March 3,2016 GOP debate thread

Page 15 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

emperus

Diamond Member
Apr 6, 2012
7,824
1,583
136
This hit job didn't seem to have the effect the establishment was hoping for:
https://www.salon.com/2016/03/04/even_the_fox_news_audience_is_fed_up_with_fox_news_debates/

Looks like they can't kill off enthusiasm for Trump without killing off enthusiasm for everyone.

Wowsie at this quote:

Luntz called the mood in the room following the Fox News debate “the most negative response” he’d ever seen. After all, as Nate Silver pointed out this week, Republican voters basically hate all of their candidates:

Trump does not just divide rank-and-file voters from Republican poo-bahs. He’s also extremely divisive among Republican voters, much more so than a typical front-runner. In exit polls so far, only 49 percent of Republican voters say they would be satisfied with Trump as their nominee — remarkable considering Trump’s lead in votes and delegates. But compounding the GOP’s problems, Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz would leave only slightly more Republican voters happy.

[…]

Not only is Trump’s 49 percent satisfaction rating lower than any recent party nominee’s, it’s also lower than almost all the losers’. Rick Santorum in 2012 was more widely acceptable than Trump, for example. The only exception was Ron Paul in 2012, although the exit polls asked about him in only two states.

Watch the Fox News audience rip apart the Fox News debate below
:
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Wowsie at this quote:

:

I had totally missed that the actual video was linked to. I just watched it and "damn" at two things: 1) Kasich's positives when he was painting his completely unrealistic foreign policy strategy and 2) Rubio's negatives attacking Trump over Trump University. His attack isn't entirely without merit but these establishment morons just don't seem to realize when you throw restaurant manager types under the bus you're alienating a huge swath of your base.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,783
31,185
146
Wowsie at this quote:

:

that's nuts. I guess this really is the moment when a major political party experiences a major shift.

I think it is certain that no matter what happens until the convention and after, Trump will be a candidate in some form or another.

Maybe there is some legitimacy to his being an inside Clinton attack agent--created for lulz and distraction, but when the masks of the GOP base fell off and Trump kept winning, it was like an uncontrollable tire fire.

This is the smartest thing Trump has ever done. I'm starting to admire the hateful little pants-shitter.
 
Feb 16, 2005
14,077
5,447
136
Bull fooking shit! Sanders is the only one who has integrity, but he's a bum and he never had a steady job until he was in his 40's. But, he does have integrity and he is honest about who he is. OTOH, Hillary is a neocon and a DINO....and there is all that other shit too.

Drumpf is Drumpf. Gruff, but effective.

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA! Wow when you go, you go full drumpftard. Sanders IS a bum?!?!
Here's what he was doing when he 'never had a steady job until his 40's' ( :rolleyes: )

While at the University of Chicago, Sanders joined the Young People's Socialist League,[28] the youth affiliate of the Socialist Party of America, and was active in the Civil Rights Movement as a student organizer for the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.[15][29] Under Sanders's chairmanship, the university chapter of CORE merged with the university chapter of SNCC.[30] In January 1962, Sanders led a rally at the University of Chicago administration building to protest university president George Wells Beadle's segregated campus housing policy. "We feel it is an intolerable situation when Negro and white students of the university cannot live together in university-owned apartments," Sanders said at the protest. Sanders and 32 other students then entered the building and camped outside the president's office, performing the first civil rights sit-in in Chicago history.[31][32] After weeks of sit-ins, Beadle and the university formed a commission to investigate discrimination.[33] Sanders once spent a day putting up fliers protesting against police brutality, only to eventually notice that a Chicago police car was shadowing him and taking them all down.[34]

Sanders attended the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, where Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his "I Have a Dream" speech.[15][34][35] That summer, he was convicted of resisting arrest during a demonstration against segregation in Chicago's public schools and was fined $25.[27][36]

