Official Donald Trump for President thread (4 Viewers)

[Sammy3469]

We know the Trump Foundation solicited donations in states other than New York, and at some point they might have solicited online.  Would the Foundation have to go through a similar registration process in all states that they failed to do in New York?

I don't think so....it's a NY foundation, so they are the governing state law I think.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

So let's recap, today:

- AP does story on Trump's sexist past, including hounding female staffers on TV set.

- Trump is connected to Iranian bank (possibly illegal) and also that bank has terror ties.

- Trump seems to attack injured vets. Again.

- Trump Foundation shut down.

- Trump continues to swirl in tax controversy.

Meanwhile:

Rubio leads by +7 in Florida.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Yeah, the laws have changed since then, but I believe that in the 90s you could do accelerated depreciated. Any tax experts remember?

@Steve Tasker

Depends on the type of property.  "Real property" aka the building itself and its main structural components cannot have accelerated depreciation.   The additional assets in service - furniture, cabinetry, appliances, flooring/carpeting, decorative finishes, etc., are considered "personal property" and are allowed shorter depreciable lives (5 or 7 years these days).  I am not sure what was in place in the mid-90s but I know the shorter lives were available on personal property.  I don't believe there was any "bonus depreciation" that we have now, but I am not sure.  Section 179 expensing would be irrelevant today as it is not allowed on a rental.  I am not sure what exactly was allowed in the mid-90s because I was in approximately 4th grade in 1995....

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Silly me, I thought Democrats were the very bottom of the barrel of our society.

Weak, even for you, and that's saying something.

 

[bagger]

Hillary and her team has just been given a gift. It would a major missed opportunity not to run with it. You may not care if he hasn't paid taxes the last 20 years due to some loophole, but it will matter to a lot of average working class Americans who similarly can't take advantage and avoid taxes.

I wonder.

 

[TheMagus]

They go back to the trailer parks, watch Trump's new cable news network, buy his crap, and complain for the next four years. The people at those rallies are literally the very bottom of the barrel of our society. Ideally, the Republican Party realizes that pandering to these folks is a great way to ensure defeat, and swings back to the center.

There is the Republican party that can change course. But there is also the 24 hour news cycle and talking heads on the right that are going to stay on course. They have a gold mine. And that is likely where most of the irrational fears discussed earlier in the thread are coming from. Not the party itself.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

It has been said that Hannity and Limbaugh do not want Trump to really win.  It would be so much better for their ratings to have these bottom feeders tuning in everyday to listen about Hillary killing America.  They can sell their gold and other #### to this mouth breathers.  If Trump wins the only thing that Hannity and Limbaugh can do is go after Pelosi again?  Such a racket.

1.) Hillary wins.

2.) Trump hires Roger Ailes to run his new alt-right news network.

3.) Profit.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

There is the Republican party that can change course. But there is also the 24 hour news cycle and talking heads on the right that are going to stay on course. They have a gold mine. And that is likely where most of the irrational fears discussed earlier in the thread are coming from. Not the party itself.

The party itself does get to control who runs as a Republican in the various races, though. Telling the crazies to go elsewhere would hurt short-term, surely, but they clearly need a complete overhaul and re-branding if they hope to compete on a National level ever again. The Trump-stench isn't going to just disappear after he loses.

 

[bueno]

Depends on the type of property.  "Real property" aka the building itself and its main structural components cannot have accelerated depreciation.   The additional assets in service - furniture, cabinetry, appliances, flooring/carpeting, decorative finishes, etc., are considered "personal property" and are allowed shorter depreciable lives (5 or 7 years these days).  I am not sure what was in place in the mid-90s but I know the shorter lives were available on personal property.  I don't believe there was any "bonus depreciation" that we have now, but I am not sure.  Section 179 expensing would be irrelevant today as it is not allowed on a rental.  I am not sure what exactly was allowed in the mid-90s because I was in approximately 4th grade in 1995....

I seem to recall it was different in the 1990s, but I'm too lazy to go back through my tax records to find out. I seem to remember using a sum of the years depreciation method back then.

 

[massraider]

Betting sites have it back about where Clinton was ahead at her height in the immediate aftermath and wake of the DNC (here, 80%/20%). Just an epic, historically DISASTROUS post-debate week for Trump. 

http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-president-winner#Link10

That's what I'm talking about.

 

[massraider]

I'm sure they would feel the same way about you.

Sure, but two people that disagree about something don't always have strong arguments and legitimate concerns.

Sometimes, one side is just incorrect. 

 

[bagger]

What's going to happen the day after Hillary wins? Seems like there is more of a rage now than I ever recall. There are bad people on both sides but almost daily at a Trump rally people chant "Trump that #####!" or something about putting her in jail etc. Will they just slither away?  

