Trump

Gern Blansten

rgambs said:

mrussel1 said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

This was a major letdown. I thought a bombshell would come out when his taxes were released, instead we find out he did what everyone has the capability to do, he was smart and found the best solution? Huh. Well onto the next issue we go

We all have the ability to lose $950 MM in one tax year? I am not so sure about that.

According to something I saw from Robert Reich, I think, most of the lost money wasn't likely his own personal assets to begin with!

No it was likely debt that he personally guaranteed.

If I want to start a casino and a bank will loan me $1,000,000 I can effectively write off $1,000,000 on my taxes assuming
1. The entity is an LLC or partnership
2. The entity lost that money from operations (i.e. wages, overhead....not capital assets)

Gern Blansten

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

But that's my point. For most people talking about this online and on the news, etc, it IS about how he didn't pay those taxes.

Not because it's a crime, but it damages his personal narrative that he tries to sell. Remember Warren Buffet made this a huge deal several years ago. He came out and said he was upset because he paid a lower income tax rate than his secretary. Trump could have done the same thing six months ago and made it part of the 'rigged system' argument. But he didn't. Probably because of the billion dollar loss. But now he has to face it head on.

I disagree that him using an accountant to get the most put of his tax filing damages the narrative. If anything, the whole thing is damaging Hillary's campaign, because it is a glaringly meaningless "accusation" that Hillary supporters have all jumped on, while there are so many more important things they should be trying to hammer into people's brains. Things that actually would be damaging to his personal narrative. This is just another pointless distraction. I bet Trump is thrilled it's sticking around for as long as it is. I mean, if him committing fraud and giving campaign donations to his kids doesn't make a dent, and if racist propaganda and threats of nuclear war don't affect his numbers, etc etc etc, why would anybody think this non-issue would? This is the most bland thing he's been attacked for in months.

To me the issue is that he isn't successful. He sucks.

Gern Blansten

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01GYPLR1U/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

If interested, read this book. It isn't a tabloid type of biography...it references actual events, actual court cases, etc. It's pretty good.

BS44325

rgambs said:

BS44325 said:

rgambs said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

Gern Blansten said:

The tax issue is simple. It shows that he lost a MASSIVE amount of money.

He keeps saying that it shows he is "smart"...it doesn't, it shows that he lost a MASSIVE amount of money

That is ridiculous. Businesses take risks...sometimes they win and sometimes they lose. The "smart" businessman knows how to shield themselves and/or how to sustain a loss while still moving forward. That number is massive on our scale but not massive at Trump's scale. The fact that he took that loss and yet is where he is today in business shows that he is indeed "smart". Again this is so silly except to the novice.

How many troops did he support with his state, local and real estate taxes?

Ahhhh...so if you don't pay more taxes then you're legally required too then you don't support the troops. I get it. I was under the impression that it is evil republicans who question people's patriotism.

You are always forgetting that these criticisms of Trump are meant to point out his glaring his hypocrisy, not the critic's genuine concerns.

Sure but I don't see in this situation how it shows him to be particularly "hypocritical". He doesn't deny taking advantage of the rules of the system to benefit his business while running to change the rules now that he's chosen a different calling. The attack just seems to fall flat with me. The New York Times is throwing out a big loss from 1995 without saying much else. Will the price tag make people care? I just don't know.

You don't see the hypocrisy in being the head of the party that demonizes poor people for taking advantage of the rules and then doing so for millions more dollars?

Trump is not doing this.

BS44325

PJ_Soul said:

This is the second time in the past couple of days where I am actually going to defend Trump, whihc galls me, lol, but fair is fair. I think the way a lot of the left is reacting to Trump not paying these taxes is damaging to the fight to keep Trump out of office.
Trump has not evaded taxes. He has simply taken advantage of the existing tax system. Totally legal. Would a single one of you honestly claim that you would pay income taxes that you aren't legally obligated to pay????? I know i wouldn't. So why are so many acting as though Trump had done this huge horrible thing just because he is following tax law?? All these irroneous accusations are doing is bolstering the the anti-Clintonites. Why not focus on the laws that Trump HAS broken??? There appear to be several of them! Hillary shouldn't be using this point as another way to attack Trump. She should only be using it as a good example as to why tax reform is needed, and then she should tell everyone what she's going to do to make sure super rich people are obligated to pay income tax just like everybody else.

