Donald J. Trump 2024

[northland10]

I don't think that we should tax all churches, but I wish that the IRS would be more agressive about revoking the tax exempt status of those churches that blatantly engage in partisan politics. Some of these churches are so far over the line, that they have become political organizations, rather than houses of worship.

Has the IRS ever revoked a church's tax exempt status? I remember, in the Obama administration, there was some talk of doing just that. The GOP and other RWNJs went ballistic that the IRS was targeting conservatives. AFAIK, nothing ever came of it.

No argument about hitting up these churches that are blatantly politicized. I know some places had been hit some years ago but I don't know if the IRS has been pushing hard lately. The GOP tries to keep them weak to prevent it.

In the case of the Detroit church, I have a hunch that it was nothing but a rental for them and does not represent their actual views (I have not followed along enough to see if they had their pastors directly involved). My parish would not do something like that because it could easily damage our mission and ministries, but some probably see a wad of cash waved in their direction so decided to just act like a rental.

That said, as we have seen with BooBoo's stuff in church, other churches are all in with that RWNJ stuff.

Because the RW loves revenge more than God's love, I could see them deciding to go after churches with Pride flags and BLM signs as being "political."

[Resume18]

Can we now start taxing churches, please?

Yes please.

I'm sorry. Does my church offend you by feeding the hungry through our food pantry (an ever growing ministry), working to help house migrants, and many other local ministries to help those in need?

Please stop blaming all churches for the actions of some. We don't control them, and some of them only wear a label of Christian in order to look important.

Nope, no offended by whatever "good works" churches claim to be doing. $$$ spent on charity work is, and should be tax exempt. Other income such as salaries etc on the other hand . . . or property taxes, stuff like that, yeah, tax it. I'm two minutes away from the Willow Creek monstrocity. I can't even imagine what that South Barrington property is worth.

I deleted a paragraph about the Catholic church coverup of abuse; I still have extreme anxiety because of what I and others suffered. Only my late parents, my wife, and a therapist know those details.

[MN-Skeptic]

I haven't given it a lot of thought, but for-profit businesses are allowed to deduct ordinary and necessary business expenses. Yes, there are certain expenses not allowed, and large items have to be written off over a number of years (depreciated). But, for the most part, churches and other non-profits which spend most of their income on running their churches and supporting charitable missions would probably not end up owing a lot in taxes. But, like I say, I haven't given this a lot of thought.

Where the problem comes in, that I can see, is that individuals can only deduct on their tax returns donations to non-profit organizations. If the non-profit lose that status, you can't deduct your contribution. Non-profits love to tell you that your deduction is tax deductible and most folks don't think about the fact that they're probably using the standard deduction so there's no benefit to them for making that deduction. But it is a selling point on fund drives.

[Ben-Prime]

I'm sorry. Does my church offend you by feeding the hungry through our food pantry (an ever growing ministry), working to help house migrants, and many other local ministries to help those in need?

Please stop blaming all churches for the actions of some. We don't control them, and some of them only wear a label of Christian in order to look important.

I was going to say myself that there's already supposed to be standards for when a church crosses a line on this, IRS-wise, yes? I would think it'd be more moral and ethnical -- though certainly more difficult, politically -- to just enforce those rather than punish the folks who are doing it right.

I don't think that we should tax all churches, but I wish that the IRS would be more agressive about revoking the tax exempt status of those churches that blatantly engage in partisan politics. Some of these churches are so far over the line, that they have become political organizations, rather than houses of worship.

Has the IRS ever revoked a church's tax exempt status? I remember, in the Obama administration, there was some talk of doing just that. The GOP and other RWNJs went ballistic that the IRS was targeting conservatives. AFAIK, nothing ever came of it.

I think the problem is that unless you devote the resources to do it comprehensively, across the board, regardless of the political affiliation of the churches in question, you really do open yourselves to the risk of political malfeasance. And, let's face it, this Congress ain't gonna give the IRS that level of resources.

[Ben-Prime]

MeidasTouch
@MeidasTouch

BREAKING: While Trump brags about “acing” a dementia test, he forgets the name of Ronny Jackson twice and calls him Ronny Johnson.

