Home Depot Co-Founder Says Trump could go down as "one of our greatest presidents ever"

[enhanced_deficit]

Some recent claims suggesting Trump ending up the best President and Obama being the worst Presdent in US history sound a bit too dramatic:


Home Depot Co-Founder Says Trump Could Be the Best President

If President Donald Trump is able to keep defying expectations — like he did in the election — and push through legislative changes against great odds, he could go down as "one of our greatest presidents ever," Ken Langone told CNBC on Monday.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/home-depot-co-founder-says-trump-could-be-the-best-president/vp-AAolULu



This on the heels of the recent claim:

Claim: Obama will go down as the worst President in US history (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?504969-Did-Trump-cross-the-line-by-inviting-a-foreign-leader-who-called-Obama-quot-son-of-a-whore-quot-twice&p=6377057&viewfull=1#post6377057)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wC1NGWM8gP8

[phill4paul]

Hopefully, he will.

[Zippyjuan]

A bit early to say. All presidents start out with high hopes and expectations.

[RPtotheWH]

A bit early to say. All presidents start out with high hopes and expectations.

When does he get his Nobel peace prize?

[enhanced_deficit]

A bit early to say. All presidents start out with high hopes and expectations.

When does he get his Nobel peace prize?


That is a very awesome and troubling question at the same time.

Zippy, where do you stand on the Nobel Peace Prize question?





Related

Poll: Nobel Peace Prize for Donald J Trump (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?506715-Nobel-Peace-Prize-for-Donald-J-Trump&)

[Zippyjuan]

That is a very awesome and troubling question at the same time.

Zippy, where do you stand on the Nobel Peace Prize question?



I didn't think Obama deserved one and Trump has certainly not earned one.

[enhanced_deficit]

I didn't think Obama deserved one and Trump has certainly not earned one.

Thank you. It is refreshing to hear candid views on such issues.

A follow up question if I may. Why do you think Obama did not deserve Peace Prize... because you see him as a war criminal?
Or because he did not do enough to spread peace in the world in your view but you don't see him as a war criminal?

[Zippyjuan]

I don't view him as a "war criminal" but neither did he do much to promote world peace. He did try (mostly unsuccessfully) to reduce US entanglements in the world but they were too much of a mess. He found that leaving without a stable government in place was making things worse. I think everything in the Middle East today (including ISIS) dates back to Bush taking out Saddam (first mistake) and then removing all his police and military (security apparatus) without a viable replacement. That created a vacuum and the chaos which ensued and the US was the only game in town. Iraq is finally starting to stabilize better though their old Sunni- Shite conflict remains. That could rise up again as the common enemy of ISIS is dealt with.

[enhanced_deficit]

So in other words, you are saying:

Bush's Iraq regime change taking out Saddam - mistake

Obama's Libya regime change taking out Gaddafi - right

Obama's Syria regime change push (failed after horrible bloodbath) - right



Somewhat amazed how you can you look at their regime change policies so differently. Bush made a huge blunder in Iraq.. but by 2007-08 Iraq was starting to become relatively stable and there was nothing like the bloodbaths in Syria and Libya seen during Obama years. I'm getting the impression that you don't even see him as neocons puppet, DGP etc either.

[RJB]

Home Depot Co-Founder Says Trump could go down as "one of our greatest presidents ever"

That very well may be the case. However the bar ain't set that high in modern times.

[Zippyjuan]

So in other words, you are saying:

Bush's Iraq regime change taking out Saddam - mistake

Obama's Libya regime change taking out Gaddafi - right

Obama's Syria regime change push (failed after horrible bloodbath) - right



Somewhat amazed how you can you look at their regime change policies so differently. Bush made a huge blunder in Iraq.. but by 2007-08 Iraq was starting to become relatively stable and there was nothing like the bloodbaths in Syria and Libya seen during Obama years. I'm getting the impression that you don't even see him as neocons puppet, DGP etc either.

Gaddafi was also a mistake. Syria crisis was started by Assad sending military to attack peaceful demonstrators. Even Russian generals agree with that. The situation in Syria is not the US's fault.


