First presidential debate - September 26: Trump vs Hillary

[Stonecloak]

Trump did. That's why he didn't prepare.

I wonder how he thinks it went. I mean, he claimed to see 80% 90% poll results -- which not even Breitbart has -- but, let's be honest, his campaign staff needs to sit him the fuck down, tell him to shut the fuck up, and LISTEN TO THEM NEXT TIME. Yes-men will not help his current situation.

- - - Updated - - -



Um..isn't that backwards?

Yea, I me at it the other way.

[Kellhound]

Ah republican sound byte 101, act like you speak for the majority and sheep will believe it is the truth even though you failed to be the majority for the last 8 years.

Political sound byte, both parties do it. We really need to accept that both parties are evil.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Racist, Sexist, Xenophobe, Islamaphobe, Homophobe... which buzzwords am I missing?

Cuck, regressive liberal, triggered, beta, SJW...

[zealo]

It works in the small Scandinavian countries, not 300 million people. Take money out of the hands of the job makers and there are no jobs for the consumer class. We can debate this for years.

The real problem is that Americans don't want to pay the taxes Scandinavians do, not one of scale.

Economics and healthcare systems do scale up well, when you consider our countries are basically the same size as some of your mid sized states. But it requires a lot heavier taxing than what's currently going on.

[mvaliz]

Your entire post is mostly wrong, but this is the wrongest.

...It's not "Wrongest"... it's "Bigly".

>_<

[alexw]

Your entire post is mostly wrong, but this is the wrongest. When you have money you use it to make more money. At least that's what any intelligent wealthy person has done since forever. You don't hire them to do nothing, you hire them to do what you other employees are doing that's making your money. When you take away their money you incentivize them to save money as much as possible to stay in business. That sure as hell means not hiring $15 minimum wage US workers.

You hire them to make money by producing goods and services to sell. Ergo no increase in consumer demand means no hiring. It doesn't matter a damn if they want to make money or not. If there is no rise in consumer demand no-one will be hired. Period.

[Jtbrig7390]

...It's not "Wrongest"... it's "Bigly".

>_<

Drump is Bigly and Hillary is Wigly.... I demand this to be a thing

[Hooked]

The real problem is that Americans don't want to pay the taxes Scandinavians do, not one of scale.

Economics and healthcare systems do scale up well, when you consider our countries are basically the same size as some of your mid sized states. But it requires a lot heavier taxing than what's currently going on.

You cant have a welfare state and open borders as Scandinavian countries are now finding out.

[Endus]

Your entire post is mostly wrong, but this is the wrongest. When you have money you use it to make more money. At least that's what any intelligent wealthy person has done since forever. You don't hire them to do nothing, you hire them to do what you other employees are doing that's making your money. When you take away their money you incentivize them to save money as much as possible to stay in business. That sure as hell means not hiring $15 minimum wage US workers.

You can't "hire people to make more money" by selling more product, when you're already meeting market demand with your current production. You can not stimulate more spending through boosting production; all you will do is force your own profit margins to shrink as you have to drop prices to unload your excess supply.

You've got basic economic theory completely backwards, somehow. Consumption drives capitalist economics. Not production. You cannot boost the economy by providing producers with more money, and only those producers. That isn't how economics works.

And we don't have to guess; the USA tried this, and it spectacularly failed to produce any of the results it promised. No growth in jobs, no growth in economy (instead, recession after recession).


Hell, here's Adam Smith, the Father of Capitalism, on how wrongheaded your argument is;

Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that of the consumer. The maxim is so perfectly self-evident that it would be absurd to attempt to prove it. But in the mercantile system the interest of the consumer is almost constantly sacrificed to that of the producer; and it seems to consider production, and not consumption, as the ultimate end and object of all industry and commerce.

What you're talking about isn't even capitalist, it's a return to the failures of mercantilism that capitalism was meant to correct, because they don't work very well.

[NED funded]

Your entire post is mostly wrong, but this is the wrongest. When you have money you use it to make more money. At least that's what any intelligent wealthy person has done since forever. You don't hire them to do nothing, you hire them to do what you other employees are doing that's making your money. When you take away their money you incentivize them to save money as much as possible to stay in business. That sure as hell means not hiring $15 minimum wage US workers.

They don't, we have studies of this shit. This is the most recent one I could find, but the general theory is that tax cuts to the rich do not work, because they just sit over it, which is fine if you work for the finance industry I guess. Tax cuts should be directed to the poor, where is more effective. That is a point I will concede to Trump, however massive tax cuts as he proposes are not the way to go.

[Kellhound]

Time, CNBC, and Drudge polls all show trump won the debate and it wasnt even close.

Yet even Fox seems to point to Clinton doing better....

[OrcsRLame]

Does someone have a link to the debate that is not CCN go? It wants me to spend money to keep watching.

[DeadmanWalking]

Things you don't do at a debate,
claim your opponent who is 68 spent her adult life fighting a group who wasn't around more than a few years.
Say that she doesn't look like a president.
Get in a 10 minute fight with the moderator
Blame 400 lb bed ridden hackers
Claim that not paying taxes makes you smart when the majority of voters pay taxes.
Refuse to prepare and then try to push a message that not preparing in advance is good.

[Paula Deen]

Time, CNBC, and Drudge polls all show trump won the debate and it wasnt even close.

All three are currently being spammed by /pol/.

[Endus]

Things you don't do at a debate,
...
Claim that not paying taxes makes you smart when the majority of voters pay taxes.

Particularly since, if he's actually making the kinds of incomes he claims to, this pretty much is an admission that he's engaging in deliberate and intentional tax evasion. Which, let's recall, is a crime.

Makes his refusal to release his tax returns that much more damning.

[DeadmanWalking]

Time, CNBC, and Drudge polls all show trump won the debate and it wasnt even close.

That's funny, you think Drudge is a news source, the head of the company is part of Donald's campaign and was in Donald's rear since he was still fighting Cruz. Don't talk about bias and then quote Drudge as factual.
Just because their bias fits your bias doesn't make either one factual.

[Hooked]

Particularly since, if he's actually making the kinds of incomes he claims to, this pretty much is an admission that he's engaging in deliberate and intentional tax evasion. Which, let's recall, is a crime.

Makes his refusal to release his tax returns that much more damning.

Like apple and google.

[alexw]

Why would he say that, and still not release them?

Stupidity? Its obvious he speaks before he thinks. Why else would he say "If I did, they be wasted" when Hillary was talking about him paying taxes.

[Stommped]

You can't "hire people to make more money" by selling more product, when you're already meeting market demand with your current production. You can not stimulate more spending through boosting production; all you will do is force your own profit margins to shrink as you have to drop prices to unload your excess supply.

You've got basic economic theory completely backwards, somehow. Consumption drives capitalist economics. Not production. You cannot boost the economy by providing producers with more money, and only those producers. That isn't how economics works.

And we don't have to guess; the USA tried this, and it spectacularly failed to produce any of the results it promised. No growth in jobs, no growth in economy (instead, recession after recession).

Like I said we can debate this all day. You don't just invest your funds in your current market, if you demand truly is capped, then you just invest it elsewhere and grow those markets. Your entire theory is pretty debunked when a larger economy like France has tried the redistribution approach and their economic growth has been abysmal.

[Breccia]

All three are currently being spammed by /pol/.

Yeah, I'm not sure I trust anything that wasn't done on actual people. We'll have much more reliable results in the morning news and over the next few days. Plus, the next polling batch of course.