Upload
Login or register
x

Can't stump the Trump

 
(Enlarge)
Can't stump the Trump. Gawker released The Donald's personal cell number, so Trump made lemonade out of lemons and threw a party instead of whining like a bitch

Gawker released The Donald's personal cell number, so Trump made lemonade out of lemons and threw a ****** party instead of whining like a bitch. This- ladies and gentlemen- is why he is so popular.
Full article:abcnews.go.com/beta/Politics/donald-trump-turns-cellphone-voicemail-campaign-ad/story?id=32875155

i' LLB. World Politics Entertainment Health Tech
Donald Trump Turns His Cellphone Va. -iceball Into at
Campaign Ad
TRUMP VOICE MAIL
MESSAGE
Hello, this is Donald Trump
and I' m running for the
presidency of the
United States of America.,.
has turned the ilmenite an Gawl-( er. after the site released cahe at "climb"
Trump' s ( numbers, the GDP’ presidential candidate changed his 'mam" mm this
merman_;_
Hi, this is Donald Trump and " running fer the presidency [if the United States at
he says an the “Witll ' help and , toegether we can make Anner' iea truly
great again! Visit me at twitter . and 'alittle' nut in}: campaign website at
HOPE ta see mu an the campaign trail, we' re gluing he " it!"
...
+760
Views: 37228
Favorited: 36
Submitted: 08/06/2015
Share On Facebook
submit to reddit +Favorite Subscribe to lean

Comments(246):

Leave a comment Refresh Comments Show GIFs
123>
[ 246 comments ]
Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest
Anonymous comments allowed.
103 comments displayed.
Reply
+292
#3 - witchofsand (08/06/2015) [-]
You could say Gawker got trumped
Reply
0
#244 to #3 - killername (08/11/2015) [-]
guess you could even say he played his trump card
Reply
+5
User avatar #163 to #3 - tzukaza (08/07/2015) [-]
GOD DAMNIT CARLOS!
Reply
+16
#116 to #3 - liamdurf ONLINE (08/07/2015) [-]
Reply
+27
#95 - anon (08/07/2015) [-]
Gawker's run by a bunch of privacy-invading hypocritical faggots, so regardless of whether or not you support Trump I think we can all be happy about seeing their typical douchebaggery blow up in their faces for once.
Reply
+4
User avatar #97 to #95 - lean [OP](08/07/2015) [-]
That was my main idea in this post, but obviously it turned into a political debate
Reply
+92
#7 - tohruadachi (08/06/2015) [-]
"together we can make America truly great again!" He sounds like Senator Armstrong Senator Armstrong's Speech (Presidential Ad)
Reply
0
User avatar #76 to #7 - loganmadder ONLINE (08/07/2015) [-]
Holy **** is that what Raiden sounds like? Like goddamn he needs a drink.
Reply
-3
User avatar #119 to #76 - Zaxplab (08/07/2015) [-]
Kojima tried so hard to make him cool, but he'll never be anything but a ******* .
Reply
+2
User avatar #146 to #119 - phantomcancer (08/07/2015) [-]
Aside from the name, Raiden was indisputably a badass by the end of MGS4. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Kojima gave Platinum more or less free reigns with Revengeance.
Reply
-1
User avatar #230 to #146 - Zaxplab (08/07/2015) [-]
I just think the way he tried to advance that character is stupid.

From ******* , to robot ninja ******* , to robot ninja breakdancing ******* , to robot ninja breakdancing motorcycle riding ******* , etc etc.
Reply
0
User avatar #233 to #230 - phantomcancer (08/07/2015) [-]
Eh, Raiden's always been a ******* . He went the same way as Frank Jaeger Grey Fox , except there was a happy ending for once. MGR was not written by Kojima, takes place four years after MGS4, and is a spin-off, so I'm on the fence whether to label it canon or mindless hack'n'slash fun.
Reply
0
#174 to #119 - anon (08/07/2015) [-]
Kojima didn't write MGR, this raiden isn't his vision of the character.
Reply
+1
#204 to #7 - buffygifs (08/07/2015) [-]
He plagiarized Reagan's 1980 campaign slogan:

