Bond slashed to 175 million while Trump appeals

[Mike M (the other one)]

(03-27-2024, 06:47 AM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/29/us/trump-750-taxes.html

Ah your link really doesn't work but i found another.

When dealing with numbers like his, you are better off taking the itemized deductions.  The option is there for everyone, but most of us don't do enough to make doing itemized better than the standard deductions.

[Dill]

(03-26-2024, 02:27 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I'm discussing Socialism. 
If he's discussing something else then he should clarify. 

Socialism is everyone works for the good of the state and only takes what they need. 
In the end, we can only take roughly the same out. No incentive for anyone to work harder. 
In a free enterprise you can elevate yourself over others.

What pseudo brand of socialism is he referring to?

No. That is not socialism.  

"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs," is an 18th century slogan which
19th century German Communists adapted to their political program--a Communist political program.

Neither socialism nor Communism is about "working for the good of the state."
(E.g., the goal of Marx's communism was for the state to "wither away.") 

"Socialism" is a term attached to quite a variety of political projects/programs,
which share a common ideal of public ownership of the means of production
--variety because there are degrees of ownership. Communism is a subset of socialism. 

The social democracy Bels just described is a hybrid or accommodation of socialism to (partially) free markets.
When American voters become interested in social democracy, our right warns us "socialism has never worked."
When the voters point to the Nordic model, the right says "Hey, that's really capitalism." 
I hope voters get to the point where they respond--"Ok, we want THAT capitalism then." 

[Dill]

(03-25-2024, 11:14 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Why do you feel being called a Democrat is a personal attack? Come out of your political closet, own it, you can do it in 2024. 

The more Republicans attack Nately, the higher his poll numbers go! 

[Dill]

(03-25-2024, 08:44 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: They've both been so bastardized that there is no point in trying to get into an argument over semantics. 

Socialism paves the way for Communism, just like Authoritarian does for Totalitarian. No need to go Dill on us. .

In fact, what I'd really like to know is how Trump will turn our democratic Republic into a Totalitarian state. If you have the inside scoop on that, please share.

Well, gosh. Someone needs to weigh in on this. 

Trump is a right wing authoritarian populist, for sure. But it takes rather more to get from there to totalitarian.

There have been hundreds of authoritarian regimes in the world since the 17th century, but rather few genuinely totalitarian. 
Maybe a dozen if you don't count puppet states. Leading effective fascist or communist revolution takes serious dedication, sacrifice, and
a  long-term commitment to reshaping the values of private individuals and civic organizations into a specific national order
from the top down. "Gleichschaltung" the Nazis called it. Erasing the distinction between state and civil society, as I said on another thread.

I've seen nothing like that in the chaotic and unfocused Trump, who has attained authoritarian control of his party and will seek to
expand that if he gets into power. But it will be a personal, narcissistic* and idiosyncratic sort of power, lurching from this anti-woke campaign
to that. He has a strong desire to personally operate outside the law, and to self-aggrandize as a super-celebrity. He is interested in
buildings with his name on them and lots of adulation from supporters. If the movement to re-structure school curricula at the 
secondary and tertiary level in accordance with "conservative' values continues, he will avidly support it, but does not himself have
an interest in or ideas about how the curricula should be formed and to what end. "What DeSantis said," will be his mantra, only
without mentioning DeSantis.  If Hitler had condemned TicToc on ideological grounds, he'd not have back-tracked on that for a campaign contribution.
Trump's nationalism, like his Christianity, is de fault, not serious. 

This is why I always contest calling Trump a "fascist." It's not just another term for any old authoritarian, and suggests easily refutable
analogies and connotations.  There are people who will serve as his brown shirts, but they are relatively few and bringing organization 
and ideology with them, projecting their vision onto Trump. For all the rally frenzy, MAGA hats are not brown shirts. 

*E.g., breaking foreign policy commitments because they were a rival's achievements would be an example of narcissistic motivation, as would
seeking historic "firsts" like a fruitless summit with Kim Jong Un. Such moves do not evolve from an ideological vision for where US foreign
policy should be going.

