In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On September 21 2016 07:01 Doodsmack wrote: "The big problem with Donald Trump was he never went right. He basically overpaid for properties, but he got people to lend him the money. He was terrific at borrowing money. If you look at his assets, and what he paid for them, and what he borrowed to get them, there was never any real equity there. He owes, perhaps, $3.5 billion now, and, if you had to pick a figure as to the value of the assets, it might be more like $2.5 billion. He’s a billion in the hole, which is a lot better than being $100 in the hole because if you’re $100 in the hole, they come and take the TV set. If you’re a billion in the hole, they say ‘hang in there Donald.’
[...]
Donald Trump failed because of leverage. He simply got infatuated with how much money he could borrow, and he did not give enough thought to how much money he could pay back.
You really don’t need leverage in this world much. If you’re smart, you’re going to make a lot of money without borrowing."
- W. Buffett, 1991
i gotta disagree, buffet technically made his fortune on borrowing. he's a damn good investor, but his model was basically taking the float from insurance (negative interest loan pretty much) and buying really big really good stuff
Trump supporters don't give a fuck about anything other than him not being hillary, except for the deplorables who just care that hes white nationalism's greatest star in decades and possibly their last chance to break into the mainstream.
On September 21 2016 07:32 TheTenthDoc wrote: So, Trump apparently called the first moderator a Democrat and said all the debates are shams. Problem is, he's a registered Republican.
Why anyone thinks someone who doesn't even check the debate moderator's party affiliation before saying he's a Democrat can be thought of by anyone as informed or competent is beyond me.
I'm sure it doesn't matter because [insert bending over backwards justification here].
The key with Trump is to whine about the debate before it starts and then once they do something he doesn't like, then he was right. Trump doesn't like playing by the rules or being told things he doesn't want to hear.
Trump has played everyone to the highest extent, perhaps unintentionally because of the extreme circumstances, but the end result is the same. In the debates all he has to do is not be a complete buffoon and he will get an A+, meanwhile HRC will have to impress with some new and effective policies we haven't heard before to get the same effect. The expectations are drastically different, yet the polls are even which means trump is heavily favored before the debates even begin.
Just for good measure, he will discredit the moderators/mainstream media to cover in case he appears poorly in any of the debates. I don't see him being negatively impacted unless he really screws it up.
Case in point: Trump goes to mexico, stands there and smiles, poll numbers go up.
On September 21 2016 08:13 biology]major wrote: Trump has played everyone to the highest extent, perhaps unintentionally because of the extreme circumstances, but the end result is the same. In the debates all he has to do is not be a complete buffoon and he will get an A+, meanwhile HRC will have to impress with some new and effective policies we haven't heard before to get the same effect. The expectations are drastically different, yet the polls are even which means trump is heavily favored before the debates even begin.
Just for good measure, he will discredit the moderators/mainstream media to cover in case he appears poorly in any of the debates. I don't see him being negatively impacted unless he really screws it up.
Case in point: Trump goes to mexico, stands there and smiles, poll numbers go up.
Yeah the Trump standard is that while his opponent is treated like a potential president of the USA, in a effort to appear unbiased the media takes it wayyy too easy on him
On September 21 2016 08:13 biology]major wrote: Trump has played everyone to the highest extent, perhaps unintentionally because of the extreme circumstances, but the end result is the same. In the debates all he has to do is not be a complete buffoon and he will get an A+, meanwhile HRC will have to impress with some new and effective policies we haven't heard before to get the same effect. The expectations are drastically different, yet the polls are even which means trump is heavily favored before the debates even begin.
Just for good measure, he will discredit the moderators/mainstream media to cover in case he appears poorly in any of the debates. I don't see him being negatively impacted unless he really screws it up.
Case in point: Trump goes to mexico, stands there and smiles, poll numbers go up.
On September 21 2016 08:13 biology]major wrote: Trump has played everyone to the highest extent, perhaps unintentionally because of the extreme circumstances, but the end result is the same. In the debates all he has to do is not be a complete buffoon and he will get an A+, meanwhile HRC will have to impress with some new and effective policies we haven't heard before to get the same effect. The expectations are drastically different, yet the polls are even which means trump is heavily favored before the debates even begin.
Just for good measure, he will discredit the moderators/mainstream media to cover in case he appears poorly in any of the debates. I don't see him being negatively impacted unless he really screws it up.
Case in point: Trump goes to mexico, stands there and smiles, poll numbers go up.