"Let's make America great again."
Reply
+1
#218 to #7 - infinitereaper (08/07/2015) [-]
Senator Armstrong is my ******* hero
Reply
+6
User avatar #72 to #7 - mpghbombsaway ONLINE (08/07/2015) [-]
I'd vote for him
Reply
+22
User avatar #12 to #7 - drbrainbleach (08/06/2015) [-]
He played college ball ya know
Reply
+18
User avatar #19 to #12 - rockmanfan ONLINE (08/06/2015) [-]
could've gone pro if he hadn't joined the navy.
Reply
+20
User avatar #26 to #19 - drbrainbleach (08/06/2015) [-]
He's not one of those beltway pansies!
Reply
+4
User avatar #57 to #12 - hxhmaniac ONLINE (08/06/2015) [-]
at some cushy ivy league school
Reply
+14
#179 - durkadurka ONLINE (08/07/2015) [-]
Reply
+34
#13 - Metric (08/06/2015) [-]
I'd be willing to bet one of the many campaign managers he has came up with this. Donald is a ******* retard.
Reply
+1
User avatar #217 to #13 - infinitereaper (08/07/2015) [-]
Yeah never mind he is a real estate genius.
Reply
+5
#14 to #13 - anon (08/06/2015) [-]
no **** they did, every candidate has a team of people perfecting every mistake they make, its called spinning and no matter how smart the candidate is they use it to their advantage
Reply
+3
User avatar #16 to #14 - lean [OP](08/06/2015) [-]
Some are better than others.
Reply
+10
User avatar #15 to #13 - lean [OP](08/06/2015) [-]
I thumb everyone who comments, but I really didn't want to thumb you. Why is he a retard? He is one of the most successful business men on the planet, he can't be completely inept.
Reply
-7
#48 to #15 - anon (08/06/2015) [-]
He's a conman who inherited Daddys cash. He is in no way a good business man.

4 different bankrupt businesses where his investors got stuck holding the bag. He considers bankruptcy a smart and viable business "tool". He's fleeced hundreds with his ******** "schools" and if he didn't have a pit bull unethical sack of **** leading his band of merry lawyers willing to sue for any trivial thing he would have gone personally broke LONG ago.

See, if he were, and he won't, but if he WERE to get the Presidency he would **** over the money men like always. Thats us buddy.

The draft dodging **** stain is DYING for war because he'll make "uuuuuge" money off it. You sure it won't be you or yours that end up as maggot chow so the Dick can make a few more bucks and play Prezzydent?

You think the TALIBAN finds this guy scary? ISIS would rip his eyeball out, **** the socket then decapitate this little bitch for giggles and grins.

He's a buffoon and a carnival barker at best.

Even that war mongering old **** stick Graham is infinitely more qualified than Trump.

We get it, you young bucks think it's funny.

Trump is the candidate of /b/tards, how very hipster of you. Now **** off with the nonsense and take your little toy with you. Grown ups have **** to decide.
Reply
+12
#66 to #48 - anon (08/07/2015) [-]
Mate I think you misunderstand -- nobody actually thinks Trump would make a good president. Trump is however, the only politician in my 20 years of living that has the balls to spout opinions that dont align with america's PC ******** , and is the only candidate who hasn't committed to continuing the alarming agenda to feminize men, disparage the white race, and turn america into a minority welfare state. So its worth giving him the respect he is due.
Reply
+4
User avatar #94 to #48 - lean [OP](08/07/2015) [-]
estimated 20 million dollar real estate company into an estimated 80 billion dollar multinational corporation in 30 years, so suck it. Lets see you do that.

I don't think he would be a great president, but i think he would be better than the last two.
Reply
-3
#52 to #48 - Metric (08/06/2015) [-]
Dear anon, this is the most honestly amazing rant I have read in a long time. You are the hero we deserve.
Reply
-7
#18 to #15 - Metric (08/06/2015) [-]
Short version is this: if you think having money means your a capable businessman then your wrong. Honestly, if your that rich you can just hire someone else to be the good businessman for you. Or hire someone to do next to anything for you. He has 4billion big ones backing him, he can literally buy anything.

His history, not limited too the obama birth certificate insanity (and regardless of your political position, that was just bat **** crazy), His open support of tea party speakers, .. I don't even want to get into the israli **** he does... Honestly, if you think this guy would be good to have in the driving seat of the most powerful country in the world... at any time... even after hearing him speak at any legnth.

