Trump humor


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

William,

The elite mainstream media and the Clinton crowd are so stupid, they think Trump supporters WANT Trump to have paid a lot of taxes.

They don't realize that gaming the IRS is a prerequisite on Trump's resumé for Commander in Chief, not a black mark.

:)

I once read some mainstream media person or other say the following. I don't remember who said it, probably because I think the person was more into the wordplay and looking clever than the underlying wisdom. Whatever. Anyway, it went something like this: Anti-Trump people take him literally, but not seriously. Trump supporters take him seriously, but not literally.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

William,

The elite mainstream media and the Clinton crowd are so stupid, they think Trump supporters WANT Trump to have paid a lot of taxes.

They don't realize that gaming the IRS is a prerequisite on Trump's resumé for Commander in Chief, not a black mark.

:)

I once read some mainstream media person or other say the following. I don't remember who said it, probably because I think the person was more into the wordplay and looking clever than the underlying wisdom. Whatever. Anyway, it went something like this: Anti-Trump people take him literally, but not seriously. Trump supporters take him seriously, but not literally.

Michael

Trump is under no legal obligation to pay one cent more in taxes than the law requires.  If the liberal-progressives have a beef,  it should be with the law  and not with Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

81_18540920160928044504.jpg

2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

The elite mainstream media and the Clinton crowd are so stupid, they think Trump supporters WANT Trump to have paid a lot of taxes.

You may be right about the stupid crowd and the Trump supporters.  Media are running with versions of the New York Times 'bombshell.'  I have read reaction from surrogates, but not from Trump himself, except for the tweet that was quoted. The surrogates suggest that Trump was a genius in 1995, that  he got out of casino bankruptcy without unduly damaging the brand. War is peace. Loss is gain. Fair game is for fools.

The obvious spin given by Ye Eleetz is that Trump probably was able to avoid any federal tax liability going forward from 1995 ... in other words, he likely paid little income taxes in subsequent years.  Since the candidate bucks tradition by not releasing his tax returns, the spin and speculation will keep the hot-air balloon of speculation aloft, I think.  It has more 'buoyancy' than Trump knocking on about some fat disgusting beauty queen or the sick and crazy Clinton in his way.

A Trump supporter may act like an extension of the campaign, in some ways.  There is no immediate reward for a campaigner to admit deficiency in the candidacy.  Since the authoritative consensus gelled here that Trump always wins -- even when losing an inch or so in popular opinion -- some discussion can be stillborn or sidelined. For example, I don't think a Trump campaign surrogate would ever allow that the Trump Pays No Taxes meme could be destructive.  All is predictably well within Trumpland and there is no worry among his train passengers about the eventual winner on November 8.

Quote

They don't realize that gaming the IRS is a prerequisite on Trump's resumé for Commander in Chief, not a black mark.

That is one way of looking at the impact on Trump warriors.  If Trump was able to avoid handing money to the Feds (to be squandered), in 1995 and beyond, then this could be spun to  mean he did a great job for himself, for the greater Trump Inc.  It isn't like he cheated. He lost that money fair and square with his junk-bond financed casinos. 

I know it can be hard to treat an erstwhile opponent or a doubter as a fully-functioning rational human, when the doubtful opponent goes blind to the argument one is making. But -- there is a small possibility that some voters who are presently undecided could have a less-favourable opinion of Trump because of the No Taxes bombshell and its effects.  We will have to look at public opinion as it is sampled going forward.

For example, what would an undecided voter think about these old Trump tweets about taxation?

 

 

 

Quote

I once read some mainstream media person or other say the following [...] Anti-Trump people take him literally, but not seriously. Trump supporters take him seriously, but not literally.

I wonder what 'waverers' take home from an Only Little People Pay Taxes spin ... if there is only feigned disgust that "Trump avoids paying his fair share."

Here's some of the Eleetz and some second-order outlets going to town on the tax-hole story. Something tells me that this issue will still be alive for the Town Meeting-style encounter coming up.

Quote

 New York Times:

Donald Trump Tax Records Show He Could Have Avoided Taxes for Nearly Two Decades, The Times Found  —  Donald J. Trump declared a $916 million loss on his 1995 income tax returns, a tax deduction so substantial it could have allowed him to legally avoid paying any federal income taxes for up to 18 years …
Discussion:

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of watching Twitter,  why not read the entrails of birds  to  foretell the election???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, william.scherk said:

For example, what would an undecided voter think about these old Trump tweets about taxation?

William,

I don't know about undecideds.

