First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  Last
Post Reply US Presidential Race: Is it OK if I get a little excited this year?
6642 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / USA
Offline
Posted 5/6/16

theYchromosome wrote:

Alright then. I'll consider Trump. On economics, I legitimately do not know whether he would be worse than Hillary, because he has no fucking clue how anything works. Hillary at least knows what she's saying, she's just wrong. Trump, however, seems to think that trade deficits matter somehow. As though having a trade deficit means there's actual money owed somewhere. All it is, however, is businesses from different countries buying stuff from each other. You can't just tell Mexico to build a wall because we have a trade deficit, because what that means is that you will dictate what Americans can and cannot buy. Instead of businesses getting the best product for the best price, you're making them pay more money for a possibly inferior product. This is such a shitty policy for businesses, that I can't possibly believe Trump knows anything about economics. He has the same misconception about China, Europe, and everywhere else. Trade deficits don't matter--Mercantilism has been debunked for hundreds of years now. But, the fact that he seems so ill-informed on economics may be a two edged sword. It may mean that he'll just leave it to people that do know what they're doing, and we'll be fine, or it could mean that he'll implement some stupid trade embargo thinking that it will help. On the whole though, he probably is just a hair preferred to Clinton on economics. At least she'll support some version of free trade, though.


I agree with you to an extent. Free trade in general is a good thing and a trade deficit generally does not matter. For the most part I am unconcerned with them. The problem is that trade deficit with China and a few other countries to a lesser extent was created by market and currency manipulations designed to lower the price of their goods abroad while inflating the prices of imports. Any future president would be well served addressing these manipulations that are unfairly skewing the market and are in breach of various trade treaties between the US and China.


theYchromosome wrote:
On immigration, he simply hasn't looked on the facts. Immigrants, on average, post a net gain on country's budget, paying more in taxes than they take out in services, they commit less crime than natives (they don't want to be deported, after all), and they spur growth in the economy. Yeah, it's true they take jobs, but they also create jobs. It's not like they're some sort of superhumans that don't eat, live, and consume. They need stuff as much as anyone. So while they increse supply side, they also increase demand side, and on top of that, increased exchange of ideas in a now bigger population leads to increased innovation. Immigrants, even illegal ones, are such a slam dunk for this country that I can't ever see myself thinking he has good ideas here. Even when he talks about refugees, I'm sort of on board for erring on the side of caution on the issue, but truth be told, we already have one of the toughest screening processes in the world for refugees. It could very well be that we still ought to make it tougher, but he just makes himself sound like he knows absolutely nothing about the issues. Those two issues are just about the only things he seems to talk about. There is, oddly enough, one point in which I do think Trump might have a leg up.


True, illegal immigrants do pay taxes. According to the American Immigration Council they pay about $11 billion in taxes every year. They avoid most because they lack a social security number. Buuuuut they also rake in about $22 billion in government benefits for a net loss of $11 billion. And while immigrants have a much lower crime rate than the general population, this includes legal immigrants. Illegal immigrants have a much higher crime rate than the general population. Despite being only 3.5% of the population they make up around 25% of prison populations.



theYchromosome wrote:
He want's to bolster Libel laws, which is (for all his talk about political correctness and saying what you please) a free path to censorship and anti-free-speech. He's anti-privacy, anti-government-transparency, anti-free-trade, anti-immigration, anti-gay-marriage, and whole host of other things that clash with Libertarian values. If I only had two choices, I'd probably choose Hillary by a hair, but I actually could see myself voting Trump in a rare mood. It's way too fucking close, and I disagree way too fucking much with both of them to consider them when I have a chance to vote against the system that put them there.

And what if I genuinely don't think there's much of a difference in overall quality between Trump and Clinton? Military Spending and Military isolationism is the biggest issue for me. I think Clinton will spend less on the Military, but I actually think Trump is slightly less likely to go to war. But, he's been kind of cryptic on the issue. At the very least, I get the feeling that Clinton believes she knows best, and won't hesitate going to war--all the while believing herself in the right. If she has any edge, it's small. She's more along my lines on gay rights and abortion, but since she's started co-opting Bernie's policies, she's getting worse and worse on economics--and she started pretty badly to begin with. She definitely has a leg up on Trump with immigration. On the whole, It's true that I'd be voting for a different country under Trump than with Hillary, but they're pretty similar on the most important issue to me, and their differing views cancel each other out on a more absolute scale of preference. Ultimately, it's not, as maniackillah puts it '4 years of bs,' that I'm voting against, it's (probably) 200+ years of bs. If a third party never gets any sort of chance, then we're stuck with decade after decade of bs--of choosing between two shitty options that only each make sense on a small portion of what you believe.

