Candidate’s fiscal plans ‘unrealistic,’ experts say
ASSOCIATED PRESS
In an economic policy speech to the Detroit Economic Club on Monday, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump offered pro- posals split between traditional GOP policies, like rolling back taxes and easing federal regulations, and ideas unpopular with the GOP majority in Congress.
Reeling from a cascade of blunders that drove his poll ratings down, Donald Trump sought to regain his standing Monday by laying out an economic agenda of tax cuts, vast spending on public construction and a tougher posture on trade.
“I want to jump-start America, and it won’t even be that hard,” the Republican presidential nominee said in a speech to the Detroit Economic Club.
Trump’s formal presentation, read from a teleprompter, was a central part of his attempt to recover from campaign turmoil that left many Americans doubting his capacity to be commander in chief.
Trump’s economic proposals were split between traditional GOP policies, like rolling back taxes and easing federal regulations, and ideas unpopular with the GOP majority in Congress, like scrapping trade pacts and pouring new money into railways, highways and other infrastructure.
Trump’s claim that his plans would spark explosive job growth left many economists skeptical, as did the absence of detail on how he would pay for his proposals.
“At some point you can’t live in a world completely divorced from economic reality,” said Edward Kleinbard, a business and law professor at University of Southern California. He called Trump’s simultaneous tax cuts and new spending “fundamentally unrealistic.”
Trump proposed tax cuts last year that would benefit primarily the wealthy and cost as much as $10 trillion over the next decade, economists say.
Trump has also promised a major buildup of the military at an unspecified price, and he has vowed to resist pressure by fellow Republicans to curb Social Security and Medicare, a pledge he did not mention Monday.
“It can’t add up is the bottom line,” said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank.
Still, the New York businessman appeared to cut the overall cost of his previous plan by making several revisions Monday.
He initially had proposed simplifying individual income tax rates with four brackets — 25 percent, 20 percent, 10 percent and 0 percent. He raised those Monday to align with a House Republican plan that calls for rates of 33 percent, 25 percent, 12 percent and 0 percent.
Prior to those changes, a Moody’s Analytics report concluded that Trump’s economic agenda would thrust Americans into a lengthy recession, create “very large deficits” and burden the country with “a much higher debt load.”
In Detroit, Trump also proposed letting parents deduct the average cost of child-care spending. The plan risks favoring the higher-income taxpayers who most rely on itemized deductions, but the absence of specifics left the impact unclear.
Trump, who was interrupted by hecklers more than a dozen times, cast his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton as a champion of old economic ideas that have left millions of Americans unemployed or impoverished as jobs shift to foreign countries.
“Every policy she has tilts the playing field toward other countries at our expense,” Trump said.
Clinton offered a simple reply to Donald Trump’s economic address Monday: “Don’t let a friend vote Trump.”
At a rally in St. Petersburg, Fla., Clinton said the plans Trump outlined would push the country back into recession, warning that his plans benefit the rich and do little to create jobs or boost the economy.
“His tax plans would give super big tax breaks to large corporations and the really wealthy,” Clinton said, characterizing the proposals, which include substantial tax cuts, as “trickle-down economics.”
“You know that old saying: Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me,” she said.
———
The Los Angeles Times and the Associated Press contributed to this report.
94 responses to “Candidate’s fiscal plans ‘unrealistic,’ experts say”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
As usual……
Oh me, oh my!
What would we ever be able to do without “experts”?
Small wonder that Don Trump scares the [redacted] out of them.
If he succeeds in November, they will all have to go to work for a living and their fancy rice bowls will be cracked.
And all those self-labeled experts for liberals. Almost 8 years of Obomme financial policies have failed. Shove-ready jobs? Obomme couldn’t find a shovel. Lest we forget – You can keep your plan, you can keep your doctor and save $2500 per year in premium costs. Where were those experts then? Oh, yeah, at the DNC convention in 2008.
Thos, fully agree with your post. I’ll just add that those who are critical of Mr. Trumps plan support the current Hawaii’s born President Obama’s economic failure over the seven and a half years and want to continue the economic failure for another four years with the Liberal democrat candidate.
