Little-Acorn
Gold Member
I know, he's rude, boorish, and speaks off the cuff too much.
But... until now, every man who has been elected President, got there as a direct result of people, and companies, and political parties, etc., giving millions of dollars to causes that support him. So when he gets elected, they can all say, "We helped you, now you help us." And he has little choice but to toe the line and do things they want.
Trump would be the first person in my lifetime to NOT have that problem. Sure, people who like him would still donate to him. But he can (and no doubt would) tell them, " I'm going to do what I want. If you don't like it, tough. You can leave, and take your money with you. I don't care, I've got plenty."
And when he's President and contemplating a run for a second term, some might tell him, "We don't like what you're doing, better change your ways, or we won't give you and your Superpac a penny in contributions." Trump can simply reply, "Tough titty. You don't like it, leave. I don't need your money, I've still got plenty, plus lots of people who DO like me and are contributing."
Bottom line, Trump would be the first president who has NO incentive to change what he's doing simply because he owes somebody.
Some people might say, "Oh, that's terrible, the man is out of control, we can't have that."
No, he isn't "out of control". He can only sign into law, things Congress has passed. (Someone might want to notify Barack Obama of this fact, he'll be surprised). Campaign contributors were never supposed to be the President's "checks and balances". Congress is his "check and balance". And no one else should be.
If Trump is elected President, he'll be the first one who doesn't owe anybody anything. And people who tell him "Do what we want, and we'll take care of you later," will have ZERO effect on what he decides to do.
But... until now, every man who has been elected President, got there as a direct result of people, and companies, and political parties, etc., giving millions of dollars to causes that support him. So when he gets elected, they can all say, "We helped you, now you help us." And he has little choice but to toe the line and do things they want.
Trump would be the first person in my lifetime to NOT have that problem. Sure, people who like him would still donate to him. But he can (and no doubt would) tell them, " I'm going to do what I want. If you don't like it, tough. You can leave, and take your money with you. I don't care, I've got plenty."
And when he's President and contemplating a run for a second term, some might tell him, "We don't like what you're doing, better change your ways, or we won't give you and your Superpac a penny in contributions." Trump can simply reply, "Tough titty. You don't like it, leave. I don't need your money, I've still got plenty, plus lots of people who DO like me and are contributing."
Bottom line, Trump would be the first president who has NO incentive to change what he's doing simply because he owes somebody.
Some people might say, "Oh, that's terrible, the man is out of control, we can't have that."
No, he isn't "out of control". He can only sign into law, things Congress has passed. (Someone might want to notify Barack Obama of this fact, he'll be surprised). Campaign contributors were never supposed to be the President's "checks and balances". Congress is his "check and balance". And no one else should be.
If Trump is elected President, he'll be the first one who doesn't owe anybody anything. And people who tell him "Do what we want, and we'll take care of you later," will have ZERO effect on what he decides to do.
