General Presidential Campaign: Trump vs Hillary
- Thread starter mchammer
- Start date
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Trump caught up from the lower ratings on each of the prior nights. As stated in another thread, for those voting for HRC they certainly aren't doing so for her charismatic speech delivery.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Nah, the star power of the previous nights overshadowed her, IMHO. Here was the most effective speech last night:
I think that is telling. If HRC can't turnout the vote, Trump wins. I was at a bar last night in NYC. Two prototypical older female democrats were debating the election. They hate both. Low democrat turnout favors Trump.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Were viewers tuning in to listen to the message or for entertainment? One candidate certainly offers more of the latter.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Here is a pretty quick read by Wilbur Ross and Peter Navarro on US trade policy
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/29/we-n...-trump-to-fix-us-trade-policy-commentary.html
"Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is threatening to leave the World Trade Organization and rip up agreements like the North American Free Trade agreement, and his critics predictably are branding him everything from "wrong-headed" to "insane." But here's the real deal.
When our politicians and diplomats negotiate trade deals, we lose because they don't know a good deal from a bad one. For instance, when President Bill Clinton signed NAFTA in 1993, he believed it would "create 200,000 jobs in this country by 1995 alone." Instead, the U.S. has lost over 700,000 jobs, according to the Economic Policy Institute, while our trade deficit with Mexico has rocketed from $1.6 billion in 1993 to $60 billion in 2015, according to the Commerce Department.
Clinton also lobbied for China's entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001, promising China would "play by the same open trading rules we do." Instead, the U.S. has had to file WTO case after case against China's questionable trade practices on products ranging from apparel, aircraft, and autos to shrimp, steel, and textiles.
Despite numerous WTO "victories" for the U.S., most have been pyrrhic. It takes years to adjudicate a case. In the interim, American companies go bankrupt, China takes over the market, and the court ruling becomes moot. This happened to Bethlehem and 30 other steel companies that went bankrupt waiting for relief.
As a second glaring flaw, many of America's trading partners rely on value-added taxes, and WTO rules permit VAT rebates on export sales. However, the U.S. has no VAT — yet our exports don't receive similar corporate income-tax rebates. While Congress has tried three times to modify our laws to get equal treatment, each modification was rejected by a hostile WTO, giving foreign competitors a huge tax-break edge.
The WTO also provides little or no protection against four of the most potent unfair trade practices many of our trade partners routinely engage in — currency manipulation, intellectual property theft, and the use of both sweatshop labor and pollution havens. America's status as the largest market in the world with a freely floating exchange rate and the world's most advanced set of environmental and work safety regulations makes us a defenseless victim.
As for 2012's South Korean free trade agreement, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called it a "cutting edge trade deal" that would create 70,000 new jobs. All we've gotten is a near doubling of our South Korean trade deficit and more than 75,000 jobs lost, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
All of America's free trade agreements share fundamental flaws. For example, there is no automatic rollback if China, Mexico, or South Korea fails to honor its commitments. Nor is there adequate assistance for displaced American workers. There's not even a required renegotiation if a deal turns out lopsided — as these so obviously have.
We also rarely negotiate even the easiest of concessions. For example, the Obama-Clinton team never fully analyzed what products South Korea was importing from somewhere other than the U.S. but with some help from the Korean government could have been imported from the U.S.
There are also non-tariff barriers (NTB) our trading partners regularly use to offset lowered tariffs — we experienced the same kind of tactics with Japan in the 1980s, so we should be on guard. In the Japanese case, America experienced its first real flood of illegally subsidized Asian imports, but a free trading President Reagan acted decisively as the free trader Trump would: Reagan imposed stiff defensive tariffs on Japanese imports.
Despite all these fundamental flaws, American negotiators keep making the same mistakes. Besides hurting our workers, chronic trade deficits stifle economic growth while we now owe China and other trading partners trillions in U.S. Treasury debt.
Here's the tragedy — and one that would never occur if an "art of the trade deal" Trump were in the Oval Office: All of our bad trade deals could have been good ones if we had simply bargained tougher. Safeguards going forward should include: (1) prompt triggers and automatic renegotiations if the trade gains are not distributed fairly, (2) equally prompt relief against NTBs, (3) ironclad sanctions against currency manipulation, (4) zero tolerance on intellectual property theft, and (5) stringent environmental and health and safety standards — without the proverbial "wiggle room" characterizing proposed deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
It's not too late to save America's existing trade deals through tough renegotiations. Donald Trump knows that as the world's largest and most lucrative market, America has an enormous bargaining chip.
