October 27, 2016

Of course, Donald Trump cheats at golf

He cheats at everything else so why would anyone expect his golf claims to be true?

Golf is a curious sport with unique components not found in most other activities. One of the most striking elements is that, in general, there isn't a referee adjudicating every stroke. It's a game of honor where the players are required to enforce the rules on themselves. There are times when an official ruling must be determined in competitive play but that doesn't happen often and almost never in most recreational play.

There are two basic approaches to the game: keep a strict adherence to the rules and keep score mercilessly OR go out and have fun and don't fret over the rules or the scores. If a player keeps an official handicap with the USGA, it is understood that they will play strictly by the rules and post every score they shoot for calculating their official handicap index.

Since Mr. Trump cheats, (and in addition to Alice Cooper there are others who've observed Mr. Trump's casual approach to the rules) his claimed handicap is suspect. The false equivalency of Bill Clinton's liberal use of mulligans illustrates that Mr. Clinton plays for fun, that is, he doesn't claim that he's a single-digit player, (for non-golfers, that's an amazingly difficult achievement requiring hours of training every week). Here's an interesting article about Mr. Clinton's golf game:

http://www.golftoday.co.uk/news/yeartodate/news00/clinton.html

Conversely, Donald Trump makes outlandish claims about his abilities. In New York, there's a public course that's managed by Mr. Trump's golf company. It's ridiculously expensive but it's quite beautiful with panoramic views of the NYC skyline and the upper East River. On a par-3 hole, there's a big brass plaque alleging that in the inaugural round, Mr. Trump got a hole-in-one. It sounds to me like a claim Kim Jong-Il would make, and I just don't believe it. That's because Mr. Trump always lies and his arrogance knows no limits.

I cannot imagine spending four hours playing a round with Donald Trump. That would be hellacious. And I hate it when someone cheats and thinks I don't notice it. It's insulting because only one of two things can be true: the cheater thinks I'm too unobservant to see the cheating OR the cheater thinks I'm stupid.

It's the same with Mr. Trump's campaign. He thinks we'll not see his blatant lies and contradictions OR he thinks he's so much smarter than we are that he can gaslight us with his lies.

Donald Trump is an idiot.

October 17, 2016

Trump TV won't happen

The reasons are simple:

- It's incredibly expensive to start a TV network from scratch. Where is Donald Trump going to get the money? American banks won't lend to him. We know he won't spend his own money. Will it come from Russians? Don't count on that.

- Which cable company will accept Trump TV on their service? Time-Warner? Comcast? Optimum? There is already a plethora of news on their systems. The controversy of distributing Trump TV would hurt their over-all business models. By the way, cable operators are not required to carry any and all programming that comes their way.

- The base of supporters that Mr. Trump enjoys is probably not large enough to sustain the 24/7 programming a new channel would have. In order for the channel to work economically, it would have to be a premium channel. Would enough of his supporters pay an additional monthly charge for Trump TV?

- Far too many corporations have shunned Donald Trump because of his extremism and bigotry. The list is long and includes Macy's, NBCUniversal, the PGA and many others. Where would the big money advertisers come from? Mr. Trump is toxic to so many Americans that the corporations will not want to associate with such a divisive man. The ads on a Trump TV would end up mirroring old-time late-night broadcast television. There's not enough money there to sustain a business that way.

- Where will Trump TV get its programming? An important point to consider is that Roger Ailes will not be able to assist a nascent Trump TV because of his severance deal from Fox News. But who is going to create the shows? Donald Trump is not a producer and it's very difficult to come up with 168 hours a week of programming. It's also expensive.

- A review of other attempts by right-wing individuals demonstrates the fragility of such programming. Sarah Palin's shows were failures so were Glen Beck's. Even Rush Limbaugh's programs (and their advertising dollars) have diminished in recent years. An entire network of such programming would be exceedingly difficult to execute.

- Donald Trump is going to be the thing he hates the most: a loser. He's trashed his own brand so thoroughly that it's hard to see how he could establish a consistent audience. In addition, Mr. Trump is going to be facing something else he hates: scrutiny. His legal problems are just beginning and he's going to find himself in a lot of courtrooms in the next couple of years. Does he really have the focus and business model to make a network successful? He doesn't seem to ever put in the hard work for any of his endeavors.

- The Financial Times article about Jared Kushner's informal talks with Aryeh Bourkoff also points out some of what I've written above. More importantly, the article doesn't indicate that anything concrete came of those talks. The article is speculative, at best.

Even if Trump TV gets off the ground, history has repeatedly demonstrated that Donald Trump's endeavors have an extremely high rate of failure. One analysis showed that only 25%-30% of his businesses made money.

