Can Hillary Still Win?

March 19th, 2017 at 6:21:48 AM permalink
RonC
Member since: Nov 7, 2012
Threads: 6
Posts: 457
Quote: rxwine
He's a crook.

Quote:
For comparison, USA TODAY analyzed the legal involvement for five top real-estate business executives: Edward DeBartolo, shopping-center developer and former San Francisco 49ers owner; Donald Bren, Irvine Company chairman and owner; Stephen Ross, Time Warner Center developer; Sam Zell, Chicago real-estate magnate; and Larry Silverstein, a New York developer famous for his involvement in the World Trade Center properties.

To maintain an apples-to-apples comparison, only actions that used the developers' names were included. The analysis found Trump has been involved in more legal skirmishes than all five of the others — combined.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/01/donald-trump-lawsuits-legal-battles/84995854/


"Close to half the court cases — about 1,600 — involved lawsuits against gamblers who had credit at Trump-connected casinos and failed to pay their debts."

Damn his corporation for wanting to collect money from people who walked on paper they signed...

"And he has been aggressive in suing unrelated companies that were using his name without permission."

Jimmy Buffett, noted Liberal and Democrat, has folks working to vigorously protect his brand. There is absolutely nothing unusual about that.

"...in a defamation suit Trump filed after she posted on Facebook that she thought the 2012 Miss USA Pageant was “rigged.”"

Is it bad to sue someone for defamation if some actually does it? I guess it is even worse to win.

Yes, Trump has been involved in a lot of lawsuits. He is litigious. None of this was hidden from the press, Hillary, or the public. This article was written months before the election. The writers point of view was that Trump should not be President based on his actions. The people that had this information and could have used it either did so ineffectively or not at all.

Hillary lost. She lost because she ran a poor campaign. She lost because she did not connect with the people. She lost because she did not go to some states that went to Trump...she counted them as in the bag. She made the classic mistake of underestimating her opponent. She did not learn from the failure of 16 or so other Republican candidates (many of them that I wanted, at the time, to beat Trump but I believe would have failed to win the general after looking at what happened). She lost because she was almost as untrustworthy in the minds of voters as he was but she also had a political record with a lot of red flags that seemed to mitigate his red flags.

Democrats are still stuck on the results of the election. This is good for the Republicans. It is probably good for them even if Trump fails miserably, which is not a given but could happen. The longer they continue to whine about what happened months ago, the less energy they spend moving towards 2018. If Trump has a decent record at that point, he will gain a stronger majority in the Senate. If the Democrats hold up government too much, it will backfire..."look, they accused the Republicans of this and look what they are doing..." They have to go out and win back the hearts and minds of the very "deplorables" their idiot candidate spoke of.

..or they can just continue to whine...
...While Mr. Wolf smoked opium and grinned at Mama Bear
March 19th, 2017 at 6:28:15 AM permalink
ams288
Member since: Apr 21, 2016
Threads: 11
Posts: 1693
Quote: RonC
Quote: rxwine
He's a crook.

Quote:
For comparison, USA TODAY analyzed the legal involvement for five top real-estate business executives: Edward DeBartolo, shopping-center developer and former San Francisco 49ers owner; Donald Bren, Irvine Company chairman and owner; Stephen Ross, Time Warner Center developer; Sam Zell, Chicago real-estate magnate; and Larry Silverstein, a New York developer famous for his involvement in the World Trade Center properties.

To maintain an apples-to-apples comparison, only actions that used the developers' names were included. The analysis found Trump has been involved in more legal skirmishes than all five of the others — combined.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/01/donald-trump-lawsuits-legal-battles/84995854/


"Close to half the court cases — about 1,600 — involved lawsuits against gamblers who had credit at Trump-connected casinos and failed to pay their debts."

Damn his corporation for wanting to collect money from people who walked on paper they signed...

"And he has been aggressive in suing unrelated companies that were using his name without permission."

Jimmy Buffett, noted Liberal and Democrat, has folks working to vigorously protect his brand. There is absolutely nothing unusual about that.

"...in a defamation suit Trump filed after she posted on Facebook that she thought the 2012 Miss USA Pageant was “rigged.”"

Is it bad to sue someone for defamation if some actually does it? I guess it is even worse to win.

Yes, Trump has been involved in a lot of lawsuits. He is litigious. None of this was hidden from the press, Hillary, or the public. This article was written months before the election. The writers point of view was that Trump should not be President based on his actions. The people that had this information and could have used it either did so ineffectively or not at all.


I think you missed his point.

