Obama's Response to Louisana Flooding compared with Bush and Katrina

[Belsnickel]

(08-23-2016, 12:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So some folks are critcizing the fact that someone donated a truck and supplies to someone in efforts to help the flood victims?

I continue to be amazed on a daily basis.

Yep. They are criticizing because some is saying it is from them directly, when they don't know that for certain, and because it was given to someone that is very controversial. It's rather interesting seeing it all unfold.

Personally, I don't like anybody involved, so I don't really care who gave what to whom, so long as it is being used to help people out.

[*bfine32*]

(08-23-2016, 12:43 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yep. They are criticizing because some is saying it is from them directly, when they don't know that for certain, and because it was given to someone that is very controversial. It's rather interesting seeing it all unfold.

Amazing

[GMDino]

(08-23-2016, 12:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So some folks are critcizing the fact that someone donated a truck and supplies to someone in efforts to help the flood victims?

I continue to be amazed on a daily basis.

They are criticizing someone CLAIMING they made a donation (including and alleged cash donation that has not be verified either) while making a photo-op after announcing it would not be.

(08-23-2016, 12:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Amazing

Indeed.

[fredtoast]

Remember the $6 million Trump claimed eh arise for veterans back in January when he boycotted the Iowa debate.



Trump said he’d raised $6 million for veterans, but that wasn’t true. He later claimed he never used the $6 million figure, but that wasn’t true. His campaign insisted Trump had contributed $1 million himself, but that wasn’t true. Trump said he “didn’t want to have credit” for the fundraising efforts, but that wasn’t true. He said he and his team were vetting groups they’d never heard of four months after the fact, but that wasn’t true.


http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trumps-veterans-controversy-goes-bad-worse

The amazing tihng is that anyone would believe anything Trump says.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-23-2016, 10:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Remember the $6 million Trump claimed eh arise for veterans back in January when he boycotted the Iowa debate.



Trump said he’d raised $6 million for veterans, but that wasn’t true. He later claimed he never used the $6 million figure, but that wasn’t true. His campaign insisted Trump had contributed $1 million himself, but that wasn’t true. Trump said he “didn’t want to have credit” for the fundraising efforts, but that wasn’t true. He said he and his team were vetting groups they’d never heard of four months after the fact, but that wasn’t true.


http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trumps-veterans-controversy-goes-bad-worse

The amazing tihng is that anyone would believe anything Trump says.

Geeze seeing as he's worth, what is it now $9 billion, you think he'd just cut a check.

[Belsnickel]

(08-24-2016, 08:58 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Geeze seeing as he's worth, what is it now $9 billion, you think he'd just cut a check.

You would think. But he's not the philanthropic type of billionaire.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-23-2016, 10:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Remember the $6 million Trump claimed eh arise for veterans back in January when he boycotted the Iowa debate.



Trump said he’d raised $6 million for veterans, but that wasn’t true. He later claimed he never used the $6 million figure, but that wasn’t true. His campaign insisted Trump had contributed $1 million himself, but that wasn’t true. Trump said he “didn’t want to have credit” for the fundraising efforts, but that wasn’t true. He said he and his team were vetting groups they’d never heard of four months after the fact, but that wasn’t true.


http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trumps-veterans-controversy-goes-bad-worse

The amazing tihng is that anyone would believe anything Trump says.

I agree. Equally amazing is that anyone would believe anything Hillary says. Yet, here we are with die hard supporters of BOTH candidates.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(08-21-2016, 02:56 PM)GMDino Wrote: Because as President people "want" to see him there.  I think its silly personally as I already said.


But at least he had the decency to respect the governor's request.

Look, as a private citizen what Trump did is great.  (If he made the donation and didn't just show up with the truck.)  Everything else about it was a photo-op.

And if Clinton had done this or Obama the same people praising Trump would be CRYING about the cold and calculated campaign move.

But it wasn't a photo op. There was no media there, only individuals that captured it on their cell phones.
The Governor has since recanted and said that Trump's visit has helped.

If Hillary had done it, it would've been a good move, but she didn't.

(08-21-2016, 02:59 PM)GMDino Wrote: Weird...I didn't say anything other than share a link about the 49 seconds Trump "helped".

But the truck apparently had other items on it too.  We just don't know if HE got the items or he just showed up with the truck full of donated items.

Except that he did more than just be there for 49 seconds. He talked to the people, learned how the help process works (from the command center) and donated some money specifically to be used as aid for the flood victims.

(08-24-2016, 09:42 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: You would think. But he's not the philanthropic type of billionaire.

That is true, but Hillary is even less of a philanthropic than Trump.

hell, Hillary sent out an email to many of her donors invoking the LA floods and that we need to help in any way we can.

