US Politics: Celebrating and despairing too early;No poll bump for Trump yet.

[Fez]

It only took 110 years, but US DOJ is finally officially saying the break-up of Standard Oil is complete.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-closes-book-on-landmark-standard-oil-breakup-11555418344?tesla=y

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

But otherwise I agree, this is all one giant nothing burger, and if an individual candidate cannot paint Trump as being hyper shady for not releasing his returns, they shouldn’t be the nominee.

Honestly, you know the best way to make this an issue politically?  Say you'd be totally willing to provide the annual financial disclosures MCs always have to do, but:  "I'll release my tax returns immediately - when Donald Trump does."

6 minutes ago, Fez said:

It only took 110 years, but US DOJ is finally officially saying the break-up of Standard Oil is complete.

Wow, LOL, good link!

[Relic]

FoxNews hypocrisy watch - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/beto-orourke-underpaid-two-years-of-taxes-records-show 

 

They run this story on their front page today, while conveniently saying nothing at all about Trump's tax returns.  

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

24 minutes ago, DMC said:

Honestly, you know the best way to make this an issue politically?  Say you'd be totally willing to provide the annual financial disclosures MCs always have to do, but:  "I'll release my tax returns immediately - when Donald Trump does."

And the net result would be no one releases their taxes. Trump, despite claiming innocence, has behaved like the guiltiest mofo to ever live. Democrats need to highlight that.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

And the net result would be no one releases their taxes. Trump, despite claiming innocence, has behaved like the guiltiest mofo to ever live. Democrats need to highlight that.

Uh, the point would exactly be to highlight that.  Everyone releasing their returns insanely early doesn't emphasize anything, it just makes low-mid information voters not care about the issue.  If someone confronted him with it, that would very clearly make sure the issue is maintained by the media.  And especially in a primary field of 256 thousand, it would make you stand out as a candidate.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

52 minutes ago, DMC said:

Uh, the point would exactly be to highlight that.  Everyone releasing their returns insanely early doesn't emphasize anything, it just makes low-mid information voters not care about the issue.  If someone confronted him with it, that would very clearly make sure the issue is maintained by the media.  And especially in a primary field of 256 thousand, it would make you stand out as a candidate.

But that happened in 2016. The media talked about it all the time and are still talking about it. What the Democrats failed to do was effectively prime the public and condition them to associate the lack of disclosure with shady and untoward behavior.

[Zorral]

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

But that happened in 2016. The media talked about it all the time and are still talking about it. What the Democrats failed to do was effectively prime the public and condition them to associate the lack of disclosure with shady and untoward behavior.

[mormont]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Uh, the point would exactly be to highlight that. 

It doesn't, though. Instead it provides Trump with cover. 

So long as he is unique in not providing tax returns, he is exposed: if it's accepted as being conditional on other people doing the same, then you're helping him undermine the normality of it. 

[DMC]

11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

But that happened in 2016. The media talked about it all the time and are still talking about it. What the Democrats failed to do was effectively prime the public and condition them to associate the lack of disclosure with shady and untoward behavior.

No, Hillary released her returns just like all the Dem candidates seem to be rushing to do.  There's only one way to make a distinction that's sustainably interesting to the media, and it's not by taking the moral high ground.  Leftists of all stripes need to stop thinking taking the high ground is somehow politically advantageous.  It's not and it never has been.  It used to be favorable and not too damaging, but you all seem to always be telling me we're in a different age.  This is a way to leverage the different age.  More, it's something he'd never expect.

8 minutes ago, mormont said:

So long as he is unique in not providing tax returns, he is exposed:

See above.  He's been exposed for 3 years, hasn't done shit.  Time to try something new.

[IheartIheartTesla]

I'm not sure how much Trump tax returns will move the needle with the general populace in 2020. To my mind its like the anti-Mueller report, once you decipher his returns which will contain what I imagine is a complicated web of deceit and shell corporations and what have you, and spend all the time explaining this complex story to a populace whose perceptions of him are mostly baked in, you have already lost the battle. I dont think you'll find a line item in it ----> paid $XXXX to Russian Oligarch to build hotel in Moscow, which is the level of dumb the voting public needs to be subjected to.

Some folks seem to think the reason MAGA was so successful (apart from being a stupid cap-friendly slogan) is the Again part of it, harking back to a bygone era. To boost voter turnout, maybe the tax returns need to be part of a strategy like "Hey, remember when we had a President who could speak in complete sentences, had no extra-marital affairs and no shady financial dealings?" There is a reason no one pays me to be a campaign manager, but I strongly feel for 2020 the Democrats need to use social science to their advantage and craft messages accordingly. 

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I'm not sure how much Trump tax returns will move the needle with the general populace in 2020.

Neither am I.  In fact I'm very skeptical, that's kinda my point.  The only way it would is to do something different.