Bang on PJSoul! And to your point Hillary is NOT pushing to alter the tax rules that Trump used to his advantage. That is why this argument is so phony in my eyes. If she were elected these rules would remain in place. Her corporate donors would see to it.

HughFreakingDillon

PJ_Soul said:

Yeah, I'm not defending the laws. But I don't know why or how people can hold tax law against anyone besides those responsible for the laws. As I said, every single last one of us would say ends much on taxes as we could. Period. I just don't think the little shit storm that Clinton has kicked up about him not paying taxes is pretty unreasonable and hypocritical (as if the Clintons don't adhere to beneficial tax laws themselves! Just like all of us do, or at least would if we knew how!).

of course we would take advantage of it. the difference is I'm not doing it then turning around and saying someone accessing welfare is a lazy fuck working the system.

Gern Blansten

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

Yeah, I'm not defending the laws. But I don't know why or how people can hold tax law against anyone besides those responsible for the laws. As I said, every single last one of us would say ends much on taxes as we could. Period. I just don't think the little shit storm that Clinton has kicked up about him not paying taxes is pretty unreasonable and hypocritical (as if the Clintons don't adhere to beneficial tax laws themselves! Just like all of us do, or at least would if we knew how!).

of course we would take advantage of it. the difference is I'm not doing it then turning around and saying someone accessing welfare is a lazy fuck working the system.

Yeah...or "I'm a very successful businessman...I'm the best businessman ever believe me"

Gern Blansten

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/2/13137604/trump-tax-return

Really good points here....if Trumps returns would show him in better light than the 1995 release he will be releasing them soon.

If he doesn't....likely they would just give Clinton more ammo.

Reread the first sentence. “Donald J. Trump declared a $916 million loss on his 1995 income tax returns, a tax deduction so substantial it could have allowed him to legally avoid paying any federal income taxes for up to 18 years.” “Could” is doing all the work there, too. It’s also possible that Trump paid taxes in all of those years!

The reason the media keeps saying that he could avoid tax for 18 years is because that is the limit on net operating losses. You can generally carry back the loss to the prior two returns and then forward for 18 years. The other option is to forego the carryback and carry it forward for 20 years.

Gern Blansten

Another point that I haven't seen addressed.

If the IRS audits you they can generally only audit three years of tax returns...the most recent 3 years.

This begs the question as to why Trump won't release the returns that are NOT under audit. He keeps saying that he would release the returns if he wasn't under audit so why not release the others?

If the IRS expects that fraudulent returns were filed....there is no 3 year limit. They can go back as far as they want.

I'm wondering if that could be the case?

If I were advising Clinton I would be all over that narrative.

mrussel1

Gern Blansten said:

Another point that I haven't seen addressed.

If the IRS audits you they can generally only audit three years of tax returns...the most recent 3 years.

This begs the question as to why Trump won't release the returns that are NOT under audit. He keeps saying that he would release the returns if he wasn't under audit so why not release the others?

If the IRS expects that fraudulent returns were filed....there is no 3 year limit. They can go back as far as they want.

I'm wondering if that could be the case?

If I were advising Clinton I would be all over that narrative.

He must believe it is more damaging than to release them.

Remember he knew this was coming and threatened to sue the NYT if they were released. I'm surprised he did not proactively disclose this issue before publication and take the tact that it was evidence of rigged system and he was going to fix it. He had a small window to do damage control and they missed it.

Gern Blansten

https://www.icij.org/blog/2016/09/trumps-organization-did-business-iranian-bank-later-linked-terrorism?utm_content=buffered964&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Donald Trump’s real estate organization rented New York office space from 1998 to 2003 to an Iranian bank that U.S. authorities have linked to terrorist groups and Iran’s nuclear program.

Trump inherited Bank Melli, one of Iran’s largest state-controlled banks, as a tenant when he purchased the General Motors Building on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan, according to public records reviewed by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and the Center for Public Integrity. The Trump Organization kept the bank on as a tenant for four more years after the U.S. Treasury Department designated Bank Melli in 1999 as being controlled by the Iranian government.

U.S. officials later alleged that Bank Melli had been used to obtain sensitive materials for Iran’s nuclear program. U.S. authorities also alleged that the bank had been used between 2002 and 2006 to funnel money to a unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard that has sponsored terrorist attacks — a period that overlapped with the time the bank rented office space from Trump.

The Trump Organization’s dealings with the Iranian bank shed more light on Trump’s wide-ranging business interests, which sometimes stand at odds with his blunt declarations on the campaign trail. Trump has denounced Iran as a “big enemy,” blasted Hillary Clinton for not taking a harder line against the Iranian regime and charged that donations from foreign governments to the Clinton Foundation amounted to evidence of corruption. His five-year stint as Bank Melli’s landlord provides an example of the Trump Organization itself doing business with a government hostile to the United States.

“It’s a pretty hypocritical position to take,” said Richard Nephew, who served from 2013 to 2015 as principal deputy coordinator of sanctions policy at the U.S. State Department and spent nearly a decade working on Iran sanctions in the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama. “It suggests that his principles are pretty flexible when it comes to him getting paid.”

A court document obtained by ICIJ indicates that Bank Melli’s rent on more than 8,000 square feet on the GM Building’s 44th floor may have topped half a million dollars a year.

The legal ramifications of the Trump Organization taking rent payments from Bank Melli are unclear.

Gern Blansten

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-group-did-business-iranian-bank-later-linked-terror-n657636

Starting to break everywhere now...

Cliffy6745

https://twitter.com/anamariecox/status/782969673067421697

Gern Blansten

Cliffy6745 said:

https://twitter.com/anamariecox/status/782969673067421697

He likes people that can handle it...

pjhawks

Cliffy6745 said:

https://twitter.com/anamariecox/status/782969673067421697

god what a fucking idiot he is.

Gern Blansten

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/10/03/ny-ag-sends-cease-and-desist-to-trump-foundation.html?via=desktop&source=copyurl

badabing...

The New York Attorney General has sent a cease and desist letter to the Trump Foundation for allegedly operating without proper certification. Eric Schneiderman sent Donald's Trump's charity a notice that he had not acquired proper certification to solicit contributions in New York State and has not been registered with the Charities Bureau.

InHiding80

dimitrispearljam said:

Ha ha charade he is.

PJ_Soul

Gern Blansten said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

But that's my point. For most people talking about this online and on the news, etc, it IS about how he didn't pay those taxes.

Not because it's a crime, but it damages his personal narrative that he tries to sell. Remember Warren Buffet made this a huge deal several years ago. He came out and said he was upset because he paid a lower income tax rate than his secretary. Trump could have done the same thing six months ago and made it part of the 'rigged system' argument. But he didn't. Probably because of the billion dollar loss. But now he has to face it head on.

I disagree that him using an accountant to get the most put of his tax filing damages the narrative. If anything, the whole thing is damaging Hillary's campaign, because it is a glaringly meaningless "accusation" that Hillary supporters have all jumped on, while there are so many more important things they should be trying to hammer into people's brains. Things that actually would be damaging to his personal narrative. This is just another pointless distraction. I bet Trump is thrilled it's sticking around for as long as it is. I mean, if him committing fraud and giving campaign donations to his kids doesn't make a dent, and if racist propaganda and threats of nuclear war don't affect his numbers, etc etc etc, why would anybody think this non-issue would? This is the most bland thing he's been attacked for in months.

To me the issue is that he isn't successful. He sucks.

Okay ... but that isn't connected to this not paying income tax thing. Two separate issues. And FWIW... I don't really think it can be said that Trump isn't successful. I mean... as much as I can't stand him, and as fucked up as his finances may or may not be right now, I'm not sure if one of the most famous people in the world (gag gag) who is heavily invested in so many properties and developments and side businesses can be called unsuccessful. He is 100000000% unqualified to be a politician/President, and his business practices are a big reason behind that, but still, Trump isn't an unsuccessful person overall. I'd say he's still more successful than most other people on the planet... and more awful, too.

Gern Blansten

PJ_Soul said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

But that's my point. For most people talking about this online and on the news, etc, it IS about how he didn't pay those taxes.

