Sunday, March 20, 2016

Pro's and Con's of a TRUMP Presidency .

Pro's and Con's of a TRUMP Presidency .

Soon we are all going get what were asking for, unless a strange kinda twilight zone twist of fate puts Ted Cruz ( or Hillary Clinton for Democrat's sake ) with enough delegates to win the nomination. For Now we can only speculate , ponder on Donald Trump's plans for the government of the United States . Trump has done a good job of making himself rich -- he's worth somewhere between $4.5 billion and $10 billion, depending who you ask. Can he make the rest of America rich, too? The economy isn't something Trump looks forward to tackling. In a January interview with "Good Morning America," Trump offered up a bleak assessment of the U.S. economy but added that, in terms of fixing it, it's a task he'd rather skip. Yes, he is a business man , yes he is vary successful if you compare with the likes of Carly Fiorina (  (1)>>a failed CEO who tried to run for President ) , or the likes of wannabe's like Meg Witman  ran for governor of California . Question is can Trump really do it ? So I'd decided  to give a analysis of his plan(s) as it is available  from his campaign web site ( ). It's a PRO and CON analysis , which I give my own nay , yea, and commentary .
(2)>>Heath Care . Repealing Obamacare .
The reforms, which Trump calls "simply a place to start," are aimed at broadening access to health care, making health care more affordable and improving the quality of care, according to the plan published on Trump's campaign website.Trump also called in his health care plan for eliminating the individual mandate, which under Obamacare requires all Americans to have health insurance and which Trump suggested he was in favor of less than two weeks ago.
Here is what Trump says: 

Since March of 2010, the American people have had to suffer under the incredible economic burden of the Affordable Care Act—Obamacare. This legislation, passed by totally partisan votes in the House and Senate and signed into law by the most divisive and partisan President in American history, has tragically but predictably resulted in runaway costs, websites that don’t work, greater rationing of care, higher premiums, less competition and fewer choices. Obamacare has raised the economic uncertainty of every single person residing in this country. As it appears Obamacare is certain to collapse of its own weight, the damage done by the Democrats and President Obama, and abetted by the Supreme Court, will be difficult to repair unless the next President and a Republican congress lead the effort to bring much-needed free market reforms to the healthcare industry.
My vote is PRO .
We have to really gut this Obama-care . It's deceitfully forced on the American public , none of the plans are "affordable" if you make less , near the poverty line , you could find your self getting a subsidy from welfare like from  my home state California . You would be enrolled in what we call Medi-Cal. Honestly in a careful investigations besides gouged out rates for silver , bronze and gold packages most consumers who can't afford are enrolled in their state welfare program . Worse off the individual mandate forcing people to get insurance that in reality not affordable, nor Universal healthcare by any means .Think Trillion dollars Obama wasted on Obamacare would provide for people through private insurance carriers, especially if they could do business across state lines? Obamacare cost alone are staggering if you enroll in with a higher income.   Besides the tax penalty , this healthcare plan needs serious reform after Obama leaves , or plain and simple "repeal it".   
What's the Con?
Sadly Trump's seven point plan is not vary clear , it has good ideas , but like his Republican brethren over the years fighting to repeal Obamacare law. They like him just  don't have anything to replace it.Making healthcare really affordable means completely dismantling the trillion dollar bureaucracy,it's a industry like the NRA that has received government perks on drugs , costs , it's not  consumer, patient friendly . A real shake up is vary necessary needed here.

REFORMING THE U.S.-CHINA TRADE . The news about (3)>>The news about (3)>>China’s economy is on track to overtake the U.S. economy  has been in one of the
problems that  Bill Clinton fostered on our economy   It was his efforts at the end of his second administration that opened U.S. markets for Chinese imports.Clinton had the gall to accuse those who opposed China's entry into the WTO of "aligning themselves with the Chinese army and hard-liners in Beijing who do not want accession for China." Clinton claimed that the agreement that he championed "creates a win-win result for both countries," arguing that exports to China "now support hundreds of thousands of American jobs" and "these figures can grow substantially." That has proved false . Now in 2016 , China controls the world market , many products once had  "made in America" are made in China at cheaper costs , and resold to us in a higher market value. Clinton has been heavily criticized for overseeing the creation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which made it more affordable for manufacturing companies to outsource jobs to foreign countries and then import their product back to the United States. This policy caused a significant decrease in the amount of unskilled jobs in the United States.

