Now you have to pick too. Take all or nothing of Forbes as a source. Don't cherry pick.
-
-
Replying to @GregoryMakles @AndrewLazarus4 and
A) Forbes is right: Trump is a successful billionaire (3.1B), who lost hundred of millions because he became president. B) Forbes is wrong. Explain what source is more credible to you and why. C) You estimates it's unknowable, in wich case we shouldn't discuss it in the 1st place
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Didn't Forbes admit even after discounting the John Barron call, they still overestimated him at least 5x that year? Bloomberg has 2.8Bn. But I suspect some of these assets are straw purchases. One reason Trump is so upset about Cohen is his books won't bear serious exam. 1/
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Maybe, but here's another pattern. You started this exchange /w some views you believed from article that didn't survive scrutiny. That shows a (perfectly legit) anti trump bias and you want to believe he'll collapse, probably as you believed he couldn't win the election /1
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GregoryMakles @AndrewLazarus4 and
Me OTOH have no horse in the race and could predict Trump election via unbiased observation. The same kind that makes me sort your (well expressed and educated) views has cognitive bias. May be true. Or may be the opposite.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GregoryMakles @AndrewLazarus4 and
Here's what seems likely from where I stand (no bias): - Real Estate, NY, mafia/mob connection, political corruption? Likely. - Running for prez to the scrutiny /w massive damaging secret for his wealth? Unlikely
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GregoryMakles @AndrewLazarus4 and
Trump has a mixed interest in disclosing his wealth. He needs some to be credible but not too much if he's evading or hiding some business moves. So I believe things can go the other way too. He may have more.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
He doesn’t have any history of underestimating anything of his. That’s implausible.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
How can you know that? It's an unknown unknown. You may not be familiar with it but rich people enter live in world where paying less taxes matters a lot and where corrupting politics need hidden money. Conventional wisdom says someone like Trump has some hidden assets.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
You know, Trump would have lost without Comey. In which case your 2015 prediction would have been close but not quite. Anyway, I’m a high-tech lucky rich. But not in the class where we are hiding assets. To extent it is verifiable, Trump has exaggerated every dollar amount.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Just that one variable mattered? I think there were hundreds of variables that mattered at least that much.
-
-
No, there were many but-fors, some under her control. She would have won if she hadn’t fixed up Huma Abedin and Weiner. I even think she would have won had she not caught pneumonia. But the mistimed Coney letter was one of them.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yup, all of those were pretty solid issues. My early prediction was based on the fact that I identified her has "bad candidate" and Trump as a good one (speaking on skills/persona, not politics).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.