Page 11 of 418 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161111 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 4174

Thread: Politics Thread

  1. #101
    Supporting Member boozehound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Section 212
    Posts
    5,232
    This is finally starting to get some press after the election. For those of you that supported Trump: What are your thoughts on this? This ranked as one of my top several concerns RE: a Trump Presidency (after all the policy stuff). Fortunately it seems like he is backing off of many of his claims (Mexico paying for the wall, deportation force, Obamacare, Muslim ban) - but this feels like a very bad idea to me. This seems more like something that would take place in an Eastern European Oligarchy, not a Western Democratic Republic.

    http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/13/news...cts/index.html

    The situation is made even more dubious, IMO, by the failure to release tax returns. Much was made (not without validity) of accusations of pay-to-play politics with respect to the Clinton Foundation. This seems like an even worse conflict of interest, particularly when you consider his role as the President vs. her role as Secretary of State. Are we really OK with him having his kids run is businesses as long as they pinkie swear not to talk to him about it? Are we OK with having no visibility to those business dealings? Not knowing who is funding his ventures?
    Eat Donuts!

  2. #102
    Supporting Member bjf123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Section 105
    Posts
    2,974

    Politics Thread

    Trump can't simply turn over the operations to his kids. That would be a clear conflict. I'm sure he has trusted people he can turn the day to day operations over to. This is uncharted waters. I'm not sure if any presidents in recent memory had such varied business interests. For them, I think it was mostly investments, stocks, bonds, and passive interests in others entities. Those are easy to turn over to an advisory firm who can operate independently. That's much tougher when you're incredibly active in the running of the operations.

    I heard something on one of the news programs this morning that the conflict of interest rules don't technically apply to the President like they do to cabinet members. No idea if that's true.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Golf is a relatively simple game, played by reasonably intelligent people, stupidly.

  3. #103
    Supporting Member bobbiemcgee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    8,141
    The tax returns may have shown his involvement with the Russians. I don't think too many NYC banks wanted his business after he stiffed them so many times, so he may get his money from the Putin oligarchs.
    Donald Trump Jr. pretty much covered that saying “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.” He added, “we see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”
    This space for rent.

  4. #104
    Supporting Member xu82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    8,724
    Quote Originally Posted by bobbiemcgee View Post
    The tax returns may have shown his involvement with the Russians. I don't think too many NYC banks wanted his business after he stiffed them so many times, so he may get his money from the Putin oligarchs.
    Donald Trump Jr. pretty much covered that saying “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.” He added, “we see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”
    Clever move to get Secret Service protection from the Russian mob. They play by different rules than Wall Street banks.

  5. #105
    Supporting Member Strange Brew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by boozehound View Post
    This is finally starting to get some press after the election. For those of you that supported Trump: What are your thoughts on this? This ranked as one of my top several concerns RE: a Trump Presidency (after all the policy stuff). Fortunately it seems like he is backing off of many of his claims (Mexico paying for the wall, deportation force, Obamacare, Muslim ban) - but this feels like a very bad idea to me. This seems more like something that would take place in an Eastern European Oligarchy, not a Western Democratic Republic.

    http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/13/news...cts/index.html

    The situation is made even more dubious, IMO, by the failure to release tax returns. Much was made (not without validity) of accusations of pay-to-play politics with respect to the Clinton Foundation. This seems like an even worse conflict of interest, particularly when you consider his role as the President vs. her role as Secretary of State. Are we really OK with him having his kids run is businesses as long as they pinkie swear not to talk to him about it? Are we OK with having no visibility to those business dealings? Not knowing who is funding his ventures?
    CNN?

    Ha....ha...ha..aaaahahahahaha!

  6. #106
    Sophomore Caf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    1,123
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange Brew View Post
    CNN?

    Ha....ha...ha..aaaahahahahaha!
    Good to see the Trump victory hasn't gone to your head.

  7. #107
    Sophomore Lamont Sanford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    The freaking 'Nati
    Posts
    1,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Caf View Post
    Good to see the Trump victory hasn't gone to your head.
    CAF -

    If there is one thing we learned from this election, it's that CNN is just a corrupt as Crooked Hillary, the Clinton Foundation, Qatar, Donna Brazelle, Don Lemon, Chris Matthews, and Mick Cronin. For anyone to legitimately get their "news" from CNN, is laughable. I wouldn't trust them to deliver sports scores.
    "Xavier born and Xavier bred, and when I am gone I will be Xavier Dead!"
    NJ!NP! 8/30/12

  8. #108
    Sophomore Caf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    1,123
    Quote Originally Posted by Lamont Sanford View Post
    CAF -

    If there is one thing we learned from this election, it's that CNN is just a corrupt as Crooked Hillary, the Clinton Foundation, Qatar, Donna Brazelle, Don Lemon, Chris Matthews, and Mick Cronin. For anyone to legitimately get their "news" from CNN, is laughable. I wouldn't trust them to deliver sports scores.
    CNN stinks - not many people are going to challenge you on that. However, you can find this story and question on basically every news outlet. It's a valid question, boozehound set it up well, and a CNN link doesn't somehow invalidate it.

    Watchdogs question Trump’s plans to keep his empire in the family

  9. #109
    Supporting Member boozehound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Section 212
    Posts
    5,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Caf View Post
    Good to see the Trump victory hasn't gone to your head.
    This mentality is a little frightening to me, and I hope it isn't widespread. CNN isn't Huffington Post. You can make a good argument that they slant their news to the left, but they don't generally report outright falsehoods. It's looking like it's going to be VERY easy for Trump to continue to manipulate the roughly 27% of the population that voted for him. He already has his propaganda minister in Steve Bannon, now he just needs to continually reinforce that Breitbart should be their source for the 'real' news, and that all other media is 'biased' and 'wrong'.

    The thing that does give me hope, is that you generally need much more than a quarter of the people in your camp in order to actually seize control of a democratic republic. The question becomes how many of the roughly half of Americans who didn't vote will buy his message. If it under-indexes relative to the people who actually did vote (as I suspect it does), he may have closer to 35%-40% of the people's support, which still isn't really enough to seize power ala Vladimir Putin in Russia. If you can manage to control the media it gets much easier, but I think that would be difficult to do on a large enough scale in America.

    I figure probably 20% of the people will believe literally everything he says, with the remainder of the population falling at various other places on the spectrum.
    Eat Donuts!

  10. #110
    Supporting Member boozehound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Section 212
    Posts
    5,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Caf View Post
    CNN stinks - not many people are going to challenge you on that. However, you can find this story and question on basically every news outlet. It's a valid question, boozehound set it up well, and a CNN link doesn't somehow invalidate it.

    Watchdogs question Trumpís plans to keep his empire in the family
    Thank you. See my above post for why this mentality frightens me. To wholesale discount CNN is a little ridiculous. It is, however, highly convenient when they are reporting on things you really don't want to address though.

    Donald Trump has done a phenomenal job of convincing his supporters that every media outlet that reports negative things about him is biased and false, even in the face of video evidence to the contrary.

    It's one thing to elect Donald Trump. It's another thing entirely to allow him free reign to do whatever he wants. That could be disastrous, particularly when you consider who he is taking advice from (I'm looking at you, Steve Bannon). The question RE: his business is legitimate and valid, and should be addressed. Unless we want to go full oligarchy here.
    Eat Donuts!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •