Republican debate thread

I'm an independent at heart, but i can't help but watch. It's already intriguing seeing the reaction of Trump stating the obvious that he would run as an independent

Does Trump have a chance? Obviously he'll have to go independent and Rubio or jebediah will win the repub nomination, but ultimately the Clinton powerhouse will win (not saying whether i'm for or against this).

Which candidate most helped his chances? hurt his chances?

Any other thoughts?

 

If he runs as a third party, the presidential race might see a near 50 state sweep in favor of Hillary. The margins are paper thin throughout the country, and if Trump manages to even swing 1-5% of the GOP base, the GOP nominee could lose every swing state and potentially normal states that are usually locked in one direction.

I don't like Trump, Hillary, or any of the other major players right now, so this is more of a fun shit show to watch with some popcorn.

 

I'm in the Rubio/Fiorina camp right now. Fiorina absolutely killed it and Rubio is so calm and collected. Both present a great face of the GOP.

Kasich was super high on my list until tonight, but fell off hard as I was just not impressed. I'm liking Ben Carson a lot, but I see him as a very solid VP selection and not at the top of the ticket. I like Walker but his stance on abortion---good Lord is that going to be an albatross come the general election, so I'm not too sure right now...

Bush is staying on my short list ONLY because he polls so well against Hillary Clinton, but he turned in another uninspiring performance. Ted Cruz came onto my short list. While I think Cruz may be unelectable in the general, there are usually 3 or 4 debate performances in the fall general election. Cruz may be running 10 points behind Clinton before the opening debate and may be running 5 points ahead after the 3rd debate. The guy would absolutely annihilate Hillary Clinton in a one-on-one debate.

Trump did extremely poorly. I'm hoping that THIS is what finally starts to deflate his balloon, but who knows? The guy really is "teflon Don."

Array
 
jankynoname:

Trump / Schwarzenegger 2016!

That is such a no-brainer ticket for me. I cannot stand career politicians that have never done anything in the real world.

The guy I cannot stand in the field is Scott Walker. That guy is a complete religious lunatic and his thing about being an Eagle Scout really cracks me up. Biggest dork around and embarrassment to the country.

 

Most entertaining debate ever. I loved it.

Trump the buffoon came across as what he really is: mean spirited, snarky, arrogant, and uninformed. His refusal to not run as a 3rd party candidate really pissed me off and tons of other republicans. A FOX focus group's view of Trump plummeted during the debate. I hope this spells the beginning of the end for Trump. The guy is an absolute disaster and has no business being on stage with serious politicians.

Rubio and Kasich did well I thought, although the latter is a bit too socially conservative for my taste. I would be pretty happy with a Rubio/Kasich ticket, as it puts key swing states and demographics into play and would present a sharp contrast to Hillary.

Jeb really disappointed. He was nervous, fumbled a few times, and way too canned. He was rusty and seemed unsure of himself. This will further cement the view that there is no real frontrunner for the nomination.

Overall I'm ecstatic about the GOP field. This is the strongest field we've had since 1980. Even second-tier candidates such as Fiorina would govern this country better than Hillary/Biden/Sanders/O'Malley. The Democratic field is old, weak, sclerotic, and wedded to the failed liberalism of Obama's disastrous presidency. With the GOP being in its strongest position since 1920 (in terms of seats in congress, governorships, and state legislatures), winning the White House in 2016 will allow us to obliterate the liberals and put America back on the path to greatness.

 

I thought Rubio, Kasich, and Bush did very well tonight. Ben Carson was terrible but then came alive in the end. Rand Paul is one of my favorites but he had a very bad night. Trump was hilarious.

Commercial Real Estate Developer
 

What's bizarre is how people can watch the same debate and draw exactly different conclusions. I was with a group of people and we were in universal agreement that Kasich did not perform well, but I've read lots of commentary, talked to my boss, and the common theme is that Kasich did well. Just shows how very diverse people are.

Array
 
Virginia Tech 4ever:

What's bizarre is how people can watch the same debate and draw exactly different conclusions. I was with a group of people and we were in universal agreement that Kasich did not perform well, but I've read lots of commentary, talked to my boss, and the common theme is that Kasich did well. Just shows how very diverse people are.

Oh definitely. I'm sure a more evangelical person would have loved Huckabee or Cruz, but I wanted them to be aborted any time they opened their mouths.

I though Kasich's no bullshit answers, especially his "if my daughter was gay" answer, really resonated. He had Bush's and Rubio's statesman poise as well.

Commercial Real Estate Developer
 

Who cares? Hillary is going to win. The GOP may have gerrymandered their way into being favorites in congress but the shifts in demographics and changing attitudes in this country are against them. @MBAGrad2015" at this point I'm positive that even if the devil ran as the GOP candidate you'd vote for it. Has unemployment and the deficit not reduced unber Obama? Has obamacare not proven to reduce the rapid rise in healthcare cost? Did he not just sign a historic nuclear deal with Iran? Didnt we avoid getting into the pointless Crimea debacle? (Economic sanctions are working BTW). I swear if a GOP was in the presidency during Obama's tenure we'd be in wars against ISIS AND the Syrian govt. Thank God for liberalism.

Array
 
BobTheBaker:

Who cares? Hillary is going to win.

There is a very solid chance she doesn't even with the democratic nomination. Her negatives are absurd right now. She was also the front runner in 08 if you don't remember.

