Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[david0925]

He was unqualified as a president in every single aspect imaginable, but people that vote him into office think anywhere from "hey what do you have to lose (a lot apparently)" to "fuck the libtards (you sure showed them)"

[Antiganon]

Do you have any actual clue on how those tax policies work?
That was a rhetorical question, your reply already made it obvious you don't.
Trumps tax cuts were passed under reconciliation. Which require it to be 'revenue neutral' over a period of 10 years.

Those tax cuts you got will get less year over year and instead turn into a tax INCREASE in order to pay for the corporate tax cuts that will not expire.
If I give you 10 dollars a year starting today, but 5 years from now you change it to you paying me 10 dollars a year for the rest of your life, who is giving who money?

Trump did not lower taxes on the middle/lower classes. He raised them, only in such a way that you won't see it for another few years and instead blame someone else 10 years down the line for your taxes being higher rather then the person actually responsible.

Its a tax cut for corporations and rich, over the backs of working Americans. And you applaud him for raising taxes on you.

It wasn't even a net gain in the short term for plenty of middle class families.

My wife and I made just under 100k in 2018 and just over 100k in 2019, two people working full time jobs with overtime, and we paid more in taxes both of those years than we did in FY 2017, due to his changes to deductions for dependents and the child care tax credit.

If you were a single earner married couple with 1 child (so the other parent is providing child care at home for free) or two incomes with no children, or a single person, the increased standard deduction was a windfall (provided you didn't also get screw by the cap on SALT deductions). For almost everyone else making under ~250k at least it was a tax increase.

[Breccia]

The WSJ reports--

"Paywall."

Um...TheHill reports that the WSJ reports that those rumors of Trump's Fake News Network (featuring such groundbreaking works of investigative journalism as "Trump won" and "Taco Bell retired the Mexican pizza") are actually coming true.

Hicks Equity Partners

"Hicks"?

No relation.

a private-equity firm with connections to a co-chair of the Republican National Committee, have been in discussions in recent months with the media company about investing in Newsmax. WSJ reports the talks may also be part of larger efforts that could include a streaming video service.

Trump's allies have been exploring ways to compete with Fox News for the last two years, according to WSJ. Trump’s relationship with the network has been complicated. He has often shown appreciation for the support he receives from Fox News hosts and the networks coverage of his presidency has often influenced decisions he's made inside the White House. He has also lashed out at the network when it criticized him.

Once again, I am looking forward to this. Trump is broke. Murdoch will crush Trump. However, the question isn't if Murdoch will crush Trump, but if he'll crush Trump before Trump skims enough money from his stockholders to pay his personal debts. I have no doubt in my mind that Trump is pulling yet another con job. We'll see if the people supporting him directly will get any kind of oversight to prevent exactly this outcome.

[beanman12345]

The WSJ reports--

"Paywall."

Um...TheHill reports that the WSJ reports that those rumors of Trump's Fake News Network (featuring such groundbreaking works of investigative journalism as "Trump won" and "Taco Bell retired the Mexican pizza") are actually coming true.



"Hicks"?

No relation.



Once again, I am looking forward to this. Trump is broke. Murdoch will crush Trump. However, the question isn't if Murdoch will crush Trump, but if he'll crush Trump before Trump skims enough money from his stockholders to pay his personal debts. I have no doubt in my mind that Trump is pulling yet another con job. We'll see if the people supporting him directly will get any kind of oversight to prevent exactly this outcome.

Murdoch won't crush Trump. Trump will crush Trump. It'll be bankrupt w/i a year simply cause he doesn't know how to run a business of any kind.

[Breccia]

Fauci's interview on CNN was about 90% "Trump is a horrible murderer" and 10% "Neener neener you can't fire me"

As Trump refuses to concede the election to Biden, General Services Administration administrator Emily Murphy has not signed documents declaring Biden the apparent winner, preventing the president-elect's agency review teams from having access to information they need in order to get to work.

Fauci, who has served for 36 years under six presidents, said the transition process is "like passing a baton in a race."

