I can understand it from a business standpoint. I don’t agree with the logic of it because it invariably leads to longer term issues (such as having it become a campaign issue later or helping to create a monster), but I do see the point of it short term from a financial standpoint.
With Carson though, I cannot for the life of me understand the upside for any association that doesn’t involve the word ‘pander’.
If he’s going for the ‘unity’ thing it makes no sense as Sharp is as polarizing a figure that has ever trod earth.
If he’s going for a black vote thing, he’s black and does not need token black people to sell him to the black population. Which would be wrong regardless of color.
He sure isn’t going to make conservatives or even people on the right side of moderate warm and fuzzy and people on the left side of it and lower hate him regardless as he is the thing they hate. A successful minority off the plantation.
Sharpton immediately brings the specter of violence, BLM/Occupy and reparation shakedown cons to any campaign. The only possible market that caters to is populated by Dindu “Nuffin” Gibdsmedat, who can’t vote anyway due to felony convictions.
Which doesn’t leave a lot of options for a rational explanation.
If you think about it, your thoughts on the overall merits actually align with Conservatism. It your business enterprise needs an influx of cash and all things being legal, it's wise to take measures to remain solvent.
Trump's interests, the interests of his employees, the interest of his suppliers and affiliated companies, the interests of the community, and the interests of all taxing agencies are being looked out for by his tenacity.
Is it reasoned to wish Sharpton were not involved? We agree there, no.
Overall, I think people would understand him being involved with Sharpton. You and I can make sense of it. I think the public could too.
If he got challenged on it, he could simply say, "Look, it was at a time when my casino needed more hard currency to remain solvent. What I asked Sharpton to do was legel. My options were to possibly have to shut down my hotel casino or remain solvent. I think I made the right choice. I'm sure my employees agreed. I'm sure the community did." I think most folks would see his point.
As for Carson, you're right on target there too > IMO.
It's unseemly for a political affiliation between the two. Beyond that, it demonstrates a tone deafness to the likes of Sharpton and all the dynamics surrounding him.
If you're going to become affiliated with a creature like Sharpton, I think Jessie Jackson would be the more respectable of the two, and probably has more political clout.
Sharpton is a disgusting little guy. Well, they obviously both are. I think you understand my point of view on it.