# 2016 Republican Presidential Clown Car Begins!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by joepistole, Jan 30, 2015.

1. ### Ivan SeekingRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
883
Ah, but those are establishment Republicans, say Trump's supporters. It seems the only person in this country not involved in some conspiracy is Donald Trump.

The same Trump spokesman just said we have the highest tax rates in the world.
False! Lying Trumpers.

Last edited: Aug 8, 2016

3. ### joepistoleDeacon BluesValued Senior Member

Messages:
22,908
Yeah, Trump and most of his Republican cohorts have a conspiracy theory for everything.

5. ### joepistoleDeacon BluesValued Senior Member

Messages:
22,908
I think we need to begin calling Trump "Slick". Trump said today he was going to eliminate the "carried interest" deduction. First, "carried interest" isn't a deduction. It's income. The US tax code doesn't treat all income equally. Different kinds of income are taxed very differently. Earned income or wage income is the most heavily taxed income. What carried interest does, is to allow the profits of an investment or investment fund which is paid to the manager as capital gains rather than earned income. That's huge. Instead of paying 39.6% of their income in taxes, they pay 23.8%.

Trump boldly announced today he would eliminate the carried interest "deduction", a deduction that isn't a deduction, and he would lower business tax rates to 15%. So he is taking away the 23.8% carried interest tax rate these managers currently pay and replacing it with a 15% rate. He's giving these investment fund mangers a huge tax reduction. Yeah, I think the Donald should be called Slick from here on out. If the income of these managers were treated like wage or earned income which it should be the tax rate on that same income would be 39.6%.

The Donald is pulling a fast one. The guy who likes to assert he represents the common man isn't. Contrary to his prior assertions the tax plan Trump released today would dramatically lower taxes on the nation's wealthiest while screwing the common man.

Last edited: Aug 9, 2016

Messages:
883

8. ### Ivan SeekingRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
883
joepistole likes this.
9. ### joepistoleDeacon BluesValued Senior Member

Messages:
22,908
It's amazing. I've have seen many presidential elections, and I have never seen anything like this. This is one for the history books.

I cannot see how Trump wins this election. And I can't see how Trump's business enterprise survives his election bid either. Trump's business is based on his name. He has built a brand based on his lifestyle and image as a successful businessman and a mountain of debt. That's arguably his most valuable asset, and I don't see how that image survives his campaign.

This campaign will become an existential threat to The Donald's business. At some point, he has to know that. This is a very high stakes game Trump is playing, not only for the nation, but for Trump as well. I think Trump will get skunked this fall. He will be defeated overwhelmingly. But then what happens? Will he do the honorable things as all past presidents have done? Will he recognize his defeat as legitimate? I think not. I think we could have a rocky period. Trump has already set that up by claiming the process is "rigged". In the end it won't matter to most people, because most people understand Trump is a narcissistic nut. But there are those who would follow him to Hell and back and those are the people I worry about. Those folks are just as crazy as Trump and just as divorced from reality.

Last edited: Aug 9, 2016
10. ### TiassaLet us not launch the boat ...Staff Member

Messages:
35,599
Jesus Trump | Donald Christ

Click for appalling revulsion.

Rebranding.

I had a notion, but the numbers bother me―iHeartRadio shows a $113m market cap and a staggering$20b in debt―that Donald Trump might move his media bid into right-wing radio. What about right-wing media in general?

But Salem Media Group, parent of Regnery Publishing, shows market cap of $167m, and around$271m debt; SALM saw its credit rating downgraded earlier this year, from B to B-.

If Donald Trump really is worth \$3.9-4.5b, as emerging reports suggest, he could easily leverage a couple purchases. I still don't like the iHeartRadio notion, given the debt load, but, still, I can't begin to account for all the inroads to the general conservative media market sector. Regnery, though? Can you imagine Regnery with Trump branding? It's nearly enough to worry about. And he's already connected peripherally, at least, through Roger Stone.

(And if Trump wants revenge against Hillary Clinton for what is about to happen, why not buy his Clinton-obsessed friend's Clinton-obsessed publisher pitching to tinfoil-wrapped conservative potsherds?)

It's not that I doubt the damage to his brand.