"You don't want to stop and then give it to somebody. You want to just essentially keep going, and that's what transition is. So it certainly would make things more smoothly if we could do that."

Asked if he would like to start working with Biden's team from a public health perspective, Fauci responded, "Of course, that's obvious. Of course it would be better if we could start working with them."

[Rasulis]

because everyone has different ideals that might lie in the Republican Party. I mean, people voted for Trump for a reason. You just don't know how reality might turn out though.

I actually liked Trump's tax policies. It made life a bit easier before the COVID crisis.

Interestingly enough, the people that benefited the most from Trump's policies voted against him.

Are you better off than you were four years ago? That question has been at the heart of presidential campaigns since President Ronald Reagan first asked it in 1980. The general thinking has been that voters who are doing well would vote to reelect a sitting president. That’s not what happened in 2020.

This time around, those who were better off voted for a change in the White House.

[Benggaul]

Fauci's interview on CNN was about 90% "Trump is a horrible murderer" and 10% "Neener neener you can't fire me"

I would be surprised if there wasn't at least some back-channel talk going on between Trump's admin and Biden's people. Pretty much all of the "in front of the camera" people are toast once Biden's administration comes in, but there must be a lot of "lower-level employees" who want to end this shitshow as much as everyone else does.

[Zan15]

He was unqualified as a president in every single aspect imaginable, but people that vote him into office think anywhere from "hey what do you have to lose (a lot apparently)" to "fuck the libtards (you sure showed them)"

Trumps sloagan should have been


"Vote for me, you've already lost everything, so what do you have to lose?"

[Breccia]

I would be surprised if there wasn't at least some back-channel talk going on between Trump's admin and Biden's people.

There shouldn't be. It should be a standard admin transition. Not something that risks national security and a thousand lives a day.

[Benggaul]

There shouldn't be. It should be a standard admin transition. Not something that risks national security and a thousand lives a day.

There are a lot of things that "shouldn't be" but manifestly are right now. That's what happens when a not-insignificant portion of the population are happy to fuck over the majority for their feefees.

[Zan15]

Hey anyone notice we have not had any of our regulars like @Ghostpanther come and denounce Trump's actions after being all about "law and order" and constitution

You'd think someone like GP with his hard stance on referring to the constitution every minute because of 2A would be all up in arms..

Its almost like we all predicted this and they called us silly and biased for saying they would act this way

[PhaelixWW]

Trumps sloagan should have been


"Vote for me, you've already lost everything, so what do you have to lose?"

Then Biden's slogan should have been "If you're still breathing, then you still have something that Trump can lose for you."

[Lynarii]

Have they ever seriously made a case that they were for any part of the constitution except the single interpretation of the 2nd amendment that they like? They've already been... frankly outright hostile to the rest of it.

[TwistedSkull]

I have no clue how to post pictures so can someone please post the Venn diagram with Impeached, one term and lost the popular vote?

[Benggaul]

I have no clue how to post pictures so can someone please post the Venn diagram with Impeached, one term and lost the popular vote?

Just go to the General Election thread. It's been posted there several times.

[TwistedSkull]

Nevermind then. As long as it's been posted.

[Poopymonster]

Have they ever seriously made a case that they were for any part of the constitution except the single interpretation of the 2nd amendment that they like? They've already been... frankly outright hostile to the rest of it.

The First. Well, part of it. If they can't enforce their mythology upon others, it's destroying freedom of religion.

[david0925]

The First. Well, part of it. If they can't enforce their mythology upon others, it's destroying freedom of religion.

you mean to tell me there's more to the constitution than God and guns?

[Valerossi]

you mean to tell me there's more to the constitution than God and guns?

I always thought the right to arm bears to be enshrined in the constitution was strange.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Sorry if it's been posted, but it seems almost too ridiculous to be true.

Trump asked aides if he could pursue a wild plan to replace the Electoral College with loyalists who would ignore the vote, report says

https://www.businessinsider.com/trum...ts-nyt-2020-11