It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump Stuns Critics By Raising $11 MILLION DOLLARS In Just 48 Hours

page: 7
44
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 08:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: Snarl

My immediate thoughts were that these "donators" are actually artificial in nature and it's really just Trump siphoning his own money using "donations" as the vehicle (more like a Flinstones Car because it's totally bogus) and Voila - headlines and "Trump GodKing Supreme has another Amazing Victory"

It's laughable - but people eat it up


Or maybe Saudi Arabia donated to him like they gave Hillary $20 million to fund her campaign. They may want to play both sides of the coin.




posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 08:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
The election is 137 days out, Trump needs about $2 billion to compete, that's 14,598,540 per day. $11 million in 48 hours is less than half the pace he needs to sustain for the remainder of the election season.


originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: jimmyx

He spent his own money on his businesses. Much of which probably ended up in his employees hands.

I see no reason to even bring it up.


Because it's a conflict of interest, government functions shouldn't be going through your own private company.


originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Snarl

How did the Obama's make so much money off 450k a year?


Most of what Obama made came from his book sale, that took him from being upper middle class in the 100-200k range (I don't remember exactly what he was getting) to being a millionaire. That was worth a few million. Since then he has made his $450k/year as President, but he is probably pocketing about $300k of that after taxes and what little of his own money he does have to spend in the position. That brings him up to around $6 million. The rest would be getting a return on smart investments, no doubt helped by the insider trading that's unavoidable at high levels of government.


Insider trading is illegal.

No way he needs even $1 bil for the next few months. $10 bil won't help hillary a bit.

He's not in the govt so he can spend wherever he wants. It only makes sense he uses his own facilities.
Remember the RNC and DNC are private entities.




posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

11 million is a drop in the bucket when it comes to campaign advertising TV spots in the main stream during elections.

Lots of luck. 6 corporations own the media and they have already (s)elected Hillary.

How big is her war chest?



posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk
a reply to: xuenchen

If you had any doubt this man could raise money as needed, then you're still in some serious denial. You naysayers are literally wrong about everything concerning Trump. Not one of your predictions or claims has been correct. If an anti-Trump person makes a claim, you can guarantee with great confidence just the opposite will occur.
exactly right, just coz trump isnt in the bloodlines of the elite its suprising they havent mk ultrad someone to kill him... O wait a sec



posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
Insider trading is illegal.


For the president and congress it is not illegal. It's considered a necessary and unavoidable part of doing their job. That's why the net worth of people in those offices rises so quickly. It's not bribes, it's because of insider trading.

The law that tried to make it illegal was ineffective and lasted for less than a year
www.npr.org...
edit on 25-6-2016 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

I don't support hillary. I don't hate Donald either, just don't want him to be president and at this point I don't think that will be an issue.

If he is not...then she is. Think about that for just a moment.



posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Trump critics should be used to being "stunned" by Trump successes by now. In fact, they should go do something useful with their lives, LOL!



posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: matafuchs

No, it is not the end of the story. If you raise money for a veterans group, or any charity, once you have the money and all of the fundraising is done, you can't keep that money, you actually have to give it away, to keep it is fraud and a crime. This was a one day event, it was collected, and should have been given a week after the event, after all of it was collected.

If you were running for president, or any office, the most expensive part is the advertisement, to get your name out. Now he knows he has critics at that time frame, why not use that as a means to get the publicity to not only assist in your own campaign, and start to put doubt in those critics and to sway people, along with bringing attention to those groups who could use the attention to be on lists and minds of people which receive charities?


You apparently know nothing of how donations work. You take pledges for money then you have to keep calling and calling and calling to get people to send you a check for there donations. Usually months later if at all. Just because I pledge to donate 100000 doesn't mean that I have the money nor does it mean I'm going to give it away. People can always come up with excuses about why they can't pay. THEN once you collect the money jobs not over. You have to decide how much everyone gets and for what groups and and hire a staff to keep track of the payments as they start cutting checks. Which of course requires an accountant as he has to keep track of expenditures and donations as they come in.



posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: TheBulk

I don't think "literal" means what you think it does.

Raising money doesn't equate to being a good POTUS. There are plenty of claims about Trump and his agenda, methods of operation, racism, womanizing, flip-flopping on issues that have a lot of merit. They certainly are not "literally wrong" about all those claims, and it is a ridiculous comment for you to make.

