Here's How Donald Trump Could Become President

[Disgustipated]

Hey now! :caning:

Sorry you were a casualty

 

[VaticanAssassin]

So it is perfectly okay for me to start the Aggie Foundation, to collect charitable contributions, and use those to pay my personal or bussniess exspenses with?

You honestly are fucking retarded.....

He used the foundation funds to donate to a charity. Pretty much exactly what the foundation funds are suppose to be used for.

The fact that it also satisfied a legal obligation is secondary and completely inconsequential.

It broke no law. As your dumb ass already knows because you are unable to point out said law when asked.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

You honestly are fucking retarded.....

He used the foundation funds to donate to a charity. Pretty much exactly what the foundation funds are suppose to be used for.

The fact that it also satisfied a legal obligation is secondary and completely inconsequential.

It broke no law. As your dumb ass already knows because you are unable to point out said law when asked.

Peddle that horse shit at a Trump rally where someone might be fucking stupid enough to buy it.

You're completely ignoring numerous other instances where the Trump Foundation used money donated to his non-profit to benefit his for-profit businesses. Also, the proper law governing self dealing was cited you illiterate fucking buffoon.

 

[toubab]

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ror-the-polling-world-rarely-talks-about.html

"We Gave Four Good Pollsters the Same Raw Data. They Had Four Different Results."


And these are supposedly "good" pollsters, using supposedly good raw data. Imagine what kind of results average and below average pollsters would have come up with, as if they don't do so all the time, in their regular polling.

Seriously, most polls should be viewed with great skepticism. I'm sticking with the USC/LA Times poll to the bitter end.

 

[Sean]

You honestly are fucking retarded.....

He used the foundation funds to donate to a charity. Pretty much exactly what the foundation funds are suppose to be used for.

The fact that it also satisfied a legal obligation is secondary and completely inconsequential.

It broke no law. As your dumb ass already knows because you are unable to point out said law when asked.

I suggest you Google self dealing regulations pursuant to the administration of charities.

 

[toubab]

Blade Runner is one of my favorite movies, so I'm looking forward to this sequel. Many years ago, as a kid, I came across the short story the original was based on, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, and I was really struck by the title. It's a good story, if you haven't read it.

 

[sr71plt]

They both have done wrong.

Trump has done a whole lot more wrong and misuse of charity than the Clintons have. The Clintons haven't misused charity at all that I've seen so far. They used their positions to pull in the charity money that has done a whole lot of good. Using their positions to do this, by the way, is business as usual in just about every government/society on earth. Sure, it would be nice to cut that down and for the wealthy to open their pocketbooks just out of a sense of public duty and gratefulness that they have the means to help, but it's hardly a Clinton-only activity. In addition, no one has shown that Clinton receiving big charity donors when she was secretary of state (all folks she would have given appointments to anyway as a cabinet secretary) resulted in giving them anything more than a warm and fuzzy handshake and smile and a photo op. If you can show that she did, cite it from a reputable source. Otherwise stop your Swiftboating.

Trump, on the other hand, has been accused--yet to be proved, but let's go ahead investigate that, shall we? (and strongly suspect we both know what would be found--especially when he insists on hiding his records)--of having turned charity money around to support his personal and business interests--and the legal authorities are now picking that up to investigate.

All the probabilities point to you being a Swiftboater on the Clinton Foundation and a willing dupe on the Trump Foundation. Welcome to the ranks of the dumb chumps Trump is conning.

 

[Disgustipated]

Blade Runner is one of my favorite movies, so I'm looking forward to this sequel. Many years ago, as a kid, I came across the short story the original was based on, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, and I was really struck by the title. It's a good story, if you haven't read it.

lolololol. Wrong thread, 3b00b.

How Drumpfesque of you.

 

[toubab]

lolololol. Wrong thread, 3b00b.

How Drumpfesque of you.

I'm blaming my computer.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

lolololol. Wrong thread, 3b00b.

How Drumpfesque of you.

Why is "Drumpf" thought to be an effective put down? It's pretty stupid, and there is no way that he nor his fans care. So he has a silly sounding last name in his family history, so do most of us. Why is this supposed to be insulting, funny or clever?

 

[sr71plt]

Why is "Drumpf" thought to be an effective put down? It's pretty stupid, and there is no way that he nor his fans care. So he has a silly sounding last name in his family history, so do most of us. Why is this supposed to be insulting, funny or clever?

Maybe because of all the dumb names he's called everyone else? Duh.

 

[Wrong Element]

I'm trying to think of another famous world leader who had an ancestor change the family name from something that sounded comically German to something a little more ... blunt. It's right on the tip of my tongue...

 

[xbb]

I'm trying to think of another famous world leader who had an ancestor change the family name from something that sounded comically German to something a little more ... blunt. It's right on the tip of my tongue...

Soetoro

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

Maybe because of all the dumb names he's called everyone else? Duh.

Share your spreadsheet. I've not paid attention. That his name calling controls your behavior is interesting, I'd like to see what you mean.

PS you are FAR TOO OLD to still be using "duh". The 80s are long gone, get used to it.

 

[Wrong Element]

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ror-the-polling-world-rarely-talks-about.html

"We Gave Four Good Pollsters the Same Raw Data. They Had Four Different Results."


And these are supposedly "good" pollsters, using supposedly good raw data. Imagine what kind of results average and below average pollsters would have come up with, as if they don't do so all the time, in their regular polling.

Seriously, most polls should be viewed with great skepticism. I'm sticking with the USC/LA Times poll to the bitter end.

I think this is actually an argument for consulting more polls, not fewer.

