Jump to content
270soft Forum

NYT: Trump didn't pay income tax for 10 of 15 years


vcczar
 Share

Trump Tax Poll  

27 members have voted

  1. 1. If true, which of the following from the NYT should result in Trump somehow being punished (resigning, going on trial, being audited, and/or etc.)

    • Trump not paying income tax 10 times in the last 15 years.
    • Trump paying only $750 in income tax in 2016 and 2017.
    • Trump has hundreds of millions in debt
    • Even if true, he should not face consequences
  2. 2. If you believe Trump should face some sort of consequences for the above, what do you think should happen?

    • Nothing more than an official release of his taxes ASAP
    • He should be forced to resign ASAP
    • He should face an audit ASAP.
    • He should go on trial for tax fraud ASAP
    • He should face some sort of consequence but none of the above.
    • He should not face any consequences even if it is true.
  3. 3. Will this tax news have any real impact on the polls?

  4. 4. Do you think the NYT report is accurate?

    • I'm leaning mostly or entirely yes.
    • I'm leaning mostly or entirely no.


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

Community: Trump is bad at his job.
 

Admin: Morals and decency, on my good Trumpian forum server? Not a chance!

He's only like one of 4 Trump supporters on his forum. That's 10% of the forum or less. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

As a libertarian, perhaps you would appreciate my commitment to not banning people and open debate? 😉

Yes, just like your open debate and not banning people because of vigouously engaging and seeking vital, real, and meaningful answers to seemingly empty and vapid statements back in February of last year. 😒

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, admin_270 said:

As a libertarian, perhaps you would appreciate my commitment to not banning people and open debate? 😉

I feel like @admin_270 doesn't really mindlessly support Trump so much as he plays the Devil's Advocate on a highly left-leaning forum.  And I appreciate that he allows us to have these discussions on what is literally HIS forum (Though they usually don't get this heated). If he was really an extremist he would have outlawed all opposing views. Though his name-calling regarding financial literacy was somewhat uncalled for, and as someone who was helped two dozen people from my high school set up their own individual brokerage accounts, Roth IRAs and investing shit in general I felt like that would have been a good opportunity for admin, a business owner who is obviously financially literate and someone who I assume is an investor to respond using his facts and knowledge instead of assuming the responder was financially illiterate and name-calling.

I'm not a Trump supporter, I just hate taxes as an investor, ecommerce supplier, and soon-to-be residential real estate investor. Either voting Biden or Jorgensen, depending on how the debates play out.

However i'm politically apathetic and don't really care much anyways. This thread was entertaining though, but disheartening. Still love my forum family.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The questions miss the real headlines

More than $100 million in fraudulent charitable giving 

Millions of tax write offs to a “consultant” who is now revealed to actually be  Ivanka Trump — who was also a paid employee, which makes the consultant fees not just a fraudulent tax deduction but also an attempt to circumvent the wealthy inheritance tax.

And then there’s the $100 million mortgage that Trump has to pay by 2022...he’s paid zero on the principle so far.

Or the $100 million+ he’s going to end up being fined over his $75 million fraudulent tax refund claim.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, vcczar said:

I do think this will impact the polls, but not in any immediately visible way. I think the current poll #s will stay about where they are. I just think this will make it near impossible for Trump to decrease Biden's lead, that's all. 

I was 60% sure Biden would win a month ago. This moved up to 90% this month. If this is true or seems likely true to most voters, then I think Biden has a 99% chance of winning.

If somebody was still a Trump supporter yesterday, their concept of “true” is so far gone that it can never be repaired.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

I feel like @admin_270 doesn't really mindlessly support Trump so much as he plays the Devil's Advocate on a highly left-leaning forum. 

You mean like (dis)HonestAbe claimed to play the "Devil's Advocate," while obviously, blatantly, sycophanitcally, and clumsily always defending Trump when he was on these forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Actinguy said:

If somebody was still a Trump supporter yesterday, their concept of “true” is so far gone that it can never be repaired.