Not because it's a crime, but it damages his personal narrative that he tries to sell. Remember Warren Buffet made this a huge deal several years ago. He came out and said he was upset because he paid a lower income tax rate than his secretary. Trump could have done the same thing six months ago and made it part of the 'rigged system' argument. But he didn't. Probably because of the billion dollar loss. But now he has to face it head on.

I disagree that him using an accountant to get the most put of his tax filing damages the narrative. If anything, the whole thing is damaging Hillary's campaign, because it is a glaringly meaningless "accusation" that Hillary supporters have all jumped on, while there are so many more important things they should be trying to hammer into people's brains. Things that actually would be damaging to his personal narrative. This is just another pointless distraction. I bet Trump is thrilled it's sticking around for as long as it is. I mean, if him committing fraud and giving campaign donations to his kids doesn't make a dent, and if racist propaganda and threats of nuclear war don't affect his numbers, etc etc etc, why would anybody think this non-issue would? This is the most bland thing he's been attacked for in months.

To me the issue is that he isn't successful. He sucks.

Okay ... but that isn't connected to this not paying income tax thing. Two separate issues. And FWIW... I don't really think it can be said that Trump isn't successful. I mean... as much as I can't stand him, and as fucked up as his finances may or may not be right now, I'm not sure if one of the most famous people in the world (gag gag) who is heavily invested in so many properties and developments and side businesses can be called unsuccessful. He is 100000000% unqualified to be a politician/President, and his business practices are a big reason behind that, but still, Trump isn't an unsuccessful person overall. I'd say he's still more successful than most other people on the planet... and more awful, too.

It is actually. His lack of success equates to massive tax losses.

I think we would all be surprised at what his true wealth is. He clearly isn't self funding...which likely means he has no cash.

PJ_Soul

Well shit. I wish I could be as unsuccessful as Trump then. I'd be a multi-millionaire!
I understand about all the speculation about Trump's actual worth, etc. But we actually know nothing, and no matter where his businesses stand, the dude is still a rich mofo and has a looooooooong business career where billions were bought and sold, and had a long-running hit reality show to boot. It's not like he's now destitute. I assume he did waste a whole shit load of his own money on this election though. I bet he regrets that.

mrussel1

InHiding80 said:

dimitrispearljam said:

Ha ha charade he is.

ooh that is clever. Pigs and Dogs could have been written for him.

benjs

mrussel1 said:

InHiding80 said:

dimitrispearljam said:

Ha ha charade he is.

ooh that is clever. Pigs and Dogs could have been written for him.

Bizarre that it hadn't been more than 20 seconds since I put Animals on at work prior to seeing this!

rgambs

PJ_Soul said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

But that's my point. For most people talking about this online and on the news, etc, it IS about how he didn't pay those taxes.

Not because it's a crime, but it damages his personal narrative that he tries to sell. Remember Warren Buffet made this a huge deal several years ago. He came out and said he was upset because he paid a lower income tax rate than his secretary. Trump could have done the same thing six months ago and made it part of the 'rigged system' argument. But he didn't. Probably because of the billion dollar loss. But now he has to face it head on.

I disagree that him using an accountant to get the most put of his tax filing damages the narrative. If anything, the whole thing is damaging Hillary's campaign, because it is a glaringly meaningless "accusation" that Hillary supporters have all jumped on, while there are so many more important things they should be trying to hammer into people's brains. Things that actually would be damaging to his personal narrative. This is just another pointless distraction. I bet Trump is thrilled it's sticking around for as long as it is. I mean, if him committing fraud and giving campaign donations to his kids doesn't make a dent, and if racist propaganda and threats of nuclear war don't affect his numbers, etc etc etc, why would anybody think this non-issue would? This is the most bland thing he's been attacked for in months.

To me the issue is that he isn't successful. He sucks.

Okay ... but that isn't connected to this not paying income tax thing. Two separate issues. And FWIW... I don't really think it can be said that Trump isn't successful. I mean... as much as I can't stand him, and as fucked up as his finances may or may not be right now, I'm not sure if one of the most famous people in the world (gag gag) who is heavily invested in so many properties and developments and side businesses can be called unsuccessful. He is 100000000% unqualified to be a politician/President, and his business practices are a big reason behind that, but still, Trump isn't an unsuccessful person overall. I'd say he's still more successful than most other people on the planet... and more awful, too.