In addition to his civil rights activism during the 1960s and 1970s, Sanders was active in several peace and antiwar movements. He was a member of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee and the Student Peace Union while attending the University of Chicago. Sanders applied for conscientious objector status during the Vietnam War; his application was eventually turned down, by which point he was too old to be drafted. Although he opposed the war, Sanders never placed any blame on those who fought and has been a strong supporter of veterans' benefits.[37][38]

Private careers
After graduating from college, Sanders initially worked in New York City in a variety of jobs, including Head Start teacher, psychiatric aide, and carpenter.[25] In 1968 Sanders moved to Vermont because he had been "captivated by rural life." After his arrival there he worked as a carpenter, filmmaker, and writer[39] who created and sold "radical film strips" and other educational materials to schools.[40]

Liberty Union campaigns
Sanders began his electoral political career in 1971 as a member of the Liberty Union Party, which originated in the anti-war movement and the People's Party. He ran as the Liberty Union candidate for governor of Vermont in 1972 and 1976 and as a candidate for U.S. senator in 1972 and 1974.[41] In the 1974 Senatorial race, Sanders finished third (5,901 votes; 4.1%), behind 33-year-old Chittenden County State's Attorney Patrick Leahy (D, VI; 70,629 votes; 49.4%) and two-term incumbent U.S. Representative Dick Mallary (R; 66,223 votes; 46.3%).[42][43]

The 1976 campaign proved to be the zenith of Liberty Union's influence, with Sanders collecting 11,000 votes for Governor and the party forcing the races for Lieutenant Governor and Secretary of State to be decided by the state legislature when its vote total prevented either the Republican or Democratic candidates for those offices from garnering a majority of votes.[44] The campaign drained the finances and energy of the Liberty Union, however, and in October 1977—less than a year after the conclusion of the 1976 campaign—Sanders and the Liberty Union candidate for Attorney General, Nancy Kaufman, announced their retirement from the party.[45]

Following his resignation from Liberty Union, Sanders worked as a writer and the director of the nonprofit American People's Historical Society (APHS).[46] While with the APHS, he made a 30-minute documentary about American Socialist leader and presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs.[28][47]

Yea, Bernie was just bumming around, so what did you do in your 20's and 30's?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
You really went there.....character, temperament & integrity?

I fixed part of that, as you can see. Hillary fails in all three.

Anyone who says they have done objective research about Hillary, yet still supports her, needs to go back and do some ACTUAL, objective research. If she can still be supported, after that, the supporter is not an objective researcher, but a Sycophant, who cares, not about the truth, or doesn't have the integrity to dismiss her for what she is.

You just might be the latter.

Bull fooking shit! Sanders is the only one who has integrity, but he's a bum and he never had a steady job until he was in his 40's. But, he does have integrity and he is honest about who he is. OTOH, Hillary is a neocon and a DINO....and there is all that other shit too.

Trump is Trump. Gruff, but effective.

Hit a nerve, huh? Trump's ego is monstrous as only a self indulgent spoiled rich kid asshole's ego can be.

Like I said- start with the hair. It's obviously fake & a real tell about the rest of the Trump image. It's all fake.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
142
106
Which speaks to the issue of emotional IQ not at all. When we put the two together conservatives are often incapable of determining the truth because of their insecurities. If anything, being intelligent just means they can rationalize better.
So now your excuse for Repubs having higher IQs is that it only means they can rationalize better? Sure. The point stands that Dems are repeatedly proven as lower intelligence any way you slice it.
 
Last edited:

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
142
106
Why does that even matter when we're talking about the character, temperament & general mien of a presidential candidate?

Shee-it, Sherlock. Any man as ridiculously vain as Trump about their fucking hair doesn't really have the character to be President. He's just as vain about his wealth & his string of trophy wives.
Trump wins in persuasion of all the candidates in 1v1 situations. You can't stump the trump because he uses tactics like double binds which already put you in a submissive situation at the start. None of the other candidates have been battle tested like him in the art of persuasion. This is an asset when it comes to foreign relations and getting the other party to agree to a deal.
 