[mormont]

15 minutes ago, DMC said:

See above.  He's been exposed for 3 years, hasn't done shit.  Time to try something new.

The logic there seems flawed, though: along the lines of something must be done, this is something, therefore it must be done. Absent any argument as to why withholding Dem candidates' tax returns will work, arguing that not doing so has not worked is not a good argument. I know there were a lot of uses of the word 'not' in that sentence. Sorry. 

[Maithanet]

The lack of tax returns is just one piece of the puzzle showing this administration's corruption, unaccountability and incompetence.  There are a lot of Trump voters out there who admit he's an asshole, but don't think that particularly matters.  Democrats need to show it's more than just a character flaw, it's a governing style. 

EDIT: clarity

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, mormont said:

The logic there seems flawed, though: along the lines of something must be done, this is something, therefore it must be done. Absent any argument as to why withholding Dem candidates' tax returns will work, arguing that not doing so has not worked is not a good argument. I know there were a lot of uses of the word 'not' in that sentence. Sorry. 

Oh I strongly disagree, and the logic is pretty simple:  A has not led to B.  So either try C to lead to B, or let the House deal with it.  There's absolutely no reason for 18 Democratic candidates to set precedents for releasing years of tax returns.  Again, that will do nothing politically and is not news.  I suppose it's good for transparency's sake, but that's it, and the farthest thing from a salient issue.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

58 minutes ago, DMC said:

No, Hillary released her returns just like all the Dem candidates seem to be rushing to do.  There's only one way to make a distinction that's sustainably interesting to the media, and it's not by taking the moral high ground.  Leftists of all stripes need to stop thinking taking the high ground is somehow politically advantageous.  It's not and it never has been.  It used to be favorable and not too damaging, but you all seem to always be telling me we're in a different age.  This is a way to leverage the different age.  More, it's something he'd never expect.

See above.  He's been exposed for 3 years, hasn't done shit.  Time to try something new.

I don’t necessarily disagree about not always taking the moral high ground, but I don’t see how this particular strategy will have the intended effect. If anything I think it would take attention and pressure off of Trump for not releasing his returns.

[Zorral]

This particular issue of his taxes could heat up a whole lot as many tax payers just recently got hit with the shock that not only were not getting a refund, they owed a tax bill this year, even though they'd planned ahead and instituted a much higher withholding since the tax law changes.

[Jace, Extat]

16 minutes ago, Zorral said:

This particular issue of his taxes could heat up a whole lot as many tax payers just recently got hit with the shock that not only were not getting a refund, they owed a tax bill this year, even though they'd planned ahead and instituted a much higher withholding since the tax law changes.

Goddammit man, you can't just leave comments like this lying around. Do you have any idea how foolish I looked clapping and dancing around the  bank????

[Larry of the Lawn]

11 hours ago, DMC said:

Does this matter?  Harris got news yesterday for releasing 15 years.  I'm not worried about any of the candidates' returns.

Yeah, but my take was that, if you look at the way he released it on his site, it's a challenge to Trump, which is admittedly pretty blah on its own, but he's comparing himself to Trump as the party's presumptive nominee.  He's got more cash on hand than anyone else and he's only polling behind Biden.  Basically I'm looking at this as a move from Sanders camp to further assert himself as the Dem nominee.  He could have just posted them on his site with no plugging or sent them in to some newspapers, or had a boilerplate press release.  

I was looking at this as trying to separate himself from the 15 odd other 'contenders'.  And it's getting him some coverage, which he really hasn't had recently.  

[mormont]

2 hours ago, DMC said:

Oh I strongly disagree, and the logic is pretty simple:  A has not led to B.  So either try C to lead to B, or let the House deal with it. 

I mean, I know you think this is disagreeing with my point, but it's essentially just confirming it. A has not led to be so let's try C. No argument for why C will work.

 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, DMC said:

Disagree.  If every candidate responded to every unwarranted criticism than that's all the campaign would be.  Bernie's finances have been fairly damn open for a very long time, the criticism itself was invalid.

But isn't the point, especially during a campaign, that it doesn't really matter whether any particular criticism is warranted, but rather that what matters is whether that particular criticism, warranted or not, sticks in the minds of the voters?

I mean, the Willie Horton attacks against Dukakis in '88 and the "John McCain has an illegitimate black baby" attack during the 2000 South Carolina primary definitely were unwarranted, but they sure as fuck stuck in the minds of the voters.

And while I agree that the criticism itself is invalid, Clinton and her proxies attacked Sanders in 2016 for only releasing his 2014 return, and he had already been attacked this year for waiting to release his returns. Because of that, I think it's probably rather prudent to cut off a potential line of attack.

Now, you could argue whether that particular line of attack is prudent or efficacious when Democrats are using it against other Democrats. I'm always in favor of more transparency, but it's a fair argument. But I just don't understand your dismissiveness to the political optics of refusing to release his returns when he's actively being attacked for not doing so.