Is it possible to be a fan of Trump the Entertainer but not Trump the POTUS?

[UNC71-00]

As a former banker and current person in the same industry, the banks are what need to pop and start lending. They are more conservative than even what Dodd-Frank and the CFPB dictate. It’s still really hard to get funding. Hopefully the shake up at the CFPB encourages banks to take a little risk.

Being in DC, we’ve been lucky. We have been up significantly every year since 2012. Hope the rest of the country is catching up.



I didn’t like it either. Just like I don’t like Trump trolling libs. Doesn’t serve a purpose

True on the banks, but the other side of this is that because the rates are so low, private money is moving in for a higher rate of return and funding a lot of these projects.

DC will always be fine- you are closest to the spigot there.

And as far as Trump trolling libs vs Obama trolling cons, you are in the minority here. Most of Obama's base loved him trolling the conservatives. And they are the ones whining the most now about Trump. See Boy, Unc.

 

[ticket2ride04]

True on the banks, but the other side of this is that because the rates are so low, private money is moving in for a higher rate of return and funding a lot of these projects.

DC will always be fine- you are closest to the spigot there.

And as far as Trump trolling libs vs Obama trolling cons, you are in the minority here. Most of Obama's base loved him trolling the conservatives. And they are the ones whining the most now about Trump. See Boy, Unc.

Private money is good for the big boys but the little guys needs funding. Hoping it loosens more. I turned down so many food deals as a lender because I couldn’t get approval despite the client checking all the boxes.

Yes. We are on the tit. It’s been great and makes me feel a bit dirty.

I know a ton of libs loved it. It’s what turned me off the most about Obama. He admitted at the end he wished he had been more magnanimous. I certainly don’t love trump doing it

 

[uncboy10]

True on the banks, but the other side of this is that because the rates are so low, private money is moving in for a higher rate of return and funding a lot of these projects.

DC will always be fine- you are closest to the spigot there.

And as far as Trump trolling libs vs Obama trolling cons, you are in the minority here. Most of Obama's base loved him trolling the conservatives. And they are the ones whining the most now about Trump. See Boy, Unc.

The fukk are you talking about? Name one instance of Obama "trolling" conservatives that I "loved."

 

[UNC71-00]

Private money is good for the big boys but the little guys needs funding. Hoping it loosens more. I turned down so many food deals as a lender because I couldn’t get approval despite the client checking all the boxes.

Yes. We are on the tit. It’s been great and makes me feel a bit dirty.

I know a ton of libs loved it. It’s what turned me off the most about Obama. He admitted at the end he wished he had been more magnanimous. I certainly don’t love trump doing it

When the big boys are spending money, they are often hiring the little boys. And I think the banks are loosening up for capital expenditures, regardless of size of business. But I don't think you will soon see many significant loans for working capital or acquisitions of intellectual capital or brand equity and that's ok, I think.

Sorry Boy. You just seem the type who would have appreciated Obamas trolling. If I'm wrong, then I apologize.

 

[ticket2ride04]

This morning’s barrage actually surprised me.

 

[UNC71-00]

This morning’s barrage actually surprised me.

What barrage? I was being sincere in my apology to Boy.

 

[ticket2ride04]

What barrage? I was being sincere in my apology to Boy.

Fake Video

Weird video

Spoiler: Slightly Graphic

 

[UNC71-00]

Fake Video

View embedded media

Weird video

View embedded media

Spoiler: Slightly Graphic

I don't get it- where did you see this barrage other than twitter? Did Trump RT all this?

 

[ticket2ride04]

I don't get it- where did you see this barrage other than twitter? Did Trump RT all this?

It was all over the news this morning along with Lauer. Trump re-tweeted this shit a few hours ago.

 

[CanuckChuck]

But for his supporters, he's still saying publicly what they can't. He's changed the culture. He's forced people to listen to "the other side of the argument" - that people are afraid to tackle for fear of being labeled this or that. And they love him for it.

