Would there be any functional difference between him just using the offices and treating the use of them as a donation beyond that there'd be a piece of paper that said he donated to himself?
Is the problem that he could just donate his own stuff, but the Trump organization is co-owned by him and his children, and there's limits on how much they can donate?
I'm just curious how this works, I know that regardless of what the answer is the real answer is Trump gotta Trump, one way or another
He could probably donate the space but that's not why he's doing it. He's having the GOP pay him for the use of his office space. He makes money by having them work out of there.
Honestly...this is the smartest business thing I've seen from Trump all campaign. Making money off campaigning that way if he loses the presidency he still wins by making money off the process,
See also: his entire business career
He rides ventures like Jack Sparrow's entrance in the first POTC movie: gets as far as he can, then just hops off as the ship sinks and walks away
Got a text from my lawyer best friend. Trump is apparently paying his campaign staff as contractors instead of employees, to avoid payroll tax. And he thinks that might be illegal.
Every day I drive past a trailer park with a sign out front that says Trump For President.
It just blows my mind how the poorest people can vote for the richest of people who are explicitly out to screw them.
The really poor are more likely to be "low information" which is the polite way of saying just plain stupid.
The alternative is that they're not stupid, and they just have priorities that I/we vehemently disagree with.
If a person wants to be able to buy whatever kind of gun they want, if they think that America should be a white, Christian nation, if they think that a fetus is a child, if they think that females have all of the rights and privileges that they need and that people are trying to use legislation to get around innate female deficiencies, if they think that harsh sentencing of criminals is a moral imperative, etc, then they can support the Republicans without being "low information" or stupid. I find that vision of America and the world horrific, but I also believe that a person can legitimately hold those beliefs despite being fully aware of the arguments against them.
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
Seems like the kind of thing that is technically illegal, but hard to prove because who's to say they weren't hired as contractors for his campaign and do you really want to go through the trouble of litigating it over fewer than 30 people.
0
Options
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
Got a text from my lawyer best friend. Trump is apparently paying his campaign staff as contractors instead of employees, to avoid payroll tax. And he thinks that might be illegal.
If you have a Reddit account, you could ask /politicaldiscussion . It's on an even shorter leash than this place.
Would there be any functional difference between him just using the offices and treating the use of them as a donation beyond that there'd be a piece of paper that said he donated to himself?
Is the problem that he could just donate his own stuff, but the Trump organization is co-owned by him and his children, and there's limits on how much they can donate?
I'm just curious how this works, I know that regardless of what the answer is the real answer is Trump gotta Trump, one way or another
He could probably donate the space but that's not why he's doing it. He's having the GOP pay him for the use of his office space. He makes money by having them work out of there.
Honestly...this is the smartest business thing I've seen from Trump all campaign. Making money off campaigning that way if he loses the presidency he still wins by making money off the process,
See also: his entire business career
He rides ventures like Jack Sparrow's entrance in the first POTC movie: gets as far as he can, then just hops off as the ship sinks and walks away
Someone needs to photoshop a gif of this.... I would, but I don't have the meagre skills.
Would there be any functional difference between him just using the offices and treating the use of them as a donation beyond that there'd be a piece of paper that said he donated to himself?
Is the problem that he could just donate his own stuff, but the Trump organization is co-owned by him and his children, and there's limits on how much they can donate?
I'm just curious how this works, I know that regardless of what the answer is the real answer is Trump gotta Trump, one way or another
He could probably donate the space but that's not why he's doing it. He's having the GOP pay him for the use of his office space. He makes money by having them work out of there.
Honestly...this is the smartest business thing I've seen from Trump all campaign. Making money off campaigning that way if he loses the presidency he still wins by making money off the process,
See also: his entire business career
He rides ventures like Jack Sparrow's entrance in the first POTC movie: gets as far as he can, then just hops off as the ship sinks and walks away
I'm not saying his business career isn't shady as fuck, I'm saying that most of the time he isn't good at it, and loses his ass. He's kind of shitty at business.
What he's doing now shows some shrewd competence.
I guess a busted watch is right twice a day.
0
Options
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
It would be hilarious if whoever Clinton picks as her VP, is the only one that actually attacks Trump. Gives the impression that Clinton has more pressing things to do than deal with a tiny handed ego ridden cheesepuff.
Of course Trump would spin it as if she's afraid of him, but I can dream.
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I would love, at the VP debate, for whomever Hillary chooses to look at whoever Donald chooses and ask them why they attached themselves to this tire fire. That would be the kind of awesome I want.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Putting Trump aside for a moment. Who do you guys think would be VP next to Clinton? I just read a list of names where I only knew Bernie Sanders.
A mention of Xavier Becerra, for the record. But Perez is likelier.
If the lead keeps growing for Clinton, Tim Kaine becomes likelier because it's the safest pick. Former Gov of a large swing state, current Senator, Obama's second choice to Biden.
Putting Trump aside for a moment. Who do you guys think would be VP next to Clinton? I just read a list of names where I only knew Bernie Sanders.
A mention of Xavier Becerra, for the record. But Perez is likelier.
If the lead keeps growing for Clinton, Tim Kaine becomes likelier because it's the safest pick. Former Gov of a large swing state, current Senator, Obama's second choice to Biden.
Putting Trump aside for a moment. Who do you guys think would be VP next to Clinton? I just read a list of names where I only knew Bernie Sanders.
A mention of Xavier Becerra, for the record. But Perez is likelier.
If the lead keeps growing for Clinton, Tim Kaine becomes likelier because it's the safest pick. Former Gov of a large swing state, current Senator, Obama's second choice to Biden.
Pls Hillary, don't do that.
+19
Options
zepherinRussian warship, go fuck yourselfRegistered Userregular
edited June 2016
I like the rumors of giving Uncle Joe another crack at the office next to the oval office, but I don't think that's going to happen.
I hear Elizabeth Warren mentioned a lot, but I'm not a fan of her in the VP roll. She doesn't really help Hilldawg that much.
I mean let's get real. Hillary needs to secure Pennsylvania. And she needs Ohio or Florida...Or Virginia and like Colorado or Iowa or New Hampshire. Uncle Joe helps with Pennsylvania. They love him. Hillary looks to have a huge advantage in Florida, so Pennsylvania and Florida, and things are looking good.
zepherin on
+1
Options
SteevLWhat can I do for you?Registered Userregular
I would not want Biden as veep again, I want someone who can carry the mantle to the next election. I love Joe, but let the man rest. Its like the Obama to the SCOTUS talk, completely ignores what the people themselves actually want.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I said it in SE++, but I hate the narrative that is being set that if Warren isn't selected its because of Wall Street when the much better "So Scott Brown is not a senator again" is the reason I'd like for her to not be selected.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Just to be clear, that's "Draper Sterling," as in the characters from Mad Men.
So, is that some form of fraud? Is this criminal, or simply something the RNC would have to file suit over?
What happens if Trump is caught with his hand in the cookie jar?
At this point I'm guessing Reince priebus's would see how much of the contents of his liquer cabinet he could drink before losing consciousness.
Because that's about all he and the rest of the party can do, since the crazies will burn the whole thing down if they make another move against him.
no they won't
they'll vote R or not vote at all, and the states that are currently red will remain so due to creative districting and lack of polling stations in poor areas!
You sure about that? Because none of the guys in the republican party who have any real authority are.
yep, absolutely sure. It's odd. The GOP seems to have spent decades making sure that almost half the population will blindly vote for them and they succeeded! Now that they need to prove it, they've turned into a bunch of cowards.
They got those people to vote for thinly veiled racism and american exceptionalism. Trump is doing that Much, Much more blatently then they ever had any intention of, and if they try and make a move against him they will effectively destroy the party as those legions of idiots find themselves forced to choose between the ubermench they've been conditioned to adore and the Party that fights the horrible left.
McConnel, Ryan and Reince either lack the will to pick that fight or are patient enough to wait for November when they can reassert themselves. Either way they're not going to oust trump.
oh yeah, they should have brought down the hammer on trump in march, but they chickened out. Now they'll have to wait until november when (god willing) he loses big.
