Who Won The Debate?

[CageTheBengal]

It depends on what your definition of winning is.

If winning to you means sounding credible, knowledgeable, experienced and presidential then Clinton won.

If winning to you means over-talking your opponent so they can't make their point, ignoring topics, interrupting over and over and speaking/acting like a third grader then Trump won.

[GMDino]

(09-27-2016, 12:54 PM)treee Wrote: The cyber, of which the security is very important.

Fortunately he has a ten year old son (!) who is very, very good with his computer.

[Vas Deferens]

(09-27-2016, 01:34 PM)GMDino Wrote: Fortunately he has a ten year old son (!) who is very, very good with his computer.

its incredible

[*bfine32*]

I thought the tables were turned from what i expected. it seemed Hills went on the attack and caught Trump off guard.

I would like a count of how many times Trump said he and Hills agree (seemed like quite a few) as opposed to where she sought common ground.

As to who won: I don't think either gained much and neither lost much. Those that look for a sense of fair play might not like the way holt "moderated".

He went after Trump much more that Hills and he "reminded' the audiance to be quiet only once. Does anybody remember when it was?

I will say Hills impressed me with her forgien policy stance.

[BoomerFan]

(09-27-2016, 11:26 AM)PhilHos Wrote: I don't see anyone changing their vote. If you were going to vote for Trump or Hillary or neither before the debate, it'll still be the same afterwards.

Apparently polling bumps from debates do happen but they're typically small and take about 5 days to show up:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-won-the-debate-which-means-shes-likely-to-gain-in-the-polls/

[CageTheBengal]

Watched the whole thing and here were some highlights for me taken from the transcript...

Quote:Hillary: Well, let’s stop for a second and remember where we were eight years ago, we had the worst financial crisis - the great recession, the worst since the 1930s. That was, in large part, because of tax policies that slash taxes on the wealthy, failed to invest in the middle class, took their eyes off of Wall Street and created a perfect storm. In fact, Donald was one of the people who rooted for the housing crisis. He said, back in 2006, gee, I hope it does collapse because then I can go in and buy some and make some money. Well, it did collapse.

Trump: That called business, by the way.

I'm sure he will come back and say I never said I hoped it collapsed but that was the first red flag for me during this debate. It's a glimpse into what considers business and the lack of morale fiber he has. This was the first of many of his chime ins during the debate to delude Clinton's message.

Quote: Clinton: Well, at least I have a plan to fight ISIS.


Trump: No, no. You’re telling the enemy everything you want to do.

Clinton: No, we’re not.

Trump: No wonder you’ve been fighting ISIS your entire adult life.

So the con-artist doesn't want to share his secret plan? Is this guy serious? It shows how little this guy knows about the military and foreign issues. (Oh wait he knows more then the generals.) Anyone who thinks simply posting an outline of your plan is exposing your plan is a rube. That's like accusing Marvin Lewis of giving away his game-plan for saying he wants to play strong defense against the run game and not turn the ball over. Only someone who knows so little would think that's the whole plan.

ISIS has only existed in it's current form since 2013-14. Last time I checked Hillary didn't turn 18 then. Why doesn't it matter to people that this guy either...

A. Gets easily peeved and says moronic things off the cuff.

or

B. Is just a moron who claims he knows when he doesn't.

Quote:
LESTER HOLT

Mr. Trump, we're talking about the burden that Americans have to pay, yet you have not released your tax returns. And the reason nominees have released their returns for decades is that voters will know if their potential president owes money to -- who you know owes it to, and any business conflicts. Don't have Americans have a right to know there are any conflicts of interest?

DONALD TRUMP
I don't mind releasing. I’m under a routine audit. And it will be released. And as soon as the audit’s finished, it will be released. But you will learn more about Donald Trump by going down to the federal elections where I filed a one hundred and four page, essentially financial statement of sorts, the forms that they have. It shows income, in fact the income -- I just looked today, the income is filed at six hundred ninety four million dollars for this past year. Six hundred ninety four million. If you would have told me I would make that fifteen or twenty years ago, I would have been very surprised. But that’s the kind of thinking that our country needs.

When we have a country that is doing so badly that is being ripped off by every single country in the world, it is the kind of thinking that our country needs because everybody -- Lester, we have a trade deficit with all of the countries that we do business with of almost eight hundred billion dollars a year. You know that is? That means who is negotiating these trade deals? We have people that are political hacks negotiating our trade deals.

LESTER HOLT

The IRS has an audit

DONALD TRUMP
Excuse me

LESTER HOLT
of your taxes. You're perfectly free to release your taxes during an audit. And so the question does the public’s right to know outweigh your personal...