I think he is living in a house of cards and getting into this election was a bad move because it is about to collapse.
I suppose his past successes don't just get negated if he crumbles now.

Gern Blansten

PJ_Soul said:

Well shit. I wish I could be as unsuccessful as Trump then. I'd be a multi-millionaire!
I understand about all the speculation about Trump's actual worth, etc. But we actually know nothing, and no matter where his businesses stand, the dude is still a rich mofo and has a looooooooong business career where billions were bought and sold, and had a long-running hit reality show to boot. It's not like he's now destitute. I assume he did waste a whole shit load of his own money on this election though. I bet he regrets that.

Hold on....unsuccessful doesn't necessarily mean he is flat broke

I'm just stating the obvious. If someone loses $1billion dollars in a year they lose the right to call themselves successful.

Gern Blansten

rgambs said:

PJ_Soul said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

But that's my point. For most people talking about this online and on the news, etc, it IS about how he didn't pay those taxes.

Not because it's a crime, but it damages his personal narrative that he tries to sell. Remember Warren Buffet made this a huge deal several years ago. He came out and said he was upset because he paid a lower income tax rate than his secretary. Trump could have done the same thing six months ago and made it part of the 'rigged system' argument. But he didn't. Probably because of the billion dollar loss. But now he has to face it head on.

I disagree that him using an accountant to get the most put of his tax filing damages the narrative. If anything, the whole thing is damaging Hillary's campaign, because it is a glaringly meaningless "accusation" that Hillary supporters have all jumped on, while there are so many more important things they should be trying to hammer into people's brains. Things that actually would be damaging to his personal narrative. This is just another pointless distraction. I bet Trump is thrilled it's sticking around for as long as it is. I mean, if him committing fraud and giving campaign donations to his kids doesn't make a dent, and if racist propaganda and threats of nuclear war don't affect his numbers, etc etc etc, why would anybody think this non-issue would? This is the most bland thing he's been attacked for in months.

To me the issue is that he isn't successful. He sucks.

Okay ... but that isn't connected to this not paying income tax thing. Two separate issues. And FWIW... I don't really think it can be said that Trump isn't successful. I mean... as much as I can't stand him, and as fucked up as his finances may or may not be right now, I'm not sure if one of the most famous people in the world (gag gag) who is heavily invested in so many properties and developments and side businesses can be called unsuccessful. He is 100000000% unqualified to be a politician/President, and his business practices are a big reason behind that, but still, Trump isn't an unsuccessful person overall. I'd say he's still more successful than most other people on the planet... and more awful, too.

I think he is living in a house of cards and getting into this election was a bad move because it is about to collapse.
I suppose his past successes don't just get negated if he crumbles now.

That's what I think. He thought this was going to strengthen his "brand" and it is backfiring. Remember how the NBC folks said that Trump wanted to run The Apprentice from the White House? They guy is clueless and likely cashless.

Gern Blansten

PJ_Soul

Gern Blansten said:

PJ_Soul said:

Well shit. I wish I could be as unsuccessful as Trump then. I'd be a multi-millionaire!
I understand about all the speculation about Trump's actual worth, etc. But we actually know nothing, and no matter where his businesses stand, the dude is still a rich mofo and has a looooooooong business career where billions were bought and sold, and had a long-running hit reality show to boot. It's not like he's now destitute. I assume he did waste a whole shit load of his own money on this election though. I bet he regrets that.

Hold on....unsuccessful doesn't necessarily mean he is flat broke

I'm just stating the obvious. If someone loses $1billion dollars in a year they lose the right to call themselves successful.

