I am really impressed by the interviewer. She really let him have it and she looks around my age. Plus, I'd hit it...

DT is a Troll...

Surprised that the WSJ gave him such a hard time.

I really like Trump; it boggles my mind how bad some of you speak of him.

Trump himself has never been bankrupt and has a good business track record. Bankruptcy is a commonly used tool, especially in real estate. I'm not an expert on Trump, but I doubt he ever had any sort of personal guarantee on any real estate deals, so he himself would never go bankrupt even if a property became totally worthless.

The guy is a non-bullshit guy. He bluntly says the Iraq war is about oil, which while 100% true, no politician ever admits. I applaud him for that. For example that dipshit Romney would probably say "oh but it's about the FREEDOM!!!"...freedom my ass! You know how many non-oil rich countries need "freeing"? Why did we choose to "free" the most oil rich one of them all? Wake up people... This country needs a non-bullshitter; unlike Obama. The Republicans need a good salesman; Trump is the only one that comes close to Obama as far as that.

I think if Trump runs he will have a very good chance of winning.

I agree with most of what you're saying, but how do you defend the Obama birther bullshit?

lol... "I like... WINNING"

Like I have mentioned before - I like Trumps straight, no bull, talk / rhetoric. He will make the debates lively and definitely more entertaining then the usual political bull answers that everyone has memorized and recites.

I question Trumps knowledge and understanding of certain topics. The answers he has given on Iraq, China, etc are absolutely insane. I would give him serious consideration if he actually runs and I can get a good grasp of his positions. As of right now, I wouldn't give him my vote. If it was down to Trump v Obama v Newt v Palin ... I would go with Trump. The other two guys are scumbags and Palin is well Palin. Basically everyone else on the GOP ticket would be getting my vote before Trump right now.

Trump is no less qualified than Obama. As far as the birther issue, I have a fcking idea...show us your birth certificate (not just a cert of live birth - short form) rather than spend $3mm+ trying to conceal the information.

While I do not think that Trump is well-versed on all of the hot button issues I do find his candor refreshing. You can all criticize him for being a self-promoter, which is ironic given the fact that many people on this board work or wish to work in an industry driven by self-promotion.

I would vote for anyone (Trump included) over Obama.

What about Rand Paul? The man tears apart interviews with the liberal commentators, making them look very foolish (Letterman anyone?).

Umm...we conquered Iraq. In case you didn't know, that actually means we can actually do with it whatever we want. We invaded that country because Cheney knows a shit-ton about oil depletion issues and he knows that when we have a 10M bpd global shortfall by 2020, we're going to be very happy we took it over before China. The war in Iraq is about oil; I invest in energy for a living; trust me when I say it's 100% about oil.

There are issues with free trade in that there are externalities and market imperfections that make it such that even with true free trade, it can be detrimental for one of the parties (unlike the abstract theory, which would state that freer trade can never make any of the parties worse off). Emerging market countries do this intelligently to grow, China is doing this right now by what they are doing as far as their currency, intellectual property, etc. They are being very intelligent in how they syphon wealth out of the US, all in the name of providing the US with free trade and cheap imports. I don't think Trump is confused at all, I think you're confusing abstract economic theory with cold hard reality (and I'm a huge libertarian and proponent of free markets, btw). Real life is often a little more complicated than your economics textbooks...

I addressed the birther in my other post just now.

Ummm...Trump actually supported pay caps on Wall Street (i.e. agreed with Obama and the Democrats, just like I did also) when Wall Street accepted government funds; saying that if they take gov. money, the gov. can now write the rules and protect taxpayer's interests. Does that sound like everything that is wrong with big-government conservatism?

I don't really care about the social issues, I don't think he's anywhere near the furthest right on social issues as far as the Republican candidates. I think if anything a lot of that is political pandering. The guy lives in NYC, not flyover country for crying out loud.

Some tariffs can be good, others bad; would have to know specifics. I don't think Trump is retarded, which is more than I can say for some of the other front runners. He's a good businessman and would probably negotiate favorable trade deals. Still, our country doesn't live or die by trade deals alone, I think Trump talks about that a little too much to be honest. I also don't think putting Trump in the "big government" bucket makes a lot of sense. Being tough on international trade does not extend to domestic issues. I highly doubt Trump would be for instituting more regulations, increasing government spending, or increasing taxes; so I don't see why you say "big-government".

I'm not saying the man's perfect, I just think he's the best Republican that actually has a chance of winning. Who else would be better and why? I'm assuming there are a lot of Romney fan boys here, but that guy's a big flip flopper and only in it for himself. I don't disagree with Romney's actual policies, but unless you're horrible at reading people, it should be plainly obvious that the man has no true principles and is just in it for the power/ego-boost. Even though I disagree with Obama much more than with Romney from a policy perspective, I feel like Obama has a lot more empathy for the American people; and I think the general US public would agree. No way Romney would beat Obama in the general election.

Thanks for the intelligent comments, btw. :)

Anddd why is that?

Seriously, Romney is the ONLY credible alternative to Obama, no one else has a legitimate shot. He has his flaws like everyone else but I can live with them.

The Kerry comparison is accurate on some fronts, but I'm thinking that if unemployment is still shaky next year he could pull the upset based on his business background. I agree with you that Obama is the favorite hands down.

Great candid interview. It's clear Trump is a serious d-bag; having said that, he is right in saying that he hasn't been bankrupt himself. The comparison to Jobs and Gates isn't fair, they too would declare bankruptcy in a second if it benefited a takeover/acquisition. The interviewer is ballsy, but kind of a dumb bitch. I wouldn't vote for the guy, but we need someone with business experience and a pair of balls (man week!) in office. If only Mitt Romney didn't believe that his savior was an womanizing alcoholic miner...jeez...

Good insight, this would explain his dabbling in the dark arts of conspiracy theory.

this has been tossed around for a while now - documentation or it's fake

THIS is driving too much of the GOtea party. This reminds me of the Bush hating circa 2003.

Someone else will be president only if Obama screws up and 'loses'. No one is going to 'win' against him, his positioning is just too strong. [I look at it like a chess board, and did NOT vote for him....I'm just being honest]

hahaha. Actually, He's setting the tone for the platform that the GOP candidate for 2016 will refine and run on. Who jumps on it is anyone's guess, but the 2012 election is a dry run for conservatives as far as I'm concerned.

he isnt as big of an embarrassment as Goldman Sachs henry paulson.

.....wow good find King just another reason why he needs to go do something with this life other than be on tv.

BLASPHEMY

his daughter is hot though

Michael Bloomberg is NOT a "moderate Republican". He was a lifelong Democrat who chose to run as a Republican because in NYC winning the Democratic nomination is almost like winning the general election--if you get the nomination and Giuliani isn't running then you are a slam dunk. So Bloomberg ran as a Republican where he faced virtually no real primary challenger and then he used his vast wealth to drown out his competitor in the general election.

Well he is a fiscal conservative, better?

I would not consider Rand Paul a potential presidential candidate. Unfortunately no Republican candidate stands a chance unless they pander to the social conservative base, it really holds the party back.

Seriously, if you are not anti-abortion, anti gun control, and anti same sex marriage you don't stand a chance. Those are the three hot button issues, there is little flexibility. The Dems have a more diverse voter base to play with and it makes their candidates more interesting most of the time.