T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Anything and Everything political, express your view, but play nice
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by madhatter »

SnoBrdr wrote:
boston_e wrote:
freeski wrote:Obama will make huge money from books and if he chooses speaking fees. He's going to be a hero to many until he dies. I don't think he'll push the speaking circuit like Cankle. It's not in his fabric. Butt, he's not going to crawl under a rock. .
I think this is pretty accurate. Pretty much only the far right dislikes him.

He is finishing up with pretty high approval ratings and weather someone liked his policies or not, he carried himself with grace and dignity (very unlike the two terrible candidates we had to choose from this year).

I predict that history will prove to be kind to Obama.
With this press writing it, Stalin could be made to look good.

I in no way believe those favorability ratings.

Polling has been proven to be a canard.
those same polls predicted a clinton landslide...I'd say only the far left really likes him...everyone else is either indifferent or despises him to one degree or another...I'd say the vast majority of the right has very little use for the agitator in chief and his divisive rhetoric, though it did bring in the red tide...but that purpose has been served...

grace and dignity? only if you like being lectured, talked down to, called bitter clingers, racists, bigots, misogynists,etc...

these memes sum him up perfectly:

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
boston_e
Postaholic
Posts: 2979
Joined: May 19th, '07, 21:12

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by boston_e »

Thus proof that the far right dislikes him! :lol:
Don't Killington Pico
freeski
Post Office
Posts: 4699
Joined: Feb 13th, '13, 19:55
Location: Concord, N.H.
Contact:

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by freeski »

SnoBrdr wrote:I in no way believe those favorability ratings.
Good point, What are they claiming? 60%, approve. I'd guess more like 46%. He should have tried harder to work with congress. Less divisive... I was hoping he would have rescheduled my favorite herb, butt with the political climate surrounding the heroin crisis he couldn't. I'd give him a B-.
I Belong A Long Way From Here.
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by madhatter »

boston_e wrote:Thus proof that the far right dislikes him! :lol:
just how do you determine who is " far right"? anyone to the right of sanders?

as has been mentioned numerous times, I'm far more liberal in practice than most of the posters here are in verse...

if you don't see why many people see obama as an obnoxious, divisive, agitator then you still have no idea why the D's were so soundly rejected across the nation this past november...


his last week of angry screaming insults campaign tour for clinton was a prime example... that it was intentionally directed at the very people who would reject him shows just how tone deaf and completely out of touch w working class america he truly is...


mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
boston_e
Postaholic
Posts: 2979
Joined: May 19th, '07, 21:12

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by boston_e »

madhatter wrote:
boston_e wrote:Thus proof that the far right dislikes him! :lol:
just how do you determine who is " far right"? anyone to the right of sanders?
I would say that anyone who has never or say they would never approve of any democratic candidate would classify as far right.

Most people who are more centrist, (lean left, or lean right), will commonly vote for members of both parties or at least view some members of both parties favorably.
Don't Killington Pico
boston_e
Postaholic
Posts: 2979
Joined: May 19th, '07, 21:12

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by boston_e »

freeski wrote:
SnoBrdr wrote:I in no way believe those favorability ratings.
Good point, What are they claiming? 60%, approve. I'd guess more like 46%. He should have tried harder to work with congress. Less divisive... I was hoping he would have rescheduled my favorite herb, butt with the political climate surrounding the heroin crisis he couldn't. I'd give him a B-.
The most recent CNN poll taken after the election has him at a 57% favorable rating, while the Democratic party as a whole is at 39%.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/23/politics/ ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Give the polls as much weight as you want, but they are what we have.

I personally think the election was more a reflection of Shrially (one of the two worst candidates ever in history) and not so much of Obama.
Don't Killington Pico
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by madhatter »

boston_e wrote:
madhatter wrote:
boston_e wrote:Thus proof that the far right dislikes him! :lol:
just how do you determine who is " far right"? anyone to the right of sanders?
I would say that anyone who has never or say they would never approve of any democratic candidate would classify as far right.