Hang onto your wallets if Hellary wins.
The truth is neither candidate is fit or worthy of the office.
It’s going to come down to choosing who you think the lesser of 2 evils is. Having alienated hispanics, blacks, muslims and women – the Donald has set himself up to be blown out in November. If nothing else, he’s super entertaining to watch, even if it’s crash and burning.
Once again, Trump supporters cannot back up his claims. All they can do is accuse those that disagree as being “liberals” or say something negative about Obama or Hillary. Never any actual acknowledgement of the facts or comments to back up any of Trump’s supposed “policy”. Tell us why his tax plan will work? Tell us why his proposed abolishing of the estate tax is beneficial to the middle class? Or even, tell us how he went from “I can’t tell you my plan because someone will steal it” to “I am telling everyone my plan now” if the polls are supposedly rigged and he’s not reacting to his current polling figures? Tell us something other than why Hillary is evil or how Obama ruined the world or how every non-partisan think-tank is secretly liberal if they debunk Trump’s policy.
“Tell us something other than why Hillary is evil”..She is also ill….As the presidential campaign enters its final stages, probing questions have emerged about the health condition of Hillary Clinton.
Hillary’ bizarre, erratic behavior on the campaign trail (culminating with last week’s perplexing “short-circuit” comment) has left many wondering whether she is seriously ill. Hillary has at multiple times had convulsions that appear to be seizures on camera, including a series of seemingly inexplicable coughing fits.
Hillary may have seizure-like conditions emerged several weeks ago and has so far failed to lead to a conclusive explanation whether Hillary may have ongoing health problems and potential residual after effects from a blood clot in her brain sustained three years ago.
Recall in January 2013, CNN reported that then Secretary of State Clinton was treated with blood thinners at a New York hospital to help dissolve a blood clot in her head. Back then doctors were confident she would make a full recovery. Clinton was admitted to New York Presbyterian Hospital on Sunday due to the clot that was discovered during a follow-up exam related to a concussion she suffered this month, her spokesman, Philippe Reines, said. The clot was located in the vein between the brain and and the skull behind Clinton’s right ear and did not result in any stroke or neurological damage, her doctors said in a statement.
Going further back, in 2005 then Senator Hillary fainted during a speech in Buffalo, NY, where she received medical attention on site. “About five minutes into the speech, she said she was queasy,” said Erie County Democratic Chairman Len Lenihan, who was at the Women’s TAP fund-raiser at the private club. “Clinton left the podium and continued her talk sitting in a chair but eventually left the room, saying she needed a break, Lenihan said. She returned to the podium a short time later but fainted before resuming her speech. “It became clear she was faint. She was sort of brought down gracefully,” he said.
Trump looked very uncomfortable reading off the script he was given by GOP officials. It was like he was being held hostage and forced to read the script. At least he didn’t just pull stuff out of his rear end like he usually does. Trump always says he’s going to eliminate the deficit, yet this plan adds billions to the deficit without any new sources of revenue and just lines the pockets of the super rich like himself that don’t need additional money. He calls himself a Reagan Republican, yet he has no idea what being a Reagan Republican is, which includes funding any tax cuts before implementing them.
Judicial Watch Investigation Ties Clinton, De Blasio, Billionaire Developer Ratner to ‘New Tammany Hall’ Scandal
AUGUST 09, 2016
Email Print Text Size
‘The central scam of the new Tammany Hall system would not be unfamiliar to old Tammany’s [George Washington] Plunkitt: public money for private profit.’
(Washington, DC) – An incisive new expose published today in Judicial Watch’s Investigative Bulletin charges that New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, real estate developer Bruce Ratner, and Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton are key players in a “new Tammany Hall” that manipulates billions of dollars of public funds into vast private profits. The report was written by Judicial Watch’s Chief Investigative Reporter, Micah Morrison.