Yeah the Trump standard is that while his opponent is treated like a potential president of the USA, in a effort to appear unbiased the media takes it wayyy too easy on him
I would say it is more due to the fact that the media is simply unable to do anything. He says or tweets something everyday that in previous elections would be campaign ending. The media had so much control then, they could drag a story and put someone in the dirt for sending out the wrong tweet or having a slip up. With trump, it doesn't matter anymore. Everyone is so desensitized to his outlandish comments, the media can't affect the opinion of the populace. On top of that he has utterly destroyed the trust of the people in the media, which has been shown in recent polls to be the lowest it has ever been in history.
On September 21 2016 07:35 Jaaaaasper wrote: Trump supporters don't give a fuck about anything other than him not being hillary, except for the deplorables who just care that hes white nationalism's greatest star in decades and possibly their last chance to break into the mainstream.
There are people that never vote anything other than one party, of course, but Trump supporters like the candidate.
On September 21 2016 08:13 biology]major wrote: Trump has played everyone to the highest extent, perhaps unintentionally because of the extreme circumstances, but the end result is the same. In the debates all he has to do is not be a complete buffoon and he will get an A+, meanwhile HRC will have to impress with some new and effective policies we haven't heard before to get the same effect. The expectations are drastically different, yet the polls are even which means trump is heavily favored before the debates even begin.
Just for good measure, he will discredit the moderators/mainstream media to cover in case he appears poorly in any of the debates. I don't see him being negatively impacted unless he really screws it up.
Case in point: Trump goes to mexico, stands there and smiles, poll numbers go up.
Yeah the Trump standard is that while his opponent is treated like a potential president of the USA, in a effort to appear unbiased the media takes it wayyy too easy on him
Are we watching the same media? They fabricate attacks constantly.
The entire comedy crowd on TV is liberal. People like John Oliver, Trevor Noah, Seth Meyers, Larry Wilmore, Colbert, Stewart, SNL, it's basically their business model to go "lol Republicans."
On September 21 2016 08:13 biology]major wrote: Trump has played everyone to the highest extent, perhaps unintentionally because of the extreme circumstances, but the end result is the same. In the debates all he has to do is not be a complete buffoon and he will get an A+, meanwhile HRC will have to impress with some new and effective policies we haven't heard before to get the same effect. The expectations are drastically different, yet the polls are even which means trump is heavily favored before the debates even begin.
Just for good measure, he will discredit the moderators/mainstream media to cover in case he appears poorly in any of the debates. I don't see him being negatively impacted unless he really screws it up.
Case in point: Trump goes to mexico, stands there and smiles, poll numbers go up.
Poll numbers did not go up after the Mexico visit
I was under the impression that they did, but either way I would argue that he looked good doing it, meaning the expectations for trump from the population are extremely low. However these expectations don't line up with the polls, basically showing a even race so HRC is gonna have to bring her absolute best, while trump can just keep his cool.
Hillary Clinton is having a harder time beating Donald Trump than she bargained for. According to a recent poll, a staggering 44% of millennials say they’ll be voting for either Green party candidate Jill Stein or Libertarian Gary Johnson. The chief reason for Clinton’s dip in these polls is not – as Barack Obama claimed on Sunday – that she’s a woman (though sexism does have a lot to answer for). It’s because Clinton has assumed a third of the electorate – millennials – would vote for her out of fear of her opponent.
Simply put, we want more.
Millennials are the generation that has occupied Wall Street, shut down bridges for black lives and chained ourselves to the White House fence to stop the Keystone XL pipeline. Disillusioned by Obama’s embrace of war and austerity alike – especially after knocking on doors to get him elected – we know better than to put blind faith in any candidate for the Oval Office.
What Clinton can do now is prove that she’s listening. Doing so could bear fruit in the polls, but only if she shows she’s willing to part ways with her billionaire friends and push for policies that are in line with what millennials really want.
Since the Democratic national convention, Clinton and Trump have peddled their own politics of fear. Hers: of an ascendant far-right. His: of immigrants and the prospect of a truly multi-racial democracy. If Bernie Sanders’ primary campaign showed anything, though, it’s that young Americans are eager to vote for something – not against it.
Laying out plans for single-payer healthcare and a $15 minimum wage, Sanders beat Clinton among millennials in each one of the 27 states where they faced off in the primaries. And he might still be the most popular politician in the US today.
At a time when Americans across the political spectrum are turning against the status quo, Clinton seems to be embracing it. She spent weeks in August wooing millionaire donors in Silicon Valley and Martha’s Vineyard, and has chased endorsements from Bush-era official and war criminals like Henry Kissinger. It’s out of frustration that millennials will register protest votes, not ignorance.
