**** Elections thread *****

[Poopadoop]

Never. And I'm absolutely AMAZED that you can even entertain this idea.

It's kind of cute how you rail about other people's outrage over serious social issues and then have the same reaction yourself to someone posing a hypothetical question about Trump's motivations.

Firstly, it's a vicious accusation with positively no basis whatsoever.

It's a possibility is all I'm saying. Don't confuse that with a declaration that I know the facts.

Second, this same "what if" standard has never been applied to any other president ever. Did Reagan run because he liked being on TV so much? Did Clinton run just so he could get laid? Did Taft run for the free food?

Let's stick to talking about things that actually relate to Trump's situation and not some silly stuff about Taft wanting free food. There's loads of precedents of people seeking political power in order to benefit themselves financially. Not sure what makes you so confident Trump is above that. Especially when there's many things to suggest personal ethics isn't his strong suit.

And btw, I wouldn't be shocked if Clinton's lust for power was related in some significant way to his lust for sex.

And Thirdly, this idea completely flies in the face of the very logic you've used to support every one of your positions thus far. It completely undermines the entire basis for your opinion of Trump.

It's not at all logically inconsistent with him also wanting power for other reasons as well. You can do something for more than one reason. Similarly, it's not inconsistent with him using that power to do things besides increase his own wealth.

Would a self-serving narcissist be more interested in avoiding public impropriety, or would he be more interested in making a profit by granting favors to foreign governments, against american interests, in return for them patronizing a hotel room that would probably be sold anyway?

I'm not sure which answer you want to hear, or what you think it would prove...

but the fact is, I don't know. You'd have to ask a self-serving narcissist or his psychiatrist that question. I don't have that much insight into the workings of other people's minds.

[BananaStand]

I'm not sure which answer you want to hear, or what you think it would prove...

How about this then,

How many actual dollars do you think Trump might actually profit if the Chancellor of Monaco chose to stay in a Trump hotel during a diplomatic visit?

You don't have to know exactly, just ballpark guess. Is that number more or less than the President's salary, to which Trump is legally entitled, but declined.

If he's just in it for the money.....he's fucking up.

[Poopadoop]

How about this then,

How many actual dollars do you think Trump might actually profit if the Chancellor of Monaco chose to stay in a Trump hotel during a diplomatic visit?

You don't have to know exactly, just ballpark guess. Is that number more or less than the President's salary, to which Trump is legally entitled, but declined.

If he's just in it for the money.....he's fucking up.

Right, 'cause his only investment is one hotel in DC. Never mind all those other businesses he owns around the world, those don't count.

Do you really need conflict of interest explained to you? I think you're smarter than that.

[BananaStand]

Right, 'cause his only investment is one hotel in DC. Never mind all those other businesses he owns around the world, those don't count.

Do you really need conflict of interest explained to you? I think you're smarter than that.

You can explain conflict of interest to me, to Trump, to anyone who wants to listen. it doesn't change the fact that laws governing conflicts of interests do not apply to the President of the United States. And despite that he's taken action to separate himself from his business anyway.

The only potential for legal action would be a violation of the emoluments clause, and thus far the only hypothesis put forward has been a roundabout logic that classifies patronization as a gift, citing the most likely sources being hotels and golf courses.

I'm just asking, how much profit can he really make on a round of golf, or a night in a hotel, compared to the $400K annual salary he turned down.

[Poopadoop]

You can explain conflict of interest to me, to Trump, to anyone who wants to listen. it doesn't change the fact that laws governing conflicts of interests do not apply to the President of the United States.

The only potential for legal action would be a violation of the emoluments clause, and thus far the only hypothesis put forward has been a roundabout logic that classifies patronization as a gift.

Never mind the legal arguments then. Let's talk hypotheticals (and I use that word so you don't get excited about thinking I'm 'vicisouly accusing' him of something, though at the same time I think it should be clear that these are plausible scenarios).