Bigger concern is the next guy with more political ambitions and less about ego who taps into this base. 

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Sure, but two people that disagree about something don't always have strong arguments and legitimate concerns.

Sometimes, one side is just incorrect. 

I'm fairly certain that the imbeciles screaming at the Trump rallies are incorrect in this case. 

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

23 states now asking for help from DHS to protect them from hackers.

 

[massraider]

I'm fairly certain that the imbeciles screaming at the Trump rallies are incorrect in this case. 

Exactly.

I don't care if 20,000 yokels are out there screaming.  I do not think we need to 'address their concerns'.

It legitimizes them.  

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Exactly.

I don't care if 20,000 yokels are out there screaming.  I do not think we need to 'address their concerns'.

It legitimizes them.  

Agreed. Addressing the issues that lead to the rise of Trumpism in general is one thing. Giving the (relative) handful of crazies that show up to his rallies a place at the grown up table is quite another.

 

[bueno]

Sure, but two people that disagree about something don't always have strong arguments and legitimate concerns.

Sometimes, one side is just incorrect. 

In this case people supporting either major candidate are incorrect.

 

[bueno]

Exactly.

I don't care if 20,000 yokels are out there screaming.  I do not think we need to 'address their concerns'.

It legitimizes them.  

How about 18 million?

 

[squistion]

Steven Rattner ‏@SteveRattner Oct 2

Giuliani: Trump is a genius for not paying taxes

Sanders: if everyone was a genius like that, we wouldn't have a country

@ThisWeekABC

 

[General Malaise]

Bigger concern is the next guy with more political ambitions and less about ego who taps into this base. 

Donald Trump Jr?

 

[Riversco]

Gallup has a really simple question that asks:  Which party do you think can do a better job of handling the problem you think is most important?

The party that wins this poll also wins every election (except 1980).  The republicans are actually winning this poll this year, but Hillary will win anyway.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx

Also, any election where the economy is the #1 issue, the voters change the party that runs the white house.  This happened in 1980, 1992, 2000, and 2008.  The economy is the top issue again this year, which again says Trump will win.  But Hillary will win anyway.

Voters are simply turned off by Trump.  He lost the convention and the debate.  That will overcome all of these trends.

 

[massraider]

How about 18 million?

I think the number of racists/straight up hateful morons in this country is far higher, so no: I am not interested in having some serious discussion with people not bright enough to vet the stories they are being fed. 

The internet allows for 4Chan, and Twitter trolls, and InfoWars.  That doesn't make any of those turds legitimate.  

People disgusted with both sides? Yah man, I'm there. Sanders, Gary Johnson, you think someone else has an answer, I'm in.

I'm talking about a very specific group here. Maybe it's 18 million or 13 million. I'm not talking about Never Clinton types voting for Trump.

I'm talking about: Trump is the answer, he can fix it, he is going to be good for the country.  

Anyone with that mindset isn't worthy of a legitimate dialogue. Because the evidence is laughingly overwhelming that he isn't qualified to run a casino, let alone a country.

So if people aren't bright enough to operate the Google machine, and read just about anything about him, they aren't bright enough to have opinions worth considering.

 

[massraider]

Gallup has a really simple question that asks:  Which party do you think can do a better job of handling the problem you think is most important?

The party that wins this poll also wins every election (except 1980).  The republicans are actually winning this poll this year, but Hillary will win anyway.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx

Also, any election where the economy is the #1 issue, the voters change the party that runs the white house.  This happened in 1980, 1992, 2000, and 2008.  The economy is the top issue again this year, which again says Trump will win.  But Hillary will win anyway.

Voters are simply turned off by Trump.  He lost the convention and the debate.  That will overcome all of these trends.

Its there a collection of all your predictions anywhere?

 

[WetDream]

Silly me, I thought Democrats were the very bottom of the barrel of our society.

Speaking of barrel bottoms, where do you and Larry Craig practice your wide stances these days?

 

[bueno]

I think the number of racists/straight up hateful morons in this country is far higher, so no: I am not interested in having some serious discussion with people not bright enough to vet the stories they are being fed. 

The internet allows for 4Chan, and Twitter trolls, and InfoWars.  That doesn't make any of those turds legitimate.  

People disgusted with both sides? Yah man, I'm there. Sanders, Gary Johnson, you think someone else has an answer, I'm in.

I'm talking about a very specific group here. Maybe it's 18 million or 13 million. I'm not talking about Never Clinton types voting for Trump.

I'm talking about: Trump is the answer, he can fix it, he is going to be good for the country.  

Anyone with that mindset isn't worthy of a legitimate dialogue. Because the evidence is laughingly overwhelming that he isn't qualified to run a casino, let alone a country.

So if people aren't bright enough to operate the Google machine, and read just about anything about him, they aren't bright enough to have opinions worth considering.