Donald Trump is in a swirling vortex of personal, business, financial and legal troubles that will finally take him down. I won't watch Trump TV (if it happens) but I'll certainly enjoy the shows and news detailing his demise.

October 1, 2016

We are witnessing the beginning of the end of Trump

Throughout his life, Donald Trump has exaggerated everything he's been involved with. Given all of his obvious psychological problems, each step of his existence has to exceed the last. In the drug culture, it's called "chasing the dragon" because the user keeps grasping for a higher high. This need is the same in Mr. Trump and it could be more catastrophic than anything we've seen in the public sphere.

I believe we are going to witness a piece of cultural history as one by one, Donald Trump's (leveraged) Houses Of Cards collapse. Here's my scenario.

First, he loses the election. He'll bitch and moan and come up with a thousand conspiracies and excuses but none of it will matter and Hillary Clinton will be sworn in as president. This will humiliate him in front of the world, something he's never experienced. It will affect him profoundly.

Next, his fraud cases regarding Trump University will go to trial at the end of November. As the cases unfold, it will take more and more of his time. Ultimately he'll lose. I believe there are two cases, one is a class-action civil suit and the other is a RICO fraud case. I don't know if jail time is a possible punishment for the RICO case but there will be no way for Mr. Trump to spin his losses as wins.

Meanwhile the civil case against him for allegedly raping an underage girl years ago is ongoing. He could lose that one, too. Imagine the public humiliation he is going to be going through! With each loss, his supporters will dwindle and he'll lose his audience.

As if those issues weren't enough, the investigations into the Trump Foundation are going to result in some serious repercussions for Mr. Trump. The public scrutiny that this narcissist has willingly subjected himself to is yet another example of his unbelievable hubris.

Now, things get really interesting. Mr. Trump has bragged about how his company is so awesome with the most incredible assets around the world. But the value of these assets is flexible as Donald Trump himself has sworn in testimony.

The first problem is that the assets that he owns have been impacted by his divisive campaign. As two examples, bookings at his hotels are down and rounds of golf paid for at his courses are down.

The second problem is that a great many of his endeavors are licensing deals for the use of his name, that is, he doesn't have equity in many of his ventures, he only receives a fee for the Trump™ brand.

His campaign for president has seriously damaged this brand name. Consider the corporations and organizations that have severed their ties with him because of his bigoted and ignorant comments: Macy's, Univision, Televisa, NBCUniversal (home of his TV shows), Serta, ESPN, NASCAR (sort of), and even the Professional Golfers Association of America. There are more and these organizations do not want their brands associated with such a controversial buffoon as Donald Trump.

Specifically, his ugly campaign has tremendously limited his future businesses. His kids must freaking out about the old man.

There's been speculation that he wants to start Trump TV. There won't be enough of an audience; look at what happened to Sarah Palin's TV shows. There is no way that Mr. Trump could program enough material for a 24-hour cable channel and sell enough advertising to pay for it. Remember all of the corporations that do not want to work with him anymore. Such organizations seek to avoid controversies because it shrinks their customer base.

I think Donald Trump is accelerating wildly towards a crash of Fitzgeraldesque proportions. What a show we're in for!

August 22, 2016

Donald Trump is not a deep thinker

He has never demonstrated an ability to plan a project and see it through to completion without an undue amount of drama or fraud or some other malfeasance. He is incapable of playing the long game because he has a terribly short attention span. And he's not particularly bright or articulate.

Specifically, he's seriously damaged his brand. Originally, Mr. Trump was a real estate developer. But for more than the last ten years, he hasn't been able to raise or borrow the capital to actually build and own the buildings that bear his name. Banks won't lend to him because they know he's a huge risk. So, he's merely licensed the "Trump" brand for those structures which were built with other peoples' money. Likewise with the products that he promoted including the steaks, vodka, bottled water and board games.

But after all the things that he's said and done over the course of his campaign, he's ruined that brand. There will be very, very few organizations that will want to associate with him when the campaign is over. Keep in mind that corporations desire to sell their goods and services to the greatest number of customers. They avoid controversies- and controversial people as spokespersons- because trouble tends to diminish their sales. Donald Trump's imprimatur will not help grow sales after this is finished.

The signs of that damage have already occurred: Macy's terminated their partnership with Mr. Trump. Univision dropped Trump's Miss USA pageant from their programming. NBC ended their relationship with the star of "The Apprentice." And the Professional Golf Association moved a marquee event from Trump Doral in Miami to, get this, Mexico City! These are just some of the many organizations that don't want to be associated with Mr. Trump.

Simply put, he's insulted far too many people and groups. His lame attempt at apologizing doesn't mask the ugliness and sincerity of what he's said. People know this.

I do agree with you, onehandle: "The joke's on the GOP."