Should it not be of concern if he has a huge stake in [insert name of Russian oil company here] if he's the one driving your foreign policy? Should it not be of concern that his own personal business interests in [Russian or whatever oil company] would be improved if he dropped the US out of the Paris Accord? Would you not at least like to know where his business interests are if he is going to be running the country? Should it not be of concern that he refuses to release his tax records, so we can know where his business interests are?

The answer a lot of people give to those questions is 'yes, we should be concerned'. But yours seems to be: 'He's our president and would never do anything that wasn't in the country's interests'. If you really really believe that with 100% confidence and are willing to just give him a pass on everything else I mentioned here then I'm sorry, but you are living on Lollipop Lane.

[BananaStand]

Never mind the legal arguments then. Let's talk hypotheticals ...

I'm going to answer your hypothetical with a hypothetical.....

Let's say Trump negotiates a deal and can demonstrate that it's in American interests. But it also somehow benefits his business. Do you think Trump will get credit for helping America? Or will he be buried with accusations of personal greed? It's a lose-lose for Trump to open up his books. Either he keeps them closed and gets criticized for it, or he opens them up and gets slammed every time foreign policy happens to occur in the same neighborhood as one of his hotels. He's operating in more than a few countries, it's bound to happen. I wouldn't release my taxes either if I were him.

The answer a lot of people give to those questions is 'yes, we should be concerned'.

Holy crap dude....this is WHY we have elections!!! This was already debated for a year and a half, and then settled last November. Those exact questions were posed to every American citizen aged 18 or older, and the results of the election were that people either said "no, I don't give a shit, I trust the guy to do a good job", or "yes I'm concerned, but not as concerned as I am about a jillion other issues where i expect a strong performance from Trump".

We've known forever, at least my entire lifetime, that Trump is a successful business man with massive international investments. That's not news. The potential for these conflicts has always been there. He was asked about his taxes dozens of times during the election, people decided that they don't give a fuck.

The election is over. You shouldn't keep re-living these issues that have already been adjudicated just because you don't like the outcome. You most certainly can't claim that it's evidence of any nefarious intent by Trump, and you certainly can't demonstrate that he's done anything illegal.

This is the nature of democracy. There is always a losing side. People should be able to handle it without accusing Trump of shenanigans, or engaging in coordinated efforts to undermine and de-legitimize him.

But yours seems to be: 'He's our president and would never do anything that wasn't in the country's interests'. If you really really believe that with 100% confidence and are willing to just give him a pass on everything else I mentioned here then I'm sorry, but you are living on Lollipop Lane.

You're putting words in my mouth man. I thought we agreed that was against the rules. I never said the guy is a saint. I never said I give him a pass on everything. I do give him the benefit of the doubt. I believe he's patriotic. I believe he genuinely wants to be a good president. I don't see how that puts me on Lollipop Lane.

I will say we've been doing this for days now and you have thrown out more nefarious hypotheses about Trumps intention than the worst foil-hat wearing conspiracy theorist I've seen to date. Not once have you ever shown that you're even open to the idea that Trump is just trying to do a good job.

[Poopadoop]

I'm going to answer your hypothetical with a hypothetical.....

Let's say Trump negotiates a deal and can demonstrate that it's in American interests. But it also somehow benefits his business. Do you think Trump will get credit for helping America? Or will he be buried with accusations of personal greed? It's a lose-lose for Trump to open up his books. Either he keeps them closed and gets criticized for it, or he opens them up and gets slammed every time foreign policy happens to occur in the same neighborhood as one of his hotels. He's operating in more than a few countries, it's bound to happen. I wouldn't release my taxes if I were him.

So it's fair every other president in how many years has released their taxes but he gets a pass? Ok then.

It's about transparency and accountability. Surely anyone can see those are good qualities for a president to maintain. What he has to gain is people's trust that he's willing to be transparent. What he has to lose is the ability of people to scrutinize every deal he does and wonder if it's motivated by his own greed.