Make no mistake: a vote for either Jill Stein or Gary Johnson in a swing state is a vote for Trump, and could land the US in a situation more dangerous and unstable than any it has known yet. Clinton is this country’s best hope right now. Especially if we want to avoid a future defined by hostility towards immigrants and people of color, the near certainty of catastrophic global warming and a disastrous economic plan ripped straight from the Tea Party’s playbook.
But making sure that painful, hate-filled future never comes to pass is up to the Clinton campaign now, and its ability to make an earnest and heartfelt appeal to the future of the Democratic party.
So what is it that millennials actually want? Around 70% favor wealth redistribution, one Gallup poll found, and many are eager to avoid six-figure debt for things like education and routine visits to the doctor’s office. The Movement for Black Lives released a detailed policy agenda this summer with plenty of ideas for senior Clinton staffers, and round-the-clock protests against the Dakota Access pipeline should give them a sense for where young Americans stand on new fossil fuel infrastructure and violations of indigenous rights.
On September 21 2016 08:13 biology]major wrote: Trump has played everyone to the highest extent, perhaps unintentionally because of the extreme circumstances, but the end result is the same. In the debates all he has to do is not be a complete buffoon and he will get an A+, meanwhile HRC will have to impress with some new and effective policies we haven't heard before to get the same effect. The expectations are drastically different, yet the polls are even which means trump is heavily favored before the debates even begin.
Just for good measure, he will discredit the moderators/mainstream media to cover in case he appears poorly in any of the debates. I don't see him being negatively impacted unless he really screws it up.
Case in point: Trump goes to mexico, stands there and smiles, poll numbers go up.
Yeah the Trump standard is that while his opponent is treated like a potential president of the USA, in a effort to appear unbiased the media takes it wayyy too easy on him
I would say it is more due to the fact that the media is simply unable to do anything. He says or tweets something everyday that in previous elections would be campaign ending. The media had so much control then, they could drag a story and put someone in the dirt for sending out the wrong tweet or having a slip up. With trump, it doesn't matter anymore. Everyone is so desensitized to his outlandish comments, the media can't affect the opinion of the populace. On top of that he has utterly destroyed the trust of the people in the media, which has been shown in recent polls to be the lowest it has ever been in history.
minor quibble, it wasn't trump who destroyed people's trust in the media; waht did that is an ongoing thing republicans have been doing for quite some time now.
Hillary Clinton is having a harder time beating Donald Trump than she bargained for. According to a recent poll, a staggering 44% of millennials say they’ll be voting for either Green party candidate Jill Stein or Libertarian Gary Johnson. The chief reason for Clinton’s dip in these polls is not – as Barack Obama claimed on Sunday – that she’s a woman (though sexism does have a lot to answer for). It’s because Clinton has assumed a third of the electorate – millennials – would vote for her out of fear of her opponent.
Simply put, we want more.
Millennials are the generation that has occupied Wall Street, shut down bridges for black lives and chained ourselves to the White House fence to stop the Keystone XL pipeline. Disillusioned by Obama’s embrace of war and austerity alike – especially after knocking on doors to get him elected – we know better than to put blind faith in any candidate for the Oval Office.
What Clinton can do now is prove that she’s listening. Doing so could bear fruit in the polls, but only if she shows she’s willing to part ways with her billionaire friends and push for policies that are in line with what millennials really want.
Since the Democratic national convention, Clinton and Trump have peddled their own politics of fear. Hers: of an ascendant far-right. His: of immigrants and the prospect of a truly multi-racial democracy. If Bernie Sanders’ primary campaign showed anything, though, it’s that young Americans are eager to vote for something – not against it.
Laying out plans for single-payer healthcare and a $15 minimum wage, Sanders beat Clinton among millennials in each one of the 27 states where they faced off in the primaries. And he might still be the most popular politician in the US today.
At a time when Americans across the political spectrum are turning against the status quo, Clinton seems to be embracing it. She spent weeks in August wooing millionaire donors in Silicon Valley and Martha’s Vineyard, and has chased endorsements from Bush-era official and war criminals like Henry Kissinger. It’s out of frustration that millennials will register protest votes, not ignorance.
Make no mistake: a vote for either Jill Stein or Gary Johnson in a swing state is a vote for Trump, and could land the US in a situation more dangerous and unstable than any it has known yet. Clinton is this country’s best hope right now. Especially if we want to avoid a future defined by hostility towards immigrants and people of color, the near certainty of catastrophic global warming and a disastrous economic plan ripped straight from the Tea Party’s playbook.
But making sure that painful, hate-filled future never comes to pass is up to the Clinton campaign now, and its ability to make an earnest and heartfelt appeal to the future of the Democratic party.
So what is it that millennials actually want? Around 70% favor wealth redistribution, one Gallup poll found, and many are eager to avoid six-figure debt for things like education and routine visits to the doctor’s office. The Movement for Black Lives released a detailed policy agenda this summer with plenty of ideas for senior Clinton staffers, and round-the-clock protests against the Dakota Access pipeline should give them a sense for where young Americans stand on new fossil fuel infrastructure and violations of indigenous rights.
The more I read these self-righteous, I'm-so-idealistic posts the less faith I have in my generation. Do these people not know that Clinton has pushed for most of the things they want in some for another her entire career? And maybe that some of the things they want are actually pretty stupid or unimplementable, and there's a reason a politician who is by most reasonable standards somewhere between very and pretty liberal doesn't support some particular initiatives like banning fracking or Medicare for all? Do they not understand how the incredibly flawed world we live in works?
Hillary Clinton is having a harder time beating Donald Trump than she bargained for. According to a recent poll, a staggering 44% of millennials say they’ll be voting for either Green party candidate Jill Stein or Libertarian Gary Johnson. The chief reason for Clinton’s dip in these polls is not – as Barack Obama claimed on Sunday – that she’s a woman (though sexism does have a lot to answer for). It’s because Clinton has assumed a third of the electorate – millennials – would vote for her out of fear of her opponent.
Simply put, we want more.
Millennials are the generation that has occupied Wall Street, shut down bridges for black lives and chained ourselves to the White House fence to stop the Keystone XL pipeline. Disillusioned by Obama’s embrace of war and austerity alike – especially after knocking on doors to get him elected – we know better than to put blind faith in any candidate for the Oval Office.
What Clinton can do now is prove that she’s listening. Doing so could bear fruit in the polls, but only if she shows she’s willing to part ways with her billionaire friends and push for policies that are in line with what millennials really want.
Since the Democratic national convention, Clinton and Trump have peddled their own politics of fear. Hers: of an ascendant far-right. His: of immigrants and the prospect of a truly multi-racial democracy. If Bernie Sanders’ primary campaign showed anything, though, it’s that young Americans are eager to vote for something – not against it.
Laying out plans for single-payer healthcare and a $15 minimum wage, Sanders beat Clinton among millennials in each one of the 27 states where they faced off in the primaries. And he might still be the most popular politician in the US today.
At a time when Americans across the political spectrum are turning against the status quo, Clinton seems to be embracing it. She spent weeks in August wooing millionaire donors in Silicon Valley and Martha’s Vineyard, and has chased endorsements from Bush-era official and war criminals like Henry Kissinger. It’s out of frustration that millennials will register protest votes, not ignorance.
Make no mistake: a vote for either Jill Stein or Gary Johnson in a swing state is a vote for Trump, and could land the US in a situation more dangerous and unstable than any it has known yet. Clinton is this country’s best hope right now. Especially if we want to avoid a future defined by hostility towards immigrants and people of color, the near certainty of catastrophic global warming and a disastrous economic plan ripped straight from the Tea Party’s playbook.
But making sure that painful, hate-filled future never comes to pass is up to the Clinton campaign now, and its ability to make an earnest and heartfelt appeal to the future of the Democratic party.
So what is it that millennials actually want? Around 70% favor wealth redistribution, one Gallup poll found, and many are eager to avoid six-figure debt for things like education and routine visits to the doctor’s office. The Movement for Black Lives released a detailed policy agenda this summer with plenty of ideas for senior Clinton staffers, and round-the-clock protests against the Dakota Access pipeline should give them a sense for where young Americans stand on new fossil fuel infrastructure and violations of indigenous rights.
The more I read these self-righteous, I'm-so-idealistic posts the less faith I have in my generation. Do these people not know that Clinton has pushed for most of the things they want in some for another her entire career? And maybe that some of the things they want are actually pretty stupid or unimplementable, and there's a reason a politician who is by most reasonable standards somewhere between very and pretty liberal doesn't support some particular initiatives like banning fracking or Medicare for all? Do they not understand how the incredibly flawed world we live in works?
They feel they have been cheated, and are voting against their best interests out of principle. You probably wouldn't understand if you see HRC in such a positive light.
CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) — Immersed in an intense re-election campaign and besieged for a law about transgender people and restrooms, North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory answered questions last week before Charlotte's small business community. The written questions were supposedly from audience members and a newspaper.
