Hillary Clinton made history in 2016 by being the first Female Woman to be nominated for President of the United States. Hillary Clinton made history in 2016 by being the first Female Woman to win the popular vote. Those accomplishments will be in history books someday.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
He's inherited a successful real estate developer and made it more successful - thanks to his father's money and connections. He's not a successful businessman. He doesn't payback his business loans nor his contractors. That makes him a crook.
shareThanks for your comment.
Your case number is #0000105
"Your case number is #0000105"
?????
[deleted]
I guess some people are afraid of freedom of speech if it's coming from someone else.
shareIf thats true then anyone that inherited a business or anything from their parents or relative is not successful.
shareHe didn't inherit a "business". He inherited a "real estate empire" from his father. He has mismanaged many of his businesses. If running government is like running a business, then we're doomed.
You must admit that an inheritance does give you a leg up.
That's really splitting hairs. If he had actually mismanaged, he'd be broke and not a multi-billionaire.
shareHe's not broke because of his real estate empire. Even Trump mentions how the casino bankruptcies almost destroyed him. BTW, his dad gave him millions to help him when he was having problems. No proof he's a multi-billionaire, though. Definitely not as rich as he says he is.
I'd rather have a successful businessperson running the country. Bloomberg would've been good. He helped revive the economy in NYC. He's richer and self-made.
An inheritance does help you tremendously but it doesn't help you in the real world. Just look at Paris and Nicky Hilton. Nicky started her own business while Paris lives off family money and her notoriety. If Trump was like Paris then he would not have been able to keep the business going for this long. And I am pretty sure the real estate business is considered a business.
Lets say Bill Gates made you CEO and President of Microsoft and gave you a small loan of $500 million. Starting tomorrow would you know how to run the company and be successful?
Trump didn't only inherit money. His father taught him real estate development and introduced him to his political and influential connections.
Totally disagree about Paris. Her inheritance was limited to only 5 million so she started multiple successful global businesses to have more money. Today she is worth 100 million.
Real estate, business and trading stocks/commodities are the three asset classes. Rich people focus on one to specialize in and become rich. Later, they will add the other two for a little more money, but their main focus and success usually remains with their first asset class.
Trump is still mainly a real estate developer. Even his golf club and Maralago were real estate development deals. His skill set is also strongest in real estate. He has money invested in the stock market too, but I wouldn't call him a stock trader.
Running a business, real estate developing and stocks are different skills which is why I differentiate them.
If Gates were my dad and he taught me Microsoft since I were a child, then yes, I would know what to do. I'm not so I read books like "Rich Dad, Poor Dad: What the Rich Teach Their Kids About Money--That the Poor and the Middle Class Do Not!"
Nevertheless, your differentiation is based upon biased, personal opinion and doesn't pass muster.
Real estate development not only falls under the umbrella of " business, " but is considered to be a multi-faceted business. So, it's still splitting hairs on your part.
Actually the differentiation is from books written by rich people, I'm just paraphrasing them. Even Trump differentiates between an entrepreneur and a real estate investor/developer.
Trading stocks could be considered a business too, but in the literal sense it's still different from running a company.
So, you're just parroting the opinions of other rich people who might have an axe to grind with Trump and God only knows what other hidden agendas ?
shareActually Robert Kiyosaki admires Trump and wrote two books with him. Most of the other books I read were written long before he was even a candidate and have nothing to do with him.
BTW, I have read Trump's book Entrepreneurship 101 which was pretty good - but I wouldn't have recommended taking his courses at Trump University since he's a crook and stole his students' money.
So, given your vast knowledge of the rich, are you ? That is, rich and powerful ?
shareFunny you should ask. I grew up in a poor/working-class neighborhood. I knew I had to adapt different values/behaviors to move up. Accidentally adapted middle-class model so now I'm upper-middle. Oops! Only after reading Rich Dad book did I see my mistake. Readjusted to rich model.
Don't want power - just money.
"If Gates were my dad and he taught me Microsoft since I were a child, then yes, I would know what to do. "
Ironically you just described Trump.
