The “people don’t care” election
Donald Trump gave an interview yesterday:
In an exclusive sit down with ABC News’ David Muir, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said that people don’t care about whether he should release his taxes, while Gov. Mike Pence argued that the calls to release them are a “distraction” from Hillary Clinton.
“I think people don’t care,” Trump said Monday afternoon in Ohio of his tax returns, which he has not released. “I don’t think anybody cares, except some members of the press.”
Do they care? Is he right or wrong?
Well, on the “yes, they do” side, plenty of people seem to care and are suspicious of Trump’s not releasing the information:
A Monmouth University poll released at the end of August showed that 31 percent of voters think it’s very important that a candidate release his or her taxes, while 36 percent think it’s not important. Fifty-two percent of voters polled said Trump is withholding his tax returns because there’s something he doesn’t want the public to know. Twenty-four percent think Trump is keeping his tax returns private because his taxes under audit.
If Trump doesn’t release his tax returns, he’ll be the first presumptive major party nominee since 1976 not to do so.
But in the end I believe Trump is correct and the answer is “no, they really don’t care, at least not in terms of how people will vote.” So far I haven’t found the detailed stats from that Momnouth poll, but I’d wager that very few people would say they care enough to change their votes. For example, I can’t imagine that there’s a Trump supporter around who will change his/her mind and won’t vote for him on the basis of his failure to release his tax returns. Nor is there a Hillary supporter who will switch to Trump if he does release them.
In an election like this one (although there never has been another election in this country like this one), voters for the most part are choosing candidates based very much on the lesser of two evils principle. That means that the evils of the other candidate are considered so great that there is almost nothing a person’s own candidate can do to sway them. If Hillary Clinton is defined as practically the devil incarnate, how can Trump’s failure to release his tax returns (even if one is suspicious about his motives) matter? And if Donald Trump is defined as practically the devil incarnate, what could Hillary ever do to get her voters to abandon her? I don’t see anything on either side that will change this.
Of course, in this election there are still a lot of people who say they are undecided. I’m not sure whether they really are undecided; my guess is that they are actually leaners. Do they care enough about Trump’s failure to release his tax returns for it to matter, even to them? I doubt it, and that’s because there are so many other, larger issues to think about—including other issues involving corruption and character in both candidates—that something such as the absence of tax returns, which might loom large in another election, starts seeming like relatively small potatoes.
Bill Clinton was the first not to release his medical records, even though a lot of people cared.
Sauce. Goose. Gander. (I write that often enough that I might just abbreviate it to S/G/G)
I think you have the right of it neo.
Nothing Clinton or Trump could do would change minds.
Only external events, either new or revealed have the leverage to sway votes.
With a complex and length tax return like Trump’s the media couldn’t begin to understand it. It would pick out a few items – distort the hell out of them – and beat Trump over the head with the returns for a week.
I don’t care.
But I do care about Hillary taking bribes from foreign countries in exchange for official acts.
I don’t think people care about tax returns. After all, the IRS would catch any shady dealings, right?
I guess they don’t care about medical records either; but, they should. I read one opinion that remarked that truck drivers have to take a physical exam. I am not sure that is completely accurate–drug test yes. But, I do know that Airline Captains must take a physical exam every six months, and retirement is mandatory at 65 (with restrictions after sixty). Seventy year old presidential candidates? Meh!
People will largely not care because they know one thing- the IRS isn’t shy about prosecuting tax cheats, and that is the thing people would care about- a tax cheat.
My guess is this- if there really is something damaging about Trump’s tax returns, it will get released by somebody at the IRS. If there isn’t, you won’t get any leaks at all. I think it is unlikely there is any fraud in his tax returns to be found- someone that wealthy has no incentive to lie and cheat on tax returns, or even to try modestly shady tax minimization techniques. Add to that his celebrity, and being involved in such things becomes even less likely.
Yancey.
Correct that the politicized IRS would be all over a Trump problem. Publicly. So there’s nothing there.
I was waiting in an exam room for my physician to show up and I heard him explaining to a patient in the next room, who was a truck driver, that his A1C–diabetic measurement–was too high for him to continue to have a trucker’s license.
