I will be voting for Hillary Clinton.
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
- Status
commonsense
Active member
Truth be told, you don't have too much choice in the matter. I would do the same.
Truth be told, you don't have too much choice in the matter. I would do the same.
Than you are both out of your minds.
Me too. Trump is leading in all the statesI'm looking forward to November.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
This has some interesting numbers:
http://pollingreport.com/wh16gen.htm
I'm also looking forward to the first debate.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Truth be told, you don't have too much choice in the matter. I would do the same.
My first ever vote for a Democrat in a presidential election.
The GOP left me no other choice.
(presidential election, not primary election.)
Everyone here recognizes that for the pathetic, bald faced lie that it is.
Hillary Clinton Is Bad for Stocks and the Economy
http://townhall.com/columnists/step...on-is-bad-for-stocks-and-the-economy-n2137320
In a supremely weird election season the latest weird twist is the consensus emerging on Wall Street that Hillary Clinton would be better for financial markets than Donald Trump.
The usually sensible Barrons magazine concluded in its cover story last week that Hillary-onomics are better for investors than Trump. Warren Buffett and other stock gurus have made the same case.
The argument for Clinton is that she's predictable and that Wall Street knows what she will do. Trump, by contrast, is the high beta candidate, and let's face it: No one knows exactly what you get with a President Trump. Clinton's the safer bet. Investors are also drooling for a return to the 1990s and the bull-market returns we saw under Bill Clinton -- when stocks tripled in value. I know I am.
Hillary Clinton is seen as less likely than Trump to spark a trade war that could send stocks tumbling.
But there's a problem with each of these arguments. It's true that Clinton brings far more certainty, but what this means is that we are absolutely certain to get bad ideas. I have never bought the argument that Wall Street wants the devil they know.
If you're walking down a dark street at night and there's a 100 percent chance that you will get mugged on the left side of the street and a 50 percent chance if you cross over to the right side of the street, what's the logical move?
Clinton is 100 percent predictable. She is going to raise tax rates; she is going to spend trillions more over the next decade; she is going to stop drilling for oil and gas and shut down our coal industry; she is going to double down on Obamacare; and she is going to wage war against the rich on Wall Street. Is that the certainty Wall Street is craving?
Let's take taxes. Trump wants a 20 percent capital gains tax. Clinton wants a 46 percent capital gains tax. These are direct taxes on investors. What is the difference between these two policy courses? A share of stock is worth the discounted present value of the returns after tax. So let us assume a stock earns $10 a share. Under Clinton the stock's after-tax return is $5.54 a share. Under Trump the after-tax return is $8.00. This is an over-simplification, because Hillary would tax longer held stocks at a rate of 23.8 percent. But the stocks have a much higher return under Trump.
But the corporate tax also has an effect on stock values. Clinton wants to keep the 35 percent rate. Trump wants a 15 percent rate. So under Clinton the government takes one-third of corporate profits, and under Trump the government takes one-sixth of the profits. It's true the effective tax rate is lower for many multinationals, but the broader point is obvious: Trump's tax plan is much, much better for stocks than Clinton's. By the way, Trump wants a lower estate tax -- another tax on stocks -- and Clinton wants a more confiscatory system.
But stocks did phenomenally well under Hillary's husband, you say. True, but this isn't Bill Clinton's party anymore. Hillary is running as Bernie-lite, not Bill-lite. The days of the centrist Democrats are long past. Bill balanced budgets, cut spending, cut the capital gains tax and signed welfare reform. Hillary stands on the other side on all these issues.
On trade -- Trump's black mark -- Hillary might be better, but not by much. She's against the Asia trade deal. She was against lifting the export ban on American oil and gas.
Will there be a Hillary Clinton bull market? I'd short that bet. And in some ways, Trump could be the most pro-investor president in decades. Most voters don't know this, because Republican super PACs keep pounding Trump. Yes, it is still the stupid party
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
No, everyone doesn't.
I'm comfortable knowing the truth.
I couldn't care less about what you and the rest of the Putz Patrol think.
Yes, everyone does. You have a choice, and still do. But you CHOOSE to vote for the lying criminal baby-killer. Don't you dare try to say that the GOP has taken that choice away from you. That is a pathetic disgusting bald-faced lie.
You are making the choice. To say otherwise is a lie. You have sunk as low into the gutter as someone can go.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
:chuckle:
Oh, I dare to say it all right, I dare to say it right to your face. Again.
The GOP left me no choice.
I CHOOSE to vote Democrat because the GOP candidate is untenable.
Trump is a disaster.
^ This ...
You choose to vote liberal because you are a liberal. It wouldn't be a rational choice for someone to vote liberal if they are conservative, regardless of the circumstance. So shut it
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
From last month:
Trump’s Interview With Jake Tapper Is A Rambling Disaster
There really has to be something wrong, mentally, with Donald Trump. In a rambling interview with Jake Tapper, the bulk of the time was spent with Tapper, trying in vain to get Trump to answer a specific question.
The entire time, Trump was rattling off the same things over and over again. Rubio repeated himself a few times during a debate and everybody was ready to declare him unfit for office. This interview with Jake Tapper shows that Trump either has no idea what he is talking about or can't think through what he says.
The interview is about seven minutes long but it is worth watching just to see how absurd it is. Note this is only part of the interview. The entire crap-fest can be seen on Sunday.
Trump’s Interview With Jake Tapper Is A Rambling Disaster
There really has to be something wrong, mentally, with Donald Trump. In a rambling interview with Jake Tapper, the bulk of the time was spent with Tapper, trying in vain to get Trump to answer a specific question.
The entire time, Trump was rattling off the same things over and over again. Rubio repeated himself a few times during a debate and everybody was ready to declare him unfit for office. This interview with Jake Tapper shows that Trump either has no idea what he is talking about or can't think through what he says.
The interview is about seven minutes long but it is worth watching just to see how absurd it is. Note this is only part of the interview. The entire crap-fest can be seen on Sunday.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Actually, I'm not. I'm a moderate.
exminister
Well-known member
It is what was said after those five words that's different.
The word "rambling" certainly defines the interview ...
Poor Donald ... he seemed so addled. Perhaps he should be on ADHD meds ...
You choose to vote liberal because you are a liberal. It wouldn't be a rational choice for someone to vote liberal if they are conservative, regardless of the circumstance. So shut it
Bingo. That's the end of Anna's little propaganda attempt.
Its the lies that were said about what was said after those five words that's different. He never said what everyone says he said. Find a text transcript.
Cool story
That can be a good thing for foreign relations. Trump is a loose cannon and he will scare the pants off of other leaders. America Wins !!!
- Status