The report provides a roadmap to how New York City’s controversial Atlantic Yards development project became what Morrison terms “a giant boondoggle generating torrents of cash for well-connected insiders.” Among the highlights of the Morrison piece:
Once again, instead of addressing someone’s questioning of Trump’s policy, Sarge just cuts and pastes articles from conservative rags that have nothing to do with the original comment. I mean, at least put this in your own words or something… that is, if you have any words of your own.
It’s just so simple. You question Trump and I question Hillary. My own words are that HiLIARy is a criminal and the Clinton Foundation is corrupt and the DOJ has failed to act. Have you seen a positive article on Trump or a negative one on HiLIARy in the SA or MSM? What’s the Chicago murder rate. How about Hillary’s health. She keeps falling down and on blood thinners. You won’t find that news in this neighborhood.
It’s just so simple. You question Trump and I question Hillary…Julian Assange said he has enough evidence on secret deals for the FBI to indict Hillary Clinton
August 7, 2016 | Carmine Sabia
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange said he has enough evidence on secret deals with an alleged Islamic State sponsor for the FBI to indict Hillary Clinton.
Speaking with British journalist Afshin Rattansi for Russia Today, Assange claimed to have 350 emails on a French transnational concrete company named Le Farge that, allegedly paid ISIS to do business in regions controlled by the terror group.
The report, by left-wing British blog “The Canary,” showed the Clinton Foundation accepted, at least, $100,000 from the company.
Read more: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/08/07/julian-assange-said-enough-evidence-secret-deals-fbi-indict-hillary-clinton-375777#ixzz4GtUkAO5b
Basically with a large group of the population not producing anything and instead having entitlements, our taxes have to go up. Delaying needed repairs is a symptom of politicians trying to fool the public. Nationwide infrastructure is decaying.
3 days after Politifact rated Trump’s assertion that Clinton would raise taxes on the middle class as “Pants On Fire,” (see: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/aug/05/donald-trump/donald-trump-wrongly-says-hillary-clinton-wants-ra/), Trump repeated this blatantly false claim in his economic policy speech. This isn’t an instance of a politician stretching the truth or making inflated promises. This is flat out, pathological lying. Presented with the facts, he continues to lie. Trump simply doesn’t care whether he gets caught in his lies, and, sadly, neither do his supporters. In fact, his supporters seem to cheer the loudest when he repeats the lies that have been repeatedly exposed.
First problem with your comment – Politifact. Your BS detector doesn’t seem to work on liberals.
And facts don’t seem to work on conservatives; nor does science.
BS, I heard Ms Hillary state increasing taxes on the middle class and was completely taken by surprise, until later I watched and listed a replay confirming what she said. There is a lot of spin attempting to cover, but it was stated and recorded for the record.
Also stated and on the record is Trump calling Detroit a titty. I watched and “listened” to a replay confirming he said “…into titties like right here in Detroit.” Can’t have a president who refers to regions of the U.S. as “titties”.
Did you read the prepared text? Have you listened to other speeches? Have the read the campaign’s policy positions? At no point has Clinton ever advocated raising taxes on the middle class.
She said it. Oh but she didn’t mean it. Does she ever say anything she means?
not hearing the “t” in the word “aren’t” and claiming that Hillary is going to raise taxes because of it is an example of the kind of desperately weak thread that is barely holding up the Trump campaign. This kind of thing can get you through a republican primary but doesn’t hold up under the scrutiny of a general election, and that’s exactly what we are witnessing. But because we don’t pounce on a possible word slip (that was only heard on camera and not in person), we will be labeled as “liberals”. I can live with that.
See Washington Post’s thorough explanation of 16 instances in Trump’s economics speech where his statements are “fact challenged”: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/08/09/fact-checking-donald-trumps-speech-to-the-detroit-economic-club/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_pp-miracle-855a-top%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
This is the part where the Trumpers disregard your comment and accuse The Washington Post of being “a liberal”.
As reported by Politico, one of Trump’s own economic advisors exposes the flaw in Trump’s proposed child care deduction: “Trump added a proposal to allow families to deduct the cost of child-care from their taxes, an idea that, according to Trump adviser Stephen Moore, could cost $20 billion per year and largely benefit wealthy families, rather than low-income earners who spend more of their money on child care but pay little in federal taxes.”