Of course, Clinton would be a terrible POTUS as well. Trump would probably end up being a disaster however. He has the foreign policy acumen of a gnat.



posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr
And there is a lot more to it as well. You see before one takes one penny of donation from anyone, they have to have all of the accounting set up, to account for every cent. Every cent of any donated money that is designated for charity has to be accounted for, if not, then it is a crime. That would also include where the money goes, to what organizations. And if it is specified to a certain organization then that organization would need to receive the exact amount stated.

In this case, while no organizations were mentioned, it was mentioned that said money raised, the sum of 6 million dollars were going to vet groups. While there is no mention of which groups, however, that 6 million is considered to be untouchable by Trump in the eyes of the laws, and thus would have to be accounted for.
And it would be fair to ask and want to know which groups received money and how much, as that would be a point of public interest. Now if they were still collecting money, then why beat around the bush, why not state that in the beginning, unless they are trying to hide something.

Trump does have a record for skirting the law, going just so far, and then pulls back before he crosses the line. And this would be concurrent with that kind of behavior.



posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk
a reply to: xuenchen

If you had any doubt this man could raise money as needed, then you're still in some serious denial. You naysayers are literally wrong about everything concerning Trump. Not one of your predictions or claims has been correct. If an anti-Trump person makes a claim, you can guarantee with great confidence just the opposite will occur.


All these claims and predictions from the left so far have been nothing but spiteful wishful thinking and it shows.



posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 07:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: Snarl

My immediate thoughts were that these "donators" are actually artificial in nature and it's really just Trump siphoning his own money using "donations" as the vehicle (more like a Flinstones Car because it's totally bogus) and Voila - headlines and "Trump GodKing Supreme has another Amazing Victory"

It's laughable - but people eat it up


That spiteful wishful thinking in action right here ^



posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 08:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
Insider trading is illegal.


For the president and congress it is not illegal. It's considered a necessary and unavoidable part of doing their job. That's why the net worth of people in those offices rises so quickly. It's not bribes, it's because of insider trading.

The law that tried to make it illegal was ineffective and lasted for less than a year
www.npr.org...


But it's illegal for normal people!!!!

WTF!?





posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
But it's illegal for normal people!!!!

WTF!?




Correct. On the one hand it's a case of the law not being equally applied, but on the other hand it was written this way because it's impossible for people in those positions to not have insider knowledge. Specifically, they have knowledge of who is and isn't getting government contracts and they use that to influence their stock buying decisions.

The only real way to avoid this is to prevent high level pubic sector employees from participating in the investment game. We could do that in theory but that's just as bad, because you then have a group of people who make decisions affecting the market, and decisions on how investments work who are completely removed from the process not only having no personal stake in it, but having little to no actual experience either.



posted on Jun, 25 2016 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

The conclusion I have reached is the GOP isn't bothering to fund raise at all for Trump. Instead they are focused on Congressional races and saving the party from complete political destruction. Trump is the Goldwater of 2016. If the GOP survives post November as a single party they will take 8 years to recover from the wreckage.



posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 08:36 AM
link   
I'm not a Trump supporter. I've written several threads critical of Mr. Trump. I think he is a dangerous loose cannon. A large part of the danger I associate with Mr. Trump is his apparent inability to see anything outside the mental bubble he lives in. Congratulating the Scots on the success of the Brexit vote when they voted massively against Brexit is a glaring example of what I mean. This very unsubtle blunderer would be impossible to restrain if he were ever to become President.

I don't take him lightly, though. It is clear that substantial numbers of American voters respond to a man with brutal ideas. We've seen that before in the world. It didn't turn out well.

Despite her lead in the polls Hillary Clinton would do well to tread carefully and deliberately all the way to election day. As his fund raising efforts demonstrate Mr. Trump is a formidable opponent perfectly capable of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat.



posted on Jun, 29 2016 @ 10:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: xpert11
a reply to: MrSpad

The conclusion I have reached is the GOP isn't bothering to fund raise at all for Trump. Instead they are focused on Congressional races and saving the party from complete political destruction. Trump is the Goldwater of 2016. If the GOP survives post November as a single party they will take 8 years to recover from the wreckage.


This may be because Trump isn't raising and spending for them - which is critical if he wants Republican support he has to have Republicans elected to office. So now they're scrambling to find money to educate voters about why they should be in office. Democrat candidates, on the other hand, are being helped by the party.



Trump's campaign spent $208,000 on hats, $5,000 on signs and $694,000 on t-shirts, mugs and stickers in June, according to a financial disclosure with the Federal Election Commission. Those "Make America Great" clothes and posters have been Trump's primary form of paid advertising.
source: www.kitv.com...


...while it's cute, it doesn't do anything to educate voters on how he plans to implement his policies and what strategies he has in mind. Nor is he showing up and supporting the senators in their reelection bids.