Commercial Real Estate Developer
 
CRE:
BobTheBaker:
Who cares? Hillary is going to win.

There is a very solid chance she doesn't even with the democratic nomination. Her negatives are absurd right now. She was also the front runner in 08 if you don't remember.

Vegas puts her at an 80% chance of winning the dem nomination, 538 also has her as an overwhelming favorite. There are no Obama's in this democratic field, she's almost a lock.

Array
 

Who's going to unseat her? Bernie with his scary policies and lack of establishment support? Or Biden who as of yet hasn't announced and would have a hard time getting any big financial backers? Hillary has all the money and all the establishment support right now. 80% primary win chance sounds about right.

 
BobTheBaker:

Who cares? Hillary is going to win. The GOP may have gerrymandered their way into being favorites in congress but the shifts in demographics and changing attitudes in this country are against them. @MBAGrad2015 at this point I'm positive that even if the devil ran as the GOP candidate you'd vote for it. Has unemployment and the deficit not reduced unber Obama? Has obamacare not proven to reduce the rapid rise in healthcare cost? Did he not just sign a historic nuclear deal with Iran? Didnt we avoid getting into the pointless Crimea debacle? (Economic sanctions are working BTW). I swear if a GOP was in the presidency during Obama's tenure we'd be in wars against ISIS AND the Syrian govt. Thank God for liberalism.

You Sir, are an ABSOLUTE idiot. I Say Good Day.

 
BobTheBaker:

Who cares? Hillary is going to win. The GOP may have gerrymandered their way into being favorites in congress but the shifts in demographics and changing attitudes in this country are against them. @MBAGrad2015 at this point I'm positive that even if the devil ran as the GOP candidate you'd vote for it. Has unemployment and the deficit not reduced unber Obama? Has obamacare not proven to reduce the rapid rise in healthcare cost? Did he not just sign a historic nuclear deal with Iran? Didnt we avoid getting into the pointless Crimea debacle? (Economic sanctions are working BTW). I swear if a GOP was in the presidency during Obama's tenure we'd be in wars against ISIS AND the Syrian govt. Thank God for liberalism.

Employment has reduced as the economy is naturally getting better, no matter who was president employment would have went up unless your a complete and utter worthless fuck. My girlfriends family is all doctors and I know many other doctors, THEY ALL FUCKING HATE OBAMACARE. Obamacare is a half-ass system and I gaurantee you know nothing about it. HISTORIC NUCLEAR DEAL? ARE YOU FUCKING JOKING? hahahahah! The fucking Nuclear Deal was absolutely shit! At this point I'm assuming your an Obama dick hugger and have not actually read anything about that pitiful deal. Thank god for liberalism? Whats the difference between a modern Liberal and a fucking Socialist? Ill be awaiting a response.

 

GeorgeMilesArnold your comment is stupidity. Vegas has the best statisticians in the game and their odds are literally better than even 538 can muster (you know, the site headed by the guy that correctly picked who would win 49/50 states in the electoral college in the 2008 presidential election). I love how u came with that sarcastic/snide response without having any idea what you're talking about. Good job. Nate Silver, head of 538 and the one who acknowledges Vegas' dominance at odds, also picked every single state correctly in the 2012 election and had Obama at a 90% chance of winning before the election at a time when Media was still looking at Romney like he had a chance.

Array
 

@Virginia Tech 4ever" Vegas has her (ik its super early and alot will change) at 50% chance of winning the general, her closest competitor is Jeb with less than a 25% chance, she is the overwhelming favorite no matter how you slice it.

Array
 

Presumably, the future Republican nominee would have the other 50% chance of winning. What you're saying is that Vegas is saying that Jeb Bush is the favorite to win the GOP nomination. When you look at the general election polls, the top GOP candidates, less Trump, are running dead even with Clinton, so Hillary Clinton running at half odds is logical. But how does that compare to, say, 2 months ago? I'm sure that 50% number is substantially lower than it was in May.

Array
 

@Virginia Tech 4ever" I cane speak to those numbers because I don't know, I guess you're correct about the GOP nominee having a 50% chance but its doubtful. At this point Biden and Sanders are taking % pts from Hillary that they won't be taking when she is the outright nominee. Given the way national elections have gone (of the past 4 presidential elections GOP won 2 but only 1 time with the popular vote) you can't possibly think its 50/50. The GOP is at an inherent disadvantage in Presidential elections moving forward, they don't have the support of hispanics, a demographic that will only grow. I'd say if its 60%-40% Hillary vs GOP candidate before the election that would be a victory for Republicans.

p.s. I don't know where they are posted I just googled it and 538 makes references to the odds on their politics articles

Array
 
BobTheBaker:

@Virginia Tech 4ever I cane speak to those numbers because I don't know, I guess you're correct about the GOP nominee having a 50% chance but its doubtful. At this point Biden and Sanders are taking % pts from Hillary that they won't be taking when she is the outright nominee. Given the way national elections have gone (of the past 4 presidential elections GOP won 2 but only 1 time with the popular vote) you can't possibly think its 50/50. The GOP is at an inherent disadvantage in Presidential elections moving forward, they don't have the support of hispanics, a demographic that will only grow. I'd say if its 60%-40% Hillary vs GOP candidate before the election that would be a victory for Republicans.

p.s. I don't know where they are posted I just googled it and 538 makes references to the odds on their politics articles

I follow the Vegas odds. The Vegas odds swing wildly based on the most current information. You know why the odds are usually right? Because the final odds come out the day before the election when there is all the information in the world--the most recent polling data, debate performances, etc. Even Nate Silver didn't accurately predict the final 2012 election results 15 months out. He utilized the polling averages of the most recent polls right before the election.

