[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[Milouse]

when i heard Trump would run i had the immediate reaction
everyone has, thinking he would be an evil lunatic who would throw the world into conflict.

Which is the exact point where you should stop considering him as an option, period.

i'd rather take a chance with that seeing he's been a successful businessman

o_O
So to rip off people is an economic model for a country to you. Okay...

And when Trump says that HRC plans to make 600 millions immigrants enter the country in one week... you know... oh, never mind.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

Comey's letter is extremely misleading (these new emails were neither sent by nor to Hillary), not to mention unethical (it violates long-standing DOJ policies against taking actions that might influence an election).

Whilst I see your point (bolded), if the FBI had deliberately delayed investigation into something pertinent to the case - with the possibility Clinton is implicated, even if they weren't her emails - would that not also arguably be intefering with the election?

She supposedly has a dude walking around by her side with a needle in case he has another fit

Source please - for the guy with the needle, and if by fits you mean seizures, that too.

and recently collapsed during the 9/11 memorial.

Absolutely, and a couple of days ago had nasty coughing fits on stage. The explanation given for this was walking pneumonia. I can't prove that's true, but having coughing fits, at the memorial, and recovering the week after is at least consistent with it.

Someone that had a serious neurological issue like that should start by questioning herself if she would be able to handle the stress of a job like that in the first place...

I disagree, if the issues are recoverable - and concussion/blood clots are certainly not irrecoverable conditions.

If there's any credible evidence that she hasn't recovered from these, or something worse has developed from them, then I'd see your point, until then I'm not convinced.

Imagine if she has fits or has to lay down during important summits.

Pretty embarrassing, probably. I'd imagine it'd be pretty embarrassing if President Trump projectile vomited over the G7, too. That's just my imagination, though.....

 

[Johnnypenso]

Trump rushed off the stage at a rally...possible assassination attempt is the rumour. Just a rumour at this point, no verification. Ignore the hyperbole in the title of the video:

 

[Northstar]

Which is the exact point where you should stop considering him as an option, period.

The problem is that every person that actually wants to be president fits that category.

I'll let Douglas Adams elaborate.

To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”

 

[Sanji Himura]

Source please - for the guy with the needle, and if by fits you mean seizures, that too.



Absolutely, and a couple of days ago had nasty coughing fits on stage. The explanation given for this was walking pneumonia. I can't prove that's true, but having coughing fits, at the memorial, and recovering the week after is at least consistent with it.



I disagree, if the issues are recoverable - and concussion/blood clots are certainly not irrecoverable conditions.

If there's any credible evidence that she hasn't recovered from these, or something worse has developed from them, then I'd see your point, until then I'm not convinced.

This whole issue about Hillary's health is certainly a very valid reason to not go and vote for her. I myself have sourced the concern many times in this thread, so what is to stop the average American voter from doing the research and drawing their own conclusions. The fact of the matter is that she did herself no favors by burying the story with the press without offering any evidence of her improvement, if she made any progress at all.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Trump's "policies," on the other hand, don't get any deeper than "We are going to have so much _____, tremendous _____, believe me."

This is such a lie, it should be against the AUP.

Just because you don't know anything about Trump's policies, does not mean they don't exist.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Just because you don't know anything about Trump's policies, does not mean they don't exist.

Just because Trump has policies, that doesn't mean that people know what they are. Given the his policy on cyber security is that his ten year old son has a laptop, one could argue that Trump doesn't know what his policies are, either.

 

[Mike Rotch]

Trump rushed off the stage at a rally...possible assassination attempt is the rumour.

Given he wants more guns out there, is it a surprise when someone turns up to a rally with one?

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Just because Trump has policies, that doesn't mean that people know what they are. Given the his policy on cyber security is that his ten year old son has a laptop, one could argue that Trump doesn't know what his policies are, either.

, of all the issues you could bring up, it's cyber security?

We all know what Clinton thinks about cyber security.

 

[huskeR32]

This is such a lie, it should be against the AUP.