Yancey Ward; Richard Aubrey:
I’ve never heard anyone speculating that there is fraud in Trump’s tax returns, or anything that would alarm the IRS.
The speculation is usually that his worth is nothing like what he has alleged, and that’s why he doesn’t release them. I believe that to be the most likely explanation. He has always been very very touchy about the size of his worth (almost as touchy as about the size of his hands or some of his other body parts). His worth seems to be mainly based on his evaluation of his brand. I’ve written posts about this; don’t have time to find them right now.
If Trum’s tax records show how much he donated to the Clintons and how many favors Clintons gave to his corporatins, that might sink him. So it would be better to release it after the elections.
Given what Trum came up with personally for Cruz’s family, wife, and father, Trum like all people of the lying deal, often believe everybody else will act like him, if he gives them an opening.
Neo,
They aren’t going to care about that, too. In any case, you wouldn’t even be able to determine his net worth from the tax returns, so I doubt that is even why he won’t release them. The most interesting data would be the net income for those years, and what assets he sold in each of those years. As long as he hasn’t been charged with tax evasion, no one is really going to care one way or another. And he had been charged with tax evasion, you would already know about it.
Yancey Ward: “I think it is unlikely there is any fraud in his tax returns to be found- someone that wealthy has no incentive to lie and cheat on tax returns, or even to try modestly shady tax minimization techniques. Add to that his celebrity, and being involved in such things becomes even less likely.”
Trump’s return is likely 100+ pages long. It is prepared by a bunch of skilled tax preparers. They are undoubtedly paid to minimize Trump’s taxes. They probably push the line on every deduction and credit. Trump is audited for two probable reasons.
1. Because of the aggressive approach of his preparers, the IRS can usually find that he owes more money. (But not as much as he would owe if the preparers were less aggressive.) Both parties end up happy.
2. It would be interesting to see when his audits began. Trump began criticizing Obama about 2012. Could it be that the IRS was directed to go after him around that time? Oh wait, Obama would never do anything like that, would he? 🙂
I think the tax return thing is highly overrated. The social justice warriors just want to shame anyone who doesn’t pay their “fair share” of taxes (whatever that is) and doesn’t give lots of money to charities.
The Clintons earned $10.8 million and paid 34% in Federal taxes. (Is that a fair share? Who decides?) They gave $1 million, 42 thousand to charity, of which $1 million went to the Clinton Family Foundation. So by giving $1 million to their foundation they saved $340, 000 in taxes and the foundation (their personal little pot of tax free money) gained $1 million. Who decides if that was a virtuous or a self serving thing to do?
I don’t care! As someone said, if they did something wrong on their taxes it is the IRS’s job to police that. As long as the IRS is satisfied, I am too.
I am embarrassed to be in agreement with Trump, except about the odiousness of Hillary, but the release of his book-length tax return is an open invitation to a fishing expedition. The dumber half of the country’s people might be led down the garden path again, but they will be, anyway, with or without the tax returns. The disclosure of sensitive but honest information is much more damaging to a business man, no matter how good or bad he is at business.
I do wonder, still, about Bill Clinton’s secret health history. What might he be hiding? Hillary’s health history? Augghh!
We have all seen how the IRS is being run. For those who have not been paying attention; the current controversy in the House of Representatives is between whether to impeach the head of the IRS or to simply censor him.
If there was anything in those returns that would discredit Trump, the IRS would have leaked it and we would have heard about it by now – in spades.
It seems pretty clear to me that 1) it is in the best interest of the Democrats to continue to harp on this issue even though they know that there is no “there”; “there”, and 2) Trump knows how the media will cherry-pick difficult-to-understand reporting requirements in his returns, mis-report them in the most damning way possible and thus harm his campaign in ways worse than the damage caused by his withholding the information.
Therefore, by this logic I can conclude that the information that I am missing by not reading the mis-information published by the media is not relevant. Please point out any flaw in my logic.
There are always those voters on the margins, and something like this could be that proverbial “last straw” on the camel’s back.
Just because we cannot separate the straws doesn’t mean it doesn’t have an impact.
trump’s obviously made the calculation that it would do more political harm than good to release his tax returns.
trump, like clinton, values opacity over transparency and clarity.