Pardus

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2000
8,197
21
81
This whole race is like a boxing match, less the actual boxing. Rubio, Cruz and Romney are all attacking Trump every chance they get, non-stop. Every debate is just petty attacks back and forth and barely talking about the issues.

On the other hand, Trump keeps reversing his stance on many issues and talks about the size of his anatomy and continues to bash his opponents.

Latest polls state Trump will win big today and Tuesday, eventually leading to a brokered convention which every news channel is talking about.

I wonder if an alien race out there is watching this and saying "son, you see, this is why we won't ever go to earth".
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
He would have done better investing in the market, then trying to 'make' money.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-probably-better-investing-donald-233020366.html

I don't believe that article is reliable, at all:

That year, Forbes said Trump’s fortune was “estimated at over $200 million,” but also acknowledged that Trump claimed it was “$500 million,” according to Timothy L. O’Brien’s book “TrumpNation: The Art of Being The Donald.”

Again, let’s give Trump the benefit of the doubt and assume he was worth $500 million in 1982.

Imagine Trump had retired in 1982, sold his real estate holdings and invested his $500 million in the S&P 500 — that is, 500 stocks representing the American stock market.

If Trumps r/e holdings were worth $500M when he sold them he would net much less after taxes.

Because Trump is a r/e professional he does not get LTCG on his sale of r/e. It will be taxed as ordinary income. I believe the rate back then was 50% (federal only). That alone blows the authors' contention right out of the water.

Furthermore, we're at the end of a deep long recession in r/e. How much higher would the FMV of his r/e holdings have been in 2006 or 2007?

The author includes all the dividends paid out to shareholders and adds them in to the total stock value. He forgot income taxes. Dividends, whether reinvested or not, are taxable.

Trump's FMV of $10B is after paying income taxes all these years. How much does one think that might be? I'm going to guess a lot.

Additional, If Trump's net worth report was prepared according to accounting standards, and I have no reason to believe it was not, the $10B amount is AFTER TAX. What that means is if Trump sold all his assets, paid off all his liabilities and paid income taxes he would net $10B. The stock market number in the article is pre tax.

(I could go on but will stop here.)

Basically, the author is saying if Trump could have put his $500M tax free into an IRA and let it sit for all these years he would have made out well. Well, duh.

His analysis is so simplistic (and apples to oranges) as to be worthless.

Fern
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
Because Trump is a r/e professional he does not get LTCG on his sale of r/e. It will be taxed as ordinary income.

That's not true at all. It depends on the legal structure of the particular enterprise. If he's a stockholder, he gets CG rates. If it's structured like a hedge fund he gets carried interest breaks as well.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
So now your excuse for Repubs having higher IQs is that it only means they can rationalize better? Sure. The point stands that Dems are repeatedly proven as lower intelligence any way you slice it.

As was linked earlier, 1-4 IQ points isn't enough difference to matter. What does matter is this, from your own link-

higher intelligence among classically liberal Republicans compensates for lower intelligence among socially conservative Republicans.

Trump devotees clearly aren't classically liberal Repubs at all. They just kinda figured out that they've been manipulated by the leaders who are.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
That's not true at all. It depends on the legal structure of the particular enterprise. If he's a stockholder, he gets CG rates. If it's structured like a hedge fund he gets carried interest breaks as well.

True, at least theoretically. But most real estate development is held (in an LLC taxed) as a partnership. You can really "F" yourself by holding r/e in a corporation (S or regular).

The only real estate developers I can think using a corporation are those that did so to be public companies with share sold on the stock market.

Trump has nothing to do with hedge funds.

Fern
 

chimansaurus

Junior Member
Jun 18, 2017
4
0
1
True, at least theoretically. But most real estate development is held (in an LLC taxed) as a partnership. You can really "F" yourself by holding r/e in a corporation (S or regular).

The only real estate developers I can think using a corporation are those that did so to be public companies with share sold on the stock market.

Trump has nothing to do with hedge funds.

Fern
Hi Fern, can you please point me to a free online resource that has more details on single member LLC's owning real-estate? Thanks in advance.