Question for Trump supporters and others

Voter suppression laws are the only thing they have to work with.

 

Because I was asked why people will vote for Trump. Why would I discuss democrats when answering that question? lol It's YOU that isn't making any sense right now.

 

No you didn't. You speculated that idiocy and then got called out as you should have.

 

Those economists are sorta right, but in a particularly horrific way. This is a serious economic proposal to eliminate global poverty: Let the poorest 2 billion people in the world come to the richest countries. Say...the US got a billion poor SE Asian Peasants or African tribesman, the GDP would go up quite a bit as the government would have to deficit spend like crazy to provide housing food ect... So would it eliminate global poverty? Yep, of the "dollar a day" type. Those billion people would be much better off, so mission accomplished right?

So if you are one of the ones who thinks that's a great idea and would benefit the poorest of the poor, you probably won't understand why most of the country would oppose that even though GDP would go up.

 

Are you talking about this speech?

Full transcript: Donald Trump's jobs plan speech

Because I'm not sure what it is that you don't understand.

 

All I really care about is who Trump will nominate for the supremes vs who Hillary will

 

Well who didn't know they were globalists (non-protectionists)? They are ones who are so dumb they don't realize that unfair trade and unfair competition is bad for the American worker. Either they're dumb or they are just part of the establishment. They have vested interests in the crony capitalism. They are basically part of the problem.

Here all the evidence you need to see that globalization has resulted in a lower standard of living for Americans:

Jobs are being exported.
Immigrants, legal and illegal are being imported.
Unemployment is high (actual unemployment is about 20%)
Wages are down.

Basic supply and demand. If supply of jobs are down (due to factories exporting their production) and the supply of labor is going up (due to job losses and rising number of immigrants) it puts downward pressure on incomes (lower standards of living for Americans).

If you can't understand the basic economics of this then you shouldn't call yourself an economist.

 

You think he'd nominate justices like the ones The Great and Holy Ronald Reagan nominated???

- - - Updated - - -

Explain some basic economics to me then....

Trump wants a 30% tariff on products made by companies that are produced overseas....


who will pay that tariff on those products?

 

We will have a $500 billion trade deficit this year. Hillary Clinton couldn't care less. This situation just makes her owners richer, so it's all good.

 

And if you don't understand that trade is not a zero-sum game (another factor of basic economics), you shouldn't criticize educated economists.

 

No, I'm talking about my OP link;http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word Not your off topic nonsense.

 

Oh...well I'm not going to sit through a Lawrence O'Donnell screed. I thought you were talking about his trade speech this week.

 

I don't think you understand Trump's trade policies whatsoever. He never said he wants a 30% tariff on all products.

Once again we see that the liberals must tell lies to make a point. When you have to lie to make a point, you lose all credibility. Try debating truthfully. I'd like to debate you on trade, but there's no point if you are factually incorrect in your premises.

 

be like being for flat earth, then someone proving the earth is round.... you change your opinion or be stubborn I suppose

 

I obviously understand it better than you. Economics not being a zero-sum game is a basic theme of Supply Side Economics. It goes back to Reagan's much maligned theme that, "a rising tide lifts all boats".

The reverse if true as well. When you have an economy that is stagnant and perhaps shrinking as we are here in America, it has deleterious effects that echo throughout the economy.

For instance, when a coal mining town loses it's coal mine, not only do the coal miners lose their jobs, but the people of the town that used to depend on the business from those miner lose business and jobs. The same is true for all the 60,000 factories that have closed throughout America. Many factory workers lost their jobs, but many people who supported those industries, suppliers, truckers, distributors, restaurants, gas stations - on and on - also lost income and jobs.

You can pretend this isn't a problem, but for millions of Americans who haven't had a raise in 25 years, it is definitely a problem. They will be voting for Donald J. Trump.

 

Yes. She supported it and then has figured out that it didn't work as advertised so she now opposes it.

 

It is a basic theme of econ 101, it predates Reagan considerably, no, it is distinct from "a rising tide lifts all boats," and laying stagnant raises solely at the feet of international trade is ludicrous.

Saying that trade is not a zero-sum game means that a job sent overseas does not necessarily mean a net loss of one job here in the U.S. If Trump wants to abandon the lessons of capitalism, including econ 101 concepts like competitive advantage, and go back to protectionist mercantilism and all of its failures, then so be it.

 

No I didn't what? Look at the post you quoted. I didn't claim I did anything. So i'm not sure what you're saying I didn't do. Seriously, are the only posts that make any sense to you the ones that criticize democrats? Because the question was why people would vote for Trump. That question doesn't involve democrats at all. Then, you criticized me for answering the question and not changing the subject?

 

That's what my link is talking about.

 

Okay, thanks! Another one who hasn't the foggiest idea of what Trump is talking about. Don't worry, neither do I.

 

NAFTA was the first step in establishing the North American Union. If she is elected, she will finish the job.

 

I didn't say "do away with it"..i said "go after it"..Hillary has vowed to do just that... Liberals know they cant get rid of the 2A all at once..but by picking at it...This gun..or that gun..etc...Then some other gun.... Or by claiming the 2A needs to be "updated"...because our founders did not anticipate semi-auto firearms....it's just never ending... Or founders DID...anticipate that firearms would advance...thats why it says "to keep and bear arms"....not "keep and bear a musket"... But use the same logic..and suggest the 1st Amendment need to be re-written , sets the libs off....Why...did the founders anticipate Twitter, Email, Facebook, Forums, cell phones, etc......???

 

Yeah well I hope Hillary has a chance to use that line of thinking in a debate against Trump should she win the "slipped by getting an indictment" nomination process of the democratic party.

I think it will go over very well with all the people who lost their factory jobs to hear Crooked Hillary tell them that not one "net" job was lost. The stupidity of such arrogance will only serve up more votes for Donald J. Trump.

When the government undercuts intentionally American companies and American workers and puts our nation at a competitive disadvantage with stupid trade deals because of crony capitalism, then what is really being abandoned is free market capitalism.

Trying to blame Trump for a trade war that we are already in when he hasn't even taken office is just stupidity.

 

Neither does he. Do you know what they are?

All one has to do is watch Trump's speech in Bangor Maine on trade to know this isn't a debate about who's telling the truth. This is a debate to determine what in the blank Trump is talking about? Do you know? That's what this thread is about.

 

Trump is a monolith, a singular but entirely representative example of every person who agrees with him in the US, those Britons who voted to leave Europe and billions of people like him around the world who distrust 'foreigners'. He IS the people that you suggest don't understand him. As such, understanding is tacit, implicit...not required. Understand?