You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
This girl could literally radicalize at any moment.
Edit, she probably already is.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
This is a leader here. Assigned no blame to any objects or people. Just put blame where it belongs.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
https://www.facebook.com/subjectpolitic … 279475525/
https://www.facebook.com/subjectpolitic … 279475525/
Bill Maher speaking truths...
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
This girl could literally radicalize at any moment.
Edit, she probably already is.
I'm all for free speech, but at the very least people who admit openly to such hatred should be monitored closely if not incarcerated on the spot. Unfortunately we're too loose when it comes to situations like this and there's only so much that's allowed. These people are allowed to go about their lives, spew hate, and we just hope they're all talk and no action. That doesn't work. We need to tighten up. Unfortunately there are a lot of hate groups out there. People who hate different types of people based on race, sexual proclivity, nationality, etc. It'd be near impossible to lock everyone up who doesn't quite seem right. I don't know what the answer is.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
Smoking Guns wrote:This girl could literally radicalize at any moment.
Edit, she probably already is.
I'm all for free speech, but at the very least people who admit openly to such hatred should be monitored closely if not incarcerated on the spot. Unfortunately we're too loose when it comes to situations like this and there's only so much that's allowed. These people are allowed to go about their lives, spew hate, and we just hope they're all talk and no action. That doesn't work. We need to tighten up. Unfortunately there are a lot of hate groups out there. People who hate different types of people based on race, sexual proclivity, nationality, etc. It'd be near impossible to lock everyone up who doesn't quite seem right. I don't know what the answer is.
She hates and clearly she was born in the US and her English is flawless and she is even a bit of a smartass. But at her core, is HATE. The only difference between her and a terrorist is she hasn't done the violent act yet. It is only a matter of time.
Bill Maher nailed it in the above video. The sheer numbers makes it hard to ignore.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
http://youtu.be/75Zfgj2k0KM
Here is the video above on YouTube.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
This has been mentioned in this thread before, and I've heard rumors of it from reporters in the biz. Donald Trump is not acting like he wants to win, and numbers show he's not even really mounting much of a campaign.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the … ald-trump/
He has hardly visited any swing states since clinching, and he's spending no money in any of them to speak of.
And thus, since he continues to jettison any semblance of wanting to appeal to anyone but white males, his campaign is at McCain-levels of terrible.
And all this comes before the Cleveland convention where the GOP splintering will be on national display and Paul Ryan continues to tell delegates they can do what they want. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos … ge%2Fstory
"With a group of Republican delegates working to stop Donald Trump at next month's convention, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) has given no indication that he plans to stop them.
"It's not my job to tell delegates what to do," Ryan told NBC's Chuck Todd in an interview that aired Sunday on "Meet the Press." "… They write the rules. They make their decisions."
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
Trump fires campaign boss Lewandowski
The campaign manager for presumptive Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has been fired.
A campaign spokeswoman said Corey Lewandowski would no longer be working on it and said the team was grateful to him "for his hard work and dedication".
Speaking on CNN, he did not deny being fired, replying "I don't know" when asked why he was let go.
He oversaw the New Yorker's unlikely triumph in the primary contests.
The exact reason for Mr Lewandowski's departure is not yet clear but he denied it was to do with his abrasive style.
His departure comes as the businessman faces strong resistance from senior members of his own party over his strident tone, hardline immigration policy and falling poll numbers.
Mr Lewandowski was not escorted from the building as some reported but accompanied by a "friend from the campaign", he told CNN, saying it had been a privilege to work on the team.
He also denied he had not been getting along with top Trump strategist Paul Manafort and the Trump children.
Mr Lewandowski has had a contentious relationship with the press. Earlier this year, he was charged with battery after allegedly yanking a female reporter out of Mr Trump's way after a campaign event. The charges were dropped.
One Trump campaign staff member told NBC News that the campaign was not briefed on Mr Lewandowski's firing and that right now there is "bedlam in the Trump campaign. No one knows what is happening".
