is it really possible that Donald trump could be president????? [Part 3]

[Lweji]

Continuing the thread, and in reply to the two last posts of thread 2

Today 08:15 OhYouBadBadKitten

I don't think it is about Trump taking risks, its more that he is a narcisstic sociopath. He feels untouchable in what he says and has no regard for the consequences.

Today 06:53 fourmummy

To be fair, voters know that all political rhetoric mostly comes to nothing (rhetoric = argumentation and persuasion, elevated to an art from in Ancient Greece). Why do you imagine Labour want to introduce votes for 16 year olds? They know that people don't become "more conservative" as they get older-they become wiser to the political process and its lies rhetoric. So what's different with Trump? Why hasn't his unbelievably unlikeable public and private persona sunk him?

Answer=risk

He is not a ready-rolled, ready-prepped and ready-to-go politician (think Blair's son parachuted into a constituency; MIliband brothers, Clintons). These are not risking much because they were cast in the role when they were made. We know that this is the case with, certainly, Clinton (numerous interviews with aides attest to this; ditto for the others). Voters are doing a risk assessment of his risks and have decided that he is worth something. It's not as simple as suggesting that if someone votes for him then they must be racist or sexist, as I've seen journos assert. Voters are effectively doing a risk assessment and deciding that given the enormous costs both to him (energy, health, time away from family, reputation, financial, career, historical implications, ) and to his voters (risk of being viewed as sexist, racist, intolerant, asshole), the benefits must outweigh these costs. Very unwise to dismiss ordinary voters as simplistically sexist and racists, as many, many journalists have (shortsightedly) done. Even non-experts are very good at performing cost/benefit analyses

As I said I don't see anything of what he says as taking a risk. Because he is saying what many people want to hear.
As for personal cost, he is clearly someone who enjoys the power, the limelight, the adoration. All that is missing for him is the ultimate power, particularly as he sees other true billionaires taking central stage.
But he doesn't have the heart to be Gates.
So, he's going for the highest office, and on the back of American voters most primal fears.

But...
He's not averse to risk. He's built his empire on it. He's had four bankruptcies. Anyone should be worried about the way he manages risk.

It might not have been the same, but I've send work emails through personal emails because the work server was down for some reason.

At my workplace that is a sackable offense and people who have done it have lost their job every single time when it's been discovered.

So why can't Trump release tax returns that have already been audited?

Look! Squirrel!

Whether or not HRC did anything illegal is being investigated. Unwise, yes. Illegal, well, let's wait and see.

As for Trump and the tax returns, the IRS has said there is no reason not to release unaudited tax returns. And he can certainly release older ones. HRC's returns back to at least 2000 are easy to find online.

I wonder what the embarrassing secret is?

We advise our clients against distributing or accepting returns subject to an IRS audit. The reason is very simple. When you have complex returns, which trumps will be, the IRS will challenge tax positions taken by his accountants. Normally when the IRS challenge the position they will calculate the effect on that return plus subsequent years of returns. I've seen the IRS work through returns and seen agents get heated about a $30k difference in taxes owed. As accountants we advise our client to pay the $30k ASAP as if we argue our bill will quickly get to be more than $30k. However, when you are running for office having a $30k difference doesn't look good even if it's a timing issue on taxes paid (ie depreciation method used resulting in higher income in current year compared to subsequent year).

That doesn't prevent the release of earlier returns (HRC's returns back to 1977 are in the public domain).

HRC is also rich, and presumably any audits on recent tax returns are not yet complete, yet her 2014 return has been released.

Want2bSupermum
At your work, perhaps.
If I miss a deadline because of email issues I'd be in trouble.

I would be fired too. I audit broker dealers and regulatory reports which go the SEC have extremely firm deadlines. Failure to deliver a report on time could result in the SEC shutting down our client. There have been times when we have printed reports or put them on encrypted USB sticks and hand delivered to their office because systems have been down. Firm policy is crystal clear that the use of personal email is forbidden.

Latest from Roger Stone. "Trump is the toughest person he has ever dealt with, tougher than Nixon" whom Stone worked for. "This man has ice water in his veins".

The Establishment are now trying to circle Trump with their advisers and stooges claimig that they are here to help, but Trump has their number.