Here is what Trump says: 

America has always been a trading nation. Under the Trump administration trade will flourish. However, for free trade to bring prosperity to America, it must also be fair trade. Our goal is not protectionism but accountability. America fully opened its markets to China but China has not reciprocated. Its Great Wall of Protectionism uses unlawful tariff and non-tariff barriers to keep American companies out of China and to tilt the playing field in their favor.If you give American workers a level playing field, they will win. At its heart, this plan is a negotiating strategy to bring fairness to our trade with China. The results will be huge for American businesses and workers. Jobs and factories will stop moving offshore and instead stay here at home. The economy will boom. The steps outlined in this plan will make that a reality.When Donald J. Trump is president, China will be on notice that America is back in the global leadership business and that their days of currency manipulation and cheating are over. We will cut a better deal with China that helps American businesses and workers compete.
My vote is PRO .
It makes no sense that Ford Motor Company is building American cars in Mexico , why is this allowed ? It makes no sense also why Apple products are "made in China" . If we have to put Americans back to work , we have to penalize  , or prevent American companies from jumping ship to another country just to build things . The 500 largest American companies hold more than $2.1 trillion in accumulated profits offshore to avoid U.S. taxes and would collectively owe an estimated $620 billion in U.S. taxes if they repatriated the funds, according to a study released last year.Congress can and should take strong action to prevent corporations from using offshore tax havens, which in turn would restore basic fairness to the tax system, reduce the deficit and improve the functioning of markets.

What's the Con?
He is well on his way to becoming the first Republican nominee in nearly a century who has called for higher tariffs, or import taxes, as a broad defense against low-cost imports. And there is a good chance he would face a Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, who has expressed fewer reservations about trade, inverting a longstanding political dynamic.First, he wants to “bring China to the bargaining table by immediately declaring it a currency manipulator.”Second, he wants to “protect American ingenuity and investment by forcing China to uphold intellectual property laws and stop their unfair and unlawful practice of forcing U.S. companies to share proprietary technology with Chinese competitors as a condition of entry to China’s market.”Third, Trump wants to “reclaim millions of American jobs” and revive “American manufacturing by putting an end to China’s illegal export subsidies and lax labor and environmental standards.” Trump says there will be “no more sweatshops or pollution havens stealing jobs from American workers.”-- The REAL problem for Trump is I don't think he is going to be able to negotiate a "deal" without punishing American companies first .


President Barack Obama once promised to "make the  (4)>>Veterans Administration a national leader in health reform" — was based on four tenets laid out by Obama: electronic records interoperability, effectiveness research, wellness programs, and accountability for performance and quality improvement initiatives. The progress made in those areas during Obama's six years, however, was overshadowed when it was discovered that a Phoenix VA office falsified wait-time data to see a doctor. The House and Senate have passed bills responding to revelations that veterans died after the VA delayed providing medical care. But the measures don’t change the VA employees’ habit of gaming the system, covering up problems and punishing whistle-blowers who try to sound the alarm — the “corrosive culture” that White House deputy chief of staff Rob Nabors warned about in a report to President Barack Obama in 2014.

Here is what Trump says: 

The current state of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is absolutely unacceptable. Over 300,000 veterans died waiting for care. Corruption and incompetence were excused. Politicians in Washington have done too little too slowly to fix it. This situation can never happen again, and when Donald J. Trump is president, it will be fixed – fast. 
My vote is PRO .
It's a national disgrace when a VET is pushed under the paperwork of bureaucracy.  Syrian refugees , illegals are pushed ahead getting "free" healthcare , clothing  and homes. A homeless Vet is a sad tale in our "rich" country that we can't take care of our own "heroes" , whose sweat , blood was spilled in our nations shadow wars . I am for reforming the VA .

What's the Con?

Two years after systemic problems within the Department of Veterans Affairs boiled over into a nationwide scandal, veterans continue to struggle with a dysfunctional bureaucracy and long waits for health care and other critical benefits. While most observers agree that the VA seriously needs reform, it’s now more than clear that the impetus for change will not come from the Obama administration. Instead, Obama and his VA secretary, Robert McDonald, have chosen to double down on the VA’s failed government-run health-care system and have sided with the government unions against common-sense civil-service reforms within the VA. In the eyes of the real estate mogul-turned-politician, Trump's plan requires managerial prowess — a skill that he frequently touts as one that only he possesses in a saturated Republican primary field.  But when it comes to VA reform, it would be a grievous mistake to allow 2016 to become another wasted year. Now is the time for Speaker Paul Ryan and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to force the issue: This is a year when voters will be highly engaged, and the VA perfectly represents the failures of big government.


