Octopus Overlords

...and sold out. Made himself $4.5 million in 12 hours for doing nothing, less whatever the company running the laundering scheme skims.

Though the NFTs were widely mocked by both Trump supporters and detractors alike, all 45,000 sold out in around 12 hours, according to OpenSea data. At $99 each, that means $4.45 million has been raised. The collection's creators also receive 10% of every sale on secondary markets like OpenSea. Thus far traders have spent $406,000 (320 ether) buying and selling the NFTs on OpenSea. Who that money goes to and how it's used remains a mystery. 

Yeah, in some ways, these suckers really ARE buying ‘the essence of Trump’.

The laziness
The grift
The lack of shame
The amateurishness
Etc.

From that perspective these are perfect.

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 12:31 pm ...and sold out. Made himself $4.5 million in 12 hours for doing nothing, less whatever the company running the laundering scheme skims.

Though the NFTs were widely mocked by both Trump supporters and detractors alike, all 45,000 sold out in around 12 hours, according to OpenSea data. At $99 each, that means $4.45 million has been raised. 

Is “raised” the correct word, there? It’s not a charity, or even ‘raising’ money for his political campaign.

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 11:25 am They're also selling the prize aspect. Every NFT purchase gets a sweepstakes entry for things like a round of golf with Trump or dinner at Marlago.

The best part is that the person who wins a free meeting with Trump is responsible for paying for their own travel and lodging expenses.

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 12:31 pm ...and sold out. Made himself $4.5 million in 12 hours for doing nothing, less whatever the company running the laundering scheme skims.

Though the NFTs were widely mocked by both Trump supporters and detractors alike, all 45,000 sold out in around 12 hours, according to OpenSea data. At $99 each, that means $4.45 million has been raised. The collection's creators also receive 10% of every sale on secondary markets like OpenSea. Thus far traders have spent $406,000 (320 ether) buying and selling the NFTs on OpenSea. Who that money goes to and how it's used remains a mystery. 

For all we know, half of them were bought out by family members, Pillow Guy and Rudy Giuliani.

I should get into that business.

This pic reminds of elf on the shelf but its grifter on the sifter

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 12:35 pm

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 12:31 pm ...and sold out. Made himself $4.5 million in 12 hours for doing nothing, less whatever the company running the laundering scheme skims.

Though the NFTs were widely mocked by both Trump supporters and detractors alike, all 45,000 sold out in around 12 hours, according to OpenSea data. At $99 each, that means $4.45 million has been raised. 

Is “raised” the correct word, there? It’s not a charity, or even ‘raising’ money for his political campaign.

I could see it all being a money laundering scheme.

With gravy made by anyone made that actually wanted one.

This is certainly interesting:



Hearing some rumblings of discontent about this.

Wake me up when it's WAY below 50 percent. These numbers are still too large for comfort.

hepcat wrote:Wake me up when it's WAY below 50 percent. These numbers are still too large for comfort.

Just remember, Bush was leading the GOP field at this time in 2014.

Those polls are 100%garbage at this point in time, and the reporting of them is essentially lazy reporting.

Until the attacks start flowing, ignore every single poll.

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk

He’s not even hiding it any more:

Of course he would. They half-assed their way into taking over the Capital; it was a proof-of-concept event that paid dividends. Not only did it demonstrate how easy it could be but the aftermath shows our investigative and legal process slows to an almost standstill when trying to deal with it like a traditional/normal event; we're incapable.

If only there was some type of historical precedent we could use as a point of reference here for what's at stake. Eh, better to just let him campaign.

Yet he could still win even if that number persists just as in 2016.

I'm not sure he can if he split independents in 2016 with Clinton and is now "struggling mightily" with them. And you have to think he's going to have lost some support from other demographics.

Let's also not forget that in 2016, Clinton was a generally unpopular candidate up against an unknown. Those tables have been completely flipped.

YellowKing wrote: ↑Mon Mar 27, 2023 6:54 pm I'm not sure he can if he split independents in 2016 with Clinton and is now "struggling mightily" with them. And you have to think he's going to have lost some support from other demographics.

Let's also not forget that in 2016, Clinton was a generally unpopular candidate up against an unknown. Those tables have been completely flipped.

Right he was unknown as a candidate but it was offset a little since he had a national profile. IMO the bigger determinant to look at is that Trump and Clinton were two candidates weighed down with higher unfavorables than favorables. That's probably what we're heading for if it is Biden-Trump again. Trump is going to be worse off but unfortunately the way the EC works Trump will have a good shot. Is it 50/50? Probably not but it'd still be an absolute disaster from a risk weighted point of view.

I agree *any* chance above zero is a terrible proposition, but I haven't seen any sound arguments as to why Trump 2024 would be in a better position to win the presidency than Trump 2016. If there are good arguments why, I'd like to hear them. Not being a smartass; I'm genuinely curious.

The only thing I could think of would be GOP turnout combined with gerrymandering/shady state election officials being more effective in 2024 than they were in 2016, but that's all longshot stuff that would have to depend on multiple puzzle pieces falling into place perfectly.

And it may come down to Kamala Harris determining which electors are valid. If so she should be prepared to flee the country.