[*pally*]

How does Trump turn this country into a Totalitarian government...It is easier than we thing

-a Lack of respect for the Constitution and law
-a complicit Congress
-Complicit Judicial system especially at the highest level
-seeding the government with synchopaths
-undermining of the legitimacy of the Judicial and education systems
-undermining of military leadership
-attack and demonize the selected minority group
-a large group of like-minded, gullible, or apathetic citizens who ignore or approve of what is going on

The right-wing Federalist Society and the billionaires that fund it have been working for 40 years for this moment in time. The only thing lacking is the right person in the Presidency. And that will happen if Trump wins again. He will have learned there is nobody that can stop him

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-28-2024, 11:04 AM)pally Wrote: How does Trump turn this country into a Totalitarian government...It is easier than we thing

-a Lack of respect for the Constitution and law

One could very easily make this exact same argument against the Dems, and quite honestly it could be a stronger case.

Quote:-a complicit Congress
-Complicit Judicial system especially at the highest level

Neither of these are easy to achieve, or have been achieved.

Quote:-seeding the government with synchopaths

I believe you meant sycophants. 

Quote:-undermining of the legitimacy of the Judicial and education systems

Two very different things.  Would directly threatening sitting SCOTUS members by name count?

Quote:-undermining of military leadership

How so?

Quote:-attack and demonize the selected minority group

Which minority group is selected?

Quote:-a large group of like-minded, gullible, or apathetic citizens who ignore or approve of what is going on

How large?  How easy is this to achieve?

Quote:The right-wing Federalist Society and the billionaires that fund it have been working for 40 years for this moment in time.  The only thing lacking is the right person in the Presidency.  And that will happen if Trump wins again.  He will have learned there is nobody that can stop him

This post is honestly quite silly.  You post examples of "easily achievable" goals, none of which are easily achievable, that will enable the overthrow of the longest contiguous democracy in modern history.  It's fear mongering at its most generic.  If Trump does win, which is becoming increasingly possible, then we'll almost certainly get another four years identical to his first term.  Then Trump can "retire" and claim he's the only POTUS to win his position back after being defrauded of his reelection the first time, proving him right all along (in his mind).  Then we'll see what lame candidates the two parties can vomit up for us to agonize over in 2028.

[*pally*]

(03-28-2024, 11:25 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: One could very easily make this exact same argument against the Dems, and quite honestly it could be a stronger case.



Neither of these are easy to achieve, or have been achieved.



I believe you meant sycophants. 



Two very different things.  Would directly threatening sitting SCOTUS members by name count?



How so?



Which minority group is selected?



How large?  How easy is this to achieve?


This post is honestly quite silly.  You post examples of "easily achievable" goals, none of which are easily achievable, that will enable the overthrow of the longest contiguous democracy in modern history.  It's fear mongering at its most generic.  If Trump does win, which is becoming increasingly possible, then we'll almost certainly get another four years identical to his first term.  Then Trump can "retire" and claim he's the only POTUS to win his position back after being defrauded of his reelection the first time, proving him right all along (in his mind).  Then we'll see what lame candidates the two parties can vomit up for us to agonize over in 2028.

well you reacted exactly how I would have predicted.  And exactly why becoming totalitarian is easier to achieve than assumed.  Because people like you think the idea is silly.

The architects of this have been working for 40 years towards this goal.  They've put pieces in place including a majority of Federalist Society members on the Supreme Court.  You have a candidate right now who is planning on purging the civil service system because its bloated, not because its incompetent but for political ideology.  You've got state laws that muzzle teachers from essentially anything but right-wing positions

The press is the 'enemy of the people"
Immigrants are here to replace white Americans and are "poisoning the blood"
The drip drip drip of attempting to force right wing evangelical beliefs into the school systems and legal systems
People who disagree with Trumpism are unAmerican and should be "driven out"

Open your eyes!  pooh poohing the rhetoric coming from Trump and his followers is being deliberately ignorant

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-28-2024, 11:44 AM)pally Wrote: well you reacted exactly how I would have predicted.  And exactly why becoming totalitarian is easier to achieve than assumed.  Because people like you think the idea is silly.

If I stepped in dog poop I'd bet you could predict my reaction as well.  I think your assertion that it will be easily achieved is silly, yes.  it is demonstrably so.