Clinton is definitely the front runner right now, but her numbers are objectively degrading. Guys like Rubio, Paul, and Bush have narrowed the polling gap to zero in the last 2 months. Vegas odds almost certainly reflect Vegas' uncertainty about who will emerge as the GOP nominee, and whether or not Trump runs as an independent. Clinton running at 50% is completely understandable. I'm a partisan Republican hack and that's exactly where I'd put her 15 months out given the total uncertainty on the GOP side. That's not necessarily a reflection of her strength; it's a reflection of the fact that there is a cavernous gap between the ability to win a general election between guys like Rubio and Cruz, Bush and Trump.

Array
 

GeorgeMilesArnold the way u responded was what made me annoyed. No one said Vegas decides elections, they make odds based on statistics. What's funny is I referred to Hillary's chance of winning the nomination, not the election, and you went off on some bullshit about Vegas deciding the general election. It was ill conceived.

p.s. the likes of Fiorina, Ted Cruz, Chris Christie, Ben Carson, Trump, Rubio all have no shot at winning the nomination. It'll between Bush/Walker I think

Array
 
Sil:

I think that the only real take away here is thay Trump is still considering running as a third-party candidate (though, we do not know if he is serious). If this happens, I cannot possibly see the Republican candidate winning the 2016 general election.

I think this is just good game theory by Trump. He knows that the GOP is considering barring him from running on the GOP ticket. He also knows that if he runs as a 3rd party the GOP will have literally zero chance of winning the General. So by threatening to run separately, he is basically saying to the party "kick me out and you completely fuck over your chances." That forces them to keep him in under the GOP ticket and give him a fair shot to run. I think it's brilliant. Well played, The Donald.

I still say Trump is the only one who legitimately has a chance to beat Hillz. None of these other guys stand a chance at turning out voters in the swing states. Jeb just seems weak to me... he's solid on policy but he's a bit like the Republican version of Al Gore... just no charisma whatsoever. I'm certainly far from a George W fan but you've got to hand it to him that guy had charisma.

The others are either too extreme on social issues (e.g. Scott Walker, Huckabee, Carson) or policy wonks (Rand, Cristie, Kasich, Cruz). Trump is going to be fiscally conservative and "tough" as he likes to say, but not overly extreme on social issues, which I think will resonate well with young votes. If you pair him with a solid VP like Rubio/Carly Fiorina/Paul Ryan, I think he'll have a decent shot.

 

Donald Trump has no shot at beating Hillary Clinton, he doesn't even have a real chance at the GOP nomination. His current candidacy is based on the fact your avg Joe knows his name, he has low favorability ratings (ppl in his own party (like @Virginia Tech 4ever") don't like him. His candidacy is only that because of a fragmented party (lol@ him "leading GOP polls with 21%.... means 79% are backing other candidates). He has no real policy stances and is a flip flopper, once these fringe candidates drop out (I'm looking at you Ben Carson/Chris Christie etc.) the indication is they wont be going his way (low favorability) but the way of one of the establishment backed candidates (Bush, Walker). It is an uphill battle to get the nomination, if he gets it (don't worry, @MBAGrad2015" he won't) then there won't be a point in a general, the guy will be railroaded by Hillary.

Array
 

You want to see someone get railroaded, run Jeb against Hillary... I would bet a substantial amount of money that Hillary wins that election.

I actually think a lot of votes will accrue to Trump from guys like Rand Paul, Cristie, maybe Kasich. By the time we get down to Super Tuesday this is probably a four horse race between Trump, Brother Jeb, Rubio and Walker. I think Trump looks pretty good there...

 

I agree with this. Trump is an arrogant buffoon who held liberal positions until this year, has no real understanding of policy, and resorts to vicious name-calling when asked a tough question. The guy is an utter disgrace to our political process.

My worst nightmare is Trump running 3rd party and giving the election to Hillary. I literally fantasize about a GOP congress and a Republican President who will cut taxes, appoint conservative Supreme Court justices, re-assert U.S. power abroad, get serious about radical Islam, and stop engaging in this PC race bullshit.

 
MBA_Junkie:

it is becoming more and more clear that the democrats will win 2016.. most likely Hillary even though my personal favorite is Bernie..

I think the Democratic primary will be the real show of the power of money. If Hilary did not have the connections that she did, I bet liberal donors would not think twice of supporting Bernie.

 

By "reassert U.S. power and get serious about radical Islam" you mean go to War, which we need military spending for, which would increase the deficit but you wanna cut taxes which would further put us in debt. I'm not even gonna comment on the rest, it's all garbage.

Array
 

true... i was gonna point this out myself but realized @MBAGrad2015" probably thinks along the following lines:

someone else will risk their life fighting overseas - someone other than @MBAGrad2015" ... while at the same time @MBAGrad2015" will be enjoying/blowing off the additional disposable income from reduced taxes..

this, in his mind, is how he will split the reduced taxes but more wars dilemma.. what a hero! :)

 

First, we should drastically cut entitlement programs, which are the biggest source of spending for the government.