Yes, this thread has been a beacon of facts lately (InfoWars links? lol), and this one line of hyperbole has completely derailed it. Lock me up.

Just because you don't know anything about Trump's policies, does not mean they don't exist.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

Oh, I've read that page. Several times. Where I find nuggets like this:

Boost growth to 3.5 percent per year on average, with the potential to reach a 4 percent growth rate.

He's claiming that he's going to nearly double the level of GDP growth predicted by both the Federal Reserve and the Congressional Budget Office, but he doesn't say how. (We are going to have the best GDP growth, tremendous growth, believe me.)

 

[Northstar]

but he doesn't say how.

Phase 1: Build a wall (a big wall)
Phase 2: ...
Phase 3: Profit!

 

[Chrunch Houston]

He's claiming that he's going to nearly double the level of GDP growth predicted by both the Federal Reserve and the Congressional Budget Office, but he doesn't say how. (We are going to have the best GDP growth, tremendous growth, believe me.)

When I was a young kid, J. Paul Getty was the richest man in the world. The robber baron families were still the wealthiest families in the country.

By the time I was a teenager, nothing had changed, but the economy was in the toilette.

Then came Reagan with his tax cuts.

The economy exploded in the 80's and the 90's.


Trump wants to cut taxes.

History has shown, cutting taxes increases economic growth.

Plus, if my boss didn't have to pay his useless "partner", the federal government, 39% of his profits, maybe I could get a raise.

 

[huskeR32]

Then came Reagan with his tax cuts.

The economy exploded in the 80's and the 90's.


Trump wants to cut taxes.

History has shown, cutting taxes increases economic growth.

There are a couple of big problems in assuming that cutting taxes now would have an effect similar to the Reagan era:

1. Current tax rates are lower than when Reagan took office, meaning there's less to cut.

2. One of the biggest factors that drove economic growth during the '80s was the lowering of the Fed interest rate, which had skyrocketed in response to the inflation of the late '70s. In March of 1980, the rate was at an historic high of 20% (!). It's at a measly 0.5% today, again leaving little room to cut.

Whoever our next president is, they simply won't be facing the same situation that Reagan did, and they won't have the same options available to them.

I'm left still wondering how Trump is planning to double the growth rate predicted by economic experts. "Reaganomics" isn't a one-size-fits-all solution, and there's little reason to believe it would be anywhere near as effective today.

 

[Biggles]

When I was a young kid, J. Paul Getty was the richest man in the world. The robber baron families were still the wealthiest families in the country.

By the time I was a teenager, nothing had changed, but the economy was in the toilette.

Then came Reagan with his tax cuts.

The economy exploded in the 80's and the 90's.


Trump wants to cut taxes.

History has shown, cutting taxes increases economic growth.

Plus, if my boss didn't have to pay his useless "partner", the federal government, 39% of his profits, maybe I could get a raise.

Actually, history doesn't show that - although there have been times when low taxes accompanied strong economic growth, there have also been times when strong economic growth went along with high tax rates. In fact, income tax rates are MUCH lower than they have been for most of the last 100 years. During the 1950's & '60's the top income tax bracket was over 90% & the economy & the stock market boomed & so did income for the middle classes.

Government spending as a percentage of GDP is less than it has been for pretty much any time in the last 40 years. The big tax cuts in the 1980's started the US on a path of lower tax revenue & higher deficits.

If your boss gave you a raise it would reduce his profitability, but it would also reduce his taxes. Perhaps he just doesn't think you've earned a raise.

 

[Sanji Himura]

There are a couple of big problems in assuming that cutting taxes now would have an effect similar to the Reagan era:

1. Current tax rates are lower than when Reagan took office, meaning there's less to cut.

2. One of the biggest factors that drove economic growth during the '80s was the lowering of the Fed interest rate, which had skyrocketed in response to the inflation of the late '70s. In March of 1980, the rate was at an historic high of 20% (!). It's at a measly 0.5% today, again leaving little room to cut.