Luckily, government is only able to leech off the success of its citizens, and there are so many checks on power in this country, that citizens can make a great country against their government through sheer determination. I don't think government can do a whole lot to dismantle that, and I don't think having Trump or Clinton as president can completely ruin this country. So, I play the long game, because having a third party can open this country up to so many other political directions--we won't have to just vote for one of two ideologies when there are so many others to choose from. You said that it's american tradition to 'vote against' someone, but if there's a third party, then I may have the chance--americans might have the chance--to vote with somebody. To stop voting for government, and start voting with the people and their convictions. I can't just let that chance slip by, small as it may be. Particularly with a field as bad as the one available to me.


Trump does seem much more isolationist and if Hillary's time in the State Department is any indication her bumbling will probably lead to World War 3. Hyperbole of course but if her 'successes' include getting Russia to just invade the Ukraine, getting the theocrats in Iran nuclear weapons, and giving guns to the Islamic State we sure don't want to risk her failing.

But yeah, there's not much different between the two on rights issues I think. Both are anti-free speech, anti-justice, and anti-privacy. Both are all but proclaiming they will rule through dictatorial fiat like Obama has tried to do in his last term with his Executive Orders.

But like you I intend to vote Libertarian. I am pretty confident that my state, Kentucky, will vote Red whether I support the Cheeto that Walks or the Queen of Lies.
14468 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Houma
Offline
Posted 5/6/16 , edited 5/6/16

maxgale wrote:
everyone else should pay for their good time!


Pay for what exactly? I think you may be confused. Less government interference of course means less money spent... what are you even referring to?



theYchromosome wrote:

Economics
Low taxes--most of us support a flat tax rate, say, 10% of income across the board, and a closing of loopholes and deductions. Nobody should get out of paying their taxes, but we shouldn't penalize success.

Deregulation--We hold that government regulation stunts progress and prevents consumers from getting the goods that they want. People should be able to decide for themselves what they want to buy and sell, and the government has little to no role in deciding this for us.

Repealing Obama-Care--Here, the issue is a bit contentious. Just about all of us want Obamacare gone, but a good portion believe in states rights, and that something similar might be better implemented at the state level, as a sort of experiment.

No/low Minimum Wage--If you're willing to work for a lower price than your competition, why should the government take away your job? Basically, it's the same arguments you're used to. Minimum wage is bad economics.

Greatly reduced military budget--This is sort of Foreign Policy, but I'll put it here. We are often divided on America's role in foreign wars, but most of us agree that, with a military budget exceeding the next 7 countries combined, we could do better reducing it. Whether it's tax cuts, reducing the deficit, or even (the lesser of evils) spending it on the governments domestic services, we could do a lot more good spending elsewhere. This might not even mean a decrease in military effectiveness. A big reason why European countries can almost afford things like universal health care is that they don't have to worry so much about defense. NATO pretty much guarantees this, with American military might acting as a bulwark. If we weren't so imposing from a military standpoint, it may encourage other NATO members to bolster their own defenses.

Free Trade/Globalization--Economies work best when companies can get the best products for the lowest cost, and this is best achieved when trade between countries is unimpeded by things like tariffs, sanctions, and the other varied protectionist policies.



Where? How? How do you even take "pay for their good time" from this?
47864 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 5/6/16

Ravenstein wrote:


On immigration, I should make a couple of corrections. It had been a while since I had looked at the study, and it turns out, the facts I was thinking of was that descendants of illegal immigrants are a net gain. You're correct on first generation immigrants. But on crime, I am curious, what crimes are the illegals committing? Technically, being here illegally is a crime, but if that's why they make up such a large portion, it's kind of a red herring argument. However, if they are generally committing more serious crimes, I'd like to learn more. Could you link me the study you have in mind?

