It's a cult. As long as he empowers their worst impulses, they'll support him. They wouldn't care if he were convicted of first degree rape or first degree murder, they'd come up for excuses for why his victim deserved it. 

It might not be the only reason but it’s pretty naive to think it’s not a major factor.

Once again, that's strange that you think so given that he is one of less than a handful of Presidents to actually come out of the presidency as more poor than they entered.
And all the money that is being raised for Trump is legally the RNC's which is specifically for campaigning.

Not to point any fingers but your statements aren't based on anything and seem biased. (I hope the tone isn't negative, I'm trying to have it be a neutral tone)

I just don't get what people see in him.

For months he chanted "Lock her up, lock her up" in regards to Hillary. - And as soon as he becomes a convicted criminal he literally LIES and says he never said it... And starts acting like the victim to garner sympathy.

I am a firm believer in treating others the way you wish to be treated, so this is just going full circle and he is just receiving what he dished out.

Trump is cash poor, which is in stark contrast to his prior claims that he is "filthy rich". - And that was before he took office.

Since taking office he has been using fundraising money to channel into his businesses and support legal costs and we are not small amounts either... He has received some significant wealth since taking office, but it's been used to support his never-ending drama.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/trumps-use-campaign-funds-pay-legal-bills

https://apnews.com/article/trump-campaign-fundraising-rnc-c0e8f1e7b59f70c5237e13a3462e5790

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/us/politics/trump-legal-bills-rnc.html

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4511516-rnc-resolution-to-ban-paying-trumps-legal-bills-is-dead/amp/?nxs-test=amp

You sure about that?

I appreciate you actually using some type of source. 

Yes, he is cash poor (if >$500 million can even be considered cash poor) compared to other business owners.

Aren't politicians allowed to use the campaign funds if the campaign company (RNC for Republicans and DNC for Democrats, etc) allows it?

From entering the presidency to leaving, Trump lost $700 million. From 2021 to 2024 has earned about $20 million on a coffee table book, lost funding from many NYC companies, including the government of NYC, lost bank accounts, lost property value, etc. The only reason he says he is filthy rich is due to his shares in TMTG, which bring his net worth to $6.5 billion , which he can't take any out until September 2024 at the earliest, so he is still cash poor in comparison. And even those shares are depleting in wealth.

The RNC and other Super-PAC's (some were founded by Trump) have raised as of from 2021 to May 2024 around $962.8 million. And at the moment Lara Trump as co-chair of the RNC has said that they will send funds to Save America PAC which will fund Trump's legal fees. Huff Post April 6 dinner for fundraiser called "Trump 47" PAC via the RNC. Yes they will not be small amounts of payments.

In one respect, he succeeded beyond their wildest dreams: Stacking the Supreme Court, which is leading to the wholesale collapse of all of the civil rights rulings made by the Warren Court (plus Roe, which was a 7-2 ruling by the Burger Court, which had been stacked with conservatives). 

Roe and affirmative action are dead. They'll likely set their sights on Obergefell v. Hodges (gay marriage), and perhaps even Lawrence v. Texas (which nullified anti-sodomy laws and overturned a 1980s ruling, Bowers v. Hardwick, that upheld a Georgia statute that criminalized oral and anal sex and targeted gays). Clarence Thomas even suggested that Griswold v. Connecticut (which established a right to privacy for married couples in regards to family planning) might be revisited.

In 1873, the United States Congress passed the Comstock Laws, which criminalized all kinds of behavior as being "immoral," largely because of the lobbying of a postal inspector named Anthony Comstock (this is who the villain of Bioshock Infinite, Zachary Hale Comstock, is based on). The civil rights rulings of the mid-1900s were ones that found the Comstock laws to be unconstitutional and unenforceable. 

One of the worst nightmares Trump could inflict would be to win a second term and pressure Alito and Thomas, the two oldest jurists on the Supreme Court, to resign, then confirm two younger replacements that will be on the bench for decades to come. 

I don't know if you have evangelicals (Christian fundamentalists) in Australia, but they are Trump's primary base of support in the United States. 

Normally I do use a source.
But in this instance I really don't care much about the subject matter to spend the time to do it.
That... And if you are dealing with Trump supporters, they don't care about sources/evidence anyway.

More than likely less than $500 million. As he would have been required to sell off assets.
Which is in stark contrast to his prior claims that he has billions in the bank.

But this is actually the root cause of his fraud cases, where he inflates his wealth and how much money he has to get better bank loans.

