Elections 2016 Presidential Election General Discussion v2

[m52nickerson]

Write me another paragraph chump.

My poll asks do you support trade as it exists today.

Your poll, asks do you support trade.

Spin all you want, but my poll > your poll, and I mean that in every way possible.

The poll is posted asked...

"Would the TPP be a good thing for the US or a bad thing."

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...s-favor-tpp-but-less-than-other-countries-do/

You did not even post a poll you moron. You posted a paper that cited many polls and individual poll questions.

 

[VivaRevolution]

The poll is posted asked...

"Would the TPP be a good thing for the US or a bad thing."

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...s-favor-tpp-but-less-than-other-countries-do/

You did not even post a poll you moron. You posted a paper that cited many polls and individual poll questions.

Seems like your BS from the other thread where you pretend to answer a question with a bunch of technobabble.

So, I didn't post a poll, I posted a source with polls in it.

Hmmmmm, seems like a difference without meaning.

 

[ncordless]

So then the purpose isn't to bend China to our rules with this trade deal as Obama has been arguing?

BTW, the whole world is engaging in currency wars, from Brazil to China to Indonesia.

It might ultimately lead to China being better, yes. If TPP makes us a more attractive trading partner than China, China will try to make itself more attractive. But the US interest in TPP regarding China isn't to make China follow rules, it is to increase markets for the US as compared to China.

So Brazil, China, and Indonesia are manipulating their currency. Which of those three, or any others, are a party to TPP?

How do you define currency manipulation? Does the US manipulate its currency when the fed takes actiin to avoid inflation. Say a decade from now it is in our interest to "manipulate" our currency for some reason. Why would we want to hamstring our selves with language that wouldn't do anything for us because we can't even identify a party to the agreement that manipulates its currency.

 

[VivaRevolution]

It might ultimately lead to China being better, yes. If TPP makes us a more attractive trading partner than China, China will try to make itself more attractive. But the US interest in TPP regarding China isn't to make China follow rules, it is to increase markets for the US as compared to China.

So Brazil, China, and Indonesia are manipulating their currency. Which of those three, or any others, are a party to TPP?

How do you define currency manipulation? Does the US manipulate its currency when the fed takes actiin to avoid inflation. Say a decade from now it is in our interest to "manipulate" our currency for some reason. Why would we want to hamstring our selves with language that wouldn't do anything for us because we can't even identify a party to the agreement that manipulates its currency.

Well if the purpose is to increase market share, then let's not do TPP.

What happened to our trade deficit with the south Korea trade deal, did it increase or decrease?

What happened to our trade deficit with Mexico and Canada, did it increase or decrease?

How are we gaining more market share, if our trade deficit is increasing?

 

[ncordless]

Well if the purpose is to increase market share, then let's not do TPP.

What happened to our trade deficit with the south Korea trade deal, did it increase or decrease?

What happened to our trade deficit with Mexico and Canada, did it increase or decrease?

How are we gaining more market share, if our trade deficit is increasing?

How would not having trade deals in place increase our market share vs. China?

Deficit and market share are two different things. The amount of trade happening is the market share. Trade deficit is the amount the stuff we import outweighs the value of atuff we export with a given trade partner. You'd hope to have a trade deficit with a place like Mexico. They don't have a ton of purchasing power. Some countries we want to import from. Some we want to export stuff to. Depends on the situation. US wants to sell to the rich and buy from the poor. If we can import from the poor something cheaper than we, the rich, can make it ourselves, it is more efficient to import it and focus on things that the make and buy. After all, that is where the money is. Trade deficits with individual trading partners are not important in the larger scheme of things.

 

[VivaRevolution]

How would not having trade deals in place increase our market share vs. China?

Deficit and market share are two different things. The amount of trade happening is the market share. Trade deficit is the amount the stuff we import outweighs the value of atuff we export with a given trade partner. You'd hope to have a trade deficit with a place like Mexico. They don't have a ton of purchasing power. Some countries we want to import from. Some we want to export stuff to. Depends on the situation. US wants to sell to the rich and buy from the poor. If we can import from the poor something cheaper than we, the rich, can make it ourselves, it is more efficient to import it and focus on things that the make and buy. After all, that is where the money is. Trade deficits with individual trading partners are not important in the larger scheme of things.

Who said anything about not having trade deals?

The correct question is, is this deal even close to the best way to go about achieving any of the stated goals?

If you judge by our past trade deals, I think the answer is clearly no.

Now comes the second question, what was changed in TPP to correct for the mistakes of the past? All I have heard is crickets in response to that question.

 

[ncordless]

Who said anything about not having trade deals?

The correct question is, is this deal even close to the best way to go about achieving any of the stated goals?

If you judge by our past trade deals, I think the answer is clearly no.

Now comes the second question, what was changed in TPP to correct for the mistakes of the past? All I have heard is crickets in response to that question.