Republicans have started to distance themselves from Mr Trump following his personal attacks against a Hispanic federal judge overseeing two lawsuits against him.
Among his critics is Speaker of the House and top-ranked Republican Paul Ryan, who appeared to leave the door open to a possible revolt at next month's convention.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
NOTE: Mark Zandi who did the below analysis was the former economic adviser to Republican Sen. John McCain's 2008 campaign.
Moody's Analytics analysis: Trump presidency would 'significantly' hurt economy
Donald Trump’s presidency would “significantly” weaken the country, driving the U.S. into a “lengthy recession” with nearly 3.5 million job losses and a 7 percent unemployment rate, according to a Moody’s Analytics analysis released Monday.
The analysis examined the presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s economic plans at face value, based on interviews, speeches and his campaign website. The authors of the report, however, warned that quantifying the real estate mogul’s economic polices “is complicated by their lack of specificity.”
“Broadly, Mr. Trump’s economic proposals will result in a more isolated U.S. economy. Cross-border trade and immigration will be significantly diminished, and with less trade and immigration, foreign direct investment will also be reduced,” Mark Zandi, Chris Lafakis, Dan White and Adam Ozimek wrote in the report.
His policies would also diminish the country’s growth prospects, grow federal government deficits, increase the nation’s debt and finance his “mix of much lower tax revenues and few cuts in spending” with “substantially more government borrowing.”
“Driven largely by these factors, the economy will be significantly weaker if Mr. Trump’s economic proposals are adopted. Under the scenario in which all his stated policies become law in the manner proposed, the economy suffers a lengthy recession and is smaller at the end of his four-year term than when he took office,” the authors wrote. “By the end of his presidency, there are close to 3.5 million fewer jobs and the unemployment rate rises to as high as 7%, compared with below 5% today. During Mr. Trump’s presidency, the average American household’s after-inflation income will stagnate, and stock prices and real house values will decline.”
The report also determined that Trump’s plans would hit the middle class the hardest while high-income earners would benefit the most from his tax breaks.
“Everyone receives a tax cut under his proposals, but the bulk of the cuts would go to those at the very top of the income distribution, and the job losses resulting from his other policies would likely hit lower- and middle-income households the hardest,” the report said. “The decline in wealth caused by weaker stock prices and housing values would be felt by all households.”
“Even allowing for some variability in the accuracy of the economic modeling and underlying assumptions that drive the analysis, four basic conclusions regarding the impact of Mr. Trump’s economic proposals can be reached: 1) they will result in a less global U.S. economy; 2) they will lead to larger government deficits and more debt; 3) they will largely benefit very high-income households; and 4) they will result in a weaker U.S. economy, with fewer jobs and higher unemployment,” the report stated.
Trump's campaign did not respond when asked to comment on the analysis.
The analysis acknowledges that presidential candidates often put forth proposals “that are as much political statements as firm policy positions,” adding that candidates don’t anticipate their proposals to go through the legislative process fully intact and that Trump’s policies should be viewed in that capacity.
Nevertheless, “what he is asking for is fiscally unsound,” the authors concluded.
“His tax and spending proposals will result in very large deficits and a much higher debt load. A future Congress may be able to rein in this profligacy, but it will not be easy, as there is a gulf between what he says he wants on taxes and spending and what it will take to make the budget arithmetic work,” they wrote. “He is also very suspicious of globalization. His willingness to threaten higher tariffs on U.S. trading partners and his sharp criticism of major trade deals signal a reversal on the long-running expansion of U.S. trade and foreign investment. Requiring millions of undocumented immigrants to leave the country also signals less openness to the rest of the world.”
Under almost any scenario, according to the analysis, the result of Trump’s economic policy positions “is that the U.S. economy will be more isolated and diminished.”
Moody’s Analytics will also release an analysis of Hillary Clinton’s proposals.