Our Russian guide in Syria, Major General Igor Konashenkov, is chief spokesman for the Ministry of Defense.


Ruined, in large part, by President Assad's own military. We got the sense Admiral Komoyedov is not crazy about the Syrian president, who has dropped bombs on his own people. The admiral used a derogatory term to describe Assad, then asked that we not repeat it on TV.

Vladimir Komoyedov: We know why the opposition was formed. It was formed due to the mistakes of the president of Syria himself.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-road-to-syria-bill-whitaker/

But they are also right that removing Assad would create another Iraq- like situation with a power vacuum and the chaos flowing into the country. Russia wants their friendly country and military bases. If the country collapsed, they could lose those.


Bill Whitaker: What is the primary goal of Russia in this intervention?

Vladimir Komoyedov, translator: The main task is to restore statehood in this region, Syrian statehood.

Admiral Vladimir Komoyedov is the chairman of the Russian Parliament's Defense Committee. He was involved in the planning of the Syrian mission.

Bill Whitaker: The United States is focused primarily on defeating ISIS. And Russia seems to have other priorities, supporting the Assad regime and helping the Assad regime fight its enemies. And that seems to take priority over fighting ISIS.

Vladimir Komoyedov: If you cut off the head, you get chaos. There's chaos in Libya, chaos essentially in Iraq. Half the country is under ISIL. And the head was chopped off there, you see. So, if you want to so stubbornly remove the leaders of Syria, it's an enormous mistake.

Once things in Syria are stable again, Russia wants to have elections to replace Assad.

Should the US be involved in Syria? No. They are only making things there worse. Trump wants to send in even more troops.

[Iowa]

Guess if you think raising lukewarm temperature to 95 is great....

[anaconda]

I didn't think Obama deserved one .

But he was for change,

[klamath]

I don't view him as a "war criminal" but neither did he do much to promote world peace. He did try (mostly unsuccessfully) to reduce US entanglements in the world but they were too much of a mess. He found that leaving without a stable government in place was making things worse. I think everything in the Middle East today (including ISIS) dates back to Bush taking out Saddam (first mistake) and then removing all his police and military (security apparatus) without a viable replacement. That created a vacuum and the chaos which ensued and the US was the only game in town. Iraq is finally starting to stabilize better though their old Sunni- $#@!e conflict remains. That could rise up again as the common enemy of ISIS is dealt with. Sorry Zippy but Obama's destruction of Libya and the spread of drones to far flung countries very much expanded wars and instability. The Syrian Rebels sure as hell wouldn't have tried to rebel had they not thought Obama was going to provide them with an air force like he did for the Libyan rebels. ISIS mostly grew in the war torn Syria. The refugee problem in Europe is a direct result of those two conflicts. Obama failed utterly on this front and contributed to the nightmare we have today, including Trump.

[enhanced_deficit]

Gaddafi was also a mistake. Syria crisis was started by Assad sending military to attack peaceful demonstrators. Even Russian generals agree with that. The situation in Syria is not the US's fault.


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-road-to-syria-bill-whitaker/

But they are also right that removing Assad would create another Iraq- like situation with a power vacuum and the chaos flowing into the country. Russia wants their friendly country and military bases. If the country collapsed, they could lose those.


Once things in Syria are stable again, Russia wants to have elections to replace Assad.

Should the US be involved in Syria? No. They are only making things there worse. Trump wants to send in even more troops.

For a moment, putting aside the colonial, greedy slash racial mindset that allows neocons to casually plot interventions in other countries to install friedly dictators/puppets.

Do you view Obama as a puppet/political slave of neocons?
Do you thimk Trump is correct in calling Obama "Founder of ISIL"?

Do you think Hitler's wars and death tolls of those wars were a "mistake"?





And they intend it to be. How else will american youngsters forever be the military of the bankers?

http://new1.fjcdn.com/pictures/Politics_5568b5_5447876.jpg


If this is confirmed... neocons, ISIL Founders, DGPbags etc are politically finished.

