It’s funny like Jabba the Hutt biting off the head of a Klatooine paddy frog. Which is what that picture of Donald reminds me of.
You overestimate Clinton’s appeal. Yes, there are hardcore Clinton supporters but a goodly chunk of her voters - possibly even a majority - will be the “oh god not Trump” crowd (myself included).
Frankly it’s Trump’s supporters who don’t really understand who he is or what he will do. I’m not even sure Trump knows what he’ll do if he wins; his purpose in running for President is to be President. Period. Policy is for losers.
Consistency in political views? Sad.
Hillary is a likeable person IMO but she is a continuation of Obama. So when Hillary becomes president, public debt will be rising at 10times faster pace than the GDP.
Root cause IMO is that dollar is too overvalued for the US to be competitive in trade.
I give you one scenario to imagine: Right now, 80-90% of international trade happens in USD and you also have the petrodollar. Now Trump is supposedly critical of Muslims and is anti-immigration. Due to this, let’s say Arab countries get pissed off n stop trading oil for USD and USD doesn’t get used for international trade anymore. Price of USD crashes vis-a-vis Chinese yuan, INR etc. The US manufacturing becomes competitive. US made Tesla 3 becomes affordable in most parts of the world. Good for trade balance, good for environment, good for US blue collar jobs etc. Just a random scenario.
Hillary isn’t def. not the solution… Trump is a hope for disruptive change…
By that argument, as a continuation of Obama unemployment will continue to fall and by the end of her first term everyone in America will have three jobs! Extrapolation is fun.
That is definitely a random scenario. Of course, an increase in US manufacturing is unlikely to translate to many blue collar jobs thanks to automation, the US oil industry is still booming and isn’t going to let electric cars outstrip the gas-burning kind, and the whole scenario would greatly depress the US economy to the point of driving it into another massive depression. But apart from that, it’s a winner!
I must admit the “we need to burn it all down in order to rebuild” approach certainly makes a change from the old “try not to fuck up the country” technique most presidents have aimed for.
So let’s say public debt rises 10 times faster than the GDP. Let’s say debt = 100% of GDP presently. Let’s say debt rises at 10% CAGR, growing 10 times faster than the GDP, which is growing at say 1% CAGR.
At this rate, debt doubles in ~7 yrs and GDP remains almost the same. So debt becomes ~200% of GDP.
You think this system is sustainable? The root cause IMO is the overvalued dollar which doesn’t let the US become competitive in trade.
Oh my. Where does all this ignorance come from?
Let me walk you through this with questions:
(a) Do tax cuts increase or decrease the deficit?
(b) Which party is responsible for recent tax cuts?
(c) Did you know that $100’s of millions of the much-derided “Obama stimulus” (actually proposed by Bush) took the form of tax cuts?
(d) How much did the Bush Adventure in Iraq cost?
Obama has reduced the deficit by $1T
All of this would be fascinating if Trump was going to reduce the deficit. He’s not. His tax plan will reduce revenues by trillions and he’s ruled out spending cuts. And on top of all that, he’ll probably raise taxes on the rich, which is kinda pointless when you’re cutting taxes on the semi-rich and middle class by trillions.
Deficit alone doesnt tell the full story. Everyone should read the following
Your public debt is growing at a rate 10 times faster than the GDP growth.
Then why do conservatives want to cut taxes, which will reduce revenue, grow the deficit and the debt?
Maybe they will increase the indirect taxes (service tax, import duty etc) and reduce direct tax. This could give push to local manufacturing.
Do they? I mean, “let’s say” and “maybe” don’t indicate a lot of assurance on your part of what is actually going to happen. Do you have any feeling that Republicans support your views, and if so, what makes you feel so?
About Import duties and incentivising local manufacturing, Trump has consistently talked. He won’t talk about increasing other types of indirect taxes like service tax because he wants votes.
Opinions have already changed. People have gone from thinking he’s a harmless buffoon to thinking he’s an extremely dangerous buffoon.
Somehow and at some point we decided that calling a statement disingenuous meant something other than calling a statement dishonest when used to accuse the other person of being deceptive in some way. Its like a magic word some people use on this board to accuse others of lying without violating the rule against accusing people of lying.
"dis·in·gen·u·ous.
1.not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.
synonyms: insincere · dishonest · untruthful · false · deceitful ·
[more]"
What has he said about incentivising local manufacturing as opposed to penalizing foreign manufacturing?
Trump admits to using aliases two weeks after denying it.
So it wasn’t him except when it was, which he denies although he only did it as a joke.
Honesty!
According to top Trump aide Paul Manafort, picking a woman or minority for VP is pandering.
And he needs a VP to do the parts of the job he thinks are boring.