DONALD TRUMP

Well, I told you I will release them as soon as the audit. Look, I have been under audit almost for fifteen years. I know a lot of wealthy people that have never been audited. I said do you get audited? I get audited almost every year. And in a way I should be complaining. I’m not even complaining. I don't mind them. It’s almost become a way of life. I get audited by the IRS. But other people don't. I will say this. We have a situation in this country that has to be taken care of. I will release my tax returns against my lawyer's wishes when she releases her thirty three thousand e-mails that have been deleted. As soon as she releases them, I will release, I will release my tax returns. And that is against, my lawyers, they say don’t do it. I will tell you this -- in fact watching shows, reading the papers. Almost every lawyer says you don't release your return until the audit is complete. When the audit is complete I will do it.
But I would go against them if she releases her emails.

LESTER HOLT
So it's negotiable?


DONALD TRUMP
It's not negotiable. No, let her release her emails. Why did she delete 33,000 emails?

LESTER HOLT

I will let her answer that. But let me just admonish the audience one more time. There was an agreement. We did ask you to be silent so it would be helpful for us. Secretary Clinton?

HILLARY CLINTON
Well, I think you have just seen another example of bait and switch here. For 40 years everyone running for president has released their tax returns.
You can go and see nearly I think thirty nine, forty years of our tax returns. But everyone has done it. We know the IRS has made clear there is no prohibition on releasing it when you are under audit. So you gotta ask yourself -- why won't he release his tax returns? And I think there may be a couple of reasons. First, maybe he is not as rich as he says he has. Second, maybe he’s not as charitable as he claims to be. Third, we don't know all of his business dealings but we have been told through investigative reporting that he owes about six hundred and fifty million dollars to Wall Street and foreign banks. Or maybe he does not want the American people, all of you watching tonight, to know that he has paid nothing in federal taxes because the only years that anybody has ever seen for a couple of years where he had to turn them over to state authorities when he was trying to get a casino license. And they showed he did not pay any federal income tax.

DONALD TRUMP

That makes me smart.

HILLARY CLINTON
If you have paid zero, that means zero for troops, zero for vets, zero for vets, zero for schools or health. And I think probably he is not all that enthusiastic about having the rest of our country see what the real reasons are because it must be something really important, even terrible, that he is trying to hide. In the financial disclosure statements they don't give you tax rate. They don't give you all the details the tax returns would. And it just seems to me that this is something that the American people deserve to see. And I have no reason to believe that he has ever going to release his tax returns because there is something he is hiding. And we will guess -- we'll keep guessing at what it might be that he is hiding. But I think the question is were he ever to get near the White House, what would be those conflicts? Who does he owe money to? Well, he owes you the answers to that. And he should provide them.

Okay it was painfully obvious Trump wanted to switch the subject because he went to his go to distraction her emails. So the shoddy business man doesn't want to release his tax returns. An expectation of every nominee that has run for president for the last 40 years (Excluding Ford because of him stepping in for Nixon but he did release a summary but not his full returns.) but Trump decides not to release them (Unless you believe his bogus audit line.) leaving a lot of people to assume he's hiding something. Is he hiding something that is so bad that he would rather let the public's imagination run wild guessing at what it could be? Obviously. Why else would he try to make some deal where he would release only if Clinton reveals 33,000 emails? It's because he's banking those emails will have something so bad in it that it would counter-balance his awful hiding in his returns. Just like your classic third-grader 2 wrongs = 1 right.

Trump going on about his wealthy friends that he never says by name was a re-occurring theme all night. It was like the kid in third grade that was always saying lies just to make his life seem more cool. Except Trump isn't a kid. He's a grown man running for a real job.

So far Trump has said "It's called business." when Hillary claimed he was hoping the housing market would collapse so he could buy the properties on the cheap and he has said "That makes me smart." when confronted with the fact he hasn't paid federal taxes except when it was a requirement to get a casino license. There's your great businessman he looks for any way he can to take advantage. Sounds honest.

Quote:
LESTER HOLT

He also raised the issue of your e-mails. Do you want to respond to that?

HILLARY CLINTON
I do. You know, I made my mistake using a private e-mail.

DONALD TRUMP
That's for sure.


HILLARY CLINTON
And if I had to do it over again I would obviously do it differently. But I'm not going to make any excuses. It was a mistake and I take responsibility for that.

LESTER HOLT
Mr. Trump?


DONALD TRUMP
That was more than a mistake. That was done purposely. That was not a mistake. That was done purposely. When you have your staff taking the Fifth Amendment, taking the fifth so they are not prosecuted,  when you have the man that set up the illegal server taking the fifth, I think it’s disgraceful. And believe me, this country thinks it is this -- really thinks it is disgraceful also. As far as my tax returns, you do not earn that much from tax returns. That I can tell you.

