Trump runs for POTUS/ Trumped Up! Part VII

[uke2se]

That'd be the same Trump that:
1. In 1996 gatecrashed (he wasn't invited) a benefit for children with AIDS, sat on the stage, posed for photos, and then left without donating anything.
2. "Donated" more than a quater-of-a-million dollars (US$264,631, the largest donation ever made by the Trump Foundation) to fix up a fountain outside the windows of the Plaza Hotel in New York. Trump owns the Plaza Hotel.
3. Gave $1,000 to the German-American Hall of Fame after being inducted. He charges them more than twenty thousand dollars for rental of space at Trump Tower for the ceremony.
4. After agreeing to appear in a music video for the band Precious Metal in exchange for a $10,000 donation to charity he then (after recording) demanded a "Trump kind of donation" of $250,000 instead. The band refused and re-shot the video, which Trump then publicly criticised.
5. After a chess team's bake sale came up $5,000 short of its goal while Trump was serving as "principal for a day" at a school in the Bronx he gave the students a fake million-dollar bill. Then he gave them $200 in real money and drove away in a limousine.

Classy.

None of this matter because Hillary.

By now everyone should have realized that nobody supports Trump for rational or logical reasons. It's all emotion, and thus arguments against Trump must be made on the same level. Trump is obviously less qualified and many times more corrupt than Clinton, but facts don't matter anymore.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

By now everyone should have realized that nobody supports Trump for rational or logical reasons.

While I am often befuddled by the motives of Trump supporters, painting an entire class of voters as irrational and illogical seems out of place on a skeptic's forum, and I think misses the point entirely.

Go to right leaning forums, and you're as likely to see: "By now everyone should have realized that nobody supports Hillary for rational or logical reasons."

As obviously misguided, IMHO.

 

[Stacko]

I do have a relationship with Putin.

 

[uke2se]

While I am often befuddled by the motives of Trump supporters, painting an entire class of voters as irrational and illogical seems out of place on a skeptic's forum, and I think misses the point entirely.

Go to right leaning forums, and you're as likely to see: "By now everyone should have realized that nobody supports Hillary for rational or logical reasons."

As obviously misguided, IMHO.

I did not paint anyone as irrational or illogical. I merely asserted that the people voting for Trump aren't doing that because of rational or logical reasons. There simply are none. That doesn't mean the people in question are irrational or illogical in all facets of their lives, although as we have seen from Trump supporters on these forums, as well as in various news stories, they appear not to be the most well versed in critical thinking.

ETA: And I don't care what they are saying on right leaning forums. I'm speaking as an outsider, and a center right voter in Sweden. If you want me to list rational or logical reasons for voting for Clinton I will do so. I would bet you can't do the same for Trump.

 

[phiwum]

No. Reasonable people can't.

You don't need to keep your mind so open that your brains fall out.

Again, you haven't addressed any of the reasons that I don't find the evidence compelling for overt racism. You just assert again that of course that's what it is.

 

[phiwum]

\
Measuring how racist one Florida supporter is has nothing to do with the election.

Good point.

 

[Stacko]

NYT reports that Pennsylvania GOP has shifted to turning out voters who've said they support Toomey and Clinton.

Late last week, Pennsylvania Republicans updated their scripts for volunteer phone callers and canvassers to identify, and ultimately turn out, voters who are supporting Senator Patrick J. Toomey — but who also plan to back Mrs. Clinton.

 

[seayakin]

I would hazard a guess that people who vote for Trump are voting for him due to one or a combination of the following reasons.

• Believe Trump will "shake things up" and remove or fix problems created corrupt politicians
• Don't support Trump strongly but strongly oppose Hillary figuring Trump is the lesser of two evils
• Solidarity with the Republican party and support the Republican platform
• Don't want a Democrat to appoint any Supreme Court justices

Judging whether the decision to vote for Trump is based on rational thinking vs. pure emotion depends a lot on their reasons. I can understand an individual who wants to support conservative principles of small government making a rational decision to support Trump for the latter two reasons. (I don't agree with them but I believe they can come to a rational decision to support Trump for these reasons.) However, if the decision is based on the idea that Trump is more honest than Hillary and will counteract "corrupt politicians" this is based on pure emotion and buying into Trump's rhetoric. There is nothing in Trump's record to indicate that he is more honest than Hillary. I agree Hillary has many problems in this area also but the evidence of to me indicates that Trump is far worse.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Paul Ryan on voting for Trump: I already voted for 'for our nominee'

