Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [MJuric] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MJuric wrote:
Jill Stein

So how does the government do the following? I mean how does one do the following while keeping the laws of economics intact and not destroying the economy?

  • Create millions of jobs by transitioning to 100% clean renewable energy by 2030, and investing in public transit, sustainable agriculture, and conservation.
  • Create living-wage jobs for every American who needs work, replacing unemployment offices with employment offices. Advance workers rights to form unions, achieve workplace democracy, and keep a fair share of the wealth they create.

~Matt

What difference does it make? She'll get less than Johnson who'll get less than 1%.
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
oldandslow wrote:
Several thoughts:

A lot of polling during primary season is whack. It is likely that Johnson pulls more from Trump and Stein pulls more from Clinton and that early polls which show something different are suspect.

Sanders hasn't directly attacked Clinton (very much), but has made huge indirect attacks (money in politics, corporatism,...). Additionally, Sanders followers are "berning" up facebook with endless attacks. Couple that with ~two decades of attacks, and she is at a nadir of popularity.

Johnson can't win anything, and he probably can't even be a spoiler. The Libertarian and Green parties represent various political wonks who are largely incapable of gaining any grassroots traction.

Clinton it is. We have survived Obama, we can survive her (and a majority actually approve of Obama's job). What Trump represents is horrible. The GOP would do best to abandon this cycle, and figure out what it actually stands for as it moves forward.

They know what they stand for.

1. reaganism
2. conservatism

Don't you know this? Pink font.


"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [TheForge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
They know what they stand for.

1. reaganism
2. conservatism

Don't you know this? Pink font.

LOL
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Seriously though, my definition of conservatism is very different than that of Rich Lowry, Bill Kristol, Beck and Cruz. Try as they might, the all inclusive nebulous of conservatism as defined since Reagan has run its course. Reaganism has run its course as well. More and more of the voting population wasn't even around when he was president. Running on deified ideas that are subject to revised history is a losing strategy. Rich Lowry (national review editor) had the nerve to not even make an attempt to kiss the ring of Reagan policy. How can we even talk of party unity if he can't do that. This same crap came from Stephen Hayes of the weekly standard last week.

Are you serious? They sound like the desperate losers who hung their hat on something that most know can't last forever try as they might. It is figuratively like the people who stayed in the hulls of the titanic because they believed it couldn't sink. Political movements are just that, movements. They move and eventually stop. It can get absorbed into the next movement or it can get run over by the next one. This election was about real change (positive or negative). Bernie failed on his side, the trump train is still rolling. If it fails, the next election will only be worse. Hillary WILL BE THE LAST of her kind, which really isn't much different than Obama or Bush.


"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [Old Hickory] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What difference does it make? She'll get less than Johnson who'll get less than 1%.

I find that those that support green party and far left positions tend to support a similar ideology as Libertarians...cept they can't do math stuffs.

The "Difference it makes" is that if those on the far left and could understand or grasp the basic economics of the idea that government can't just "Create jobs" and people can't just "Pay me some more money" without there being ramifications then a good portion of the other stuff they are in agreement with the Libertarian party.

I, to some degree, see far left people as Libertarians that don't understand the conflict that more government can not provide a better life and more freedom for all, only certain groups.

~Matt







Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [MJuric] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MJuric wrote:
What difference does it make? She'll get less than Johnson who'll get less than 1%.

I find that those that support green party and far left positions tend to support a similar ideology as Libertarians...cept they can't do math stuffs.

The "Difference it makes" is that if those on the far left and could understand or grasp the basic economics of the idea that government can't just "Create jobs" and people can't just "Pay me some more money" without there being ramifications then a good portion of the other stuff they are in agreement with the Libertarian party.

I, to some degree, see far left people as Libertarians that don't understand the conflict that more government can not provide a better life and more freedom for all, only certain groups.

Some people are incapable of understanding certain topics which are easy to others. That is why conservatives need to run government and liberals need to own art shops.
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [TheForge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Try as they might, the all inclusive nebulous of conservatism as defined since Reagan has run its course.

Has it completely? Real question, Reaganism has had a very good run, what replaces it? I would argue that Trumpism is a dead end.
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Has it completely? Real question, Reaganism has had a very good run, what replaces it?

Has "Reaganism" or the fantasized version of it? Reagan ran up government debt at a rate never seen before. He is essentially the god father of loosening of monetary policy and the use of monetary policy to control the economy.

His "Trickle down" was not really trickle down at all as there was very little done to help business and the wealthy. Changes in the tax code seemed to be relatively broad based not target at the wealthy or business.

For the most part Bill Clinton was a better representation of Reagonomics then Reagan was although admittedly had it not been for a Rep congress Clinton would not have done what he did.

~Matt



Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [MJuric] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Don't really disagree with anything that you wrote, and Clinton's version of Reaganism was/is probably more sustainable (Obama is pretty much are using that template). That said, has it run out? What replaces it? There are a lot of alternatives, and most of them are extremely bad. Do we go all in on protectionism?
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [Dirty Bottles] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Johnson.
I can't vote Trump and I'd rather let you take a swing at my nuts with a baseball bat then vote for Hillary.


^this

Let's adjust the OP's question a bit: "It's November 1st, Trump and Clinton are polling within the statistical margin of error of each other. Who are you voting for?"

48% Clinton + 46% Trump. Does Trump get your vote then?

king of the road says you move too slow
KING OF THE ROAD SAYS YOU MOVE TOO SLOW
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't really think trumpism has been defined yet. I think we will see it better defined in the next few months as he has to win over those who haven't jumped on the train yet. If Trumpism does turn out to be a dead end, it certainly bring about something similar but more palatable.

