The sad thing is... most of Trump's supporters simply won't care. No joke... that "man" once stated he could a person in cold blood up on stage and his supports would still cheer for him... I fear he isn't wrong.
View Trump as a revolutionary. Then, it starts to make sense. ....................................... Wild guess: Nobody will change their vote based on last nights "debate". ............... It seems most likely that HRC will win the election. If she does not start a bigger war, we will all be undeservedly lucky.
Words are cheap, while actions speak louder than words. If a politician promises a chicken in everyone pot, this promise is only good, if they actually deliver. It is only bad breath, if they do not deliver. PC has conditioned the mind of the leftist, to think making noises and sounds is the most important thing. But in the real world, actions speak louder than words. Trump supporters are not leftists. They will hear his words and then look at Trump's previous actions in life, to see if this; shooting, is something he will deliver. There is no history of gun violence, so they understand this is all theatrical, for affect. It is part of the show. Trump supporters have a brain and can divide words from action,s to see which combine and which diverge. Those on the left only hear words. The left, which is more feminized, is often like the lonely woman sitting in the bar, looking for a mate. Each night she meets different men who tell her what she wishes to hear. She dreams and hopes for the best, only to be taken advantage of by each man. Yet she never seems to learn how talk is cheap and action matter. Instead she continues to believe the same bull crap, from different men, because of the way flattering words, makes her feel. Her need to feel good, is like an addiction, that prevents her from seeing if there is a long term correlation between words and actions. Hillary has been shown to be unreliable and a self serving liar. She is analogous to the con artist who frequents the bar. Everyone knows he is a player, including the lady in the example. Yet, our lady in the example, enjoys his promises and lies, since his words are so important to her feelings. Trump's words are more like the bravado of old fashion men, when old fashion men and women, got together at parties. Their wives all know how men, with a little alcohol can be. They become like young boys with the minds of men. The wives, don't take their words too seriously, unless it looks like a fight may happen. This is mostly so friends don't go too far. Men also don't take it too seriously, since they will look for patterns of behavior and not patterns of words. A guy talking tough about his control over wife, who then tells his friend to be quiet, when she calls on the phone, is all about words, not actions. Men know the difference. They will let their friend rant, since there is no correlation between words and any harm. A feminized culture needs to relearn how the men of old used to think, so they can interpret Trump, properly. Trump never become PC and feminized. He is a draw back to earlier days, which appeals to many men and women, who are not afraid to be natural men and natural women. The wise wife of old, is not afraid of the loud noises coming from husband. She knows when push comes to shove, her husband does the best for both of them. His words may be tough, but in the end, his actions tells her what is in his heart.
Well, here is the thing about that revolutionary argument, for all the talk, there is really very little revolution in Trump's agenda. If you think diminishing the US footprint in in the world is revolutionary, then maybe you have a case. But if you are talking about overturning the "establishment" in Washington, revolution in the classical sense, there is virtually nothing revolutionary in Trump's agenda. For more than a year and a half now Trump has been railing about "corruption" in Washington. But the funny thing is up until 2 days ago, Trump had NO policies, not a single policy other than "trust me", to remedy Washington's corruption. It's telling that after railing so much and for so long about Washington corruption, it wasn't until the last few days before the election and when he was down and falling in the polling that he decided to come out with a few warmed over Republican anti-corruption policies which would do nothing to fix the corrupt he likes to complain about, and in all likelihood would make corruption worse. But, hey, it appeals to the Republican base, and that's what it's all about with Republicans. The Donald isn't a revolutionary candidate. He is revulsion. I don't worry about Clinton beginning another war. There is nothing in her background which would indicate such a thing. The Obama administration has reduced the number of American combat troops deployed in war zones to only a few hundred. When Obama took office there were tens of thousands of US troops deployed in active combat roles in multiple war zones. Under Obama, and because of Obama's policies and the role played by Clinton, that is no longer the case. Additionally, Trump's foreign policy positions are blatantly contradictory. Trump wants to strengthen the US military, or so he says. But he fails to understand that our allies are our strongest military advantage. By withdrawing or weakening our overseas troops as Trump has promised, he will greatly compromise America's military and economic advantage in the world. Trump cannot expand and strengthen US military power at the same time. Unfortunately for Trump and his Republican followers facts and reason do matter.
It's more than a little ironic to hear Trump supporters call Hilary "unreliable" and a "self serving liar" given their candidates record. That's the pot calling the kettle black in spades. Fact checkers have found Clinton tells no more lies than any other politician would be expected to tell whereas Trump tells a lie every 3 minutes, several fold more than Clinton.
