US Politics/2016 Election Pick Your Poison Master Thread

[churnbabychurn]

So what does a president do which affects economics?

Why is rent so high in Westgate Lakewood? HUD
Why is daycare so expensive in Lakewood? CHS
Why is food so expensive? Food stamps
Why is my tax bill so high? See above

So what's your question exactly?

[ExGingi]

I still don't understand, my example is something from the supreme court that would have a direct and major impact on your way of life not the American culture and having 2 conservative justices appointed vs 2 liberal "progressive" activist judges over the next 4 years can make a major difference on those decisions  for the next 25 years...also if you want an economic reason that very same example I gave you can have a major economic impact bec the first and most likely repercussion.of a supreme court ruling that you can't refuse to perform a gay marriage would b the loss of tax exempt status of orgs. that refuse.

FTFY

While we don't know who Trump might nominate, and we've seen R nominations go bad (including Roberts - Obamacare is a tax, though there have been worse than him) we do know that HRC will appoint justices that would continue her legacy.

And to CBC I will just say that US Presidents do not write laws. They can sign or veto a law, and that could be overturned by a veto-overturning vote in Congress, or by the SCOTUS overturning a law or providing their interpretation. SCOTUS decisions ARE final and ARE the law of the land!

If you pay taxes and tuition, and ever hope that you or your children might get some offset or recognition for the tuition paid, you WANT to have a SCOTUS that believes that believes in minimal government intervention.

[Moshe123]

Trump loves Jews and hates blacks.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/opinion/sunday/is-donald-trump-a-racist.html?_r=0&referer=

[aygart]

Why is rent so high in Westgate Lakewood? HUD
Why is daycare so expensive in Lakewood? CHS
Why is food so expensive? Food stamps
Why is my tax bill so high? See above

So what's your question exactly?

And those were created by whom?

[churnbabychurn]

And those were created by whom?

Whoever supports welfare

[aygart]

Whoever supports welfare

You mean like a Democrat congress?

[good sam]

Repost?
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/11156794.html

[David Smith]

It's not about Donald himself as a person. It's about his whole cabinet and his team.
They are nowhere near perfect or ideal, however they are the best option at the moment; and much better than anti-Israel and the unethical, email deleting, server-switching Clinton team.

If your only problem with Hillary is her email server, vote for her. That was the biggest non issue I've ever heard of. (Yes, I know, national security, blah blah blah.)

[ilherman]

If your only problem with Hillary is her email server, vote for her. That was the biggest non issue I've ever heard of. (Yes, I know, national security, blah blah blah.)

Come again please?  Without saying blah blah.

And besides the עצם חטא there is the amount of lies she said about the whole issue. I wouldn't trust her as my local mayor.

[David Smith]

Come again please?  Without saying blah blah.

And besides the עצם חטא there is the amount of lies she said about the whole issue. I wouldn't trust her as my local mayor.

Can you explain to me the differences in the firewalls between the government servers and the Clinton servers?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/10/us/office-of-personnel-management-hackers-got-data-of-millions.html

https://www.wired.com/2015/11/cia-email-hackers-return-with-major-law-enforcement-breach/

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/


If anything, at worst she did something stupid. It's nothing which is an inherent disqualification in a candidate. None of the nobodies screaming about it have any idea what's so bad about it. They just know that the media told them to be outraged, so they're outraged. There are so many bigger issues that are so much more pertinent to the public than this.

[ad120]

I just ordered my Make America Great Again.
I can't wait to get it and proudly wear it.

[churnbabychurn]

Can you explain to me the differences in the firewalls between the government servers and the Clinton servers?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/10/us/office-of-personnel-management-hackers-got-data-of-millions.html

https://www.wired.com/2015/11/cia-email-hackers-return-with-major-law-enforcement-breach/

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/


If anything, at worst she did something stupid. It's nothing which is an inherent disqualification in a candidate. None of the nobodies screaming about it have any idea what's so bad about it. They just know that the media told them to be outraged, so they're outraged. There are so many bigger issues that are so much more pertinent to the public than this.