Quote:The architects of this have been working for 40 years towards this goal.  They've put pieces in place including a majority of Federalist Society members on the Supreme Court.  You have a candidate right now who is planning on purging the civil service system because its bloated, not because its incompetent but for political ideology.  You've got state laws that muzzle teachers from essentially anything but right-wing positions

News flash, both sides work towards these exact same goals.  Come to CA and tell me that ideological purity isn't a goal for the civil service.  You won't be able to.

Quote:The press is the 'enemy of the people"

What a shame that the legacy media actually provides this position with valid examples on a nearly daily basis.

Quote:Immigrants are here to replace white Americans and are "poisoning the blood"

Who said they're here to replace "white people".  Please link source.  You are talking about a government official since it's being cited as an example of a deliberate slide towards totalitarianism.

Quote:The drip drip drip of attempting to force right wing evangelical beliefs into the school systems and legal systems

Again, an argument could easily be made the exact same thing is happening in deep blue states.  Is that part of a slide toward fascism as well?

Quote:People who disagree with Trumpism are unAmerican and should be "driven out"

Who said this?  Again, link source.

Quote:Open your eyes!  pooh poohing the rhetoric coming from Trump and his followers is being deliberately ignorant

Not agreeing with you is not synonymous with being ignorant.  That's a rather totalitarian way to view things.  It's telling you didn't even attempt to refute my points, just threw out more of your own.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(03-28-2024, 11:44 AM)pally Wrote: well you reacted exactly how I would have predicted.  And exactly why becoming totalitarian is easier to achieve than assumed.  Because people like you think the idea is silly.

The architects of this have been working for 40 years towards this goal.  They've put pieces in place including a majority of Federalist Society members on the Supreme Court.  You have a candidate right now who is planning on purging the civil service system because its bloated, not because its incompetent but for political ideology.  You've got state laws that muzzle teachers from essentially anything but right-wing positions

The press is the 'enemy of the people"
Immigrants are here to replace white Americans and are "poisoning the blood"
The drip drip drip of attempting to force right wing evangelical beliefs into the school systems and legal systems
People who disagree with Trumpism are unAmerican and should be "driven out"

Open your eyes!  pooh poohing the rhetoric coming from Trump and his followers is being deliberately ignorant

You are giving him way to much credit for things that would be next to nearly impossible to accomplish in 4 more years.

[*pally*]

(03-28-2024, 12:15 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: You are giving him way to much credit for things that would be next to nearly impossible to accomplish in 4 more years.

He doesn't have to have 100% success in the next 4 years.  Moving the movement down the road and putting in important pieces is all he needs to do.  Any movement towards authoritarianism or totalitariianism  is dangerous

[Mike M (the other one)]

(03-28-2024, 12:22 PM)pally Wrote: He doesn't have to have 100% success in the next 4 years.  Moving the movement down the road and putting in important pieces is all he needs to do.  Any movement towards authoritarianism or totalitariianism  is dangerous

What exactly did he accomplish in his first 4 years that "put us on that road"?

[GMDino]

(03-28-2024, 12:25 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: What exactly did he accomplish in his first 4 years that "put us on that road"?

Other than almost stopping the certification of the election he lost?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(03-28-2024, 12:36 PM)GMDino Wrote: Other than almost stopping the certification of the election he lost?

And if that's true, he couldn't even get that right. What else?

[GMDino]

(03-28-2024, 12:41 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: And if that's true, he couldn't even get that right. What else?

"if"...lol

Quote:Still don't get it and i'm{sic} not going to keep explaining.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(03-28-2024, 01:00 PM)GMDino Wrote: "if"...lol

Nothing else hunh? 

and FYI, i don't get into all of the details on it, cause in my opin, if he was guilty, then the Federal Government should have been all over him and charged him immediately. 

So why didn't they?

[hollodero]

(03-28-2024, 01:43 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Nothing else hunh? 

and FYI, i don't get into all of the details on it, cause in my opin, if he was guilty, then the Federal Government should have been all over him and charged him immediately. 

So why didn't they?

