U.S Presidential Election

[AngryAnt]

Agree that both candidates are underwhelming but for the choices are:

1. Career politician. in the pocket of big business, Washington insider, member of the political elite. Contributor to conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere although probably good intentioned in this regard. Like anyone in power has doubtless done many questionable deals. But competent, intelligent, diligent. Despite around 20 years of desperate Republican action to pin criminality on her has never been convicted of any crime. Likely to be an uninspiring but steady Pres of the USA.

2. Businessman. Born into the New York elite, inherited bags of money from dad. Avoided paying tax for 18 years, refuses to show tax returns. Uses highly questionable business practices including not paying or underpaying contractors and service advisers and running a dodgy university. Sues anyone who crosses him. Uses his money to bully victims through lawsuits. Morality I don't care about so don't care that he's been a serial womaniser. Unproven charges of sexual assault from multiple women - never convicted of this. Again threatens to use his money and clout to sue and bully anyone who alleges anything against him.

More worryingly he's clearly a delusional narcissist who only cares about himself and his image. A bully. Can't string a coherent sentence together. Thinks the solution to ISIS is nuclear war. Complete populist who will say anything if he thinks it will appeal to some of the electorate. No experience in government or public administration. Doesn't know much if anything about foreign affairs. As a President who knows? Perhaps he'd be happy being a figurehead leader and sitting in the White House while letting more competent people make the actual decisions.

So for me Clinton is the best of a poor choice.

 

[poppa x]

Trump is a version of our Clive Palmer.
Clinton possibly a Julia Gillard type.

Very uninspiring options.

 

[AngryAnt]

Yep it's too bad Ron Paul didn't run for President this time.

He realised he'd poll around 2% so realised he has better things to do with his time.

 

[Baloo]

Trump is a version of our Clive Palmer.
Clinton possibly a Julia Gillard type.

Very uninspiring options.

Clinton is more Sophie Mirabella.

 

[AngryAnt]

Clinton is more Sophie Mirabella.

But less charismatic and likeable

 

[Sintiger]

But less charismatic and likeable

Is that possible ?

 

[AngryAnt]

Is that possible ?

Hence the joke.

 

[tigersnake]

This reasoning is deluded, and based on fallacy. Firstly Trump is not self-made, he is a third-gen tycoon, a spoilt brat. An economist in the US calculated that if had put the money he inherited off his dad into a savings account, he'd be 30% richer. Most businesses he touches turn to sh!t, he makes his money off his brand when others do the work, that's a legit business sure, but doesn't square with the myth. Second, the only shaking up of the system he will do will benefit the rich, but your house and car on it. And then there is the fact he's a thin-skinned, petty, defensive, immature, undignified *smile*. Call me old fashioned, but they aren't qualities apt for the leader of the free world.

I'm not a Clinton fan, and I understand the disaffectedness with the system, but Trump ain't a solution. He's the opposite in fact.

edit, I was responding to G-mans post on a US voters reasoning to vote trump.

 

[tigersnake]

Hence the joke.

I laughed and shuddered at the same time. Her new gig is Gina Rinehart's PA.

 

[Sintiger]

An economist in the US calculated that if had put the money he inherited off his dad into a savings account, he'd be 30% richer.

The only difference may be that if he had done that he may have paid tax on the earnings....

 

[jb03]

Agree that both candidates are underwhelming but for the choices are:

1. Career politician. in the pocket of big business, Washington insider, member of the political elite. Contributor to conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere although probably good intentioned in this regard. Like anyone in power has doubtless done many questionable deals. But competent, intelligent, diligent. Despite around 20 years of desperate Republican action to pin criminality on her has never been convicted of any crime. Likely to be an uninspiring but steady Pres of the USA.

2. Businessman. Born into the New York elite, inherited bags of money from dad. Avoided paying tax for 18 years, refuses to show tax returns. Uses highly questionable business practices including not paying or underpaying contractors and service advisers and running a dodgy university. Sues anyone who crosses him. Uses his money to bully victims through lawsuits. Morality I don't care about so don't care that he's been a serial womaniser. Unproven charges of sexual assault from multiple women - never convicted of this. Again threatens to use his money and clout to sue and bully anyone who alleges anything against him.

More worryingly he's clearly a delusional narcissist who only cares about himself and his image. A bully. Can't string a coherent sentence together. Thinks the solution to ISIS is nuclear war. Complete populist who will say anything if he thinks it will appeal to some of the electorate. No experience in government or public administration. Doesn't know much if anything about foreign affairs. As a President who knows? Perhaps he'd be happy being a figurehead leader and sitting in the White House while letting more competent people make the actual decisions.

So for me Clinton is the best of a poor choice.

Well put A-Man.

 

[TigerForce]

That Trump is this close to being President makes me think that the average American has a donut for a brain.

Agree. I can't believe how many cuckoos kept voting for this moron to end up in the final 2. Why did other candidates simply drop out leaving these 2?? I would've accepted Jeb Bush in this case.

This is like Dr Geoffrey Edelsten becoming our PM.

 

[Giardiasis]

The only difference may be that if he had done that he may have paid tax on the earnings....

The problem is that the claim that ts is so quick to accept as truth is complete nonsense. List of inaccuracies in the claim:
- Trump's dad died in 1999, but the "economist" calculated from 1974.
- They got his current net worth wrong by ~$7 billion.
- A large part of his inheritance was a portion of the business that Trump had run for close to a decade (not that easy to liquidate).