Most people who are more centrist, (lean left, or lean right), will commonly vote for members of both parties or at least view some members of both parties favorably.
so every republican and many independents? just like I said above...
I still don't think you understand how many people found obama to be all I said above...he and many of his supporters were very open about their classification of flyover country as backwoods hillbilly rednecks longing for the jim crowe era...


the ACA was a huge FU to the R's and anyone who was opposed... it's many failures accurately predicted...it only got worse from there which is why his presidency saw the largest losses of D seats across the country as I outlined elsewhere...clinton ran as obama's third term, he campaigned saying his policies were on the ballot even though he wasn't and that his legacy was on the line as well...he was right about all that, but the outcome was a firm rejection of "all that"...and a vote for reversal of much of it...that whole pen and phone thing...

from your perspective do you honestly not see that? do you not see the divisiveness of his hyper-partisan identity politics? do you not his utter disdain and disregard for anyone outside of his coalition? do you not see that his policies hurt the working class 40-70k crowd? cuz everyone outside his coalition sees it first and foremost in everything he says and does...

and lastly what do you think he will be noted for historically besides skin color?
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
User avatar
Dickc
Postaholic
Posts: 2595
Joined: Sep 6th, '11, 11:34

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by Dickc »

SnoBrdr wrote:
boston_e wrote:
freeski wrote:Obama will make huge money from books and if he chooses speaking fees. He's going to be a hero to many until he dies. I don't think he'll push the speaking circuit like Cankle. It's not in his fabric. Butt, he's not going to crawl under a rock. .
I think this is pretty accurate. Pretty much only the far right dislikes him.

He is finishing up with pretty high approval ratings and weather someone liked his policies or not, he carried himself with grace and dignity (very unlike the two terrible candidates we had to choose from this year).

I predict that history will prove to be kind to Obama.
With this press writing it, Stalin could be made to look good.

I in no way believe those favorability ratings.

Polling has been proven to be a canard.
I believe his favorability ratings during 2016 were largely driven by the two most hated candidates to ever run as a D or an R. Compared to how they ran and campaigned, he looked OK. I think he will drop as history marches on however.
freeski
Post Office
Posts: 4699
Joined: Feb 13th, '13, 19:55
Location: Concord, N.H.
Contact:

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by freeski »

Check out the attached. The more money Jill Stein gets for recount... the more she needs... What a snake. This must fall under election law :?:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-25/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I Belong A Long Way From Here.
SnoBrdr
Whipping Post
Posts: 9521
Joined: Jun 18th, '07, 04:45

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by SnoBrdr »

freeski wrote:Check out the attached. The more money Jill Stein gets for recount... the more she needs... What a snake. This must fall under election law :?:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-25/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Page Not Found
Beware of fools & trolls here, they lurk everywhere.
freeski
Post Office
Posts: 4699
Joined: Feb 13th, '13, 19:55
Location: Concord, N.H.
Contact:

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by freeski »

It was from Drudge, it's been removed. Try this...
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-25/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
edit: This didn't search on Zero Hedge. Interesting article, the more she raises, she changes the goal needed.
I Belong A Long Way From Here.
boston_e
Postaholic
Posts: 2979
Joined: May 19th, '07, 21:12

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by boston_e »

madhatter wrote:so every republican and many independents? just like I said above...
I'm not really sure about that... I know plenty of Republicans who have voted for a Democrat on occasion as well as plenty of Democrats who have voted for a Republican candidate on occasion. I think it is far to call someone "far right" or "far left" if they profess that they would never even consider a vote for the opposite party before they even know who the candidate is.

I still don't think you understand how many people found obama to be all I said above...he and many of his supporters were very open about their classification of flyover country as backwoods hillbilly rednecks longing for the jim crowe era...


the ACA was a huge FU to the R's and anyone who was opposed... it's many failures accurately predicted...it only got worse from there which is why his presidency saw the largest losses of D seats across the country as I outlined elsewhere...However in 2012 he won re-election by a considerably larger margin than Trump won this year clinton ran as obama's third term, he campaigned saying his policies were on the ballot even though he wasn't and that his legacy was on the line as well...he was right about all that, but the outcome was a firm rejection of "all that"...and a vote for reversal of much of it...that whole pen and phone thing...she sure tried to run as his 3rd term, but as I have mentioned before, she was one of the two worst candidates in history. No way of ever knowing but I think the election results are much more of a reflection of Shrillary than of obama.

from your perspective do you honestly not see that? do you not see the divisiveness of his hyper-partisan identity politics? do you not his utter disdain and disregard for anyone outside of his coalition? Indeed, and I saw the exact same from Trump during his campaign and see the same from many of the tea party members of congress and the senate. I don't like that is what the political climate has become in the US but that seems to be how it is right now.do you not see that his policies hurt the working class 40-70k crowd? cuz everyone outside his coalition sees it first and foremost in everything he says and does...