By tonight (my time) the spin will be that Trump regularly calls Ron Johnson, Jackson, and Ronny Jackson, Johnson, as an in-joke between the three of them, and we're just stupid libruls if we don't believe that and think it's high-larious.

Apparently, Jon Stewart agrees with me that this will be the case, though I'll withdraw the absurdly short time-frame.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/jon-stewa ... tive-gaffe

“The sad thing is, under MAGA law, [the doctor’s] name is now Ronny Johnson.”

[zekeb]

I haven't given it a lot of thought, but for-profit businesses are allowed to deduct ordinary and necessary business expenses. Yes, there are certain expenses not allowed, and large items have to be written off over a number of years (depreciated). But, for the most part, churches and other non-profits which spend most of their income on running their churches and supporting charitable missions would probably not end up owing a lot in taxes. But, like I say, I haven't given this a lot of thought.

Where the problem comes in, that I can see, is that individuals can only deduct on their tax returns donations to non-profit organizations. If the non-profit lose that status, you can't deduct your contribution. Non-profits love to tell you that your deduction is tax deductible and most folks don't think about the fact that they're probably using the standard deduction so there's no benefit to them for making that deduction. But it is a selling point on fund drives.

How many middle-class people itemize anymore? I don't believe you can deduct charitable donations unless you itemize, yes/no? The only churches that members might donate enough are Mormons and a few others like it where it where it is mandatory that you buy your way into... errrrrrr tithe 10% or more. Now don't get me started on where the Mormon Church is spending its excess billions.

[RVInit]

I honestly am scared the mfer will cheat his way into power and then we will all be screwed.


My passport is only good till 26

I am fearful that voters will do what they have always done when it comes to an incumbent President and perceived economic issues during an election year.

"It's the economy, stupid" has been a well known explanation of how the typical low information voter decides who they will vote for. And the media seem to be fixated on constant talk of inflation, inflation, inflation. And now talking about how godawful electric bills are expected to be all summer because of extreme heat. It would be nice if the majority of voters thought in terms of long term, which party is most responsible for the lack of effective response to climate change, and other issues. But sadly, they are not. If "it's the economy, stupid" rules the thinking like it seems to always do, we are fucked and looking at Trump to be elected again. Every single incumbent since I was old enough to vote became a one term president when we had various economic issues during an election year. Some of them were doomed by other nonsense as well, like Carter, who was fucked when Reagan and his hoodlums made a deal with Iran to keep the hostages until after the election, but he was primarily screwed by inflation and gas prices. I really wish Biden would hammer more on the fact that every country in the world is experiencing inflation in the aftermath of Covid, and, that we have the lowest rate of inflation than any other country, and that has been true during his entire presidency. That needs to be on repeat constantly, not just during the debate, given how these voters use the economy as their number one decision making issue.

[Suranis]

I honestly am scared the mfer will cheat his way into power and then we will all be screwed.


My passport is only good till 26

I am fearful that voters will do what they have always done when it comes to an incumbent President and perceived economic issues during an election year.

"It's the economy, stupid" has been a well known explanation of how the typical low information voter decides who they will vote for. And the media seem to be fixated on constant talk of inflation, inflation, inflation. And now talking about how godawful electric bills are expected to be all summer because of extreme heat. It would be nice if the majority of voters thought in terms of long term, which party is most responsible for the lack of effective response to climate change, and other issues. But sadly, they are not. If "it's the economy, stupid" rules the thinking like it seems to always do, we are fucked and looking at Trump to be elected again. Every single incumbent since I was old enough to vote became a one term president when we had various economic issues during an election year. Some of them were doomed by other nonsense as well, like Carter, who was fucked when Reagan and his hoodlums made a deal with Iran to keep the hostages until after the election, but he was primarily screwed by inflation and gas prices. I really wish Biden would hammer more on the fact that every country in the world is experiencing inflation in the aftermath of Covid, and, that we have the lowest rate of inflation than any other country, and that has been true during his entire presidency. That needs to be on repeat constantly, not just during the debate, given how these voters use the economy as their number one decision making issue.