As a nation we can argue that there has to be (5)>>Tax reform . Our nation was founded on the premises of taxation  with representation  . Contrary to the colonial British "dreadful acts" that ignited the American revolution . Today it's a different America , we don't exactly vote when our taxes go up . Though we might get that 10 cent measure on the ballot to raise taxes to pay for public transportation projects , schools ,  and libraries . We as a nation are taxed to death ,it's  plain and simple . Tax reform is not getting rid of the IRS , but gutting out a system that is burdensome . Donald J. Trump released details of a tax reform plan.[1] This plan would reduce individual income tax rates, lowering the top rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent and creating a large zero bracket. The plan would also reform the business tax code by reducing the income tax on all businesses to 15 percent and eliminate business tax expenditures, including deferral and interest deductions. In addition, the plan would eliminate the Estate Tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax.

Here is what Trump says: 

America needs a bold, simple and achievable plan based on conservative economic principles. This plan does that with needed tax relief for all Americans, especially the working poor and middle class, pro-growth tax reform for all sizes of businesses, and fiscally responsible steps to ensure this plan does not add to our enormous debt and deficit.This plan simplifies the tax code by taking nearly 50% of current filers off the income tax rolls entirely and reducing the number of tax brackets from seven to four for everyone else. This plan also reduces or eliminates loopholes used by the very rich and special interests made unnecessary or redundant by the new lower tax rates on individuals and companies.

 My vote is PRO .
Americans think federal taxes are too high. Shocking! Seriously, what’s more interesting about the results of a new Gallup poll is that we’re much – much --  more at peace now with our taxes than we used to be.The annual Gallup poll found that 52% of taxpayers say federal income taxes are set too high, an increase from 46% in 2012. Statistics vary by area, but experts estimate that between 30 and 60 percent of taxable property in the United States is over-assessed, and this leads to higher property tax bills. Middle- and lower-income taxpayers are among the most often over-assessed. Yet typically fewer than 5 percent of taxpayers challenge their assessments, even though the majority who do so win at least a partial victory when properly prepared.

What's the Con?

Mr Trump does suggest some new sources of revenue. He would eliminate many tax deductions, most of which remain unspecified. In particular, the controversial “carried interest” deduction, beloved of partners in private equity firms and hedge funds, would go. This raises, perhaps, $1 billion-2 billion. The plan burnishes Mr Trump’s Republican credentials by giving high earners whacking tax cuts. Individuals earning more than $150,000 will see their marginal tax rate fall from close to 40% now to 25%, three percentage points lower than under Mr Bush’s plan. Whereas the former Governor of Florida wants merely to double the standard deduction, the amount that can be earned before paying tax, to $11,300, Mr Trump would quadruple it, to $25,000 (or $50,000 for a married couple). This would remove more than half of households from the income tax rolls altogether,While his tax reform plan simplifies the tax code and reduces tax rates for individuals, Trump argues his across-the-board tax cuts "are fully paid for" by eliminating loopholes on the very rich, enacting a one-time 10 percent corporate tax rate for repatriated overseas cash and reducing corporate loopholes and the deductibility of business interest expenses.The biggest problem with Trump's plan is that while he says he's in favor of a balanced budget amendment, there's not a single mention of any federal spending cuts – or even any spending restraint. No mention of reforming Medicare or Social Security, the two biggest drivers of federal spending.


This issue is so perplexing that no dare challenge  it from  a so called "conservative" GOP standpoint. Arguably gun violence has always plagued the nation The so-called right to bear arms is truly a vestigial relic of the 18th century and has precious little to do with personal liberty or public security in the 21st century.The founders' pre-occupation with preserving the role of citizen based state militias could have not been made more strikingly evident than in a key legislative enactment less than one year after the Second Amendment was ratified. This law provided for the "National Defence" by establishing a "Uniform Militia" throughout the United States, and mandating universal enrollment in the state militias.

Here is what Trump says: 

The Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right that belongs to all law-abiding Americans. The Constitution doesn’t create that right – it ensures that the government can’t take it away. Our Founding Fathers knew, and our Supreme Court has upheld, that the Second Amendment’s purpose is to guarantee our right to defend ourselves and our families. This is about self-defense, plain and simple.----We need to get serious about prosecuting violent criminals. The Obama administration’s record on that is abysmal. Violent crime in cities like Baltimore, Chicago and many others is out of control. Drug dealers and gang members are given a slap on the wrist and turned loose on the street. This needs to stop.Several years ago there was a tremendous program in Richmond, Virginia called Project Exile. It said that if a violent felon uses a gun to commit a crime, you will be prosecuted in federal court and go to prison for five years – no parole or early release. Obama’s former Attorney General, Eric Holder, called that a “cookie cutter” program. That’s ridiculous. I call that program a success.  (7)>>Murders committed with guns in Richmond decreased by over 60% when Project Exile was in place – in the first two years of the program alone, 350 armed felons were taken off the street.Why does that matter to law-abiding gun owners? Because they’re the ones who anti-gun politicians and the media blame when criminals misuse guns. We need to bring back and expand programs like Project Exile and get gang members and drug dealers off the street. When we do, crime will go down and our cities and communities will be safer places to live.Here’s another important way to fight crime – empower law-abiding gun owners to defend themselves. Law enforcement is great, they do a tremendous job, but they can’t be everywhere all of the time. Our personal protection is ultimately up to us. That’s why I’m a gun owner, that’s why I have a concealed carry permit, and that’s why tens of millions of Americans have concealed carry permits as well. It’s just common sense. To make America great again, we’re going to go after criminals and put the law back on the side of the law-abiding.
My vote is CON. 
Trump's opposition to stricter gun legislation in favor of focusing on mental health problems is not new. But many experts argue such thinking is flawed. "Consider that between 2001 and 2010, there were nearly 120,000 gun-related homicides…Few were perpetrated by people with mental illness," psychiatry professor Richard A. Friedman wrote in the New York Times after the Newtown shooting in 2012. Since Mr. Obama took office there has been a increase in mass shootings . Even though we go to the mental health approach as prevention  ,The "mental health" line is no more than deflection. They trot it out every time but they NEVER do anything to actually improve mental health care.  You still have to (8)>>EXPAND  background checks ,which Trump is opposed to expanding. This sticking point is pretty much about keeping the same status quo by the NRA lobby . My vote is against . My honest PREDICTION is that if Donald Trump is elected and a mass shooting happens again , there is a likelihood he is going to flip flop , and enforce stricter gun control . Wait and see...


Immigration has become a flashpoint in the presidential race. Candidates have debated how to address the approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S., secure the nation’s borders and create a system that encourages legal immigration that is more responsive to labor and economic needs. Trump is routinely blamed for using rhetoric that supposedly justifies reactionary violence.  This is typical, and over the years, the “establishment wing” of the Republican Party has lost its footing in caving to the unreasoning demands of the radical border anarchists. Donald Trump, the Republican presidential front-runner whose tough stance against illegal immigration has made it a key issue this campaign season and helped rocket him to the front of the GOP field.(9)>>The U.S. immigration system is very different today than it was when prior generations of immigrants arrived. Many of our families might not have been allowed to enter the country had today’s laws been in effect. Even our current laws do not provide sufficient channels for legal immigration and do not respond to the needs of our economy—a mismatch between supply and demand that is dramatically illustrated by an unauthorized population which is the largest in our nation’s history.We now find ourselves at a point where the United States must update its immigration laws. The public agrees it must be done in a fair and practical manner and must provide a path to legal status for the 11 million unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States, while also creating legal immigration channels sufficient to fuel our 21st century economy.

Here is what Trump says: 

When politicians talk about “immigration reform” they mean: amnesty, cheap labor and open borders. The Schumer-Rubio immigration bill was nothing more than a giveaway to the corporate patrons who run both parties.Real immigration reform puts the needs of working people first – not wealthy globetrotting donors. We are the only country in the world whose immigration system puts the needs of other nations ahead of our own. That must change. Here are the three core principles of real immigration reform:1. A nation without borders is not a nation. There must be a wall across the southern border.2. A nation without laws is not a nation. Laws passed in accordance with our Constitutional system of government must be enforced.3. A nation that does not serve its own citizens is not a nation. Any immigration plan must improve jobs, wages and security for all Americans.
 My vote is PRO .

We do need immigration  reform , our American government should stop bickering on both sides ,work on a solution to a serious problem . It's true that we are (were) a nation of immigrants (colonizers)  that come to the New World , that has been the premise . Things have changed, One of the reasons Congress set limits on the number of immigrants we admit to this country is to protect job opportunities and prevent the erosion of wages for American workers. Virtually every nation on earth limits immigration for this reason. While it may be in the short-term interest of some businesses to flood the labor market with foreign workers—many of whom are prepared to accept poorer wages and working conditions—doing so undermines core national interests.

What's the Con?

Donald Trump’s plan to build a wall to stop illegal immigration on the Mexican border and deport 11 million undocumented migrants would ravage the U.S. economy and cost at least $400 billion, according to California’s Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat. Deporting 11 million or so people might require not just local law  enforcement , but the Army of the United States ?? It's un-realistic, that the nation just can't deport all these people . Secondly we have to enforce the laws we have on immigration first , we should deport criminals who are here illegally first . Trump wants to build a wall -- even though we have already bits and pieces of walls . Trump has proposed building a wall along the entire 1,900-mile Mexican border. But that won’t work because of rivers, mountains, tribal land, private land and countless other challenges.