In any negotiation or renegotiation, our guiding principle should be this: Enter into a free trade agreement only if it both increases total trade and reduces our trade deficit. When these two conditions are met, real world trade will converge with textbook theory, this country will be far more prosperous, and a now shattered faith in the global trading order will be restored. Only a Reagan or a Trump-like figure in the White House will achieve this goal."
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/29/we-n...-trump-to-fix-us-trade-policy-commentary.html
"Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is threatening to leave the World Trade Organization and rip up agreements like the North American Free Trade agreement, and his critics predictably are branding him everything from "wrong-headed" to "insane." But here's the real deal.
When our politicians and diplomats negotiate trade deals, we lose because they don't know a good deal from a bad one. For instance, when President Bill Clinton signed NAFTA in 1993, he believed it would "create 200,000 jobs in this country by 1995 alone." Instead, the U.S. has lost over 700,000 jobs, according to the Economic Policy Institute, while our trade deficit with Mexico has rocketed from $1.6 billion in 1993 to $60 billion in 2015, according to the Commerce Department.
Clinton also lobbied for China's entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001, promising China would "play by the same open trading rules we do." Instead, the U.S. has had to file WTO case after case against China's questionable trade practices on products ranging from apparel, aircraft, and autos to shrimp, steel, and textiles.
Despite numerous WTO "victories" for the U.S., most have been pyrrhic. It takes years to adjudicate a case. In the interim, American companies go bankrupt, China takes over the market, and the court ruling becomes moot. This happened to Bethlehem and 30 other steel companies that went bankrupt waiting for relief.
As a second glaring flaw, many of America's trading partners rely on value-added taxes, and WTO rules permit VAT rebates on export sales. However, the U.S. has no VAT — yet our exports don't receive similar corporate income-tax rebates. While Congress has tried three times to modify our laws to get equal treatment, each modification was rejected by a hostile WTO, giving foreign competitors a huge tax-break edge.
The WTO also provides little or no protection against four of the most potent unfair trade practices many of our trade partners routinely engage in — currency manipulation, intellectual property theft, and the use of both sweatshop labor and pollution havens. America's status as the largest market in the world with a freely floating exchange rate and the world's most advanced set of environmental and work safety regulations makes us a defenseless victim.
As for 2012's South Korean free trade agreement, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called it a "cutting edge trade deal" that would create 70,000 new jobs. All we've gotten is a near doubling of our South Korean trade deficit and more than 75,000 jobs lost, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
All of America's free trade agreements share fundamental flaws. For example, there is no automatic rollback if China, Mexico, or South Korea fails to honor its commitments. Nor is there adequate assistance for displaced American workers. There's not even a required renegotiation if a deal turns out lopsided — as these so obviously have.
We also rarely negotiate even the easiest of concessions. For example, the Obama-Clinton team never fully analyzed what products South Korea was importing from somewhere other than the U.S. but with some help from the Korean government could have been imported from the U.S.
There are also non-tariff barriers (NTB) our trading partners regularly use to offset lowered tariffs — we experienced the same kind of tactics with Japan in the 1980s, so we should be on guard. In the Japanese case, America experienced its first real flood of illegally subsidized Asian imports, but a free trading President Reagan acted decisively as the free trader Trump would: Reagan imposed stiff defensive tariffs on Japanese imports.
Despite all these fundamental flaws, American negotiators keep making the same mistakes. Besides hurting our workers, chronic trade deficits stifle economic growth while we now owe China and other trading partners trillions in U.S. Treasury debt.
Here's the tragedy — and one that would never occur if an "art of the trade deal" Trump were in the Oval Office: All of our bad trade deals could have been good ones if we had simply bargained tougher. Safeguards going forward should include: (1) prompt triggers and automatic renegotiations if the trade gains are not distributed fairly, (2) equally prompt relief against NTBs, (3) ironclad sanctions against currency manipulation, (4) zero tolerance on intellectual property theft, and (5) stringent environmental and health and safety standards — without the proverbial "wiggle room" characterizing proposed deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
It's not too late to save America's existing trade deals through tough renegotiations. Donald Trump knows that as the world's largest and most lucrative market, America has an enormous bargaining chip.