It's just that these are conservatives, so he has an escape hatch. Seriously, what is the combined net worth of the conservatives who feed into this political movement, buying the scam products and gobbling up the books and DVDs and television shows? How much can Donald Trump bleed them for?

700 Club. American Family Association. Family Research Council. Televangelism in general. Radio evangelism in general. The Tea Party movement.

How much can Donald Trump make selling these people what they want to hear?

Imagine if he gets his advertising hooks into the tourism industry: How much will they pay for airtime and adspace if he can start pushing petit-bourgeois and burgeois Christians start booking cruises and resorts?

Rebranding.

That's how he saves his business empire.

11. ### joepistoleDeacon BluesValued Senior Member

Messages:
22,908
Trump had better hope those Joe Six Packs out there have enough money to support his life style and his botched business ventures. Trump has a lot of money invested in various projects. He cannot turn on a dime. His projects are very aren't easily converted into cash. Trump just opened up a new golf course in Scotland. My bet is his presidential run is causing that project to suffer. We could see many more Trump projects go under as a result of his presidential bid and tarnished brand.

But as you point out, he can appeal to a different consumer i.e. the Joe Six Pack. But I do wonder if that will be enough to support his life style. Jets, mansions, and yachts are not cheap.

Trump has been marketing to Joe Six Pack for a long time. He has made a lot of money speaking to Joe, "educating" Joe, selling books to Joe. But is that enough to support his life style? I guess we will find out.

12. ### TiassaLet us not launch the boat ...Staff Member

Messages:
35,599
¿What Annoys a Noisy Oyster?

Donald Trump is a noisy noise that annoys a noisy oyster. Click for annoying noisy noise that is not a noisy oyster ... or Donald Trump

Well, to the one, a Joe Six Pack who can be fleeced out of thirty thousand dollars also has thirty thousand dollars to give.

It's also true I once knew a musician who called off his career and sold his instruments to buy into what (cough!) turned out (hack! was obvously wheeze!) to be a pyramid scheme. People max out credit cards, and all manner of other stupid things in their quest for more. And we have to remember that Donald Trump is also well postured to capitalize off their subsequent misery.

The only question is how far he can push it.

Buying a company like SALM would merely be for prestige; it would be an inroad. The more visible, or audible as such, the better; all the easier herding the flock to be shorn. Fleeced. Metaphorically, at least, slaughtered.

Not all of these Six Packs are workaday. There's money in them thar potsherds.

Quite technically, you've made the point yourself: "An Interesting Observation"↗. And, you know, I think it was Maddow who, on a couple of occasions, offered bits about the strange advertising on conservative broadcast: precious metals, prepping, nonmedical supplements. And aren't Huckabee and Santorum each in conservative media production? I mean, Huckabee at one point promoted those insane, racist, revisionist history lessons on video; I forget if he actually produced them. And didn't Rick Santorum open a movie studio? They're all trying to tap this pool of money, and seem to think it's worth the endeavor. It's amazing what the market can pitch to these right-wing audiences. And let's not forget Ben Carson. I know a Christian community that thinks it's smart because they go to Church on Saturday―they do, technically, appear to have a valid, proper, winning argument from an absolute literalist perspective, but even they aren't properly literalists, so ... right―but, tellyawhat, they also bought a hell of a lot of books from Ben freakin' Carson.

And when they run out of money, Donald Trump will vulture their houses and RVs. Or, you know, something like that.

I know it's not going to happen, of course, because these things don't if I actually predict them like this. It's part of the fun.

For a while, it kept happening with Republican rhetoric and behavior. No matter how many times I said they wouldn't for the absurdity of the prospect, it seems they were almost always capable of proving me wrong, and yeah, it's not exactly pleasure, but the outrage numbs just a little basking in the awe of witness.

I mean, Donald Trump is the nominee. My next benchmark is that the clock should be ticking until his withdrawal. I don't think that will happen, this time, but yeah, if it did, that defiance of expectation would strike awe.

Still, though: Donald Trump is the nominee. According to pretty much everything I ever learned from parents and community about being an American, that wasn't supposed to happen.

Then again, I said, "pretty much everything".

Because if I account for two axioms I have learned from others over time―"people are stupid", and, "because it's there"―then, yes, of course Donald Trump is the nominee. Every once in a while, people seize the unthinkable simply because they're tired of being told what's unthinkable.

It's always a mob.

And in the end, these things happen.

No, that last is not intended to comfort.

13. ### joepistoleDeacon BluesValued Senior Member

Messages:
22,908
Things must be getting desperate for the Donald. He just called on the 2nd Amendment people to stop Hillary Clinton. First, he calls upon the Russians to hack Hillary's servers and now he calls upon his people to "stop" i.e. kill Clinton? That's horrible. That's disgusting. That's illegal and were it not for his candidacy, I think he would be in jail. We have enough nuts. We don't need Trump encouraging people to violence to stop what he couldn't get through the ballot box.

Trump belongs in jail.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/trum...ay-be-able-to-stop-clinton-over-scotus-picks/

Wasn't this supposed to be the 2nd day of his campaign reset?

14. ### TiassaLet us not launch the boat ...Staff Member

Messages:
35,599
And Then This

Let us start, then, with Louis Nelson↱ of Politico:

Donald Trump on Tuesday said "the Second Amendment people" may be the only way to stop Hillary Clinton from getting to appoint federal judges if she wins the presidential election in November.

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish, the Second Amendment," he said as an aside while smiling. "By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know. But I'll tell you what, that will be a horrible day."

The reference to the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, could be interpreted as a joke about using violence to stop Clinton or her judicial picks.

‡​

The Trump campaign rejected the notion that Trump was inciting violence against Clinton or anyone else with his aside at the Wilmington rally. Instead, the campaign said the Manhattan billionaire was simply appealing to the collective political muscle Second Amendment supporters possess.

"It's called the power of unification―2nd Amendment people have amazing spirit and are tremendously unified, which gives them great political power," Trump's senior communications adviser Jason Miller said in a statement emailed to POLITICO.

This is pretty straightforward:

(1) Dabbling in violent rhetoric has been a Republican thing in recent years, the famous expression being Sharron Angle's propositon of "Second Amendment solutions".

(2) We should point out that Trump spokesman Jason Miller fails to make sense:​

• "Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish, the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know. But I'll tell you what, that will be a horrible day." ― Donald Trump

• "It's called the power of unification―2nd Amendment people have amazing spirit and are tremendously unified, which gives them great political power. And this year, they will be voting in record numbers, and it won't be for Hillary Clinton, it will be for Donald Trump."
― Jason Miller

Just, you know, think about it for a moment. According to Mr. Miller, Trump is calling for unification because firearms-issue voters will come together and defeat Hillary Clinton at the ballot box. According to Mr. Trump, this "will be a horrible day".

Thus: A Republican proposes that an issue-driven voter bloc unifying to deliver a Republican victory should be "a horrible day".

To what degree does that make sense?​

Just sayin'.

Then again, the point is pretty much made: Everybody but Trump's now dwindling voter base gets that he's not up to the task of being president. To what degree should we really be shocked and appalled that Donald Trump just said something else that was, hitherto, astoundingly unacceptable in our political discourse, and who the hell is going to come to his rescue this time?

It's almost enough to want to watch conservative media tonight, just to see what the hell is going on.

But we already have a hint:

Bob Owens, the editor of the NRA-linked BearingArms.com, initially tweeted disapproval of Trump's comments. "That was a threat of violence. As a REAL supporter of the #2A it's appalling to me," Owens tweeted. Bearing Arms had sponsored the May meeting of the NRA's lobbying arm where the group formally endorsed Trump.

Within two hours of posting that tweet, however, Owens deleted it and put up a link to a new blog post on Bearing Arms, contending that Trump's comments had been taken out of context.

"While he left himself open to be exploited by a serially dishonest media that has clearly chosen to support Hillary in this election, I don't see anything to suggest that he was threatening violence against Mrs. Clinton," he wrote.

Still, as Chris Vannini↱ put it: "Guy behind Trump immediately realized what he said was a problem."

I do not think that statement is inaccurate.