"Anything you like. No filter here," McCrory told the event moderator at the start of the Q-and-A, according to The Charlotte Observer.
Turns out, the three questions identified as from the Observer actually came from McCrory's campaign. The newspaper knew nothing about them. The planted questions generally were favorable to the Republican incumbent and opened the door for him to criticize his opponent, Democratic Attorney General Roy Cooper.
Editorial Page Editor Taylor Batten attended the event and said Tuesday he knew the first question hadn't come from him. Later, two other Observer reporters who were there told him the same thing, raising suspicions about the questions.
When Batten did try to ask a question, McCrory responded: "We've got three Observer questions answered already. I think you guys dominate the news enough." The governor moved on.
McCrory campaign spokesman Ricky Diaz acknowledged to the Observer the campaign provided questions because he said "we were asked to in order to keep the conversation format going."
But the head of the group that hosted the event disputed that account. Jenn Snyder, executive director of the Hood Hargett Breakfast Club, said she expected McCrory to take live audience questions. She said his campaign demanded a format that included questions of its own.
Diaz declined comment Tuesday at an event in Charlotte, where he helped escort McCrory out without taking questions.
Hillary Clinton is having a harder time beating Donald Trump than she bargained for. According to a recent poll, a staggering 44% of millennials say they’ll be voting for either Green party candidate Jill Stein or Libertarian Gary Johnson. The chief reason for Clinton’s dip in these polls is not – as Barack Obama claimed on Sunday – that she’s a woman (though sexism does have a lot to answer for). It’s because Clinton has assumed a third of the electorate – millennials – would vote for her out of fear of her opponent.
Simply put, we want more.
Millennials are the generation that has occupied Wall Street, shut down bridges for black lives and chained ourselves to the White House fence to stop the Keystone XL pipeline. Disillusioned by Obama’s embrace of war and austerity alike – especially after knocking on doors to get him elected – we know better than to put blind faith in any candidate for the Oval Office.
What Clinton can do now is prove that she’s listening. Doing so could bear fruit in the polls, but only if she shows she’s willing to part ways with her billionaire friends and push for policies that are in line with what millennials really want.
Since the Democratic national convention, Clinton and Trump have peddled their own politics of fear. Hers: of an ascendant far-right. His: of immigrants and the prospect of a truly multi-racial democracy. If Bernie Sanders’ primary campaign showed anything, though, it’s that young Americans are eager to vote for something – not against it.
Laying out plans for single-payer healthcare and a $15 minimum wage, Sanders beat Clinton among millennials in each one of the 27 states where they faced off in the primaries. And he might still be the most popular politician in the US today.
At a time when Americans across the political spectrum are turning against the status quo, Clinton seems to be embracing it. She spent weeks in August wooing millionaire donors in Silicon Valley and Martha’s Vineyard, and has chased endorsements from Bush-era official and war criminals like Henry Kissinger. It’s out of frustration that millennials will register protest votes, not ignorance.
Make no mistake: a vote for either Jill Stein or Gary Johnson in a swing state is a vote for Trump, and could land the US in a situation more dangerous and unstable than any it has known yet. Clinton is this country’s best hope right now. Especially if we want to avoid a future defined by hostility towards immigrants and people of color, the near certainty of catastrophic global warming and a disastrous economic plan ripped straight from the Tea Party’s playbook.
But making sure that painful, hate-filled future never comes to pass is up to the Clinton campaign now, and its ability to make an earnest and heartfelt appeal to the future of the Democratic party.
So what is it that millennials actually want? Around 70% favor wealth redistribution, one Gallup poll found, and many are eager to avoid six-figure debt for things like education and routine visits to the doctor’s office. The Movement for Black Lives released a detailed policy agenda this summer with plenty of ideas for senior Clinton staffers, and round-the-clock protests against the Dakota Access pipeline should give them a sense for where young Americans stand on new fossil fuel infrastructure and violations of indigenous rights.
The more I read these self-righteous, I'm-so-idealistic posts the less faith I have in my generation. Do these people not know that Clinton has pushed for most of the things they want in some for another her entire career? And maybe that some of the things they want are actually pretty stupid or unimplementable, and there's a reason a politician who is by most reasonable standards somewhere between very and pretty liberal doesn't support some particular initiatives like banning fracking or Medicare for all? Do they not understand how the incredibly flawed world we live in works?
What's worse, they don't pay respect to the fact that there are other voters. Many people don't want those things. There's no consideration for the over 50 crowd that simply come from another generation. You can't implement something just because 90% of millennials agree with it.
EPT
