[DEBATE] Presidential Election - 2016 (closing Nov 22)

Wouldn't Mike Pence end up as President if that happens?

I'd take Trump over Pence any day.

I'm not going to condemn you for what you've said but you have said you are in high school, correct me if I'm wrong. You probably don't remember what it was like in 2007-8 at the end of 8 years of G W Bush as president as you were probably around 8 years old. I remember it well. The banking system on the verge of collapse, the stock market tanked and people's retirement savings wiped out, unemployment soaring, many industries in the US ready to disappear. We were immersed in two wars that seemed they couldn't be resolved and had destabilized an entire region with it. The debt soaring with the wars and Bush's huge tax cuts for the very wealthy. That was reality, I lived it. Look at what happened in the 2008 election. I never thought an African American president could be elected but he was. Democrats controlled both the house and the senate. I'm no big fan of Obama. He has greatly disappointed me. But we still have an automobile industry in this country, the unemployment rate is a fraction of what it was, the stock market is hitting record highs. Before being condemning you want to have context, and it seems you don't have that.

Where do you get that illegals are draining the economy? I assure you if they disappeared tomorrow our economy would tank. They do the jobs you don't want to do. They work in the fields, they work in the slaughterhouses, they clean up after you. And if you want good Christians, the majority of them are significantly more Christian than the majority of whites in this country, or Trump.

I don't know everything that Trump will do. I just know what he has done. He is putting racists and the religious intolerant in high cabinet posts in his administration. That's no secret to anyone on the left or the right. Don't take it personally. It just is what it is.

I'm not 100% sure, and yes, I would prefer Trump over him any day myself; it doesn't sound like that dream will hold to be true for too much longer... :\

You can use the news as a starting point but you should always be questioning what you're hearing because just because it's called "news" doesn't mean it's factual. Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, etc all have news commentators and people mistake them for news journalists. Because they are commentators they often slant the facts to support their commentary, they don't even deny they're doing this but people still just adopt their opinions as if they are facts.

None of them. I think they're all full of it!

because they are. How else do you explain what has happened?

us? I live in the U.S. as well so I'm included in "us" when I say that.

All you have to do is watch the news and how it's presented from each different channel and you can see how it's all slanted, biased, and thus full of it. There are people out there that think Hannity is a genius and Rachel Maddow is a genius and if the ability to manipulate the news to get gullible people to believe their slant is genius then I would agree but otherwise they are both journalistic conmen.

I would agree with Wayne for the most part. I like to keep to the major news outlets like the major networks, BBC and understand that Fox, etc.. are not going to give me unbiased news. And I like to look at multiple sources that I think are as unbiased as possible and compare what they are saying. Obviously, in all cases you have to consider context and think of it considering overall trends and my personally observed events/historic events. It is so much more difficult to get unbiased information than it used to be prior to digital news. I was just talking to a good friend today that owns a large computer networking firm and is 62 years old. We have seen huge changes to the way people get information and the ethics related to reporting news. And both agree that it is much harder now than it used to be.

No idea how the American BBC works. But in the UK, they're funded by the British government, so I'm always cautious about them being unbiased - they have plenty of reason to give biased news. And recently I've seen them giving mitigated or non-existent reporting on stuff - most recently, on the Snooper's Charter, the biggest 'let's make privacy invasion legal!' law ever passed in the Western world, which I haven't seen a single piece on by the BBC.

The two main causes I think are the push towards 24/7 news and a for-profit news organization in a climate with too much competition. What ends up happening is you can't afford to pay for real journalists and what you're left with is a path that leads you to sensationalism because that pays the bills without costing you anything because all you have to do is turn a few of your "anchors" into stars and let them spew their opinions a few hours a day.

Think back to when all there was were the major cable outlets and their news shows (ABC, NBC, CBS, etc)... it was like an hour a night, then expanded to a hour a couple times a day, then to a morning news show and an evening news show... and now we have multiple stations that do nothing but 24/7 news. That leads us to stuff like a camera pointed to the front door of a court house for 8 hours straight waiting for OJ Simpson to come out of it while a room full of talking heads talk nonsense for the entire time. That's not news, that's just figuring how to possibly fill in the time using the least amount of money.

Same sort of situation that leads to us to having reality TV shows on the History and Travel channels that have nothing to do with history or travel.

Did anyone see that Trump settled the case on Trump University for 25 million for all the poor people he swindled. There again, Trump is a business man and there are no ethics in business. There is only profit. His daughter Ivanka was showing off a diamond ring on the 60 minutes interview and the next day she was peddling it to people online. Does that seem absurd to you? It does to me. Does Trump only think how he can make more money from becoming president? Very possibly.

According to Trump campaign insiders, Trump ran to elevate his brand like Michelle Bachman did, he did not expect to or want to win hence why he offered Kasich basically the presidency as VP. He wanted nothing to do with it. He's tried to throw away his campaign multiple times - "Obama FOUNDED ISIS" - not created the vacuum which it rose out of but FOUNDED it. He probably smelled the white house closer and said screw it and went for it.

