Trump Loses Even If He Wins

[atgss]

[quote=natalie469;46032579]

Originally Posted by 3~Shepherds

But Hillary Clinton rubs some of you the wrong way. She wrongly used a private email server when she was secretary of state and may have exposed confidential information to foreign spies. You can't point to any real-world negative consequences of this admitted misdeed — an undercover agent exposed, a mission compromised — just like you can't point to any government policy change or concession that looks like a quid pro quo for donations to the Clinton Foundation, her family's charity.
She's lawyerly, secretive, calculating and too often has her finger to the wind on matters of policy. I get that you wish she were less sketchy.
But she is in most ways a conventionally flawed politician, no more ambitious, deceitful or venal than many of the glad-handers who run for public office. And she is extremely knowledgeable about the issues and the ways of Washington.


This above from the article, is exactly why many of us don't want Hillary in office. Seems Hillary feels she is privileged to sell/giveaway America at her own choosing. This is much more than a mistake, even Huma had to have a file......Life Insurance.


Most Americans are certainly not "stupid" enough to vote for Hillary![/QUOTE]

They are the sane ones.

I agree!

However I will find out how many sick people we have amongst us on Tuesday night as I'm looking to possibly relocate and the result does to a point figure in my decision of where and what type of people I want to be around overall.

[AnywhereElse]

Originally Posted by MPowering1

And we all lose if Hillary wins.

Many of the Democrats aren't the "big picture" type, but yes, you are correct.

Originally Posted by greywar

He has a little over a 1 in 4 chance of winning currently based upon Nate Silver. And his odds have been increasing as of late.

Yeah. Ouch.

Nate Silvers? OK. I got a crystal ball that says that is wrong.

Originally Posted by natalie469

We all lose if Trump wins too. At least you know what Hillary brings, faults and all. People voting for Trump are taking a leap of faith. Who knows what wars he may get us into. He's a bully, his way or not at all, which isn't the best leadership with other countries. He could very well alienate them. We are only a super power if we have allies to back us up. Left alone not so much.

Yes, Hillary would bring the end of our country as we know, it a sovereign nation built by people that had certain ideals coming from countries where they were suppressed, often by their religious choices or economic stature. I am more than willing to take a "leap of faith" to try to save our country, who we are, what are ancestors worked and died for and everything we are as a people.

Originally Posted by jamies

Excuse me but I think some socialist commie demorats made a wrong turn at Great Debates and accidentally wandered into the wrong forum. Please be gentle with them folks, you don't want to fracture their safe space.

Everyone knows Trump is the only way to save the country.

Obviously everyone doesn't know that. You have to realize that many are spoonfed the delusions that they are spreading. Hopefully, President Trump will improve the educational system with his choice, hopefully Dr. Carson, and we can train our children how to think for themselves before it is too late.

Originally Posted by evilnewbie

I have to congrats both candidates... the two worst candidates in history and yet they are drawing the biggest voter turnout I have ever seen... I am amazed that good candidates cannot draw voters out but really bad candidates can... strange times...

Many realize what this election is about:

Trump vs. Hillary Is Nationalism vs. Globalism, 2016 | The National Interest

Originally Posted by MPowering1

You're right, Natalie, about the uncertainty, but the uncertainty of Trump is less disgusting to some of us than the certainty with Clinton.

You can have her - I wouldn't hire that sick, self-serving, liar to clean my toilets.

Yeah, the toilet thing wouldn't work since she is more in creating what needed to be cleaned up, than cleaning up something herself.

Originally Posted by burdell

Donny can clean my toilets, for minimum wage.

He will be too busy as POTUS cleaning up the poop that Obama is leaving behind to clean your toilets.

Originally Posted by PedroMartinez

If you looked at it objectively, you'd see Hillary is worse than Trump.

I'm not voting for either, but if you want to vote for the lesser of two evils, you should vote for Trump.

I refuse to vote for someone to keep another out of office, that is why I won't vote for POTUS.

When it comes to "lesser of two evils", I still thinking that voting is important. Keeping Hillary out of office is a necessity. I don't think Trump is capable of messing things up at the tune that Hillary is. Also, a vote for Trump is a vote for Nationalism, saving us from the doom of globalism.

Originally Posted by Ghostrider275452

If she wins, she wants open borders, just imagine what will come along with that. We will no longer be a sovereign nation and loose our identity.

Our identity is slipping through our fingers a little everyday. Globalism (Hillary) is working to redistribute the wealth of our country to 3rd world countries.

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger

Nice way to start a thread, insult at least half the people reading it.

You know, we are already "deplorable" to start out with. Insults is all they have. Geesh, did you expect them to start a thread about the positive impact Hillary Clinton has had on our country.

Originally Posted by Ellise

Guns? You still have guns? I thought Obama was supposed to take all of your guns away in 2009?

Not for lack of trying. As we know, Hillary hopes to get that done. You have to look extensively at what they are doing behind the scenes and understand what history tells us about such things. Most people just aren't that invested in the survival of our country and people.

[wildflower82]

Originally Posted by CraigCreek

YOU should learn to distinguish my own writing from that of others.

You should also read "The Making of Donald Trump", by Pulitzer Prize-winning author and investigative reporter, David Cay Johnston.

You can also find multiple accounts of the Bonwit-Teller demolition fiasco online - just go to any search engine, and type in "bonwit-teller" "trump" and look for news accounts of the time, along with additional articles. It's all well-documented, and no, I do not plagiarize. But thank you for praising my writing ability.

From what I gather, this is what happened to Bonwit-Teller. A non-American owned business.


The Decline of Bonwit Teller - Did Time Pass Retailer By? - NYTimes.com
Industry analysts said that Bonwit's problems were magnified by the operational and marketing changes brought about as at least 10 management teams altered the company with their own agendas. By comparison, Saks had three top-management shuffles in the same period, and they kept the chain's policy consistent. They also drove Saks's sales to six times that of Bonwit's - more than $1 billion, compared with $168 million - and kept the stores profitable while Bonwit suffered intermittent losses.
Both Bonwit and Saks were put up for sale several months ago, but for very different reasons. Bonwit drew no bidders, while the more alluring Saks attracted eight, leading to strong expectations that it will soon have new owners.


Behind the Sale Signs
The Hooker Corporation, the Australian developer that bought both Bonwit and B. Altman, went into Chapter 11 bankruptcy in August and put Bonwit on the block to raise cash. Last week a Federal bankruptcy judge approved Hooker's plan to liquidate most of the Bonwit stores. As a result, there was a sharp cutback in the number of stores, to 4 from 16, effectively putting the other 12 out of business.
For its part, Saks's owner, B.A.T. Industries of London, is selling off Saks, along with Marshall Field & Company and other American retail entities, to focus on its core tobacco business and forestall a hostile takeover by Sir James Goldsmith, the British financier.


'It Was a Great Company'
Rival retailers express sympathy but are often caustic about the reasons for Bonwit's downfall.
''I started with Bonwit and it was a great company many years ago,'' said Ira Neimark, chairman and chief executive of Bergdorf Goodman. ''But the lack of consistent management is one of the biggest reasons why Bonwit lost its way.''


I'm not sure why this is an issue......Trump was one of the many investors that bought this failing business out. Looks to me they got a pretty good deal for going bankrupt.

Bonwit Teller Sells Its Name to Trump Group - latimes
Most of the existing Bonwit Teller specialty retail chain will be closed, including the flagship store in Manhattan, under an agreement announced in bankruptcy court Wednesday.
A group of investors, including Donald J. Trump and a shopping mall developer, that won rights to the Bonwit Teller name paid $22 million for five of Bonwit Teller's 16 stores, including the outlet in Manhattan's Trump Tower.
The sale was approved by the federal bankruptcy court overseeing the Chapter 11 filing by L. J. Hooker Corp., Bonwit Teller's owner and a subsidiary of Australia's Hooker Corp.

The sale was approved by the federal bankruptcy court overseeing the Chapter 11 filing by L. J. Hooker Corp., Bonwit Teller's owner and a subsidiary of Australia's Hooker Corp.
Sanford (Sandy) Sigoloff, who became a corporate savior when he engineered the stunning recovery of Wickes Cos. in the early 1980s, was unable to repeat the magic with the beleaguered chain.


Sigoloff had been charged with resurrecting the 83-year-old Bonwit Teller in August. But after racking up at least $21 million in debt last year, Bonwit was auctioned this week in U.S. Bankruptcy Court.
The Trump consortium includes Pyramid Cos., Alfred Taubman and Phil Palevsky. Stores in Boston and Buffalo, N.Y., will continue to operate under the Bonwit name. Trump plans to open another store at the Manhattan site.
Hooker will continue operating Bonwit stores in the malls it owns in Cincinnati and in Columbia, S.C. Stores in Palm Beach, Fla.; Oakbrook, Ill.; Troy, Mich., and Chicago went to other buyers, who will operate the stores under different names. The total sale was worth $30 million.
Five other stores will be closed. In all, only four stores will remain open under the Bonwit name.
Sigoloff, 59, said he regrets not having been able to rescue the chain. "Would I like to have saved it?
You bet," he said. "But we came to the party too late."

With the chain on the verge of financial collapse when he took over and subsequent delays in merchandise deliveries, Sigoloff had little chance, several industry analysts said.
Sigoloff earned the reputation as a turnaround specialist when he brought Santa Monica-based Wickes out of Chapter 11 reorganization in 1985, paying creditors between 90 and 100 cents on a dollar.
Although a success with Bonwit would have only enhanced that reputation, several industry analysts still lauded Sigoloff for keeping Bonwit alive long enough to attract a host of bidders for at least some of the stores.
"He's done great," said Alan Millstein, publisher of Fashion Network Report, a monthly trade publication. "As far as salvaging the retail empire, I don't think there was any expectation of that."
L. J. Hooker Corp. bought Bonwit in 1987. It also snapped up four other retailers, and has sold all of them except for a small Texas chain, including the venerable B. Altman & Co. department stores.


After overextending itself financially in its rush to build shopping malls and fill them with its retailers, Hooker filed for protection from its creditors on Aug. 9, 1989. Sigoloff was named chief executive of the company that same day and charged with salvaging what he could for creditors.
Although there were initial hopes that Bonwit might make a comeback, Sigoloff said it was clear by October that the chain, which had been losing money for several years, would have to be sold.