Let us see who tries.
____________________

Notes:

Nelson, Louis. "Trump in trouble over 'Second Amendment' remark". Politico. 9 August 2016. Politico.com. 9 August 2016. http://politi.co/2b4F8Fh

Vannini, Chris. "Guy behind Trump immediately realized what he said was a problem". Twitter. 9 August 2016. Twitter.com. 9 August 2016. http://bit.ly/2aQcUha

15. ### Ivan SeekingRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
883
This is the key to clarifying the context of Trump's statement. He was saying that once elected, there will be no way to stop her except for the second amendment people.

So the context is clear: If she gets elected, the only way to stop her is for the second amendment people to kill her.

As a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment, I find Trump's statement dangerous and offensive. I don't kill people and resent the implication that I would just because Hillary gets elected.

The Secret Service said they are aware of his statement. That is a warning.

16. ### KilljoyKlownWhateverValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,493
Has anybody considered after it's all said and done, we may need to thank Trump for the biggest Democratic landslide in the history of presidential elections ever?

Ivan Seeking likes this.
17. ### Ivan SeekingRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
883
Are you kidding, you have Republicans running for office saying they will oppose Trump if he wins. The R Party seems to have devolved into total chaos with Trump being the fruit of decades of deception [ala Fox News, Limbaugh etc] and demographic isolation. We can only hope the country comes to its senses and yes, we see a landslide, hopefully of historic proportions that sends a clear message - the culture war is over and we [the good guys, ladies, and transgenders

] win. We will not allow fascism and tyranny to be the law of the land.

18. ### KilljoyKlownWhateverValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,493
I think you need to reread what I said. Trump doesn't have a chance to win, but his being in the race is most likely going to give the Democrats a good chance to take back both houses and many governor races too.

19. ### TiassaLet us not launch the boat ...Staff Member

Messages:
35,599
Twenty-Six|Haunt

Click for something far more entertaining.

Oh, well, Republicans have. There has been, pretty much from the outset, a "phantom candidate"↑ conspiracy theory that I just can't figure out. The basic idea was that Trump was running specifically to help Hillary Clinton win, or so said a Florida backbencher, Congressman Carlos Curbelo (R-FL26). At the time I pointed to a number of Republicans who had tacked to line up behind Donald Trump, and even the editor of National Review: A Clintonian conspiracy including Cruz, Walker, Carson, Fiorina, and Lowry, among others, as participants? I actually had to repeat that question less than a month later↑ because, well, duh, of course Donald Trump and Bill Clinton have had conversations before, and while that's not quite the whole of it, the idea that the former president once gave the game show host political advice would also make Mitt Romney a "phantom candidate". Significantly for me, since, you know, I'm human and have an ego, my favorite mainstream political blogger got around to making the point about how it's hard to blame Bill Clinton if Republican voters like Donald Trump.

Skip forward, what, like three weeks↑, and things were so (ahem!) out of hand―why does assailing birthright citizenship seem so relatively mild an offense, this year later?―as to compel me to recall Curbelo's nonsense and suggest "it does actually remind the question of just why Mr. Trump is eviscerating the Republican Party like this". But that's the thing, we had seen the stupid derby from Republicans before in a weird episode having to do with GDP growth projections. Jeb Bush said four percent throughout, for no particular reason, and quickly the other candidates lined up to all say four percent, of course four percent, and then Scott Walker said four and a half, and we all laughed. In this case, Trump had the candidates lining up to parrot him on ending birthright citizenship; Governor Four and a Half offered three answers in less than a week. At that point, it seemed obvious that Trump is a wrecking crew in himself, but come on, damn it, why?

Honestly, I've been stuck on that question ever since. At the time I speculated at least colloquial "megalomania" and the possibility of "some larger plan to rebuild the GOP". And, really, the phantom candidate is one of those theses you really just want to leave alone, because conspiracy theories are as conspiracy theories do, and come on, really? I don't get how that would be working, I wrote in March↑, if it's about Hillary Clinton. Nor could this be about screwing with the GOP, because otherwise this should not be happening. That is to say, at that point it was simply unbelievable that so much of the Republican zeitgeist would be on board with the destruction of the Party:

So it's not really the phantom candidate thesis; but here is a guy rich enough to not care about anyone or anything absolutely thrashing the political party that has been traditionally friendly to the business community. It's like he's punishing them for something.