Second, re-assert does not necessarily mean war. It means being engaged abroad, supporting our allies, and not letting ourselves get taken advantage of like in the Iran nuclear deal. Obama basically shit on Israel and Netanyahu, abstained from taking out Assad even though Obama said that using chemical weapons will be crossing the line, and gave Iran the keys to becoming a nuclear power without getting anything substantive in return. He also did not stick up for Eastern European allies against Russia regarding missile defense. Then you have ISIS, which is only growing stronger. I could go on about this, but Obama could have been proactive on all these issues without sending American ground troops.

 

It's funny you don't want us taken advantage of but then cite that bullshit chemical attack as further proof of inaction. Isolated area, no upside, they were already winning, and the risk of the US getting involved.... But you assume they perpetrated the chemical attack, whereas the opposition forces had everything to gain I.e., U.S. Involvement but in your mind they were obviously not involved. Which means we "failed to act."

To put it another way, what happened the last time someone cried WMD and the U.S. got involved using incomplete information? And how can you say that wouldn't mean war? So you just what, expect full scale US involvement beyond sanctions and air strikes but no ground component or "war", walk me through that.

"I am that I am"
 

Lol @ALASKAIBANKER" raging like this is fox news and anyone here will confuse your loudness for intelligence. When you say the economy would've gotten better regardless, did that stop GOP drones like you from destroying him when the economy was struggling? You give me an anecdote about random doctors that hate obamacare like their worries change the reality of data or because they're doctors I should never question their correctness. That's funny. You shit on the nuclear deal without going into ANY specifics, I wouldn't be surprised if you railed it without knowing a single detail. Such is the conviction of your average conservative, the conviction to denigrate anything the current POTUS has done. I'm a libertarian and I don't really like either party,but I know which of the 2 douches puts us in worse positions. It's funny. Reagan and GWB increased spending as a % of GDP to unheard of levels and the GOP is supposed to be fiscally conservative. They increase military spending further enlarging the govt (in GWB case he actually created a whole new govt department) but they are supposed to be for small govt. They constantly can't pay for the tax cuts they champion and I'm supposed to continue to support them because "omg low taxes". The GOP is a joke, the Dems are at least tolerable.

Array
 

Again, I repeat, I was having a slight rage listening to Liberals who actually want Hillary Clinton to be president. Regarding Obamacare- Why do you think all of the best doctors in the world flock to America? Do you think it's because they want to go through 10 years of school and hundreds of thousands in debt to make barely above average salaries? It's simple: Obamacare forces doctors to take patients who can't pay shit and guess what? Doctors turn them away. Why would a Doctor take a patient they can only make $10 on when they could make $150 on the next? It's just business. So instead of helping patients like the PLAN was supposed to, these patients are now turned away because the doctors 'don't have time for them.' Yes I understand in a perfect world healthcare is free, but who has the money to pay for that shit? Not us. Not America.

Boston University Economics Professor Laurence Kotlikoff swore under oath that the fiscal gap in 2014 was over $210 Trillion, not $13 Trillion like everyone falsely believes.

I don't really feel like going into the Iran nuclear deal. Yes, I read up on it a great deal and yes I think the deal was treacherous for the U.S. Any why are you talking about GWB like I agree with anything he did? Yes, GWB was a piece of shit president for the most part. Who the fuck in their right mind would say GWB did a good job? Your placing me into the category of 'Retard Conservative' which I am not. I am not a conservative and I'm not a republican. I don't choose political parties. I just happen to slightly lean more right so if I had to place myself it would be Moderate Republican.

I understand this is a long and annoying post, but I literally can not understand for the life of me why ANYONE would vote for Hillary Clinton? Do you truly believe she will take American in the right direction? Look at all her fucking scandals. How the fuck could you trust that woman to lead our country? What has she done for us the whole time shes been in her "political career?" Not sure about everyone else, but I can't trust a woman who's foundation takes 90% of the money and pockets it and on top of that has shitty policies, who's untrustworthy, is completely lacking of passion and absolutely will do nothing for our country. Shit, I'd rather have Obama run for a third term than have Hillary. The sad thing is, DUE TO BEING A WOMAN AND CELEBRITY, the bitch is probably going to win. Good god I hope a GOP candidate who has sense wins.

 

@MBAGrad2015" Obama has armed the Kurds, formed an Arab state alliance against ISIS, and supports with airstrikes, short of going to War I'd like to see your suggestions as to how we get even more involved. As for Russia we have supported our eastern allies by imposing harsh sanctions, again, how do you want the US to getmore involved. Which entitlements do you want to cut to pay for your tax cuts? Why not cut military spending? Because you like war mongering? ISIS is not growing stronger, they have been losing territory since the airstrikes started. As for Isreal, I am happy the POTUS has stood up to them. I don't understand why we put up with their war crimes against Palestinians on the west bank. I do understand that Isreal does not want peace in the mid East, the Arabs fighting each other weakens themselves which is good for Isreal. Since their goals regarding peace in the mid East are fundamentally misaligned with ours I see no reason to criticize Obama for giving the finger to Isreal and Netanhyu. If it were a GOP POTUS you'd be celebrating his brashness.

Array
 

I wouldn't call myself a liberal but I can't believe the whackos that have taken over "conservativeism" - they have started to look more and more like tyrants themselves...

"Go bomb this country... Go set up military bases all over the world... fill them with our sons and daughters who must die in disputes we have no business being in in the first place."

