US Presidential Election 2016: Hillary Clinton vs Donald Trump

[Basil II the B.S]

Millennial OP-ED: How I Went From Voting for Obama in '08 to Trump in '16

Read more: http://710wor.iheart.com/articles/na...#ixzz4PMta6CiT


The obvious result. Millennial is filled with hope by Obama, enters the job markets, faced the harsh reality, votes Trump. It'll be the same, either now or in 4 years.

[Akrotatos]

Millennial OP-ED: How I Went From Voting for Obama in '08 to Trump in '16

Read more: http://710wor.iheart.com/articles/na...#ixzz4PMta6CiT


The obvious result. Millennial is filled with hope by Obama, enters the job markets, faced the harsh reality, votes Trump. It'll be the same, either now or in 4 years.

Nahh this reads like somebody from Trump's campaign wrote it. That or a really stupid person.

I can understand voting for Trump to keep Hillary out of power (I want him to win for this reason) or because his win is the first step to dismantle the two-party hegemony but seriously: "I believe Trump loves his country....."??

Americans...

[Phier]

Laugh, a Vox writer learns a hard truth about the Clinton's. Took'em a long time, but better late than never.

https://twitter.com/JStein_Vox/statu...29368541249536

3 million for Hilary's daughters wedding paid for by the Clinton Foundation.

3 million.

Better have had an open bar.

[alhoon]

How Democrats proved to be a better choice than Republicans in 2012 for the economy

Weeeeeeell my Romney-believing friends, Obama, demonstrably a good president, has now done better than the Republicans promised to do on Unemployment.
This should give anyone that voted Romney for his promises to fix the unemployment and improve the economy a pause; Democrats did what Republicans promised to do. So, Republicans that plan to vote for Trump because their main issue is unemployment and job-flight... they should vote for Clinton instead.

[Dick Cheney.]

If I have to pick between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, I'm picking Texas!

[Derpy Hooves]

How Democrats proved to be a better choice than Republicans in 2012 for the economy

Weeeeeeell my Romney-believing friends, Obama, demonstrably a good president, has now done better than the Republicans promised to do on Unemployment.
This should give anyone that voted Romney for his promises to fix the unemployment and improve the economy a pause; Democrats did what Republicans promised to do. So, Republicans that plan to vote for Trump because their main issue is unemployment and job-flight... they should vote for Clinton instead.

How many of those jobs are part time compared to full time?

[Phier]

How many of those jobs are part time compared to full time?

Lets ask the chair of the DNC!

To the power of wikileaks!

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/24797

From:donna@brazileassociates.com To: john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2016-02-13 22:52

Subject: Ok, one a week
I think people are more in despair about how things are—yes new jobs but they are low wage jobs. HOUSING is a huge issue. Most people pay half of what they make to rent…

[Love Mountain]

How many of those jobs are part time compared to full time?

What relevance does that have? Republicans only proposed tax cuts and austerity. The exact opposite of job creation.

[Acco]

ELECTION SHOCK: TRUMP OUTPERFORMS ROMNEY


Can't say I'm shocked Romney was milk toast and offered nothing but not being Obama. He's still at about 33% I'd guess to win, but Romney was a horrible disappointment.

Florida overhauled their absentee and early voting system and significantly more of the electorate is voting early this time, so it's not easy to compare 2012 and 2016 in terms of raw numbers. This 'outperformance' could be for naught if it turns out that more of these GOP early voters are high-propensity, i.e. the GOP is cannibalizing its election-day vote, which is what Democratic strategist Steve Schale, who ran the Obama campaign in the state in '08 and '12, has suggested.

Florida should be interesting, but when is it not?

[ABH2]

It's still under investigation, but it seems they were entering an airbase and didn't respond to commands to stop, so the Jordanians opened fire.

...

At least it was close this time. Last time he claimed that US soldiers were being shot at from behind by ISIS insurgents in the Iraqi army

One might ask why it particularly matters. Obama has somehow managed to keep the Afghanistan war for 8 years without any real anti-war movement, and with the media mostly ignoring it. I'd wager a large part of the electorate couldn't even tell you we are still fighting in Afghanistan. And when you put forces into a warzone, you are putting them at risk. So special forces are short by Jordanian forces - and that means Obama gets some pass? That's even assuming you are getting the full or real story when their mission is classified to begin with.

So good job on jumping on some detail, and showing that you guys have no interest in discussing the real issue that 8 years of Chocolate Jesus has changed little about American foreign policy. I mean, we had one Hillary supporter try to claim that foreign policy discussion was just a senseless distraction in this thread. The same people who will be voting Hillary will spit and slather all over you telling you about how awful Bush was for his wars...

[removeduser_487563287433]

If I have to pick between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, I'm picking Texas!

The Dallas Morning News endorses Clinton, the first Democrat they've endorsed in decades. All decent Republicans are horrified by Donald.