I’ve never looked at anyone’s tax return before, except for some curiosity about Bernie Sanders. But, Trump’s obstinance in not releasing them adds to my mistrust of him.
@nb – rather twisted and too convenient logic.
Have a little feeling that if it was clinton and not trump, you’d be right there harping on this issue.
Have a little feeling that if it was clinton and not trump, you’d be right there harping on this issue.
If I assume that you mean everything is the same, but it is Clinton withholding her tax return, let us apply the logic.
1) The IRS would be acting like the FBI has acted. If they are not leaking info on Clinton’s return, it is because it is damning. At any rate, they would tend to be be hiding, not leaking. Since the media could be counted on to minimize any negatives in her return, her hiding it would magnify the potential harm one could expect from its disclosure.
2) I note that Big Maq is avoiding challenging my logic and going ad hominem on me.
In support of my original logic, Trump said today that he would instantly disclose his return if Hillary would disclose her 30,000 deleted emails (Megan Kelly show on Fox).
Have a little feeling that if it was clinton and not trump, you’d be right there harping on this issue.
If I assume that you mean everything is the same, but it is Clinton withholding her tax return, let us apply the logic.
The IRS would be acting like the FBI has acted. If they are not leaking info on Clinton’s return, it is because it is damning. At any rate, they would tend to be be hiding, not leaking. Since the media could be counted on to minimize any negatives in her return, her hiding it would magnify the potential harm one could expect from its disclosure.
In support of my original logic, Trump said today that he would instantly disclose his return if Hillary would disclose her 30,000 deleted emails (Megan Kelly show on Fox).
Michael Adams; J.J.:
Nothing book-length is required.
For example, in 2012 Romney released summaries of 20 years of tax returns. Do you think Romney’s tax returns are simple? They’re not, but it is possible to release summaries, and there certainly is precedent for it. In addition, Romney released his full tax returns for 2010 and 2011 (2010 was over 200 pages long).
And last February, both Rubio and Cruz released summaries of their most recent tax filings.
There is no reason Trump can’t release summaries, or even the whole thing if he wanted to. We don’t even know if he’s actually being audited (see this). But let’s assume he’s telling the truth about that. There’s no objective reason he can’t release tax summaries for last year or any other year:
Hey, Trump doesn’t have to release a single thing if he doesn’t want to (although the irony of his not releasing his documents isn’t lost on those who remember how big he was on birther arguments). It is his right to not release his tax documents. But don’t pretend there’s any reason for it other than (a) he doesn’t want to (b) he doesn’t think he needs to in order to win the election; and (c) there’s a good possibility he wants to hide something, most likely that his holdings aren’t as huge as he’s held them out to be.
It’s a race to the bottom. When you have two candidates as bad as this, all sorts of things are going to get overlooked.
notherbob2 Says:
If there was anything in those returns that would discredit Trump, the IRS would have leaked it and we would have heard about it by now — in spades.
I’m going to quibble with you here. We still have two more months where anything could still be leaked on Trump or Hillary.
Supposedly Assange may have something more on Hillary.
On this question I agree with Donald Trump. He said that Mitt Romney should release his tax returns, and Trump was right about that.
Trump also said, in one of the debates if I recall correctly, that he would release his tax returns. He should keep his promise.
What would we learn from them? Here’s some moderately informed speculation: Trump has not been paying what many woudl consider his fair share of taxes; in fact in some recent years he has paid no federal income taxes at all. Whatever your opinions on that, you should recognize that some voters would not consider that fair. A coal miner, for instance, who found out that Trump paid less in taxes in some years than the mine did, would not be happy with that fact.
Trump contributes nothing, or almost nothing, to charities.
He is not nearly as wealthy as he has claimed. It is true that the tax returns will not give us direct information on that question, but a set of them would give enough data so that experts could make informed estimates.
Frankly I am less interested in seeing his federal tax returns than his medical records, and the records of his companies that show what relationship he has, if any, with Putin’s regime.
Is he, as one protester crudely put it, “Putin’s bitch”?