It's not what she did; it's why she did it!

Using her own server means she was up to sneaky business as secretary. She also obviously deleted the sneaky stuff.

If you don't believe this you are terribly naive

[ExGingi]

If you don't believe this anything a politician tells you, especially a career politician and especially during election season, you are terribly naive

FTFY

[hachover]

Can you explain to me the differences in the firewalls between the government servers and the Clinton servers?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/10/us/office-of-personnel-management-hackers-got-data-of-millions.html

https://www.wired.com/2015/11/cia-email-hackers-return-with-major-law-enforcement-breach/

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/


If anything, at worst she did something stupid. It's nothing which is an inherent disqualification in a candidate. None of the nobodies screaming about it have any idea what's so bad about it. They just know that the media told them to be outraged, so they're outraged. There are so many bigger issues that are so much more pertinent to the public than this.

It's far from the worst thing she's ever done, but it seemed to be the one tbat would finally stick. Unfortunately, she slithered out of that scandal too.

[JTZ]

If anything, at worst she did something stupid. It's nothing which is an inherent disqualification in a candidate. None of the nobodies screaming about it have any idea what's so bad about it. They just know that the media told them to be outraged, so they're outraged. There are so many bigger issues that are so much more pertinent to the public than this.

I guess lying when you get caught is now the norm and no longer a big thing. The big question for me is why she did it. It seems she wanted to protect her personal emails at the expense of top secret government info.

Do you think she would ever be able to pass a security back ground check now?

[aygart]

Can you explain to me the differences in the firewalls between the government servers and the Clinton servers?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/10/us/office-of-personnel-management-hackers-got-data-of-millions.html

https://www.wired.com/2015/11/cia-email-hackers-return-with-major-law-enforcement-breach/

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/


If anything, at worst she did something stupid. It's nothing which is an inherent disqualification in a candidate. None of the nobodies screaming about it have any idea what's so bad about it. They just know that the media told them to be outraged, so they're outraged. There are so many bigger issues that are so much more pertinent to the public than this.

none of those were for classified information. Data breaches can happen, but her security was less than gmail.

[semper fi]

http://m.clevelandjewishnews.com/news/new-jersey-rnc-attendees-split-on-trump-unified-on-cleveland/article_99ab4d2c-4f28-11e6-bcda-37666c266ce5.html

[Moshe123]

.@LatinoDecisions/@Fusion poll found that every day of the RNC, Clinton's numbers went up and Trump's went down. https://t.co/dUFfhHLP9y

[aygart]

One thing I cannot figure out is all the talk of a Trump dictatorship. Such leadrs have created dictatorships in countries where there is a parliamentary system and there is no separation of powers or where the president has significant amounts of power on his own. At the very least it would need for a parliametary body to go along with the president. In this case there is no sign of even the Rs in congress being ready to blindly go along with any and every policy put forth by Trump. The resistance from the Ds would be even greater. He does not have a blind following among the administrative state or the military either. To have the IRS go after opponents or the like requires the cooperation of the ilk of Lois Lerner. How would he get thepower to become a dictator? How would he be able to even start abridging freedoms? His opponent on the other hand has openly spoken about wanting to change the SCOTUS to enable criminal prosecution of those who produced a video against her. The administrative state has shown its willingness to cooperate with Ds in power against Rs not vise versa.

[aygart]

Who cares about scotus?
Imho the only thing that matters is the economy and security. For these the president has a large say.

Scotus is all about making serious decisions about whether men can go to the little girls rooms, killing babies, and other important stuff that affect this countries culture more than anything else. Occasionally of course they rule on things of economic importance but nothing too partisan anyway.

SCOTUS is about preserving freedom. We were one vote away from prosecution of a film producer for making a film against a candidate. You are looking at onlythe cases which the media chooses to make high profile. There are many cases each session which you never heard of but can affect you, your freedoms as well as your economics and security in ways you seem to not realize.