Trump will be a better President than Hilary. If you like the status quo then vote for her if you want Change vote for Trump !
Wake up change yea change for the worst!
You’re a Kool-Aid drinker. Find a 12 step, or seek professional help while you’re still on your parents health-care plan.
Yeah, that hope and change from 2008 really paid off didn’t it? It really paid off for the insiders and Wall Street.
Stock market tripled, 14 million jobs were added, unemployment cut over half, and the US Auto industry was not only saved, but the US was then reimbursed prior to due date and with interest.
“In a month, quarter and year, in which many have scratched their heads trying to answer just who is buying stocks, as both retail and smart money investors have been aggressively selling…
… yesterday we got the answer.
In the second quarter, the Swiss National Bank added $7.3 billion to its US equity portfolio, and according to its just filed 13-F, is now long a record $61.8 billion in US stocks, up from $54.5 billion a month ago. In fact, rising from $41.3 billion in total US stock holdings as of December 2015, this means that the Swiss central bank increased its total US holdings by a record 50% in the first half of 2016.
Shortly, we will show the just as unprecedented buying of US stocks by another state actor, Japan’s $1.3 trillion General Pension Investment Fund, which also acquired billions of stocks in the past few months, but even absent that we now have the answer to the recurring question of who has been buying stocks as others were selling: central banks.”
On Topic…Updated Aug. 9, 2016 2:33 p.m. ET
The longest slide in worker productivity since the late 1970s is haunting the U.S. economy’s long-term prospects, a force that could prompt Federal Reserve officials to keep interest rates low for years to come.
Nonfarm business productivity—the goods and services produced each hour by American workers—decreased at a 0.5% seasonally adjusted annual rate in the second quarter as hours worked increased faster than output, the Labor Department said Tuesday.
It was the third consecutive quarter of falling productivity, the longest streak since 1979. Productivity in the second quarter was down 0.4% from a year earlier, the first annual decline in three years. That was a further step down from already tepid average annual productivity growth of 1.3% in 2007 through 2015, itself just half the pace seen in 2000 through 2007, and the trend shows little sign of reversing.
Sarge, the WSJ article you cut and pasted that from says the cause of that is hard to pin down and lists reasons like the long-term effects of the 2007 recession, modest efficiency gains because of technology, and and other things and links to another article that states that the same slowdown in growth is shared by many other advanced countries and things like aging population may also to be to blame. in no way does the article present any proof that it is a result of any economic policy of the current administration, but you use it as such. I bet if I fact-checked any of your other cut-n-paste jobs that I would find similar flaws.
You can make all the excuses you want but here are the facts.”It was the third consecutive quarter of falling productivity, the longest streak since 1979. Productivity in the second quarter was down 0.4% from a year earlier, the first annual decline in three years. That was a further step down from already tepid average annual productivity growth of 1.3% in 2007 through 2015, itself just half the pace seen in 2000 through 2007, and the trend shows little sign of reversing”..
With all due respect to Trump and his prestigious (not) economic policy team, they have not unwarapped the marquee piece of this economic plan, which might indeed resolve some of the revenue aspects of this plan: they will be selling nude pictures of his wife, some illegal (immigrant wise)….. Come and get it!!!
Hey, Ike From Eli (that’s code for Yale, your alma mater, right?)
DIDJA hear the news?
The Yale prez is forming a committee to rename the school. Seems old Eli was a /gasp!/ slave owner and so the dear little students cannot find any more ‘safe spaces’ to hide from these macro- and micro-aggressions that loom over them from the dreaded past.
Yale undergrad is made up of 12 distinct residential colleges, with a 13th soon to be opened. One of these colleges, Calhoun, has a rather dubious past and distinction.
Opened to undergraduates in 1933, Calhoun is one of the original eight residential colleges donated by Edward Harkness, and the only one designed by John Russell Pope. It is the most compact of Yale’s residential colleges.