Well... I really suppose we don't have much of a discussion to have.
Reply
+12
User avatar #20 to #18 - lean [OP](08/06/2015) [-]
Ok, well when he took over his father's real estate company in the 60's he turned a multimillion dollar business into a multibillion dollar global corporation. 90% of companies that fail do so because the original owner hired someone to "run it for them". When it isn't yours, it is hard to be invested enough to make the correct call. After all, when you are an employee and make a mistake you still collect a paycheck. A non president CEO of a multinational can get fired and be hired elsewhere without breaking stride. Donald Trump has had heavy investors on virtually every project he starts because he makes people wealthy. His entire career has been one success story after another. You don't get that way by being stupid. On top of that there have been several occasions where he invested his personal money keeping a business venture afloat, almost to the point of personal bankruptcy. Surprise, he recovered every time.

What is your problem with the tea party? It is not a central movement, every faction has a different agenda. The only thing they have in common across the country is a focus on economic and limited federal government. They want to reduce the scope of federal government and prioritize decreasing the national deficit. They opposed TARP, ARRA, cap and trade, and PPACA, all of which were monumental, if not complete, failures. Every group has its nutjobs, but overall the tea party wants the federal government to govern instead of wage petty political smear campaigns.

Who is the best candidate in your mind?
Reply
-8
#23 to #20 - Metric (08/06/2015) [-]
"What is your problem with the tea party? "



I do need to ask one thing before I ask anything else here or even go into this in the slightest...

Are you sir a master troll, or is this a serious conversation? Either way I'm taking my hat off to you one way or another.
Reply
+10
User avatar #27 to #23 - lean [OP](08/06/2015) [-]
Dead serious. I don't get why people are against a party that isn't centralized (AKA establishment, so basically immune to corruption and lobbism) and avoids social issues like abortion and gay marriage, and wants to reduce the scope of federal government, and answers "leave it to the states" on a multitude of issues that the federal government has a history of mucking up rather than helping out.

Do some reading, I think you have opinions about politics that come from biased media instead of credible sources:
www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Tea_Party_Civil_Rights.htm
Reply
-8
#50 to #27 - Metric (08/06/2015) [-]
That's a very interesting link... however... It's not really a good one. (especially linking to issues on social values, while interesting doesn't really show the scope of the issue or explain stances overall, I had to explore for a while to get to their real issues and stances that were listed on the bottom). It's ill organized to bring forth what they actually present as information. In short, I distrust the links at a glance because it's basically poorly made. However, I think I know a better site to actually get their stances in a clearer form.

So... I supposes the best place therefore to find more information on this part would be? www.teaparty.org/

And to drive this point home, I'm going to assume that every fact they list is correct, and I'll only follow links from their site and read what they list.

Wonder if I can find any bat **** insanity... oh this looks interesting, apparently the IRS has been unfairly treating the tea party. Intresting ( www.teaparty.org/senate-report-finds-irs-delinquent-targeting-conservative-groups-111798/ ) But what did they source as a link for further reading (oddly not the government sites... werid). Found another one stating pretty similar stuff, but it links to another site... could that be? THE ACTUAL REPORT!

www.finance.senate.gov/newsroom/chairman/release/?id=11f4db1f-9986-4ecb-ba61-f3a8abeb2672

interestingly... it seems that the Tea party members we're apply for tax except status in mass... and because of that oddly a number of them had been turned down. We'll doesn't sound like the original story I read, but that must of something lost in communication... I mean really, who can fact check every detail in this day and age.

www.teaparty.org/tea-party-uprising-pledge/
Oh and then I found this! Oh this is so intresting, apparently it's a thing calling for an uprising to stop the corruption (I immediately signed up by the way, sounded so good)... Loved this line though "Defund the office of the president other then for necessary expenses". Sounded great, less political funding for.... what?

what's getting cut? Precisely? And why? God damn it, the tea party site doesn't seem to tell me anything other then they want to get ride of higher taxz and corruption, but they really seem to not know what corruption actually is? I always thought it was trying to evade taxes, cut bypass government regulations, and get rid of legal heads of state? Was I wrong on this all the time?
Reply
+5
User avatar #92 to #50 - lean [OP](08/07/2015) [-]
Tax exempt status is ******** in every instance and subject. If you make money you should pay the tax everyone else does regardless of what you do with it. The NFL is ******* tax exempt for christsake. They are actually seeking to remove the tax exempt status.

The tea party bottom line is to reduce FEDERAL government spending, because it is outrageous and the good estimates put it at 50% losses in bureaucracies. 8 million federal employees. what do they all do?
Reply
-3
User avatar #30 to #23 - formeranony (08/06/2015) [-]
There ****** nutters mate.
Reply
-3
User avatar #21 to #18 - fuzzyballs (08/06/2015) [-]
>implying a president has any real power
Reply
-2
#61 to #21 - durkadurka ONLINE (08/06/2015) [-]
>Commander in Chief of most powerful military on the entire planet
>The president doesn't have any real power!