"I stand where I've stood all fall and all summer," Ryan said during an appearance on "Fox and Friends." "In fact I already voted here in Janesville for our nominee last week in early voting. We need to support our entire Republican ticket."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/01/politics/paul-ryan-voted-for-donald-trump/index.html

 

[NoahFence]

While I am often befuddled by the motives of Trump supporters, painting an entire class of voters as irrational and illogical seems out of place on a skeptic's forum, and I think misses the point entirely.

Go to right leaning forums, and you're as likely to see: "By now everyone should have realized that nobody supports Hillary for rational or logical reasons."

As obviously misguided, IMHO.

You're right. There are some Trump supporters who are just as misogynistic, racist, xenophobic and wanna be alpha males as well. Those would be the deplorables.

 

[Belz...]

Do I really need to? You honestly can't puzzle it out on your own?

No, I'm just that *********** stupid.

Why don't you just answer my goddamn question?

 

[PhantomWolf]

I do have a relationship with Putin.

Why do people insist on posting nothing more then a tweet and linking to that tweet? Seriously, it does nothing. Link to an article or don't bother linking at all.

 

[Tony Stark]

Why do people insist on posting nothing more then a tweet and linking to that tweet? Seriously, it does nothing. Link to an article or don't bother linking at all.

The tweet is a video of Donald saying he has a relationship with Putin.

 

[varwoche]

Trump and Russia, again, courtesy of the FBI.

It frustrates me to no end that Trump was never confronted with his unambiguous claim to have had direct contact with Putin, and then his subsequent denial.

How the hell does this happen?

 

[seayakin]

Why do people insist on posting nothing more then a tweet and linking to that tweet? Seriously, it does nothing. Link to an article or don't bother linking at all.

MSNBC Video

 

[Stacko]

Why do people insist on posting nothing more then a tweet and linking to that tweet? Seriously, it does nothing. Link to an article or don't bother linking at all.

This site lacks the ability to imbed tweets so that's the only way I can link to the video. No I won't get off your lawn.

 

[halleyscomet]

It frustrates me to no end that Trump was never confronted with his unambiguous claim to have had direct contact with Putin, and then his subsequent denial.

How the hell does this happen?

The media wants Trump to win because his abortion of an administration will be GREAT for ratings.

That, and they probably figure a US POTUS who spends his days slobbing Putin's knob is less likely to start a nuclear war. Why would Russia launch nukes if the USA is already in their pocket?

 

[steve s]

Paul Ryan on voting for Trump: I already voted for 'for our nominee'

He doesn't want there to be video of him saying "I voted for Trump." It's the name that shall not be mentioned.

Steve S

 

[Belz...]

It frustrates me to no end that Trump was never confronted with his unambiguous claim to have had direct contact with Putin, and then his subsequent denial.

How the hell does this happen?

It's the "you know how he is!" excuse. No one bothers because that's just what Trump does. Clinton doesn't say or do stupid things all the time, and for some reason her detractors are digging and digging, hoping to find dirt somewhere.

 

[phiwum]

Looks like the Clinton campaign is unloading some opposition research today.

Donald Used Legally Dubious Method to Avoid Paying Taxes

I thought that it was conventional wisdom that Trump is audited every year. If so, I'm puzzled by this article. As your excerpt includes,

Mr. Trump avoided reporting hundreds of millions of dollars in taxable income by using a tax avoidance maneuver so legally dubious his own lawyers advised him that the Internal Revenue Service would most likely declare it improper if he were audited.

Either the experts cited in the article are wrong in their speculations of what Trump did (the returns aren't available, so I think that some inference is required) or they are wrong that it obviously violates the tax code or else it just isn't the case that a guy like Trump gets audited every year (at least not back in the 1990s).

ETA: Oops. Later in the article, I see it's not clear whether the IRS balked at Trump's scheme or not. Also, it seems as if the Times had access to advisory letters from tax attorneys, so there may be less speculation involved in guessing how Trump avoided taxes than I thought.