(11-04-2016 09:44 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  As I've said all election cycle, if you like Ruth Bader Ginsberg by all means vote for Hillary. If you want something a little less Chairman Mao in a supreme court justice, vote for whomever you think can beat her. It's just that simple.

SNL has an awesome RBG impersonator

Max, it still defies reason to me that people who were staunch Bernie supporters can easily switch their vote to HRC so easily. She's the antithesis of everything Bernie stood for. On top of that, Trump is more in the mold of a democrat from generations past who supported making stuff in the USA. I don't know a single person who is a member of a union tied to mfg who is voting for HRC. Not one. That's USW, UAW and Teamsters. I'm talking rank and file workers - not the leadership of these unions.

No way is Trump a Demcorat from generations past, at least not since the 1930s. Trump said wages are too high. Hillary supports increasing it to $15. She supports universal health care. Trump says he has a plan that's "terrific" but won't say what it is. Hillary proposes a trillion dollars in spending on infrastructure, which would create millions of jobs. Trump doesn't. Hillary supports free education for poor and middle class families, Trump doesn't. Trump spent his business career screwing small business owners and contractors with his projects. He even just did it to his own pollster!

Now, I agree with both of their rhetoric on trade, but I don't trust either one. Trump has personally outsourced jobs, and it would be to his personal benefit not to follow through. He lies through his teeth, all the time, about everything, no matter how petty.

It's not even close who is better for the workers.

(11-04-2016 10:39 AM)Max Power Wrote:  No way is Trump a Demcorat from generations past, at least not since the 1930s. Trump said wages are too high. Hillary supports increasing it to $15. She supports universal health care. Trump says he has a plan that's "terrific" but won't say what it is. Hillary proposes a trillion dollars in spending on infrastructure, which would create millions of jobs. Trump doesn't. Hillary supports free education for poor and middle class families, Trump doesn't. Trump spent his business career screwing small business owners and contractors with his projects. He even just did it to his own pollster!

Now, I agree with both of their rhetoric on trade, but I don't trust either one. Trump has personally outsourced jobs, and it would be to his personal benefit not to follow through. He lies through his teeth, all the time, about everything, no matter how petty.

It's not even close who is better for the workers.

Hillary has ties to Wall Street. Hillary is on record as saying that you need to have 2 different positions on issues - a public one that you tell to the people and a private one that you actually believe in and support. It's also common knowledge that Hillary is not going to follow thru on most of her agenda for the workers. The leaked emails have shown that to be the case.

In the debates, Hillary is on record as trying to curb fossil fuel usage plus significantly increase the use of these fuels in favor of making a big push for solar power. No matter how much spending she does on infrastructure - which she won't deliver on btw - she'll put a lot of mfg companies out of business by jacking up the energy prices coupled with increasing corporate taxes.

Hillary's team called Sanders a doofus, showed how they were pandering to wall st, it gets leaked from wikileaks, and a few days later cuckold Bernie walks out on stage to support her.

He was nothing but fluff. No values in his core.

(11-04-2016 08:42 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I honestly don't think this will be as close at some think. I think Hillary wins by a decent margin. The difference IMO will be GOP turnout. Trump has to set records to win.

Your portfolio will be sooooooo disappointed when Trump wins.

(11-04-2016 09:42 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(11-04-2016 09:01 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(11-04-2016 08:49 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(11-03-2016 09:12 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(11-03-2016 09:01 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  You see happy that America would fall to a corrupt hypocrite but since you are a Bernie Sanders supporter, it was pretty easy to sell our your principles.

No offense HOOD..but a hell of a lot of principles will be sold out... on both sides Tuesday.

Yep.

They're both pretty much equal in every negative category. About the only thing Hillary leads in right now are her number of provable crimes.

Yep, both are terrible and yet folks on both sides are excited to vote for their brand of terrible. SMH.

I don't get it. Hold your nose and vote if you must but how anyone is excited for either of these losers is beyond me.

This has been my thought all along. It is one thing to be so against one that you vote for the other, but to be generally excited about either of these two, that I can't understand.

I'm aware of that quote. I think she may have just been telling the people in the room what they wanted to hear, but if not at least we have a candidate on record as supporting these policies, who will owe Warren and Bernie for getting her to the WH, and who will need to listen to us progressives if she wants to govern. Ignore all that and she will get primaried in 2020.

None of what you said would come close to offsetting the difference in wages, health care and education between the plans, plus it's incorrect.

Clinton proposes an "exit tax" on companies that want to take their headquarters overseas. She also wants to bar mergers with smaller foreign companies that allow U.S. companies to file their taxes overseas. That's not going to bankrupt any manufacturing companies. It's not raising the tax rate but rather raising the cost and effective tax rate for companies who would dodge US taxes (and offshore jobs) via loopholes.

And renewables are crushing fossil fuels as it becomes cheaper and cheaper by the year. It makes sense to invest now in renewables, not to mention the scientific consensus on the side effects of pumping all this carbon into the atmosphere.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2...ssil-fuels