Wow - there are so many things we could address in this one paragraph but I like the "changed the culture" bit.

I hope this is true in that the left needs to wake up to the fact that people are easily manipulated and that "facts" are low on the list of factors that manipulate. The right has know this for years. Fear of God, gays, blacks, browns, you name it. And they have done well with that strategy. To many on the left just dismiss GOP voters as idiots because "How does "fear of Y" affect your daily life? Why would you vote for someone that wants to take 'X' away from you just because of 'Y'?" I hope that's why so many were angry with HC getting the nod over Bernie because he was trying to play the game. He was trying to make the wealthy a bigger boogieman than immigrants or Muslims. He was trying to give people something to fear that might actually impact their daily lives.

CC

 

[gunslingerdick]

Wow - there are so many things we could address in this one paragraph but I like the "changed the culture" bit.

CC

Well let's get into it then.

I hope this is true in that the left needs to wake up to the fact that people are easily manipulated and that "facts" are low on the list of factors that manipulate. The right has know this for years. Fear of God, gays, blacks, browns, you name it. And they have done well with that strategy. To many on the left just dismiss GOP voters as idiots because "How does "fear of Y" affect your daily life? Why would you vote for someone that wants to take 'X' away from you just because of 'Y'?" I hope that's why so many were angry with HC getting the nod over Bernie because he was trying to play the game. He was trying to make the wealthy a bigger boogieman than immigrants or Muslims. He was trying to give people something to fear that might actually impact their daily lives.

CC

I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

 

[nctransplant]

Well let's get into it then.



I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

He's saying if you are conservative you are homophobic, racist, xenophophic, ect. Same old tired portrait of Republicans.

 

[strummingram]

He's saying if you are conservative you are homophobic, racist, xenophophic, ect. Same old tired portrait of Republicans.

But, they seem to be fine with that portrait, apparently. So much so that they wind-up playing the part willingly. I rarely, if ever, see them acting-out the antithesis of the behavior they're accused of.

It's "etc.", by the way. Aren't you a teacher??? Don't use that in class, if you can help it.

 

[gunslingerdick]

But, they seem to be fine with that portrait, apparently. So much so that they wind-up playing the part willingly. I rarely, if ever, see them acting-out the antithesis of the behavior they're accused of.
.

What would be the antithesis? How would one "act that out"?

 

[nctransplant]

But, they seem to be fine with that portrait, apparently. So much so that they wind-up playing the part willingly. I rarely, if ever, see them acting-out the antithesis of the behavior they're accused of.

It's "etc.", by the way. Aren't you a teacher??? Don't use that in class, if you can help it.

Thanks for correcting my typing mistake. After listening to Bill Walton this weekend I can now understand you much better.

 

[strummingram]

What would be the antithesis? How would one "act that out"?

I guess it depends on the issue, context, or specific incident.

But, I'll give you an example from the Iowa (HROT) Rivals board. One of the resident "conservatives" criticized a Joy Reede comment by referring to MSNBC as pmsNBC. So, while it is minimal and, perhaps, even trivial to most others who lean conservative... the decision to use a woman's menstrual cycle in a pejorative manner in order to ridicule or criticize, is precisely why "conservatives" live-up to their label of misogyny (for one). They think they're being clever. Others see it as an instinctive response motivated by a male superiority.

 

[nctransplant]

I guess it depends on the issue, context, or specific incident.

But, I'll give you an example from the Iowa (HROT) Rivals board. One of the resident "conservatives" criticized a Joy Reede comment by referring to MSNBC as pmsNBC. So, while it is minimal and, perhaps, even trivial to most others who lean conservative... the decision to use a woman's menstrual cycle in a pejorative manner in order to ridicule or criticize, is precisely why "conservatives" live-up their label of misogyny (for one). They think they're being clever. Others see it as an instinctive response motivated by a male superiority.

Is this a good example of racism as well?

 

[strummingram]

Is this a good example of racism as well?

