Does Trump have less political experience than any other President we've ever had?

[Revoltingest]

I can agree with that. How then is Trump proving the cost effectiveness of this wall? I'm not seeing studies or evidence to suggest it. I'm actually seeing data to suggest against it, but it's not conclusive to be fair. Still, he wants to build it so he needs to prove that it will work. Right?

I don't have these answers.
I'm just making general predictions about how a "wall" would be.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I was going to say Washington, but even he was a delegate to the Continental Congress before becoming President.

... so I guess Trump takes the prize.

Pretty much where my head went.

 

[suncowiam]

I don't have these answers.
I'm just making general predictions about how a "wall" would be.

You don't know if Trump has the responsibility to prove that this wall will work? You don't have an opinion on this?

 

[Revoltingest]

Basically it's obvious to anyone with their fingers not buried in their ears.

The argument of obviousness is not very convincing.
To claim he's actively making money by corrupt means
deserves more. If he is, I'd like to see evidence.

 

[Revoltingest]

It relates to your reference of rat holes.

You've lost me.
Pleased don't find me.

 

[Revoltingest]

You don't know if Trump has the responsibility to prove that this wall will work? You don't have an opinion on this?

How can I opine about a wall whose details I know nothing of?
I'm not a Democrat or Republican with a pre-ordained judgement, you know.

 

[Quetzal]

I don't get worked up over speculation.
I'll see what he actually does.

One more speculation question then I will let ya off the hook. If the wall is funded and your taxes go up, would you see this as a good use of tax revenue? As for me: I want the immigration question to be tackled but I am not convinced this would be the best way to use that funding. You?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

The argument of obviousness is not very convincing.
To claim he's actively making money by corrupt means
deserves more. If he is, I'd like to see evidence.

There's far more evidence we have on him having unprecedented conflicts of interest and corruption than you have EVER had on Hillary. But you never were this 'Oh guys we should wait and see' when ultimately proven false accusations were leveled at her.

 

[suncowiam]

You've lost me.
Pleased don't find me.

Too late. I know where you are.

Let me summarize. You mentioned Hilda would have spent money down an economic rat hole. Of course, Hilda is not in office, so you assumed this based on her actions and experiences prior to the election.

The reference to Hilda is in comparison to Trump. So Trump should have a subjective good record of not spending money down an economic rat hole. However, that is not true and the facts suggests he's done so before.

He spent billions on the Taj Mahal which failed over time. He also declared bankruptcy four times which I believe is an indicator of spending money inefficiently. Hence, he does spend money down a rat hole.

Does this help?

 

[Revoltingest]

One more speculation question then I will let ya off the hook. If the wall is funded and your taxes go up, would you see this as a good use of tax revenue? As for me: I want the immigration question to be tackled but I am not convinced this would be the best way to use that funding. You?

I'm OK with effectively used tax dollars.
To spend more on border security (be it a wall, on staff, or something else) could be worth it.
Or it might not be.
How can I possibly venture an opinion on the cost effectiveness of an unknown yet-to-be program?

 

[suncowiam]

How can I opine about a wall whose details I know nothing of?
I'm not a Democrat or Republican with a pre-ordained judgement, you know.

But that's not the question I asked.

Do you feel that Trump should at least first try to prove the effectiveness of the wall before building it? How do we know if this wall will work?

 

[Kuzcotopia]

Yup, woefully inadequate.

He's Chauncey Gardener with an inferiority complex.

 

[Revoltingest]

There's far more evidence we have on him having unprecedented conflicts of interest and corruption than you have EVER had on Hillary. But you never were this 'Oh guys we should wait and see' when ultimately proven false accusations were leveled at her.

I judged Hillary on what could be objectively determined, eg, poor information security.
But you're making claims without any support whatsoever so far.
You might ultimately be right.....but it appears that you're guessing.
Perhaps even hoping?

 

[Revoltingest]

Too late. I know where you are.

Let me summarize. You mentioned Hilda would have spent money down an economic rat hole. Of course, Hilda is not in office, so you assumed this based on her actions and experiences prior to the election.

The reference to Hilda is in comparison to Trump. So Trump should have a subjective good record of not spending money down an economic rat hole. However, that is not true and the facts suggests he's done so before.

He spent billions on the Taj Mahal which failed over time. He also declared bankruptcy four times which I believe is an indicator of spending money inefficiently. Hence, he does spend money down a rat hole.

Does this help?

His record in business is what it is, & gives some insight.
But his losses pale in comparison to Hilda's penchant for
war & playing policeman to the world, for example.

 

[Revoltingest]

But that's not the question I asked.

Do you feel that Trump should at least first try to prove the effectiveness of the wall before building it? How do we know if this wall will work?

I fully expect that he'd use analysis of the situation to evaluate proposed designs.
But I've access to neither, so I don't pass judgement....yet.

Will it work?
That would depend upon what the standards are for success.
I'd wager that Dems would decry its failure, & Pubs would trumpet its success.

 

[suncowiam]

I fully expect that he'd use analysis of the situation to evaluate proposed designs.
But I've access to neither, so I don't pass judgement....yet.

I hope he releases that analysis so we can understand his logic.

 

[Quetzal]

I'm OK with effectively used tax dollars.
To spend more on border security (be it a wall, on staff, or something else) could be worth it.
Or it might not be.
How can I possibly venture an opinion on the cost effectiveness of an unknown yet-to-be program?

It doesn't have to be a good opinion, I mean, look at my posts!

 

[Revoltingest]

I hope he releases that analysis so we can understand his logic.

That would be wonderful!

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I judged Hillary on what could be objectively determined, eg, poor information security.
But you're making claims without any support whatsoever so far.
You might ultimately be right.....but it appears that you're guessing.
Perhaps even hoping?

Meanwhile you're making claims about Hillary without any support whatsoever. You claim her losses would have been huge, you have no evidence. You compare it to her statements which did not guarantee your accusations in any way, and you're ignoring Trump's statements and the many lawsuits against his shady practices and failed businesses because it's conveniently not Hillary.

 

[Revoltingest]

It doesn't have to be a good opinion, I mean, look at my posts!

I'm willing to give sub-standard opinions.
(Staff regularly remind me of this.)
But even I have my lower limits!