The candidates could not be farther apart
Walter Donway writes:
I recently published a personal manifesto on the controversial question—a.k.a. adult pillow fight—of global warming/climate change. The weather used to be a safe topic of conversation, avoiding politics and religion, but now epitomizes the type of divisive political question that scuttles family reunions. Critics of “Big Climate Alarmism,” and I am one, compare it point for point with religious dogma. In reply, advocates of the view that CO2 generated by man’s activities is heating up the Earth’s atmosphere, with potentially calamitous consequences, assert that anyone who fails to see the Big Truth is like those wackos who deny that the WWII Nazi-extermination-camp Holocaust ever occurred. Who would have thought that discussing the weather conditions of not tomorrow but in 2050 could end lifelong friendships?
I am not going to debate global warming/climate change, here. I have another agenda.
In the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, which at present demands our breathless attention to personal health issues, Clinton’s email servers, Trump’s admiration of Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, Trump’s Obama “birther” obsession, and Clinton’s supposed deceptions, there nevertheless are remarkably—even startlingly—clear differences between the candidates that bear upon the future of the Great Republic and the world.
One example is the candidates’ positions on global warming/climate change. True, through the angry noise of the campaign, amplified in the echo chambers of the media, I barely discern any substantive issue. And yet, five minutes of Googling reveals a stark and (yes!) well-articulated, black-and-white difference between the candidates.
…
Yes, something is at stake when the chattering classes, including our candidates for president in 2016, have a difference of opinion over “Big Climate Alarmism.”
What characterizes Hillary Clinton is pride in what the Obama administration has accomplished in the McKibben “war of the worlds” scenario. Her position is that more must done, building on these policies, and must be done urgently.
Donald Trump is a “global warming denier.” To me, that begins to sound like an honorable designation. He seems to understand in an easy, commonsensical way that the climate changes; he understands that theories of climate change evolve; and he understands that one live scenario—advanced by solar scientists, now in disrepute for contradicting Big Climate alarmism—is that we face a coming ice age. And that to devote all resources on the basis of a national emergency to mothballing fossil fuel energy, and to erecting a worldwide structure of wind and solar power, would leave humanity utterly naked and unprepared for a new ice age Victims of the fatally wrong decision for humankind, promoted by the scientists it had come to trust, who really only wanted to be accepted by their peers and make a good living.
But Trump does not buy either scenario. He says, as quoted, “Let’s see.” But, for now, he says, do not make the American economy and jobs hostage to weather forecasting 50 or 100 years into the future.
Follow the link the read the rest of this article,
So the big question, will they even mention climate at all tonight?
The moderator will ask Trump:
“97% of all scientists know CAGW will kill billions of children, yet you think it’s a hoax. Mr. Trump, why do hate children so much?”
I am hoping for Hillary to just pass out for just 20 seconds in the middle of the debate. No harm… just enough for her to be forced to address her Parkinson-like/neurological dysfunctions. The USA does not need a chronically sick person as president.
A very long pause with a blank stare (her eyes need not cross) is sufficient!
… her right eye is wandering all over the place..
Sorry, amigo, but they’ve got her all hopped up on meds.
Which IMO is OK. If she passed out or went all gaga or on a coughing jag, then Biden would have been called off the bench and been harder to beat.
Well, here we go. I’ll try listening, but I dislike both of them so much, I may not be able to take much of the debate (still, I’m voting for Trump).
As far as speculation, Hillary mentioned “clean, renewable energy” in her first response.
Just had the 1/2 billion solar panels…
Made in China!
Because US environmental regulations make it impossible to make them here.
Boom
Took 18 minutes for her to bring it up.
She just made an issue of it.
And Donald isn’t picking up on the fact that her husband’s administration was responsible for the Great Recession, thanks to the subprime slime.
Clinton claims Trump called it “a hoax cooked up by the Chinese”
Shoot. The Chinese and Indians both called it a hoax.
He did say that. Later he claimed he was joking. He claims he is joking a lot. He’s a funny guy.
IIRC, Trump said, with obvious-to-anyone-with-an-average aptitude for discerning the dry humor (with a point, ~~who knows, (shrug), may be true~~) of a typical New Yorker: (quoting from memory) “… probably a hoax cooked up the Chinese {to ruin the American economy}.”