He is apparently relying on news and controversial statements to get him coverage - but this doesn't help the party and some of his more objectionable statements are starting to hurt the very Republicans that he will need to help him implement any of his policies.



And the reticence to fully embrace Trump reflects concerns that the candidate, if he maintains his current unpopularity in the polls, could not only lose the presidency but cost Republicans in Congress their jobs too.
...
Democrats will need to gain 30 seats in this fall's elections to get a majority in the House, and five seats for a Senate majority. Senate Republicans are particularly vulnerable, with six seats up in states that Obama won in 2012.

"The Senate these days tends to follow the top of the ticket, so if Trump loses the states where GOP senators are up for re-election, most if not all will also lose," said Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the conservative Ethics and Public Policy Center
source: www.nbcnews.com...


Bottom line: conservatives are in for a rough ride.



posted on Jun, 29 2016 @ 03:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: xpert11
a reply to: MrSpad

The conclusion I have reached is the GOP isn't bothering to fund raise at all for Trump. Instead they are focused on Congressional races and saving the party from complete political destruction. Trump is the Goldwater of 2016. If the GOP survives post November as a single party they will take 8 years to recover from the wreckage.


This may be because Trump isn't raising and spending for them - which is critical if he wants Republican support he has to have Republicans elected to office. So now they're scrambling to find money to educate voters about why they should be in office. Democrat candidates, on the other hand, are being helped by the party.



Trump's campaign spent $208,000 on hats, $5,000 on signs and $694,000 on t-shirts, mugs and stickers in June, according to a financial disclosure with the Federal Election Commission. Those "Make America Great" clothes and posters have been Trump's primary form of paid advertising.
source: www.kitv.com...


...while it's cute, it doesn't do anything to educate voters on how he plans to implement his policies and what strategies he has in mind. Nor is he showing up and supporting the senators in their reelection bids.

He is apparently relying on news and controversial statements to get him coverage - but this doesn't help the party and some of his more objectionable statements are starting to hurt the very Republicans that he will need to help him implement any of his policies.



And the reticence to fully embrace Trump reflects concerns that the candidate, if he maintains his current unpopularity in the polls, could not only lose the presidency but cost Republicans in Congress their jobs too.
...
Democrats will need to gain 30 seats in this fall's elections to get a majority in the House, and five seats for a Senate majority. Senate Republicans are particularly vulnerable, with six seats up in states that Obama won in 2012.

"The Senate these days tends to follow the top of the ticket, so if Trump loses the states where GOP senators are up for re-election, most if not all will also lose," said Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the conservative Ethics and Public Policy Center
source: www.nbcnews.com...


Bottom line: conservatives are in for a rough ride.


This assumes that money and the old way of getting elected is the only way. Trump has already proven it does not have to be that way. You are also forgetting the millions of people who will vote for the Republican candidate just because Trump leads their party, without a cent of media spending.

I think your analysis assumes nothing has changed, which is a mistake in my view.
edit on 29/6/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 04:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

My feeling is Trump in his heart of hearts doesn't want to be president. Trump probably didn't expect to still be in the political process when the Iowa Caucus kicked off little alone face off against Hillary Clinton. The way Trump has squandered the last 6 weeks suggests to me he has little interest in doing anything but dominate the 24 hour media cycle.

If one wishes to take a conspiracy theory angle , Trump may well be the ultimate plant from the Clinton campaign.



posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 05:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

This assumes that money and the old way of getting elected is the only way. Trump has already proven it does not have to be that way. You are also forgetting the millions of people who will vote for the Republican candidate just because Trump leads their party, without a cent of media spending.


There can be no doubt every bit of political wisdom was thrown out the window as Trump went through the Primary Calendar. Trump can't win the election if the only people who vote for him are his current supporter base.


I think your analysis assumes nothing has changed, which is a mistake in my view.


One major Task for Trump is winning over undecided voters. Trump performed poorly in this area during the Primary Season. To stay topical I would argue Trump doesn't need to raise a lot more cash. Blending his non traditional campaign style with winning over the voters Romney lost out on must be the primary focus. Trump must go to the large urban centers and talk to people who have given up looking for work, lost out due to Obama Care and so on. Thinking outside the square the Trump campaign could combine combing neighborhoods with speeches and street BBQs.

Not funding more traditional forms of media like TV advertising would still be a mistake. Older people may not be on Social Media and as such somewhat out of reach to the Trump campaign. Voter numbers are higher in older population demographics.
edit on 30-6-2016 by xpert11 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join