Hope you have a good week.

August 15, 2016

Interesting quote in the article

Greg from Michigan called into C-SPAN and said, "there are a lot of us who are gun owners who are going to object to that very strongly. And since we do have firearms, it might if it comes down to it be us having to defend our rights with those guns, just as the revolutionaries did in the Revolutionary War."

Let me make certain I understand him. If near-future President Clinton repeals the Second Amendment, (something she has NEVER suggested she would attempt), then "a lot" of people will defend their rights by using their firearms against the US Government.

First of all, Greg from Michigan needs a history lesson. The American revolutionaries were fighting against a foreign power as they sought independence. In his scenario, Greg from Michigan is suggesting attempting to over-throw the US Government. These events are not analogous as he isn't proposing a new sovereign and constitutional state.

Second, the premise is a ridiculous fantasy as the government isn't going to take away people's guns. No one has seriously proposed such an overreach.

Third, does Greg from Michigan really think that his AR-15 or AK-47 or any other weapon he can own will be of any use against the US Military? If he were a serious threat and had taken violent actions against the government, his bank accounts would be seized as well as his property. Then he'd be arrested or shot by a sniper or a drone. The foolish fantasy that paramilitary groups could fight against the US Government is stupid beyond belief.

Fourth, these so-called patriots don't understand civics. A repeal of any Amendment to the Constitution is a process that involves all of the states and the Legislative and Executive branches of the US Government. Such an act could not be effectively accomplished by Executive Order.

Lastly, these so-called patriots don't understand that taking up arms against the US Government is called treason.

Greg from Michigan shares a common trait with Donald Trump: they're both idiots.

August 10, 2016

What about the Trump brand?

Your point that Donald Trump never loses, is an excellent observation, malthaussen. The failures are never his fault, they are always other incompetent peoples' fault. He never bears any responsibility.

I believe something else has happened. For more than the last ten years, Mr. Trump hasn't been able to raise the capital to actually build and own the buildings that bear his name. He's merely licensed the Trump brand for those structures which were built with other peoples' money. Likewise with the products that he promoted including the steaks, vodka, bottled water and board games.

But after all the things that he's said and done over the course of his campaign, he's ruined that brand. There will be very, very few organizations that will want to associate with him when the campaign is over. Keep in mind that corporations seek to avoid controversies because they tend to diminish their sales. Donald Trump's imprimatur will not grow sales after this is finished.

I hope that he stays in the race until November 8th when he is utterly crushed taking with him as many Republicans as possible. In late November, the Trump University trial will begin and it would be wonderful if he loses that, too. Then it's essentially "lights out" for Mr. Trump. He has been such a toxic force in our election system that he must be eradicated. His defeat and demise should be total annihilation for him and a warning to anyone who seeks to follow his fetid path.

August 5, 2016

"...all the investigations and still no charges."

You're correct, liberal N proud, that propaganda works. Hillary Clinton has been investigated more than any other candidate in our history. She has been vetted continuously for nearly 30 years. It's actually quite ridiculous. Only one of these things can be true:

- Hillary Clinton is guilty not only of all the things she's allegedly done but probably scores of more violations. She's so deceitfully smart, however, that she's evaded all attempts to prosecute her.

= OR =

- Hillary Clinton has done nothing wrong. Every investigation of her has come up empty.

But the general public hears our corporately-owned news report only the allegation or they create false equivalencies. With the constant repetitions and scandalous lack of media corrections, the public has developed a negative perception of Mrs. Clinton. Remember, she's never been charged, let alone convicted, for anything!

I believe she will once again overcome any obstacles, become our 45th president and be a worthy successor to President Obama.

July 6, 2016

It's not that bad

Don't get me wrong, Gman. Director Comey's editorial comments were inappropriate and demonstrated that he probably really wanted to find something to indict Secretary Clinton with. After all, in a previous job, he was Kenneth Starr's lead investigator in the Whitewater affair.

When he began his presentation yesterday, his tenor gave me a sick feeling he was going to announce a recommendation to indict and frankly, I was surprised that he didn't. My reaction was specifically because he so forcefully expressed his views about Secretary Clinton's "careless" handling of sensitive information.

Actually, Director Comey may have inadvertently done us a favor. By publicly scolding Secretary Clinton he's blunted any attacks on his investigation by Republicans. As you wrote, he and his staff know that there wasn't a case and that the evidence would not support charges. With his criticism of her, the Director has signaled to his Republican allies that he's one of them, he tried, he hates her, too but there's nothing he can legally do. He'll just verbally spank her for her lack of good judgment.

