  What did change this time, I wonder?

When it comes to governing, I would say that Trump is a novice.

Too bad voters don't think like you do or we'd elect Kasich.  He was the first non-Trump candidate in the debate that I immediately liked.

Any other cycle, Kasich would be the front runner.  He's easily the strongest candidate on the Republican side.

What is your analysis of Santorum, Pataki, Graham and Webb?

Imagine a barbershop quartet in a depressing bar where politicians, sports writers and alcoholic fishermen and house painters hang out--those four would be perfect for it.

WiseOne wrote: In other words, MT, are you saying that we seem doomed to repeat recent mistakes?

That would argue for Hilary Clinton then.  Ugh.

The problem is that Hillary is also a loser.

She's an incredibly weak candidate.  How weak do you have to be to be the front runner and lose to some no-name liberal first term senator from Illinois?  That's what happened in 2008.

The 2016 race is shaping up to look like a boxing match where both fighters are trying to take a dive, but they don't know the other one is trying to do the same thing. 

The real loser, of course, is the American people.

MediumTex wrote: 1. Kasich - Moderate, realistic, experienced, genuine, seasoned.  Executive level experience.  Would work effectively with Congress.  Very strong candidate.

I thought Trump's takedown of Kasich for his association with Lehman brothers in the last debate was classic. That was something I didn't know about. Jeb Bush too...

"Bush and Kasich received big Lehman paychecks as the bank’s mortgage-backed securities decimated the investments intended to support their states’ retired workers, and today, both are getting financial support for their presidential campaigns from donors they worked with during their time at Lehman."


http://www.ibtimes.com/election-2016-je ... or-2061128

Fred wrote:

MediumTex wrote: 1. Kasich - Moderate, realistic, experienced, genuine, seasoned.  Executive level experience.  Would work effectively with Congress.  Very strong candidate.

I thought Trump's takedown of Kasich for his association with Lehman brothers in the last debate was classic. That was something I didn't know about. Jeb Bush too...

"Bush and Kasich received big Lehman paychecks as the bank’s mortgage-backed securities decimated the investments intended to support their states’ retired workers, and today, both are getting financial support for their presidential campaigns from donors they worked with during their time at Lehman."


http://www.ibtimes.com/election-2016-je ... or-2061128

Kasich was not in any kind of leadership role at Lehman Brothers.  He was just a guy in Ohio who gave speeches and helped with business development.

Connecting Kasich to the collapse of Lehman Brothers is a stretch.

What is NOT a stretch, though, is Cruz acting like this great populist when most of his household income comes from his wife's paycheck as a Goldman Sachs partner.  I couldn't believe that no one jumped on that one.  Everyone on that stage knows that Cruz's folksy populist routine is just a cynical act.  Cruz is 100% Establishment: Harvard educated, Constitutional lawyer, and married to a Wall Street executive.  Nothing populist about any of that.

I forgot to rank Fiorina.

9. Fiorina - Seeking hat trick of failing in marriage, business and politics, all with astonishing narcissistic flair.  Imagines that political leadership consists of mastering talking points and coming across as tough.  Makes up reality as she goes along.  Once challenged Mother Nature to a knife fight.  On another occasion she said of Angela Merkel: "She couldn't carry my thong."  Missed her calling by not being cast in third Terminator film--it was a role that was made for her.  Makes Hillary Clinton look like Dale Carnegie.

MediumTex wrote: I forgot to rank Fiorina.

9. Fiorina - Seeking hat trick of failing in marriage, business and politics, all with astonishing narcissistic flair.  Imagines that political leadership consists of mastering talking points and coming across as tough.  Makes up reality as she goes along.  Once challenged Mother Nature to a knife fight.  On another occasion she said of Angela Merkel: "She couldn't carry my thong."  Missed her calling by not being cast in third Terminator film--it was a role that was made for her.  Makes Hillary Clinton look like Dale Carnegie.

And that's not easy!

Fred wrote: Santorum - Probably the most anti-liberty politician in the bunch.
Pataki - Say What? Didn't even know he was running. Who is he any way?
Graham - Neoconservative warmonger of the worse possible kind.
Webb - Not a Republican. Was running as a democrat but dropped out. Would have cast my first democrat vote since Jimmy Carter if any of the above were the Republican nominee (or also Rubio, Fiorina, or Christie).

You voted for Jimmy Carter over The Gipper?!!

MediumTex wrote: What is NOT a stretch, though, is Cruz acting like this great populist when most of his household income comes from his wife's paycheck as a Goldman Sachs partner.  I couldn't believe that no one jumped on that one.  Everyone on that stage knows that Cruz's folksy populist routine is just a cynical act.  Cruz is 100% Establishment: Harvard educated, Constitutional lawyer, and married to a Wall Street executive.  Nothing populist about any of that.

Wow, I didn't know all that.  I just knew he was a carpetbagging Canadian, eh!