1308 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 5/6/16
To say that this election doesn't matter who wins, is dead wrong. To have said that in 2008 when Obama and John McCain were running, like the South Park folks said, possesses the enlightenment of a brain stem. Maybe if I had the kind of money that Trey Parker and Matt Stone have, then I can sip wine in my mansion and bemoan the minor inconvenience it is to find someone who can properly trim my lawn who can speak English. But for me personally, who relies on the affordable care act every day to survive, and be able to hold a job. This election is very important.
22333 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/6/16
You seem to not understand how measly your vote for a Libertarian candidate is. I will say once again, I belong to no party like I said originally. I vote based on what's going to improve a situation. Join the Libertarian party and establish yourself as a member of that group gaining expansion then go vote for someone else. I understand your distaste in voting for someone not in your party but help us now. The fact that libertarians could choose to do that may actually sway voters to look at libertarian views compared to their own and consider a change to your party or at least bringing

that view into the voter's party. I don't care about parties at all I have my own thoughts and when I see a new issue I'll determine what's best myself not by a party's views. Libertarians aren't all that new, they are in comparison to the other two parties. People know your party exists they just don't care. You won't see the day that your party becomes legit enough to take the white house, and if you don't stop democrats now while trump is bringing in millions of more new voters, many of which are independent like myself and open to views, are country may fall apart. If trump can't do it now I imagine no republican is going to win for a long time and the democratic party is full of morons. Trump will add more new voters this year than libertarians have in since their beginning, maybe you should vote trump and ask independents to take a look. I can compromise on Libertarian and Trump views which Ychromosome is going to here, but if Mcafee's views are in respect to his party, not all of those ideas are viable solutions for the now.

That'll take a long time, but it'll take even longer when there are people like you trying to convince everyone that it's meaningless.-Phantom Gundam


Not really it's going to take the same amount of time no matter what, which is hundreds of years. By which time all of this will be pointless.
I say once again I don't care about the two party system, that system doesn't stop a competent person from getting votes. Compromise on your ideas and don't sound like an ignoramus and maybe people will listen to some of the good stuff you got, if there is any substance. Lol your vote is based on a party not mine, I do not stand by republicans whatsoever. So there is no contradiction.
6642 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / USA
Offline
Posted 5/6/16

theYchromosome wrote:
On immigration, I should make a couple of corrections. It had been a while since I had looked at the study, and it turns out, the facts I was thinking of was that descendants of illegal immigrants are a net gain. You're correct on first generation immigrants. But on crime, I am curious, what crimes are the illegals committing? Technically, being here illegally is a crime, but if that's why they make up such a large portion, it's kind of a red herring argument. However, if they are generally committing more serious crimes, I'd like to learn more. Could you link me the study you have in mind?



Article here:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/07/illegal_aliens_murder_at_a_much_higher_rate_than_us_citizens_do.html

citing figures from the FBI and GAO.
dezkai 
12041 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 5/6/16

Nogara-san wrote:


dezkai wrote:


WeeabooWarrior wrote:

Also voted for Johnson.

Going for Trump in 2016, Bernie got screwed but also dug himself a hole by being a racist and a war monger.


Yes, Bernie was a very disappointing opposition candidate. Shot himself in the foot with that corporate message.

If only he took a leaf out of Hillary's book and took on some progressive views - he might have been able to fix his abysmal performance with the youth.


You know, she's not really that progressive. She is more than Trump...but she's also a racist and war monger and has blood on her hands.


Am I still the only one who doesn't think Trump will seriously build a wall? I mean...ain't no one gonna pay for that He can go on and on about immigrants and certain things all he wants, but he's still gotta stick to the Constitution. And I'm sure Senate ain't gonna let him get away with half the crap he says.




I hate to be that guy, but I was actually being sarcastic. Sorry lol :3

Bernie's reaaally progessive. Way moreso than Hillary and Trump. He actually fought for the civil rights back in the 60s - back when Hillary was a republican. He's also supported gay marriage for decades and *hinted* at wanting America to take a more passive role in foreign affairs (and a more balanced view of the Arab-Israeli conflict). I could go on but I've rambled enough.