What about past trade deals does TPP have that you would like to see corrected?

 

[VivaRevolution]

What about past trade deals does TPP have that you would like to see corrected?

Labor and environmental protection.

Poisoning the environment, and paying people a slave wage, is not doing it better. No one should be rewarded for that.

On top of that, how about actual free trade that doesn't protect corporate America........

If American corporations can't do it better with labor and environmental protections, then they should die off.

 

[ncordless]

Labor and environmental protection.

Poisoning the environment, and paying people a slave wage, is not doing it better. No one should be rewarded for that.

On top of that, how about actual free trade that doesn't protect corporate America........

If American corporations can't do it better with labor and environmental protections, then they should die off.

Well, TPP has both environmental and labor protections in it. Could it be better? Sure. But having some is better than having none, yes?

I do not know what you mean by actual free trade.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Hillary State Dept. Helped Jailed Clinton Foundation Donor Get $10 Mil from U.S. for Failed Haiti Project

Not surprisingly, the Department of Justice (DOJ) never mentioned Osorio’s Clinton connections and seemed to downplay the $10 million scam of taxpayer funds by focusing on the “victims” that invested in his bogus company. Among them was a beloved professional basketball star. “Osorio offered and sold shareholder interests and joint-venture partnerships in Innovida to select individuals and groups, raising more than $40,000,000 from approximately ten (10) investors and investment groups in the United States and abroad,” a DOJ statement says. “Osorio solicited and recruited investors by making materially false representations and concealing and omitting material facts regarding, among other things, the profitability of the company, the rates of return on investment funds, the use of investors’ funds and the existence of a pending lucrative contract with a third-party entity. Osorio received moneys from investors based on these misrepresentations. Osorio used investor monies for his and his co-conspirators’ personal benefit and to maintain and further the fraud scheme.”

The bigger story is that, despite Osorio’s shady history, it appears that the Clinton State Department helped him get $10 million—which will never be repaid—because he was a Clinton Foundation donor. This connection was not made until years after Osorio got sentenced. After his 2013 sentencing in Miami, the area’s largest newspaper tied him to the Clintons and President Obama as a campaign donor who held fundraisers at his waterfront home, but the foundation was not mentioned. A Washington D.C. newspaper eventually connected the dots after obtaining a document that shows an OPIC official recommending funding for Osorio’s Haiti project. In the document, the OPIC official writes that Osorio’s company had “U.S. persons of political influence that are able to assist in advancing the company’s plans.” It continues: “For instance, former President Bill Clinton is personally in contact with the Company to organize its logistical and support needs,” the document states. “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has made available State Department resources to assist with logistical arrangements.” Additionally, the Clinton Global Initiative had “indicated that it would be willing to contract to purchase 6,500 homes in Haiti from InnoVida within the next year.”

Less than 24 hours after the OPIC official submitted the recommendation, the news report says, OPIC approved Osorio’s $10 million loan to build homes in earthquake-ravaged Haiti. Not one was ever built and no one has been held accountable for giving the crooked businessman millions of taxpayer dollars.

Man, those Clintons are all kind of scrupulous when it comes to using their foundation to funnel money to worthwhile causes. more pay to play than a dave & busters

 

[Jack V Savage]

So then the purpose isn't to bend China to our rules with this trade deal as Obama has been arguing?

Huh? No, and Obama hasn't been arguing that.

Where do you get your, uh ... news?

 

[Gervinho]

He flipflops so bad by the time November gets here Chump will be a Democrat again.

The funny thing is watching the right wing pundits who defended his hard line immigration are now defending this softening. He even use the exact same language as Dems on law abiding illegal immigrants. You cant actually be a law abiding illegal immigrants and only people who dont want them to leave use that language

 

[m52nickerson]

Seems like your BS from the other thread where you pretend to answer a question with a bunch of technobabble.

So, I didn't post a poll, I posted a source with polls in it.

Hmmmmm, seems like a difference without meaning.

If my post are over your head perhaps you should stop posting and educate yourself.

Yes, you posted a paper that cited different polls and parts of polls. The way they did that is what I attacked, pointing out that in the very first citation they used a single question from a multiple question poll and ignore other questions that did not support their agenda. The second citation was from a online poll, which are never accurate.

 

[Gervinho]

1.10-1.16 is why I hate Hannity so much. The man is up Trumps ass so much its sickening. now he is arguing for illegal immigrants to stay. The way he emphases on 20 years is just sad

 

[Diamond Jim]

 

[carlos cadona]

 

[ncordless]

I hope so.

 

[Deleted member 429137]

Someone remixed Palin's sick rhymes from the RNC.

 

[ncordless]

Alt-right is trending on facebook and twitter after Clinton's speech denouncing it and Trump's ties to it. Gonna be an interesting few days

 

[Space]

Me all hyped up before Hillary's alt-right speech:

Me five minutes into the speech: