Donation History of Donald Trump (since 1989)

[SamAdams76]

There was some discussion on another thread regarding the fact that Donald Trump should not be trusted as our Republican nominee due to the fact that he donated a substantial amount of money to Democrats over the years.

This is a valid concern, especially as it is becoming more likely that Trump will be the nominee. And as a Donald Trump supporter, it concerns me as well. So I thought I'd put the facts out there and throw this open to discussion.

Trump himself has been asked about this and his responses can be distilled as follows: In his line of work, which in large part entails building and acquiring properties in New York City, which is mostly controlled by Democrats, it was necessary for Trump to donate to both parties, especially to Democrats, in order to get business done. Further, Trump goes on to say that this is why he is self-financing his own campaign, as he does not want to be beholden to campaign contributors as they have been beholden to him over the years. This is something that Trump hopes to change should he get into office.

Many here will probably not buy that and they will state that Donald Trump should not be our nominee because he cannot be trusted, having supported Democrats in the past. Others here will state that the past is the past, that Ronald Reagan himself was once a Democrat and that this did not stop him from being one of the greatest conservative presidents in our history.

So can Trump be trusted as Reagan was?

To use football parlance, I decided to go to the tape. Below is a chart showing Donald Trump's political contributions each year since 1989. Up until 2010, it appears that Trump gave more or less equally to both parties and in some years, clearly gave more to the Democrats. However since 2010, not only has Trump only given to Republicans but his donations have greatly accelerated.

During the 2011-2014 period, Trump donated nearly $500,000 to Republicans while giving zero to Democrats. This appears to be more donations that the total Trump gave during the 1989-2010 period (21 years).

Now granted, that might not sit will with some folks here either as folks like Mitt Romney and John Boehner representee Republicans during that time.

This all said, we must consider the future of the Republican party and conservatives in general. Are we looking to win the hearts and minds of those who once voted for or donated to Democrats? Or we willing to forgive those who may have supported GOPe in the past such as Romney or McCain? Or do we need to turn our backs on them because they are not pure and cannot be trusted? If we take the latter course, the conservatives may be doomed to minority status, I fear.

Speaking for myself as a Trump supporter, I concede that Ted Cruz is the superior conservative in this race. But I'm not convinced that Cruz can win the nomination and then the general. I would love to be proven wrong on that and I would happily support Cruz should he get the nomination. But as of right now, I believe Trump is the best chance we have to keep a GOPe lightweight like Jebbie Bush or Marco Rubio from getting the nomination and then winning decisively next November against the Democrat.

Below is the graph of Trump donations to both Democrats and Republicans since 1989. I'm looking at recent history and giving Trump the benefit of the doubt. But I'm interested in the opinions of others.

[Eddie01]

CRUZ!

[Pikachu_Dad]

Yep. “So I guess we can thank him for helping create Speaker Pelosi and Obamacare.”...

But he is a ‘good negotiator’ so he can make it work. /sarc

[DoughtyOne]

Thanks. Heads exploding as I type...

After the events in Paris on 11/13, I will be adding
this to my posts for the next week. I'm certain our
turn is coming again soon. We stand united against
Islamic extremists.

[RginTN]

So for 4 years Trump gave only to Repubs which makes his claims that he had to give to Dems in previous years to get business done suspect. As a cynic on these newbie Repubs(Trump & Carson) I think they need more time in politics(as Governor or Senator) to prove they really aren't phonies.

[Pikachu_Dad]

Or he could have funded the Republican Party in ‘New York City’ and made it competitive ...

“...New York City, which is mostly controlled by Democrats, it was necessary for ...”

But then, as his good friend Hillary said, ‘What difference would it make?’

[Norm Lenhart]

Its totally practical. Unless one thinks they fall under too big to fail.

I see no point in overhauling it. You would need to fire 90% of the people behind the scenes to avoid sabotage and then you are stuck with the legacy.

Yugo could start building Bugatti/Ferraris and few would by them. Same reason. Brand damaged beyond repair.

Why not take the very same resources and start clean?

[Pikachu_Dad]

A most excellent point.

Especially when a donation or two to the Republican running against Dirty Harry Reid would have resulted in his removal from power...

Instead he did us the dirty and gave to dirty.

[butterdezillion]

Since Trump found out that 2008 was a coup and publicly questioned Obama’s eligibility he has not donated to a democrat.

Trump sees what has happened. He is one of the few who has actually checked out the evidence and learned from it.

I prefer Cruz who is also a fighter, but I do think Trump “gets it”. He knows the country cannot survive the damage of the 2008 coup unless somebody who is aware of that damage bulldozes ahead to reverse what happened.

And I’ve got to say that he has used what he knows about the “conservative” media being threatened during the 2008 coup in order to fashion his war plan for overturning the damage that was done then. I think he specifically confronted Fox immediately to let the Islamist-communist cabal (that threatened Fox and other media entities in 2008 and 2009) know that it would NOT work to do it again so don’t even try. He made it clear from the outset that he does not NEED Fox or any other media entity. He is not owned by donors and he is not owned by the media which he knows is owned by the Islamist-communist cabal.