You learn a lot from financial disclosure. And you should go down and take a look at that. The other thing - I am incredibly the underleveraged. The report that six hundred feet fifty -- which by the way, a lot of friends of mine that know my business say boy that's really not a lot of money. That's not a lot of money relative to what I had. The big buildings that were in question they said in the same report, which actually wasn’t even a bad story, to be honest with you -- but the buildings are worth 3.9 billion dollars. And the six hundred fifty is not even on that. But it is not six hundred fifty. It is much less than that. But I could give you a list of banks. If that would help you I would give you list the banks. These are very fine institutions, very fine banks. I could do that very quickly. I am very underleveraged. I have a great company. I have it tremendous income. And the reason I say it is not a braggadocios way. It’s because it is about time that this country had somebody running it that has an idea about money.

So Hillary admitted a mistake and said she would take responsibility for it. Sounds like a better response then filling the room with hot air. I can't fathom why the emails would bother anybody more then a man running on the basis he's an honest business man when he is in fact the opposite.

So defying decade of tradition we don't know how legitimate his business empire really is because the majority of his business is run through Trump's own private organization the Trump Foundation. Although Trump's Hotels and Casinos were one of the few that they could find info on and public investors claimed they lost lots of money while Trump gained money. In fact the public company lost money every year until he filed for bankruptcy.

No worries though! Trump has released his own financial statement written by lawyers (Trump puppets.) and he says "Believe me!" you will learn more from that statement then you ever will from tax returns.

Quote:HILLARY CLINTON
If your main claim to be president of the United States is your business, then I think we should talk about that. You know your campaign manager said that you built a lot of businesses on the backs of little guys.

And indeed I have met a lot of the people who were stiffed by you and your businesses Donald. I've met dishwashers, painters, architects, glass installers, marble installers, drapery installers like my dad was, who you refused to pay when they finished the work that you asked them to do. We have an architect in the audience who designed one of your clubhouses at one of your golf courses. It's a beautiful facility. It immediately was put to use. And you wouldn’t pay what the man needed to be paid when he was charging you.

DONALD TRUMP
Maybe you can do a good job and I was unsatisfied with his work. Which our country should do too.


HILLARY CLINTON
Do the thousands of people that you have stiffed over the course of the business not deserve some kind of apology from someone who has taken their labor, taken the goods that they produced, and then refused to pay them? I can only say that I am certainly relieved that my late father never did business with you. He provided a good middle-class life for us but the people he worked for, he expected the bargain to be kept on both sides. And when we talk about your business, you’ve taken business bankruptcy six times. There a lot of great business people that have never taken bankruptcy once. You call yourself the king of debt. You talk about leverage. You even went and suggested that you would try to negotiate down the national debt of the United States.

DONALD TRUMP
Wrong.

HILLARY CLINTON
Well, sometimes there is not a direct transfer of skills from business to government. But sometimes what happened in business would be really bad for government. And we need to be very clear about that.


DONALD TRUMP

Look it's all words. It's all soundbites. I built an unbelievable company, some of the greatest assets anywhere in the world, real estate assets anywhere in the world, beyond the United States. In Europe, lots of different places. It's an unbelievable company.

But on occasion, four times, we used certain laws that are there. And when Secretary Clinton talks about people that didn’t get paid, first of all they did get paid a lot but taken advantage of the laws of the nation. Now, if you want to change the laws, you've been a long time, change the laws. But I take advantage of the laws of the nation because I am running the company. My obligation right now is to do well for myself, my family, my employees, for my companies.

And that is what I do. But what she does not say is that tens of thousands of people that are unbelievably happy and that love me -- I’ll give you an example. We’re just opening up on Pennsylvania Avenue right next to the White House, so if I don't get there one way, I'm going to get Pennsylvania Avenue another. But we are opening the old post office. Under budget, ahead of schedule, save tremendous money, I’m a year ahead of schedule.

And that is what this country should be doing. We build roads and they cost two and three and four times what they’re supposed to cost. We buy products for our military and they come at a cost that are so far above what they are supposed to be because we don't have people that know what they are doing. When we look at the budget, the budget is bad to large extent because we have people that have no idea as to what to do and how to buy. The Trump International is way under budget and way ahead of schedule. And we should be able to do that for our country.

So the honest business man doesn't pay the people he works with for their time and resources and he takes advantage of laws he knows are wrong? Sounds like a real straight shooter who will turn around and fix the laws he's gotten rich off of and was able to claim the status of successful business man because of.

Funny how the king of soundbites is trying to flip the script.

Quote:LESTER HOLT

Mr. Trump for five years you perpetuated a false claim of the nation's first black president was not a natural-born citizen. You questioned his legitimacy. In last couple weeks you acknowledge what most Americans have accepted for years, the president was born in the United States. Can you tell us what took you so long?
DONALD TRUMP

DONALD TRUMP
I’ll tell you- it’s very simple to say. Sidney Blumenthal works for the campaign and a very close friend of Secretary Clinton. And her campaign manager Patti Doyle went to, during her campaign against President Obama, fought very hard, and you can go look it up, and you can check it out, and if you look at CNN this past week Patti Solis Doyle was on Wolf Blitzer saying that this happened. Blumenthal sent McClatchy, a highly-respected reporter at McClatchy to Kenya to find out about it. They were pressing it very hard, she failed to get the birth certificate. When I got involved, I didn't fail. I got him to give the birth certificate. So I'm satisfied with it, and I’ll tell you why I’m satisfied with it.