In any negotiation or renegotiation, our guiding principle should be this: Enter into a free trade agreement only if it both increases total trade and reduces our trade deficit. When these two conditions are met, real world trade will converge with textbook theory, this country will be far more prosperous, and a now shattered faith in the global trading order will be restored. Only a Reagan or a Trump-like figure in the White House will achieve this goal."
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Also telling from the last 4 days in Philly is that they do not think they can prop her up enough on her own to win it. They realize their only hope is to knock Trump down enough to make her appear to be the 'least-worst.' If that entire Convention was anything, it was this concession.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Making the Constitution itself more important than ever.
Leading to -- HRC must not be handed the SCOTUS.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Did you see the Republican convention as a celebration of Trump?
No (outside his family members), Trump didn't need it.
I believe you misspelled NOMINEE there at the end...
texas_ex2000
2,500+ Posts
Now, my Facebook feed is all about 2 New York City billionaires sniping at each other.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Did you watch the Dems in Philly?
They saw the Rep Convention as solely about Trump.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Interesting poll JF
"The USC Dornsife/LA Times Presidential Election "Daybreak" Poll is part of the ongoing Understanding America Study: (UAS) at the University of Southern California’s (USC) Dornsife Center for Economic and Social Research, in partnership with the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics and the Los Angeles Times. Every day, we invite one-seventh of the members of the UAS election panel to answer three predictive questions"
There are 3000 ( they expect more will start answering going forward)people on this particular election panel so it is a larger sampling than many polls AND they poll every day.
"The USC Dornsife/LA Times Presidential Election "Daybreak" Poll is part of the ongoing Understanding America Study: (UAS) at the University of Southern California’s (USC) Dornsife Center for Economic and Social Research, in partnership with the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics and the Los Angeles Times. Every day, we invite one-seventh of the members of the UAS election panel to answer three predictive questions"
There are 3000 ( they expect more will start answering going forward)people on this particular election panel so it is a larger sampling than many polls AND they poll every day.
Precisely, Joe. If HRC gets to place new justices with a liberal bias, the Constitution will be in serious jeopardy. That's one of the two reasons I will vote for Trump. Here are my two principal reasons:
(1) Potential appointments to the SCOTUS
(2) HRC is way too far left
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
We have already seen the erosion of Separation of Powers
And I promise they already have a plan to undue or at least modify Heller.
First Amendment shredded.
We have also already seen what Hillary thinks of the 10th Amendment and States Rights
What she would do would be to create a situation where Congress had no power. It would not matter if the people voted in a 90% Republican House & Senate. She would do whatever she wanted with a SCOTUS override. The Court itself would begin to effectively legislate. And since they long ago established themselves as the final arbiter, they would have no one to challenge them.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Looks like Trump stepped in it:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/khizr-khan-donald-trump/
Should have gone after the father instead of the mother. I wouldn't be happy if someone waved the constitution in my face and questioned my patriotism. Donald took the bait.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/khizr-khan-donald-trump/
Should have gone after the father instead of the mother. I wouldn't be happy if someone waved the constitution in my face and questioned my patriotism. Donald took the bait.
4th_floor
Dude, where's my laptop?
Obviously I am not a Trump fan and have made it clear that I will vote for Gary Johnson this year. However, it's ridiculous to focus on 4 failed projects and come to the conclusion that Trump is a poor businessman. Trump has apparently made $billions in real estate and has been a great success. Yes he has had a number of failed projects. But he starts an enormous number of projects and most are wildly successful.
There are plenty of reasons to vote against Trump. My favorite is that he is a big government liberal who will put the government's nose where ever he sees a benefit for himself. Hillary will do the same. I think Gary Johnson will at least put up a fight to shrink the government. Why should we keep voting D or R and expect a different result? If you do what you'e always done, you'll get what you always get. Let's try the Libertarians for a change.
Recent Threads
-
Trump Administration Accomplishments
- Started by LonghornCatholic
- Replies: 333
- West Mall
-
Black Lives Matter; The Cerebral Warlords of Our Time
- Started by iatrogenic
- Replies: 1K
- West Mall
-
Elon Musk Stuff
- Started by LonghornCatholic
- Replies: 504
- West Mall
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
'I Feel Duped on Climate Change'
- Started by Namewithheld
- Replies: 3K
- West Mall
