Trump seems like a guy who will easily embrace ideas that make intuitive sense to him and have a hard time going for anything that seems counter-intuitive, no matter the math or scientific evidence which backs it up.

So you don't understand International Trade and want to elect Trump because?

Jobs/economy as a major issue is just so vague. I sincerely believe that one major impediment to economic growth is the Republican attitude towards the size/role of government.

that's well said. A strong indicator of this is wanting to build a wall along Mexico. On a deeply intellectual level there just isn't any rational reason to do that. the only reason is racism, but someone who is racist enough to want to kick out all the mexicans asap is by that persons very nature not flexible enough to make counter-intiutive judgements that go against their own visions.

Well at least this is logically consistent. If you think things are so bad that you want to roll the dice - go with Trump.

My counter-argument would be that anyone who watches conservative media all day (not saying you do) thinks things are much worse than they really are.

I do think Trump support almost always boils down to anti-immigration and anti-Islam, which is why no amount of talk about tax, trade or monetary policy will cost him much support.

especially the people who listen to Alex Jones.

You mean like Mexico sending mostly rapists across the border?

I believe that Trump sincerely believes that because he thinks that Mexico would happily empty its prisons to copy the Mariel boatlift.

Why does it matter who did what? What's done is done. Why can't we be humans first and not be divided by political lines. I don't mind calling out either candidate or party.

I do agree with Trump that the free trade deals are atrocious. Foreign companies get to undercut american companies and workers. Just can't compete with some countries that have way more lax regulations, labor laws, pollution standards, etc.

Free trade lets companies like Ford move those companies to those same countries.

http://www.latimes.com/business/auto...405-story.html

When some companies can't move, they just bring the workers here, sidestepping US law and using H-1b visas.

http://www.latimes.com/business/auto...405-story.html

Yeah, it's ok to raise the minimum wage and tax the wealthy more, but that just seems more like a short term solution that is not going to solve the problem of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.

Taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor doesn't solve the problem of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer?

Sounds like that's exactly what it does.

Like Hillary isn't a bigot also? Called a guy a ****in jew bastard in 1974.

http://buzzpo.com/hillary-clinton-an...g-jew-bastard/

Catching up on a few days of this thread, just one post really stuck out to me

rofl

Elections like these are why voting is meaningless.

good for them but gotdamn old whitepeople, step your meme game up.

The rich getting richer is fine. The problems are that it's happening along side there being too many poor (not necessarily getting poorer) and the large middle is getting poorer.

Changes in tax policy, labor law and social services seem like a perfect way address this in the short, medium and long run.

And I think Bernie is obviously right that universal health care and education are not impossible dreams, but Hillary is a step in the right direction or perhaps sideways, and Trump is a big step in the wrong direction.

There's a lot wrong with the trade deals and they have accelerated changes in manufacturing, but those were happening anyway before the deals and lots of jobs have gone to countries which are not part of any of these trade deals being talked about. And even if factory jobs do come back, that doesn't automatically mean great jobs. Factory work in the US WAS good because of labor laws and unions. Cars can be built in the US with workers making $9/hr and that's not going to be a big help to the declining middle class.

Bill Clinton was so smart to get out of office before Pets.com stopped being worth $9 trillion dollars. Also, smart for deregulating Wall Street which led to housing bubble under Bush! Also, Hillary set the trap for Bush by advocating for the Iraq War and voting for it!

Such brilliant Clinton forward planning.

Deregulation and union-busting fall under the general classification of "make American more like a third-world country to compete with third-world labor". I'm not a fan of that "solution".

I completely agree that presidents don't have that much control over the economy but do have control over stupid wars.

The only reason the economy was brought up is a poster claiming the economy as his top 5 reasons for supporting Trump.

History kind of says so. Lack of jobs, poor economy has led to a lot of civil unrest and revolutions, sometimes even things a little more minor like electing an egomaniac blowhard for president. Dead men breathe no air.

Watch and read both sides. I understand that each side over exaggerates and the truth is closer to the middle. Take climate change. No reasonable person denies the planet is getting warmer. The effects are somewhat debatable. The liberal media has said that there will be continent size hurricanes, thousand foot tsunamis, etc. This seems to also be a bit of fear mongering

I have a feeling our grandchildren would really prefer it if we erred on the side of caution.

I started writing this post in longer form as a response to the silly GWB meme, but after 10 minutes and way too many lines of text, I just said **** it.

I do that a lot these days.

The unemployment rate is hovering near 5%. That's the natural rate of unemployment. The economy is doing well by all accounts. Maybe your personal situational isn't the best. That doesn't mean the sky is falling. There's always those who have shortcomings in the economy.

They'll be too pissed about the 100T national debt we leave them with to care about the weather.

dstock,

How do you feel about immigration?