Trump views on education fall in line with most of the Republican field. He supports school choice, opposes Common Core and is likely in favor of for-profit collegesHe recently criticized two of his Republican opponents, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R), for their positions on Common Core. Like most of the Republican field, with the exception of Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) and Bush, Trump has characterized Common Core as federal overreach. The standards were created by the National Governors Association and Council of Chief State School Officers and states were not forced to adopt them. Trump said of Bush’s support of Common Core standards on Fox’s On The Record, “I watched Jeb Bush … I think it’s pathetic what’s going on, his stance on (10)>>Common Core … He’s in favor of Washington educating your children.”A popular political stance for Republicans in recent years has been to suggest eliminating the U.S. Department of Education. He only wants to cut the department “way, way, way down.” He has not provided specifics on how much funding should be cut from the department, which administers Pell grants, provides overnight to the states to check on inequality of education between low-income and wealthy districts and is responsible for keeping national education data. In his 2000 book, The America We Deserve Trump supported vouchers and charter schools. In the same book, he also took a shot at teachers unions, and compared them to monopolies. 

What Trump says.

We cannot have the bureaucrats in Washington telling you how to manage your child’s education. So Common Core is a total disaster, we can’t let it continue. We are rated 28 in the world—the United States, think of it—28 in the world, and frankly we spend far more per pupil than any other country by far, it’s not even a close second. So here we are, we spend more money and we are rated 28, Third World countries are ahead of us. We’re going to end Common Core. We’re going to have education an absolute priority.

My vote is PRO .
I honestly agree we need to get rid of Common Core It isn't easy to find common ground on the Common Core. Already hailed as the “next big thing” in education reform, the Common Core State Standards are being rushed into classrooms in nearly every district in the country. Although these “world-class” standards raise substantive questions about curriculum choices and instructional practices, such educational concerns are likely to prove less significant than the role the Common Core is playing in the larger landscape of our polarized education reform politics. There are many arguments against as much as there were against NCLB . Pretty much Common Core is bait and switch . Most states altered their education systems to accommodate Common Core before public opinion turned against the standards. Many states joined one of the two federally-funded testing consortia, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. But dropouts have now left only 29 states as full members of either consortium. Common Core basically changed the education system by introducing new teaching methods and testing . Some Core literature contains controversial concepts in textbooks particularity in middle-school and high school. Common Core is not affiliated with No Child Left Behind, the unpopular law pushed by then-President George W. Bush in 2001. There may be confusion over the federal government’s role in Common Core because of President Obama’s Race to the Top initiative, according to the U.S. News & World Report. Common Core standards align with Race to the Top standards, so applicants for Race to the Top grants who had adopted Common Core had points added to their score to qualify for grants, according to the U.S. News & World Report’s “Guide to Common Core.” Written mostly by academics and assessment experts—many with ties to testing companies—the Common Core standards have never been fully implemented and tested in real schools anywhere. Of the 135 members on the official Common Core review panels convened by Achieve Inc., the consulting firm that has directed the Common Core project for the NGA, few were classroom teachers or current administrators. Parents were entirely missing. K–12 educators were mostly brought in after the fact to tweak and endorse the standards—and lend legitimacy to the results.The standards are tied to assessments that are still in development and that must be given on computers many schools don't have. So far, there is no research or experience to justify the extravagant claims being made for the ability of these standards to ensure that every child will graduate from high school “college and career ready.” By all accounts, the new Common Core tests will be considerably harder than current state assessments, leading to sharp drops in scores and proficiency rates.

So What's the CON?
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump declared that in order to cut federal spending he wants to eliminate the Department of Education. Trump’s suggestion to eliminate the Department of Education outright goes a bit further than his earlier rhetoric. Back in August, Trump said he wanted to gut the department and leave only “little pieces” remaining. While Trump presents nothing to replace Common Core as shown (Donald Trump ) released a new video explaining his proposals for U.S. K-12 education policy.I feel sorry for the educators, the Teachers , Principals and School Administrators every time the Federal Government has to intervene with a new plan to make our national education system better . It always fails , so far we have had a few .  Before NCLB each state was allowed to run their education system the way they wanted to. Some states had state wide tests for certain grades, others had exit tests for HS graduation, some had different types of diplomas (college bound, basic level of competency, certificate of completion,...) Other states had nothing and left it up to the individual schools or districts. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was passed in 1965 under the Johnson administration. Before that, federal legislation dealing with education provided funding or land for schools and special programs but was careful not to intrude on states' rights to make decisions on curriculum and the general operations of schools.While the Department of Education is one of the smallest departments of the federal government, employing about 5,000 people, eliminating it would free up about $68 billion a year. Though much of this is spent on the dispersal of federal funds to states, which may continue even if the department itself is eliminated.Plus, getting rid of the Department of Education would give parents much more power over what their children learn. However, whether Trump could get actually rid of Common Core, which is his apparent goal, remains to be seen.