In other words, Simon, he did not “state” that as a fact certain, only as a plausible possibility. Which it is. If you do not realize that, you do not know much about China in the 21st century. That China says that the U.S. cooked up the idea does not negate their possibly being the cooker-uppers, O Trusting Simon.
India is right, for certain: AGW is a hoax.
when did the Chinese and Indians call it a hoax? China just ratified the Paris agreement and India announced it will next weekend…
Griff, it’s called salesmanship. The Chinese government will tell us everything we want to hear, and promise that in 15 or so years, sure, they’ll begin to reduce, recycle… blah blah blah. They do this with the full understanding that they never really need to do anything they don’t want to, that they can rewrite their own internal rules and laws in any way they see fit, at any time they want. This is their unique, totalitarian way of playing the Western leaders for chumps and benefiting economically from our (ie.your) need to “save the planet.” And the Western leaders pretty much understand this. When our Western leaders tell us “see, even the Chinese are on board with my program” that’s their way of playing US for chumps. Don’t be a chump, Griff. Western leaders don’t really think they’ve got control over the behaviors of the Chinese. Only a fool would think that.
So much for a hands off boring lovefest!
BAM! Trump says nuclear weapons and not global warming is a problem.
It has been a good debate overall, plenty of point-counterpoint. Mistakes made by both, , more by Trump in general debating skills. His points on her past mistakes and judgement land solidly.
+1!
Hillary brought it up (to satisfy Google/Ivanpah, et. al., no doubt), but
Mister Trump won the point and the debate.
**********************************************************
Trump in Sum:
1. I know about money (therefore, I can fix the economy via tax and regulation policy).
2. You have experience, yeah: BAD experience (yes!).
3. You (Democrats and H.R.C.) have messed up:
a. the U.S. inner cities (which is where Blacks and Hispanics really need help)
b. the U.S. economy by business/investment wealth-choking energy regulation and tax policy
c. the Middle East — creating the vacuum for ISIS and doubling down in it with bad deals like paying cash to Iran for a very bad deal
I want to help our country.
(Appearance/demeanor: Presidential — genuinely cares about America, well informed, strong, and competent, statesmanlike in using Secretary Clinton (glaring contrast to her bush league tactic “Donald”)
****************************************************
Clinton in Sum:
I want another chance to try to do what we’ve been trying for many years, now. This time, it will work!
I want to “help the government” (yes, she used that exact phrase).
(Appearance/demeanor: Nurse Ratchet-Lumberjack — I sound tough so I must be physically fit even though I have a serious neurological condition and wore my Devil’s Suit Red pajamas in public).
********************************
Trump won.
Yes, he won, but Clinton came across as the polished politician.
Which begs the question, why is the US having these problems?
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/26-incredible-facts-about-the-economy-that-every-american-should-know-for-the-trump-clinton-debate
“Clinton came across as the polished politician” — is a BAD thing. That equates her with typical politician lying and with her party’s failed policies. So, I think your statement would be better phrased, Yirgach, as:
Clinton came across as the polished politician, thus, Trump not only won the debate on points made, he won on “most appealing to voters looking for change in Washington, D.C.” {which at least 60% of Americans want).
Yirgach, demographics, that’s why we’re having these problems…
Missus M., i tried thrice, “snowmen against global warming” to no avail. The saints (down here in n’awlins) lost thrice and i lost 3 times in making you LOL (!). Maybe i’ll try again later with some success. Keep up the good fight!
arthur…
Yigach,
Please!
Begging the question is the name of a logical fallacy which means assuming that which you intend to demonstrate. You mean raises the question.
Trump pointed out the bubble and the US Fed’s role in pumping it by politically based monetary policy.
He also pointed out the hard landing that is inevitable if things continue as is. He didn’t mention that it’s probably too late to prevent the crash even if he is elected.
The “polished politician” aspect of Hillary may become an increasing burden on her campaign the more that Trump highlights the failing of the current administration.
“Trump won.”
I see on the betting odds, Trump down 3.2%, Clinton up 5.8%.
Nick Stokes, a link to “Election Betting Odds” of course shows
– worst case scenarios!