Let's see if we can get to 100 pages!

Nope, no high school here. Disabled vet and i used to wear bell bottoms because they were in style and cool. First of all, Reagen is who I want if you want to talk of presidents past. 1980-1988. Dont know if you were paying attention to the political scene back then but he rocked. The problem with the economy from the point of bush senior taaking office is that it became a war economy. a war economy always looks good when bracket it and dont look out side the brackets. Industry is cranking, people are working and cash is moving. But a war economy borrows against the future and if nothing is gained from all the war preparations and activity then your stuck footing the bill.

The idea would be to bring stuff back. Oil, gold, anything of value to offset the cost But we don't. Then on top of that we rebuild their towns and take in their refugees. We are the nicest nation on the planet.

Speaking of nice, illegal immigrants. First, what does Iran do with illegal immigrants? North Korea? Nothing good i bet. I know that Kuwait, in the last couple years, lowered the legal number of foreign work visa's allowed in the country because they dont want as many foreign workers. What about illegals on top of that?



Thats just school, now think about the strain on medical services. They are unregistered in the area and areas judge how much rescue equipment is needed in an area by registered information. They might not be prepared for an emergency because the numbers are off. If they are living in your town and taking up most of the minimum wage jobs then the minimum wage will remain low and job demand will remain low. Having millions of people not paying into the system and taking a large amout out of the system is killing us.

Like Democrats think they should get it free, you cant have free school. You cant have free health care. You cant have free food and a free house and a phone and everythng else. Life should not be full of programs to offer free stuff to everyone. Someone is paying for it.

Someone is paying for it, it is not free. Giving the banks and auto companies a bail out so they could stay in business was interesting to bad the executives of the companies still collected large bonuses. If they were allowed a bonus, why they need a bail out?

I dont speak of the religion of the illegals but of this country. This country was founded One Nation Under God. We started this country with the freedom of our religion. We did not think twice about a mention of our Lord in a book or in a picture. Now we must remove every trace of our religion from government buildings and state buildings and schools. We must conform to what others want and their feelings.

To listen to you tell me i need context, it dosent work. Everyone cant just come on over for a party in America. Whos going to pick up the bill. You going to pay for millions of party crashers? and the whole picking the fields and cleaning up after us does not work on me, the numbers dont add up. I am an educated adult. I am a college grad despite my brain damage from the military I still got some action up stairs.

It's nationalised. It is paid for by the taxpayer. Not free. Nobody ever said it was 'free'.

A none of the above option on the ballots.

You see this is the problem. its easier to sit back and collect someone eases money than to go earn your own.

Obama had many programs like the free phone program. People were on tv bragging about having 3-4 Obama phones. People live on welfare and dont care. our taxes go up to pay for all the extra people comming into the country that need school, medical, housing and food. The middle class tax payer is the work horse.

Exactly, raises taxes on the rich. Why is it that billionaires pay less in taxes than their secretaries?

In the UK - and every other country with nationalised healthcare and the other things (everyone but the US lmao) - we see it as paying for the infrastructure of the country. We pay a small amount each month dedicated to the NHS - fairly minimal, we don't mind paying for it (many want to pay more for it) - and we get healthcare free at the point of use. If we break a bone, we don't end up thousands in debt - unlike in the US, where your healthcare fees are a living nightmare.

Just tax the rich if you don't want to tax the middle class (no idea what they are in the US but they're fairly rich over here) and stop offering tax shelters to them. Simple as that.

Because otherwise they'll get up and move to another country with less taxes. And with them, goes everyone elses' jobs.

Then the government should invest on lessons to have them taught to stop being a bunch of pussies ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yes, I found the conservative rag you got your information from. Seriously? That goes back to my point before of believing any obscure thing you find on the internet that reinforces what you already think. Dude, seek the truth. Now check out a bit more reputable source of information.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/economy/immigration-myths/
You need to consider things better. The huge bailout that Bush wanted to give to banks any banks with no recourse never happened. Obama made them pay it back with interest and all has been paid back. Sure the executives should have been sent to jail and that is one thing Obama didn't do that disappoints me. How about the "bailouts" to the auto industry that the republicans wanted to let fail. Remember all that? How many jobs would have been lost then let alone hurt our national security. I voted for the godly Reagan but I assure you the republican party today is not the party of Reagan. And I will also remind you that Bush's tax cuts for the very wealthy was the first time this country has cut taxes during war time. Only for the very WEALTHY.

Now I have to ask you what you think Trump and the republican party will do for you? You must have considered that right? Do you make over a million a year? What could it possibly be? Do you use medicaid? Republicans across the country are cutting medicaid terribly. And I work in that field. Do you want the job in the fields or slaughterhouses? Is it about fear of losing your guns? Democrats really aren't going to take guns away. They had a chance but they didn't do it, did they? Seriously, what is it you think the republicans and Trump are going to do to help YOU?