It is easy to poke fun at many of Trump’s foreign-policy notions—the promises to “take” Iraq’s oil, to extract a kind of imperial “tribute” from U.S. military allies like South Korea, his eagerness to emulate the Great Wall of China along the border with Mexico, and his embrace of old-style strongmen like (11)>>Vladimir PutinAfter years of American adventurism underwritten by neoconservative and liberal interventionist administrations, Donald Trump — knowingly or unknowingly —The candidate has taken flack for his lack of advisors on international matters. And Peter Feaver wrote this week for FP that Trump doesn’t even have a foreign policy. But the truth is, The Donald has a grand (you might even call it yooge) vision. In its simplest terms, he seems to believe that the United States should not expend its foreign-policy energy and power unless its allies, partners, or other stakeholders have a similar commitment to solving the issue at hand. That’s basically the opposite of the current consensus among Washington’s foreign-policy and national security leaders.
What Trump says: 

While Trump made clear that he was willing to deploy American military power in some instances – “If there’s a problem going on in the world and you can solve the problem” – he continued to question most US interventions, including what he described as an ill-considered Obama administration policy in Syria.The United States owes $19tn,” he said. “We have to straighten out our own house. We cannot go around to every country that we’re not exactly happy with and say we’re going to recreate [them].
My vote is CON .

The US needs to focus on fixing itself rather than on “nation-building” abroad,Donald Trump told the Guardian in an exclusive interview. The Republican presidential frontrunner then gave two examples of exceptions to his philosophy: in Kosovo in the 1990s, and in the conflict against ISLAMIC STATE  today. I on the Russia issue , which we really need to mend our relations with Russia. While the Kremlin was once generally more positive about Trump than the other presidential candidates, this was turned around after the billionaire released a pre-election video that it says demonised Russia. China is also turning against Trump, with China’s state-owned Global Times newspaper delivering a scathing criticism of him as a candidate who has “opened a Pandora’s box in US society”.The tensions point to the scary potential for Trump to hijack relations with the world’s superpowers. This week analysts warned that a Trump presidency could be a disaster for Australia, as he seemed “postitively allergic to Washington’s miliary alliances, which is a problem for a US ally such as Australia”.With his convincing wins in the US primaries this week, the prospect of a Trump presidency is becoming more likely.

What's the CON?
Trump's celebrity experience worries me  as much as as Obama's somewhat "apologetic" tour of the world in his first term , and bowing to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt . Lack of experience could fog the judgement process . I know Trump is universally ridiculed and disliked and likely so and I'm not agreeing with anything he might say, but for US voters and the Republicans he is becoming more and more credible (as a frontrunner) by the week. He's doing the "politician thing" telling everyone what "everyone" wants to hear. However being "nice" to Israel and stop nation building and settle the Palestinian crisis might be contradictory.
Finally, someone who makes sense as far as America should get out of the regime change business. In a complex and dangerous situation, one should simplify and just get out now. We are supplying who knows who over there in Syria and normally it comes back to bite us in the butt. When will our politicians ever learn? The money is good for a select few, the consequences are bad for millions. Time for a new paradigm of peace and cooperation I believe. Instead of continuous war and destruction. Trump is a disruptor, and international relations are certainly a sector in need of disruption . Not being beholden to these interests, progress will be made. Liberalizing trade in agriculture will not only unleash a bounty for third world farmers, it would be the first trade deal that would directly benefit middle America since the Reagan years — ending the status quo whereby the American consumer market is kept captive for expensive American agribusiness. Trump’s refusal to stake a position on the Israel/Palestine issue (and refusal to take AIPAC money) is a similarly unique position among the field of candidates.