Walls aren't as unrealistic as you may expect. It's just the getting-Mexico-to-pay-for-it-part. Hell, there are already a lot of walls at the border as far as I'm aware - some of them even put there by democrats.
22333 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/6/16
Hillary is garbage at trade and I believe is almost 80% corrupt and is receiving influence other than American interests. Americans are going to build a wall that mexico pays for, not because of the deficit but because they are abusing or border. They will also build the border because if they want us to support legal immigration they will first need to acknowledge the issues with their people commuting crimes (not violent just crossing or staying illegally). I am 100% for the following: Legal immigration, The LGBT community, Abortion. Trade deficits do matter China is abusing currency and we can't just ignore it like it doesn't matter. It's like someone is robbing your house and but he's only taking stuff from your basement, all the while you saw him walk in and your just sitting on the couch like nothings happening. Can't do it. Won't do it. Someone's gotta stop it.

Another gentleman already abolished your ideas on immigration quite a lax and uneducated response. If a member of your family was ever a victim of a serious crime from an illegal crossing the border you would change your mind. The wall would start to give issues to the cartel. The Mexican gov. receives a ton of contributions from cartels it is quite obvious why they don't want to build a wall. Cartels reach all the way to the top of our country and in my area several people were just confirmed kills from illegal cartel members.

I can tell you what Mcafee agrees with legalizing drugs (which I am 100% for), I'm not so sure about prostitution lol but whatever idc. Repealing Obamacare (Trump focus). Free trade, which I already explained should be fair and legitimate. Garbage Military budget which could lead to many issues which I don't feel I need to even approach. Iran, North Korea, Russia are all I need to say. We still have the best military, let's double down and let people know to check themselves before they wreck themselves, because I don't want any invasions of America. I can't tell you where I stand on privacy, if the gov can stop a violent crime by spying I ain't worried, I am no psychopath but I would still like privacy. So there's an issue I don't care about. Saying you would vote for hillary based on views that don't affect the economy is stupid as ever, now your just upset.

If you don't think there is a big difference in Trump and Hillary than I don't think the earth is in an ellipse around the sun anymore and the earth is flat. I love gay-rights and abortion and understand that argument but idc what trump says about that stuff because they don't change a thing. Abortion will never be illegal and hopefully gay-rights doesn't effect economy. Im sorry gay people but that's how its gotta be your with democrats. You acknowledge the amount of time it's going to take well I'm going to say that no amount of time will fix your 3rd party concerns. By the amount of time your party needs we will be a Type 3 civilization and have no need for trivial bs but that is not the present so don't waste your vote. I know the more I tell you to vote trump you'll be less likely to vote for him but do it and he is definitely in line with your economic ideas which is whats most important right now.

Betting on a small chance is what I call religion, and the reason you won't vote for Donald. Irrational especially in such an insurmountable time. Your small chance in no chance. Trump is what you've got he is the field because politicians suck. You need to reevaluate what is realistic.

17031 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / F / In a van down by...
Offline
Posted 5/6/16

dezkai wrote:


Nogara-san wrote:


dezkai wrote:


WeeabooWarrior wrote:

Also voted for Johnson.

Going for Trump in 2016, Bernie got screwed but also dug himself a hole by being a racist and a war monger.


Yes, Bernie was a very disappointing opposition candidate. Shot himself in the foot with that corporate message.

If only he took a leaf out of Hillary's book and took on some progressive views - he might have been able to fix his abysmal performance with the youth.


You know, she's not really that progressive. She is more than Trump...but she's also a racist and war monger and has blood on her hands.


Am I still the only one who doesn't think Trump will seriously build a wall? I mean...ain't no one gonna pay for that He can go on and on about immigrants and certain things all he wants, but he's still gotta stick to the Constitution. And I'm sure Senate ain't gonna let him get away with half the crap he says.




I hate to be that guy, but I was actually being sarcastic. Sorry lol :3


OOPS. that's okay I ain't mad




Bernie's reaaally progessive. Way moreso than Hillary and Trump. He actually fought for the civil rights back in the 60s - back when Hillary was a republican. He's also supported gay marriage for decades and *hinted* at wanting America to take a more passive role in foreign affairs (and a more balanced view of the Arab-Israeli conflict). I could go on but I've rambled enough.

