Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's another Christie quote from MSNBC: "“If you can’t take it, on the stage, no matter whether it’s fair or unfair, and I thought there was a lot of unfair stuff the other night,” he told NBC News in Iowa. “But if you can’t take it, then how are you going to take running against Hillary Clinton, how are you going to take negotiating for America around the world?”
Christie has never done that, though. In fact the only two that have ever negotiated around the world is Trump and Fiorina on the GOP side. All the others do is talk.
Christie has never done that, though. In fact the only two that have ever negotiated around the world is Trump and Fiorina on the GOP side. All the others do is talk.
Trump and Fiorina have never worked within the structure of the federal government. They won't know the rules going in on Day 1. Those rules, those connections, are vastly different from the private sector.
I like Trump's ideas, but he can't apply them because he just doesn't know how. The man DOES have limitations. They'd both be going in with about as much experience and information as a presidential aide, not a president of an entire nation.
The way the federal government works is what those supporting Trump are trying to change.
Well, that's a good point, but he has to know how the government works before he can change it. That would require a complete overhaul in his strategy; it would basically mean he'd have to take an advanced crash course in domestic and international government.
For example, the RNC stated a single policy imperative: "We must embrace and champion comprehensive immigration reform." But over the weekend, Speaker Ryan said there will be no immigration bill until 2017 at the earliest.
We all know the federal government is a constantly changing machine, and it does not work from one person's order; it goes through many channels, people, red tape -- and to alter that would take years upon years and who knows how many proposed amendments to the Constitution. Trump is used to making a phone call in the afternoon and securing a deal the next evening, but government does not work that way. I wish we had someone with his ideas who knew the intricacies of all the cogs in the governmental wheel so he'd be in a good position to make those changes. But we don't, and it's disheartening to me.
Well, that's a good point, but he has to know how the government works before he can change it. That would require a complete overhaul in his strategy; it would basically mean he'd have to take an advanced crash course in domestic and international government.
For example, the RNC stated a single policy imperative: "We must embrace and champion comprehensive immigration reform." But over the weekend, Speaker Ryan said there will be no immigration bill until 2017 at the earliest.
We all know the federal government is a constantly changing machine, and it does not work from one person's order; it goes through many channels, people, red tape -- and to alter that would take years upon years and who knows how many proposed amendments to the Constitution. Trump is used to making a phone call in the afternoon and securing a deal the next evening, but government does not work that way. I wish we had someone with his ideas who knew the intricacies of all the cogs in the governmental wheel so he'd be in a good position to make those changes. But we don't, and it's disheartening to me.
The first order of business is to get rid of the red tape, people and channels. Dump the executive orders and go through all of the regulations with mandates to get rid of a good number of them. Congress makes laws but they leave it to people like you and me to write the instruction on how it will be implemented. Those people get their marching orders from the President through his minion appointees. They also submit their budgets through the Departments and to the White House.
I heard Bush wants to cut the Federal Government by 11% (I think that's what I heard). That's nothing. They need to ditch regulations and the people that come with them. No business person would put up with the red tape that it takes to get simple things accomplished nor will they have the mindset that this is the system, deal with it. They are used to effectiveness and efficiency because that's how they make money. Plus, they've been on the receiving end of government red tape.
The Federal Government contracts out work but keeps the people who used to do that work along with the contractors. The headquarters offices create jobs in name only to justify keeping/hiring executives.
The problem with the Federal Government is it's a non-profit operation. Making and saving money is an abstract concept. There's no incentive to work effectively and efficiently. In fact, it's just the opposite. Make sure you spend what you get or you won't get at least the same amount next year. I would hope a President Trump would appoint fellow business people to run the government agencies. The way I see it is this Election year is the last chance to fix it. Get a business person in there.
Plus, like Obama, Trump would have his pen and his phone...and a boatload of lawyers. The real problem is the number of people on the stage who accept that you can't do anything unless you work within the slow grinding system.
Things like this would not go unpunished:
Nearly $43 million of U.S. taxpayers' money was spent on building a gas station in Afghanistan — 140 times more than it should have cost, according to a government watchdog..."It's an outrageous waste of money that raises suspicions that there is something more there than just stupidity," John Sopko, the special inspector general, told NBC News. "There may be fraud. There may be corruption. But I cannot currently find out more about this because of the lack of cooperation."
So, you know, we'll have another Congressional hearing and the likes of Rubio, Cruz and Paul and their peers will feign outrage, put on a posturing lawyer show and absolutely nothing will happen to change the way things are done.
Well, that's a good point, but he has to know how the government works before he can change it. That would require a complete overhaul in his strategy; it would basically mean he'd have to take an advanced crash course in domestic and international government.
I thought it was people like him (the rich) that controlled and ran the government?
"If you’re running for President of the United States and you can’t handle yourself against three CNBC moderators without, you know, crying foul and calling for intervention, then you’re not gonna do very well against Vladimir Putin either. So I’m not going to complain about it."
The first order of business is to get rid of the red tape, people and channels. Dump the executive orders and go through all of the regulations with mandates to get rid of a good number of them.
So let me get this straight... you want to get rid of executive orders, but you want the new president to go through every single regulation in the federal government and determine which ones can be eliminated? So, presumably, those that are to be eliminated will have to be voted on in Congress, right? (Since you don't want the president to use executive orders.)
That sounds like a colossal waste of time that is unlikely to accomplish much of anything.
"If you’re running for President of the United States and you can’t handle yourself against three CNBC moderators without, you know, crying foul and calling for intervention, then you’re not gonna do very well against Vladimir Putin either. So I’m not going to complain about it."
Well said, Governor Christie. I couldn't agree more.
I always liked Christie but he has been hurt somewhat by Bridgegate and also Trump taking Christie's strength, straight talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777
^^^^This. I'm starting to like Christie more. It will be interesting if the revolting candidates (no pun intended) break away from the RNC and others don't. Also if the revolting candidates don't want the RNC involved in the election, maybe they'll split off. If they aren't connected to the RNC, their 'No Third Party Run Pledge' would be invalid.
I agree and that could destroy the RNC by creating a third party. The third party talk is growing more and more from the non-establishment side of the RNC (Trump, Carson, even Fiorina) and them breaking off will further fracture the party beyond repair.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crone
I thought that defining greatest weakness was a standard job interview question.
There has been a picture on my frig for the last 30 years proclaiming half of being smart is knowing what you are dumb at.
It would help anybody with their own self perception. If a person wants in my pocket for the next 4 years, that is something worth knowing.
IMO, there is nothing wrong with such a question.
Yeah, except if you don't know how to answer that question. That said, it isn't typically the first question in an interview though. In this case, the interview is a community one called a debate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) break away from the RNC and others don't. Also if the revolting candidates don't want the RNC involved in the election, maybe they'll split off. If they aren't connected to the RNC, their 'No Third Party Run Pledge' would be invalid.