Warren Buffett’s Nifty Tax Loophole It is brilliant in it's simplicity. Not only does he avoid most income taxes, but he does the same for thousands(millions?) of his shareholders. The trick is in not paying dividends. Berkshire hoards the money and buys another company that pays dividends, then stops paying the dividends, and uses the money to buy another company that pays dividends and stops paying the dividends,...etc...repeat... (much like a d.r.i.p. on steroids) These dividends are taxable at a current maximum rate of 23.8%. If Berkshire followed the average of the S&P 500, it would have paid out about $6 billion in dividends in 2014, simple huh? ...saving his shareholders about 1.5 billion dollars in income tax in exchange for about .9 billion in capital gains. nifty? Here's the link to the Barron's article: (good read) http://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-nifty-tax-loophole-1428726092
Susan Sarandon on Trump: “Some people feel Donald Trump will bring the revolution immediately if he gets in then things will really, you know explode,” Sarandon said. Maybe, even if he doesn't get in? (She came from the 60s, and part of her is still there)
Well, here is the problem with that, Warren Buffett's "Nifty Tax Loophole" isn't the "Nifty Tax Loophole" used by "The Donald". Additionally, dividends aren't taxed at 23.8%. If you are in a certain income bracket, capital gains are taxed at 23.8% else they are taxed at 15%. Buffet doesn't pay dividends, he uses the money to reinvest in his businesses. That's a legitimate business tactic. There is nothing wrong with using your profits to grow your business. Buffet reinvests in his businesses because he feels he can earn his stockholders more money, not because of any tax benefit. Trump's problem isn't so much his taking of a tax deduction for his business losses. It's the fact that everyone isn't allowed that deduction. Everyone is allowed to reinvest profits in their business. Everyone isn't allowed to take the deductions Trump took. Further, Trumps nearly billion dollar loss debunks his idea that he is somehow a successful businessman.
Good news for Republicans: http://www.theonion.com/video/gop-maintains-solid-hold-on-youth-that-already-loo-36778 Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Duh obvious? They are in different businesses with different business models. Roughly, Trump builds brick and mortar businesses and takes advantage of the tax incentives for that business segment. While Buffett buys existing businesses and takes advantage of the tax incentives for that business segment, in part by switching from dividends to capital gains which saved (avoided paying taxes of) over 6 hundred million dollars for his shareholders in just one year, or 6 billion of unpaid income tax dollars in 10 years, or over 60 billion of avoided taxes in 20 years---------------- all legal and nifty and berkshire hathaway chart(20 yr. compared to dow) shows the brilliance of building a business on sound tax avoidance as one of the components. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! nifty buy brk.a or brk.b for significant tax avoidance
If by which you mean she jammed her fist down his throat, ripped out his entrails and painted the walls with the contents of his bowels, then sure, she won on points. Many people considered Hitler to be a revolutionary, same with Stalin and Mussolini. You know, when they were just starting out, braying about conspiracies against them and the country and whatnot. That all turned out great, didn't it? Is it making sense for you yet? At what point is that sense going to.. umm.. I don't know.. Kick in? When his deportation force starts asking non-whites for proof of residency? Or when he becomes chummy with Assad and Putin, both of whom he praised in the 3rd debate? Oh, I don't know about that. I'd say many undecided female voters probably switched off. Not to mention those who value the constitution and who felt revulsion at his comments at not supporting the result of the election. Vets he claimed he gave money to, who are still waiting for that charity donation from his foundation for years now.. Say's the guy who is voting for the one who is talking about arming others with nuclear weapons for self defense.. Oh yeah, let's give Japan nuclear weapons.. And South Korea. Because that will end well, won't it? I'm sorry, I was laughing too hard at this part "Trump supporters have a brain and can divide words from action,s to see which combine and which diverge" to take the rest of that statement seriously. Ever heard of The Blaze? Trump's supporters tend to congregate there in the comments section. There's like this whole debate raging there at present because they bought the argument that Iraq and other countries in the ME are staging the Mosul incursion to help Clinton in the election and primarily the debate. These are the same people who routinely comment on "chem trails" poisoning conservatives and who believed the UN and Obama were in cahoots in taking over Texas in Operation Jade Helm. And Trump is more manly man? Don't even get me started on his hair and fake tan. Are you talking about Trump suddenly becoming pro-life, pro-gun, pro everything right wing Christian evangelists are and care about for the purpose of this election? But your statement right there, shows exactly how and why you are the perfect Trump supporter. While everyone else acts with revulsion, you sit there with your mouth open in admiration. The man speaks your language.. So, in other words, Trump is an immature little boy who lies a lot and who simply should not be taken seriously or believed because everyone knows he's just so full of shit. Is this the culture where men are real men are so full of shit that no one should believe them or take them seriously? Is this the culture you venerate, Wellwisher? Is this the type of man you bow down to?
Aaaannnddd.. It gets better. “Ladies and gentleman, I wanna make a major announcement today,” Trump told a rowdy crowd in Delaware, Ohio. “I would like to promise and pledge, to all of my voters and supporters and to all of the people of the United States, that I will totally accept the results of this great and historic presidential election,” he paused, “If I win.” It is the gift that keeps on giving.