Well, I'd guess all indictments take their time, even more so if it's about a former president with an extremely loyal fanbase, that is delicate and won't get done overnight. But I have to wonder. If a president losing an election calls a state secretary and tries to pressure him to find the necessary nuber of votes to overturn the state results, or employs fake electors, or tries to get his VP to not certify an election result, how is there even an "if" involved. He did all those things.

I can give you another example, Trump and his lawyers argue for total immunity that he should enjoy as president, including killing political opponents. As stated by the lawyers themselves. That idea is as dictatorial as it gets.

Whether Trump can actually achieve what he aims for, that I do not know. But there is little doubt about his intent. Eg. the man himself declared that rectifying the "stolen" election superseeds the laws written in the constitution.

[Dill]

(03-28-2024, 11:04 AM)pally Wrote: How does Trump turn this country into a Totalitarian government...It is easier than we thing

-a Lack of respect for the Constitution and law
-a complicit Congress
-Complicit Judicial system especially at the highest level
-seeding the government with synchopaths
-undermining of the legitimacy of the Judicial and education systems
-undermining of military leadership
-attack and demonize the selected minority group
-a large group of like-minded, gullible, or apathetic citizens who ignore or approve of what is going on

The right-wing Federalist Society and the billionaires that fund it have been working for 40 years for this moment in time.  The only thing lacking is the right person in the Presidency.  And that will happen if Trump wins again.  He will have learned there is nobody that can stop him

Still just authoritarian.

[Dill]

(03-28-2024, 11:25 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: One could very easily make this exact same argument against the Dems, and quite honestly it could be a stronger case.

Actually, one could not, and it would not. Easy to claim so, though.

(03-28-2024, 11:25 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I believe you meant sycophants. 

This post is honestly quite silly.  You post examples of "easily achievable" goals, none of which are easily achievable, that will enable the overthrow of the longest contiguous democracy in modern history.  It's fear mongering at its most generic.  If Trump does win, which is becoming increasingly possible, then we'll almost certainly get another four years identical to his first term.  Then Trump can "retire" and claim he's the only POTUS to win his position back after being defrauded of his reelection the first time, proving him right all along (in his mind).  Then we'll see what lame candidates the two parties can vomit up for us to agonize over in 2028.

I believe you meant "continuous." 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-28-2024, 04:44 PM)Dill Wrote: Actually, one could not, and it would not. Easy to claim so, though.

Last I looked the 2nd Amendment was still a thing.  Also, the refusal to properly enforce the law in many deep blue urban areas is a direct attack on the rule of law.  Abusing prosecutorial discretion to enact absurd social engineering is thoroughly damaging to the daily functioning of those areas.  I see it literally every day I'm at work.  It would be like a LEO exercising their discretion to not issue citations, but only doing so for straight Asian males.  Except this is far more damaging, as it enables more criminal conduct, which means more victims.  So yeah, one could and it's easily provable.

Quote:I believe you meant "continuous." 

I did.

[Dill]

(03-28-2024, 01:43 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Nothing else hunh? 
and FYI, i don't get into all of the details on it, cause in my opin, if he was guilty, then the Federal Government should have been all over him and charged him immediately.   So why didn't they?

The "federal government" WAS all over him. 

He was impeached--twice--but let off the hook by the party he controls.

Before that he could have been charged for obstruction during the Russia 
investigation--but not on Barr's watch! Trump controlled the DOJ. 

So the expected checks and balances have been paralyzed so far, rendered impotent
because the GOP now functions as a regime party centered on the personality of Trump.

And now, to the cheers of MAGA faithful, Trump wants two things--another term as president
and full immunity for his actions before, now, and forever. 

So please don't mistake the effects of successful party autocritization as evidence nothing is wrong 
simply because Trump hasn't been convicted of much--just defamation of a rape victim and massive fraud.

A significant segment of voters WANT an autocrat for president, while "independents'
still don't see any real danger signs. 1/6 was prevented so "the system worked."  
"Both sides do it" and one could "quite honestly" make a stronger case against the party whose
leader did not try to overturn a valid election and doesn't want full immunity, and whose members are
not laying the legal groundwork to take advantage of another round of "rigged elections" if necessary.