Holy crap dude....this is WHY we have elections!!! This was already debated for a year and a half, and then settled last November. Those exact questions were posed to every American citizen aged 18 or older, and the results of the election were that people either said "no, I don't give a shit, I trust the guy to do a good job", or "yes I'm concerned, but not as concerned as I am about a jillion other issues where i expect a strong performance from Trump".

We've known forever, at least my entire lifetime, that Trump is a successful business man with massive international investments. That's not news. The potential for these conflicts has always been there. He was asked about his taxes dozens of times during the election, people decided that they don't give a fuck.

The election is over. You can't keep re-living these issues that have already been adjudicated just because you don't like the outcome.

Issues don't just 'get settled' because you win an election. People being elected doesn't give them carte blanche to just do whatever the fuck they want 'cause 'well, they voted for me and they knew there were these issues, so the whole country must be ok with that'. Get real.

You're putting words in my mouth man. I thought we agreed that was against the rules. I never said the guy is a saint. I never said I give him a pass on everything. I do give him the benefit of the doubt.

Bullshit. You're putting words in my mouth. Tell me where I said you called him a saint and gave him a pass on 'everything'. I was talking specifically about his business conflicts of interests, and yes, 'giving him a pass' is a fair representation of your position on that, since you're clearly not interested in knowing what or where his interests are or holding him accountable for them.

I believe he's patriotic. I believe he genuinely wants to be a good president. I don't see how that puts me on Lollipop Lane.

It's a very black-and-white interpretation of things isn't it. It's not an either/or situation. He may very well be patriotic, may genuinely want to be a good president (or at least whatever he thinks 'good' is), and still could be doing things that benefit himself financially independent of whether or not they're right for the country. The point is WE'LL NEVER FUCKING KNOW THAT BECAUSE HE'S HIDING THE INFORMATION WE COULD USE TO DETERMINE IT.

I will say we've been doing this for days now and you have thrown out more nefarious hypotheses about Trumps intention than the worst foil-hat wearing conspiracy theorist I've seen to date.

Lol. If having a healthy skepticism regarding a public figure and a willingness to question his motives makes me the worst foil-hat conspiracy theorist you've seen to date in Lollipop Lane, then I can live with that.

Not once have you ever shown that you're even open to the idea that Trump is just trying to do a good job.

Of course I'm open to him just trying to do a good job. That doesn't mean I have to accept things he does I don't agree with, or pretend that problems don't exist with his behaviour.

[Poopadoop]

I'm just asking, how much profit can he really make on a round of golf, or a night in a hotel, compared to the $400K annual salary he turned down.

A more apt question is how much could he make if he made a favourable trade deal with a foreign power that benefitted a business interest in that country THAT WE HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA EVEN EXISTS BECAUSE HE WON'T RELEASE HIS TAX RETURNS.

[MadMojoMonkey]

the President's salary, to which Trump is legally entitled, but declined.

He's said he will decline it. He hasn't done so yet.

If/When he does decline it, that will be gangsta. I'll respect that.

[Savy]

He's said he will decline it. He hasn't done so yet.

If/When he does decline it, that will be gangsta. I'll respect that.

This is such a bullshit line from anyone. The reason you pay people for a job isn't just so they can afford to live.

[Poopadoop]

This is such a bullshit line from anyone. The reason you pay people for a job isn't just so they can afford to live.

Yes, but it pushes the narrative that he's doing this for altruistic reasons, which is great for his image. Meanwhile he could be robbing the country of billions and everyone would just say 'what a guy, he declined his $400k salary'.

[Savy]

Yes, but it pushes the narrative that he's doing this for altruistic reasons, which is great for his image. Meanwhile he could be robbing the country of billions and everyone would just say 'what a guy, he declined his $400k salary'.

I get you want to get your point across but I'm not in anyway implying that any of these things aren't true.