The story Trump tells, basically, is that since the system was corrupt as he was building his empire, he did what he had to do to produce (without breaking the law). And he did it better than others. Now he wants to fix the corrupt system and can fix it because he knows where the weak points are. (The tweets you posted point to a few. :) )

His detractors scream that he is the corrupt one, not the system they forced on everyone and want to keep forced on everyone. They don't frame it that way. They say normal Americans pay "their fair share" into the corrupt system and all others should, also, especially the rich. In other words, Trump detractors seem to be more concerned about the corrupt system getting its "fair share" from the rich than anyone fixing the system.

But answer me this. What is fair, what is a fair share, when everything is corrupt?

That's not a question Trump detractors are too interested in looking at.

But I believe most undecideds will have some portion of this story in this manner in mind (and this question) when they finally decide.

We shall see.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Instead of watching Twitter,  why not read the entrails of birds  to  foretell the election???

Ha. Heh. Ho.

But then again, what's the difference?  If not entrails, crowing, flocks of like-minded opinion sealed in bubbles, 300 million whacked-out micro-bloggers on Twitter (including self-sets of opinion in a million archipelagos), what is left?  The party-line at OL is established, there is no doubt of a Trump victory November 8. That makes the race hardly exciting, no contest.  Even if anyone on the Trump Train briefly breaks ranks and sez "Oh, OK, Trump didn't actually win all the Hoftstra encounter," it doesn't mean much in and of itself in terms of shifting public opinion his way or not -- if anything a shortfall of expectations makes the next debate more interesting, since almost everyone loves an underdog. In which case Trump wins not only the web-hackable surveys but the real public attention, and the "entrails" disgorged by the pollsters will indicate the symbolic victory.

So, what else, Bob?  You could always toss your hat in the ring and make a guess at who will be triumphant.  If any other readers are in doubt of the outcome of the town meeting format TV encounter a week away, I'd say it will be easy for Mr Trump to best his first performance.  He will do his prep like a man, and be less distracted. 

And for those who are maybe almost thinking of betraying Mr Trump by conceding he may have lost the first debate, well there are other entrails to read that can blow such negativity away.

I suggest the Trump-touted instant polls; in one instance, Mr Trump gained almost twenty-seven million survey 'clicks,' and ran off with the contest hands-down with 98% of the score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Man, this is getting too serious for a humor thread.

Back to the gutter...

10.02.2016-18.33.png

 

:evil: 

Michael

Who is the one on t he left, the better looking one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said:

That's Huma Abedin, who separated from Anthony Weiner after his latest sexting problem.

Korben,

Just to complete the info for Bob, Huma Abedin is also Hillary Clinton's top aide.

As to the imitating people theme, I wasn't going to post the following, but I just can't resist.

So apologies in advance...

10.02.2016-21.29.png

 :evil:  :) 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Korben,

Just to complete the info for Bob, Huma Abedin is also Hillary Clinton's top aide.

As to the imitating people theme, I wasn't going to post the following, but I just can't resist.

So apologies in advance...

10.02.2016-21.29.png

 :evil:  :) 

Michael

LOL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Korben,

Just to complete the info for Bob, Huma Abedin is also Hillary Clinton's top aide.

As to the imitating people theme, I wasn't going to post the following, but I just can't resist.

So apologies in advance...

10.02.2016-21.29.png

 :evil:  :) 

Michael

Marvelously cruel .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Ha. Heh. Ho.

But then again, what's the difference?  If not entrails, crowing, flocks of like-minded opinion sealed in bubbles, 300 million whacked-out micro-bloggers on Twitter (including self-sets of opinion in a million archipelagos), what is left?  The party-line at OL is established, there is no doubt of a Trump victory November 8. That makes the race hardly exciting, no contest.  Even if anyone on the Trump Train briefly breaks ranks and sez "Oh, OK, Trump didn't actually win all the Hoftstra encounter," it doesn't mean much in and of itself in terms of shifting public opinion his way or not -- if anything a shortfall of expectations makes the next debate more interesting, since almost everyone loves an underdog. In which case Trump wins not only the web-hackable surveys but the real public attention, and the "entrails" disgorged by the pollsters will indicate the symbolic victory.

So, what else, Bob?  You could always toss your hat in the ring and make a guess at who will be triumphant.  If any other readers are in doubt of the outcome of the town meeting format TV encounter a week away, I'd say it will be easy for Mr Trump to best his first performance.  He will do his prep like a man, and be less distracted. 

And for those who are maybe almost thinking of betraying Mr Trump by conceding he may have lost the first debate, well there are other entrails to read that can blow such negativity away.

I suggest the Trump-touted instant polls; in one instance, Mr Trump gained almost twenty-seven million survey 'clicks,' and ran off with the contest hands-down with 98% of the score.