(Fun fact: In Norway, all of the citizens’ tax returns are available to everyone, on line. I’m not advocating that; we aren’t Norway. But, having grown up in a small town, I know what it is like to live in a community where anyone who wants to can know a lot about you — and I know that that isn’t all bad.)
Neo: ” and (c) there’s a good possibility he wants to hide something, most likely that his holdings aren’t as huge as he’s held them out to be.”
I doubt seriously that anyone could estimate Trump’s net worth based on his tax return. I know my net worth could not be derived from my tax return. His income tells us little about the value of his holdings, which vary and can only be estimated until they are actually marketed. One of his biggest assets is his brand. The value of that is variable and always only an estimate. I’m pretty sure he overestimates the value of his brand. The real estate values can be derived to some extent by doing comparables, but that is a job for a real estate appraiser not a tax attorney. Income from real estate is also variable as occupancy rates vary from season to season and year to year. Also depreciation figures in and that varies with time. It doesn’t tell you much about the value of the underlying real estate.
Yes, he brags about his wealth. The Clintons brag about all the good works of their foundation. Both candidates are bragging about their accomplishments. So what else is new?
There is another set of records we need to see: Melania Trump’s immigration records, for reasons I explained yesterday.
Financial statements (multi-year balance sheets, income statements and cash flow) would be more informative than tax returns. But I am an accountant so,I look at those statements on a regular basis.
But, a good report on the health of the candidates ( president and VP) would be appreciated since that would indicate whether that person would be able to complete a four year term.
To get” key man” insurance for a company, you have to go through health exams. So, for certain positions in government, why don’t we know about the health of our key people?
A general observation: If Trump didn’t want to relase this information, he shouldn’t have run for president.
Every game has its rules, formal and informal; you shoudln’t join a competition unless you are willing to play by the rules of tha competition — and these days that includes releasing tax returns if you run for president.
J.J.:
Well, one big difference I can think of is that the Clintons released their tax returns.
I am sure that we would not learn everything about Trump’s holdings if he released his. I am sure, however, that we would learn more than we know now.
I would also bet money that there is something he is hiding.
Gee, I dunno. What did Harry Reid say?
neo.
While Lois Lerner is officially retired, her clones continue to draw paychecks.
If Trump is hiding something,it’s so obscure that even the IRS can’t find it. Or, as has been said, we’d know all about it.
At the very least, it would be vomited out by some agency along with a couple of hundred thousand others’ in one more oopsie.
Kind of interesting that Assange, who thought outing Afghans who worked for us was a good idea (may he rot) can release documents faster than the US government can respond to court orders.
Banana republic ain’t in it.
@Jim M – great points.
We forget, with trump so mutable, that he made an issue out of Romney not releasing his taxes, and that trump himself made a “promise” to do so himself (we now see the worth of his promises).
And, formal and informal rules are part of the conditions of running for POTUS. On one thing trump’s been consistent on, only when it is convenient for trump are the rules okay, otherwise they are rigged and unfair.
There is good reason to believe your many points about his financials (bringing into question his wealth, his miserly charitable contributions, and his low low effective tax rate). That said, a tax return has its limitations on the detail to make any firm conclusions. In any case, that he now resists releasing them is a calculation on the political damage he’d sustain vs any gain from transparency (to Neo’s point, will it gain trump anything, or will it cost trump anything more, if people already have it baked into their assessment).
Not so sure about the Putin connection. But, given the surreality that has played out before us, it wouldn’t be a surprise.
@nb – not going ad hominem, just saying it looks like you have a conclusion that you are backing into with your logic.
Even assuming that logic holds, one has to wonder about the sincerity of most anyone who, despite trump’s mutability and lying nature, do not want to see more objective information about him, even with its limitations (every bit of objective info has its limitations, btw), especially when releasing that info has been established practice.
Makes no sense.
It is “convenient” logic. That kind of logic changes based on who we are talking about. If the shoe was on the other foot, that logic would surely fly out the window.
