The LA Times did a great piece on this.
[URL=]Trump's failed Baja condo resort left buyers feeling betrayed and angry
People swindled in this deal say they were led to believe by statements like the above that this was a TRUMP project, not a “licensed” project. Notice his orangeness says “I build” in the above quote.
i had a huh? moment, i thought it was a bit of an ackward move. then when they reshowed it, it was really obvious. what on earth??!! very odd.
In a press conference this morning, Trump said he didn’t understand why the National Enquirer didn’t get a Pulitzer Prize for its reporting on Trump’s father’s connection to the JFK assassination.
I’m going to guess that’s a common “move” of his when interacting with women, slightly titillating but plausibly deniable, and he just did it here out of habit.
Back to the change theme, I got a look at the Democratic platform and was pleasantly surprised. Among other things:
-a $15 national minimum wage
-free public college tuition a la Berne
-decriminalize marijuana
-end for-profit prisons
-hire millions for infrastructure projects
-campaign finance reform
And more. Getting it passed is a whole nother thing, and we can argue about whether they are good ideas, but right off the bat there seems way more to sink one’s teeth into compared to, “distract them with fear from the fact that all we really care about is cutting taxes for the wealthy.”
Well, she admitted to learning at her father’s knee. Or at least his desk knee hole. When your role model is a scammer and a swindler, what lessons are learned?
How was anyone scammed or swindled? As far as I know, at the time Trump and his daughter made those statements, the condo development was underway and expected to be completed. How were Trump and Ivanka to know the guy would run out of money and be unable to complete his building? And if anyone was swindled it would have been by the developer, not the Trumps. But I haven’t read anywhere so far that the developer himself was enriched somehow by swindling or otherwise cheating people who put down money for a condo in his building.
Every investment carries with it an element of risk, even down payments on real estate. Just because someone loses money, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they were deliberately screwed out of it to enrich someone else. I imagine there’s a long list of financiers and contractors and suppliers this developer wound up owing money to as a result of his having failed to complete his building. Meh, it happens. I’m sorry for the guy who lost his savings by putting up money for a condo that was never finished, but the fault wasn’t Trump’s. The fault lies with an overly ambitious developer who bit off more than he could chew.
I see the convention is over.
When should I start looking to see if there’s a post-convention bounce?
Well, that speech and convention have settled the question without a doubt:
Fascism is “a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”
Didn’t see it, but I assume you mean Cruz’s father.
A somewhat less editorialized definition from Merriam-Webster:
Sounds a lot like communism to me, only without long lines to get a loaf of bread.
Yes, sorry, Cruz’s father.
Politics aside, we both have an interest in Trump’s business model.
You are absolutely correct. But word did get around. And after the early 1990s nobody would lend him money for new projects. So he went into branding, which is an arm’s length transaction. Trump can’t reneg on an agreement like that.
A friend of my family was a NY contractor who told my parents about Trump’s slowness in paying his bills. At the time it was a semi-humorous and vague story (which I heard via my parents). So yeah, word got around.
What fascinates me though is how Trump was able to keep going so long. Continue reading the TPM piece: Low Dollar, Same Grift - TPM – Talking Points Memo
The proper strategy of dealing with Trump is to say you’re going to speak with your lawyer. Because if you agree to 70% too soon, you are prey. You will then be pushed down to 30%. This part is what truly surprised me though: [INDENT][INDENT] I’ve seen many a New Yorker settle things like this with Trump people for 5-10 cents on the dollar and then happy, even eager to keep doing business with them. Why? Because he got in their heads with this aggressively counterintuitive behavior. [/INDENT][/INDENT] Boggles my mind. We know he does this sort of thing though. Think about the scandal with the Mexican real estate development with his kid. Deposits were said to be refundable, except in practice they weren’t. They reneged.
It reminds me of the creepy stuff that used to go on with Billy Ray Cyrus and Miley, esp in the Vanity Fair photos.
Missed the edit window, so here is a link that works
I’m guessing that the networks didn’t broadcast Congressman Sam Klimson (R-Delaware) diverging from his originally planned speech. (NSFW)
I reads that as Sam Kinison. No wonder the network didn’t broadcast it.
Plus him being dead and all that.
Point taken, but I’d like to add that I don’t intend to characterize all Republicans themselves that way. I’ve known many fine ones including my father and pretty much all of his family.
Plus that the clip was from* The Onion*.
“This one” being:
LMAO! I love this so much–thank you.
538’s answer is to look for polls that were conducted entirely after the convention ended (so Friday through Sunday or Monday) with the caveat that they have to be conducted before the DNC gets underway. Otherwise, what’s really useful is to see where things stand after both conventions are over.
Link to video?
I’m a dad of two daughters (and two sons), and I don’t see anything wrong with that photo. If Trump (the #whinylittlebitch) grabbed his daughter’s ass, then yeah: that’s creepy.
Cosigned, although I will say that as Snarky Kong notes, it is not the hill to die on.
Only one of whom lost decisively.
I’m just not buying into your narrative whatsoever. “We are Democrats, these are our longstanding principles, here’s why they are worthy principles, please elect us so we can enact them” seems to me *exactly *what a political party should present to the voters. What individual candidates and campaigns should be judged on is how effectively they execute the “here’s why they are worthy principles” part. Not on whether they rewrite the playbook so it’s shiny and new. Hell, look at how jazzed young voters got over Bernie Sanders, even though his musty, dusty, little red playbook was over half a century old at the very least.