Reply
0
User avatar #59 to #18 - durkadurka ONLINE (08/06/2015) [-]
Isn't that kinda the ******* point? You send the best people to do the job?

**** man, I'd take that over sending John Kerry to negotiate with Iran any day.
What we do now is send in clowns to do the job because they're politically connected.

Do you know who started the whole birther thing?
Reply
-3
#60 to #59 - Metric (08/06/2015) [-]
Well here's the thing in context, you still want someone with half a brain at the helm of the ship ultimately. When it comes to a job like prez, it's a little difference then business (also I should mention I use business success loosely with tard) as people WILL be telling you mixed things both deliberately and by accident.
Reply
+7
#65 to #13 - bazda (08/07/2015) [-]
Yeah, you're right. Retards typically become billionaires.
Reply
0
#74 to #65 - anon (08/07/2015) [-]
inheret
Reply
+2
User avatar #134 to #74 - captchakid ONLINE (08/07/2015) [-]
He didnt inherit all of his wealth though.
Reply
+49
#17 - comradewinter ONLINE (08/06/2015) [-]
Not even president yet, yet already showing he finds solutions.
Reply
+52
User avatar #10 - rudeobuteo (08/06/2015) [-]
He will only be as popular and accountable as the television news networks allow him to be. He would completely kick Hilary's ass, though.
Reply
-6
#49 to #10 - anon (08/06/2015) [-]
He's got no shot against Hil-Dawg. None.
Reply
-1
User avatar #147 to #49 - discobleach (08/07/2015) [-]
dunno why they're thumbing you down - based on data we have at the moment, this is factually true.
Reply
-20
User avatar #38 to #10 - failtolawl (08/06/2015) [-]
"He would completely kick Hilary's ass, though."

I'm sorry, it doesn't take a Political Scientist to see how dumb that is.

The more Moderate Candidate will always win.

Oh, and it's typically not a good idea to call 54 million people rapists and criminals and expect to be elected.
Reply
+14
User avatar #67 to #38 - earlturner (08/07/2015) [-]
He did not call ALL of them rapists, he said some are rapists. He was also only referring to illegal immigrants not all immigrants so unless there are 54 million illegals I think your wrong here. Also technically since they broke our laws by crossing the border illegally they ARE all criminals.

This is most likely the result the liberal media propaganda so I don't blame you personally lawl, but there is no excuse for ignorance when you have a freakin computer right in front of you.
Reply
+12
User avatar #73 to #67 - failtolawl (08/07/2015) [-]
and I quote
"They're sending people who have lots of problems. They bring in drugs, they bring in crime, they're rapists. and some, I assume are good people"


But yea, liberal propagandas.
Reply
+1
User avatar #171 to #73 - wrpen (08/07/2015) [-]
"They bring in drugs, they bring in crime, they're rapists".

According to basic grammar, it can be assumed (and, with context, confirmed) that the pronoun "they" refers to the "people who have lots of problems" in the previous sentence. So, yes, indeed liberal propaganda.
Reply
+1
User avatar #79 to #73 - earlturner (08/07/2015) [-]
He is only talking about illegals though so your claim that he said all Mexicans are rapists and criminals is ******** .

I understand that his statement "they're rapists" could be wrongfully construed to mean "they are all rapists" but do you honestly believe that he meant every single person who crosses the border illegally is a rapist? even when he said in the same sentence that some are good people? Cmon, look at that quote in context and dont be intellectually dishonest, it is clear what he meant.

Keep in mind Trump doesn't use a teleprompter and often goes without any material at all and speaks off the cuff.

Reply
0
User avatar #220 to #73 - fatkidatrecess (08/07/2015) [-]
they're* (mexican government)
Reply
0
#213 to #73 - anon (08/07/2015) [-]
Are you denying that mexico is riddled with very serious crime and corruption? Did you consider he also said he would make getting citizenship easier to obtain? Unregistered, unknown people are a problem especially when it comes to crime, trump wants it to be much harder for illegals to get into the country but for Mexican citizens to have an easier time applying for US citizenship which the liberal media casually leaves out so they can blast his "racist" comments.