LESTER HOLT

That was in 2011.

DONALD TRUMP
Because I want to get on to defeating ISIS. Because I want to get on to creating jobs. Because I want to get on to having a strong border. Because I want to get on the things that are very important to me and that are very important to the country.

LESTER HOLT
I will let you respond, that’s important. But I just want to get the answer here. The birth certificate was produced in 2011, you continued to tell the story and question the president's legitimacy in 2012, 13, 14, 15, as recently as January. So the question is, what changed your mind?

DONALD TRUMP
Well, nobody was pressing it. Nobody was caring much about it. I figured you’d ask the question tonight, of course. But nobody was caring much about it. But I was the one that got him to produce the birth certificate. And I think I did a good job. Secretary Clinton also fought it. I mean, you know, now everybody in the mainstream’s gonna say, that’s not true. Look, it’s true.

Sidney Blumenthal sent a reporter. You just have to take a look at CNN last week, the interview with your former campaign manager. And she was involved. But just like she can't bring back jobs, she can't produce.

LESTER HOLT

I'm sorry. I’m just going to follow up. I will let you respond because there is a lot there. We're talking about racial healing in the segment. What do you say to Americans --

DONALD TRUMP

I say nothing because I was able to get him to produce it. He should have produced a long time before. I say nothing, but let me just tell you. When you talk about healing, I think that I developed very, very good relationships over the last little while with the African-American community. I think you can see that. And I feel that they really wanted me to come to that conclusion. And I think I did a great job and a great service, not only for the country but even for the president in getting him to produce his birth certificate.

So all of that was complete and utter B.S. He started the movement no matter how many times he says otherwise that can't be changed. Classic Trump he's actually a hero for getting him to present a certificate that he didn't have to present. Nobody cared about the issue because it was stupid and a waste of time just like when he tried pulling that card with Ted Cruz.

Quote:DONALD TRUMP

I do want to say that I was just endorsed and more are coming next week, it’ll be over two hundred admirals, many of them are here, admirals and generals endorsed me to leave this country. That just happened and many more are coming. And I'm very proud of it. In addition, I was is endorsed by ICE. They’ve never endorsed anybody before -- on immigration. I was just endorsed by ICE. I was just recently endorsed...16,500 border patrol agencies. So when Secretary Clinton talks about this, I mean, I'll take the admirals and I’ll take the generals any day over the political hacks that I see who have led our country so brilliantly over the last ten years with their knowledge because look at the mess that were in. Look at the mess that were in.

You were endorsed by former border patrol agents not ICE jackwad. Anyways on to the actual subject...

Quote:As far as the cyber, I agree to parts of what Secretary Clinton said. We should be better than anybody else and perhaps we’re not. I don’t think anybody knows that it was Russia that broke into the DNC. She saying Russia, Russia, Russia. I don't -- maybe it was. I mean, it could be Russia, but it could also be China, it could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed who weighs 400 pounds, ok?

You don’t know how broke into DNC? But what did we learn with DNC? We learn that Bernie Sanders was taken advantage of by your people, by Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Look what happened to her. But Bernie Sanders was taken advantage of. That’s what it was. Now, whether that was Russia, whether that was China, whether it was another country, we don't know because the truth is under President Obama, we've lost control of things that we used to have control over. We came in with the Internet. We came up with the Internet. And I think Secretary Clinton and myself would agree very much when you look at what ISIS is doing with the Internet, they’re beating us at our own game. ISIS. So we had to get very very tough on cyber and cyber warfare. It is a huge problem. I have a son -- he’s ten years old. He has computers. He is so good with these computers. It’s unbelievable.

The security aspect of cyber is very, very tough. And maybe, it's hardly doable. But I will say, we are not doing the job we should be doing. But that’s true throughout our whole governmental society. We have so many things that we have to do better, Lester. And certainly cyber is one of them.

So clearly this is a guy who has no idea what he is talking about. We actually can trace cyber crime to a certain degree and simply saying "Who knows?!" over and over might get to people who knows as much as he does about the internet but he just sounded really naive to people who just have a fraction of knowledge in this category. We know for sure it wasn't a 400 pound random fat guy sitting on his bed.

He clearly has no interest in talking about who broke into the DNC's files but he has interest in talking about what they uncovered. Doesn't sound like a neutral party in this he sounds like he is trying to move the target off of Russia's back.