[Zippyjuan]

ISIS was not a creation of Obama. They rose from the chaos in Iraq and blossomed in Syria (where we didn't have any forces at the time) due to their civil war. The original Al Quaeda were pretty moderate compared to ISIS. We killed off AQ leadership and the more extremists moved up the ladder- eventually taking control. In that sense, Bush and Obama contributed to but did not directly create them. We also indirectly help them by knocking off Gaddafi- the vacuum there gave them access to a huge supply of weapons which allowed then to start seizing territory. They expanded territory in Iraq because we pulled out too many troops too soon and the Iraqi forces were inadequate to deal with the situation and ran away when confronted. Since then, they have been better trained to handle things on their own better and have been driving ISIS out again but it is still difficult.

Your cartoon shows the US destroying Syria. Russian bombs are destroying the cities of Syria as are Assad forces. Historic and beautiful cities being turned into rubble. Millions killed or driven out of their homes. A sad story. (Iraq is nothing to brag about either on the US end- another tragic mistake for the populous of those countries).

[timosman]

ISIS was not a creation of Obama. They rose from the chaos in Iraq and blossomed in Syria (where we didn't have any forces at the time) due to their civil war. The original Al Quaeda were pretty moderate compared to ISIS. We killed off AQ leadership and the more extremists moved up the ladder- eventually taking control. In that sense, Bush and Obama contributed to but did not directly create them. We also indirectly help them by knocking off Gaddafi- the vacuum there gave them access to a huge supply of weapons which allowed then to start seizing territory. They expanded territory in Iraq because we pulled out too many troops too soon and the Iraqi forces were inadequate to deal with the situation and ran away when confronted. Since then, they have been better trained to handle things on their own better and have been driving ISIS out again but it is still difficult.

Your cartoon shows the US destroying Syria. Russian bombs are destroying the cities of Syria as are Assad forces. Historic and beautiful cities being turned into rubble. Millions killed or driven out of their homes. A sad story. (Iraq is nothing to brag about either on the US end- another tragic mistake for the populous of those countries).

You sound like Barbara Starr - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INeEnzv687g


Published on Sep 21, 2016
Video Transcript:

BARBARA STARR: The most important thing, no U.S. troops hurt in this but some did go through decontamination as a precaution. It happened on Tuesday, but now as we speak, this chemical shell is being tested by the U.S. Military to see exactly what was in it. The shell landed on an air base in northern Iraq where U.S. and Iraqi troops are operating, getting ready to try and fight to take Mosul back from ISIS. The shell landed, U.S. Troops went out to look at the shell. They saw something suspicious. They tested it and the test came back positive for mustard agent. They are testing it further. Why do they believe it’s ISIS? ISIS is up in that area and they’re desperate to hold on to Mosul. They wanted to prove to the world that they have in their view, a caliphate, an Islamic state. ISIS has used this type of mustard agent before against civilians. A lot of concern about what is happening here. U.S. troops do have and have had protective gear against this type of attack. And again, the most important thing Jake, no U.S. troops exhibiting signs of exposure to the agent. Even as the U.S. tries to figure out exactly what did transpire here.

[TER]

The Russian bombs are the only things that stopped the US supplied mercenary invaders from completely overtaking the entire country and instilling sharia law and the death and subjugation of the people, especially Christians.

of course, Zippy like to spread the official liberal/neocon talking points. Meanwhile, thanks to the Russians, many of the displaced are returning home and repairs and rebuilding is currently underway. If Zippy had his way, Hillary would have been elected and the Christians would have been eradicated there already, because Zippy is not a friend to the Syrians or a friend to the Christians.

[timosman]

The Russian bombs are the only things that stopped the US supplied mercenary invaders from completely overtaking the entire country and instilling sharia law and the death and subjugation of the people, especially Christians.

of course, Zippy like to spread the official liberal/neocon talking points. Meanwhile, thanks to the Russians, many of the displaced are returning home and repairs and rebuilding is currently underway. If Zippy had his way, Hillary would have been elected and the Christians would have been eradicated there already, because Zippy is not a friend to the Syrians or a friend to the Christians.