Couple points: 1) as/re "chummy with Assad and Putin" not likely, but if we can bow out and let them take care of the middle east, we win by not wasting hundreds of billions of dollars more in that part of the world. What the hell are we doing there? What good has come of our spending hundreds of billions of taxpayers dollars there? We have been pawns of the Saudis long enough. It seems that they have studied the bribery part of the politics of Byzantium. May I remind you that neither Assad nor Putin has threatened the United States. Putin once said that the USA was the world's only superpower, and that he was fine with that. 2) as/re "the one[Trump] who is talking about arming others with nuclear weapons for self defense" That is complete and total bullshit. To come even close to that lie, one would need to parse several of Trumps comments and then combine the fragments to create something than even comes close to your claim, and would still miss the mark. Bells: You do not need to promulgate fictions and lies about Trump. Perhaps, it would be more instructive if you could find good things to say about your candidate? (without recourse to bashing Trump)
Almost Entertaining, and Bigly So Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! A fun aside: I did actually note the word "bigly" in my attempt to liveblog the debate, but the only reason I did so is that it's a joke among Maddow viewers. As Rachel explained some months ago, when she first noticed Donald Trump using the word, she and Susan have a couple of dogs, and one of whom is larger than the other, and the smaller one wags its tail a lot more enthusiastically; they are called Bigly and Squiggly. Note: Some transcripts―(automated?)―appear to be using the phrase "big league", instead. More broadly, Trump's sales-pitch deployment of comparatives and superlatives seemed extraordinarily clumsy, or maybe the word is desperate. Meanwhile, I'm going to go with the Conway story; it's kind of fun. Sophia Tesfaye's↱ headline for Salon―you know, the site of obnoxiously overwritten titles―is actually pretty straightforward: "Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway is already auditioning for her next gig". And, basically, this is the joke: • Robert Costa of the Washington Post, whose conservative curriculum vitae includes his time at National Review―which is where WaPo found him―issued a tweet criticizing Donald Trump↱ during the debate last night: "Bad hombres" = Trump being Trump Trump's other answers = Conway-esque • Kellyanne Conway retweeted↱. Tesfaye didn't bother with any manner of proper lede: Donald Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway must be making a covert cry for help, as nothing short of desperate confusion could explain a tweet she sent in the middle of the third presidential debate. It's a fun joke, but in truth I think the problem is that Kellyanne Conway, who was not especially prominent outside soccon circles, was probably never up to the task of handling, clearing, or defending Donald Trump. There have been the inevitable jokes, though they pass in chatter on the punditry circuit, about how Mr. Trump's campaign staff is not exactly what we would call top shelf. Truly smart hands stayed away for obvious reasons, and yes, it is fair to note that the GOP can't really claim they didn't see this part coming when their most successful political veterans staged an uncalculated but generally orderly withdrawal. (That is to say, they didn't look too panicked while running away in bloodblanched fear.) This seems to be something of a "clueless" gaffes; that is, if we watch closely, Team Trump is rife with Kinsley gaffes among the litany of nobody thinking anything through, but this has the appearance of having no clue the question exists. Or, as Tesfaye put it in the most reportage-styled paragraph of the short piece: After Trump's "bad hombres" comment caused a ruckus on social media, Trump's campaign manager took to Twitter to retweet a compliment and back-handed diss to her boss And that about sums it up. The headline? The lede? They sound like jokes because they are; nobody knows exactly what Kellyanne Conway meant, but, sure, I'll go with the headline insofar as it seems insensate self-promotion. It's not a matter of winning or losing; in the gaslit alt-right era of the new model conservative Conway is looking past the impending electoral loss and pitching some aspect of herself, her work, and her pride to others in the movement. Bannon can likely take Bossie with him wherever he goes, and if it's with Trump to some new enterprise we won't be surprised. Kellyanne Conway, though, is a pollster, and it seems old pollsters never die―Dick Morris landed at The Hill until he decided on a gig with the National Enquirer earlier this year―but, rather, just keep working away as if anyone should rightly be bothered to care. (Morris and McGann, by the way, were worth reading for the farce↱.) Kellyanne Conway has many potentially lucrative pathways to follow next. And, as a conservative political hand, she can follow pretty much most of them. A book for Regnery, tours of evangelical radio―which would in itself be hilarious for the irony↱ except that it probably should be sickening, or, at least, leave you feeling a little queasy for reasons other than having laughed too hard―upstart, right-flank insurgent Congressional candidates. If she's lucky, her polling data will point her back to a successful candidate who climbs the ladder and restores her fame, much like an actor trying to restart her career except in conservative politics, as the late Phyllis Schlafly showed, there is no last fuckable day. Kellyanne Conway can probably continue to screw the GOP like this for the rest of her life. ____________________ Notes: Conway, Kelly. "--- >". Twitter. 19 October 2016. Twitter.com. 20 October 2016. http://bit.ly/2eneU4q Costa, Robert. "Bad hombres". Twitter. 19 October 2016. Twitter.com. 20 October 2016. http://bit.ly/2dsQj86 Tesfaye, Sophia. "Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway is already auditioning for her next gig". Salon. 19 October 2016. Salon.com. 20 October 2016. http://bit.ly/2eVqmDo
Sorry, Sculptor, I'm reading your post at #275↑ and just not seeing it. Could you please clarify: What "fictions and lies about Trump"? What, did you just post them in a different thread, or something?
2) as/re "the one[Trump] who is talking about arming others with nuclear weapons for self defense" That is complete and total bullshit. To come even close to that lie, one would need to parse several of Trumps comments and then combine the fragments to create something than even comes close to your claim, and would still miss the mark.