Congressional Republicans, of course, have already said they will hold hearings on this investigation. Isn't it grand how Republicans can marshall the energy to investigate an investigation but they can't do their jobs like passing a budget and confirming judicial appointments? Just like their fixation on Benghazi, they'll come up empty and once again look foolish.

It's not really that much of a story anymore, surprisingly. I had to scroll way down the page at the Huffington Post in order to find the story from yesterday! Donald Trump's comments about Saddam Hussein and the endless tale of his Twitter feed have already superseded the email story. Sure, Republicans will use his quotes in some attack ads but they'll be ineffective since no charges will be filed.

July 5, 2016

Well...

MaggieD, we already agree that Secretary Clinton is eminently qualified to be our next president and I will proudly include her in my straight Democratic ballot.

There are two thoughts I'd like to ask you to consider. First, in my post, I didn't suggest that Senator Obama was the most qualified candidate when he ran for his first term. I distinguished that by referring to his reelection by which time he had four years of Republican obstructionism behind him. I give him great credit for all of his attempts to work across the aisle during his first term but, you know, Republicans are jackasses. In his reelection and throughout his second term, he showed us what real spine and dedication to accomplishments can bring in a hostile environment.

My second point is hard to write because I'm about to acknowledge some accomplished Republicans along with Democrats. But facts are facts, so here goes.

When I was born, Dwight Eisenhower was president so the first presidential election in my lifetime was 1960 when JFK was elected. Consider the resumes of the candidates in my lifetime.

John F. Kennedy: Served in the US Navy, Congressman, Senator and Pulitzer Prize winning author
Richard M. Nixon: Served in the US Navy, Congressman, Senator and Vice President
Lyndon B. Johnson: Congressman, Senator (including Senate Majority Whip, Minority Leader and Majority Leader) and Vice President
Barry Goldwater: Served in both the US Army and the US Air Force in World War II and Korea, as a Senator chaired the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Senate Armed Services Committee
Hubert Humphrey: Mayor of Minneapolis, Senator (including Senate Majority Whip) and Vice President
George McGovern: Historian, Author, Served in the US Air Force, Congressman and Senator
Gerald Ford: Served in the US Navy, Congressman, Chairman of the House Republican Conference, House Minority Leader and Vice President
Jimmy Carter: Served in the US Navy, Georgia State Senator and Governor of Georgia
Ronald Reagan: Served in the US Army Air Forces, President of the Screen Actors' Guild (a union!) and Governor of California
Walter Mondale: Served in the US Army, Attorney General of Minnesota, Senator and Vice President
George H.W. Bush: Served in the US Navy, Congressman, successful businessman, Ambassador to the United Nations, Chairperson of the Republican National Committee, Chief of the U.S. Liaison Office to the People's Republic of China, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and Vice President
Michael Dukakis: Served in the US Army, Member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives, Governor of Massachusetts
William J. Clinton: Rhodes Scholar, Attorney General of Arkansas, Governor of Arkansas
Albert Gore: Served in the US Army, Congressman, Senator and Vice President
George W. Bush: Served (allegedly) in the Texas Air National Guard, businessman in oil and baseball and Governor of Texas.
John Kerry: Served in the US Navy, Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts and Senator
Barack Obama: Community organizer, Author, Illinois State Senator and Senator
John McCain: Served in the US Navy, Congressman and Senator
Mitt Romney: Successful businessman, CEO of the Salt Lake City Olympics, Governor of Massachusetts

I think that any objective view of these men's resumes would have to observe that they are extremely accomplished.

Once again, I concur that Secretary Clinton is accomplished and has an impressive resume. I'll support her with some money and my vote. Meanwhile, let's keep some perspective with our hyperbole!

July 3, 2016

Longer than 20 years

The partisan and corrosive attacks by Republicans on both Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton go back more than 25 to 30 years dating to Mr. Clinton's terms as Governor of Arkansas. The constant spewing of lies, spurious charges and garbage by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell, Newt Gingrich and other Republican hypocrites has never provided the kill shot that they desperately hoped for. Gosh, is it possible that the Clintons aren't guilty of anything?

Those GOP losers hoped that they could destroy the Clintons with innuendo and insinuations and falsehoods. The great irony is that they impeached him for lying about sex but many of them, especially Speaker Gingrich, lost their gigs because they had their own skeletons in their closets. Of course, the Senate didn't convict him so he retained his office and President Clinton had terrific approval ratings when he left office. Was he perfect? Of course not. Neither are you or I. But he was better for our country than the alternatives and Secretary Clinton has the opportunity of the ages ahead of her. She'll get my vote.

Every time the Republicans have gone after the Clintons, (or the Obamas, for that matter), they have failed. How stupid are they?

Well, they're about to nominate Donald Trump for president.

They're stupid.

And Donald Trump is an idiot.