Oh, Arthur (smile). Sorry I missed you at 9:33pm. Well, just the THOUGHT of “snowmen against global warming” made me chuckle, so, it wasn’t strikes but balls you were racking up, there and you did NOT get “Ball four! Yerrrout!” you hit a home run.
LOL! 🙂
Ms. M.
☺
The Donald says nuclear proliferation is more important than “global warming”.
I was suprised that Hillary brought up renewables early, and gun control later, and Trump did not take what was apparently intended as bait. The only real line Trump did have on global warming is that nuclear proliferation is a much larger problem.
You’re right. IMO he dropped the ball on a number of points, but maybe he knows what he’s doing by going after the issues he did emphasize.
Here in OZ our leftist ABC reckons Shrillary won but after watching most of it I think the Don had her measure and the left will always back the left anyway .
Lots of opportunities missed by Trump though .
There are two maor debates scheduled, and it could be Trump wanted to see what attacks Hillary would use. IMO the only attack Trump did not really deal with was on tax returns, which would be simple to defuse.
Robert,
I agree, because he’s focused on the issues that help him with blue collar workers and hasn’t been schooled on issues which show the Clintons in an even more unfavorable light than trade.
So everyone agrees Americans must pay their fair share of taxes.
And that much of our tax dollars go to defense, a large percentage of which is used to provide security for other countries.
Is it unreasonable to insist that those other countries pay THEIR fair share, when we insist that our own people do?
Should we give a pass to people in foreign lands who refuse to pay up, and we pay for their free ride?
The average voters has only one or two, at the outside, three major issues that use to decide how to vote.
Wasting time on issues that aren’t important to the voters is a good way to lose an election.
Moderator, is two words about global warming, bringing up the issue? It appears to be a non-topic.
My impression is that Clinton did herself some good merely because she didn’t faint, freeze up, go on a coughing jag or otherwise demonstrate the debilitating neurological conditions which render her incapable of serving as president for four years.
Sure Clinton didn’t faint, but then she wasn’t under the pressure he was. Mmmm why was Trump continually sniffing and drinking gallons of water? I hope he is not getting sick?
Trump apparently had a cold.
Clinton apparently has: Parkinson’s Disease; deep vein thrombosis; and is on life-long Coumadin (among OTHER problems).
Hm. I wonder who I should vote for.
(Don’t worry — I’m not wondering — VOTING FOR TRUMP! 🙂 )
Aside from the clotting/stroke problems, her appearance and symptoms are consistent with Addison’s disease. That could explain why she was not brougt to an emergency room when she collapsed, if her handlers knew what the real problem was.
http://d22zlbw5ff7yks.cloudfront.net/images/uncaptioned-s6G8n-50d8c25d1b676.speg
http://d22zlbw5ff7yk5.cloudfront.net/images/uncaptioned-s6G8n-50d8c2561b676.jpeg
Along with his many other ailments, Addison’s disease afflicted JFK.
http://d22zlbw5ff7yks.cloudfront.net/images/uncaptioned-s6G8n-50d8c25b1b676.jpeg
An article with details about H. R. Clinton’s medical symptoms and likely conditions (including Parkinson’s):
(hand to chest, cobalt blue glasses, finger squeeze test, etc.)
//www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/09/hillarys_pneumonia_hokum_a_timeline.html
I agree with you Janice, that Parkinson’s is the diagnosis that provides the best fit with what we can see/have seen.
Janice Moore
Yep well Clinton kicked his billionaire bottom this time round. He got a lesson in debating. He started well and faded. Funny how he was questioning her stamina.
Hillary did well due to cheating. She obviously knew all the questions beforehand which is why she was out of the public eye for a week. And the questions were rigged, too, aimed mainly at Trump, nothing at her. A fool can win a debate run this way.
Trump’s problem was that he was facing two opponents, Hillary and the moderator.
She looked proppy at times with the eyes and the frozen facial gestures… and there was definitely a moment of the repetitive movements problem. This time it was a shoulder shrug that kept repeating. Didn’t note the time but it was fairly late in the debate. Should be obvioius to anyone watching.
Simon,
Trump, unlike Clinton, has been daily out and about, meeting and greeting the people, while she has been holed up nursing sickness and debate prepping.