I said it in SE++, but I hate the narrative that is being set that if Warren isn't selected its because of Wall Street when the much better "So Scott Brown is not a senator again" is the reason I'd like for her to not be selected.
It would not be just because Wall Street. And that story isn't that 'narrative', it's an interview with a bunch of invested parties with apparently strong views about her selection. She might be skipped over without having anything to do with their wishes, or selected despite them. Their views are real, though.
I said it in SE++, but I hate the narrative that is being set that if Warren isn't selected its because of Wall Street when the much better "So Scott Brown is not a senator again" is the reason I'd like for her to not be selected.
It would not be just because Wall Street. And that story isn't that 'narrative', it's an interview with a bunch of invested parties with apparently strong views about her selection. She might be skipped over without having anything to do with their wishes, or selected despite them. Their views are real, though.
I'll be shocked if it isn't the complaint when she's not chosen. No other reason to call out that Wall Street doesn't like her other than to complain democrats are capitulating to Wall Street, specifically Hillary.
Hell if anything they are probably trying to get her specifically selected so that she can stop being in the senate and going after Wall Street.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Yeah VP is going to be at best a utility player for the Presidency. There's a decent argument that its not a strong electoral driver, so really your top considerations should be "can he or she act competently as President should the worst happen?" and "can I work with him or her both on the campaign trail and in the roles I'd be willing to delegate to them and they'd be willing to do in government."
I said it in SE++, but I hate the narrative that is being set that if Warren isn't selected its because of Wall Street when the much better "So Scott Brown is not a senator again" is the reason I'd like for her to not be selected.
It would not be just because Wall Street. And that story isn't that 'narrative', it's an interview with a bunch of invested parties with apparently strong views about her selection. She might be skipped over without having anything to do with their wishes, or selected despite them. Their views are real, though.
That doesn't mean that those who were interviewed are representative of "Wall Street" or "Wall Street Democratic donors" or even that the opinions being presented are the honest opinions of those anonymous donors who might be saying "Oh no Hillary, don't throw Warren into the Briar Patch (and out of the Senate where she can more effectively push for banking regulation)! That would anger the group that your primary opponent has painted as a cartoon villain and why would you want to make a show of rebuking us in that circumstance!?"
I said it in SE++, but I hate the narrative that is being set that if Warren isn't selected its because of Wall Street when the much better "So Scott Brown is not a senator again" is the reason I'd like for her to not be selected.
It would not be just because Wall Street. And that story isn't that 'narrative', it's an interview with a bunch of invested parties with apparently strong views about her selection. She might be skipped over without having anything to do with their wishes, or selected despite them. Their views are real, though.
I'll be shocked if it isn't the complaint when she's not chosen. No other reason to call out that Wall Street doesn't like her other than to complain democrats are capitulating to Wall Street, specifically Hillary.
Hell if anything they are probably trying to get her specifically selected so that she can stop being in the senate and going after Wall Street.
I'll be shocked if there's no one complaining about anything regrading anything using any particular argument. There will be not one canonical 'complaint', if any.
I know we won't get it anyway, but I'm disappointed in the D insistence on the watch list
attaching actual rights to the watch list when the barrier to get on it is borderline nonexistent and the remedies if you're on it are basically nonexistent is a bad move
+12
Options
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
Another detail from the CNN polling.
51% of Republican voters want Donald Trump nominated at the GOP convention next month while 48% want someone else.
I know we won't get it anyway, but I'm disappointed in the D insistence on the watch list
attaching actual rights to the watch list when the barrier to get on it is borderline nonexistent and the remedies if you're on it are basically nonexistent is a bad move
Considering banning people convicted of DV offenses from owning fire arms is a hot button issue in Merica, I'm shocked they'd even try for the watch list.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Posts
It just blows my mind how the poorest people can vote for the richest of people who are explicitly out to screw them.
The really poor are more likely to be "low information" which is the polite way of saying just plain stupid.
See also: his entire business career
He rides ventures like Jack Sparrow's entrance in the first POTC movie: gets as far as he can, then just hops off as the ship sinks and walks away
The alternative is that they're not stupid, and they just have priorities that I/we vehemently disagree with.
