Presidential Race 2016

[pumaAttack]

I voted for Clinton but just as easily would support Bernie.  

If he got some super delegates to swap votes, he could actually win this.

[boogielicious]

With a bit of irony, Trump's new grandson is named "Ted".

http://www.eonline.com/news/745274/ivanka-trump-gives-birth-donald-trump-s-daughter-welcomes-third-child-with-jared-kushner

 

[jamo]

2 hours ago, Lihu said:

It's really not as complicated as people think, and the USA is not the most powerful nation in the world and soon we will not be the largest economy any more.

I wouldn't say that's strictly true. Can you name a single country more powerful? We can't and shouldn't throw our weight around foolishly, but we are still by far and away the preeminent military power in the world, and it's not even particularly close.

[saevel25]

We are still very much the most powerful country in the world. In 2014 we had 70% more GDP than China. The entire EU is barely passed us.

 

 

[Braivo]

31 minutes ago, jamo said:

I wouldn't say that's strictly true. Can you name a single country more powerful? We can't and shouldn't throw our weight around foolishly, but we are still by far and away the preeminent military power in the world, and it's not even particularly close.

Military power trumps all. The very existence of our military keeps the rest of the world relatively peaceful because no one wants to get us involved. Keeps dictators from doing anything dumb because they know we'll annihilate them if needed. You think Iran / N. Korea would be this well behaved if we didn't loom over the situation? nope. 

[Lihu]

19 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

We are still very much the most powerful country in the world. In 2014 we had 70% more GDP than China. The entire EU is barely passed us.

 

 

If we successfully force China to float the RMB, their GDP will more than double and even possibly some where in between double and triple.

 

48 minutes ago, jamo said:

I wouldn't say that's strictly true. Can you name a single country more powerful? We can't and shouldn't throw our weight around foolishly, but we are still by far and away the preeminent military power in the world, and it's not even particularly close.

Not sure about this one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Military_Strength_Index

Note that Japan is 0.75 for a country with 70 million!

 

Expenditure is a different issue:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

Not quite a fair comparison as, for example, it costs less than 1/2 the price to build military equipment in China. Japan might be on par with US in costs primarily because they mostly buy US equipment.

[saevel25]

1 hour ago, Lihu said:

If we successfully force China to float the RMB, their GDP will more than double and even possibly some where in between double and triple.

China will be in trouble in the next few decades. Globalization is quickly causing people to want higher wages overseas. Then you add in that China has empty cities that no one can afford to live in. They need to build these cities because construction is a huge part of their economy and it's boosted by the government. So they are in a bad place if they stop building. It's not all roses over there for them. 

 

[Fourputt]

3 hours ago, boogielicious said:

I always have to look up these acronyms!  I guess that's what comes from being born when Eisenhower was President and Diefenbaker was PM of The Great White North. 

Yeah, I didn't even bother to look it up.  Still don't know what he means.

I was already in elementary school when Eisenhower was elected to his first term.  During his second campaign in 1956, I even wore a 3.5" diameter "I Like Ike" button to school. 

[Lihu]

3 hours ago, saevel25 said:

China will be in trouble in the next few decades. Globalization is quickly causing people to want higher wages overseas. Then you add in that China has empty cities that no one can afford to live in. They need to build these cities because construction is a huge part of their economy and it's boosted by the government. So they are in a bad place if they stop building. It's not all roses over there for them. 

No, not at all, but compared to us they are doing pretty well. In real terms their economy is already much bigger than ours, but they also have 4 times as many people.

[boogielicious]

12 hours ago, Lihu said:

No, not at all, but compared to us they are doing pretty well. In real terms their economy is already much bigger than ours, but they also have 4 times as many people.

Things are rosy there.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/28/asia/china-strike-worker-protest-trade-union/index.html

The US GDP is higher than China as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

 

[nevets88]

We're slowly getting off topic - it's POTUS race, not China.

[Lugowskins]

As someone who has never been very political at all and until this year I had never even voted. This was mostly because I've felt like every politician that runs for office seems to spout off the same bs making huge claims and saying they are for the people and change is coming when everyone and their sister knows exactly who's in their pocket and its all just for votes. I've never actually trusted a politician so I have never found one I felt deserved my vote when I don't believe in just trying to select from the lesser of 2 evils. This year has been very different for me with the emergence of Sanders for the first time I have someone I think is very genuine and cant be bought who I trust in completely. I'm all in with him and even if he doesn't win the Democratic nomination I will still be writing his name in in the election. Also on a slightly related note how much BS is the idea of the superdelegate? The more I find out about it the more it pisses me off I don't see why we cant go to a popular vote. Only reason I've seen is that it would be too "hard" to do. With the amount of technology today that's a piss poor excuse IMO.