On the campaign trail, you get viruses. Comes with the territory.
You mean she was cheating. This was the most rigged debate I have ever seen.
Gabro
“Trump, unlike Clinton, has been daily out and about, meeting and greeting the people, while she has been holed up nursing sickness and debate prepping.
On the campaign trail, you get viruses. Comes with the territory.”
Well good on Trumpy, but that strategy didn’t serve him well. Perhaps he should spend a little more time actually preparing, then we at least would have a debate that was a competition. Next time might be different, but this time it was a hiding. Clinton 1 Trump 0. Get over, it move on.
Trump has the best wife.
Hypothetically, what might Bill Clinton be titled if he ended up back in the White House? Prince Consort?
redneck from arkansas…
aforzarelli — You win today’s humor prize!!! — Eugene WR Gallun
☺
I think Trump missed an opportunity early on to tie together the questions about the economy, tax policy, and inner city violence by talking about his plan to create a tax Holiday for stranded offshore assets, on the condition that a certain percentage of the repatriated money then be used for investments in inner cities areas.
This one policy could bring trillions back to the US to buoy the economy, with a large fraction going to create jobs for inner city minority citizens. This would lower crime, enhance revenue, grow the economy, bring hope to those who have none, jobs where few exist…
It is a great, a brilliant plan…and he never mentioned it.
Using repatriated assets for inner city rebirth sounds like a great idea, but doesn’t take into account the amount of “leakage” which occurs during implementation. You would be lucky to see 10 cents on the dollar actually doing something useful.
Much better to remove the regulations which stifle business. For example, the City of Seattle food and retail businesses with 500 or more employees are required to give a 14-day advance notice if they change an employee’s work schedule and give 10-hour breaks between closing and opening shifts.
Hmm. Well fine, but don’t use any federal funds for that kind of local insanity.
Ten cents is better than no cents.
10% of several trillion dollars is a good start, and if the tax holiday is implemented, the money will come back.
Hundreds of billions in inner city job creation would go a long way in places with nothing.
And it would cost tax payers zero.
The money would be invested by people that know how to create jobs and opportunity and profits, and would be a starting point, as opposed to a government operated black hole for money.
And, BTW, Trump does promise to wipe away these business crushing regulations.
We know he is motivated to do so, and the President can easily do this by executive appointments and orders.
We also know she would do the opposite…doubling down on the business crushing policies of the current administration.
Her pronouncements on energy policy alone are reason enough to vote against her.
She wants to wipe out what is left of our mining and manufacturing and energy infrastructures.
Hard to rebirth inner cities when the residents are burning it all down again.
Menicholas September 26, 2016 at 8:59 pm wrote: “I think Trump missed an opportunity early on to tie together the questions about the economy, tax policy, and inner city violence by talking about his plan to create a tax Holiday for stranded offshore assets, on the condition that a certain percentage of the repatriated money then be used for investments in inner cities areas.”
Mehicholas, Trump actually did mention off-shore money and applying some of it to inner city problems.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/26/everything-said-during-tonights-presidential-debate-between-donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton/
“And here’s the thing. Republicans and Democrats agree that this [cutting taxes on off-shore assets] should be done, $2.5 trillion. I happen to think it’s double that. It’s probably $5 trillion that we can’t bring into our country, Lester. And with a little leadership, you’d get it in here very quickly, and it could be put to use on the inner cities and lots of other things, and it would be beautiful.
But we have no leadership. And honestly, that starts with Secretary Clinton.”
Any money diverted to inner cities would be wasted.
Until the people who live their want economic development, anything built there will either stand empty, or end up employing people who don’t live in the inner city.
IMHO Donald made only one mistake:
when the debate went to cyber security and hacking, Donald should have ripped into Hillarly like a pit bull on crack.
He had earlier touched on her deleted emails, but this was an opening that could have won him the presidency.
Maybe next time.
He should demand he get all the questions beforehand like Hillary. They won’t let him, of course. The Bilderberg gang controls our media.
“He should demand he get all the questions beforehand like Hillary. They won’t let him, of course. The Bilderberg gang controls our media.”
What Trump should do at the next debate is listen politely to the moderator’s question, and then Trump should ignore the question, if it doesn’t fit in with what Trump wants to discuss, and Trump should then discuss what *he* wants to talk about (Hillary can do the same if she wants but it won’t help *her*).