And I've actually been hung up on that aspect, too, recalling it again in June↑, because this time the question was Trump's take on campaign fundraising, which, I suggested at the time, presented a threat of tangible, systemic damage.

And the punishment notion persists. I mean, that's not what it is, but, rather, looks like. I made it all of ten days↑ before coming back to it, this time returning to the megalomania question in the context of capturing a segment of the Republican Party. "But it's so goddamn brutal," I wrote, and then pointed outward to my blog version↱, continuing, "It really is an atrocity." But what am I supposed to call it when Chris Christie's spokesman has cause to deny that the Governor of New Jersey is Donald Trump's manservant. To spare the click:

Okay, look, the thing I still can't figure out about the phantom candidate conspiracy theory is why. Still, though, it occurs to wonder at the actual reason Donald Trump has every appearance of trying to destroy the Republican Party. The bizarre bits and pieces we hear about Chris Christie seem nearly emblematic. Whatever hell the New Jersey governor's reputation had already discovered one wonders at the penance of such humiliation in Donald Trump's shadow. That the Republican nominee apparent is so vicious is beyond doubt, but what does Mr. Christie think he's doing? Or Republicans, for that matter? The RNC, many congressional Republicans, and various prominent voices in the conservative discourse seemed to shrug and roll, shuffling in line behind their party's primary winner. And then what happened? Look at what Donald Trump is doing to conservatives. This is astounding. This is unimaginable. This is your Republican Party, and if it wasn't for the fact that they were Republicans we probably ought to pity them right about now. I mean, sure, for a lot of the rest of us our diverse grievances against and disputes with Donald Trump are pretty clear, but what the hell did the GOP do to piss him off this badly?

No, seriously, when Scott Brown is bagging points off you about fetching stuff for Donald Trump ... I mean, you know, right? Sure, Chris Christie. Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. But, you know, who the hell actually deserves being treated like that? Anyone who cozies up to Donald Trump, I guess.

And I reiterated the blog post here, last month↗, because, well, at some point we have to consider that all this is deliberate. Seriously, it's the time machine joke all over again. Except they didn't know what rickrolling was back in 1988. And they wouldn't understand the joke because they wouldn't understand the internet. Never mind; I digress.

Yet out of all of this it's true; the freshman fringey from Florida Twenty-Six, Mr. Curbelo, still gets some credit. The one thing Donald Trump has accomplished is virtually ensure Hillary Clinton wins this presidential election.

It's the damnedest thing. At the same time, it doesn't seem Trump is doing it for her.

KilljoyKlown likes this.
20. ### RandwolfIgnorance killed the catValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,170
Like many of his products the Trump dog whistle is defective - it's audible to "normal" people. Here's my solution to the Drumpf problem:

We can bring Trump down folks - just get the Colts, Rugers, Mossbergs, Remingtons, Glocks, Savages, Springfields, and Berettas along with all the Smiths and Wessons on target - we will have enough firepower to take him out, just pull the trigger!

Translated: There are enough voters with those surnames to defeat the Donald - we just need to get them to the polls and make sure they vote in November.

That's how you interpreted it, right? Whatever did you think I meant? MEDIA CONSPIRACY!

21. ### Ivan SeekingRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
883
That is an assumption that I'm not willing to make. The future of the country and the world depends on not being complacent.

That Trump has gotten this far is proof enough that he has to be taken seriously, as does the threat to liberty and the Constitution that he represents. Trump is a clear and present danger to us and the world, as former CIA/NSA chief Hayden stated yesterday.

joepistole likes this.
22. ### KilljoyKlownWhateverValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,493
Well said Ivan. Suppose everyone thinks Hillery is now a shoe in and decides their vote is no longer needed? What a disaster that could be.

23. ### KilljoyKlownWhateverValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,493
Tiassa
As usual I'm impressed by your in-depth commentary on the subject. It is a serious can of worms that may take years to unravel if ever. Somehow it's a bit unsettling to believe someone like Donald Trump could have become a billionaire with his level of foot in mouth personality. But based on the campaign he's run, it's quite obvious this country has a long way to go. I think it's a real shock for those of us who thought we were making good headway against the hate and prejudice. It seems we were just kidding ourselves.

For the record I wish it was Bernie and not Hillery.