2016 Election -- Part II
Poll
 | 57 votes (47.89%) | ||
| | 33 votes (27.73%) | ||
| | 12 votes (10.08%) | ||
| | 10 votes (8.4%) | ||
| | 4 votes (3.36%) | ||
| | 3 votes (2.52%) |
119 members have voted
Quote: boymimboTrump's further attacks on Machado via twitter early this morning alienates him further with women..
His Achilles heel is woman
Time and time again, he just cant keep himself from insulting Woman
The list is long
Susana Martinez, the governor of Mexico
Gold Star Mother Ghazala Khan
Elizabeth Warren
Maureen Dowd
Michigan pastor, Faith Green Timmons
Heidi Cruz
Carly Fiorina
Megyn Kelly
Alicia Marcado
ect
Last election, Rommney carried white woman by 14 points
Clinton is killing it with white woman, up 16 points
wow, a 30 point swing from the last cycle
Trump will lose to a woman due to woman voters because he cant help himself from personally insulting Women
I'm giddy :-)
That would be New Mexico, USA.Quote: terapinedSusana Martinez, the governor of Mexico
Of course shorter for Clinton, longer for Trump.
Clinton 4/11
Trump 9/4
Quote: MaxPenTrump 333 and Clinton 205. That's what electoral vote outcome is pointing towards.
Good luck with that.
If you really believe that, then let's bet on it. Talk is cheap.Quote: MaxPenTrump 333 and Clinton 205. That's what electoral vote outcome is pointing towards.
Quote: MichaelBluejayIf you really believe that, then let's bet on it. Talk is cheap.
Yep, kind of like air, it's free.
He doesn't believe it, he's just jerking your chain. There's a greater chance of Jill Stein winning Texas than Trump winning 333 EC votes.Quote: MichaelBluejayIf you really believe that, then let's bet on it. Talk is cheap.
It's like during the birther insanity, when birthers kept protesting, "Why doesn't Obama simply release his birth certificate?" Right, 'simply' release it. As though they were prepared to be satisfied once he did so. Because not only was it a forgery, according to the birthers, but it was a BAD forgery. (Birthers were suddenly experts at forgery, able to discern good efforts from poor ones.) I was kind of sad that Obama actually released his certificate, like he couldn't see that one coming.
Bottom line: The kind of people who make crazy assertions consistently ignore evidence that proves them wrong. They just invent *more* crazy assertions (election was rigged, birth certificate was a bad forgery) to justify the first one.
Quote: MichaelBluejayAnd come November when Trump *doesn't* win 292 votes, will MaxPen admit his error then? No, he'll claim the election was rigged. Trump told him so.
It's like during the birther insanity, when birthers kept protesting, "Why doesn't Obama simply release his birth certificate?" Right, 'simply' release it. As though they were prepared to be satisfied once he did so. Because not only was it a forgery, according to the birthers, but it was a BAD forgery. (Birthers were suddenly experts at forgery, able to discern good efforts from poor ones.) I was kind of sad that Obama actually released his certificate, like he couldn't see that one coming.
Bottom line: The kind of people who make crazy assertions consistently ignore evidence that proves them wrong. They just invent *more* crazy assertions (election was rigged, birth certificate was a bad forgery) to justify the first one.
The scary part is thzt trump could win 292. There are more wikileaks to come which will probably be some of the embarrassing 30k deleted emails that some foreign country has been collecting.
[tinfoil] Maybe Clinton promises to grant immunity to snowden if he doesn't spill the beans [/tinfoil]
Quote: terapinedBetfair Just adjusted their odds
Of course shorter for Clinton, longer for Trump.
Clinton 4/11
Trump 9/4
Betfair themselves don't set any odds, they're set by the player the same way stock prices are set and are constantly changing.
As noted Clinton is a significantly stronger favourite now compared to immediately prior to the debate.
Sure, something could happen between now and election day which turns the race on its head. But, by definition, that requires something to change. As it stands *right now*, at this point in time, Trump is nowhere close to being able to secure 292 electoral votes. Surely you don't think MaxPen's 292-votes prediction is based on his just *assuming* that some unknown event will occur to give Trump the landslide?Quote: boymimboThe scary part is thzt trump could win 292. There are more wikileaks to come which will probably be some of the embarrassing 30k deleted emails that some foreign country has been collecting.
Quote: MathExtremistHe doesn't believe it, he's just jerking your chain. There's a greater chance of Jill Stein winning Texas than Trump winning 333 EC votes.
I'll take that bet. I win if Trump wins at least 333 EC votes. You win if Jill Stein wins Texas. That is what you mean, correct? I can go up to $1,000,000. Or do you not really believe what you wrote?
Quote: ams288Obama should offer Trump a deal: Release your tax returns before the election and I'll pardon you for any tax fraud you've committed.
It'd be the ultimate trolling of Trump.
Obama is a troll so he might do it. It would be a break from the hate and race baiting from the Hillary supporters.
Quote: AZDuffmanObama is a troll so he might do it. It would be a break from the hate and race baiting from the Hillary supporters.
Is this groundhogs day? You made this exact same post yesterday.
Quote: ams288Is this groundhogs day? You made this exact same post yesterday.
Smartphone glitch of some kind.
Quote: AZDuffmanSmartphone glitch of some kind.
Smartphones are out of control. They post by themselves and have started exploding.
If only they could cause every Deplorable's smart phone to explode!
The New York Times has obtained parts of Trump's 1995 tax return. Shows he may not have paid taxes for 19 years.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html
(Not sure if the link will work. I'm on my phone and couldn't get the non-mobile link)
Quote:She was a 52-year-old woman who had worked 20 years for the railroad, had once been a Democrat and was now a Republican, and counted herself among the growing swath of people who occupied the fringes of American politics but were increasingly becoming part of the mainstream. Like millions of others, she believed that President Obama was a Muslim. And like so many she had gotten to know online through social media, she also believed that he was likely gay, that Michelle Obama could be a man, and that the Obama children were possibly kidnapped from a family now searching for them.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/%E2%80%98finally-someone-who-thinks-like-me%E2%80%99/ar-BBwSGYe?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp
Quote:The three documents arrived by mail at The Times with a postmark indicating they had been sent from New York City. The return address claimed the envelope had been sent from Trump Tower.
I wouldn't be surprised if Trump sent them to the Times himself.
Just like he sent the John Miller tape.
Maybe he really does want to lose?
Quote: ams288I wouldn't be surprised if Trump sent them to the Times himself.
Just like he sent the John Miller tape.
Maybe he really does want to lose?
Or, as we get closer to the election, some sane people with close ties to the Trump organization are really getting worried he will get elected and are trying to undermine his run.
Quote:Donald J. Trump declared a $916 million loss on his 1995 income tax returns, a tax deduction so substantial it could have allowed him to legally avoid paying any federal income taxes for up to 18 years, records obtained by The New York Times show.
The 1995 tax records, never before disclosed, reveal the extraordinary tax benefits that Mr. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, derived from the financial wreckage he left behind in the early 1990s through mismanagement of three Atlantic City casinos, his ill-fated foray into the airline business and his ill-timed purchase of the Plaza Hotel in Manhattan.
Tax experts hired by The Times to analyze Mr. Trump’s 1995 records said that tax rules especially advantageous to wealthy filers would have allowed Mr. Trump to use his $916 million loss to cancel out an equivalent amount of taxable income over an 18-year period.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
Quote: ams288I wonder what crazy stuff Trump will tweet out to get the media to not focus on the NYT tax story.....
I don't understand the significance of the story...it says Trump didn't do anything illegal with regard to his taxes and that the return with such a large tax loss certainly would likely have been scrutinized by the IRS to verify it was accurate and properly reported. This may explain while Trump has been under audit for the last 15 years...I think that is what he indicated at some point.
Quote: ParadigmI don't understand the significance of the story...it says Trump didn't do anything illegal with regard to his taxes and that the return with such a large tax loss certainly would likely have been scrutinized by the IRS to verify it was accurate and properly reported. This may explain while Trump has been under audit for the last 15 years...I think that is what he indicated at some point.
Stealing $5 dollar is illegal. Characterizing something as legal or illegal isn't really telling the whole story.
A politician could do a lot of damage without ever doing anything illegal.
Quote: ParadigmOK, I am listening...what is the whole story?
No one knows the whole story yet. Are you sure you read the article?
For instance:
Quote:The $916 million loss certainly could have eliminated any federal income taxes Mr. Trump otherwise would have owed on the $50,000 to $100,000 he was paid for each episode of “The Apprentice,” or the roughly $45 million he was paid between 1995 and 2009 when he was chairman or chief executive of the publicly traded company he created to assume ownership of his troubled Atlantic City casinos. Ordinary investors in the new company, meanwhile, saw the value of their shares plunge to 17 cents from $35.50, while scores of contractors went unpaid for work on Mr. Trump’s casinos and casino bondholders received pennies on the dollar.
Bolding mine.
Quote: ParadigmOK, I am listening...what is the whole story?
No one knows the whole story yet. Are you sure you read the article?
For instance:
Quote:The $916 million loss certainly could have eliminated any federal income taxes Mr. Trump otherwise would have owed on the $50,000 to $100,000 he was paid for each episode of “The Apprentice,” or the roughly $45 million he was paid between 1995 and 2009 when he was chairman or chief executive of the publicly traded company he created to assume ownership of his troubled Atlantic City casinos. Ordinary investors in the new company, meanwhile, saw the value of their shares plunge to 17 cents from $35.50, while scores of contractors went unpaid for work on Mr. Trump’s casinos and casino bondholders received pennies on the dollar.
Bolding mine.
Quote: ParadigmSo one of the public companies that he ran failed and declared bankruptcy. I think we knew that, in fact I think a few of his companies declared bankruptcy. Guess what happens in bankruptcy...creditors lose money, shareholders lose money and the CEO generally loses his job. So what is the story again, because I haven't heard anything new yet?
Guess what happens in a Presidency when you have failures. YOU don't get a pass when people suffer economic losses.
Actually you don't get a pass when you're running for office. Hillary, Romney, Clinton, Bush all had their past failures and successes examined.
So, don't pretend it doesn't matter. Or go ahead and pretend, because that's a typical Trump apologist.
BTW, my local paper had a great take on the election:
Quote: Austin ChronicleJames Gassman, a Republican who served in the George W. Bush administration, wrote of his attempts to persuade his friends that Trump is simply "unfit to be president" and that they should vote for Clinton. The common response he received is revealing. "They won't vote for Mr. Trump because he's a threat to the republic, but won't vote for Mrs. Clinton either because she'll raise taxes." Destruction of representative democracy, or higher taxes? To some folks, that's a tough choice.
Where's the risk?
Quote: rxwineGuess what happens in a Presidency when you have failures. YOU don't get a pass when people suffer economic losses.
Really? Ask all the bond and debt holders of GM and Chrysler who had their lien order jumped in 2009 when the UAW was handed most of the equity the feds did not take for themselves.
The tax returns seem to be simple carry forward/carry back of losses and totally legal. Individuals can do the same on capital losses, I've done it myself on stock losses. You have to be an idiot not to do it.
SNL nails this
My favorite part
After some Trump gibberish
Lester turns to Clinton, "Senator Clinton, what do think about that?"
Clinton " I think I'm gonna be President"
Dems in Congress should fast track legislation to close the "Trump Tax Loophole." Let them run on that. It'd be a winner.
Quote: AZDuffmanReally? Ask all the bond and debt holders of GM and Chrysler who had their lien order jumped in 2009 when the UAW was handed most of the equity the feds did not take for themselves.
What? I'm talking about potential voters. If the bond and debt holders feel they should blame the President, then they won't cast votes for him. If anything you're making my point.
Quote: ams288When your entire campaign is built around "making America great again," and it turns out you haven't paid federal income tax in 20 years, you might just be a giant orange hypocrite.
Dems in Congress should fast track legislation to close the "Trump Tax Loophole." Let them run on that. It'd be a winner.