Trump could win if he wants to win. If he loses he gets to keep all his marbles. He can be a victim--of whatever--too. As President elect the curtain goes up--well, it's already going up (tax returns?) on what's behind it. The Trump brand is sustained by his mouth, not so much his bank account. How does he keep up those appearances? Will his empire evaporate in his presidential wake? Alan Greenspan's company did when he went to the Federal Reserve.

He is what he is. Can he switch gears?

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poor Pepe the Frog.

He's become an anti-semite and racist symbol of white supremacy for the left.

Rubber stamped by the ADL and everything...

The stoner frog now sits in the ADL database of hate symbols.

But he doesn't seem to mind...

10.03.2016-18.25.png

Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit is not amused: Wow! Anti-Defamation League Declares War on Cartoon Frog.

He posted this video by Ezra Levant explaining it:

About three weeks ago, Clinton's team tried to make this racism connection--because memes are popular with millennials and stuff, Trump supporters were having some fun with Pepe, and it was becoming cool--in a lame explainer.

Shortly after, they even had one of their precious flowers, Jesse Singal of New York Magazine, try to explain it all to those of discriminating taste and moral superiority: How Internet Trolls Won the 2016 Presidential Election

I wonder if there is anything deeper to look at though...

Ezra Levant said the following on his site and in the video above:

Quote

... the executive director of the ADL used to work for Barack Obama, before taking his $680,000/year job with the ADL.

Now it all makes a bit more sense, doesn’t it?

The executive director of the ADL, the one who used to work for Barack Obama, that would be Jonathan Greenblatt...

Hmmmm...

Anyway, back at the farm, Matt Furie, The Creator of Pepe the Frog Is Voting for Hillary Clinton.

I wonder if Pepe will start showing up at her rallies...

:evil:  :) 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some Social Justice Warrior fun from Aurora, Indiana:

The reporter said the 76-year-old guy, Frank Linkmeyer, apologized for making the float of Trump electrocuting Clinton and Obama as an Easter Island god. But that didn't sound like an apology to me. It sounded more like, "If you're offended and not laughing, tough cookies."

:)

Also, he's a Democrat, fer kerissakes...

Oh... (fainting)... 

The outrage...

The outrage...

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is how Drudge is responding to the overhype of the hurricane in Florida, seeing how overhyping this actual disaster is great for the Democratic climate change agenda--and even for the election since it sucks up the media attention and keeps it off Hillary's scandals.

10.07.2016-11.01.png

:)

He even got in a dig about the overhyped misogyny theme in the Clinton campaign.

Dayaamm!

On the covert message level, that was pure mastery.

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Here is how Drudge is responding to the overhype of the hurricane in Florida, seeing how overhyping this actual disaster is great for the Democratic climate change agenda--and even for the election since it sucks up the media attention and keeps it off Hillary's scandals.

10.07.2016-11.01.png:)

Removing the exclamation points would help.   The hurricane is really a hazard.  There will be wind and water damage  and probably some deaths. The only hurricane which is not a hazard is the one that does not make land fall.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/4/2016 at 7:14 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Some Social Justice Warrior fun from Aurora, Indiana:

The reporter said the 76-year-old guy, Frank Linkmeyer, apologized for making the float of Trump electrocuting Clinton and Obama as an Easter Island god. But that didn't sound like an apology to me. It sounded more like, "If you're offended and not laughing, tough cookies."

:)

Also, he's a Democrat, fer kerissakes...

Oh... (fainting)... 

The outrage...

The outrage...

:)

Michael

This fellow to be an equal opportunity offender.  He probably can make  a crutch or a wheelchair seem funny.   And Obama does look a bit like the Easter Island statues.  I appreciate his brand of humor.  I bet he has some hilarious crib-death jokes.  too.  

I used to have jokes about a variety of children's toys.  Dolls.  There was Polly pee-in-her-pants,  Baby Crib Death,  and Rodney-Retard.  Not too many people laughed, but I thought they were hilarious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Removing the exclamation points would help.   The hurricane is really a hazard.  There will be wind and water damage  and probably some deaths. The only hurricane which is not a hazard is the one that does not make land fall.

Bob,

1. The exclamation points are for satire. Removing them would further hide the parody. Dayaamm!

2. Nobody is denying that hurricanes are hazards. But there is a difference between issuing a warning and screaming in a headline: Hurricane Matthew To Kill 19 Million If Florida Capsizes.

:)

I wish I could take credit for that parody, but it came from Alex Jones.

Watch this if you dare.

Russia could blow a hole in the middle of Florida and sink the peninsula if the hurricane doesn't capsize it first.

LOL... 

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now