Who is going to win this election in November?

[suarezguy]

It's a strong point that with over 20 years in government Hillary sure wasn't able to end the tax deductions she now claims to find so outrageous. Either she isn't really against them or her party isn't against them and she can't lead either her party or the country against them. The accomplishments she achieved that she cites for all that time are getting health insurance for kids, getting money for 9/11 responders and getting reelected senator, pretty much admitting that the case for voting for her is that her opponent is worse.

Yeah I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall at the GOP.

What posessed them to pick Trump?

A lot of the consideration was in public (debates, news analysis over months including months of primary voting). It was a bad decision but Bush and Rubio seemed very much like professional politicians, people also found Kasich pretty bland and uninspiring and Cruz had previously alienated much of the establishment to where they refused to support him. A lot of voters also felt that the other candidates and those who had endorsed them had had a lot of experience in causing or not solving problems.

 

[exocomp]

It's a strong point that with over 20 years in government Hillary sure wasn't able to end the tax deductions she now claims to find so outrageous. Either she isn't really against them or her party isn't against them and she can't lead either her party or the country against them.....

For one thing, she was in government, she wasn't the government. It was never within her purview to make that kind of change. As a president she'd be more likely to succeed if she wanted to do that, however she could still be stymied by the obnoxious right in her effort, through no fault of her own.

 

[TommyR01D]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Finn]

It's a strong point that with over 20 years in government Hillary sure wasn't able to end the tax deductions she now claims to find so outrageous. Either she isn't really against them or her party isn't against them and she can't lead either her party or the country against them. The accomplishments she achieved that she cites for all that time are getting health insurance for kids, getting money for 9/11 responders and getting reelected senator, pretty much

When was she in a position to end or change it?

 

[cooleddie74]

It's a strong point that with over 20 years in government Hillary sure wasn't able to end the tax deductions she now claims to find so outrageous.

No. It isn't. Not by a longshot.

She was First Lady for eight years, at best an unelected position of national prominence and somewhat dubious influence since a First Lady has limited means at her disposal to affect and change federal law short of sparking a national grassroots movement to alter an existing law or regulation to her favor, and even then there's no guarantee a Democratic or Republican First Lady can get her agenda through both her husband and a Congress that may or may not be controlled by the opposing party. She just can't raise her voice and stomp her foot and get something changed.

She was junior Senator from New York for eight years. One of 100 Senators in a chamber that was controlled by the Republicans for about six of those eight years. So....yeah. There was only so much even Hillary Rodham Clinton could get done on the floor of the Senate or in committee as her time was also heavily tied up in other pressing and far more important issues both domestic and international, and both America and the world post-9/11 weren't exactly focused like a laser beam on overhauling the U.S. Federal tax code to eliminate deductions for the wealthy and corporations.

So, yeah. It isn't a strong point when you look at the entire picture and see how limited her power and influence were between the day she became First Lady and her final day in office in the U.S. Senate. Try again, because that argument won't fly given the reality of both the time and the positions and offices she held.

 

[JeffinOakland]

It's ok to not like Clinton but if you're voting for Trump; shame on you.

 

[exocomp]

When was she in a position to end or change it?

That's my point as well.

 

[ichab]

For one thing, she was in government, she wasn't the government.

This comment makes no sense. If you are an elected official then you ARE a part of the government.

It was never within her purview to make that kind of change

]As a president she'd be more likely to succeed if she wanted to do that, however she could still be stymied by the obnoxious right in her effort, through no fault of her own.

That has been the excuse given for the last eight years of Obama yet Bill Clinton had to deal with Newt Gingrich and a Republican congress that tried to impeach him yet he was able to pass lots of legislation through.

 

[exocomp]

....
That has been the excuse given for the last eight years of Obama yet Bill Clinton had to deal with Newt Gingrich and a Republican congress that tried to impeach him yet he was able to pass lots of legislation through.

Be that as it may, Hilary was never President, so your objection doesn't apply to her.

 

[ichab]

Be that as it may, Hilary was never President, so your objection doesn't apply to her.

You do understand that it takes a congress to write the bill before a President can sign off on it right? She was a Senator for eight years. When she becomes President she will have to work with Senators and House members if she wants to get anything done. The Presidency is not a dictatorship.

 

[exocomp]

You do understand that it takes a congress to write the bill before a President can sign off on it right? She was a Senator for eight years. When she becomes President she will have to work with Senators and House members if she wants to get anything done. The Presidency is not a dictatorship.

I never said it was. It's you that seem to ascribe too much power to one individual. Hilary couldn't have changed the law all by herself, even if her life depended on it.

 

[ichab]

I never said it was. It's you that seem to ascribe too much power to one individual. Hilary couldn't have changed the law all by herself, even if her life depended on it.

I never said she could. But as a member of congress she certainly has the power to work with other members to close that loophole. If she did that and was stymied by other members or president bush then good for her for trying. But if she didn't even lift a finger to stop it or even voted to strentghen it then she has no room to criticize Trump.

 

[Tenacity]

It's ok to not like Clinton but if you're voting for Trump; shame on you.

It's okay not to like Trump, but it's perfectly okay to vote for him.

 

[exocomp]

It's okay not to like Trump, but it's perfectly okay to vote for him.

That's playing fast and loose with the word "okay".

 

[MacLeod]

I never said she could. But as a member of congress she certainly has the power to work with other members to close that loophole. If she did that and was stymied by other members or president bush then good for her for trying. But if she didn't even lift a finger to stop it or even voted to strentghen it then she has no room to criticize Trump.

Is there any point in spending time and policitcal capital on a bill that would likely never pass Congress? If one believes the reports you read the GOP is all about tax cuts for the top earners, if that is the case then they would be unlikely to close that particular loop hole. So back to what I said at the begining isn't it futile to waste time, etc.. on trying to pass something that'll never pass. How much time has the GOP wasted trying to repeal the PPACA, surely there was more pressing concerns that needed to be addressed in the USA.

 

[nightwind1]

It's okay not to like Trump, but it's perfectly okay to vote for him.

No, it's NOT. It's really NOT okay.

 

[JeffinOakland]

It's okay not to like Trump, but it's perfectly okay to vote for him.

No, its not ok to vote for Trump. There is no good reason to vote for him. Only bad reasons.

 

[cooleddie74]

It's okay not to like Trump, but it's perfectly okay to vote for him.

No.

No, it is not. The man is stupid, willfully ignorant and dangerous, and being a willing accomplice to such stupidity and danger is not something to be proud of.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

No.

No, it is not. The man is stupid, willfully ignorant and dangerous, and being a willing accomplice to such stupidity and danger is not something to be proud of.

But democracy......

OK I'll run off now.

 

[exocomp]

But democracy......

OK I'll run off now.

I am not sure democracy would survive four years of this guy.