(1)>>a failed CEO. like Meg Witman , Carly Fiorina, and Mitt Romney have a lot in common. Though Trump has not always been that great in his business ventures , marketing he still has a inherited  multi-billion dollar world wide business that still exists .The issue of Trump's four bankruptcies came up in conversation and the real estate developer not only argued that Chapter 11 is par for the course in business but that it might also make him better equipped to handle America's money problems. "I came out great, but I guess I'm supposed to come out great. That's what I'm supposed to do for the country," he said. "We owe $19 trillion. Boy, am I good at solving debt problems. Nobody can solve it like me." He is still in business..many businesses. I doubt there is a company left in America that could make his clothing line.(2)>>Heath Care . Repealing Obamacare . But 2016 will finally be the year when Republican's ( attempt) put legislation on President Barack Obama's desk repealing his health care law. The bill undoing the president's prized overhaul will be the first order of business when the House reconvenes this coming week, marking a sharply partisan start on Capitol Hill to a congressional year in which legislating may take a back seat to politics. Despite dozens of past votes to repeal the health law in full or in part, Republicans never before have succeeded in sending a full repeal bill to the White House. They insist that doing so will fulfill promises to their constituents while highlighting the clear choice facing voters in the November presidential election. (3)>>China’s economy . American dollars helped China become a world power in the open market system , if not the trade deals , the outsourcing of jobs for cheap labor has created a system where products are made at the expense of issues like environmental , health  and safety . China seems to have violated them all. China has been under increasing pressure to halt pollution of its air, soil and water caused by more than three decades of economic growth, and at this year's full session of parliament it promised to cap energy use and draft new laws to decontaminate its soil.Beijing frequently features near the top of the list of China's most polluted cities as emissions from vehicles and heavy industry combine with weather conditions to raise smog levels. The worst bouts of air pollution tend to coincide with periods of low wind. But while China’s industrial subsidies, trade policies, undervalued currency and lack of enforcement for intellectual property rights all remain sticking points for the United States, there is at least one area in which the playing field seems to be slowly leveling: the cheap labor that has made China’s factories nearly unbeatable is not so cheap anymore. (4)>>Veterans Administration. The lack of leadership has only served to empower those who seek to protect the status quo. That’s not only a betrayal of our veterans — it’s also a betrayal of the many dedicated VA employees who are shocked and appalled at the department’s mismanagement. It will surprise no one to learn that the VA is routinely ranked among the worst federal agencies to work for, according to the Partnership for Public Service.  (5)>>Tax reform . While the April 15 tax deadline may not be the most popular day on the nation's calendar, over the past decade, stable pluralities and sometimes majorities have said that middle-income Americans pay their fair share in taxes, rather than too much or too little. But the perception has grown since 2012 that middle-income Americans pay too much in taxes; this comes as income taxes increase for the first time in 20 years, though mainly for the top earners. President Barack Obama and Congress allowed the Bush tax cuts on the marginal rates for the highest income earners to expire last year, which increased the tax rate for 2013 income from 35.0% to 39.6%. Other taxes, such as capital gains taxes, have also increased, and the bill is now coming due for many taxpayers. (6)>>SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS.The better question is whether the right can be regulated. After all, the First Amendment is subject to exceptions. "Fighting words" are not protected speech. Commercial speech is subject to regulation. Libel is not protected. The famous "yelling fire at a theater" is not allowed. The fourth amendment prohibition against search and seizure is observed in the exception, not the rule. So, why does the Second Amendment get interpreted as a sacred right, subject to no exceptions? (7)>>Murders committed with guns .....Project Exile was a crime reduction strategy launched in 1997 in Virginia, by the U.S. Attorney’s Office, as a result of the spike in violent crime rates in the late 1980s and early 1990s. In 1997, the program was implemented in conjunction with an extensive public outreach and media campaign to educate citizens about lengthy Federal prison sentences for gun crimes and to maximize deterrence. The message An Illegal Gun Gets You Five Years in Federal Prison was placed on 15 billboards, a fully painted city bus carried the message changing routes every day, TV commercials, Metro Richmond traffic reports, over a million supermarket bags were also used to advertise Project Exile During these years, Richmond, Virginia consistently ranked among the top 10 U.S. cities in homicides per capita. Specifically, in 1994, Richmond was ranked 2nd for homicides per capita, with a homicide rate of 80 per 100,000 residents. Overall, the goal of the project was to deter felons from carrying firearms and decrease firearm-related homicides through both sentence enhancements for firearm-related offenses and incapacitating violent felons (Rosenfeld, Fornango, and Baumer 2005). Project Exile has roots in both deterrence and incapacitation. Deterrence theory posits that crimes can be prevented when the costs of committing the crime are perceived by the offender to outweigh the benefits of committing the crime (Braga et al. 2001). For deterrence to obtain the maximum result (i.e., to deter the most criminal behaviors), the punishment should be swift, certain, and severe.   