and lastly what do you think he will be noted for historically besides skin color? His legacy will remain to be seen and will be a product of how things work out over time. As Freeski mentioned he likely goes down as a "B-" or something along those lines. But I think he will be remembered as the one who was steering the ship out of the biggest economic downturn since the great depression, he will be remembered really as the first in a while who at least tried to do something about health care (ACA sure has plenty of pitfalls so far, but I bet that Trump will be looking to keep aspects of it and would not be surprised if he really does more editing too it and not so much a total repeal.... will be interesting to see), as the president in place when Bin Laden was killed, as the president steering the ship when same sex marriage became legal. Some other items the jury is still out on and the full results may not be known for a long time. Iran nuclear deal, establishing relationship with Cuba etc.
Don't Killington Pico
Bubba
Site Admin
Posts: 26274
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 08:42
Location: Where the climate suits my clothes

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by Bubba »

Mister Moose wrote:
Bubba wrote:
madhatter wrote: Ford to Trump: We' ll make Lincolns in Kentucky, not Mexico

all this as president elect, wait til he actually gets in office with his pen and phone...best to not stand on the tracks if ya don't want to get run over...
By union contract, they can't cut jobs there, so the plan was to move production of the Lincoln to Mexico and increase production of the Escape in Kentucky. Note that the statement says they will continue making the Lincoln in KY but does not say they will continue making or expanding the Escape there too. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Ford begins making more Escapes in Mexico in order to manage their costs instead of moving the MKC. In fact, as a lower margin vehicle, assembly in Mexico could end up being the better decision longer term.
I think Ford is reading the tea leaves, not waiting for actual legislative change. Overall, I have no problem with many jobs remaining in Mexico, preferably lower skilled jobs where labor costs figure heavily into the price of a product. In a highly automated plant, where the jobs are programming, maintenance and repairs, engineering, and design, those jobs should remain here. In addition, Mexico should be required to maintain a balance of trade with us. Buy our raw materials, parts, or even finished cars. Teaching China to build jet engines seems to me a good example of a trade mistake. Those are high precision jobs.

Bubba, union contracts can be changed. Unions will vote for it if they realize it is in their best interest. What unions need to learn, and some may have already learned, is that saving a percentage of higher than market jobs benefits no one in the long run. The company sheds production to a lower cost provider and those last high paying jobs dry up when the plant closes. We've seen it with AT&T, we've seen it with GM, we've seen it with PanAm. If the union can be competitive by forgoing a raise, taking less retirement, and if those changes are better than no jobs at all to the membership, the contract can be amended. Unions have now seen plants close while union leaders keep their jobs, and that can't be lost on them.

America in many cases can no longer earn a living with unskilled labor if it can be done overseas. To compete with Mexico and China our workers need something that Mexico and China doesn't have. Those things are proximity and education. There are jobs like plowing your driveway that can't be done in China or Mexico. If there is no proximity need, then we have to be smarter, more automated, more efficient, and need to adapt to changes in the marketplace.
Ford continues to move production to Mexico, this time moving Ford Focus production out of Michigan.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ford-f ... r=xpebkiqd" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here"

Killington Zone
You can checkout any time you like,
but you can never leave

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function" =
F. Scott Fitzgerald

"There's nothing more frightening than ignorance in action" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
SnoBrdr
Whipping Post
Posts: 9521
Joined: Jun 18th, '07, 04:45

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by SnoBrdr »

Bubba wrote:
Mister Moose wrote:
Bubba wrote:
madhatter wrote: Ford to Trump: We' ll make Lincolns in Kentucky, not Mexico

all this as president elect, wait til he actually gets in office with his pen and phone...best to not stand on the tracks if ya don't want to get run over...
By union contract, they can't cut jobs there, so the plan was to move production of the Lincoln to Mexico and increase production of the Escape in Kentucky. Note that the statement says they will continue making the Lincoln in KY but does not say they will continue making or expanding the Escape there too. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Ford begins making more Escapes in Mexico in order to manage their costs instead of moving the MKC. In fact, as a lower margin vehicle, assembly in Mexico could end up being the better decision longer term.
I think Ford is reading the tea leaves, not waiting for actual legislative change. Overall, I have no problem with many jobs remaining in Mexico, preferably lower skilled jobs where labor costs figure heavily into the price of a product. In a highly automated plant, where the jobs are programming, maintenance and repairs, engineering, and design, those jobs should remain here. In addition, Mexico should be required to maintain a balance of trade with us. Buy our raw materials, parts, or even finished cars. Teaching China to build jet engines seems to me a good example of a trade mistake. Those are high precision jobs.