That’s the kind of move you can make when you have seriously checked into and know what the situation really is. I believe he would do the same with the other things he knows.

The fact that he quit donating to any democrats at the very time when it became clear that 2008 was a lawless coup to install a foreign enemy combatant in our White House suggests that he sees through the media lies and knows what really happened. Thank God!!

I think Obama’s jab at him at the press party shortly after Obama disclosed the Bin Laden raid (to cover up the problems people were recognizing in the fake birth certificate) is coming back to bite Obama in the butt - and to that end I say I want a bulldog on Obama’s tail, an ANGRY bulldog, and I think Trump fits that description inwardly.

[FreeReign]

Trump himself has been asked about this and his responses can be distilled as follows: In his line of work, which in large part entails building and acquiring properties in New York City, which is mostly controlled by Democrats...

NYC had Republican pro development mayors for 20 straight years

[MamaB]

That goes on everywhere for business people who want to do business in a particular area. It happens here in this state.

[sitetest]

It looks like after 2006, he didn’t get from the Party of Satan what he wanted, so he changed sides. Now he’s trying to buy us. I am not for sale.

[Pikachu_Dad]

““Nancy–

You are the greatest!

Good luck–

Donald”

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/08/408343-days-donald-trump-rails-democrats-just-look-sent-nancy-pelosi-2007/

https://mobile.twitter.com/Jimmyspolitics/status/637473342329491457/photo/1

[SamAdams76]

Yes, but the lower levels of city government were all Democrats. It’s kind of like the Reagan presidency. He always had to make deals with Tip O’Neil and the Democrats to get things done.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

Can we trust anyone who believes bribery is they way to make money?

Reminds me of a Rodney Dangerfield scene where he is in an economics class:

Rodney Dangerfield's First Economics class

Dr. Phillip Barbay: That will be quite enough, Mr. Melon! Maybe bribes, kickbacks and Mafia payoffs are how YOU do business! But they are NOT part of the legitimate business world! And they are certainly not part of anything I am doing in this class. Do I make myself clear, Mr. Melon!... now, not withstanding Mr. Mellon's input. The next question for us is where to build our factory?

Thornton Melon (Rodney Dangerfield): how 'bout fantasyland?

[manc]

same here, Cruz first, but would happily vote for Trump. Refreshing to have two decent candidates.

[mkjessup]

This is a very instructive and revealing post Sam, and it is appreciated. Naturally, none of us like the idea that Trump has made contributions to 'RATS in the past, however it cannot be emphasized strongly enough that up until he entered this race in June, he was NOT A POLITICIAN, he was a BUSINESSMAN.

And as Trump himself has said, you have to contribute to both parties if you expect to get anyone to return your phone calls or even give minimum consideration to your concerns, and unfortunately that is just the way the game is played (especially in New York, a true 'RAT stronghold).

Our esteemed Founder himself has said that our choice this year comes down to two candidates, Cruz or Trump and all the others are "amnesty pimps" and he's right.

While it is easy for some of us to engage in the ritual of 'who is ideologically more pure', that isn't going to change the views and positions of any candidate, and the Trump bashers (AND the Cruz bashers, we've got some of them too) do nothing to truly advance the cause of conservatism because all they're doing is providing rhetorical ammo for the 'RATS should either of those two patriots become our nominee.

I have a finer appreciation for the words said by former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, "you go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you wish you had", and that applies to war AND to political campaigns.

The number one issue now is not who contributed what to whom, but WHO is going to be best on national security, and Trump AND Cruz have the franchise on that issue.

[erlayman]

Trump uses the excuse quite a lot that “everyone does it” (being a Democrat in NYC) or that exaggerating one income is what businessmen/politicians do and is necessary for the public to like him and not be embarrassed with a measly 4 billion etc. Electing a no-nonsense businessman does sound like a good idea until you think how seat of the pants pragmatism might not be the best quality in a president.

[Jane Long]

You both make excellent points.

The thing is, we have to remain GOP, in order to win over RINO lovers like my aunt and uncle (in their late 70’s) who blame 0blama for EVERYTHING, and Midge/Speaker for NOTHING!!!

If Trump/Cruz are the winning ticket, folks like them won’t know what has hit....lol!! The housecleaning in DC will be G-L-O-R-I-O-U-S.

[Parmy]

Trump’s explanation of why he gives to both Democrats and Republicans is that he is in real estate and to get things done he has to bribe officeholders—and he has no problems with doing so. Can we trust anyone who believes bribery is they way to make money?

What about all the Congressional lying 'Bi===ths' who take lobbyist money all of the time. They get your vote telling you they are with you and will stand up for what you want and then in D.C. they vote the way the lobbyist money tells them to.

As Hillary says, "What difference does that make?"

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

Funny about that huh?