Not if he had 2 billion. I guess I just don't consider a person unsuccessful overall just because he suffers a big business failure here and there but keeps on going. If that had ended his entire career and forced him to sell off all of his assets and then retire, I'd agree with you. But when someone with a massive financial/property empire has a really bad year but keeps on going and immediately launches a recovery, I definitely don't consider that person unsuccessful. I consider it a successful person who had a really bad year. I'm sure things like that happen to most of the world's billionaires. All of these suffer failures in their worlds of big business.
And the reason I'm "defending" this position is because I want criticisms against Trump (and Clinton) to be honest, righteous criticisms. I don't think that is happening with either candidate, and it fucks up the whole election process IMO.

rgambs

I love the hands lol

Gern Blansten

PJ_Soul said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJ_Soul said:

Well shit. I wish I could be as unsuccessful as Trump then. I'd be a multi-millionaire!
I understand about all the speculation about Trump's actual worth, etc. But we actually know nothing, and no matter where his businesses stand, the dude is still a rich mofo and has a looooooooong business career where billions were bought and sold, and had a long-running hit reality show to boot. It's not like he's now destitute. I assume he did waste a whole shit load of his own money on this election though. I bet he regrets that.

Hold on....unsuccessful doesn't necessarily mean he is flat broke

I'm just stating the obvious. If someone loses $1billion dollars in a year they lose the right to call themselves successful.

Not if he had 2 billion. I guess I just don't consider a person unsuccessful overall just because he suffers a big business failure here and there but keeps on going. If that had ended his entire career and forced him to sell off all of his assets and then retire, I'd agree with you. But when someone with a massive financial/property empire has a really bad year but keeps on going and immediately launches a recovery, I definitely don't consider that person unsuccessful. I consider it a successful person who had a really bad year. I'm sure things like that happen to most of the world's billionaires. All of these suffer failures in their worlds of big business.
And the reason I'm "defending" this position is because I want criticisms against Trump (and Clinton) to be honest, righteous criticisms. I don't think that is happening with either candidate, and it fucks up the whole election process IMO.

If he had $2bil then he lost 50% of his net worth via a tax loss. That's bad. That's not a decline in value...that's value that ran out the door in cash or debt that has to be paid back later.

And yes businesses lose money...people lose money....but those people aren't on TV telling us how great they are.

PJ_Soul

Gern Blansten said:

PJ_Soul said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJ_Soul said:

Well shit. I wish I could be as unsuccessful as Trump then. I'd be a multi-millionaire!
I understand about all the speculation about Trump's actual worth, etc. But we actually know nothing, and no matter where his businesses stand, the dude is still a rich mofo and has a looooooooong business career where billions were bought and sold, and had a long-running hit reality show to boot. It's not like he's now destitute. I assume he did waste a whole shit load of his own money on this election though. I bet he regrets that.

Hold on....unsuccessful doesn't necessarily mean he is flat broke

I'm just stating the obvious. If someone loses $1billion dollars in a year they lose the right to call themselves successful.

Not if he had 2 billion. I guess I just don't consider a person unsuccessful overall just because he suffers a big business failure here and there but keeps on going. If that had ended his entire career and forced him to sell off all of his assets and then retire, I'd agree with you. But when someone with a massive financial/property empire has a really bad year but keeps on going and immediately launches a recovery, I definitely don't consider that person unsuccessful. I consider it a successful person who had a really bad year. I'm sure things like that happen to most of the world's billionaires. All of these suffer failures in their worlds of big business.
And the reason I'm "defending" this position is because I want criticisms against Trump (and Clinton) to be honest, righteous criticisms. I don't think that is happening with either candidate, and it fucks up the whole election process IMO.

If he had $2bil then he lost 50% of his net worth via a tax loss. That's bad. That's not a decline in value...that's value that ran out the door in cash or debt that has to be paid back later.

And yes businesses lose money...people lose money....but those people aren't on TV telling us how great they are.

I don't really see how that makes any difference. He'd be equally un/successful whether he blabbed about it or not. Obviously I'm not saying any of this to defend Trump's honour, lol. I'm saying it because I'm finding some of the criticism that is being really focus upon by the media to be too biased now. Too coloured by personal emotion and disdain because people hate him so much (understandably). I disapproved of this when it was and is happening to Clinton, and I disapprove of it just as much now that I'm seeing it happen with Trump. It erodes the process and clouds the issues. That doesn't mean I don't expect people to hate him, but once we're getting into the devil and the details, I think it becomes important that the facts and logic are matching up with the negative rhetoric.
Anyway, after this crazy campaign, he'll likely be right back into it. It's impossible to say what he'll lose and what he'll gain after a failed election campaign... That depends on who dumps him and who picks him up, business-wise, and what he does with his media ties.