[IronBrig4]

Florida should be interesting, but when is it not?

You know, if Romney ran this time around I would vote for him. At least he's not an anti-vaxxer.

I was wondering if another cute Cuban toddler would get plucked out of the sea earlier this year, and then trigger a huge custody battle that would turn Florida's cubanos against the Democratic party again. Apparently not.

[B. W.]

Florida overhauled their absentee and early voting system and significantly more of the electorate is voting early this time, so it's not easy to compare 2012 and 2016 in terms of raw numbers. This 'outperformance' could be for naught if it turns out that more of these GOP early voters are high-propensity, i.e. the GOP is cannibalizing its election-day vote, which is what Democratic strategist Steve Schale, who ran the Obama campaign in the state in '08 and '12, has suggested.

Florida should be interesting, but when is it not?

I've thought about this before you posted and I think there's something there. That's countered by the fact, though, that a lot of new voters are coming in and people are aware of it and so they are trying to avoid the long lines on election day.

Keep an eye on election day turnout and its demographics. If the lines are not long, your theory might hold. Otherwise expect a long evening.

[Phier]

What relevance does that have? Republicans only proposed tax cuts and austerity. The exact opposite of job creation.

*sigh*

THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T EXIST TO CREATE JOBS.

It does a horrible job of it, so to speak.

The DNC chair admitted the jobs created by Obama were crap low paying ones, and he didn't even create those, he just set the stage.

[removeduser_487563287433]

*sigh*

THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T EXIST TO CREATE JOBS.

It does a horrible job of it, so to speak.

The DNC chair admitted the jobs created by Obama were crap low paying ones, and he didn't even create those, he just set the stage.

If Republican policies reduce jobs and prosperity for Americans, this is legitimate criticism of those policies.

What do you mean, exactly, by Obama just setting the stage for the job creation during his two terms?

[Thanatos]

*sigh*

THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T EXIST TO CREATE JOBS.

It does a horrible job of it, so to speak.

The DNC chair admitted the jobs created by Obama were crap low paying ones, and he didn't even create those, he just set the stage.

I think you're misinterpreting what he said. The government doesn't exist to create jobs in that sense (barring things such as the WPA earlier in the 20th century), but job growth and accessibility for jobs is most definitely a by-product of good government policies (speaking from an objective standpoint, not a political party standpoint, not going to open that can of worms). The two are intrinsically linked.

[Love Mountain]

*sigh*

THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T EXIST TO CREATE JOBS.

It does a horrible job of it, so to speak.

The DNC chair admitted the jobs created by Obama were crap low paying ones, and he didn't even create those, he just set the stage.

Why are people so scared of the Government employing teachers, soldiers, police officers, and auditors. You do realize those are good things right?

[mrmouth]

If the election is as close as the recent polls say (which it almost certainly isnt because people made their minds up already and stop answering polls so these late swings have historically proven to be largely mirages), then the 5% that Johnson will take from Trump as his protest vote, vs the 1% that Stein will take as Clinton's protest vote, could be the difference right there.


I'm actually becoming far more worried about Trump and his minions when he likely loses. Having him in office would be a substantial factor in hitting rock bottom and clawing ourselves back out and into a government that once again gets things done, in bipartisan fashion. But his appointment/s to the supreme court would be a real problem. Although it is hard to imagine anyone worse than Scalia.


Trump in 2008, speaking nice about Hillary and being pro choice, is it really worth the most difficult and thankless job in human history? That is worth decimating your business and selling your soul for?

[Heathen Hammer]

Why are people so scared of the Government employing teachers, soldiers, police officers, and auditors. You do realize those are good things right?

And how does government pays their wages? With taxes. High taxation hurts profits(with both higher taxes for businesses and individuals spend less money) , so privately-owned companies hire less or downsize.
We just have to realize that "big government" is something that's applicable for early-mid-XX century and we will live in the world of small governments, where you can't solve unemployment by building autobahns.

[Love Mountain]

And how does government pays their wages? With taxes. High taxation hurts profits(with both higher taxes for businesses and individuals spend less money) , so privately-owned companies hire less or downsize.
We just have to realize that "big government" is something that's applicable for early-mid-XX century and we will live in the world of small governments, where you can't solve unemployment by building autobahns.

You know what also hurts profits? No demand. And where does demand come from? Employed people.

We just have to realize that "business" isn't something that magically manufactures money in the modern XXI century world and that we live in a world of demand-driven economics, where you can't solve economies by letting another business owner buy another ferrari or deposit a couple more million into a shadow banking system that led us to this state of affairs to begin with.

But what am I talking about? Even right-wing Greg Mankiw is ultimately a Keynesian yet online the only thing I see online is Austrian fanbois and liberterians trying to teach me the evils of taxation.