Perhaps they should but the Dems are not going to do that because they are just as much in bed with the people that want those loopholes as the other side. Wall Street obviously does not think Hillary is going to change a whole lot of things impacting them and the business folks that support Hillary don't think she is going to change the "Trump Tax Loophole" either.
It is fine to examine what happened with Trump; this huge loss is a "failure" on his part. I think it is pretty much out there that he has "failed" in some business and "succeeded" in others. That is part of the record. This illegally gained (assuming that, unless Trump actually authorized the release of this tax document which no one can order released) document tells us nothing we didn't already know or reasonable assume...the reason Trump pays very little in taxes is because he uses the tax code in his favor. He does the same thing most everyone of us does with his taxes each year--tries to make them as low as possible.
So your idea COULD be a winner, but I bet you couldn't find 50 Democrats in the House or Senate willing to put it forth right now or after the election of Hillary...can you imagine how getting out of line with her on this kind of issue could end for them? Bernie was your best bet for moving this kind of legislation forward.
Quote: ams288
Dems in Congress should fast track legislation to close the "Trump Tax Loophole." Let them run on that. It'd be a winner.
It is not a "loophole" it is to protect corporations in cyclical situations. It is more fair to tax corporations over time than the artificial constraints of a calendar. This is Business Finance 101. Not a joke, that is were you learn about it.
A bigger winner would to be to ban all income taxes in the Constitution and go to a consumption tax.
When Hillary said Trump didn't pay taxes at the debate and he interjected "That'd make me smart," the audience in the room gasped.
This is not a winning issue for Trump. The only people who are claiming it is are hardcore Trump supporters.
His campaign is centered around him being a genius business man. A genius business man who we now know incurred a $916 million loss one year.
Quote: ams288Rudy Giuliani and Chris Christie were on two different Sunday morning shows this morning and both referred to trump as "genius" for not paying taxes. It appears that the campaign sent out talking points to the surrogates telling them to call him a genius.
It is smart to minimize taxes. Only an idiot would pay more taxes than they have to. Even Obama, who bragged about how he had so much money that he did not need a tax cut in 2001 did not send extra in. Nor did Hillary, another who bragged about how well off she was. And the favorite, Warren Buffet, did he send any extra in?
What he did was slap Hillary's nonsense question right down. He does not act or answer like a politician. This has been the core of his popularity.
BTW: genius businessmen sometimes take losses. That is how it is when you are in business. Self-made men do not just get automatic raises as if they worked for the government. You get better and not as good years. That he took a big loss like that and not only survived but built himself even bigger than before just shows what a successful alpha-male he is.
Quote: AZDuffmanThat he took a big loss like that and not only survived but built himself even bigger than before just shows what a successful alpha-male he is.
You're veering into self parody territory.
What loophole? That you don't pay taxes on losses? That's a loophole to you?Quote: ams288When your entire campaign is built around "making America great again," and it turns out you haven't paid federal income tax in 20 years, you might just be a giant orange hypocrite. Dems in Congress should fast track legislation to close the "Trump Tax Loophole." Let them run on that. It'd be a winner.
There's nothing hypocritical about having losses that wipe out your taxes. It would be extremely unfair and unreasonable if we *couldn't* use losses to offset income.
Of all the bad things you can say about Trump (and there's no end to that), this is not one of them. The only ways this is a scandal are if he really had a gain but used loopholes to disguise it as a loss (and no one's alleging that), and that this supposedly brilliant businessman managed to have a personal loss of nearly a billion dollars.
Quote: ams288Dems in Congress should fast track legislation to close the "Trump Tax Loophole." Let them run on that. It'd be a winner.
What Loophole? I thought you had an accounting background. If you lose money in year one, the law says you carry that loss forward to offset future years income. Actually, the law forces you to carrying the loss back two years and get a refund for prior years tax liability unless you elect out of the carryback.
Your definition of a "loophole" is an indication of your inability to understand the most basic tax concept. Of course it isn't surprising to many here that you are drawing conclusions based on a basic misundestanding of the facts.
Quote: rxwineGuess what happens in a Presidency when you have failures. YOU don't get a pass when people suffer economic losses.
Did you want to comment on the Solyndra fiasco at this point...it seems relevant.