Trump says, “Lester, you forgot to ask Secretary Clinton about Benghazi, here, let me help you out by asking her about it myself, and then we can discuss it.”
Lester also forgot to ask Hillary about her deleted emails, and how the FBI Director described her as a liar (in so many words), and about the Clinton Crime Foundation and all the influence peddling Hillary has done as Secretary of State. How about Hillary selling 25 percent of the U.S. uranium reserve to Russia, for which her foundation received over $20 million from people affiliated with the deal. Lester didn’t ask Hillary a lot of things. Trump should do the moderator’s jobs for them if that’s what it takes.
William —
Yeah, Hillarly telling the world about her plans for cyber security — who famously said when asked if she had wiped her personal server replied — “You mean with a cloth?”
Eugene WR Gallun
Yeah, Mr. Gallun, that was the FUNNIEST segment of that show — oh, brother. The woman who not only opened the front door for cyber-spying, but, virtually hollered across the lawn, “Come on in, thieves! …. We’ll leave the light on for ya.”
Curious, this habit of presidential and would-be prime ministerial debates. If they had had them in 1930s Germany Hitler would have won hands down. Eloguence is no measure of wisdom or righteousness.
America needs change. You have had a good President for eight years, it’s about time you had a bad one.
I had many American friends who, at the time, fell for Obama’s charm and easy going oratory. I told them at the time that there were being mugged, delusional and that he would be a disaster and would disappoint. I cannot help but feel that his legacy demonstrates that.
Is America a better place for his Presidency? Is the world a better place for his Presidency? Personally, I would have thought that the clear answer to those questions is NO and NO.
America needs a good President, so does the world, but unfortunately this is not on offer in this election.
Obama has carried on with a path established by Ronald Reagan. He has done nothing to fix the financial industry. He is quite content to see jobs shipped offshore. He is also content to see poor folks growing in number and slipping further into poverty. Inequality is growing and starting to affect people’s health. In terms of lifespan, America is 31st in the world and the trend is in the wrong direction.
Obama has been a terrible president.
Inequality is somewhat bogus. If you have a poor person earning 30K and a rich person earning $1million, and then the next year the economy does great and the poor earns 60K and the rich $2 million, all of a sudden inequality is higher, and folks are screaming about a problem, even though everyone is better off. Of course when Obama policies caused a weak recovery, and now the rich person is only earning 500K and the poor is earning $zero being unemployed, all of a sudden the inequality number look much better, but who is really better off – no-one.
And no, no-one is carrying on the policies of Ronald Reagan, and they haven’t since he left office. They were disassembled starting with Bush SR and by all presidents through Obama, so now, we no longer have an economic miracle. Of course Reagan gets blamed by socialist failings for everything the socialists can’t accomplish.
The trouble is that poor white folks no longer believe in the American Dream. They can remember good jobs and a prosperous life. It doesn’t matter to them that they are still better off than the average Nigerian.
I’m not sure which policies you refer to. I was talking about deregulating the financial industry (which led to the 2008 meltdown) as well as changing the rules so our industry could send our jobs to China. No president since then has changed any of that.
Actually Bob, while I agree with you about Obama being a terrible president. I think we can thank both K-Street and Congress in general for the deregulation of the financial industry. It hasn’t been just one party or one administration. As one ex-congressman said a couple of years ago:” I’m glad I am no longer a part of that. You have too many people throwing money at you and telling you your poop don’t stink.”
Deregulation actually started in the last year of the Carter Administration with the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980. The thrifts were then deregulated almost entirely by the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 under President Reagan. Probably the ‘ icing on the cake’ was the repel of Glass–Steagall by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999 under President Clinton. On top of all that, you can then blame several generations of unintended consequences derived from initially good intentions for the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007. That all started when Henry Cisneros, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for President Clinton loosened mortgage restrictions, dropping down-payment requirements to 10%. By the time everyone go on board that train, down-payments had hit zero and income qualifications weren’t much higher.
1) Poverty is defined as a fraction of the median income. So there will always be a lot of people living in poverty. The problem is that American poverty, isn’t poverty by any rational definition of the term.
2) The only thing the government can do to stop jobs from going over seas is to get rid of the conditions that make moving jobs over seas the rational thing to do. You can’t just pass a law making it illegal, unless you want to make this country more fascist than it has become lately.
3) The bigger government gets, the bigger inequality gets.
4) Since every country measures life expectancy in a different manner, and these measures change over time, life expectancy is close to useless when comparing countries. But of course socialists like simple answers because they can’t handle the complexity of the real world.
I fully agree. The Democrat party has pretended that it is working for the people but they have thrown their lot in with a rather nasty elite.
The former middle class middle aged undereducated white population disagrees with you. They used to have good jobs and both parties saw fit to throw them on the scrap heap. They no longer care if they bring the system crashing down around their own ears. They hate Clinton, because they aren’t as stupid as the elites think they are, and will vote for Trump because he’s their only (albeit faint) hope.
In the meantime, you can still get a good job in Germany with a highschool education. link Germany cares about its population … America, not so much.
What was good about Obama?
He was good at lying.
He was good at fostering racial tensions.
He was good at spending other people’s money.
He was good at golf.
He was good at taking expensive vacations.
He was good at getting Republicans elected.
He wasn’t good at improving the economy.
He wasn’t good at creating employment.
A view from the other side of the Atlantic.
On any sort of intellectual or analytical level the performance by Trump was woeful – a clear lack of preparation, inability to focus on the questions asked, evasive, and at times straight forward untruths.
Hilary on the other hand played the conventional well prepared, informed and balanced political role she is familiar with. If a winner was selected only on the quality of the responses Hilary would be a very clear winner.
But their styles were wildly different. Hilary represents the establishment politician – balanced, careful, political. Trump played the arrogant “in your face” straight talking alternative.
For many this would be perceived as convincing (even if lacking in substance) as the conventional political process and politicians are taking a bit of a beating at the moment – not just in the US but in many parts of the world.
I think it derives from a frustration felt by many of excessive political control, societies run for the benefit of the few, lack of evident influence over the political process etc. A vote for Trump is a way to express personal frustrations and dissatisfaction – vote from the heart and not the head.
There are clear parallels with the Brexit campaign in the UK – the rational analytical Remain case was overwhelmed by an emotive message from the Leave camp who it is clear had no plan and were making up the story as they went along.
I can’t help thinking that the world will be a far more dangerous place with a Trump victory – whilst the US may be sufficiently large and powerful to ride out any problems, the role and influence of the US in world affairs may be seriously compromised through the unilateral adoption of arrogant and simplistic policies.
I am also from the opposite of the pond, and I agree with much of your analysis.
However, in my opinion, Clinton represents everything that is wrong with politics, and the political class that rule us. Whilst she has experience, that experience demonstrates clearly how inadequate and I would say incompetent she is at doing a job.
Her attitude over email security and her comments upon the Benghazi incident ought in themselves be sufficient to demonstrate that she is not a fit and proper person for public office.
She would be an utter disaster for the world if she were to get elected. I am not keen on Trump (although I do appreciate his non PC approach), but Clinton is by far the greater evil of the two
Certainly the MSM in the UK is doing its best to support Clinton and rubbish Trump, and that in itself tells you a lot. The political elite do not wish to curb their power and influence, and will do anything to protect their position.
We live in troubled times.
+ 1000
It was interesting Clinton kept lying about Trump and Trump had to defend. I work Tuesday Hillary’s presentation was about 40% truth. Then we had Lester Holt falsely Fact checking Trump. Fortunately Trump had good answers every time Lester tried to correct him. Lester’s insistance with the false narrative that Trump supported the Iraq war was also disturbing, especially since that narrative is Democrat Fantasy. Trump was asked 3 embarrassing questions which has little to do with anything. He was asked about Hillary’s birther/Muslim movement, the fake you supported the war, and tax returns. Meanwhile Hillary only got lift questions, nothing about email, Benghazi, deplorwbles, or the state of her health, all serious questions she should have been asked.
With Trump.debating two people, both lying, it was no coincidence Trump seemed a bit defensive during the debate, which may have come off as unprepared. Hillary for all the choice questions seemed to come off just as bad, and certainly not as prepared as expected with her month of prep work,
i will add it here as a reply as well as like this some will see how other countries “see this debate”.