Honestly, I am not American so I am not entirely sure what is socially acceptable or not in this aspect.
But for me personally, he could use all that money to buy properties, I don't care either way as it has no effect on me personally.

During his presidency, Trump raked in 1.6~ Billion.
https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-investigations/trump-reported-making-more-than-1-6-billion-while-president/

Seems we are at an impasse?

It's not going to make any difference in the end, it's just dead, wasted, money.

Trumps constant lies and narcissism has made his current bed... And the legal system is performing it's intended function.

Just find it hilarious that for months and months and months, Trump chanted "Lock her up" and now he is the one in the hot seat.

I actually find it interesting that political parties can even influence the supreme court.. And perhaps even slightly concerned.
I personally believe that courts and the legal system should be "stacked" with unbiased individuals... Or at-least equal representation to provide appropriate balance.

We do have evangelicals in Australia, but religion tends to be pushed into the background rather heavily which is a massive benefit.

The Australian public has made a mockery of our leaders whenever they used religion in the past, so it tends to stay out of politics for the most part.
I.E. Our ex-leader Scott Morrison sent "thoughts and prayers" during the bushfires of 2021 and the Australian public ripped him a new one... As a nation we don't like baseless, useless sentiments, we like to have action... And religion tends to be useless.

We have a very Atheist-heavy population, which I believe is a massive strength of ours culturally, as we can enact change that conflicts with religious views relatively easily for the benefit of the nation... And keep it that way.
I.E. No flip-flopping on issues like Same-Sex Marriage, we voted as a nation and made it permanent. - The Church/Evangelicals can't do a thing about it, which I think is great.

https://youtube.com/shorts/ZJorAVgHy7Y?si=KnyBCguNTuubk-Sk

(It's a short, so I can't embed, but wow...)

Journalist: Would you declassify the Sept 11 files?
Trump:Yep!

Journalist: Would you declassify the JFK files?
Trump: Yep! And I already did some of that!

Journalist: And you'd do the Epstein files?
Trump: Well... There's a lot of lies going around! I don't want to ruin anyone's lives. So, not so much the Epstein files!

Federal judges in the United States, at the trial, appellate, and Supreme Court Levels, are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Presidents tend to pick judges that line up with their ideology, and the Senate similarly confirms and denies along those same lines, depending on the composition of the Senate. The Senate Majority Leader, a position that is not defined in the Constitution, has a great deal of control over the process. In February 2016, when Antonin Scalia died and Obama was president, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to hold hearings for a replacement Justice, claiming that it should wait until after the election. In 2020, when Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, McConnell rushed the nomination through in a matter of weeks to ensure it took place before the 2020 election.

At the state level, laws vary. Judges are either appointed by the governor or directly elected by the people depending on the state. 

As far as religion, the Northeast and Western states are largely secular, though California actually claims a higher percentage of religious people than any of the three states that border it, including Arizona, which is more conservative than California. In the South, the Southern Baptist Convention, a sect founded in the 1800s to promote a biblical apologia for enslavement of Blacks and the Jim Crow laws that followed after the Civil War, is heavily influential in the government, and there are other fundamentalist sects as well. Utah is the "Vatican" of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the Mormons), and Mormonism dominates there, and is also influential in the neighboring states of Idaho, Nevada, and Arizona. Despite this, Salt Lake City, the capital of Utah and the home of the headquarters of the LDS church, is considerably more liberal than the state as a whole and is often mocked for this by the Mormons. In the US, "thoughts and prayers" are mocked by secularists, but this mocking is generally answered with anger by Republicans in Congress and state governors and attorneys-general. In the South, it is almost  impossible to run for any kind of public office and be a professed atheist; you'll be relentlessly demonized for it. However, even in the more secular parts of the country, atheists will generally not admit to being atheists. 

The Obergefell decision was decided on a 5-4 basis in the Supreme Court along largely along party lines, held simply that all 50 states must recognize marriage licenses made in other states. At the time, there was a justice, Anthony Kennedy (no relation to the Kennedy family), who was a Reagan appointee and, while fairly conservative as a whole, often functioned as a "swing vote." He supplied the fifth vote alongside votes from justices appointed by Clinton and Obama. He retired during Trump's term and was replaced by Brett Kavanaugh. A possible challenge to the Obergefell ruling may come from Kim Davis, a former Kentucky court clerk who refused to process the same-sex marriages of taxpayers in her jurisdiction in defiance of the Obergefell ruling, and refused to allow other clerks to process these marriages, and went to jail for contempt of court until she agreed to allow her clerks to process the marriage certificates. She was voted out of office shortly afterwards.