Which is quite funny given the fact Zippy is very likely a Christian. Has he/her/it been brainwashed?:confused:

[TER]

Which is quite funny given the fact Zippy is very likely a Christian. Has he/her/it been brainwashed?:confused:

He is most definitely not a Christian..

[enhanced_deficit]

ISIS was not a creation of Obama. ...

A simple question, who do you see as more honest.. Trump or Obama?

Trump: Clinton, Obama 'created ISIS' (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?487644-Trump-Clinton-Obama-created-ISIS&)

[invisible]

And wasn't this someone who backed a primary challenger to Amash?

[Zippyjuan]

A simple question, who do you see as more honest.. Trump or Obama?

Trump: Clinton, Obama 'created ISIS' (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?487644-Trump-Clinton-Obama-created-ISIS&)

Granted Trump has not been in office as long, but Trump has made more obvious lies than Obama did. He has troubles with the truth (or at least doesn't let facts get in his way).

[enhanced_deficit]

Granted Trump has not been in office as long, but Trump has made more obvious lies than Obama did. He has troubles with the truth (or at least doesn't let facts get in his way).

For a public fugure like Trump, honesty tracking had started even before he took office:

http://a.abcnews.com/images/Politics/honesty.jpg



But I gather from your response that you see Obama as more honest than Trump.
I know you tend to be a contrarion usually but this is still bit incredible.

[Superfluous Man]

All of the presidents who go down in history as greats are horrible.

[Zippyjuan]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/poll-finds-dipping-approval-honesty-ratings-trump/story?id=46311638


New poll finds dipping approval, honesty ratings for Trump

A public opinion poll released by Quinnipiac University on Wednesday reported decreasing levels of approval for President Donald Trump in the midst of his battle over the new health care bill, continued insistence he was surveilled and a probe into Russian interference during the presidential election.

Trump's approval rating fell slightly to 37 percent in the poll, compared to 41 percent just over two weeks ago when Quinnipiac released its March 7 results. Respondents disapprove of the president at a 56 percent rate in the Quinnipiac numbers, up slightly from 52 percent on March 7. The poll's margin of error is +/- 3 percent among registered voters.

Members of Trump's own political party voiced increasing levels of displeasure with his performance. Among Republicans, Trump's approval rating dropped 10 points from 91 to 81 percent and levels of disapproval almost tripled from 5 percent to 14 percent. Democratic disapproval of Trump's performance sits at 90 percent, with just 6 percent of party members reporting approval.

Perception of Trump's honesty and leadership skills were among the personal qualities gauged by the poll. Of those answering, 35 percent said Trump was honest, down slightly from 39 percent earlier in the month and a high of 42 percent on February 7.

Those who responded that the president is a good leader is down to 40 percent -- the same amount who said he "cares about average Americans -- from 47 percent two weeks ago and a high of 56 percent just after the election on November 22.

One of Trump's lowest numbers came in the number of poll respondents who said he was "level-headed:" 30 percent.

[RPtotheWH]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/poll-finds-dipping-approval-honesty-ratings-trump/story?id=46311638




Clinton Vaults to a Double-Digit Lead, Boosted by Broad Disapproval of Trump (POLL)


Hillary Clinton has vaulted to a double-digit advantage in the inaugural ABC News 2016 election tracking poll, boosted by broad disapproval of Donald Trump on two controversial issues: His treatment of women and his reluctance to endorse the election’s legitimacy.

Likely voters by a vast 69-24 percent disapprove of Trump’s response to questions about his treatment of women. After a series of allegations of past sexual misconduct, the poll finds that some women who’d initially given him the benefit of the doubt have since moved away.

See PDF with full results, charts and tables here.

Fifty-nine percent of likely voters, moreover, reject Trump’s suggestion that the election is rigged in Clinton’s favor, and more, 65 percent, disapprove of his refusal to say whether he’d accept a Clinton victory as legitimate. Most strongly disapprove, a relatively rare result.