Bubba, union contracts can be changed. Unions will vote for it if they realize it is in their best interest. What unions need to learn, and some may have already learned, is that saving a percentage of higher than market jobs benefits no one in the long run. The company sheds production to a lower cost provider and those last high paying jobs dry up when the plant closes. We've seen it with AT&T, we've seen it with GM, we've seen it with PanAm. If the union can be competitive by forgoing a raise, taking less retirement, and if those changes are better than no jobs at all to the membership, the contract can be amended. Unions have now seen plants close while union leaders keep their jobs, and that can't be lost on them.

America in many cases can no longer earn a living with unskilled labor if it can be done overseas. To compete with Mexico and China our workers need something that Mexico and China doesn't have. Those things are proximity and education. There are jobs like plowing your driveway that can't be done in China or Mexico. If there is no proximity need, then we have to be smarter, more automated, more efficient, and need to adapt to changes in the marketplace.
Ford continues to move production to Mexico, this time moving Ford Focus production out of Michigan.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ford-f ... r=xpebkiqd" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
According to the Ford CEO: "When you look at moving the Focus out of our Michigan assembly plant, that’s to make room for new products — zero jobs affected, zero jobs impacted.
Beware of fools & trolls here, they lurk everywhere.
Bubba
Site Admin
Posts: 26274
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 08:42
Location: Where the climate suits my clothes

Re: T R U M P vs. Hillary - who wins?

Post by Bubba »

SnoBrdr wrote:
Bubba wrote:
Mister Moose wrote:
Bubba wrote:
madhatter wrote: Ford to Trump: We' ll make Lincolns in Kentucky, not Mexico

all this as president elect, wait til he actually gets in office with his pen and phone...best to not stand on the tracks if ya don't want to get run over...
By union contract, they can't cut jobs there, so the plan was to move production of the Lincoln to Mexico and increase production of the Escape in Kentucky. Note that the statement says they will continue making the Lincoln in KY but does not say they will continue making or expanding the Escape there too. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Ford begins making more Escapes in Mexico in order to manage their costs instead of moving the MKC. In fact, as a lower margin vehicle, assembly in Mexico could end up being the better decision longer term.
I think Ford is reading the tea leaves, not waiting for actual legislative change. Overall, I have no problem with many jobs remaining in Mexico, preferably lower skilled jobs where labor costs figure heavily into the price of a product. In a highly automated plant, where the jobs are programming, maintenance and repairs, engineering, and design, those jobs should remain here. In addition, Mexico should be required to maintain a balance of trade with us. Buy our raw materials, parts, or even finished cars. Teaching China to build jet engines seems to me a good example of a trade mistake. Those are high precision jobs.

Bubba, union contracts can be changed. Unions will vote for it if they realize it is in their best interest. What unions need to learn, and some may have already learned, is that saving a percentage of higher than market jobs benefits no one in the long run. The company sheds production to a lower cost provider and those last high paying jobs dry up when the plant closes. We've seen it with AT&T, we've seen it with GM, we've seen it with PanAm. If the union can be competitive by forgoing a raise, taking less retirement, and if those changes are better than no jobs at all to the membership, the contract can be amended. Unions have now seen plants close while union leaders keep their jobs, and that can't be lost on them.

America in many cases can no longer earn a living with unskilled labor if it can be done overseas. To compete with Mexico and China our workers need something that Mexico and China doesn't have. Those things are proximity and education. There are jobs like plowing your driveway that can't be done in China or Mexico. If there is no proximity need, then we have to be smarter, more automated, more efficient, and need to adapt to changes in the marketplace.
Ford continues to move production to Mexico, this time moving Ford Focus production out of Michigan.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ford-f ... r=xpebkiqd" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
According to the Ford CEO: "When you look at moving the Focus out of our Michigan assembly plant, that’s to make room for new products — zero jobs affected, zero jobs impacted.
Which was exactly the same situation as in Kentucky. The point is that lower margin vehicles are being moved while higher margin vehicle assembly remains in the US.
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here"

Killington Zone
You can checkout any time you like,
but you can never leave

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function" =
F. Scott Fitzgerald

"There's nothing more frightening than ignorance in action" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Post Reply