View embedded media

I'm not looking for "what about this?" You prove the point brilliantly. Instead of admitting that the conservative displayed misogyny, your first instinct was to deflect. "What about this?" What about it? Do I think it reflects an example of racism? Of course it does. It is absolutely a racial-based comment.

To go further, this is the problem with the portrayals of liberal and conservative. EVERYONE is BOTH! But, some hard-heads believe they are one or the other, all the time. Just admit that the example given is misogynistic and THEN offer an example of your own, if you like.

Do I think that people who identify as Democrats are also capable of being racists, misogynists, homophobic, and xenophobic? Absolutely! I know for a fact that they are capable of it. I know that they try to pretend that they're impervious to it and always mean well and would much rather that "conservative Republicans" get that label exclusively. Of course, they will be more likely (usually) to admit to being whatever it is they are accused of when it is a social indiscretion. The conservative will resist it and, instead of admitting it, they'll show an example of a Democrat or "liberal" doing or saying something controversial, rather than just admitting that what was originally called into question was a legitimate example of the behavior. And, THAT is why they carry the stigma of being those things on a more regular basis.

 

[gunslingerdick]

I guess it depends on the issue, context, or specific incident.

But, I'll give you an example from the Iowa (HROT) Rivals board. One of the resident "conservatives" criticized a Joy Reede comment by referring to MSNBC as pmsNBC. So, while it is minimal and, perhaps, even trivial to most others who lean conservative... the decision to use a woman's menstrual cycle in a pejorative manner in order to ridicule or criticize, is precisely why "conservatives" live-up to their label of misogyny (for one). They think they're being clever. Others see it as an instinctive response motivated by a male superiority.

Good grief.

 

[nctransplant]

I'm not looking for "what about this?" You prove the point brilliantly. Instead of admitting that the conservative displayed misogyny, your first instinct was to deflect. "What about this?" What about it? Do I think it reflects an example of racism? Of course it does. It is absolutely a racial-based comment.

To go further, this is the problem with the portrayals of liberal and conservative. EVERYONE is BOTH! But, some hard-heads believe they are one or the other, all the time. Just admit that the example given is misogynistic and THEN offer an example of your own, if you like.

Do I think that people who identify as Democrats are also capable of being racists, misogynists, homophobic, and xenophobic? Absolutely! I know for a fact that they are capable of it. I know that they try to pretend that they're impervious to it and always mean well and would much rather that "conservative Republicans" get that label exclusively. Of course, they will be more likely (usually) to admit to being whatever it is they are accused of when it is a social indiscretion. The conservative will resist it and, instead of admitting it, they'll show an example of a Democrat or "liberal" doing or saying something controversial, rather than just admitting that what was originally called into question was a legitimate example of the behavior. And, THAT is why they carry the stigma of being those things on a more regular basis.

It's an amazing act the way you speak from both sides of your mouth.

 

[strummingram]

It's an amazing act the way you speak from both sides of your mouth.

I type with my fingers. I never use the sides of my mouth to type.

 

[nctransplant]

I type with my fingers. I never use the sides of my mouth to type.

You could.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

I guess it depends on the issue, context, or specific incident.

But, I'll give you an example from the Iowa (HROT) Rivals board. One of the resident "conservatives" criticized a Joy Reede comment by referring to MSNBC as pmsNBC. So, while it is minimal and, perhaps, even trivial to most others who lean conservative... the decision to use a woman's menstrual cycle in a pejorative manner in order to ridicule or criticize, is precisely why "conservatives" live-up to their label of misogyny (for one). They think they're being clever. Others see it as an instinctive response motivated by a male superiority.

I think that's a bit of a reach.

I don't consider every woman who has ever called someone they don't like a "dick" to be a misandrist.

 

[strummingram]

I think that's a bit of a reach.

I don't consider every woman who has ever called someone they don't like a "dick" to be a misandrist.