We lost control over "things" it's hardly doable but we are also not doing "what we should be doing" but of course according to Trump that's the state of everything in this country. How much you wanna bet his 10 year old not only knows more about the internet then Trump but also will be named head of some kind of cyber warfare department.

Quote:LESTER HOLT

Mr. Trump a lot of these are judgment questions. You had supported the war in iraq before the invasion.

DONALD TRUMP
I did not support the war in Iraq. That is a mainstream media nonsense put out by her because she frankly -- I think the best person in her campaign is mainstream media.

LESTER HOLT

My question is, since you supported it, why is your judgment….

DONALD TRUMP
I was against the war -- wait a minute, I was against the war in Iraq.

LESTER HOLT
The record shows otherwise.

DONALD TRUMP

The record shows that I am right. When I did an interview with Howard Stern, very likely first time anyone has asked me that, I said very lightly I don't know maybe who knows. Essentially. I then did an interview with Neil Cavuto. We talked about the economy as more important. I then spoke to Sean Hannity which everyone refuses to call Sean Hannity. I had numerous conversation with Sean Hannity at Fox. And Sean Hannity said, and he called me the other day. And I spoke to him about it. He said you were totally against the war because he was for the war.

LESTER HOLT

Why is your judgment better than…


DONALD TRUMP
Excuse me -- that was before the war started. Sean Hannity said very strongly to me and other people -- he’s willing to say it but nobody wants to call him. I was against the war. He said you used to have fights with me cause Sean was in favor of the war. And I understand that side also-- not very much because we should never have been there -- but nobody called Sean Hannity. And then they did an article in a major magazine shortly after the war started. I think in ‘04. But they did an article which had me totally against the war in Iraq. And one of your compatriots said you know whether it was before or right after Trump was definitely -- because if you read this article there is no doubt. But if somebody and I’ll ask the press, if somebody would call up Sean Hannity, this was before the war started. He and I used to have arguments about the war. I said it's a terrible and a stupid thing. It’s going to destabilize the Middle East. And that is exactly what it has done.

LESTER HOLT
My reference was to what you said in 2002. My question was why is your judgment any different than Mrs.Clinton's?

DONALD TRUMP
Well, I have much better question judgment than she does. There’s no question about that. I also have a much better temperament that she has, you know? You know, I have a much better -- she spent -- let me tell you. She spent hundreds of millions of dollars on an advertising, you know they get Madison Avenue into a room, oh temperament, let’s go after that…. I think my strongest asset, maybe by far, is my temperament. I have a winning temperament.

I know how to win. She does not know how to win. The AFL-CIO - the other day behind the blue screen, I don't know who you're talking to Secretary Clinton, but you were totally out of control. I said, there is a person with a temperament that’s got a problem.


LESTER HOLT
Secretary Clinton?


HILLARY CLINTON
Okay.

(LAUGHTER)

Alright so wth was all that? That was Trump losing his cool when presented with the facts. He always has an out or an excuse about why he shouldn't be held accountable for what was said. Of course when most of your supporters live in a fantasy world you can get away with blaming the mainstream media for all of your problems.

It honestly was hysterical because he is clearly losing his temperament while he is saying...

"Well, I have much better question judgment than she does. There’s no question about that. I also have a much better temperament that she has, you know? You know, I have a much better -- she spent -- let me tell you. She spent hundreds of millions of dollars on an advertising, you know they get Madison Avenue into a room, oh temperament, let’s go after that…. I think my strongest asset, maybe by far, is my temperament. I have a winning temperament."

That can only be described as verbal diarrhea.

[BigPapaKain]

America's enemies.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-27-2016, 02:47 PM)CageTheBengal Wrote: Watched the whole thing and here were some highlights for me taken from the transcript...



I'm sure he will come back and say I never said I hoped it collapsed but that was the first red flag for me during this debate. It's a glimpse into what considers business and the lack of morale fiber he has. This was the first of many of his chime ins during the debate to delude Clinton's message.



So the con-artist doesn't want to share his secret plan? Is this guy serious? It shows how little this guy knows about the military and foreign issues. (Oh wait he knows more then the generals.) Anyone who thinks simply posting an outline of your plan is exposing your plan is a rube. That's like accusing Marvin Lewis of giving away his game-plan for saying he wants to play strong defense against the run game and not turn the ball over. Only someone who knows so little would think that's the whole plan.

ISIS has only existed in it's current form since 2013-14. Last time I checked Hillary didn't turn 18 then. Why doesn't it matter to people that this guy either...