Even as a democrat living in northern Virginia, I was amazed illegal immigration was not a bigger issue in 2004 or 2008. By 2012, I figured it just wasn't going to happen. Too many interest on both sides against any sort of reform that the public wanted. Well, here we are. It turns out it didn't die, just needed a messenger for it. I'm by no means a closed borders advocate, but the system as it stands is broken and the amnesty reforms haven't nor current law have been ineffective. I could live with somebody who advocates closing the border over the status quo. I'm moderate on the position. So now that that window has been breached, it is hear to stay until a solution that takes into consideration populist desires is negotiated. To date, that hasn't been the case.

Trade, free trade is unfortunately a topic that is too complex to define in narrow sound bites. The problems we actually have that get blamed on various trade agreements are actually symptoms of other things. Tax policy, debt servitude to trade partners, etc. How do you negotiate a favorable trade position when you owe a country trillions in debt? I'll tell you what, you can't. But America first trade policy will certainly be growing topic over the next years. The candidate that can link it to growing debt and servitude will certainly benefit from being able to link such a thing, but I fear that is too complicated an argument for 10 second political sound bites. So...

Debt needs to be treated on its own. How can we reduce the debt? I know many ways that conflict with too many special interest. The key to making a viable run on reducing debt would be to adequately define and vilify those who benefit most from debt spending. And it can't just be the welfare recipients. They only get the table scraps from the big corporations, banks, and foreign interests that actively lobby for increasing debt spending. I have a feeling deficits will start mattering as real consequences start to be felt and politicians can successfully tie it to deficit spending and debt servitude. There is a lot of overlap between debt and trade. From a policy wonk standpoint, you cannot separate the two, to the masses, it must be simplified how it impacts them.

Military spending and getting lectured by who we protect. I've been pretty vocal about this myself, this has been a growing trend among more conservative circles and I'm finding the 24 hour news society we live in has made this even more relatable to blue collar masses. Sure, maybe some blue collar workers would like the benefits other more liberal countries offer their citizens, but trump has already made a popular link to that and our spending. Something I've been saying for years. A lot of liberal countries are able to socially experiment because they live under a blanket of protection our disproportionate share of NATO support and spending provides. We can debate the facts and figures all day, but this an argument growing in popularity. You can't have universal care because we can't afford it, because we pay for their defense so they can. That is a very easy to define policy that addresses issues important to different constituents. Liberals would like us to be less involved in the world militarily and would like to have universal care. Libertarians would like to be less involved in the world militarily and the cost that comes with it. Center right people would certainly like to see a draw back and be willing to capitulate on national care in light of the failure that is Obamacare. Finally some true Moderates probably support all three to some extent. The only people left out of this equation are the easy to vilify neocons and their supporters on both sides (bush, cheney, Hillary Clinton, etc.).

More global neutrality that would allow us to be less hostile with traditional enemies (Cuba, Russia, Iran). Not allying with them, but viewing them more like business partners. As long as they don't directly attack our self interest, we don't really care what they do. This ties into our nato drawbacks.

These are just some things I see touched on by Trumpism, if not what trumpism becomes, certainly subsequent movements.


"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
(Obama is pretty much are using that template).

Well, save the idea that the deficits we are running are FAR closer to what Reagan ran then what Clinton ran...well and save the fact that Obama hasn't really cut...well or even slowed spending, on anything other then national defense. But yeah, other then that they are really close :-)

That said, has it run out? What replaces it?

Let's not put a name on it but I think the trend continues. Large deficits, deficits that will continue to exist, expand at the federal level and spread out more and more into the state and local levels. Easy monetary policy that allows these large debts. It's exactly what Reagan, Bush I, Bush II and Obama has done.

The country is addicted to easy money, free shit and will continue to be until the house of cards comes crumbling down. The cry for "National health care", "$15 dollar wages", "Prtected Labor", "Expanded social programs" is nothing more then more of the same with the same result. Eventually the free stuff has to be paid for and we are running out of pockets to rob.

~Matt


Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [ttocsmi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
48% Clinton + 46% Trump. Does Trump get your vote then?

No, why would I vote for someone that does not represent any policies I believe in.

~Matt

Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [TheForge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm by no means a closed borders advocate

rade, free trade is unfortunately a topic that is too complex to define in narrow sound bites.

Trump is largely an isolationist on both of these. We've tried this in the past when economies where much less globalized and it failed miserably without a very good ending.

Debt needs to be treated on its own. How can we reduce the debt?

I have not really heard DT's position on the debt other then a few sound bites. It would surprise me to find out he was an ardent supporter of smaller debt. He's a big "Debt leverage" kind of guy.

Military spending and getting lectured by who we protect.

I see Trump using this more as the "Big stick" then anything to actually help the country. "Do as I say or we won't provide you with military support", type of move. I think that ends in disaster as well.

~Matt
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [Brownie28] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Trump. I don't trust people who take bribes.


Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
C'mon, by that silly criteria all of the business transactions and deals that Trump has made throughout his career can be called "bribes". Why do you hate capitalism?
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [Brownie28] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Johnson. If he can be included in the televised presidential debates he may actually get far more votes than the pundits predict. It will be difficult to overcome the daily dose of mass media talking only about Trump & Clinton. They essentially get free air time that's not given to any other choices.

Don

Tri-ing to have fun. Anything else is just a bonus!
Quote Reply
Re: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson...who are you voting for? [ttocsmi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ttocsmi wrote:
Johnson.
I can't vote Trump and I'd rather let you take a swing at my nuts with a baseball bat then vote for Hillary.


^this

Let's adjust the OP's question a bit: "It's November 1st, Trump and Clinton are polling within the statistical margin of error of each other. Who are you voting for?"

48% Clinton + 46% Trump. Does Trump get your vote then?

No, still would vote for Johnson.
Quote Reply

Prev Next