First presidential debate - September 26: Trump vs Hillary

[May90]

https://twitter.com/Seinfeld2000/sta...98246208962560

I loved this comment.

[mvaliz]

The majority of the country tend to believe the country is headed in the wrong direction

You couldn't even be arsed to watch the debate and yet you came here WITH YOU LYING about Clinton claiming she was never for the TPP durring the debate, and then attached some stupid link, why the hell should we believe your link now?

Please stop... seriously. You're just making a fool of yourself (admitedly, not as bad as Donald Dump did tonight, but still..)

[DeadmanWalking]

I feel sorry for you Americans!

Feelings mutual, like your countries politicians are pure as the driven snow. Glass houses and all that.

[mvaliz]

I loved this comment.

Holyshit I totally LOLed IRL! ^_^

[Stommped]

Its almost like having a media organization spending the last 8 years talking about we're about to have an apocalypse because of the President works on some people.

What a shock.

Well whether or not they're right is irrelevant right? If you're touting basically the exact same policies that led the country on it's current path, and 70% think it's the wrong path, that seems not good for her right?

- - - Updated - - -

You couldn't even be arsed to watch the debate and yet you came here WITH YOU LYING about Clinton claiming she was never for the TPP and added some stupid link, why the hell should we believe your link now?

Please stop... seriously. You're just making a fool of yourself (admitedly, not as bad as Donald Dump did last night, but still..)

Saying I didn't watch the debate is the only lie here. The link is RealClearPolitics, pretty much the source everyone uses for polls.

[Wells]

Well whether or not they're right is irrelevant right? If you're touting basically the exact same policies that led the country on it's current path, and 70% think it's the wrong path, that seems not good for her right?

You wrongly assume that those 70% disagree with Obama and his policies.

[KrazyK923]

Well whether or not they're right is irrelevant right? If you're touting basically the exact same policies that led the country on it's current path, and 70% think it's the wrong path, that seems not good for her right?

I love how you're extrapolating all of these things that these polls do not indicate.

Could you try a bit harder to defend the dumpster fire we just saw? You're not doing a good job.

[Breccia]

I think he meant, acknowledge the fact redistributing wealth by supertaxing the rich is stupid and has done shit all for the economy the past 8 years.

So, the rise of 15 million jobs, and a drop of unemployment by 5%, since 2010 is...coincidence?

[Stonecloak]

1> The country hasn't been taxing the rich to any significant degree, the past 8 years. Hence why Clinton is proposing that.
2> It's done just fine in other countries. Funny thing; when you put more money in the hands of the consumer class, consumer spending goes up. Kind of important, in a consumer economy.

Is it just a myth then? I believe Obama proposed the same thing, to tax the rich, so if that didn't happen what makes anyone think Hilary can? It does make sense that's the rich wouldn't like being taxed more, and does it directly relate to consumers having more spending money? As far as I know having a strong middle class does help the rich too, but how do we get that back? Something tells me not by a higher minimum wage, or other proposed ideas.

[mvaliz]

I think he meant, acknowledge the fact redistributing wealth by supertaxing the rich is stupid and has done shit all for the economy the past 8 years.

...if this is what we've been doing for 8 years, why is she trying to make it happen!? o_O

POLITICALLY...SMEGGING....IGNORANT...

[Breccia]

I to would like to see the "math" behind losing 3.5 million jobs. That's a pretty bold claim and you better have the independent sources to back it up.

I'd like to see it too. I've been following this pretty closely and this was the first I'd heard anyone mention it.

[Stommped]

1> The country hasn't been taxing the rich to any significant degree, the past 8 years. Hence why Clinton is proposing that.
2> It's done just fine in other countries. Funny thing; when you put more money in the hands of the consumer class, consumer spending goes up. Kind of important, in a consumer economy.

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.

[Paula Deen]

I assume it hasn't been linked yet but NPR (Unbiased and Factual) has released a fact check of the night.

http://www.npr.org/2016/09/26/495115...dential-debate

tldr: Donald Trump said lots of bullshit and outright lied about things he has said in the past.

[mvaliz]

Saying I didn't watch the debate is the only lie here.

Oh jeesus you're more politically ignorant than I thought if you willingly watched the debates and MENTALLY believed she said she was never for the TPP.

You know what... keep talking! Everybody's getting a laugh out of it. It's like an encore presentation of Dump's baboonish ignorance! ^_^

/popcorn

[Breccia]

Well at least we now know why he doesn't release his federal tax returns - its because he uses loopholes to get the amount he pays down to zero. It was nice of him to confirm that for us.

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

[Endus]

Is it just a myth then?

What, that the wealthy are overtaxed in the USA, right now? That's not a "myth", it's a straight-up lie. The only significant one targeted at the wealthy that I'm aware of was the surtax on investment income, which wasn't the huge hike you apparently think.

I believe Obama proposed the same thing, to tax the rich, so if that didn't happen what makes anyone think Hilary can? It does make sense that's the rich wouldn't like being taxed more, and does it directly relate to consumers having more spending money?

1> The campaign is about the nominee's goals, not what they'll necessarily be able to achieve.
2> The alternative to taxing the rich more is taxing them less. That's trickle-down economics. The money doesn't "trickle down". The entire argument has, through the magic of actual real events, been proven to be a meritless and intellectually bankrupt concept.

As far as I know having a strong middle class does help the rich too, but how do we get that back? Something tells me not by a higher minimum wage, or other proposed ideas.

That magical "something", despite countries which DO have strong middle classes all having programs like the ones you're poo-pooing.

[lockybalboa]

Trump just self-destructed during the debate lol, there goes his chance of winning

[Endus]

I'd like to see it too. I've been following this pretty closely and this was the first I'd heard anyone mention it.

Here's the report, pulling from a factchecker site that linked to it, FWIW; https://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/d...c-Policies.pdf

[Hooked]

Now Hillary will go home and sleep for 5 days while trump continues to rally the people. Trump is going to steamroll her on November 8th.

[Endus]

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.

Oh come on.

Economies of scale make this kind of stuff easier to implement across larger populations, not harder.

And no; your whole argument about "job makers" is just the trickle-down garbage again. It was tried. They put trickle-down policies in place. And the jobs never appeared. Because wealthy people who have more money don't hire people to do nothing, they just enjoy having more money. The idea that they'd spend it on jobs they don't need done out of some sense of charity is such a mind-bogglingly dumb concept that it's shocking it ever got traction.

If you want to increase jobs, you need to increase consumer demand, which will drive hiring to meet that demand, and the only way to boost consumer demand is to increase the spending capital of the consumer classes. That's the middle and working classes.

You're advocating for the failed economic lies that created the pattern of recessions that the USA has faced since Reagan.