Oprah for Prez?

[carpedm9587]

You are no better, when did you have proper appraisal of Trump, instead triggered 'racist nazi!!!'

My objection to Trump has less to do with his politics than it has to do with his person. I have voted both Republican and Democrat in the past, and will do so again in the future. My assessment of Trump is based on his own words and actions, not what others say about him.

[carpedm9587]

I don't know for sure, but I suspect that Oprah is not an "entrepreneur" in the sense that Trump is. I think she is a celebrity with a staff that she commands to "entrepreneur" for her. Like "I think it would be great to expand the Oprah brand. We should do soup!" and then she sends someone out to get it done and take care of everything. I don't think she is hand's on.

You are correct that she is not a hands-on manager, but then neither is Trump. He too surrounds himself with managers. Both have companies with no formal board, so they rule by fiat. Both have filed for backruptcy. Both are political novices. Both are egotistical. The only two advantages Oprah has, AFAIAC, is a) she channels her narcissism into "feel-good, do-good" activities, rather than vindictive attacks on anyone or anything that opposes or criticizes her, and b) she is generally civil, speaks well, and does not exhibit Trump's chldish predelictions.

Otherwise, they are pretty much equally unsuited to the job. If she were running against Trump, I'd vote for her. If she was running against Pence, I'd vote for her. If she was running against Bloomberg, Romney, Bush, or Kasich, I'd vote for the Republican candidate.

[Sparko]

You are correct that she is not a hands-on manager, but then neither is Trump. He too surrounds himself with managers. Both have companies with no formal board, so they rule by fiat. Both have filed for backruptcy. Both are political novices. Both are egotistical. The only two advantages Oprah has, AFAIAC, is a) she channels her narcissism into "feel-good, do-good" activities, rather than vindictive attacks on anyone or anything that opposes or criticizes her, and b) she is generally civil, speaks well, and does not exhibit Trump's chldish predelictions.

Otherwise, they are pretty much equally unsuited to the job. If she were running against Trump, I'd vote for her. If she was running against Pence, I'd vote for her. If she was running against Bloomberg, Romney, Bush, or Kasich, I'd vote for the Republican candidate.

No every person who has talked about Trump has said he is very hands on. He has to know every detail of every deal. Pretty much a micromanager. Plus he pretty much built his "empire" himself from the ground up.

[Cerebrum123]

That's a visual

roguetech made a prototype a while back. You want to see the pictures?

[carpedm9587]

No every person who has talked about Trump has said he is very hands on. He has to know every detail of every deal. Pretty much a micromanager. Plus he pretty much built his "empire" himself from the ground up.

Knowing the detail of every deal does not make him a "manager," Sparko, nor does it mean he is managing his companies. And "micromanager" is a horrendous job skill for a chief executive. I worked for a CEO that fit that description. He did nothing to manage the company - he hired a COO to do that. Instead, he stuck hi snose into every business deal the company engaged in, from the smallest to the largest - losing multiple accounts in the process because of his mercurial whims.

Trump's current success, AFAICT, stems from one skill: media savvy. In the midst of a major bankruptcy that threatened to sink him, he received a proposal for "The Apprentice" and immediately saw it's media value. From there he rebuilt his brand and his image. His brand has made him the money he has now. In that respect, he and Oprah are similar, just not in the same venues.

[carpedm9587]

roguetech made a prototype a while back. You want to see the pictures?

The idea is frightening...

[Sparko]

Knowing the detail of every deal does not make him a "manager," Sparko, nor does it mean he is managing his companies. And "micromanager" is a horrendous job skill for a chief executive. I worked for a CEO that fit that description. He did nothing to manage the company - he hired a COO to do that. Instead, he stuck hi snose into every business deal the company engaged in, from the smallest to the largest - losing multiple accounts in the process because of his mercurial whims.

Trump's current success, AFAICT, stems from one skill: media savvy. In the midst of a major bankruptcy that threatened to sink him, he received a proposal for "The Apprentice" and immediately saw it's media value. From there he rebuilt his brand and his image. His brand has made him the money he has now. In that respect, he and Oprah are similar, just not in the same venues.

Trump built his empire by doing real estate deals. He is very hands on and a manager. He is pretty much the definition of a successful Entrepreneur. Nothing like Oprah who is pretty much a famous actress turned talk show host who decided to cash in on her celebrity with other products.

Trump was a billionaire long before the Apprentice.

[Cerebrum123]

The idea is frightening...

That's true of pretty much all rogutech products.

[Sparko]

The idea is frightening...

It's a timing problem. Like firing a machine gun through a propeller on an airplane. Luckily rogue has many minions for testing.

primary.jpg

top-down-rotor-blades-slow.jpg

seat-acceleration.jpg

animation-ejection-seat.gif

The mach 19 part is also a bit of a problem. Most volunteers end up as jelly.

[Cerebrum123]

It's a timing problem. Like firing a machine gun through a propeller on an airplane. Luckily rogue has many minions for testing.

His attempts at a time machine didn't work out so well either.

[carpedm9587]

It's a timing problem. Like firing a machine gun through a propeller on an airplane. Luckily rogue has many minions for testing.

The mach 19 part is also a bit of a problem. Most volunteers end up as jelly.

I'm glad you noted the problem with Mach 19.

It reminds me of this physics proof that Santa doesn't exist.

[Sparko]

I'm glad you noted the problem with Mach 19.

It reminds me of this physics proof that Santa doesn't exist.

What the scoffers don't realize is that Santa has a time machine. In his time it actually takes him about a year in subjective time to make the entire trip, but he keeps popping back in time to make each delivery so that they all get delivered all over the world in one night. What do you think Santa does for the 364 other days of the year? The guy is busy, busy, busy, delivering toys.

[carpedm9587]

What the scoffers don't realize is that Santa has a time machine. In his time it actually takes him about a year in subjective time to make the entire trip, but he keeps popping back in time to make each delivery so that they all get delivered all over the world in one night. What do you think Santa does for the 364 other days of the year? The guy is busy, busy, busy, delivering toys.

Ahhh... I see. So the other 364 days are spent going back and reliving that one day to complete the work. Nice! Unfortunately, that means that instead of a whooping 1/1000 of a second for each home, he has about 1/3 of a second for each home. His reindeer will burst into flame at a slightly slower pace, and it will take him a couple extra nanoseconds to go from jolly to jelly!

[Sparko]

Ahhh... I see. So the other 364 days are spent going back and reliving that one day to complete the work. Nice! Unfortunately, that means that instead of a whooping 1/1000 of a second for each home, he has about 1/3 of a second for each home. His reindeer will burst into flame at a slightly slower pace, and it will take him a couple extra nanoseconds to go from jolly to jelly!

You are forgetting about time dilation and the fact he can revisit the same exact moment multiple times.

[Leonhard]

Exactly.