If a person wants to be able to buy whatever kind of gun they want, if they think that America should be a white, Christian nation, if they think that a fetus is a child, if they think that females have all of the rights and privileges that they need and that people are trying to use legislation to get around innate female deficiencies, if they think that harsh sentencing of criminals is a moral imperative, etc, then they can support the Republicans without being "low information" or stupid. I find that vision of America and the world horrific, but I also believe that a person can legitimately hold those beliefs despite being fully aware of the arguments against them.
If you have a Reddit account, you could ask /politicaldiscussion . It's on an even shorter leash than this place.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Someone needs to photoshop a gif of this.... I would, but I don't have the meagre skills.
WoW
Dear Satan.....
What he's doing now shows some shrewd competence.
I guess a busted watch is right twice a day.
A mention of Xavier Becerra, for the record. But Perez is likelier.
Of course Trump would spin it as if she's afraid of him, but I can dream.
WoW
Dear Satan.....
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
If the lead keeps growing for Clinton, Tim Kaine becomes likelier because it's the safest pick. Former Gov of a large swing state, current Senator, Obama's second choice to Biden.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
But that would put a senate seat at risk
Pls Hillary, don't do that.
I hear Elizabeth Warren mentioned a lot, but I'm not a fan of her in the VP roll. She doesn't really help Hilldawg that much.
I mean let's get real. Hillary needs to secure Pennsylvania. And she needs Ohio or Florida...Or Virginia and like Colorado or Iowa or New Hampshire. Uncle Joe helps with Pennsylvania. They love him. Hillary looks to have a huge advantage in Florida, so Pennsylvania and Florida, and things are looking good.
It'd be worth it if only for four more years of Onion Biden articles, but I doubt even Biden would want to be VP again.
My Backloggery
pleasepaypreacher.net
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/elizabeth-warren-wall-street-vice-president-224489
Not really surprising that they do not like her. Of course their wishes are not the only thing that matters.
pleasepaypreacher.net
oh yeah, they should have brought down the hammer on trump in march, but they chickened out. Now they'll have to wait until november when (god willing) he loses big.
It would not be just because Wall Street. And that story isn't that 'narrative', it's an interview with a bunch of invested parties with apparently strong views about her selection. She might be skipped over without having anything to do with their wishes, or selected despite them. Their views are real, though.
I'll be shocked if it isn't the complaint when she's not chosen. No other reason to call out that Wall Street doesn't like her other than to complain democrats are capitulating to Wall Street, specifically Hillary.
Hell if anything they are probably trying to get her specifically selected so that she can stop being in the senate and going after Wall Street.
pleasepaypreacher.net
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Yes yes more of this.
Hillary had a one word reply to the senate doing jack shit yesterday. Don't go to the tweet though so much stupid underneath it.
pleasepaypreacher.net
That doesn't mean that those who were interviewed are representative of "Wall Street" or "Wall Street Democratic donors" or even that the opinions being presented are the honest opinions of those anonymous donors who might be saying "Oh no Hillary, don't throw Warren into the Briar Patch (and out of the Senate where she can more effectively push for banking regulation)! That would anger the group that your primary opponent has painted as a cartoon villain and why would you want to make a show of rebuking us in that circumstance!?"
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
art of the steal is a pretty hilarous website name.
sadly, it also sounds like a website so heavily biased that I'd assume everything on it was wrong or skewed.
(I'm sure it won't be, but it's probably not going to change anyone's mind)
I'll be shocked if there's no one complaining about anything regrading anything using any particular argument. There will be not one canonical 'complaint', if any.
The fact that tweet is signed (meaning that it's a tweet from her, as opposed to her social media team) says a lot.
attaching actual rights to the watch list when the barrier to get on it is borderline nonexistent and the remedies if you're on it are basically nonexistent is a bad move
51% of Republican voters want Donald Trump nominated at the GOP convention next month while 48% want someone else.
He's made a very reassuring impression it seems.
The book is a mess? A third grader can write better than Trump.
??? This is new and amazingly vague.
Considering banning people convicted of DV offenses from owning fire arms is a hot button issue in Merica, I'm shocked they'd even try for the watch list.
pleasepaypreacher.net