He can repeat it as much as he wants, the media wont bother reporting it and any mentions on social media will be neutered and won't spread.

That's what I don't get when people start shouting about "the Bully Pulpit" and "HE SHOULD JUST SAY IT!!!" He's probably saying it every frigging day and you're just not hearing it. Especially if you are stuck on social media for your news.

Its just like people here were complaining that Hillary never gave interviews, when she was doing 8 interviews a day.

And just to prove my point I just did a search for "Biden Economy advert" on Duckduckgo, and, ya, he's running adverts on it. He's been releasing them for months.

But if you are stuck on social media you will never see them because you will just get hosepiped with Russian bots and bullshit and even the "left wing" will be just fake accounts poisoning your thinking into blaming your guy for "not doing" things. And getting you angry about ridiculous unimportant topics to waste your energy, and split you apart.

Example here is the NYT talking about an advert from a week ago

https://www.nytimes.com › 2024 › 06 › 13 › us › politics › biden-ad-inflation-trump.html
Biden Addresses Inflation in New Ad - The New York Times

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/13/us/p ... trump.html

Being the NYT it just immediately talks about how "many voters" give marks to Turnip on the economy rather than talking about Biden.

How to avoid this crap? Keep your head out of social media. Its just too controlled and rigged in people with moneys favour. And most voters are not on Social Media, at least not anymore. Its just bots shouting at one another and providing copy for lazy journalists, and making people think certain causes are more righteous and popular than they are...

[Suranis]

In fact, I can see Social media's effect in the sudden talking about "its the economy stupid" because Biden released an ad yesterday that ripped Turnip apart, so I can almost guarantee the "Left wing" fake accounts were shouting the advert didn't matter because its the economy stupid and Biden never talks the economy. Ya it's that blatant.

Here's the advert I allege they are reacting to.

[Dr. Ken]

[Dr. Ken]

[RTH10260]

Acyn@Acyn
Trump: We will ensure the future of crypto will be made in America otherwise other countries are going have it. The other countries are going to have it

11:41 PM · Jun 18, 2024

Samuel Benjamin Bankman-Fried is waiting for his pardon

[p0rtia]

And Mexico will pay for it.

...

Or is that, China?

[RVInit]

And Mexico will pay for it.

...

Or is that, China?

[Frater I*I]

Now, now. As I am certain DJT would explain, the poor are not there to be fed. The poor are there to be eaten.

Soylent Orange is made of people!!! IT"S PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!





I'll see myself out....

[noblepa]

I honestly am scared the mfer will cheat his way into power and then we will all be screwed.


My passport is only good till 26

I am fearful that voters will do what they have always done when it comes to an incumbent President and perceived economic issues during an election year.

"It's the economy, stupid" has been a well known explanation of how the typical low information voter decides who they will vote for. And the media seem to be fixated on constant talk of inflation, inflation, inflation. And now talking about how godawful electric bills are expected to be all summer because of extreme heat. It would be nice if the majority of voters thought in terms of long term, which party is most responsible for the lack of effective response to climate change, and other issues. But sadly, they are not. If "it's the economy, stupid" rules the thinking like it seems to always do, we are fucked and looking at Trump to be elected again. Every single incumbent since I was old enough to vote became a one term president when we had various economic issues during an election year. Some of them were doomed by other nonsense as well, like Carter, who was fucked when Reagan and his hoodlums made a deal with Iran to keep the hostages until after the election, but he was primarily screwed by inflation and gas prices. I really wish Biden would hammer more on the fact that every country in the world is experiencing inflation in the aftermath of Covid, and, that we have the lowest rate of inflation than any other country, and that has been true during his entire presidency. That needs to be on repeat constantly, not just during the debate, given how these voters use the economy as their number one decision making issue.

Not long ago, I heard of a poll that showed that something like 60 percent of voters believe that crime is rampant and increasing exponentially, that inflation is sky-high, as is unemployment and that the economy is generally in the toilet.