A. Gets easily peeved and says moronic things off the cuff.

or

B. Is just a moron who claims he knows when he doesn't.




Okay it was painfully obvious Trump wanted to switch the subject because he went to his go to distraction her emails. So the shoddy business man doesn't want to release his tax returns. An expectation of every nominee that has run for president for the last 40 years (Excluding Ford because of him stepping in for Nixon but he did release a summary but not his full returns.) but Trump decides not to release them (Unless you believe his bogus audit line.) leaving a lot of people to assume he's hiding something. Is he hiding something that is so bad that he would rather let the public's imagination run wild guessing at what it could be? Obviously. Why else would he try to make some deal where he would release only if Clinton reveals 33,000 emails? It's because he's banking those emails will have something so bad in it that it would counter-balance his awful hiding in his returns. Just like your classic third-grader 2 wrongs = 1 right.

Trump going on about his wealthy friends that he never says by name was a re-occurring theme all night. It was like the kid in third grade that was always saying lies just to make his life seem more cool. Except Trump isn't a kid. He's a grown man running for a real job.

So far Trump has said "It's called business." when Hillary claimed he was hoping the housing market would collapse so he could buy the properties on the cheap and he has said "That makes me smart." when confronted with the fact he hasn't paid federal taxes except when it was a requirement to get a casino license. There's your great businessman he looks for any way he can to take advantage. Sounds honest.



So Hillary admitted a mistake and said she would take responsibility for it. Sounds like a better response then filling the room with hot air. I can't fathom why the emails would bother anybody more then a man running on the basis he's an honest business man when he is in fact the opposite.

So defying decade of tradition we don't know how legitimate his business empire really is because the majority of his business is run through Trump's own private organization the Trump Foundation. Although Trump's Hotels and Casinos were one of the few that they could find info on and public investors claimed they lost lots of money while Trump gained money. In fact the public company lost money every year until he filed for bankruptcy.

No worries though! Trump has released his own financial statement written by lawyers (Trump puppets.) and he says "Believe me!" you will learn more from that statement then you ever will from tax returns.




So the honest business man doesn't pay the people he works with for their time and resources and he takes advantage of laws he knows are wrong? Sounds like a real straight shooter who will turn around and fix the laws he's gotten rich off of and was able to claim the status of successful business man because of.

Funny how the king of soundbites is trying to flip the script.




So all of that was complete and utter B.S. He started the movement no matter how many times he says otherwise that can't be changed. Classic Trump he's actually a hero for getting him to present a certificate that he didn't have to present. Nobody cared about the issue because it was stupid and a waste of time just like when he tried pulling that card with Ted Cruz.



You were endorsed by former border patrol agents not ICE jackwad. Anyways on to the actual subject...



So clearly this is a guy who has no idea what he is talking about. We actually can trace cyber crime to a certain degree and simply saying "Who knows?!" over and over might get to people who knows as much as he does about the internet but he just sounded really naive to people who just have a fraction of knowledge in this category. We know for sure it wasn't a 400 pound random fat guy sitting on his bed.

He clearly has no interest in talking about who broke into the DNC's files but he has interest in talking about what they uncovered. Doesn't sound like a neutral party in this he sounds like he is trying to move the target off of Russia's back.

We lost control over "things" it's hardly doable but we are also not doing "what we should be doing" but of course according to Trump that's the state of everything in this country. How much you wanna bet his 10 year old not only knows more about the internet then Trump but also will be named head of some kind of cyber warfare department.





Alright so wth was all that? That was Trump losing his cool when presented with the facts. He always has an out or an excuse about why he shouldn't be held accountable for what was said. Of course when most of your supporters live in a fantasy world you can get away with blaming the mainstream media for all of your problems.

It honestly was hysterical because he is clearly losing his temperament while he is saying...

"Well, I have much better question judgment than she does. There’s no question about that. I also have a much better temperament that she has, you know? You know, I have a much better -- she spent -- let me tell you. She spent hundreds of millions of dollars on an advertising, you know they get Madison Avenue into a room, oh temperament, let’s go after that…. I think my strongest asset, maybe by far, is my temperament. I have a winning temperament."

That can only be described as verbal diarrhea.

Yeah you paid too much attention.  

[Benton]

(09-27-2016, 02:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As to who won: I don't think either gained much and neither lost much. Those that look for a sense of fair play might not like the way holt "moderated".

He went after Trump much more that Hills and he "reminded' the audiance to be quiet only once. Does anybody remember when it was?
 

I thought Holt did fairly good about sticking to what's been proven and not letting a candidate make it up as they go along (although, admittedly that's mostly Trump as Clinton doesn't switch that much, such as saying he didn't support the war when he said he did at the time). But I do think Holt pressed too much on the taxes issues.

If anything, I thought he went a bit easier on Trump for not admonishing him for the constant speak overs.

[Belsnickel]

(09-27-2016, 12:44 PM)GMDino Wrote: I'd be curios to your take that we should run it more like a household:

You have X amount of income and have to figure out how to budget it over the month / year.

Sometimes something happens you didn't budget for (new roof) so you have to spend over your budget and then figure a way to either get in more income or pay it off as quickly as possible.