His point was that real businessmen don't screw over contractors all the time like Donald does. He is a con man.
March 19th, 2017 at 6:39:26 AM permalink
RonC
Member since: Nov 7, 2012
Threads: 6
Posts: 457
Quote: ams288
I think you missed his point.

His point was that real businessmen don't screw over contractors all the time like Donald does. He is a con man.


...and Hillary failed so miserably to use the information available to make that point that she lost.
...While Mr. Wolf smoked opium and grinned at Mama Bear
March 19th, 2017 at 8:51:43 AM permalink
SOOPOO
Member since: Feb 19, 2014
Threads: 5
Posts: 185
Quote: ams288
Quote: RonC
Quote: rxwine
He's a crook.

Quote:


His point was that real businessmen don't screw over contractors all the time like Donald does. He is a con man.


Not questioning whether your statement is true or not, but if he is KNOWN to screw contractors 'all the time' as you say, why do they continue to do business with him?
March 19th, 2017 at 9:02:43 AM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 3
Posts: 777
Quote: ams288
Quote: RonC
Quote: rxwine

His point was that real businessmen don't screw over contractors all the time like Donald does. He is a con man.


It is obvious you have never been in the construction industry with that statement. It is still the wild west where you have to be on your toes all the time to make sure you get paid.
"There is no sin but ignorance" Christopher Marlow
March 19th, 2017 at 9:33:09 AM permalink
ams288
Member since: Apr 21, 2016
Threads: 11
Posts: 1693
Quote: RonC
...and Hillary failed so miserably to use the information available to make that point that she lost.


Just because you think Hillary failed to get the point across does not change the fact that he screwed over many many contractors.

The election is over. What Hillary said about any given topic is irrelevant now. But just because he narrowly won doesn't change the reality that he's a con man.
March 19th, 2017 at 12:59:35 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 105
Posts: 10396
Quote: ams288

His point was that real businessmen don't screw over contractors


Do you have a clue what a small world
construction is in any one city? They
all know each other, they all talk. If
a builder like trump doesn't pay people
who do legit work, he gets a bad rep
and very fast and nobody will work for
him. Yet trump has no problem getting
bids up the ying yang for his projects.

That's why this story never went anywhere.
They investigated and found Trump had
good reasons for not paying who he didn't
pay. The biggest problem is over charging.
When you think you got screwed and can
prove it, you let them take you to court
for not paying. This whole 'Trump is a crook'
is a non story.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
March 19th, 2017 at 2:13:43 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 306
Posts: 10274
Quote: ams288
But just because he narrowly won doesn't change the reality that he's a con man.


You won't ever get them to admit Golden Boy is a con-man. See, a con-man's victims tend to be his most zealous defenders.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
March 19th, 2017 at 2:29:25 PM permalink
pew
Member since: Jan 8, 2013
Threads: 2
Posts: 735
Anecdote: An old friend in the trades told me he's working on a site where a guy from New York said he worked on a lot of Trump projects in the city and Trump would stop by occasionally to talk to the foremen of the different trades. He would have a wad of cash on him while he asked how things were going and would ask how many workers the foreman had as he peeled off benjamins for each one of them. I hope it's a true fake story.
March 19th, 2017 at 2:52:48 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 97
Posts: 6029
Quote: Evenbob
Do you have a clue what a small world
construction is in any one city? They
all know each other, they all talk. If
a builder like trump doesn't pay people
who do legit work, he gets a bad rep
and very fast and nobody will work for
him. Yet trump has no problem getting
bids up the ying yang for his projects.

That's why this story never went anywhere.
They investigated and found Trump had
good reasons for not paying who he didn't
pay. The biggest problem is over charging.
When you think you got screwed and can
prove it, you let them take you to court
for not paying. This whole 'Trump is a crook'
is a non story.


Very true. There are only a few firms that can do much of that kind of work. What will happen is that the general contractor might stiff someone down the line so as the developer Trump gets sued as a co-defendant and a deeper pocket. Say Donald hires a general contractor. That general contractor can't do all or even most of the work. He then hires, or was told to hire, Ace Partitions to do the drywall work. He knows to pay Ace or else, but Ace stiffs the company delivering the drywall and the mud to finish it.

BOOM! Lawsuit. Trump had zero to do with it.

The other missed thing is large payers have very specific payment processes. I dealt with in in pests control. Because our billing was automated it always put things behind. You had to attach a PO or attach a checklist or some other thing. Even when you did it right it still might take 90 days. But you had to do it right, and how to do it was laid out at some point, usually from the start. But people get lazy that way, hating the paperwork.

Story went nowhere because there was no story.
The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it