In reality, crime almost everywhere is at the lowest level its been in at least 20 years, inflation is a little higher than we would like (about 4 percent), but it is at worst, moderate and is coming down, unemployment is at such a low level that economists call it "full employment", the stock market is setting all-time high records.

[Ben-Prime]

He's going to have Russia and North Korea pay for the dome, right?

[Ben-Prime]

I honestly am scared the mfer will cheat his way into power and then we will all be screwed.


My passport is only good till 26

I am fearful that voters will do what they have always done when it comes to an incumbent President and perceived economic issues during an election year.

"It's the economy, stupid" has been a well known explanation of how the typical low information voter decides who they will vote for. And the media seem to be fixated on constant talk of inflation, inflation, inflation. And now talking about how godawful electric bills are expected to be all summer because of extreme heat. It would be nice if the majority of voters thought in terms of long term, which party is most responsible for the lack of effective response to climate change, and other issues. But sadly, they are not. If "it's the economy, stupid" rules the thinking like it seems to always do, we are fucked and looking at Trump to be elected again. Every single incumbent since I was old enough to vote became a one term president when we had various economic issues during an election year. Some of them were doomed by other nonsense as well, like Carter, who was fucked when Reagan and his hoodlums made a deal with Iran to keep the hostages until after the election, but he was primarily screwed by inflation and gas prices. I really wish Biden would hammer more on the fact that every country in the world is experiencing inflation in the aftermath of Covid, and, that we have the lowest rate of inflation than any other country, and that has been true during his entire presidency. That needs to be on repeat constantly, not just during the debate, given how these voters use the economy as their number one decision making issue.

Not long ago, I heard of a poll that showed that something like 60 percent of voters believe that crime is rampant and increasing exponentially, that inflation is sky-high, as is unemployment and that the economy is generally in the toilet.

In reality, crime almost everywhere is at the lowest level its been in at least 20 years, inflation is a little higher than we would like (about 4 percent), but it is at worst, moderate and is coming down, unemployment is at such a low level that economists call it "full employment", the stock market is setting all-time high records.

A handful of low information voters I know and try to love -- they don't make it easy at times like this, mind you -- have made it all about the economy and transphobia. Four different loved ones who don't know each other much if at all and are not to my knowledge connected on social media (one extended family member, one family member by choice, two current or former work-colleagues that I consider close to my heart) have all tried telling me different variations of the furries-getting-litterboxes-in-school story, pointing to 4 dollars per gallon gas prices in their area, ranting about grocery bills, or arguing that the state is letting kids as young as 5 go on hormone therapy. Not all of them pick the same exact topics, but each of them overlap at least 2 of the 4.

Very non-scientific. Very small sample size. But I can't ignore the pattern in my life since all of those folks live in different parts of Florida, so I don't hold out hope for turning the state back to anything even purple in the near future.

I've hopes of reaching one or two of them in the near future, sitting down in person when I'm home, and trying to convince them, but ... so far, at least 3 of the 4 have also outright told me that stacked up against the arguments above, they don't care about Trump's felonies. Their families' economic well-being or protection from The Trans Threat are more important. The saddest part here for me is that at least one of the women arguing about that has been at least a little queer since her teenage years; she's exclusively dated men for at least the last 10 or 12 years, but was in a looooooooong bi phase for about a decade and change before that.

[pipistrelle]

[Volkonski]

Iron dome?

Trump doesn't know much about metallurgy.

[Foggy]

... or anything else, for that matter.

[Suranis]

He's probably talking in the same terms as Ronnie Rayguns "SDI" and W's "Missile Shield." Selling fear by selling illusions of safety.

[RTH10260]

BUT... But.... but... will his dome also shield from heatwaves? How did domes shield during hurricane Katrina?

[RVInit]

This is an interesting interview. I used a couple of my Audible credits this morning, and one of the books I bought is Apprentice in Wonderland.

[Foggy]

Only 7 more shopping days for the quadfectee to drop out of the first debate.

Then he will swear up and down that he'll be there for the second one, before he drops out of that, too also.

My prediction: He will never set foot on any stage having to do with a debate against Joe Biden. That's my story and I'm stickin' with it.