"Of course, when I say our sons and daughters I do not mean mine specifically because they need to stay back and show their patriotism by paying less and less taxes."

"Only America has the right to stick it's nose in everyone's business but no other country should dare question our motives and must submit to our will completely... If not we will bomb them. Oh, and if we invade the wrong country, thats fine too ... Coz 'murica!!!"

 

BobTheBaker, I personally think Rubio has a very good shot of GOP nomination. Listening to Walker is like watching paint dry. And usually dem's are tolerable, but Hillary is too much of....ugh. She thinks she "deserves" to be president, and everyone is rightfully just shitting on her. She's sort of like Trump in the sense that she is a 'celebrity', except she has 'experience' in the realm of politics (whatever that means).

jankynoname, I don't see Trump going in with Rubio/Fiorina/Ryan as VP--you think those people will actually tolerate him? They've got to save face; they can't be associated with him. He's also branded as the "all politicians are stupid, so pick me" guy.

 

Here's what's going to happen in the next 16 years:

Scenario 1: Trump wins the Republican nomination, then loses to Hillary for president. He builds his wealth and runs even stronger in 2020.

Scenario 2: Trump doesn't win the Republican nomination, he runs independent, splits the Republican vote, and Hillary wins. He builds wealth and runs even stronger in 2020.

Trump isn't planning to be the president in 2016. He is planning to create four years of Hillary, wait for her to fuck up, and then destroy her in 2020. He is a cunning sociopath and a brilliant businessman that has planned 5 years ahead.

You can't stump the Trump.

 

You're the only one that gives a shit about your political views. Having said that, it's amazing how much you care about the political views of others.

Oh I know, of course you don't care, you're too cool. You just try to incite ill will and provoke a response. Like a petulant child. Grow up, respect the views of others or ignore it and if you're thinking they do it to you.... Be the better man and don't stoop to that level.

Basic shit.

"I am that I am"
 

@soap
All your doing is entertaining me. What do you think politics is? All it is is attempting to throw as much shade as possible and piss off the other candidates until they screw up or freak out and get caught.

You "being the bigger man" means nothing as this is a forum of mostly college students. Certain threads are meant to be serious and informative, this however is a thread titled "Republican Debate" so get your liberal ass out of here or sit back and take the shit I throw at you.

 

Trump is essentially winning the population of people who are not enlightened...as long as he continues to win that group he will be the GOP nominee.

The answer to your question is 1) network 2) get involved 3) beef up your resume 4) repeat -happypantsmcgee WSO is not your personal search function.
 
bfin:

Trump is essentially winning the population of people who are not enlightened...as long as he continues to win that group he will be the GOP nominee.

Why yes. The democrats are SO enlightened. Please tell me more how enlightened they are. Their 2 frontrunners are a radical socialist whose economic plan was even ridiculed by former Obama economists as being too unrealistic and a woman who sent classified e-mail on her home server and is utterly unlikable.

 

Brady go away. We are talking about the GOP. There are obviously a lot of enlighten GOP voters....they aren't voting for Trump, have you looked at the demographic numbers? Rubio is winning every group that has a college education and more advanced degrees.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/02/the-new-shape-of-th…

"In each of the first three contests, including the Iowa caucus, Trump has not run as well among voters with a college degree as with those lacking advanced education. But because those white-collar voters have fragmented among many choices, none of Trump’s rivals is consolidating enough of them to overcome the New Yorker’s dominant position among voters without a college degree. "

Yes I'm saying college educated people are enlightened and non-college educated people are not enlightened. I understand that isn't true in actuality but for the purpose I'll continue using that nomenclature.

The answer to your question is 1) network 2) get involved 3) beef up your resume 4) repeat -happypantsmcgee WSO is not your personal search function.
 

@MBAGrad2015" @Virginia Tech 4ever" bfin

You guys sound like a bunch of butt hurt babies. Can't vote outside the box of your career politicians. You're looking for another term of a President that gets next to nothing done, panders to his base, has no experience in the real world, and is controlled by lobbyists like a puppet. You can slam the Donald all you want for not sounding like an intellectual elitist, but at least he's accomplished something in his life. He's also opened the door for future elections featuring candidates from the business world, which is very exciting to me.

-Trump voter (white collar, 2 degrees)

 
adapt or die:

@MBAGrad2015
@Virginia Tech 4ever
@bfin

You guys sound like a bunch of butt hurt babies. Can't vote outside the box of your career politicians. You're looking for another term of a President that gets next to nothing done, panders to his base, has no experience in the real world, and is controlled by lobbyists like a puppet. You can slam the Donald all you want for not sounding like an intellectual elitist, but at least he's accomplished something in his life. He's also opened the door for future elections featuring candidates from the business world, which is very exciting to me.

-Trump voter (white collar, 2 degrees)

The next time you refer to someone as a "butt hurt baby" it might serve you well to look in the mirror. Although this kind of discourse doesn't surprise me coming form a Trump supporter.

As far as your comment, I don't care what you've accomplished in business if your platform is anti-free trade, pro-single payer healthcare, and if you've said that you're going to appoint left-wing judges to the Supreme Court and you have a long history of abuse of eminent domain and attempted (legal) bribery of politicians. George Soros is an accomplished businessman, too--that doesn't mean I want him within 1,000 miles of Washington, D.C.