Whoever our next president is, they simply won't be facing the same situation that Reagan did, and they won't have the same options available to them.

I'm still left wondering how Trump is planning to double the growth rate predicted by economic experts. "Reaganomics" isn't a one-size-fits-all solution, and there's little reason to believe it would be anywhere near as effective today.

Two problems with those statements, one of which is the inflation. That has certainly grew with the QEs and other programs that Obama has put in place when the economy crashed in 2008, when the inflation rate was nearly 0. The more money that is printed, the more the inflation rates rise as we can tell that the 2009 numbers climbed to nearly 3%, where as this year was 1.4%. The other is that, though related to the first, the President nor any of his cabinet has direct control of how the Fed sets its interest rates. He [The president] appoints the Fed chairman, and he and he alone gets absolute influence on how the interest rate is set. The Fed chair has little oversight into his decisions.

That said, I don't think that Trump has any control over how the fed sets its interest rate, but what is clear is that the fed sees that the economy is doing quite well for now, and may want to increase the interest rate to reflect that. Even as little as 0.5% can have a huge swing in the economy and create economic uncertainty.

 

[huskeR32]

Two problems with those statements, one of which is the inflation. That has certainly grew with the QEs and other programs that Obama has put in place when the economy crashed in 2008, when the inflation rate was nearly 0. The more money that is printed, the more the inflation rates rise as we can tell that the 2009 numbers climbed to nearly 3%, where as this year was 1.4%.

I'm unclear as to which part of my post this is supposed to rebut. The only statement I made about inflation was an incidental mention if it as a reason for the high Fed interest rate of the 1980s.

Today's inflation rate has nothing at all to do with anything I said, and really isn't relevant to this discussion, as it hasn't led to a high Fed interest rate as it did in the '70s.

The other is that, though related to the first, the President nor any of his cabinet has direct control of how the Fed sets its interest rates. He [The president] appoints the Fed chairman, and he and he alone gets absolute influence on how the interest rate is set. The Fed chair has little oversight into his decisions.

I understand that, though I can see how my post muddied those waters.

My point remains though: one of the biggest factors for economic growth under Reagan was that the Fed lowered an astronomical interest rate. The rate is already basically zero, so that's clearly not an option in the foreseeable future. Suggesting that events under Reagan somehow legitimize Trump's tax plan is a faulty comparison.

That said, I don't think that Trump has any control over how the fed sets its interest rate, but what is clear is that the fed sees that the economy is doing quite well for now, and may want to increase the interest rate to reflect that. Even as little as 0.5% can have a huge swing in the economy and create economic uncertainty.

Whihlch leaves me even more curious as to where Trump thinks there's room to magically double the expected growth.

 

[Scaff]

Trump rushed off the stage at a rally...possible assassination attempt is the rumour. Just a rumour at this point, no verification. Ignore the hyperbole in the title of the video:

Otherwise know as people can't tell the difference between a poster and a gun.

The secret service did exactly what they are trained to do, and did so excellently, but whoever in the audience shouted 'gun' simply because a protester held up a 'Republicans against Trump' poster should have been dragged out as well.

 

[mister dog]

Source please - for the guy with the needle, and if by fits you mean seizures, that too.

Should be him, some say it's a diazepam injection, others say it's just a flashlight:

Spoiler

Absolutely, and a couple of days ago had nasty coughing fits on stage. The explanation given for this was walking pneumonia. I can't prove that's true, but having coughing fits, at the memorial, and recovering the week after is at least consistent with it.

She's been having coughing fits for years now. Besides someone with pneumonia doesn't suffer from sudden spastic movements?

Nor does one go mingling with people in general.

Anyhow we've been over this before. No way for me to prove that this is fact or fiction. I do find it all a little suspicious and there is proper ground for people to doubt she is fit enough to handle a 4 year presidency (and that's leaving out her wicked character treats in general).