So yeah, liberal misinterpretation on purpose, deceit, propaganda. Whatever you wanna call it
Reply
+3
User avatar #102 to #38 - meganinja (08/07/2015) [-]
The people he called criminals don't have the right to vote in the first place.
Reply
+1
User avatar #109 to #38 - penalcupcake (08/07/2015) [-]
Political scientist here

It's on the fence because they are polarizing candidates. They are the types of candidates that go back to their own corners along with their followers. They are not the types of individuals to attract new voters from across the spectrum like what was occurring with Obama when he was a candidate, (and also what is starting to happen with Sanders).

The moderate candidate sounds appealing, however when it comes time to vote, people will vote for the individual that they feel represents their beliefs the best (or in some cases makes them feel good or seems "cool"), which these days, is typically a black and white belief structure, with little gray area in between.

All of the candidates have different qualities that I like and appreciate. And no one candidate, I believe, is the best fit for our country.
Reply
-2
User avatar #31 to #10 - discobleach (08/06/2015) [-]
looking at the polls, that looks like the opposite of the truth.
in fact he would do worse against clinton than most republican candidates.
taken from www.vox.com/2015/7/9/8924481/donald-trump-poll

<<The new poll from Suffolk and USA Today presents another problem for Trump — it shows him losing the general election to Hillary Clinton by 17 percentage points, far more than other potential nominees. (Jeb Bush, for instance, loses by just four points.) If Trump continues to perform well in polls, his rivals will surely point out that those same polls show dire results for a Republican Party that nominates him.>>
Reply
+19
#83 - mckinkymcormic (08/07/2015) [-]
i hate this man, but i also ******* love him. he is like the joker, you think he goes a little too far some times, but it's that madness that makes him a great character.
Reply
0
User avatar #154 to #83 - crazylance (08/07/2015) [-]
I'm liking that Ryuko.
Reply
+19
User avatar #1 - LocoJoe (08/06/2015) [-]
Can't stump the Trump.
Reply
+5
#148 - lordlolland (08/07/2015) [-]
>Trump made lemonade out of lemons and threw a ****** party

lemonparty?
Reply
0
User avatar #157 to #148 - thelastamerican (08/07/2015) [-]
Exactly
Reply
+16
User avatar #82 - clavatninenine ONLINE (08/07/2015) [-]
COMMENT SECTION IN A NUTSHELL, SCROLL DOWN AT YOUR OWN RISK:

-Butthurt conservatives getting mass thumbed up at their hate for Sanders and love for Trump. These are the same people who were mass thumbed down every time a pro-sanders post shows up.

-Butthurt liberals getting mass thumbed down at their hate for Trump and love for Sanders. These are the same people who were mass thumbed up every time a pro-sanders post shows up.

Enjoy.
Reply
+2
User avatar #99 to #82 - lean [OP](08/07/2015) [-]
I actually got mass thumbed up on my last comment on a sanders post. I don't dislike him, but his ideas that sound good aren't fiscally responsible. He has said the first thing he would do as president is raise individual income taxes, after 7 consecutive quarters of record tax revenue.
Reply
0
User avatar #151 to #99 - misterfrog (08/07/2015) [-]
Doesn't the record tax revenue come from a growing economy and inflation? As in, wouldn't the growing size of the US economy + inflation cause the amount of money collected to increase every time anyway? Or are you talking about percentages?
Reply
0
User avatar #195 to #151 - lean [OP](08/07/2015) [-]
actually tax revenue is a way of curbing inflation. and since the US economy has only had about 1% growth, the tax revenue is the result of tax increases/ tightening of regulations permitting writeoffs.
Reply
+3
User avatar #112 to #82 - goodguygary (08/07/2015) [-]
this is politics in a nutshell, but at this point lizard people from the desert planet of argon V or some **** would make better leaders than most canidates
Reply
+4
User avatar #111 - backupclover (08/07/2015) [-]
He should have sued them.
Reply
+7
#89 - mrjweezy (08/07/2015) [-]
To those talking **** about trump saying hes a moron.
<He did this
And he made gawker give him free advertising
Reply
0
User avatar #115 to #89 - StickyTissueLoLz (08/07/2015) [-]
He wanted to say "You're fired" so badly...
Reply
+4
#118 to #115 - doctersmiles (08/07/2015) [-]
you're finished will just have to do
Reply
+7
User avatar #32 - discobleach (08/06/2015) [-]
he may be popular, but the bigger he gets, the more the republican party is doomed to lose. for the good of republicans (not that i care) he should step down.