Incapacitation is a punishment strategy that focuses on the prevention of crime by temporary or permanent physical removal of the offender from society. It is believed that removing offenders from the population will limit their opportunities for committing crime, therefore potentially reducing crime rates (Raphael and Ludwig 2003). (8)>>EXPAND  background checks. Republican gun pro politicians forget completely that the fist gun control measure were set by an old school Republican by the name of Jim Brady   was press secretary to President Ronald Reagan when both he and the president, along with Secret Service agent Tim McCarthy and District of Columbia police officer Thomas Delehanty, were shot on March 30, 1981, during an assassination attempt by John Hinckley, Jr. Brady was shot in the head and suffered a serious wound that left him partially paralyzed for life. After the Brady Act was originally proposed in 1987, the National Rifle Association (NRA) mobilized to defeat the legislation, spending millions of dollars in the process. While the bill eventually did pass in both chambers of the United States Congress, the NRA was able to win an important concession: the final version of the legislation provided that, in 1998, the five-day waiting period for handgun sales would be replaced by an instant computerized background check that involved no waiting periods. On November 30, 1993, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act was enacted, amending the Gun Control Act of 1968. The Brady Law imposed as an interim measure a waiting period of 5 days before a licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer may sell, deliver, or transfer a handgun to an unlicensed individual. The waiting period applies only in states without an acceptable alternate system of conducting background checks on handgun purchasers. The interim provisions of the Brady Law became effective on February 28, 1994, and ceased to apply on November 30, 1998. While the interim provisions of the Brady Law apply only to handguns, the permanent provisions of the Brady Law apply to all firearms. The New York Times did a study in December 2013 analyzing gun policy since the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School the previous year, a year when 71 other children were killed by gun violence. Around the country, 1,500 state gun bills were proposed, 109 became law, and 70 of those new laws loosened existing gun legislation. According to a Gallup poll from January 30, 2014, 55 percent of Americans are dissatisfied with existing gun policy. (9)>>The U.S. immigration system is very different today.  Why is immigration in such disarray? Knowing how the present immigration system came about helps explain what went wrong. Three congressional acts gave us the system we have today: the 1952 Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA), the 1965 Amendments to the INA, and the 1990 Amendments to the INA. 1. There are known risk factors that need to be neutralized as much as possible including but not limited to stopping those who would do harm to Americans from coming into our nation. That means that step one is to figure out how to spot these people and stop them from gaining access to our nation. Some would have us start racial profiling and stopping every person of Middle Eastern decent trying to enter the country. Not only is that a stupid plan, it’s not doable. Better that we spend time learning about the mindset that leads to terrorist leanings and work to require psychological profiles for all potential immigrants to this nation. Not only do you weed out the terrorists you weed out the psychopaths that would become serial killers and rapists and any number of other unsavory things inside a free country. The key to success with that type of program is twofold. You must first secure the borders completely leaving nothing to random chance and then you address what to do with the people that are here already.  In May 2015, the Obama administration began implementing a unilateral action to grant work authorization to spouses of H-1B guest workers. These spouses had been admitted on H-4 visas, having agreed to the terms that these visas allowed them to live in the U.S., but not seek employment here. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services estimates that the administration’s action will result in nearly 180,000 H-4 visa holders being granted work authorization during the first year, and some 55,000 spouses will be granted work permits in each subsequent year. This rule is being challenged in court by FAIR’s legal affiliate, the Immigration Reform Law Institute, on behalf of Save Jobs USA, a coalition of U.S. workers.    (10)>>Common Core.  State Standards Initiative was a state-led initiative crafted by a bipartisan group of governors and state school chiefs representing most states. States can decide to adopt the standards for K-12 math and English Language Arts standards; it is not mandatory. State and local school districts design and choose their curriculums to implement Common Core standards in their districts. Many Americans agree, especially as the Department of Education has grown into a massive bureaucracy more focused on indoctrinating students in the Islamic faith and “white privilege” than in actually teaching them things that matter, like, say, literature and math. (11)>>Vladimir PutinTrump’s latest salvo to “make America great again” is a video posted to Instagram that includes clips of Putin wrestling someone in Judo as well as an Islamic State fighter.It then cuts to old footage of Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton barking like a dog, Putin laughing and the slogan, “We don’t need to be a punchline. Make America great again”.Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov said he did not know if the President had seen the video but the Kremlin regarded it “negatively”. On NBC’s Meet the Press on Dec. 20, host Chuck Todd asked the real estate mogul and Republican presidential front runner why he is so comfortable praising Putin, noting that Trump has called Putin a "strong leader.""He is a strong leader. What am I going to say, he’s a weak leader?" Trump responded. "He’s making mincemeat out of our president."


  1. I didn't read the whole thing yet, but right off the bat, I recognized full parts of your post from different articles. You plagiarized this:

  2. most was from Trump web site . The whole idea was to present two sides to his presidency . Basically if he wins what is going to accomplish ? Pro and Cons are my opinions , which ones I'm for and against . Trump jumped into the political platform rather quickly , out 17 candidates during the debates he

    swept the GOP , literally dividing the party . Trump was not the obvious choice of the GOP , but inner part was for him all a long . You should read it . It may lack originality , but many of the other blogs are also freely coping information