All told, Clinton leads Trump by 12 percentage points among likely voters, 50 to 38 percent, in the national survey, her highest support and his lowest to date in ABC News and ABC News/Washington Post polls. Gary Johnson has 5 percent support, Jill Stein 2 percent.

The results mark a dramatic shift from Clinton’s +4 points in the last ABC/Post poll Oct. 13. That survey was conducted after disclosure of an 11-year-old videotape in which Trump crudely described his sexual advances toward women, but before the events that have followed: A series of women saying he sexually assaulted them, which Trump has denied; his continued refusal to say whether he’d accept the election’s legitimacy; and the final debate, which likely voters by 52-29 percent say Clinton won.

This inaugural 2016 ABC News tracking poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates, was conducted Thursday through Saturday among 1,391 adults, including 874 likely voters. This is the first in what will be daily ABC News tracking poll reports from now to Election Day. The Washington Post will join ABC’s tracking survey later this week.

The previous ABC/Post poll found a sharp 12-point decline in enthusiasm for Trump among his supporters, almost exclusively among those who’d preferred a different GOP nominee. Intended participation now has followed: The share of registered Republicans who are likely to vote is down 7 points since mid-October.

Vote preference results among some groups also are striking. Among them:

• Clinton leads Trump by 20 percentage points among women, 55-35 percent. She's gained 12 points (and Trump's lost 16) from mid-October among non-college-educated white women, some of whom initially seemed to rally to Trump after disclosure of the videotape.

• Clinton has doubled her lead to 32 points, 62-30 percent, among college-educated white women, a group that’s particularly critical of his response to questions about his sexual conduct. (Seventy-six percent disapprove, 67 percent strongly.)

• That said, Clinton's also ahead numerically (albeit not significantly) among men, 44-41 percent, a first in ABC News and ABC/Post polling.

• Trump is just +4 among whites overall, 47-43 percent, a group Mitt Romney won by 20 points in 2012. Broad success among whites is critical for any Republican candidate; nonwhites, a reliably Democratic group, favor Clinton by 54 points, 68-14 percent.

Even with the gender gap in candidate support, the results show damage to Trump across groups on the issue of his sexual conduct. While 71 percent of women disapprove of his handling of questions about his treatment of women, so do 67 percent of men. And 57 percent overall disapprove “strongly” – 60 percent of women, but also 52 percent of men. By partisan group, 41 percent of Republican likely voters disapprove of Trump on this question, a heavy loss in one’s own party. That grows to 70 percent of independents and nearly all Democrats, 92 percent.

For comparison, 59 percent of likely voters disapprove of Clinton’s handling of questions about her email practices while secretary of state, including 31 percent of Democrats, 65 percent of independents and 84 percent of Republicans. Forty-five percent overall disapprove strongly, again a high level, if well fewer than strongly disapprove of Trump on the misconduct issue.

On Trump’s claim of a “rigged” election, 23 percent of Republican likely voters say he’s trying to make excuses in case he loses, rather than raising a legitimate concern; this view swells to 57 percent among independents and 91 percent among Democrats. That said, 74 percent of Republicans, and 84 percent of Trump supporters, say it’s a legitimate issue.

Further, one in three Republicans – 34 percent – disapprove of Trump’s refusal to say whether he’d accept the election’s outcome if Clinton won. That jumps to 65 percent of independents and, again, 91 percent of Democrats. Not only do 65 percent overall disapprove, but 53 percent feel strongly about it.


Methodology

This ABC News poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone Oct. 20-22, 2016, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 874 likely voters. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points, including the design effect. Partisan divisions are 36-27-31 percent, Democrats-Republicans-independents.

The survey was produced for ABC News by Langer Research Associates of New York, N.Y., with sampling, data collection and tabulation by Abt-SRBI of New York, N.Y. See details on the survey’s methodology here.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-vaults-double-digit-lead-boosted-broad-disapproval/story?id=42993821

The MSM's credibility is laughable especially in polling. The fact that you even post polls from them shows you're in lala land.