Presidential Debate

[TejanoLibre]

The Presidential Debate

Or

Monday Night Football?

Decisions , Decisions.

One is by a couple of meaningless teams that nobody cares about and the other one is.....

A tough choice.

TL.

[Dickhead]

One is a contest between two losing teams and the other is a football game.

[Big Boss Man]

This link demonstrates how Trump destroyed Rubio, Cruz and Bush. The examples from Clinton's debating past are not very strong in my opinion. Trump is a far better television personality.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?415634-1/road-white-house-debate-preview


The Presidential Debate

Or

Monday Night Football?

Decisions , Decisions.

One is by a couple of meaningless teams that nobody cares about and the other one is.....

A tough choice.

TL.

[Don B]

This link demonstrates how Trump destroyed Rubio, Cruz and Bush. The examples from Clinton's debating past are not very strong in my opinion. Trump is a far better television personality.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?415634-1/road-white-house-debate-previewThis election is best summed up in Latin:

Sic transit gloria America.

Don B.

[Bobby Doerr]

This election is best summed up in Latin:

Sic transit gloria America.

Don B.I think the quote is: sic transit gloria mundi - there goes the world to hell.

Try: si vis pace, pare bellum - vote for the Donald early and often.

[Don B]

One of the questions asked in the polls is "which candidate can best manage the economy?".

Who the hell (other than most of the population) is stupid enough to think the government should manage the economy?

There is a word for this, fascism.

Don B.

[Dickhead]

Communism also involves a totally managed economy. Socialism assumes a high level of government involvement in the economy. Capitalism uses fiscal policy to manage the economy to a somewhat lesser degree. Many economists think that a larger government sector within the economy strengthens the ability of the government to smooth out the business cycle.

I don't take a position on any of that, but as far as which candidate can 'best manage the economy,' I would argue it is probably not the one who has gone bankrupt multiple times.

[AllIWantIsLove]

One of the questions asked in the polls is "which candidate can best manage the economy?".

Who the hell (other than most of the population) is stupid enough to think the government should manage the economy?

There is a word for this, fascism.

Don B.The government does few things well. But what other choices do we have? You? Me? Wells Fargo? (Me gets my vote but probably not many others.).

Bob.

[Don B]

Communism also involves a totally managed economy. Socialism assumes a high level of government involvement in the economy. Capitalism uses fiscal policy to manage the economy to a somewhat lesser degree. Many economists think that a larger government sector within the economy strengthens the ability of the government to smooth out the business cycle.

I don't take a position on any of that, but as far as which candidate can 'best manage the economy,' I would argue it is probably not the one who has gone bankrupt multiple times.Capitalism does no such thing.

We do not have Capitalism and have never had pure Capitalism in this or any other country.

What we have is a mixed economy that becomes more socialist every day.

The comments were about what I expected.

Don B.

[Dickhead]

Maybe I'll be a bitter old man some day, too.

[Don B]

Maybe I'll be a bitter old man some day, too.As usual when you have nothing intelligent to say you resort to Ad Hominem.

Don B.

[Dickhead]

Perhaps you would care to define pure capitalism for us, then. We will be waiting with bated breath. Arguing over the internet is like the Special Olympics: even if you win, you're still retarded.

[El Perro]

Perhaps you would care to define pure capitalism for us, then. We will be waiting with bated breath. Arguing over the internet is like the Special Olympics: even if you win, you're still retarded.I'll have to remember that one.

[Don B]

Perhaps you would care to define pure capitalism for us, then. We will be waiting with bated breath. Arguing over the internet is like the Special Olympics: even if you win, you're still retarded.Try this for starters.

http://theamericancapitalistparty.com/platform.html

I posted a chart several years ago that defined Capitalism, Socialism, etc but apparently no one was interested enough in ideas to read it.

Try to discuss this rather than make stupid jokes and indulge in personal attacks.

Don B.

[Dickhead]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism

http://www.economicsdiscussion.net/government/role-of-government-in-economic-systems/4041

Pay particular attention to what James Meade has to say:

"In the view of Meade, following are the responsibilities of a government in a capitalist economy:

A. Regulating and controlling various economic situations, such as inflation and deflation, by formulating and implementing various fiscal and monetary measures".

Certainly I agree with Don B that there has never been pure capitalism anywhere, nor has there ever been pure socialism or pure communism. Certainly I agree that the US is a mixed economy with elements of both capitalism and socialism. I don't agree that it's becoming more socialistic all the time. It was much more socialistic (higher marginal tax rates, a greater level of transfer payments, programs such as C.E.T.A.) before Reagan.

And life was better then. In fact, you can look at surveys of the happiest or most satisfied countries, such as Denmark and Finland, and all are mixed economies, but with more tendency towards socialism than the US has.

However, let's get back to the title of the thread. Why on earth would anyone think that a rich asshole who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, who has never had a real job in his life, who has declared bankruptcy multiple times, who stiffs his workers and suppliers, and calls other people fat when he needs to lose about thirty pounds, would in any way represent the interests of the average US citizen? Why would anyone think he would be a "change agent" when his entire history is taking advantage of the existing system? Why are poorly educated white males rallying around someone who inherited all his money and went to fucking Wharton? My guess would be that it is because they are stupid and gullible. I think anyone who would vote for Donald J. Trump is stupid, gullible, and greedy to get something for nothing.

Trump doesn't understand many basic economic concepts: comparative advantage, deadweight loss from tariffs, and the invisible hand, just to name a few. However, he certainly understands one economic concept: rent seeking. He's spent his whole life seeking subsidies, tax breaks, and other forms of socialism.

[Don B]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism

http://www.economicsdiscussion.net/government/role-of-government-in-economic-systems/4041

Pay particular attention to what James Meade has to say:

"In the view of Meade, following are the responsibilities of a government in a capitalist economy:

A. Regulating and controlling various economic situations, such as inflation and deflation, by formulating and implementing various fiscal and monetary measures".

Certainly I agree with Don B that there has never been pure capitalism anywhere, nor has there ever been pure socialism or pure communism. Certainly I agree that the US is a mixed economy with elements of both capitalism and socialism. I don't agree that it's becoming more socialistic all the time. It was much more socialistic (higher marginal tax rates, a greater level of transfer payments, programs such as C.E.T.A.) before Reagan.

And life was better then. In fact, you can look at surveys of the happiest or most satisfied countries, such as Denmark and Finland, and all are mixed economies, but with more tendency towards socialism than the US has.

However, let's get back to the title of the thread. Why on earth would anyone think that a rich asshole who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, who has never had a real job in his life, who has declared bankruptcy multiple times, who stiffs his workers and suppliers, and calls other people fat when he needs to lose about thirty pounds, would in any way represent the interests of the average US citizen? Why would anyone think he would be a "change agent" when his entire history is taking advantage of the existing system? Why are poorly educated white males rallying around someone who inherited all his money and went to fucking Wharton? My guess would be that it is because they are stupid and gullible. I think anyone who would vote for Donald J. Trump is stupid, gullible, and greedy to get something for nothing.

Trump doesn't understand many basic economic concepts: comparative advantage, deadweight loss from tariffs, and the invisible hand, just to name a few. However, he certainly understands one economic concept: rent seeking. He's spent his whole life seeking subsidies, tax breaks, and other forms of socialism.I certainly do not consider Trump a Capitalist, further I don't see how anybody with three brain cells to rub together can support any of the Presidential candidates.

Don B.

[Dickhead]

Do you have a write-in candidate in mind? I am considering Charles Barkley, although he almost lost me when he said he didn't like white people, while being married to one. I like the fact he has manned up to his mistakes. Like when he threw that guy out the window of the bar, and when the judge asked him if he had any regrets, he said, "Yes, Your Honor; I regret that we were on the ground floor." Or when he got caught driving drunk while looking for a particular hooker and he offered to autograph the arresting officer's ass.

I could vote Libertarian if they could nominate someone other than a clueless douchebag. I saw Johnson and his 2012 running mate speak and it was just a vast intellectual wasteland. I think John Bogle would have been good but he's on his last legs. I think maybe I will write in Joakim Noah.

[Dickhead]

Ahhh well Noah isn't old enough. Damn. I guess I'll go with the Chuckster.

[Big Boss Man]

Ahhh well Noah isn't old enough. Damn. I guess I'll go with the Chuckster.Noah would have become the first anchor baby to become president. Yes Dickhead you suckered me into looking it up also. I was not sure he was an American citizen. He seems older than 31 . He moves so slow on the court you would think he was 60.

[Dickhead]

All y'all Republicans and "Libertarians" are in a world of fucking hurt now. We're definitely going to take back the Senate, and we're going to pack the Supreme Court with liberals. Suck it up, buttercup!

[Sapblows]

All y'all Republicans and "Libertarians" are in a world of fucking hurt now. We're definitely going to take back the Senate, and we're going to pack the Supreme Court with liberals. Suck it up, buttercup!Hey dickhead do you have the same malice for Hillary?

If i remember correctly i meet you at X a few years ago, you and a few of the board member were holding court. Are you the butt ugly one with red hair? The rest seemed fairly normal looking mongers, but if true i totally understand your position toward a fellow red head like trump.

[Dickhead]

I may be butt ugly but Trump is stupid and crazy, and I can get plastic surgery. Somebody needs to tell him that when you are really deep in a hole, throw away the shovel and stop digging. 16 straight years of Democratic presidents is coming, maybe even 20. Anybody remember the last time that happened? FDR + Truman. The Republican party might never recover from Trump, and could become completely irrelevant like the Whigs. Who talks about their daughter's tits? Who describes their own daughter as "voluptuous"? That's just weird and creepy.