YellowKing wrote:I agree *any* chance above zero is a terrible proposition, but I haven't seen any sound arguments as to why Trump 2024 would be in a better position to win the presidency than Trump 2016. If there are good arguments why, I'd like to hear them. Not being a smartass; I'm genuinely curious.

The only thing I could think of would be GOP turnout combined with gerrymandering/shady state election officials being more effective in 2024 than they were in 2016, but that's all longshot stuff that would have to depend on multiple puzzle pieces falling into place perfectly.

I think you are thinking that things in 18 months are the same as right now, more or less. If that’s the case I don’t think Trump stands a chance against Biden.

But… what if we sink into a bad recession within the year. Something like that may change Trump’s chances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Remember that Clinton lost by a narrow margin in key swing states not because of some massive swing to trump nationwide aka Reagan but rather because his electoral strategists focused on what was needed to win. And he nearly did it again in 2020 - had he won Nevada, Wisconsin, Arizona and Georgia he could have won the election with as little as 47-48% of the overall national vote. In 2024 a Republican could do that again.

Just 44,000 votes in Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin separated Biden and Trump from a tie in the Electoral College. And then the house would have re-elected trump.

Jaymann wrote: ↑Mon Mar 27, 2023 8:02 pm And it may come down to Kamala Harris determining which electors are valid. If so she should be prepared to flee the country.

Tangentially, I wonder if Biden is thinking about replacing Harris. She's very unpopular and hasn't grown in her role. Charisma is her dump stat. Biden's VP choice will be even more important in the next election as the actuarial table closes in on him. Those are good reasons to find a new No. 2.

However, Biden values two things very highly: loyalty, and continuity. I doubt that he's even entertaining the idea. But I wish he would.

waitingtoconnect wrote: ↑Mon Mar 27, 2023 9:23 pm Remember that Clinton lost by a narrow margin in key swing states not because of some massive swing to trump nationwide aka Reagan but rather because his electoral strategists focused on what was needed to win. And he nearly did it again in 2020 - had he won Nevada, Wisconsin, Arizona and Georgia he could have won the election with as little as 47-48% of the overall national vote. In 2024 a Republican could do that again.

Just 44,000 votes in Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin separated Biden and Trump from a tie in the Electoral College. And then the house would have re-elected trump.

Wait a minute, the Democrats controlled the House at that point.

I guess I just don't see the point in dwelling on random what ifs. "If he did this, and this, and this happened, he could win." Of course he could. And Biden could get hit by a bus the week before the election. Or Trump could get hit by a bus the week before the election. There are a million things that *could* happen to increase or decrease his chances.

But all we have right now to base forecasts on are current and likely conditions. Anything else is speculative nonsense (IMO).

YellowKing wrote: ↑Mon Mar 27, 2023 7:55 pm I agree *any* chance above zero is a terrible proposition, but I haven't seen any sound arguments as to why Trump 2024 would be in a better position to win the presidency than Trump 2016. If there are good arguments why, I'd like to hear them. Not being a smartass; I'm genuinely curious.

Biden's approval rating is 38%. You have to wonder if incumbency is going to actually be a PROBLEM for Biden if it continues at this level or god forbid sinks lower. Biden is a DEEPLY unpopular President. And it is on track to worsen due to his appointment of Zients as Chief of Staff, It is already moving Biden into waters that make it obvious he is extremely out of touch with many Americans. His administration is in constant crisis. These aren't speculative factors. They are happening right now.

But does that mean better odds than 2016? Hard to say but the states have rolled out many voter suppression bills in the meantime. And we will probably see that continue. In general it means any Republican - even Trump has a good chance of winning. Even though it is almost certain they'll have trouble cracking 47-48% of the population.

Grifman wrote: ↑Mon Mar 27, 2023 6:15 pm

catturd2 has something to say about that...

I guess catturd1 was busy.

I have to wonder what “Trump’s Team” means though. If this was posted by someone employed by the Trump campaign? Legit hilarious. If some rando Trump supporter, then meh.

Also, it’s hard out there bein’ a cat turd. Sure, go ahead, mock away, you elitist keyboard warriors but maybe once try to consider what’s it’s like to walk a mile in a cat turd’s shoes.

It is one of his PACs that has raised about $30M. It is intentionally dumbed down to appeal to the lowest common denominator at issue. In this case I am assuming the incel red pill crowd. The edge lords with a engagement venn diagram that would overlap Trump and Musk.

Kraken wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 2:01 am I guess catturd1 was busy.

catturd1 supports DeSantis.

Or IS DeSantis.

This fucking POS. The pandering and bullshit is unbelievable.



We cannot forget how awful he is.

The cultural and spiritual problem is the people at the NRA who worship guns over human life.

The whole thing. He actually said he would round up "legals" and ship them back to "where they came from."

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Sat Apr 15, 2023 10:00 am The whole thing. He actually said he would round up "legals" and ship them back to "where they came from."

Let's assume the "legals" agreed to such a proposition. The logistics alone would cost $Trillions, leaving no choice but to increase taxes on the remainder MAGA's a thousand fold.

I can't listen to him. It just destroys my brain that people want to hear him speak.

And this purge will be branded as getting ideology OUT of government.

Holman wrote:And this purge will be branded as getting ideology OUT of government.

It’s absurd on its face and could never happen. Of course he is too dumb to know this, so he says dumb shit like this.