No one wants to run a deficit, but you also have to take care of what you have and occasionally (as this isn't a perfect world) you get surprised and have to go over your budget.

The problem with the idea of budgeting a government like a business, or even a household, is that they just don't correlate in many ways. Both a household and a corporation have more control over their revenue stream and their expenses than a government does.

The most powerful check any legislature has on the government is the power of the purse. It is absolutely necessary for the body of the people to have that power so that the executive is reined in. That being said, it is also the thing that makes it tremendously difficult to budget in the government sector. A government agency has no control over their revenue stream, that is entirely something determined by the legislature. An executive agency can make requests, but funds are budgeted and appropriated by the legislature. Every agency is essentially lobbying the legislature for a piece of the pie to do their jobs. Sometimes, more often than not, that funding is short of what is actually necessary.

The amount that the legislature is basing this on it a revenue forecast of the taxes. We aren't talking about using the tax revenues from the prior year, no, we ware talking about building a budget on what a room full of economists are estimating will be the tax revenue for the upcoming year. You can see the problem with this already, I am sure. The fun part is that states often run a biennial budget cycle, so forecasting two years out. The only way to raise this revenue is to increase taxes, which in this political climate is not something anyone is willing to admit or do.

On top of all of that, in a corporation or a household, the people making the decisions about the budget have a much more ground level understanding of the finances as well. Even a CEO of a Fortune 500 company that is so far removed from the day-to-day has a better understanding of the financial situation of the company than a legislator on a finance/budget/appropriations committee. So while the people at the ground level in government can make decisions about what to spend the appropriated money on, the rest of the control rests with people that have no idea. And the ground level isn't going to give up any of their money without a fight because if we do with half of our appropriated amount this year, guess what will happen next year.

The whole system for governmental budgets is pretty ridiculous. People don't want to hear what the answers actually are to solve the problems. Instead they want people to tell them things like "I can run a business good, I'll do the same to the government." We expect everything but we don't want to pay for it. Look at Colorado. The only reason weed became legal there was because they needed a new revenue source. They passed a constitutional amendment that made it so increasing taxes on took a referendum. This, of course, is never going to happen. So marijuana being legal and regulated was completely an economic choice to close budget gaps. Of course, there is a legal question of whether Colorado has a constitutional government because of the amendment they passed, but that's another story. But they had to cover that gap because even though there were revenue shortfalls, people weren't going to stop needing the services of the government. That's the position government will always be in. We have to supply services to the people, the people will never accept anything less, but they will fight tooth and nail against paying for it.

Sorry for the semi long rant that really didn't answer your question too well.

[CageTheBengal]

(09-27-2016, 03:27 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Yeah you paid too much attention.  

No such thing when it comes to electing our next president.

I have a feeling that if others "paid too much attention" maybe we would have a more educated society that wouldn't have even let Trump get near being president.

[*bfine32*]

(09-27-2016, 04:15 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The problem with the idea of budgeting a government like a business, or even a household, is that they just don't correlate in many ways. Both a household and a corporation have more control over their revenue stream and their expenses than a government does.

The most powerful check any legislature has on the government is the power of the purse. It is absolutely necessary for the body of the people to have that power so that the executive is reined in. That being said, it is also the thing that makes it tremendously difficult to budget in the government sector. A government agency has no control over their revenue stream, that is entirely something determined by the legislature. An executive agency can make requests, but funds are budgeted and appropriated by the legislature. Every agency is essentially lobbying the legislature for a piece of the pie to do their jobs. Sometimes, more often than not, that funding is short of what is actually necessary.

The amount that the legislature is basing this on it a revenue forecast of the taxes. We aren't talking about using the tax revenues from the prior year, no, we ware talking about building a budget on what a room full of economists are estimating will be the tax revenue for the upcoming year. You can see the problem with this already, I am sure. The fun part is that states often run a biennial budget cycle, so forecasting two years out. The only way to raise this revenue is to increase taxes, which in this political climate is not something anyone is willing to admit or do.

On top of all of that, in a corporation or a household, the people making the decisions about the budget have a much more ground level understanding of the finances as well. Even a CEO of a Fortune 500 company that is so far removed from the day-to-day has a better understanding of the financial situation of the company than a legislator on a finance/budget/appropriations committee. So while the people at the ground level in government can make decisions about what to spend the appropriated money on, the rest of the control rests with people that have no idea. And the ground level isn't going to give up any of their money without a fight because if we do with half of our appropriated amount this year, guess what will happen next year.

The whole system for governmental budgets is pretty ridiculous. People don't want to hear what the answers actually are to solve the problems. Instead they want people to tell them things like "I can run a business good, I'll do the same to the government." We expect everything but we don't want to pay for it. Look at Colorado. The only reason weed became legal there was because they needed a new revenue source. They passed a constitutional amendment that made it so increasing taxes on took a referendum. This, of course, is never going to happen. So marijuana being legal and regulated was completely an economic choice to close budget gaps. Of course, there is a legal question of whether Colorado has a constitutional government because of the amendment they passed, but that's another story. But they had to cover that gap because even though there were revenue shortfalls, people weren't going to stop needing the services of the government. That's the position government will always be in. We have to supply services to the people, the people will never accept anything less, but they will fight tooth and nail against paying for it.