To paraphrase Reagan "The nine most scary words in the English language (from stooges and wonks) are "I am from the Establishment and I am here to help""

It is clear that Trump is for real and they don't know what to do, panic and pandemonium is their only release.

As the author in the Salon article so rightly wrote

"The elites are in a cataclysmic state of panic, they don’t know whether to look right or left, they have no idea what to do with Trump"

This is historic, a complete takedown of the stooges and the taking back of America.

I would love to see the agenda of the stooges' forthcoming Bilderberg meeting, it must have Trump as every action item as well as a note to the stooges and attendeees written in capitals

"Don't panic, Mr Mainwaring, our goose is cooked".

I guarantee that the Bilderberg agenda will not have Trump as every action item, nor will it have stupid notes on.

In 2008 and 2012, Bilderberg was held in America and apparently during an election year it is usually held in America as the stooges gather to decide things and discuss the election.

However, this year, the year of Trump 2016, they won't be holding their meeting in America and are holding it in Germany instead.

They can't hold it in America because Trump would embarrass the stooges by pointing out their meeting in America in an election year, and Trump, the populist, would then probably win a landslide as he would mention the globalist stooges on every TV show that he phones into.

They will all be discussing Trump in panicked tones over coffee and biscuits and worrying about how he will end their game.

As the author in the Salon article so rightly wrote

"The elites are in a cataclysmic state of panic, they don’t know whether to look right or left, they have no idea what to do with Trump"

I expect there will be just three items on the Bilderberg agenda

1. Trump and what he will end our climate changre dream
2. Trump and how he will tear up our free tradeTPP dream
3. Trump and how he will end our entire game.

"Donald Trump's election would derail Paris climate deal, warns its architect

A climate change denier as US president would dramatically threaten global action to cut carbon emissions, says ex-French foreign minister Laurent Fabius"

www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/04/donald-trumps-election-will-derail-paris-climate-deal-warns-its-architect

2016 is a great year for the people and a nightmare for the elite, and it is all because of Donald J Trump.

"Don't panic, Mr Mainwaring, don't panic, sir!"

A chief stooge opens the Bilderberg Conference and tries to calm the Bilderbergers' nerves after Trump's latest broadside and his cry of "Get 'em outta here"

I expect there will be just three items on the Bilderberg agenda

No, you don't.

misti The Clintons are wealthy through their political connections and experience. Their wealth has been derived from speeches and other such public appearances as well as consultancy fees for advice. That type of income and their asset base will be considerably less complex than someone like Trump who has multiple entities, multiple assets being depreciated over different life cycles and more complex investments in terms of valuation, a high number of employees and the instruments used to limit interest rate risk.

In the grand scheme of things HC has a simple tax return. Also, there have been issues with their foundation. The filings for their foundation do not go anywhere near their tax return so if you want to find her skeletons go look at the foundation and you will find them.

supermum yes, i accept that, but it does not explain why older, audited returns cannot be released. It's also not consistent with Trumps own public statements that we won't learn anything from his tax returns (which is an obviously dumb and untrue thing to say).

I simply don't think that a candidate for high office can act like this any more. There is a privacy argument to be had, about how high the office must be before you sacrifice your right to financial privacy, but there is no doubt in my mind that it is reasonable to expect that the person in ultimate charge of imposing and collecting taxes should demonstrate that s/he has met his or her own tax obligations in both the legal and the moral sense.

There are no exceptions here. It's part of what you sacrifice when you seek high office.

Honestly I don't care about tax returns being released because if people are it paying their taxes the IRS will have been all over them already.

Also I disagree with paying taxes in a moral sense. We all have a legal duty to pay taxes. The only moral is that you pay your taxes. The amount you pay is governed by the laws set by government and as long as you are acting within the law your moral duty is met.

Trump is not the official nominee yet. Expecting him to release returns is premature. Once he has been made the official nominee then I think he should be looking at making something public.

I think you'll find that a very large proportion of the population disagree with the "if it's legal it's OK" mantra.

Though personally i think that the main reason for the prevarication is that the returns will show him to be far less rich than he claims, and that his tax bill is much smaller than anyone has a right to expect of a self proclaimed billionaire.

Wealth and income are two separate things. A tax return only shows income and not wealth. If the company is incorporated it's a tax paying entity and Trump would only pay taxes on dividends and income from the corporation. It is very common to keep income low and build up cash reserves. With someone like Trump you can only know his true wealth when you look at the financial statements of the companies he owns as well as knowing his direct and indirect ownership of those companies.

You know that. I know that. But does your average blue collar trump voter know that?

I think it would be at best embarrassing and at worst damaging if trump's tax returns were to reveal a small income and an even lower tax rate.

A good article by one of the country's best journalists - John Harris of the Guardian. Years ago I didn't like him because he seemed to be just another politically correct parrot, but ever since I read his brilliant UKIP articles, I realised that he was no longer that old journalist.

He is one of the only liberals who gets close to understanding Trump and Trump voters and who doesn't hyperventilate like the other progressives who haven't got a clue what is happening and why.

"Donald Trump supporters are not the bigots the left likes to demonise
...
the global liberal left seemed to be once again working itself into a lather, which was easily translatable: how awful that a man routinely described using all the boo-words progressives can muster – misogynist, racist, fascist, xenophobe, or “xenophobic fascist”, as George Clooney understatedly put it – could now be a resident of the political mainstream, and a serious contender for president.
...
The presentation is pure political vaudeville, used in the service of anti-politics: rambling (and often very funny) oratory, cartoon political incorrectness, self-obsession so extreme that it comes out looking endearingly self-parodic. But at the core are oomphy words about something built into his audiences’ daily reality: stores full of goods made overseas, and jobs that feel increasingly under threat.
...
the story for her adversaries is a cinch. The establishment has failed; she is a card-carrying member of that establishment; ergo, she has failed too.

Herein lies a vulnerability that should chill the liberal left to the bone. Five days after I got back from Indiana, polls suggested that the presumed contest between Clinton and Trump will be much closer than some people imagine. For those who yell at him and his supporters from the sidelines, that news ought to give pause for thought: before it’s too late, maybe it’s time to stop hysterically moralising and instead try to understand not just how mainstream US politics has so awfully failed, but how it might somehow be rescued."

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/13/donald-trump-supporters-bigots-left-demonise?CMP=twt_gu

Good reasons for The Apprentice never to have happened - www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/10/apprentice-donald-trump-political-rise-election-2016

Just had the shock of my life.... The amount people are apparently spending on food:

Here

I question the amount myself! It's just over $800 a month for my family. We spend a lot less than that.

Sorry meant to say that if this is what people are spending on food it is no wonder to me that they are poor. We eat what I consider a very rich diet. We have a full fruit bowl, at least 7 veg a day and I buy things like bagged salad.

I can see how Trump is popular. When your household income is $40k a year spending $800 a month on food to feed a family of 5 isn't going to work. I have no idea why food prices have been allowed to rise so much.

The latest from Trump.

You don't push Trump about, you don't insult him and you don't stump the Trump. The USA is back and are top dog again and everyone better get used to it and its next president, Donald J Trump. Rock'n'roll. USA USA USA.

"Donald Trump slams Sadiq Khan and warns he may not have 'good relationship' with David Cameron

Presidential hopeful Donald Trump claims he may not have a "very good relationship" with David Cameron after the PM called his plan to ban Muslims form the US "stupid".

The Billionaire Republican candidate also slammed new London Mayor Sadiq Khan for calling him "ignorant" after his inauguration.
...
Presidential hopeful Donald Trump claims he may not have a "very good relationship" with David Cameron after the PM called his plan to ban Muslims form the US "stupid".

The Billionaire Republican candidate also slammed new London Mayor Sadiq Khan for calling him "ignorant" after his inauguration.

Mr Trump said: "He doesn't know me, hasn't met me, doesn't know what I'm all about. I think they were very rude statements and frankly tell him I will remember those statements.

"They are very nasty statements."

He added: "When he won I wished him well. Now, I don't care about him, I mean it doesn't mean any difference to me, let's see how he does, let's see if he's a good mayor."

Asked if he was offended by Mr Khan's public denouncement he replied: "Yeah, I am."

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/donald-trump-slams-sadiq-khan-7979055

Can you imagine the panic at high levels, the preparations for grovelling and apologies being drafted by the most diplomatic of bureaucrats and civil servants?

I could have told them, you don't stump the Trump. Get with the plan, Trump is the Man. Rock'n'roll.