Walls aren't as unrealistic as you may expect. It's just the getting-Mexico-to-pay-for-it-part. Hell, there are already a lot of walls at the border as far as I'm aware - some of them even put there by democrats.


I agree with you on Bernie, which is why I voted for him. But America hears 'socialist' and they instantly think bad things.

Mexico ain't gonna pay for that wall. And anyway, they got border guards down in the South...and people still come here so I seriously doubt that Trump is going to flatout stomp on immigrantion as much as he wants to.

24265 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 5/6/16
The way establishment republicans are talking about Trump you'd think it's Obama running again on both tickets. That would be unprecedented. A republican president who could even work with a republican congress.
dezkai 
12041 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 5/6/16

Nogara-san wrote:


dezkai wrote:


Nogara-san wrote:


dezkai wrote:


WeeabooWarrior wrote:

Also voted for Johnson.

Going for Trump in 2016, Bernie got screwed but also dug himself a hole by being a racist and a war monger.


Yes, Bernie was a very disappointing opposition candidate. Shot himself in the foot with that corporate message.

If only he took a leaf out of Hillary's book and took on some progressive views - he might have been able to fix his abysmal performance with the youth.


You know, she's not really that progressive. She is more than Trump...but she's also a racist and war monger and has blood on her hands.


Am I still the only one who doesn't think Trump will seriously build a wall? I mean...ain't no one gonna pay for that He can go on and on about immigrants and certain things all he wants, but he's still gotta stick to the Constitution. And I'm sure Senate ain't gonna let him get away with half the crap he says.




I hate to be that guy, but I was actually being sarcastic. Sorry lol :3


OOPS. that's okay I ain't mad




Bernie's reaaally progessive. Way moreso than Hillary and Trump. He actually fought for the civil rights back in the 60s - back when Hillary was a republican. He's also supported gay marriage for decades and *hinted* at wanting America to take a more passive role in foreign affairs (and a more balanced view of the Arab-Israeli conflict). I could go on but I've rambled enough.

Walls aren't as unrealistic as you may expect. It's just the getting-Mexico-to-pay-for-it-part. Hell, there are already a lot of walls at the border as far as I'm aware - some of them even put there by democrats.


I agree with you on Bernie, which is why I voted for him. But America hears 'socialist' and they instantly think bad things.

Mexico ain't gonna pay for that wall. And anyway, they got border guards down in the South...and people still come here so I seriously doubt that Trump is going to flatout stomp on immigrantion as much as he wants to.



Never underestimate the power of the American budget. If the people demand walls, the people will have walls lol.

I'm more excited about seeing that muslim ban completely implode, along with the deportation of 2 mil. illegals. That sounds like something that's going to make historians of the future facepalm so hard!
51315 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 5/6/16

maxgale wrote:

Nope, Libertarians are just selfish Liberals.


Unwilling to recognize the cost to society their policies will have, but screw it, everyone else should pay for their good time!


What are talking about? One of the core positions of libertarians is that no one should have to pay for someone else's stuff. Their stance on the economy is closer to conservatives than liberals.
23206 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Long Island
Offline
Posted 5/6/16
i probably will end up voting for some third party, since Sanders is most likely not going to get the nomination. I really don't like Trump or Hillary, but I also don't want to abstain from voting as I personally believe I'd be taking my right to vote for granted. I'm mostly Liberal, but I'm not going to give my vote to a candidate I don't believe in for the "sake of the party" or whatever. I know a third party candidate is a long shot, but my conscious won't let me vote for either of those two.
Posted 5/6/16

dezkai wrote:


WeeabooWarrior wrote:

Also voted for Johnson.

Going for Trump in 2016, Bernie got screwed but also dug himself a hole by being a racist and a war monger.


Yes, Bernie was a very disappointing opposition candidate. Shot himself in the foot with that corporate message.

If only he took a leaf out of Hillary's book and took on some progressive views - he might have been able to fix his abysmal performance with the youth.


I can smell that sarcasm lol.

Although nothing I mentioned before really had anything to do with that.
14468 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Houma
Offline
Posted 5/6/16

maniackillah wrote:

are country may fall apart.

Compromise on your ideas and don't sound like an ignoramus and maybe people will listen to some of the good stuff you got, if there is any substance.


First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.