At the end it says please donate $10 (but it's not for the Flood victims, it's for her campaign..)

I also find it amusing that people are complaining about Trumps donations to help Veterans, but no one is complaining about the fact that Hillary Donated 1 million of a total of $1,000,042,000 of her money listed on her 2015 Tax Return to the Clinton Foundation...

[GMDino]

(08-24-2016, 02:40 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: But it wasn't a photo op. There was no media there, only individuals that captured it on their cell phones.
The Governor has since recanted and said that Trump's visit has helped.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/21/politics/louisiana-governor-donald-trump-visit-helpful/

Quote:The governor of Louisiana said Sunday that Donald Trump's trip to his state was "helpful" in getting the country's attention on the devastating flooding around Baton Rouge.

Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, had released a statement before the GOP nominee's visit decrying a "photo-op," but Edwards told CNN's Dana Bash on "State of the Union" Sunday that Trump had always been welcome if he were coming to be "helpful."

"Because it helped to shine a spotlight on Louisiana and on the dire situation that we have here ... it was helpful," Edwards said.
Trump, Pence tour flood damage

He also praised Trump's running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, who joined the visit.

"I also appreciated the good phone call, the conversation that I had with Gov. Pence, who was sincere and genuine when he called, and we spoke for a long time on Friday morning, about their desire to be helpful," Edwards said.

So "helpful" in the press coverage. Not "helpful" in anything meaningful. I'm sure the governor is smart enough to not insult anyone who helps in any small way, but let's not make this look like anything more than it was: Photo-op.

(08-24-2016, 02:40 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: If Hillary had done it, it would've been a good move, but she didn't.

Bologna. The right would have accused her of a million different things if she had gone after being asked not to go.

For example:

(08-24-2016, 02:40 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: That is true, but Hillary is even less of a philanthropic than Trump.

hell, Hillary sent out an email to many of her donors invoking the LA floods and that we need to help in any way we can.

At the end it says please donate $10 (but it's not for the Flood victims, it's for her campaign..)

(08-24-2016, 02:40 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Except that he did more than just be there for 49 seconds. He talked to the people, learned how the help process works (from the command center) and donated some money specifically to be used as aid for the flood victims.

Other than talking to people everything else in that above paragraph is speculation based on info the Trump campaign said. None of it, including any donation, has been verified at all.

(08-24-2016, 02:40 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I also find it amusing that people are complaining about Trumps donations to help Veterans, but no one is complaining about the fact that Hillary Donated 1 million of a total of $1,000,042,000 of her money listed on her 2015 Tax Return to the Clinton Foundation...

And there is the classic defending of Trump....Clinton is somehow worse.

Classic!

[Belsnickel]

(08-24-2016, 02:40 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: That is true, but Hillary is even less of a philanthropic than Trump.

And none of them are as philanthropic as they could be, point? I also find the whole "yeah, so, they're worse!" diatribe to be disgusting. If you're going to defend your man, defend him. Just because someone else may not give all they could doesn't mean shit to me. Also, do you have proof of this? We don't have his tax returns to look at, but we can see how much the Clintons give below.

(08-24-2016, 02:40 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: hell, Hillary sent out an email to many of her donors invoking the LA floods and that we need to help in any way we can.

At the end it says please donate $10 (but it's not for the Flood victims, it's for her campaign..)

Source?

(08-24-2016, 02:40 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I also find it amusing that people are complaining about Trumps donations to help Veterans, but no one is complaining about the fact that Hillary Donated 1 million of a total of $1,000,042,000 of her money listed on her 2015 Tax Return to the Clinton Foundation...

Um, where are you looking? The 2015 1040 filed for the Clintons, jointly, had an AGI of $10,594,529. They donated $1,042,000 in charitable contributions. That is 9.84% of their AGI donated. 9.7% of their total income.

In the end, I still don't think the Clintons give enough. When people wear things that cost more than a month's salary to me, it indicates they aren't doing enough. But I'm a bit harsh on those living a life of luxury while there is so much need in the world.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-24-2016, 02:52 PM)GMDino Wrote:  



And there is the classic defending of Trump....Clinton is somehow worse.

Classic!

Since this is a thread about Obama, the only way Trump could have been brought in is if someone were trying to do that same thing.

[GMDino]

(08-24-2016, 04:07 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Since this is a thread about Obama, the only way Trump could have been brought in is if someone were trying to do that same thing.

Yep, I brought Trump in as an example of how Obama did the right thing and respected the Governor's wishes.  Not saying Trump was worse, but that Obama didn't do anything wrong by not running to LA.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-24-2016, 04:12 PM)GMDino Wrote: Yep, I brought Trump in as an example of how Obama did the right thing and respected the Governor's wishes.  Not saying Trump was worse, but that Obama didn't do anything wrong by not running to LA.

Personally "you're guy is worse than my guy" doesn't bother me at all.  We aren't here to solve something.  So if you (generic you) says my guy is terrible because of X, and your guy has done X2 I'm going to point is out.

[Belsnickel]

(08-24-2016, 05:02 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Personally "you're guy is worse than my guy" doesn't bother me at all.  We aren't here to solve something.  So if you (generic you) says my guy is terrible because of X, and your guy has done X2 I'm going to point is out.

I can see that if it is something directly comparable and there is evidence to back it up. For instance, both Trump and Clinton are liars. That is a given. Counting their lies for evidence would take far too many people far too much time and the number would be large. But then we always get the "Trump is being absolutely stupid" and "Clinton is corrupt" back and forth. hard to make the whole "your guy is worse" comparison with those two things. How stupid equals how much corruption?

[McC]

Kinda looks like Mother Nature is doing her damnest to wipe that state off the map. Such is life below seal level, I guess.

[Belsnickel]

(08-24-2016, 05:23 PM)McC Wrote: Kinda looks like Mother Nature is doing her damnest to wipe that state off the map. Such is life below seal level, I guess.

That's like people that live on Dauphin Island. What the **** did you think was going to happen? You are living somewhere we were not intended to live.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(08-24-2016, 02:52 PM)GMDino Wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/21/politics/louisiana-governor-donald-trump-visit-helpful/


So "helpful" in the press coverage.  Not "helpful" in anything meaningful.  I'm sure the governor is smart enough to not insult anyone who helps in any small way, but let's not make this look like anything more than it was:  Photo-op.


Bologna.  The right would have accused her of a million different things if she had gone after being asked not to go.

For example:





Other than talking to people everything else in that above paragraph is speculation based on info the Trump campaign said.  None of it, including any donation, has been verified at all.



And there is the classic defending of Trump....Clinton is somehow worse.

Classic!

Nope, if Hillary had responded first, of course I would've been pissed, but that's the game. And since this was a good thing, here you are turning it into a bad thing. Again it was not a photo op. There was no national media involved, they interviewed people after the fact. So all in all it was a good move by Trump. He played it better than the others and made them look bad. You're just pissed cause Hillary and Obama got Trumped.

(08-24-2016, 03:15 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: And none of them are as philanthropic as they could be, point? I also find the whole "yeah, so, they're worse!" diatribe to be disgusting. If you're going to defend your man, defend him. Just because someone else may not give all they could doesn't mean shit to me. Also, do you have proof of this? We don't have his tax returns to look at, but we can see how much the Clintons give below.


Source?


Um, where are you looking? The 2015 1040 filed for the Clintons, jointly, had an AGI of $10,594,529. They donated $1,042,000 in charitable contributions. That is 9.84% of their AGI donated. 9.7% of their total income.

In the end, I still don't think the Clintons give enough. When people wear things that cost more than a month's salary to me, it indicates they aren't doing enough. But I'm a bit harsh on those living a life of luxury while there is so much need in the world.

Get over it, it's politics, Dino's conversations are completely one sided and lately some are very poor attempts to make Trump look bad. So yes, when anyone posts something stupid, I will point out the hypocrisy from the other side.

Hillary's FB page is calling on everyone else to donate.
She talks about the plight of the people in LA, and at the end asks for your $10 donation on Twitter.

And as I said, $1 Mil of that money went straight to their Foundation. $42k went elsewhere.

(08-24-2016, 05:23 PM)McC Wrote: Kinda looks like Mother Nature is doing her damnest to wipe that state off the map.  Such is life below seal level, I guess.

Too bad it didn't hit Washington DC.

[Belsnickel]

(08-24-2016, 08:06 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Get over it, it's politics, Dino's conversations are completely one sided and lately some are very poor attempts to make Trump look bad. So yes, when anyone posts something stupid, I will point out the hypocrisy from the other side.

Hillary's FB page is calling on everyone else to donate.
She talks about the plight of the people in LA, and at the end asks for your $10 donation on Twitter.

And as I said, $1 Mil of that money went straight to their Foundation. $42k went elsewhere.

Except you claimed hypocrisy, you have nothing to back that up.

No idea to what you are referring. The one post I saw when looking at her page about the flooding only provided a link to Red Cross relief. That was more time than I care to spend on a politician's page, though, so I stopped at that.

And? That is still charitable giving given what the foundation does. But that doesn't fit your narrative. If you have your name on a foundation that provides help for needy people then you are going to primarily give to that organization.