However, it fits with the logic of supporting trump and not recognizing the issues with him, that there is no step too far in opposing clinton.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PibDMGxiyJw
/jk /s
Corporations over a certain size ($100M revenue) are routinely audited every year by the IRS. Trump’s audit excuse is just that an excuse. My guess is that one could easily deduce that his assets and future revenues don’t support his claim of $10B net worth. But as Neo says “no one seems to care”. I’m now a Johnson/Weld man, who as the Richmond News calls honest and “with an apparently normal ego”. Trump is filling Obama’s shoes as someone who has no business being president but can be viewed by different people as supporting their needs. Obama was the “magic negro” and it seems Trump is the “magic tycoon”.
But Trump as President will be a total disaster based on his business record alone. He has never worked for anyone else (except his father) in his life. He’s appointed his family members as his executives and unqualified yes men as staff. How would he function subject to the many legal, precedential and customary constraints of the office of President. Rather than serving himself alone he now must be a servant to the people.
“If there was anything in those returns that would discredit Trump, the IRS would have leaked it and we would have heard about it by now — in spades. “ – nb
About your logic… You assume too much, hence your “logic” breaks down.
The trouble with conspiracy theories is that innuendo is assumed as fact. Modelling Jerry Fletcher …
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snqFHjpDpes
Now, if you have some kind of proof that the IRS leaks tax data on a regular basis in support of their (presumably) favored candidate, then provide the links from credible sources. I’d like to be on the same page, if true.
“To get” key man” insurance for a company, you have to go through health exams. So, for certain positions in government, why don’t we know about the health of our key people?” – Liz
Rather interesting point.
On the other hand, do we want to make public any specific vulnerabilities (e.g. severely allergic to bee stings) that could be used by enemies.
Still, agree, and would like to see something a little more substantive from an “independent” medical professional. Is that even possible to have? IDK.
WW3 WARNING Planet closer to catastrophic World War III than at any time for SIXTY years, experts warn… and it doesn’t look good for Britain or America if it does kick off
Several flashpoints could erupt into a global conflict involving the US, China and Russia, it is claimed
on the “yes, they do” side, plenty of people seem to care and are suspicious of Trump’s not releasing the information
Take a second to imagine the key differences if a tax return done by a lifetime politician vs a tax return of a business man which includes his holdings and would expose his business tax strategy…
remember, like the back o da bus days, it was not the bus driver that made the rule, it was the dems… the bus company was caught between a rock and a hard place.
same with taxes… its not the person who is following the rules that is key, its the people making the rules. the fact that so many people would get upset at richer candidates who refuse to break the rules to lose money for a political statement no one would care they make is telling… ie. if you live in crapland you have to deal with crap people to live… and half the missives agianst him is that he lives in the nyc council/soviet world…
in fac,t right now, daily news the council is refusing to act on laws in which a majority want the law!!!
this is one reason we dont get anyone but career poliiticans, beacuse their game prevents decent people who are not like them from running and we help
just like we helped the left cause the real estate collapse by not siding with the banks and protecting them from the damned if you do damned if you dont policyh… we let them hang and they did what they could, and we all ended up hanging together financially
wake up to the f*cking games people
your so sucked in to their stating the rules and extra bs and accepting that as sounding good, that your playing for your own opposition!!!
you have two choices…
grow up and make one and stop the bs..
watching idiots crow about tons of things that dont matter is making wonder if they are nucking futs!!!
Tax planning is the analysis of a financial situation or plan from a tax perspective. The purpose of tax planning is to ensure tax efficiency, with the elements of the financial plan working together in the most tax-efficient manner possible. Tax planning is an important part of a financial plan, as reducing tax liability and maximizing eligibility to contribute to retirement plans are both crucial for success
the ONLY reason to call for this is to gin up the communists to hate him for having assets and for following the laws they helped make but the public ignores..
same thing with hiring people over seas, the idea of getting mad at trump is the same old get mad at the bus driver for putting blacks at the back and not going to jail for not doing it!!! easy if your not the person going to jail for people who obviously dont give a rats arse about you!!!!
the whole point is to avoid the idea that the person running for the left helped construct the tax code, and the person running, is running to change the tax code from that crap…
so which do you want?
because right now, the not left is working hard to elect the left and is acting out in a way that would negate their fear of an unkown in favor of fear of the known.
the devil you know is better i guess..
Big Maq says: “Now, if you have some kind of proof that the IRS leaks tax data on a regular basis in support of their (presumably) favored candidate, then provide the links from credible sources. I’d like to be on the same page, if true.”
“Proof?”…”on a regular basis?” “provide links?” “credible sources?” “true?”
One can only assume that setting this high bar is an attempt at sarcasm or humor, although neither is indicated (s/ or humor/)
In these times truth and veracity are exceedingly hard to come by.
Emails [http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2601060/] show Hillary Clinton’s inner circle knew what the Democratic chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was planning to ask Clinton at the first congressional hearing about Benghazi, raising questions about whether the former secretary of state manipulated the hearing to her advantage…“We wired it…”
…The new email is significant because Clinton repeatedly pointed to previous congressional inquiries into Benghazi – including the foreign relations committee hearing – in her attempts to delegitimize the House Select Committee on Benghazi’s findings earlier this year…
The email was first reported by Fox News.”
“Proof?”…”on a regular basis?” “provide links?” “credible sources?” “true?”
As you noted, Americans are suspicious of authoritarian rulers, because of our history.
Another factor, generally overlooked by Progressives, is that no matter how benevolent a despot may be, he (or she) isn’t immortal. You might be lucky enough to have a Washington or Lincoln in charge… but there’s always a next guy, and he might be Stalin or Pol Pot.
I guess women will have to work harder to raise children, pay rent, AND support the unemployed men with higher taxes (which i guess is better than what?)…
i want to thank all those affirmative action women for volunteering to not only do all the work at home, but all the work to pay all the taxes so us men can play nintendo… cause having a job is liberating… heh…
Worse Than the Depression: 1 in 6 Working Age Males Has No Job Under Obama
The numbers are in and after seven years of Obamanomics the economic climate in America is “worse than the depression.”
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/worse-depression-1-6-working-age-males-no-job-obama/
I’m really disappointed that people on this list are echoing Tim Keane, who recently said (not verbatim) “I bet Trump uses every tax dodge and loophole in the book.” Of course he does. Why shouldn’t he? Are you joining the left now, “Oh, he doesn’t pay his fair share of taxes! The horror, the horror!” Congress put all those loopholes in the Internal Revenue Code. You don’t like them? Get Congress to take them out!
You’re so hot-to-trot about tax dodges? How about this:
http://www.dailywire.com/news/8561/7-things-you-need-know-about-clinton-foundation-aaron-bandler
And stop whining about Trump’s tax returns! You want to know his financial situation? Read his damn financials on the FEC website! If you’re too lazy or unskilled to do that, read the Forbes or one of the other analyses of them. Sheesh!
Richard Saunders:
Well, I certainly didn’t mention, and don’t care about, his tax dodges, as long as they’re legal ones. I expect everyone to use every ploy he or she can to reduce the amount of taxes paid.
And although I haven’t gone back to review what every single person wrote, what I see in the comments is something very very different from what you are describing. That is, the people mentioning whether Trump paid a fair share of taxes or enough taxes were not saying that they themselves cared, but were indicating that Trump might not have wanted to reveal his tax statements because of the attitude of the general public or liberals towards what some people might see as tax-dodging tactics. It seems to me you are misrepresenting what most of the commenters are saying here.
And I’ve read plenty about the amount of money Trump does or does not have. Nobody seems to really know. There was even a trial on the subject, where Trump sued someone who said Trump wasn’t as rich as Trump alleged he was (see this rather lengthy post I wrote on the subject back in February; Trump lost the case and was basically humiliated by the way it went down). Most of what I’ve read on the subject of Trump’s holdings are pieces about how he doesn’t have nearly as much money as he says he does, but Trump disputes the allegations in those pieces (as I said, he once sued a writer who said as much, and Trump lost). Tax returns might shed some objective light on the subject.
Pingback:Maggie's Farm
@nb – You cannot expect the rest of us to take your statements like this at face value.
Instead of complaining about too high a bar it is to provide something representing my idea of proof of what you say, why don’t you get on with it and provide anything from a credible source that supports your assertion that the IRS leaks tax returns in the manner you say.
You haven’t even provided a poorly articulated reference written by some dodgy conspiracy website.
One suspects you are merely speculating, based solely on your own view and suspicions of the world.