I would have voted for Kasich over Clinton, by the way. Never did figure out why he never got off the ground. Too sane and reasonable, I guess.

[Daddy Rulz]

I would have voted for Kasich over Clinton, by the way. Never did figure out why he never got off the ground. Too sane and reasonable, I guess.If you are correct and this is indeed the end of the Republican Party (I think they will come back further to the right) then future historians are going to have a hard time putting Trump (3 divorces, serial infidelities) together with Mike Pence and Kasich not getting off the ground.

I don't think that having the divorces or fucking around matters as a choice for me, but Trump and Pence on the same ticket seems so bizarre. I think he will recover though. The bases on both sides are much more attached to their identification with the party than they are with the candidate. The Amish in Pennsylvania are behind Trump and his story is literally the opposite of everything they hold dear.

[Dickhead]

Let's examine the similarities between Clinton and Trump, and maybe some differences. Both grew up rich with silver spoons in their mouths. Both changed parties. Both had fathers who were rich assholes who aligned with the ruling party that geographically dominated, and both of their spawn changed parties as the direction in which the wind blew changed. Both are old and tired. Both say one thing to private donors and the opposite to the voting public. So there are some disturbing similarities there.

Trump's only been divorced twice, actually, although we could sure see a third one coming pretty soon. Clinton should have divorced Bill for fucking around on her, but is not very good looking and was actually even less so, relatively speaking, in her younger days. Trump is a dishonest crook who has screwed his employees, his contractors, and has declared bankruptcy six times. Clinton is a dishonest crook who tells wealthy donors she is for free trade and voters that she is a protectionist. Trump is a perverted sexual deviate whereas Hillary was gullible enough to marry a serial philanderer. However, in Bill's defense, it's well known that posthumous children lack role models and have a tough row to hoe from day one. Bill came a long way from where he started, and the same could be said of Melania. Growing up in communist Slovenia was probably not easy.

Trump has shown absurdly poor judgement on numerous occasions. Clinton showed very poor judgement in setting up her own unaccountable e-mail system. Trump has a ridiculous looking toupee and Clinton dresses like a bag lady. So I do see a lot of parallels between the two major party candidates.

But if it comes down to experience and competence, do you want a reality TV star or someone who has experience as a senator and cabinet member? Do you want someone with extensive diplomatic travel or someone with extensive travel experience looking where to put the next golf course? Do you want someone who spent 8 years in the White House as first lady or do you want someone who spent 8 years trying to get beaver shots of his beauty pageant contestants? Do you want somebody who refused to rent to people of color and thinks it's a real problem for him if somebody else gains weight? I can think of some good friends on the board who gained a lot of weight and it did not affect our friendship. I can think also think of some board members who said things like, "No fucking nigger will ever be president of the United States" and "No offense to our African American friend here, but I don't like black people." The latter two are Trump supporters, and the first of the two, umm, you were wrong.

So we need a kinder, gentler America with fewer school shootings, fewer killer cops, less sleazy pussy groping, less fast food and more sit down meals, and way way way less income inequality. How anyone who is economically marginalized thinks Trump will have their interests at heart, I can't possibly imagine, and can only postulate that they went to really bad public schools. We need to fix that, and the answer is certainly not charter schools, and absolutely for sure not home schooling, which is so popular with conservatives. In fact, everyone's kids need to go to the same school. That would be a really good start. If rich people's kids had to go to bad public schools, those schools would get better in a hurry. If the best public school teachers in the inner city got 10 year contracts for $5 million a year and idiots like Odell Beckham, Jr. Got $45k a year, that would be a really good start.

And if fucks like Trump would stop telling people in Nevada how their state's name should be pronounced, maybe people would stop mispronouncing Colorado as well.

[Oppatical]

I may be butt ugly but Trump is stupid and crazy, and I can get plastic surgery. Somebody needs to tell him that when you are really deep in a hole, throw away the shovel and stop digging. 16 straight years of Democratic presidents is coming, maybe even 20. Anybody remember the last time that happened? FDR + Truman. The Republican party might never recover from Trump, and could become completely irrelevant like the Whigs. Who talks about their daughter's tits? Who describes their own daughter as "voluptuous"? That's just weird and creepy.

I would have voted for Kasich over Clinton, by the way. Never did figure out why he never got off the ground. Too sane and reasonable, I guess.I do agree with you sir except for, obviously, the last part... Never would vote for a republic regardless of how sane and reasonable they might SOUND... But yeah.... Indeed Trump is stupid and crazy and now crazy sh*t would go around for the next 4 years. Congrats to dumbf*cks who voted for him.