Hillary And Bernie, Together At Last!

[Dale]

He was for healthcare for all until March 2016 when he became the front runner and had to align with establishment Republicons on healthcare.

He never really campaigned on universal healthcare and that was never a theme of his campaign. He did defend the Canadian system in a debate. But he never campaigned on bringing that system here.

Trump has two real policy goals - which he made the bedrock of his campaign since his very first speech.

1. The border wall and enforcement of current immigration law.

2. The re-negotiating of current trade laws and punishing business who move off shore to manufacture.

Most of the other stuff are just him sharing his thoughts about policy but are not prioritized policy objectives.

 

[Dale]

I'm not crazy about his foreign policy - he's too willing to risk NATO over a couple of beans (money) .

But I don't see him as a 1%'r as policy -if anything his position on trade and jobs goes against the globalist
which Obama is one and Clinton is too ( depending on her shapeshifting)

But Clinton is an interventionist, and has a horrible record on Libya ( not Bengazi -the interventionist war that has caused ISIS to flourish in Libya)
Would Trump do the same? I don't think so

Then there are the regulations which are completely out of control. The demise of federalism - both of which Clinton would escalate.
Then there is Clinton shamelessly playing identity politics ( which are themselves divisive)

So when you get right down to it, both these candidates are awful. Pick your poison, or vote 3rd party.

I agree with a lot of what you say. His opposition to global greed trade is reason enough to vote for him over Mrs. Clinton in my opinion. His stance on that issue alone is better than anything I have seen her propose.

If Trump is able to get his 35% tax through congress on businesses that manufacture abroad - that alone would do worlds of good for this country's economy and severely weaken the corporate power in Washington. Most people don't realize this - but that is actually the issue that has the Republican Establishment so adversarial toward Trump. It's not his tone, or his language, or the fact he likes to make fun of people who piss him off. It's his stand against NAFTA and the China Trade Agreement - both of which have made the corporate buddies of the Republican Establishment rich beyond their wildest dreams.

 

[anatta]

I agree with a lot of what you say. His opposition to global greed trade is reason enough to vote for him over Mrs. Clinton in my opinion. His stance on that issue alone is better than anything I have seen her propose.

If Trump is able to get his 35% tax through congress on businesses that manufacture abroad - that alone would do worlds of good for this country's economy and severely weaken the corporate power in Washington. Most people don't realize this - but that is actually the issue that has the Republican Establishment so adversarial toward Trump. It's not his tone, or his language, or the fact he likes to make fun of people who piss him off. It's his stand against NAFTA and the China Trade Agreement - both of which have made the corporate buddies of the Republican Establishment rich beyond their wildest dreams.

I don't know if it can be renegotiated or not. I do know this administration has held the US border in utter contempt just allowing
anyone to walk in here, and then add Syrian refugees who by the nature of Syria are incapable of being vetted.

I'm tired of politicians taking the people of the USA for granted with their terrible trade agreements, and disregard for sovereignty.
Clinton really offers nothing but more of the same + she is a globalist corporatist beholden to Wall st..

I wish Trump wasn't such an asshole -but if I have to put up with his childish rants to improve the USA..so be it.

 

[Dale]

I'm tired of politicians taking the people of the USA for granted with their terrible trade agreements, and disregard for sovereignty.
Clinton really offers nothing but more of the same + she is a globalist corporatist beholden to Wall st..

That's pretty much how I feel about it.

Trump can certainly be an asshole. But that might be an asset in the long run, at least when it comes to dealing directly with the Republican Establishment types who may attempt to stand in his way on trade and the 35% tax on corporations who move offshore to manufacture. The way he manhandled Jeb Bush was quite effective as an example. And it's going to take a pit bull to get it through congress, with his supporters rallying behind him all the way. And I'm ready to sustain that effort so long as Trump remains steadfast in that goal.

If he waffles on trade though he's toast. Thankfully I see no signs that he is. In fact, he's pounding it as hard as ever even now that he has basically secured the nomination. So that makes me optimistic. We'll see how he does once the official general election starts.

 

[Phantasmal]

That's pretty much how I feel about it.

Trump can certainly be an asshole. But that might be an asset in the long run, at least when it comes to dealing directly with the Republican Establishment types who may attempt to stand in his way on trade and the 35% tax on corporations who move offshore to manufacture. Because it's going to take a pit bull to get that through, with the people rallying behind him all the way. And I am ready to sustain that effort so long as Trump remains steadfast in that goal.

Sucker, that's my prediction. He will not impose any tariffs or break any trade agreements. He is a corporatist, too

 

[Dale]

Sucker, that's my prediction. He will not impose any tariffs or break any trade agreements. He is a corporatist, too

Well I'm certainly not going to vote for the candidate who isn't even talking about imposing a tax on corporations who move offshore to manufacture (Mrs. Clinton). I have zero chance of getting it done if I did that...

If Trump doesn't follow through then I'll vote someone else next time. That's how politics works. Either way I put my vote where my policy is. I'm not going to just assume he's lying and vote for the candidate who isn't even talking about doing what I want to see done. That makes no sense at all.

 

[Phantasmal]

Well I'm certainly not going to vote for the candidate who isn't even talking about imposing a tax on corporations who move offshore to manufacture (Mrs. Clinton). I have zero chance of getting it done if I did that...

If Trump doesn't follow through then I'll vote someone else next time. That's how politics works. Either way I put my vote where my policy is. I'm not going to just assume he's lying and vote for the candidate who isn't even talking about doing what I want to see done. That makes no sense at all.

I am just amazed sane people believe this carnival barker.

 

[philly rabbit]

Socialists do not sit on the board of Wal Mart and fiercely promote and advocate for global capitalism. Mrs. Clinton and Obama both have received more money from Wall Street than any other politician in history.

They may pretend they support certain policies like Universal Healthcare (which isn't socialism btw). But what did President Obama do when he got to the White House? Did he push for Universal healthcare? No. Instead he did the opposite - and created a system that forces everyone to become the customer of the insurance companies or face a tax. They basically let the insurance companies write our healthcare laws, just as they let them write our trade laws.

Mrs. Clinton is not a socialist. She's a corrupt corporate advocate and global capitalist. And her allies on Wall Street know it.

I do agree with you that she is a activist on the second amendment and wishes to do away with our individual right to bear arms. On that we agree. But again - what does that have to do with socialism?

That doesn't mean they're not socialists. I think you're confused over this business of corporations and free enterprise vs. socialism. When the government blends private industry into government, that is called fascism. But it's still socialism.

Hillary is completely supportive of wealth redistribution.

 

[Dale]

That doesn't mean they're not socialists. I think you're confused over this business of corporations and free enterprise vs. socialism. When the government blends private industry into government, that is called fascism. But it's still socialism.

Hillary is completely supportive of wealth redistribution.

Socialism is when the Government controls production instead of private enterprise. In other words: it's when the Government claims ownership to the country's resources. Such as in Venezuela the State claims ownership to the country's oil.

Fascism is basically just another word for an authoritarian system that doesn't permit people to disagree with the Government. I don't think it has anything to do with wealth distribution or blending private industry into government.

Mrs. Clinton is a predatory global capitalist. I just see no evidence that she is a socialist as I said. She seems quite the opposite to me - and spent much of political career carrying favor with corporate America. A real socialist would not be doing that.

By wealth redistribution I suppose you are referring to collecting taxes and using that money on social programs? That's just democracy. It's not really socialism. And is spelled out pretty plainly in our constitution when it gives our congress the authority to collect taxes to provide for the general welfare.