I understand your point, but unfortunately, they are bright enough to vote - which is why we ignore growth in their numbers at our own peril.

 

[kface]

I understand your point, but unfortunately, they are bright enough to vote - which is why we ignore growth in their numbers at our own peril.

I think paying attention to their opinions is more perilous than ignoring them completely.

 

[bagger]

Donald Trump Jr?

Lol could be

 

[Riversco]

Its there a collection of all your predictions anywhere?

Not really.  I was a huge fan of Carson Wentz in the NFL draft and blasted the Rams and Browns for not picking him.  That's about it.

I was really concerned the Chiefs or Broncos would trade up for Wentz because that would kill any hopes the Chargers would compete for a long long time.

I said this on March 27th:

My big fear is that either the Broncos or Chiefs wind up with Carson Wentz.  I think Wentz is a legit star.  He would transform the Chiefs into a super bowl favorite possibly in his rookie year.  The Broncos would be that much better.  The Browns just signed RGIII which must up the odds Wentz might somehow slide to the AFC West.  If I was the Broncos or Chiefs and Wentz started falling I'd give up quite a bit to go get him. 

 

[RBM]

Sure, but two people that disagree about something don't always have strong arguments and legitimate concerns.

Sometimes, one side is just incorrect. 

And they would say the same. See the circle of idiocy you're entangled in?

 

[RBM]

 

[massraider]

And they would say the same. See the circle of idiocy you're entangled in?

Only a circle if you engage/legitimize it.

Bunch of people still believe Obama is a Muslim. There's nothing legitimate about this kind of stupid.

 

[culdeus]

Steven Rattner ‏@SteveRattner Oct 2

Giuliani: Trump is a genius for not paying taxes

Sanders: if everyone was a genius like that, we wouldn't have a country

@ThisWeekABC

Which one was the socialist. I forget. 

 

[Bob Magaw]

The more I find out about Trump's business, the more I realize he's not very good at the actual business of real estate investing.

Just saw a segment on CNN (Wolf Blitzer show), with the first senator to publicly endorse him? He stated American don't care about taxes, but was corrected (fact checked) that polls show people do care whether or not Trump releases his taxes by an overwhelming, 3-1 majority. He was also questioned why he would say the nearly billion dollar loss deduction was taken because the business environment at that time ('95) was nearly depression-like. The host noted that simply wasn't true, business was booming then. Senator than switched up and said he didn't care, it was 20 years ago and irrelevant to more substantive issues.

IMO, if he is running on his business prowess, than the last question ABSOLUTELY is relevant. If he is a charlatan, than that cuts off at the knees a key reason voters are supposed to favor him (in the world of his campaign - another of dozens or hundreds of examples where because he has said/done so many contradictory things, it is literally impossible for his surrogates to be consistent - invariably, he will have said or done the opposite of what they are currently espousing, especially ridiculous and absurd when the faces of the spin that are hounding Clinton about family infidelity, such as Giuliani and Christie, were THEMSELVES plagued by this exact same issue, completely, shamelessly hypocritical).

Multiple analysts have said it appears that Trump knows next to nothing about economics and accounting, based on past interactions and reports of them. For just one example, his massive blunder in buying up three casinos in Atlantic City that would be in the position of directly competing against each other.

Did anybody else watch The Choice Frontline Doc on PBS. It was amazing how the through line of their character and personality was shaped and evident at such an early age. A few things that stood out for Trump. Someone said he was basically the same person as when he was in first grade. Also, when he lost the federal trial on discriminatory rental practices (TWICE, though without being forced to admit guilt), he spun it as a "win". Now, if he was forced to no longer code apps with C for colored and rent to black applicants, he didn't "win". His approach was to keep saying he won over and over, with the thinking that eventually people would believe it if they heard it often enough. In a related point, he thought there was no such thing as bad advertising, because being in the news they would remember HIM, but after a while they would no longer remember WHY they didn't like him. This is a dicey strategy in a modern election with legions of fact checkers to remind many WHY they are skeptical of his equivocations, double talk, contradictions, etc.         

 

[Steve Tasker]

I seem to recall it was different in the 1990s, but I'm too lazy to go back through my tax records to find out. I seem to remember using a sum of the years depreciation method back then.

Could be, I know nothing really other than seeing them come through on old tax returns in our office.  Those assets are all fully depreciated at this point.

 

[Paulymaggs]

The perception that immigrants are taking away jobs.

The plight of the working class; the loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs.

The feeling that, for a number of reasons from internal social decay to external threats related to terrorism, that we are no longer safe.

The strong resistance to Globalization.

Disgust with D.C. in general.

The huge loss of opportunity for advancement for the working and middle class.

Possibly a backlash against social policies of both Republicans and Democrats.

The feeling among conservatives in general that the Republican Party has deserted or betrayed them.

Among small businessmen, the explosion of regulation and the cost of compliance.

That's off the top of my head. I'm not saying I believe Trump can address any of this; I'm saying that he gives people a focus point for rebellion.

Lets title this appropriately:  Alt Right White Fears.

 

[Bob Magaw]

They go back to the trailer parks, watch Trump's new cable news network, buy his crap, and complain for the next four years. The people at those rallies are literally the very bottom of the barrel of our society. Ideally, the Republican Party realizes that pandering to these folks is a great way to ensure defeat, and swings back to the center.

Mark Cuban predicted last week Trump will be BK again, AGAIN, within seven years. Some analysts have noted his political brand could become so toxic, it is going to cross-impact and hurt him business-wise. Already numbers are reportedly down, whether real estate rentals or in hotels. He doesn't sell Trump steaks and vodka any more. He is almost exclusively a brander, and if his brand goes in the toilet, where does that leave him? Maybe he can found a media empire (The Birther Channel)? But as one of the most relentless investigators of his income tax dodging observed, can the typical Trump voter afford "Trump" luxury ($1,000 a night suites, etc.)?    

 

[Ignoramus]

So the trolls have run out of bash Trump material now and have to resort to bashing Trump's kids? Wow. You guys need to get help. Seriously.

Hasn't paid anything in twenty years and the ONE policy he has never changed positions on?  Repealing the Estate Tax.

Could his motivation for running for President be any more clear?

 

[Riversco]

You want to discuss whats motivating these candidates to run?  Hillary is running simply because she lusts for power. Trump actually wins that issue. 

 

[Ignoramus]

Could be, I know nothing really other than seeing them come through on old tax returns in our office.  Those assets are all fully depreciated at this point.

Yep, accelerated depreciation while they were owned by pass-through entities so he could claim the yuge losses.  Then transferred them to his publicly-traded company when they were worth much, much less.  Then declare bankruptcy and stiff the shareholders (while collecting $80+ million).  Genius!

 

[Coeur de Lion]

You want to discuss whats motivating these candidates to run?  Hillary is running simply because she lusts for power. Trump actually wins that issue. 

"Pretend to run for President to convince 10 million rubes to buy my crappy stuff and sit in my next ten years of real estate seminar scams" isn't all that noble, guy.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

It's been interesting to me watching a group of people that have spent the last 20 years complaining about poor people who can barely put food on the table for (legally) not paying enough taxes now wanting to high five a billionaire who doesn't really need the extra money for (maybe legally) finding loopholes to do the same thing.

 

[Ignoramus]

You want to discuss whats motivating these candidates to run?  Hillary is running simply because she lusts for power. Trump actually wins that issue. 

The position of President has always wielded great power.  It's not normally so blatantly used as a personal piggy bank. 

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Mark Cuban predicted last week Trump will be BK again, AGAIN, within seven years. Some analysts have noted his political brand could become so toxic, it is going to cross-impact and hurt him business-wise. Already numbers are reportedly down, whether real estate rentals or in hotels. He doesn't sell Trump steaks and vodka any more. He is almost exclusively a brander, and if his brand goes in the toilet, where does that leave him? Maybe he can found a media empire (The Birther Channel)? But as one of the most relentless investigators of his income tax dodging observed, can the typical Trump voter afford "Trump" luxury ($1,000 a night suites, etc.)?    

He's almost certainly positioning himself as the head of a new alt-right cable news channel. And it'll be a great place to sell those stupid trucker hats, etc to his followers. He's just changing his customer demos.

 

[Bob Magaw]

How Donald Trump Ditched U.S. Steel Workers in Favor of China

http://www.newsweek.com/how-donald-trump-ditched-us-steel-workers-china-505717

 

[Bob Magaw]

He's almost certainly positioning himself as the head of a new alt-right cable news channel. And it'll be a great place to sell those stupid trucker hats, etc to his followers. He's just changing his customer demos.

He will need to sell a lot of MAGA hats if his real estate empire implodes due to his political toxicity.

 

[RBM]

Alt-right  

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Alt-right  

It's nicer than "lunatic fringe of bigoted morons." 

 

[3C's]

seriously, has there been a worse communicator than Trump? The guy literally cannot say the right things (and I am not talking PC things).

I think it's just that he talks too bigly for the common man.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

He will need to sell a lot of MAGA hats if his real estate empire implodes due to his political toxicity.

How much is Fox News worth?

 

[3C's]

everybody ignore bueno

he's the guy who claimed that Senator Larry Craig, of the soliciting gay sex in a bathroom Larry Craig's, couldn't possibly be gay because he knew the guy and his wife personally.

there's a level of delusion at play here that can't be reasoned with

It's almost like we're seeing delusion take hold right in front of our eyes.