You are not logged in. Please register or login.

TheMole
 Rep: 77 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

TheMole wrote:
AtariLegend wrote:

In the unlikely scenario, Sanders beat Hillary via Super Delegates. Would the Sanders supporters call it undemocratic?

As much as I would like to see him take the nomination, it would be wholly undemocratic for him to win the vote via super delegates. I like that he's still in the race, as it allows him to keep bringing his progressive message, trying to get Hillary to pick up as much of his platform as possible. It's also wise for him to stay in, just in case the republicans or media finally manage to make their slander campaigns against Hillary (Bengazi, email scandal) stick for some reason.

Smoking Guns
 Rep: 330 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

Smoking Guns wrote:

He really should be an independent honestly as should Trump. Neither of them line up with their respective party's establishment.

Trump will win from what I am seeing right now. People don't know what he will do, but they assume he will get good people to help him and be better than HRC.

CSS 2.0
 Rep: 35 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

CSS 2.0 wrote:

Sanders has completely lost it, I take back my previous "endorsement".

slcpunk
 Rep: 149 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

slcpunk wrote:
TheMole wrote:

So, for those that support Trump, what do you think his income Tax plan is going to be like if he gets elected? He's floated a few balloons that go in different directions (more taxes on the rich, less taxes on the rich, flat rate, different rates, ...), but I'm guessing his voters would take one assumption or the other as to what he's really planning, so I'm curious.

Not that I support Trump, but his tax plan, just like the rest of the GOP blow up debt and increase deficits. They have the strangest way of dealing with debt I've ever seen. First is that they deny any part in creating it (which they all do) but then put forth plans that only exacerbate  the problem.

It would be like a married couple with a 500/month deficit deciding to cut some spending, but also cut down on their work hours as a solution. You can only cut so much before more revenue is needed.

The problem IMO is just as much the American public as the leaders they pick. They want it both ways. They want low taxes, but they also want service. Well they've had that now for decades and trillions in debt is what we end up with. The GOP are great at shifting blame towards the least among us, while the corporate barons bleed us dry. I never could understand how anybody falls for this.

buzzsaw
 Rep: 423 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

buzzsaw wrote:

It's the same reason people fall for the Democrats and their efforts to claim to bring people up while they are really trying to bring others down.

misterID
 Rep: 475 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

misterID wrote:
Cramer wrote:
TheMole wrote:

So, for those that support Trump, what do you think his income Tax plan is going to be like if he gets elected? He's floated a few balloons that go in different directions (more taxes on the rich, less taxes on the rich, flat rate, different rates, ...), but I'm guessing his voters would take one assumption or the other as to what he's really planning, so I'm curious.

Not that I support Trump, but his tax plan, just like the rest of the GOP blow up debt and increase deficits. They have the strangest way of dealing with debt I've ever seen. First is that they deny any part in creating it (which they all do) but then put forth plans that only exacerbate  the problem.

It would be like a married couple with a 500/month deficit deciding to cut some spending, but also cut down on their work hours as a solution. You can only cut so much before more revenue is needed.

The problem IMO is just as much the American public as the leaders they pick. They want it both ways. They want low taxes, but they also want service. Well they've had that now for decades and trillions in debt is what we end up with. The GOP are great at shifting blame towards the least among us, while the corporate barons bleed us dry. I never could understand how anybody falls for this.

He told his supporters he's a liar and will tell anyone anything he thinks they want to hear if it gets him what he wants (on why he supported Hillary). And they still follow him.

slcpunk
 Rep: 149 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

slcpunk wrote:

Neo Con Bill Kristol announced over the weekend that we can expect a third party run from a conservative. Looks like we'll find out in the next week or two. This is going to get interesting...

buzzsaw
 Rep: 423 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

buzzsaw wrote:

It's just going to muddy the waters.  The only good news is both parties are (rightfully imo) dealing with it.

CSS 2.0
 Rep: 35 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

CSS 2.0 wrote:

It's some random dude named David French who's an editor of The Weekly Standard and is probably most known for writing Game Of Thrones recaps...

Absolutely sensational stuff!

TheMole
 Rep: 77 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

TheMole wrote:

It's interesting to see the instant momentum behind the Libertarian candidate in the most recent polls. If this persists, it'll be curious to see who Johnson will be stealing the most votes from, conservatives or democrats...

If I were forced to make a guess I'd say conservatives are likely to lose more votes to libertarians (especially given that both names on the ticket are ex-conservatives), but I might be underestimating the importance of the religious right (although with a Trump candidacy, I find it hard to see bible belters coming out in droves to support of him).

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB