The General Election

It doesn't likely mean much different from The Donald. He has to shore up the damage somehow and these banal one-liners seem to do the trick for those likely to support him.

 
cm husker said:
It's depressing to me that the wealthy can use "charitable tax deductions" for pet projects (like football renovations) as a way to pass the tax bill on to less wealthy people.

Charitable donations or not, it's sort of ridiculous that Buffett paid a 15% effective rate.

A more sound approach would be to lower income taxes on everyone, but do away with the charitable deduction (and a host of others).
Click to expand...
Why? Do you want an enormous proportion of charitable donations to go away?

IMO, a flat tax rate would be ideal. But I'm also in favor of deductions for business expenses and charitable donations.

 
NM11046 said:
An excellent piece by Chris Kluwe from a sportsman's perspective on locker room talk.

http://www.vox.com/first-person/2016/10/10/13230346/donald-trump-locker-room-talk-chris-kluwe
Click to expand...
default_thumbsup.gif
default_mfclap.gif
default_mfclap.gif
default_mfclap.gif
default_mfclap.gif
default_mfclap.gif
default_mfclap.gif


 
knapplc said:
It doesn't likely mean much different from The Donald. He has to shore up the damage somehow and these banal one-liners seem to do the trick for those likely to support him.
Click to expand...
But...I'm trying to figure out what "shackles" he is talking about.

Is he claiming that he has told his staff that tries to keep him in check to go F*** themselves?

Is he claiming now that he has vomited all over the stage with his insults of Hillary that he can now get really nasty?

Is he claiming now that Ryan has basically given him the middle finger (half way) that he doesn't need to pander ANY to the Republican establishment?

It's an interesting statement from a narcissistic loony toon.

 
I had a chuckle yesterday.

I had a thought about how Trump's ego makes him do the most outrageous things sometimes and his love for building buildings. I had a vision of him winning the election, moving into the Whitehouse and claiming it's a dump and not worthy of him living there so he hires people to tear it down and build a new Trump Tower on the spot in honor of his greatness.

 
AlohaHuskers said:
cm husker said:
It's depressing to me that the wealthy can use "charitable tax deductions" for pet projects (like football renovations) as a way to pass the tax bill on to less wealthy people.

Charitable donations or not, it's sort of ridiculous that Buffett paid a 15% effective rate.

A more sound approach would be to lower income taxes on everyone, but do away with the charitable deduction (and a host of others).
Click to expand...
Why? Do you want an enormous proportion of charitable donations to go away?
IMO, a flat tax rate would be ideal. But I'm also in favor of deductions for business expenses and charitable donations.
Click to expand...
Why would charitable donations decrease if the deduction is dropped?

Are you saying we only give to charity to avoid taxation? If that's the case, it's effectively a method for the wealthy to target their tax dollars instead of sending them to the general fund like the rest of us have to.

Business expense deductions for individual income is an even bigger mess. Why should someone who has uniforms be allowed to take a business expense but someone who has to dry clean suits for work not be allowed one? Why should I be able to business expense a flight to do business but not the cost of commuting to do business?

Lower everyone's rate (I'm not for a flat tax) and eliminate deductions. That would clean up a ton of tax manipulation.

 
knapplc said:
TGHusker said:
Interesting - more dirt but it probably won't come out.

http://www.vox.com/culture/2016/10/10/13220296/donald-trump-apprentice-footage-mark-burnett
Click to expand...
I just cruised through that article so forgive me if I missed something, but all I got out of it was "Here's Mark Burnett. We don't know if he has any dirt on Donald Trump, but he might."
Click to expand...
I saw a quote from a producer who worked there during season 1 & 2 and he said, there is stuff, and it's bad but with a big threat (*$5mil for leaksl) he doesn't know if we'll ever see anything.

 
BigRedBuster said:
I am not meaning to tie her to Bill's sins. But, she did enable him. She was no different than the spouse who's living with the alcoholic that is making everyone else's life miserable including their kids. He/She is not the alcoholic. He/She isn't the cause of the alcoholism....but....He/She sure as hell isn't doing anything to help and prevent him from making their kid's life miserable.

To poo poo how she acted during that time to women who should have had support is playing political games.

Now...like I've said....Bill isn't running in this campaign...she is. The Republicans would do better if they didn't go full out wacko like in the tweet that was posted. But.....I don't think they can control themselves long enough to not.
Click to expand...
Thanks, BRB. I appreciate the reply. I did want to offer a couple of more well-written perspectives on why I do think it's problematic to blame Hillary for enabling Bill. Hearing such opinions is the only reason it occurred to me to make a challenge of these charges. I hope you'll find them sensible.

1. http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2016/01/hillary_clinton_blamed_again_for_bill_clinton_s_affairs.html

2. http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/news/a52234/hillary-clinton-is-not-enabling-sexual-misconduct/

3. http://www.newsday.com/opinion/hillary-clinton-no-enabler-of-bill-clinton-just-like-eleanor-roosevelt-1.12420337

4. http://www.smh.com.au/comment/how-hillary-clinton-handled-bill-clintons-cheating-shows-she-has-the-resilience-for-the-presidency-20161005-grv9jo.html

I think this quote from the Newsday article is particularly apt:

None of these first ladies condoned her husband's wanderings. They endured them. And their marriages went on.
Click to expand...
She was put, over and over again, in an impossible position by Bill. It can't have been what she wanted. To say she enabled him implies that she is, through her choices, responsible for his repeated dalliances. No. Those are on him alone.

 
Bill/Hillary seems remarkably paralleled by Francis and Claire in House of Cards imo. I'd guess she stuck around because it was politically expedient to do so, and they have a healthy functioning 'parternship' that is mutually beneficial towards power/wealth/success/etc.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top