www.vox.com/2015/7/9/8924481/donald-trump-poll
Reply
0
#175 to #32 - anon (08/07/2015) [-]
I wouldn't trust that link, Vox are pretty much on the same level as gawker, they are the owners of Polygon.
Reply
-1
User avatar #177 to #175 - discobleach (08/07/2015) [-]
it's adequately sourced.
just because they have opinions you don't agree with, doesn't mean they just make **** up
Reply
+1
User avatar #36 to #32 - lean [OP](08/06/2015) [-]
until about 10 years ago he was a registered democrat. Also here:
www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/04/boy-was-i-wrong-about-donald-trump-heres-why/
Reply
0
#62 to #36 - anon (08/07/2015) [-]
Yep. Not to mention that int he past he's come out as pro-choice, pro gun control, in favor of government-run health care, and proposed a massive, one-time "wealth tax" on the rich to pay off our national debt. And he's donated a lot of money to democrats over the years. Now he claims he's a conservative?

www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/09/ths-many-ways-in-which-donald-trump-was-once-a-liberals-liberal/
www.libertyjuice.com/2011/02/16/numbers-dont-lie-is-donald-trump-conservative-or-liberal/
www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/donald-trump-running-for-president/398345/
www.cbsnews.com/media/election-2016-donald-trump-truth-teller-or-flip-flopper/
Reply
+4
User avatar #91 to #62 - lean [OP](08/07/2015) [-]
Pretty simple- democrats in the last decade have failed to come up with a comprehensive budget reform. In trump's mind- the country is hemorrhaging losses.time for new management
Reply
0
User avatar #41 to #36 - discobleach (08/06/2015) [-]
i don't understand how his former political leanings have any relevance here.
and the article you linked shows that he is leading among republicans - which isn't in contradiction to my source.
but the biggest takeaway from the article i linked was that in the event of an election right now donald trump would lose to clinton by 17 points, while jeb bush, for example, only by 4.
that's what you get by running on an extremely right-wing platform, you lose the moderates
Reply
+4
User avatar #43 to #41 - lean [OP](08/06/2015) [-]
That article clearly maps out that he has 20% favorability among democrats, and nearly 40% among independents. He is also far more moderate than rick perry, ted cruz, mike huckabee, hell 3/4 of the GOP card. and he has far better presentation than jeb bush.
Hillary would be useless, just like all other political roles she has been in.
Reply
0
User avatar #47 to #43 - discobleach (08/06/2015) [-]
there is no comparison made to other candidates in that graph, the increase in favorability among democrats is a few percentile points, and independents are a tiny group.
not to mention favorability here is a totally different thing than preference - its values will be much higher since you can be favorable to multiple candidates at once.
the article, whose main point is to highlight Trump's surge in popularity, makes no mention at all of the favorability values among democrats and indipendents,

because those values are meaningless.
Reply
+3
User avatar #96 to #47 - lean [OP](08/07/2015) [-]
agree. polls are ridiculous and only give you a hazy idea of popularity. I think Hillary's are far exaggerated. She is under a criminal investigation for her activities as secretary of state for christ's sake
Reply
+3
User avatar #63 - elementfall (08/07/2015) [-]
Okay,i don't know Trump,i see a lot of hate and love at the same time on funnyjunk,i don't always appreciate his idea ( at least how the internet present them,so don't expect a lot of my words),but anyone that can **** on Gawker and they "journalism" while gaining something of it has my respect
Reply
0
User avatar #100 to #63 - lean [OP](08/07/2015) [-]
boom.
Reply
+1
#219 to #56 - anon (08/07/2015) [-]
Ok, some of the stuff you put is quite intelligent, but this is just retarded.
Reply
+9
User avatar #77 to #56 - robinwilliamson (08/07/2015) [-]
Do you understand what a marginal tax rate is?
Reply
+4
User avatar #103 to #77 - lean [OP](08/07/2015) [-]
Do you understand that the last 7 consecutive quarters the IRS has had record tax revenue and he still thinks we need higher taxes?
Reply
+1
User avatar #122 to #103 - robinwilliamson (08/07/2015) [-]
Do you understand why that doesn't have anything to do with this particular picture being fundamentally wrong?
Reply
0
User avatar #197 to #122 - lean [OP](08/07/2015) [-]
exaggerations aren't fundamentally wrong, Bernie said publicly that the first thing he would do is increase individual income taxes.
Reply
+1
User avatar #236 to #197 - robinwilliamson (08/07/2015) [-]
+ misterfrog
Yes, it's fundamentally wrong. The picture says "90% (a) of your (b) income".