Yeah that’s why I think it helps Biden in the polls only so much that few new people will flock to him.  Basically, I think this sustains Biden +7 vs Trump. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Actinguy said:

If somebody was still a Trump supporter yesterday, their concept of “true” is so far gone that it can never be repaired.

I cannot picture myself voting for the man unlike at the beginning of this year. I'm either voting Jorgensen out of principle or Biden out of duty.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Biden out of duty.

The feeling of HAVING to vote for a particular candidate out of DUTY, in just a void and generic context, seems to me to be horribly dystopian and an utter defeat of the very fundamental principle of elected, constitutional governance. You'll have to forgive me if I find the terminology unsettling.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Patine said:

The feeling of HAVING to vote for a particular candidate out of DUTY, in just a void and generic context, seems to me to be horribly dystopian and an utter defeat of the very fundamental principle of elected, constitutional governance. You'll have to forgive me if I find the terminology unsettling.

It's ok, i'm used to your viewing of our government as a dystopian, Orwellian, fascist state. Kidding, lol. :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

It's ok, i'm used to your viewing of our government as a dystopian, Orwellian, fascist state. Kidding, lol. :P 

Although, despite unfounded accusations about my views, I still see at least 75% of current nations' governments as being worse - and I've made that clear several time. Admittedly, though, a fair number of those nations have such crappy governments because of, or direct reaction to, American military, economic, or political meddling and intervention, but the British, French, Portuguese, Russians, and Chinses are to blame for a lot of the others' craptastic state of politics.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Patine said:

Although, despite unfounded accusations about my views, I still see at least 75% of current nations' governments as being worse - and I've made that clear several time. Admittedly, though, a fair number of those nations have such crappy governments because of, or direct reaction to, American military, economic, or political meddling and intervention, but the British, French, Portuguese, Russians, and Chinses are to blame for a lot of the others' craptastic state of politics.

I know, lol, I was joking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read the story, but I think it might be deserving of an audit, though I'm guessing he just used legal loopholes.

I think it has no significant impact on the polls except to stop or slow down what potential undecideds there are from moving in Trump's direction (and any  day where Trump isn't pulling in support is a great day for Biden as it brings us closer to the election).   Though if it does have an impact, it might be impossible to tell (between this, the supreme court news, the debates, etc, if there are any shifts in poll at this time, it will probably be difficult to tell what caused it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Defiant said:

I haven't read the story, but I think it might be deserving of an audit, though I'm guessing he just used legal loopholes.

I think it has no significant impact on the polls except to stop or slow down what potential undecideds there are from moving in Trump's direction (and any  day where Trump isn't pulling in support is a great day for Biden as it brings us closer to the election).   Though if it does have an impact, it might be impossible to tell (between this, the supreme court news, the debates, etc, if there are any shifts in poll at this time, it will probably be difficult to tell what caused it).

He is actively being audited over a $75 million fraudulent tax refund.  This investigation by the NYTimes revealed multiple other frauds he could end up being audited for as well.

I'd really recommend reading the article.  There is some amazing levels of journalism there.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Patine said:

The feeling of HAVING to vote for a particular candidate out of DUTY, in just a void and generic context, seems to me to be horribly dystopian and an utter defeat of the very fundamental principle of elected, constitutional governance. You'll have to forgive me if I find the terminology unsettling.

It's not a void and generic context.  The context is Donald Trump is President of the United States.  You may have heard of him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love all you guys, and I (usually) enjoy the back and forth - but @ThePotatoWalrus is right. My apologies to anyone who felt unfairly attacked. I used a few monikers when I shouldn't have, and instead should have simply explained how certain tax stuff works and why it might be relevant in a case like this. Peace everybody. And buckle up - we're still 35 days from the election!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Actinguy said:

It's not a void and generic context.  The context is Donald Trump is President of the United States.  You may have heard of him.

You missed my point again. You're really doing poorly at thinking in broad terms and large-scale trends. You only seem to think in strictly contextually-based specifics, and react with self-righteous indignity when the former way of putting things is applied in a subject you don't, personally, like it to be. That is very annoying to deal with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...