[Golfingdad]

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/former-trump-super-pac-director-1395626161225782.html

This could be a bunch of hooey, but I could easily see it being true as well.  Or at least true for a time.

[Braivo]

28 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/former-trump-super-pac-director-1395626161225782.html

This could be a bunch of hooey, but I could easily see it being true as well.  Or at least true for a time.

I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. He likely entered the race because it was a win-win for him. 

Does he have a genuine desire to make our country better? I believe he does. 

If he loses is he any worse off than he was before? Nope. Just more popular than ever. Business will be good.

He ran because there was no downside to him doing so. Even if he loses he has positioned his children to have political success in the future. If he wins, the same is true. 

Has this gotten further that he thought possible? Maybe. But I also don't think he would have run if he didn't think he could win. He had chances to run before but knew he couldn't win. This time there was an opening. 

Now, here he stands on the verge of being the Republican nominee and you know his sights are set on winning it all. The only thing stopping him from winning it all right now is the GOP establishment's insistence on using any means possible to try to stop in, destroying their party in the process. It is sad to watch grown men in power become so desperate, really. 

On another note: These Lyin' Ted rumors of infidelity are likely true as he has yet to issue a denial. Very telling. This will bring him down eventually as he has positioned himself as the "honest, trustworthy" candidate. 

 

[newtogolf]

I think the letter from the Super Pac director is 100% accurate.  He entered the race to shake things up but his intent was to make a good showing, not win.  When the campaign started gaining support and momentum he realized there was potential there to win but he wasn't prepared to be POTUS and still isn't. 

He has shown a great amount of ignorance in many political issues.  His retorts and statements appeal to the common man who is angry at the establishment but has little insight to real foreign policy and politics.  Trump has consistently made statements off the cuff that were inaccurate, insensitive and / or impractical only to later on state a more, well thought out position.  This is consistent with someone who wasn't serious about winning and didn't make the effort to educate themselves about the real issues and underlying causes.  

I do believe he's now serious about winning and I still appreciate some of his positions now that he's had time to think them through and formulate a real approach (minus the worlds greatest wall).  His campaign should take away his Twitter password as the tweets he makes are often ignorant, such as the one that caused his super pac director to quit.  

It's one thing to send a message to the establishment, I for one love that they are squirming in their seats right now in fear of a Trump victory but we also have to live with this decision for four years. If Trump is going to get my vote he needs to show me between now and November that he can act Presidential, that he has an understanding of foreign policy, immigration, budget issues and our military.  Most importantly he needs to exhibit some self control and think through his tweets and statements and not immediately react as he has been.  

[Lihu]

2 hours ago, boogielicious said:

Things are rosy there.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/28/asia/china-strike-worker-protest-trade-union/index.html

The US GDP is higher than China as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

It's not bad, just not all roses. They have a real economy because of production and internal consumption is on the rise.

They report their GDP in RMB, which is artificially lowered. If we successfully force China (not likely) to float their currency their effective economy will be about 2 to 3 times what is reported.

[rehmwa]

7 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

If Trump is going to get my vote he needs to show me between now and November that he can act Presidential, that he has an understanding of foreign policy, immigration, budget issues and our military.  Most importantly he needs to exhibit some self control and think through his tweets and statements and not immediately react as he has been.  

That would the best he could do.  But I don't think he can dig out of the hole he's in.  Even if he could do stellar in fixing the reality of his knowledge and presentation, at this point, even if he could, he'll be strawmanned from that point on.  Frankly, it's the SOP of the established parties anyway.  If Mother Teresa ran as a republican, she'd be labeled a racist, sexist, hate-filled corporate shill.....and 50% of the populace would eat it up.

And, frankly, he dug as much of that hole as the press invented.  I don't think it's possible to climb out now, even if his ego allowed him to.

[newtogolf]

1 minute ago, rehmwa said:

That would the best he could do.  But I don't think he can dig out of the hole he's in.  Even if he could do stellar in fixing the reality of his knowledge and presentation, at this point, even if he could, he'll be strawmanned from that point on.  Frankly, it's the SOP of the established parties anyway.  If Mother Teresa ran as a republican, she'd be labeled a racist, sexist, hate-filled corporate shill.....and 50% of the populace would eat it up.

And, frankly, he dug as much of that hole as the press invented.  I don't think it's possible to climb out now, even if his ego allowed him to.

I do believe the Cruz infidelity story has some legs and Cruz is hoping to keep the details buried until after November.  I also believe Rubio leaked the story not Trump as there are past tweets from Rubio that indicates he knew something and he potentially gains the most from it.  

If Trump isn't the candidate that represents the Republicans, who is?  Kasich is too vanilla to beat Hillary or Bernie.