Sorry for the semi long rant that really didn't answer your question too well.

Cliff Notes:

One is microeconomics the other is macroeconomics.

The two are very different.

[Belsnickel]

(09-27-2016, 04:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Cliff Notes:

One is microeconomics the other is macroeconomics.

The two are very different.

Well, yeah, if you want to take the easy way out.

[GMDino]

(09-27-2016, 04:15 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The problem with the idea of budgeting a government like a business, or even a household, is that they just don't correlate in many ways. Both a household and a corporation have more control over their revenue stream and their expenses than a government does.

The most powerful check any legislature has on the government is the power of the purse. It is absolutely necessary for the body of the people to have that power so that the executive is reined in. That being said, it is also the thing that makes it tremendously difficult to budget in the government sector. A government agency has no control over their revenue stream, that is entirely something determined by the legislature. An executive agency can make requests, but funds are budgeted and appropriated by the legislature. Every agency is essentially lobbying the legislature for a piece of the pie to do their jobs. Sometimes, more often than not, that funding is short of what is actually necessary.

The amount that the legislature is basing this on it a revenue forecast of the taxes. We aren't talking about using the tax revenues from the prior year, no, we ware talking about building a budget on what a room full of economists are estimating will be the tax revenue for the upcoming year. You can see the problem with this already, I am sure. The fun part is that states often run a biennial budget cycle, so forecasting two years out. The only way to raise this revenue is to increase taxes, which in this political climate is not something anyone is willing to admit or do.

On top of all of that, in a corporation or a household, the people making the decisions about the budget have a much more ground level understanding of the finances as well. Even a CEO of a Fortune 500 company that is so far removed from the day-to-day has a better understanding of the financial situation of the company than a legislator on a finance/budget/appropriations committee. So while the people at the ground level in government can make decisions about what to spend the appropriated money on, the rest of the control rests with people that have no idea. And the ground level isn't going to give up any of their money without a fight because if we do with half of our appropriated amount this year, guess what will happen next year.

The whole system for governmental budgets is pretty ridiculous. People don't want to hear what the answers actually are to solve the problems. Instead they want people to tell them things like "I can run a business good, I'll do the same to the government." We expect everything but we don't want to pay for it. Look at Colorado. The only reason weed became legal there was because they needed a new revenue source. They passed a constitutional amendment that made it so increasing taxes on took a referendum. This, of course, is never going to happen. So marijuana being legal and regulated was completely an economic choice to close budget gaps. Of course, there is a legal question of whether Colorado has a constitutional government because of the amendment they passed, but that's another story. But they had to cover that gap because even though there were revenue shortfalls, people weren't going to stop needing the services of the government. That's the position government will always be in. We have to supply services to the people, the people will never accept anything less, but they will fight tooth and nail against paying for it.

Sorry for the semi long rant that really didn't answer your question too well.

Eh, better answer than I usually get. 

[*bfine32*]

(09-27-2016, 04:33 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, yeah, if you want to take the easy way out.

My Econ professor in college said Micro and Macro Economists won't even talk to each other.

[Bengalbug]

(09-27-2016, 04:29 PM)CageTheBengal Wrote: No such thing when it comes to electing our next president.

I have a feeling that if others "paid too much attention" maybe we would have a more educated society that wouldn't have even let Trump get near being president.

Or Obama...  

But hindsight is 20/20

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-27-2016, 02:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: He went after Trump much more that Hills and he "reminded' the audiance to be quiet only once. Does anybody remember when it was?

When Trump made a comment about Clinton's deleted emails.

[GMDino]

(09-27-2016, 04:39 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: When Trump made a comment about Clinton's deleted emails.

Yep and then Holt asked her and she responded and Trump talked about her response and then AFTER the debate sent out a tweet that they didn't talk about her emails.  

[GMDino]

I just feel so bad for Trump.

- His microphone may have been deliberately made to not work properly.
- He thinks they didn't talk about the emails even though he brought it up and it was talked about.
- He didn't know people would actually remember things he said when he denied them right after the debate.
- He knew they would ask him about the birther thing and he didn't have answer ready.
- He knew they talk about his taxes and didn't have an answer ready.


The list just goes on and on on how this was rigged to make him look unprepared.

[*bfine32*]

(09-27-2016, 04:39 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: When Trump made a comment about Clinton's deleted emails.

Yep and then Holt really pressed the matter by asking Hills did she want to respond and then on to the more pressing subjects of birther movement and personal taxes.