Array
 
adapt or die:

@MBAGrad2015
@Virginia Tech 4ever
@bfin

You guys sound like a bunch of butt hurt babies. Can't vote outside the box of your career politicians. You're looking for another term of a President that gets next to nothing done, panders to his base, has no experience in the real world, and is controlled by lobbyists like a puppet. You can slam the Donald all you want for not sounding like an intellectual elitist, but at least he's accomplished something in his life. He's also opened the door for future elections featuring candidates from the business world, which is very exciting to me.

-Trump voter (white collar, 2 degrees)

You completely misunderstand the issue VATech and I have with Trump.

As a conservative, I want to vote for an actual conservative who has a history of espousing and fighting for the principles and policies I care about. No, this does not mean that a given candidate is perfect or that I agree with him on everything. But I have to be convinced that if he becomes President, this person would fight to move the country in the right direction.

The core issue with Trump is that he's not a conservative in any meaningful sense whatsoever. He burst into the public eye back in the 70's, and he has a very long public record of voicing his views on various issues. This is a man who has routinely bashed free trade and supported tariffs. This is a man who called for a massive wealth tax on the country's wealthiest people in order to pay down the entire national debt. This is a man who supported partial birth abortion and mentioned his ultra liberal sister as an "ideal" Supreme Court justice. This is a man who has voiced support for single payer health care. Even on his core issue, immigration, Trump supported amnesty as late as 2013. He has also routinely praised the Clintons, Pelosi, and Obama, remarking that Hillary was doing a "great" job as Secretary of State. He has donated money almost exclusively to democrats. He also has had no prior history of campaigning for and fighting for conservative causes.

Then, on June 16, 2015, at the age of 69, he announces his run for the GOP nomination and does a miraculous turnaround on par with the conversion of Saul at Damascus. Trump now wants us to believe that he did a total 180 right when he decided to run for president and that he's now a real conservative. And yet, when asked in interviews, he can't even define what conservatism means to him. Moreover, even during this campaign, Trump has changed his positions numerous times. On immigration, Trump started out by saying that he would deport all 11 million illegals. Later, he said that he would let most of them back in. On health care, Trump eviscerated Obamacare, but now he has come out in support of mandated health care. At the SC debate, Trump accused former President Bush (he was a terrible president) of intentionally lying to get us into Iraq (a kooky leftwing view that has been discredited). At the CNN townhall, he denied it and did a total flip flop. The list goes on. Trump is entirely unreliable, lacking any core principle or ideology. Trump is all about himself and will gladly change positions if they suit his personal ego. As a conservative who deeply believes in limited federal government, executive restraint, state and local rights, free market capitalism, economic growth, etc., I cannot vote for Trump. I have no idea what a Trump presidency will even look like, but I am willing to bet money that once in office, he will govern like a liberal democrat. After all, that is what he's been his entire adult life.

Second, Trump has displayed a stunning ignorance of important issues. Nowhere is this more prevalent than in economics. Trump, like socialist Bernie Sanders, sees the economy as a zero-sum game, where a person is only wealthy because he took from someone else. In the case of Sanders, the enemy is Wall Street and the financial elite; for Trump, the enemy is countries such as Mexico, China, Japan, etc. What's amazing here is that Trump has been saying the same stuff since the 80's. In 1988 Trump appeared on the Oprah show, where he talked about how Japan is eating our lunch in trade, how Japan is ripping us off, and that our leaders are a bunch of losers who can't negotiate with them. Sound familiar? What happened to Japan by the way? Are we all speaking Japanese and working for our Japanese overlords? Oh wait; that's right. They plunged into a massive recession in 1990, a YUGE real estate bubble collapse, and still have not fully recovered. Meanwhile, the U.S. economy roared during the 90's. Now, Trump is singing the same tune, but the main villain is big bad CHYNA. Trump argues that China is kicking our ass although our economy is significantly stronger. He argues that the reason manufacturing jobs have been declining is due to free trade agreements, although economic studies show that it is due to technology and automation, not trade. Trump doesn't get that the U.S. has been a huge net winner in trade. For instance, although iphones are made in China, only about 2-3% of the economic value of selling iphones go to China. Trump also believes in imposing massive tariffs, a move that would crush working class Americans since it will drastically raise the price of imported goods. Even in fiscal policy, Trump's tax plan would cost $10 trillion over a decade while ignoring any reform of entitlement programs.

If you want to vote for Trump because you are in love with his business experience (buying up mobsters and corrupt politicians to get what he wants) or you like his straight talk, that's fine. But realize that there are very good reasons for conservatives such as myself and VATech to oppose Trump.

 

Just saw the most recent polls in MA, MI, and NC. Assuming they are anywhere close to correct, I'm about to throw in the towel. Four candidates are slicing up 2/3 of the GOP electorate and Trump's faction is standing strong.

I still struggle to see how Trump can get 50% of delegates by the convention, but this new series of polls is devastating. What's most scary is that Trump is getting destroyed in the general election match-up with Clinton AND Sanders in North Carolina...

Array
 

As an Australian who keeps intimately up-to-date with U.S. politics, I seriously struggle to believe that any of you take the Republican Party seriously. These are the biggest group of religious-fundamentalists and intellectual degenerates I have ever witnessed. I understand that, given the career demographics on this site, their economic policies may be attractive. However, by the same token, I'm sure that you're all intelligent enough to see just how insane it would be to elect these people into a position of power in 2015.

I'm not saying that people should support candidates like Bernie Sanders. But how any intelligent, rational, logical human being could support the Republic Party is beyond me.