(a) There's the kind of tax that takes a percentage of your income, and then there's the tax Sanders is talking about which is a top marginal tax. That means that after certain points, your income is taxed at those rates. Sanders is talking about a top marginal tax rate similar to the top marginal tax rate of the 1950's (when growth was great despite the taxes, that's odd) which was around 92 or 91%.
-So after you make a certain amount, the income above that is taxed at that rate and that line that is drawn is untouched.

(b) The picture says "your" which is completely false for 99% of the country. That 90% is his top marginal tax rate only applying to the top 1%, of whom control almost as much wealth as the bottom half of the country. That is a majorly unhealthy difference, and it hasn't been nearly as uneven. The last time there was that high of a wealth gap was just before the Great Depression. I won't do too much linking between the two situations, but that's how long it has been, which is why it's being addressed this way.
Reply
0
User avatar #239 to #236 - lean [OP](08/07/2015) [-]
Yeah, that is fundamentally flawed.
>growth was great
No, it wasn't. JFK's platform was "get this country moving again" in 1960. growth was average that decade.
Back then, that tax rate only applied to a handful of people. That decade had the lowest tax revenue as a percent of GDP since such things were recorded. On top of that, the percentage of revenue paid by the top 3% has grown despite the 35% tax bracket cap. What that means is upward mobility- there are far more wealthy people now than in the 50's. That is a good thing.

Keep on going with your "stick it to the rich" instincts. hopefully one day you get there and feel like a dunce after you realize how much you have to pay to stay. They rich have already been stuck pretty damn well, the top 3% earners support more than half the country fiscally.
Reply
0
User avatar #240 to #239 - robinwilliamson (08/07/2015) [-]
You fundamentally misunderstand the use of the word "fundamentally".

Eisenhower was a fiscal conservative, of course he wanted low revenue, he wanted a low budget, and he did balance the budget just fine. "Get this country moving again" was to take care of the poverty that the prosperity of the 50s didn't really lift up so well, and to pick up the pace from the okay growth.

And yes, it was a prosperous time, my bad for mispeaking "great growth", with some recession dips of course but it wasn't serious enough to taint the decade that saw good unemployment levels, raises in the wage earnings of the average joes and their purchasing power, not much worries about inflation with a balanced budget, and social programs were taking care of people left and right, along with some serious infrastructure. It started to drop by the end, and that needed to be taken care of, and Kennedy addressed it.

There are more rich people of course, but there's a lot more stuck people and poor people that you'd expect in a world you're thinking of about "more rich people sounds good". Then that top income group keeps growing and growing and everybody else either has stagnant or minimal increases in their income over time, while inflation continues and productivity continues to go up. None of these things add up in a sane economy.

Reply
0
User avatar #150 to #122 - misterfrog (08/07/2015) [-]
how exactly is it 'fundamentally' wrong? the government can be greedy too
Reply
+2
#223 - improbable (08/07/2015) [-]
oh so now he's cool
Reply
+2
#221 - basichaharemix (08/07/2015) [-]
I'm more surprised terrified that there are people that are actually starting to support him... what the **** is happening!?
Reply
+2
User avatar #224 to #221 - keatontheghostfox ONLINE (08/07/2015) [-]
He'd either be really good, or really bad but it would be entertaining either way
Reply
+2
User avatar #227 to #221 - doctorprofessornv ONLINE (08/07/2015) [-]
Our political process has become such a farce that many of us are like 'let him win, what's the worst that can happen? At least it'll be fun to watch'.
Reply
+2
User avatar #139 - swiftblood (08/07/2015) [-]
to be honest, I understand why so many people are against him

but to also be honest, I think he'll be the lesser of the evils, hes backing himself, doesnt have to be a figurehead for some random companys like all the other presidents have been, so I might end up voting for him despite me thinking hes a ****** person not like all the other candidates arent ****** people, they just have more practice hiding it
Reply
+1
User avatar #140 to #139 - swiftblood (08/07/2015) [-]
everyones bitching about him, but are avoiding the fact all candidates are **** , atleast he's good at business, take the evil with a positive atleast imo
123>
[ 246 comments ]
Leave a comment
<
>
 Friends (0)