Take the most recent big national poll to come out, the NBC/WSJ poll showing Clinton up 6. This is obviously a bigger margin for her than any other recent poll, which indicates:

1. A sample that's skewed Democratic.
2. A sample that's not skewed, but is nonetheless at the outer edge of the margin of error.
3. A movement towards Hillary in recent days that the other polls haven't caught yet.
4. (My own best guess) A difference in how they are calculating "likely voters" compared to other polls which are tending to show Trump's people as more excited about voting.


But the truth is that one poll on its own isn't going to give clear answers.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

I'm trying to think of another famous world leader who had an ancestor change the family name from something that sounded comically German to something a little more ... blunt. It's right on the tip of my tongue...

So that's it, you've mentally given up on the idea of an HRC victory and now believe Trump will win. He's a world leader to you, this is a done deal. What was the turning point for you? Is it the public perception of her health?

 

[snugglestruggle]

Must have been the video of her speech at Temple university where her eyes were doing a Marty Feldman impersonation.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

Must have been the video of her speech at Temple university where her eyes were doing a Marty Feldman impersonation.

I laughed, and am now going to youtube to look for this.

 

[snugglestruggle]

I have no idea why the link is coming up snafu. Oh well.

 

[Disgustipated]

Why is "Drumpf" thought to be an effective put down? It's pretty stupid, and there is no way that he nor his fans care. So he has a silly sounding last name in his family history, so do most of us. Why is this supposed to be insulting, funny or clever?

This is where you proudly tell everyone you stopped responding to me months ago.

Again.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

This is where you proudly tell everyone you stopped responding to me months ago.

Again.

I took you off ignore two days ago because you were actively posting in a thread I was reading. I recently started posting more often and barely posted months ago.

So what? Did you want a party? Should I have dedicated a thread to you and made a speech? Your low IQ shines through as always. Next time there will be a parade, I promise.

 

[1sickbastard]

I'm trying to think of another famous world leader who had an ancestor change the family name from something that sounded comically German to something a little more ... blunt. It's right on the tip of my tongue...

You mean like the British monarch Edward VII who changed his family name from his mother's (Victoria Hanover) and his father's (also, incidentally his own first cousin, once removed, Albert Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld) to Windsor?
Because heaven forfend the Brits realize they were fighting their King's second cousin, Wilhelm II...

 

[BotanyBoy]

Altruistic Saint clinton comes into play here?

Repeatedly by the St.Clinton is the most angelic (D) and can do no wrong!! fan club ardently defending the Queen of Wall St.

Phro, UD, SR71 etc.

They must really love the current plutocracy.

Does that mean if I think Dennis Rodman would rock Pope Francis in a game of HORSE that I think Rodman is a better person?

No I'm saying a convicted child molester has no room to talk shit about the character of the pope, cracking kiddy banging priest jokes, because he beat him in a game of HORSE.

Because that's what we're talking about here.

No it's really not. What we are talking about is the fans of two shit bags that are rather equally rancid trying to take the moral high ground because their shit bag has almond chunks instead of cashew chunks.

A woman who has made her life of knowing policy (probably better than anybody else.) going up into a style of combat that she's familiar with against a man who MOSTLY coasted.

Better than anyone else? LMFAO!!

Being well connected doesn't mean she knows policy...which if know policy better than anyone that would only make her a slimier turd.

She's horrible in that style of combat...Mr.Sanders the nice old man SKULL FUCKED her and she practically ran off crying to the DNC for help to beat the kindly old socialist.

If she doesn't have a fuckin' A team of outside the box type BAMF's in her earpiece DJT just might skull fuck her too.

I expect HRC to have a bit of a tough time in the first debate and clean up the second two.

If she doesn't come up with some good shit he can't smile about and stick right up her ass because she's either done, supported or said the same shit.

She could be in big trouble.

Because "Dark!! SEXIST!!! dark!! RACIST!! DARK!!!!" just isn't going to cut it and if she doesn't absolutely CRUCIFY him in the 1st one she's in for a world of hurt.

 

[patient1]

They all coincide with the poll slide. But I think that her health problems are way more serious than they're disclosing. The symptoms have been persistent and consistent for far too long now. What it is, I don't know. But it is serious.

Ishmael

Yes, I'm afraid so, I have some lung and neurological issues myself, among others, and I wouldn't wish them on anyone.

Best case- she's only concealing an incontinent bladder, which is not unheard of at her age. So she wears layers when everyone else dresses as light as possible, because she has Depends or a catheter or something. She keeps people at a distance so that they can't smell anything. She stays dehydrated to prevent humiliating episodes such as scurrying off of the podium ... which leads to a dry throat, fainting spells, falls, head injuries.

Not a condition that should preclude anybody from being president, and if there were a disqualifying condition, urinary incontinence would make a great cover story. It would explain her evasiveness on the topic and her lack of transparency. It would make her more human and relatable in a grandma sort of way.

Henry Kissinger once said "Anything that will be revealed eventually should be revealed immediately". I think he's right.

 

[sr71plt]

Share your spreadsheet. I've not paid attention. That his name calling controls your behavior is interesting, I'd like to see what you mean.

PS you are FAR TOO OLD to still be using "duh". The 80s are long gone, get used to it.

Of course you didn't pay attention. You are one of Trump's deplorable patsies.

Or are you so stupid that you're going to claim that Trump hasn't gone through this whole campaign calling everyone in his way some derogatory name or other. Are you going to be that dumb? Are you going to be so dumb that you can't understand the answer to your own question--why someone would use a pet name for Trump too?