Forty Two wrote:piscator wrote:Forty Two wrote:
If it's Trump v. Hillary, I vote Trump.
Not that you vote will matter in the end, but you'd rather throw a fucking match on the country than see Hillary elected?
I don't think it will be a match thrown on the country, for one, so I reject that premise.
Trump=chaos
At best, he'll appoint (or try to appoint) his inexperienced yes-men to jobs they have no background for and the government bureaucracies will either run themselves, or cost even more $$.
Who's going to be Trump's VP? Chief of Staff? Secretary of State? Oh Jesus...
He's a one-man show, folks.
Trump is, in many respects, despite his indelicate delivery, correct on many issues. Hillary is an insider, and we'd get more of the same corporatism and cronyism.
She was a Senator from New York. Wall Street is in New York. That they're still friends indicates confidence. You want fucking
Trump to rationalize the $$ system?
Trump is, for example, correct when he talks about China and Japan's currency manipulations and taxes used to keep out American products (contrary to trade deals) which creates unsustainable trade deficits and causes more and more American factories to close.
You're going to have to explain how that works. It sounds like those clever Asians have used corporatism to defeat the free market, and your solution is tariffs or some other form of corporatism?
HIllary is a shill for Wall Street. The thing that the "establishment" politicians don't understand is that there is a groundswell, not just among the uneducated, of opposition to them, and a loss of any confidence in them as serving the best interests of the US and being competent.
And you consider yourself a member of that "Groundswell"?
Do you have an IRA? Any other retirement savings or investments in the markets?
Rubio was the establishment candidate, and he is emblematic of what I'm saying. A guy who is just a professional candidate. He knows how to run a campaign, and knows how to pick talking points. But, he doesn't have worldly common sense, business acumen, or any real understanding of how the world and economic activity work.
Jeb Bush got more $$ from Wall Street than Hillary in 2015. Mitt Romney got more $$ from Wall St than Hillary or Obama in 2012.
"Competence"? I think you'll find Hillary Clinton is one of the most competent candidates that has come down the pike in quite a while. First in her class at high school, at Wellesley, Honors at Yale Law (top 5 at least), made Full Partner in the biggest $$ firm in the state in less than 5 years while working on the Watergate prosecution in her fucking
pro bono time...she's elite by any measure, and she made herself that way before she ever met Bill and became First Lady of Arkansas then First Lady of the United States for eight years, won two elections and served as Senator of the biggest $$ state in the Union, became the 67th United States Secretary of State, and ran for President of the United States.
Moreover, Hillary Clinton didn't inherit two hundred million dollars, she made it working from home in her spare time, in the gaps of her resume of national service.
Only an idiot would try to tell me Donald Trump is better qualified for the Office of President than Hillary Clinton.
Apologies for segmenting your post, but you went on a gallop of subjectivity. Maybe that explains Trump's appeal?
Of course, Mussolini had a similar appeal, but he at least made the trains run on time...