Not ironically. Rich people teach their kids which is why they have an advantage over the rest of us regular folk. We have to stumble around for that information which is why it's odious that Trump cheated people who took his Trump University course.
share[deleted]
It wasn't the worst thing about Trump. I was just replying to the comment about his being a "successful businessman" which he isn't. Hillary doesn't have anything to do with the subject.
share[deleted]
We don't know his true net worth because he's afraid to release his taxes. The bulk of his money is from real estate. The reason why I mention that is because there's a different skill set from running a successful business. His casinos and hotels went bankrupt and because he defaulted on past bank loans, most banks will not give him loans. Today, many buildings with his name are actually owned by others - they just lease his name. The same with the winery. His TV show was successful and made him a great deal of money, but I don't know if it counts as running a business.
He's a successful real estate developer. Business? Not so much.
Anyway, it's all moot because I haven't see him do anything for the middle-class. I thought that was the reason why people voted for him.
[deleted]
So what ! Mata Hari is also in the history books.
share
The first "Female Woman"??? What other kind is there, TV?
😎
[deleted]
EEEEEEEEEUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!
YUCK!!!!
So are you think Caitlin Jenner is going to run in 2020?
😵
So, this idiocy is what you call " speaking from the heart ? " You make your party look really stupid.
share[deleted]
Which in light of recent events, continues to look weirder and weirder.
😎
"The first Female Woman to be nominated for President of the United States". Not by a long shot. Even in 2016, she wasn't the only female presidential nomination. Unless you mean the first female Democrat nomination for president.
shareFrom a real party she was.
shareThere have been hundreds of real parties in the US.
shareCurrently there are two, Mr. History.
shareThere are far more than two parties in the US, currently.
shareThere are two parties in this country, the other parties are playing at being parties. They are not on the ballot in all 50 states, or some other flaw that keeps them from being taken seriously. But if you like you can say she was the first women from a "major" party.
shareThey are not on the ballot in all 50 state[/quote]
Actually, there was one third party that managed to pull that off and had a nomination in all 50 states. Another got 48 states. That was just for presidential ballots, mind you. Third parties tend to show up on ballots every time for other offices.
[quote] or some other flaw that keeps them from being taken seriously[/quote]
That flaw being in the system itself, not in the parties.
[quote]But if you like you can say she was the first women from a "major" party.
I'd love to see the Green Party as a major party, they just are not. How many candidates from the Green party are in office nationally now? The problem with third parties is one, like you said the system locks them out, but also any time a third party comes up with a good idea one or both of the other parties will co-opt it and steal back those people thinking of defecting.
sharehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqgDSZ6R3Y0
I recommend the Jimmy Dore Show and similar programs. The Dems are hurting right now and they only have themselves to blame. More and more progressives are leaving the party. The two party system will likely be around as long as our country is around, but that doesn't mean the R's and D's will be around that long. Both the Democrats and Republicans were small, third parties at one point and were able to come in when previous parties fell. History will repeat itself at some point.
Hillary is very disappointing though. I voted for her because she is so much better than Trump who is unqualified to be dogcatcher. But Hillary is basically a Republican dragging the Democratic party to its doom, as Bill Clinton contributed to. People don't really feel like voting Democrat will do anything, and the people who are real Democrats and want change wanted a chance to vote for Bernie Sanders who had a broad appeal and would have won and put a lot of things right.
Hillary was such a letdown, and she was running to do a job for her friends who paid for her, not for the people a lot of people could sense that and she alienated them, even as it would have better for them to vote for her. Now we get a screwed up Supreme Court and dead health care reform. Hillary would not have done anything for education, but at least she would not have hurt the public schools like Trump.
3 years later and no one cares.
shareYeah, and this was her third try to fail. And she still hasn't learned that nobody wants her in charge.
shareIt was her second try. She lost to Barack Obama the first time in the primaries. She beat Bernie Sanders the second time in the primaries, but lost to Donald Trump in the general election.
share