Well, that's great! I certainly don't expect you, or any other "conservative" to get it. I don't personally find the use of "pmsNBC" to be offensive. I'm not a woman. I'm closing-in on 50. I've heard much worse. But, the social climate is changing and change scares the piss out of people who are conservative. And, it's pretty obvious that there was a blatant attempt to insult the female of the species there. So, while it may measure "low" on the scale of misogyny, and it does, it's just one of a never-ending line of examples. It's an instinctive choice for people like that. So, you can choose to be ignorant of it, or observe it and try to not defend them at all costs or mimic them. Or, at least try to be empathetic and not throw-up a "Well, look at what this liberal did!" It might help shake the reputation of insensitive assholes that tends to get applied to... insensitive assholes. Trump's base!

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

But, the social climate is changing and change scares the piss out of people who are conservative.

It's clear you fancy me a conservative, but I'm fairly liberal on a lot of issues as well. It's not the change that scares me. It's that we're seeking out ways to be offended wherever we can. I really wish the world would adopt the schoolyard mantra of "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me". The way people blow up over namecalling is quite frightening, frankly.

And, it's pretty obvious that there was a blatant attempt to insult the female of the species there.

I clearly don't know the poaster you reference, but I would say that it's not at all obvious there was an attempt to insult females. To me, the party intended to be insulted is MSNBC. It's scientifically proven that pms causes irritability. If someone is trying to imply that MSNBC is irritable (or more crudely, "bitchy") - why can't they compare it to something that is factually proven to cause irritability? Would calling it "insane" be better? What about all the mentally handicapped people we'd be offending? What about "stupid"? Won't everyone with low IQs be beside themselves offended?

 

[strummingram]

It's clear you fancy me a conservative, but I'm fairly liberal on a lot of issues as well.

I don't fancy you anything. I fancy you as argumentative, just as I am.

I
I clearly don't know the poaster you reference, but I would say that it's not at all obvious there was an attempt to insult females.

Referencing Premenstrual syndrome is ambiguous, isn't it? Of course not. Don't pretend that it is.

I don't understand the overreaction to words either. The context is what matters, and always has mattered. The intent is important. And, I agree that how people react to a thing(s) is getting to a point where anything and everything is inappropriate. However, when there is intent to be insulting, you can't be surprised when people feel insulted.

 

[gteeitup]

can’t believe trump is requesting that joe scarborough should be investigated for murder based on nbc firing lauer.

lol, is that a troll job?

 

[CanuckChuck]

He's saying if you are conservative you are homophobic, racist, xenophophic, ect. Same old tired portrait of Republicans.

I didn't mean it that way but I can see how you would come to that conclusion. I do think if you are homophobic, racist, etc you are more likely to vote Republican but it's not a given. And it's not because racists are by nature conservative but the GOP has played these cards for so long it's only natural. I think the majority of population are decent people of various political leanings. But a lot of these are the voters you sway with emotion, not facts. We all fear differences to some degree (race, religion, sexual) and the GOP has capitalized on that.

That's also another interesting thing about DT. He ran as anti-establishment but followed the GOP playbook step by step.

CC

 

[uncboy10]

I didn't mean it that way but I can see how you would come to that conclusion. I do think if you are homophobic, racist, etc you are more likely to vote Republican but it's not a given. And it's not because racists are by nature conservative but the GOP has played these cards for so long it's only natural. I think the majority of population are decent people of various political leanings. But a lot of these are the voters you sway with emotion, not facts. We all fear differences to some degree (race, religion, sexual) and the GOP has capitalized on that.

That's also another interesting thing about DT. He ran as anti-establishment but followed the GOP playbook step by step.

CC

Racists are also more conservative though. Conservatism is a tribal ideology by nature. I read an article from Faux News earlier where lawyers from the Freedom from Religion Foundation were referred to as "godless minions." Not even attempting to make it look like journalism. Just straight up telling people there are invaders at the gates. Textbook tribalism.