The secret service did exactly what they are trained to do, and did so excellently, but whoever in the audience shouted 'gun' simply because a protester held up a 'Republicans against Trump' poster should have been dragged out as well.

Seeing a lot of lefties see him as "the next Hitler!", it's better to be safe than sorry. I fear that should he win on Tuesday there are going to be a lot of people that will be eager to make an attempt on his life. Security detail better be top notch.

 

[Scaff]

Should be him, some say it's a diazepam injection, others say it's just a flashlight:

Spoiler

She's been having coughing fits for years now. Besides someone with pneumonia doesn't suffer from sudden spastic movements?

Nor does one go mingling with people in general.

Anyhow we've been over this before. No way for me to prove that this is fact or fiction. I do find it all a little suspicious and there is proper ground for people to doubt she is fit enough to handle a 4 year presidency (and that's leaving out her wicked character treats in general).

Are we also still not waiting on Trump's own medical report he promised to make public?

And no a letter from his doctor saying he has great stamina is not releasing medical records. Clinton's doctor did the same, so to accept Trump's you should logically accept hers.

Don't forget he's had quite the case of the sniffles as well.

Seeing a lot of lefties see him as "the next Hitler!", it's better to be safe than sorry. I fear that should he win on Tuesday there are going to be a lot of people that will be eager to make an attempt on his life. Security detail better be top notch.

Yes because banners and posters are such an unusual thing at political rallies, it was also a Republican waving it.

It is however interesting to contrast it with the Trump supporter at Obama's recent speech and the two reaction (which even being general Trump lied his ass off about).

 

[ryzno]

Whihlch leaves me even more curious as to where Trump thinks there's room to magically double the expected growth.

Well if we bring our jobs back like he says, we should be able too.
We're nothing like Detroit but we used to have 4 car factories. 2 actually in Atlanta. Now we only have one and it's on the border of Alabama, not a big help to GA since over half the employees come over from AL.
Do I need to tell you where the factories moved? I let you guess.

 

[Milouse]

Well if we bring our jobs back like he says, we should be able too.

Yes, that's the social promise that matched so well with nationalism in the past.
These national-socialists all follow a common pattern: they swim in nationalist, racist ideology for a while, then embrace a social speech to get the final boost to the power.

Not related, a discussion between Sam Harris and Andrew Sullivan worth listening:

it's just audio, 2h27 long.

 

[Johnnypenso]

It is however interesting to contrast it with the Trump supporter at Obama's recent speech and the two reaction (which even being general Trump lied his ass off about).

The Trump supporters are well treated when the POTUS is around, not so much when Daddy isn't there:

 

[Scaff]

The Trump supporters are well treated when the POTUS is around, not so much when Daddy isn't there:

Photos without sources and context are pretty much useless.

 

[mister dog]

Photos without sources and context are pretty much useless.

Here's some context:

 

[TenEightyOne]

Here's some context:

That confused the hell out of me... what do those two videos have to do with the contextless photos? What you've added isn't context rather something else.

 

[mister dog]

That confused the hell out of me... what do those two videos have to do with the contextless photos? What you've added isn't context rather something else.

 

[Scaff]

Here's some context:

No that's not context at all.

 

[mister dog]

Yes focus on the technicalities of a sentence as a last resort, whilst completely ignoring the point of both Johnny's pics and my videos..

 

[Scaff]

Yes focus on the technicalities of a sentence as a last resort, whilst completely ignoring the point of both Johnny's pics and my videos..

No.

What happened was that rather than address the actual point I made, a straw man was constructed in an attempt to hide not answering the point.

I utterly condemn violence and intimidation from either sides supporters.

However the point I asked about was the difference between how the two address protesters who confront them directly and how they then comment on each others actions.

The simple truth is that Obama did not scream at the Trump supporter, which was the claim Trump made.

Rather than address that, the unrelated photos were posted.

 

[Northstar]

There have been cases of Trump supporters doing the same thing so the only real take away is that some American's are incapable of acting like adults.