 
QGKZ:
I'm not saying that people should support candidates like Bernie Sanders. But how any intelligent, rational, logical human being could support the Republic Party is beyond me.

So WTF are you saying?

Newsflash Aussie, we have a 2 party system, so you need to vote for the candidate who's views most closely align with your own on the issues which matter the most to you. While I am not religious and do not believe faith should have a large part in govt and policy, economic issues are far and away the most important to me, so I will happily vote for the GOPer I feel has the best economic mind/ideas.

 
QGKZ:

As an Australian who keeps intimately up-to-date with U.S. politics, I seriously struggle to believe that any of you take the Republican Party seriously. These are the biggest group of religious-fundamentalists and intellectual degenerates I have ever witnessed. I understand that, given the career demographics on this site, their economic policies may be attractive. However, by the same token, I'm sure that you're all intelligent enough to see just how insane it would be to elect these people into a position of power in 2015.

I'm not saying that people should support candidates like Bernie Sanders. But how any intelligent, rational, logical human being could support the Republic Party is beyond me.

Why do you spend all of your time discussing and focusing on the politics of nations that aren't your own? Do you really have nothing better to do with your time?

“Elections are a futures market for stolen property”
 
QGKZ:

As an Australian who keeps intimately up-to-date with U.S. politics, I seriously struggle to believe that any of you take the Republican Party seriously. These are the biggest group of religious-fundamentalists and intellectual degenerates I have ever witnessed. I understand that, given the career demographics on this site, their economic policies may be attractive. However, by the same token, I'm sure that you're all intelligent enough to see just how insane it would be to elect these people into a position of power in 2015.

I'm not saying that people should support candidates like Bernie Sanders. But how any intelligent, rational, logical human being could support the Republic Party is beyond me.

If Americans wanted to hear the Australian stance on domestic politics, we'd just ask Russel Crowe. Funny enough, that may result in a republican president anyway.

 

Can't we all just vote for none of the above? Shit would be so much better if we didn't have any new laws passing for four years.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 
modestlocke9:

Romney would already have the bid right now if he was running. Also, for everyone worried about Trump and Carson, remember how well Herman Macain did for a while....

Of these two morons, I'd much rather have Trump over Carson. The guy is insane, but at least he doesn't think the world is 6000 years old like Carson.

 
Nuclear-Penguin:

Does anybody care about politics anymore? Unless you are part of the Washington DC Mafia, you should just mind your business by growing the power of your own Mafia.

You don't care about the American economy? Or tax rates? Or entitlement programs? You don't think these things affect you?

Commercial Real Estate Developer
 

Anyhow, DickFuld - I thought Rubio and Fiorina came off looking fantastic. I really like Rubio for the most part, while my opinion on Fiorina is shaky, but the two of them know how to come off to the American public. I continue to be amazed that both Bush and Kasich, on the other hand, don't know how to appear presidential. Kasich might actually be the most qualified for the post, but he acts like a mad scientist on stage. I think Bush would be a great president, but he can't stop shooting himself in the foot.

I don't think Trump and Carson will be around when it's all said and done. The person that worries me is Ted Cruz. He reminds me of a super villain - a brilliant man who uses his powers for evil instead of good. He comes off like a televangelist and does the stupidest shit in government, but he isn't dumb - he very much knows what he is doing.

Commercial Real Estate Developer
 
CRE:

Anyhow, @DickFuld - I thought Rubio and Fiorina came off looking fantastic. I really like Rubio for the most part, while my opinion on Fiorina is shaky, but the two of them know how to come off to the American public. I continue to be amazed that both Bush and Kasich, on the other hand, don't know how to appear presidential. Kasich might actually be the most qualified for the post, but he acts like a mad scientist on stage. I think Bush would be a great president, but he can't stop shooting himself in the foot.

I don't think Trump and Carson will be around when it's all said and done. The person that worries me is Ted Cruz. He reminds me of a super villain - a brilliant man who uses his powers for evil instead of good. He comes off like a televangelist and does the stupidest shit in government, but he isn't dumb - he very much knows what he is doing.

Am I the only one who thinks Ted Cruz looks and sounds like the slimiest politician I have ever seen? I seriously can't shake the feeling.

 

I've met Cruz a few times (his law school roommate is nominally in PE and we've crossed paths a few times) and he's an absolute dick. He's incredibly intelligent and I've met plenty of assholes in my time but he may have topped the list. He seemed like a mean, spiteful person for absolutely no reason, and that was how the conversations began.

 

I think we can all agree this drawn out process amongst the republicans (too many candidates) will hurt them, while they are sniping at each other and the media is entertaining irrelevant candidates who have no chance (Trump, dat boi Dougie Christie, Ben Carson) Hillary is preparing to annihilate one of Rubio, or Bush. I think the Dems are almost a foregone conclusion to win the next election, not that it matters anyway, all these people are feeding the ignorant masses the bs they wanna hear, they are two sides of the same coin. @Virginia Tech 4ever" while I agree on the afghan/iraq war (although congress was working based on false info) I would say that if we had a GOP prez we'd be knee deep in Syria/Libya by now. I think we can all agree the GOP are more war-hungry than the Dems.

Array
 
BobTheBaker:
"Virginia Tech 4ever">@Virginia Tech 4ever while I agree on the afghan/iraq war (although congress was working based on false info) I would say that if we had a GOP prez we'd be knee deep in Syria/Libya by now. I think we can all agree the GOP are more war-hungry than the Dems.

Uh, do you understand that it was the Republican Congress that rejected--and has continued to reject--war funding and war approval in Syria? I'm sorry, but your assertions don't stand under the weight of facts.

Here's what people don't get--in a 2 party system, you've got vast opinion differences on many topics within a party. There is the John McCain wing of the Republican Party and then there is the Ted Cruz wing and so on.

Array
 

Really disappointed with Rand. Was hoping he'd be able to grow his father's movement but he hasn't done anything. As far as the horse tracking goes I'd put everything on Rubio. Dude looks presidential, has the immigrant story, and is a senator from one of the most important states for the general.

I love the aussie saying the US is full of christian fundamentalists and mass shootings all over the place. Turn off the TV bud. The US is a massive diverse country that's represented by two parties that have multiple camps within each party, The early primary season is always a shitshow, but in the end its almost always a moderate who goes to the general.

 

I want to emphasise this: If we want to have a discussion on political policies founded on science, data, logic and rationality, then that is fantastic.

However, there is no excuse in 2015 for any of the religious stupidity which influences the vast majority of Republican policies.

I'm being serious here. I'm sure some of you have a sister or can put yourself in the shoes of someone who does. I'm sure some of you also have background knowledge in physiology/biology. Do you really think it is acceptable to push anti-abortion agenda, using a book written in the bronze-age as justification, whilst also threatening to put the entire country into financial default ? Do you people who are throwing MS at me seriously believe that this shit is acceptable?

 

Anyway, I think it's best for me to leave this thread before it becomes a never-ending political debate. As I said, there is a big difference between basing political policies on science and reality, and basing it on what some peasant(s) said in the bronze-age. There are obviously Republicans who are not like this (Trump), but the majority of them, including the Republican establishment, all are. Despite the outliers, do you really want to put a party filled with people this unintelligent into a position of utmost power?

Anyway, I wish you all the best. Peace.

 

Nemo laborum quis hic sunt quibusdam dolore alias aliquid. Qui repudiandae omnis rerum cupiditate aut. Dolorem quis qui repellat vel. Nemo ut minima suscipit quo magnam. Rerum consequatur nostrum sunt numquam animi. Minima asperiores sit est quam ut itaque.

Incidunt omnis vero odit nulla incidunt quo iste. Enim a corporis nisi enim quidem adipisci iste. Ratione sit est voluptas voluptatum facere accusamus explicabo.

Debitis culpa accusantium deserunt a atque ut est. Aut modi dolor in. Eos ducimus similique consequatur molestias doloremque.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 

Rem voluptatem qui aut tempore nemo nihil. Deserunt dignissimos facere quae corporis mollitia. Est velit maxime error placeat ut ratione. Dolor cumque reiciendis omnis veritatis.

Sed neque qui et illum aliquam ut. Quia debitis necessitatibus eligendi maiores saepe voluptas qui qui. Aut deserunt ratione numquam aut dolorem. Vel quis voluptas quidem id sint perferendis ab quibusdam. Aliquam unde ducimus est in alias et molestiae.

Aspernatur magnam aut alias et. Rerum mollitia beatae sed occaecati eos placeat laborum.

 

Assumenda laboriosam quia consequatur. Commodi pariatur at sapiente qui. Ipsam maxime ducimus libero rerum sunt officiis cum. Temporibus aut rerum rerum nesciunt officia repellat rem quos.

Et sit nihil soluta distinctio a repudiandae reiciendis nam. Dolorem placeat magni architecto et consequatur veritatis eos accusamus. Ut dolor dicta est aliquid aliquid sint porro. Dolores ad quisquam sit saepe autem iure vero. Et et est ipsa id nisi recusandae consequuntur.

Quod qui est sint ea inventore. Quae minima deleniti corrupti quia. Et commodi quis nostrum autem. Blanditiis quaerat vel dolores porro odio est. Culpa explicabo vitae non. Sit beatae quia voluptatem eum odit. Rerum deserunt magni rem reiciendis omnis vel voluptatum.

 

Sit repellendus reprehenderit aliquid tenetur consequuntur. Exercitationem eum iusto optio expedita alias incidunt.

Molestias qui libero ipsam saepe ipsum. Tempora est dolores excepturi.

Ipsum possimus saepe qui ut consequatur. Quis nisi ad qui dolor non sequi libero.

 

Facilis reprehenderit ut et fugiat. Nesciunt dolor rem illo. Placeat non error sunt.

Magnam tenetur quo sint animi a. Ad fugit explicabo et repellendus at ea. Sit dolorum atque quia in. Repudiandae dicta itaque enim rerum iusto.

Sint voluptatibus excepturi consequuntur deleniti sed et reiciendis. Quos non aliquid molestiae officiis. Illo iure fugit ipsum vel sit inventore est ut. Excepturi quia eaque ut aperiam qui perspiciatis. Architecto dolores et qui non. Molestiae accusantium iusto fugiat eum necessitatibus corporis eos.

Rem perspiciatis impedit veritatis sunt deleniti. Sint distinctio totam ex non at molestias. Quia in minima rem voluptatibus qui voluptate omnis. Odit eum qui dolorum nisi tenetur nihil a dicta. Eos veritatis officia incidunt doloremque explicabo distinctio.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
9
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”