Of course nothing insulting is meant by this but in Belqium a debate of this poor quality would not even move us to go vote for either of them. there’s no common sense in both candidates nor a real “plan”.
The politician with the most consistent plan was Clinton. Belgian press is unanimously agreeing on this. however they see this as “most prepared for the debate TV show” not best political strategy which if i were a US citizen i would be ashamed of: to know that other countries see something as important as electing a new president as a “show”.
also know that a lot of WWII veterans here compare trump with Hitler and are seeing the spectre of the 30’s rise to power again.
The Us is going through a backlash of it’s own created credit balloon. When the balloon pops it hurts, but that’s not a problem that can’t be dealt with. The real issues are multinationals that seek the most gain, and therefore move to low wage countries. Nothing can stop this motion it’s the achilles heel of the capitalist system. All well developed countries suffer from this weak spot, even ours.
i’m affraid that lowering the tax on work won’t help, that measure didn’t stop Caterpillar and other industries here from leaving to a low wage country. Actually a worker’s wage is just a tiny part of the real costs. Infrastructure and land area are costs that makes the biggest difference.
That’s where the low wage countries are really the first choice, that the wages are low is an additional “bonus”, however it’s just the small part of the story
and point is i see no real solution offered by both candidates to counter this issue.
Interesting – in WWII Jews were minding their own business, with regular jobs, and feeding their families off their labor.
Now we have another group, that immigrates mostly for the welfare, sits around, and concocts ways of destroying western society, some to the point where they will frequently blow up and shoot innocent civilians in their host country – the people who were kind enough to let them in. For pointing this out one is called Hitler. The Jews weren’t constantly bombing Germany/Europe/US – which made them scapegoats.
WW II vets should know better, they actually fought not to let terrorists, like Hitler take over the world, but now they are supporting the terrorists.
One thing I agree with you – Trump and Hillary were both horrible at the debate – both looking unprepared to me.
“The politician with the most consistent plan was Clinton.”
Could you explain “Clinton’s Plan” to me? All I heard from her was generalities.
That’s all you ever hear from her. She always describes what she is going to do, but never how she is going to do it. Hillary is very accomplished at not being pinned down on any issue.
She was ‘well prepared’ because she cheated and was given all the questions two weeks ago which were all designed to attack Trump.
A flat lie, completely unsubstantiated.
Her answer to the very first question was proof of the pudding. No one is THAT well prepared off-the-cuff and she’s usually a terrible extemporaneous speaker. That hysterical little laugh when Trump followed up on the illegal server set up about the tech now taking the 5th shows what happens when things go off-script for her.
A flat lie, completely unsubstantiated……
Even if……the perception of this is going to be her downfall
Terry Warner —
In regard to your first two paragraphs — about Hillary you miss the point entirely. Yes, she has all the facts at her fingertips — BUT ALWAYS MAKES THE WRONG DECISIONS!!! This is a woman with an unblemished record of failure. You seem to think scoring rhetorical points is the same thing as putting points up on the scoreboard. Hillary always loses the game. As regards Trump he knows how to win and will bull his way to the goal line. Actions speak louder than words.
I don’t want to make this an all nighter, so lets jump to paragraph five where you say, “Trump is a way to express personal frustrations and dissatisfaction — vote from the heart and not the head.” If one thing comes across clearly American progressives are the ones who vote from the heart and not from the head. (The same applies to you.) American progressives are all about emotion — not about reason. They strive hard to stir up suspicion, anger and outright hatred for those who disagree with them. Rule of thumb — If it screams and yells and spits on the opponent it is a Hillary supporter. That is the type of behavior the Democratic party encourages.
As far as Brexit goes — it wasn’t your ox getting gored — so you voted against it. And the fear campaign was run by those who wanted to Remain. Day after day some new horror was revealed by your press if Brexit passed. Don’t talk to me about a “rational analytical Remain case — you never presented one. Your entire campaign was based on creating fear.
And your last paragraph — Under O’Bummer America has lost the world’s respect!. That will only get worse under Hillary. One of our American president, Teddy Roosevelt said — “Speak softly but carry a big stick.”
How many times has O’Bummer drawn a red line and then not enforced it when it was crossed? Hillary will be worse. The Democratic Party believes in running its mouth and then backing down. Black Lies Matter has as its motto — “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot!” That will be Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy.
Eugene WR Gallun
The DNC must be getting ready to use the 97% excuse…
ABC live poll from last night.
Who Are You Voting For?
Donald Trump (55%, 30,240 Votes)
Jill Stein (20%, 11,020 Votes)
Gary Johnson (14%, 7,738 Votes)
Hillary Clinton (10%, 5,653 Votes)
Total Voters: 54,651
http://abcnewsgo.co/2016/09/abc-live-poll-who-are-you-voting-for/
===
Would the result of <15% eliminate Hillary from the next debate?
This is a fake news site. The poll results are made up.
And the real issue last night is: WAS HILLARY GIVEN ALL THE ‘QUESTIONS’ DURING THE LAST TWO WEEKS? It is obvious to me, she had prepared answers and knew none of the questions about her own activities would be asked. And this is a fraud, of course but then, we all knew this would be a fake debate with everything rigged in her favor.
When challenged that he had said, “Global Warming is a hoax,” he responded “The hoax is thinking we can change the climate. Just so.
!
I thought Hillary did well last night. She did what she needed to do to stay in the race. Of course, just about everything she said was untruthful but that’s what she needed to do to stay in the race. I’m kind of wondering how people are going to take her “implicit racism” comment, though. I personally, don’t like being called a racist by Hillary Clinton. Being falsely accused is one of the worst things in the world.
Trump did an adequate job, although he did miss numerous opportunities to hit on good points, but he hit on enough of them to keep him in the game. Trump is an amateur at this politics game, and Hillary is a seasoned veteran of politics and twisting the truth, yet Trump held his own.
Hillary used all her vicious attacks on Trump last night. She called him a racist, and a tax cheat, and out of control, among other things. I wonder what she will use next time. Or is she out of Trump ammunition and will have to use the same old smears next time?
The debate is really enlightening of Hillary’s character is one way. Hillary demonstrated just how easily she can distort the facts when it serves her interests. Look at her face and demeanor as she tries to hang the Obama birth certificate controversy around Trump’s neck. She know very well she was the one who first instigated the questioning of Obama’s birthplace, yet she calls Trump racist for doing the same thing. Hillary has no shame, and it was on perfect display right there.
Hillary is vulnerable on numerous issues. Trump will focus in on them more during the next two debates. Trump is just learning this skill, but he is a fast learner, so Hillary is not off the hook by a long shot.
Yeah, Trumps problem was that he didn’t do a good job of explaining it. He mentioned people no-one heard of. He should have said, Hillary your campaign started this in 2008.
Also Trump instead of being on defense, with taxes could have pointed out the huge tax dodge/slush fund the Clinton foundation is. (Clinton Foundation makes here returns all phony)
He also didn’t want to go over Hillary attacking women Bill raped. When she said things about him being anti-woman, he could have pointed out her slander attacks against mistresses, and forced engagements, and pointed out that Hillary Is the war on women.
Trump could have done better, and been better prepared. I think he will be next time he will be.
I had to turn off the debate after about 10 or 15 minutes. I just could not listen to either one of them. Hillery is a pathological liar and Trump just ‘rambles on’. I would expect a prep school bully like Trump to be able to think on his feet a bit faster. Guess all I can do is fall back on something David Middleton
said on another thread (August 15, 2016 at 4:55 am):
Anthony, I hope you see this, I think you would get a kick out of it. It brought tears to my eyes — America is.
Just an engineer (gotta be!) and his lawnmower.
“TRUMP” mowed in grass
(youtube)
News story (from Drudge link): http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2016/09/26/southeast-michigan-man-mows-58000-square-foot-trump-sign-into-lawn/
GO, TRUMP!
#(:))
Grass roots politics.
🙂
Ms. M., something unsettling about a text smiley without a nose…
:•) or 🙂 or :>) or :o) or (my personal favorite) :^)
(☺)
also unsettling is jocularity coming from the likes of nick stokes! (didn’t know he had it in him)…
Mario, no need to worry… i’m the only drunk left at the party and i don’t know how to read anyway. (☺)