The whole myth that Trump was gifted money is pretty disingenuous given his business relationship. He has done pretty well to build the capital that he has been responsible with, a lot of other people born into a rich home have squandered their family's capital.

 

[AngryAnt]

The whole myth that Trump was gifted money is pretty disingenuous given his business relationship. He has done pretty well to build the capital that he has been responsible with

Wasn't the claim rather that he would have made the same profits by merely investing in the stock market?

This Investopedia goes into great detail about Trump's wealth and business dealings. He did get a loan of $1M from his dad in the early '70s, and his father also kept him in business by paying debts and providing additional finance over the years. No one knows exactly how much this was, or exactly how much he inherited when his father's $350M estate was wound up. Most interesting was that he had to deal with bankruptcy at least four times, had to quadruple-mortgage properties, and was bailed out by the banks several times. He strategically used bankruptcy to avoid paying creditors. Most of this occurred in the late 80s early 90s when times were tough in real estate in the US.

Things turned around for him in the 1990s with an upturn in real estate and eventually the great success of The Apprentice and other ventures. His dodgy business practices however continue - by reporting huge losses and not paying tax, by declaring bankruptcy strategically, by underpaying or not paying workers and contractors, and by defrauding people who were stupid enough to enroll at Trump "University", he's done OK.

http://www.investopedia.com/updates/donald-trump-rich/

 

[tigersnake]

The whole myth that Trump was gifted money is pretty disingenuous given his business relationship. He has done pretty well to build the capital that he has been responsible with, a lot of other people born into a rich home have squandered their family's capital.

are you smiling serious? The myth is that Trump is self-made, he wasn't, full stop. Thats the myth. The 'myth' isn't that he inherited money, thats not a myth, its true, His dad was a super rich property developer who left his money to his son, Donald.

And now he a battling self-made man because he didn't squander the fortune his dad left him?

What kind of weird *smile* are you trying to pull here? Bizaaro world

 

[easy_tiger]

His dad was a super rich property developer who left his money to his son, Donald.

Bizaaro world

Didnt his grandad start the fortune by developing Cooney Island?

Trump should make it his white house.

Bizarre all right. Fall of the Capitalist Empire stuff. Big Ugly Grinning Fat Buffoon in a NY Circus Park, almost rules the world. You couldnt make that *smile* up in a batman comic.

 

[Sintiger]

The problem is that the claim that ts is so quick to accept as truth is complete nonsense. List of inaccuracies in the claim:
- Trump's dad died in 1999, but the "economist" calculated from 1974.
- They got his current net worth wrong by ~$7 billion.
- A large part of his inheritance was a portion of the business that Trump had run for close to a decade (not that easy to liquidate).

The whole myth that Trump was gifted money is pretty disingenuous given his business relationship. He has done pretty well to build the capital that he has been responsible with, a lot of other people born into a rich home have squandered their family's capital.

My only point was related to paying taxes on earnings of investments.

Not sure why it's relevant really. If making money was the prerequisite to being a leader then Bill Gates should be US President and Gina Rinehart our PM.

 

[RemoteTiger]

WE NEED TO DO IT HERE IN AUSTRALIA!

And America needs to do it too!

Remove private donations to Political Parties.

Have the treasury provide exactly the same amount to each candidate in an election.

Prevent Electronic Media and Press providing free coverage for political parties - they must provide equal prime time to both.

THAT WILL STOP US HAVING "BOUGHT" POLITICIANS.

And we just may get back closer to the meaning of the word democracy.

 

[AngryAnt]

Yes. Would love to see that Remote.

 

[Giardiasis]

Wasn't the claim rather that he would have made the same profits by merely investing in the stock market?

This Investopedia goes into great detail about Trump's wealth and business dealings. He did get a loan of $1M from his dad in the early '70s, and his father also kept him in business by paying debts and providing additional finance over the years. No one knows exactly how much this was, or exactly how much he inherited when his father's $350M estate was wound up. Most interesting was that he had to deal with bankruptcy at least four times, had to quadruple-mortgage properties, and was bailed out by the banks several times. He strategically used bankruptcy to avoid paying creditors. Most of this occurred in the late 80s early 90s when times were tough in real estate in the US.

Things turned around for him in the 1990s with an upturn in real estate and eventually the great success of The Apprentice and other ventures. His dodgy business practices however continue - by reporting huge losses and not paying tax, by declaring bankruptcy strategically, by underpaying or not paying workers and contractors, and by defrauding people who were stupid enough to enroll at Trump "University", he's done OK.

http://www.investopedia.com/updates/donald-trump-rich/

There have been several "claims". I've already disproved the bogus claim that TS brought up.

No doubt having a successful father paved the way for Trump, but the media has tried to paint him as largely a failure and his only success is having a rich father. The man has been involved in hundreds of businesses it is not surprising that some have gone belly up. The Trump Shuttle business was the only one that he had direct involvement in, the others were more akin to licensing deals. Saying he was bailed out by the banks is a bit of a stretch, he negotiated new terms with them. 4 of his businesses filed for bankruptcy (note: not him personally) as it was in the best interests of the business (including the people that worked for them) to do so. What's so wrong about that?

You consider it dodgey to legally avoid paying tax? Every competent business operator does this, why is that dodgey? Same question again regarding bankrupcies. Well he hasn't been found to be fraudulent as far as I'm aware, you've jumped the gun there I think.