The college is named for American politician John C. Calhoun, an 1804 graduate of Yale College and advocate of slaveholding[2] and state’s rights. Since the 1960s, Calhoun’s white supremacist beliefs and pro-slavery leadership. The surrounding history and controversy has reprompted calls to rename the college or remove its tributes to Calhoun. In 2016, the Yale Corporation chose to retain Calhoun as the college, now this is being revisted.
too funny!
Peanut where do you go to college?? Yup, that’s what I thought….crickets.
So when all these mines went off, Trump in theory always had some sort of legitimate counter-argument: Yes, Megyn Kelly was not commensurate in her sexism questions, in that she did not ask Hillary Clinton to account for her own sexist past, whether laughing over aspects of a case involving a rapist client, or demonizing Bill’s victims of coerced sex.
And, yes, it was also a fact that bombastically inviting Putin to find Hillary’s missing 30,000 e-mails could not be a breach of security if they were truly about yoga and Chelsea’s wedding. But such legitimate counter-arguments against explosive devices do not matter. Words are not as loud as Semtex and C-4. As Trump blew himself up on these mines, campaign time was irrevocably lost.
No one was asking Trump to go mute when Obama or Clinton attacked him in unprecedented fashion. The key instead was circumspection. Strike back quickly and only at major targets, to create deterrence against future smears, and then after 30 seconds get back on topic — and never step on a Democratic landmine out of curiosity whether it would really blow up. Translated, that means ignore assorted journalists eager for five minutes of cable-news attention, political flunkies, private citizens — both heroes and scoundrels — grieving widows, the disabled, the underage, and the elderly — in other words, all the cover plates that supposedly moral progressives use to mask their explosives.
Is it too late for Trump? So far, what he has thrown away in the polls Hillary so often seems to give back. So is character really fate? Or is there any chance that the outer Trump’s business savvy and heralded self-interest might half tame his inner Trump? Because he is a postmodern candidate for whom established decorum doesn’t seem to apply, and because the nation and the world are in chaos, no one quite can calibrate his powers of resilience.
And so we are left only with a probability rather than a certainty: The odds are even that Trump’s self-destructive recklessness and narcissistic crudity (which so far seem not to have turned off 40 to 45 percent of the voters) are so embedded in his DNA that he will likely fall prey to each new Khan family and Judge Curiel trap, and not win over the necessary additional 5 to 6 percent of the electorate.
Another day, another stark piece from the ultra-conservative National Review……so telling.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438773/donald-trump-can-he-still-win
This is a political election season, of the worst disorder.
There is going to be a lot of cunning, treachery, and deceit involved by both presidential candidates.
From purely an objective point of view, hundreds of polls buried Trump from day one. Trump survived the Political Darwinism. The Polls can’t be trusted any more.
Clinton has a political machine backing her, that has severely effected our military, veterans, social security, illegal immigrants, and the grocery list is as long as a 5 star dining restaurant.
Basically, neither person can truly be trusted.
The TV news media & the paper print newspapers, show their disliked candidates, by picturing them with their mouths open. If they like the candidate, that person is pictured with their mouth closed.
A tip to all of the harsh critics, choose your words carefully. Whoever gets in office, will seek 4 years of political revenge. It is a historical fact.
This is how politics has evolved. We live in the age of Political Darwinism. Political Revenge will always follow afterwards.
If Clinton wins, it will be political status quo.
What if Trump wins ?
If Trump wins, there is a small possibility that we might wake-up one morning to find Clintons, Holder, Obama, Wasserman Schultz, Lois Lerner, Ben Rhoades, and a host of others, indicted for crimes so outrageous, they’ll spend the rest of their lives behind bars. It’s what has the entire political grid is in panic free-fall mode. If Trump wins, the media loses their lock on propaganda mind control for the nation. Their never-ending slant against conservative ideology. They become irrelevant, as they should. If Trump loses, America then has it confirmed that laws only apply to the rest of us. The little folks. We have it confirmed that the progressives have won the war that has been waged over the past half century in schools throughout the country, brainwashing millions of kids into the delusion that socialism is great, and the United States isn’t. How many millennials do you know that have massive loans, still live at home, and no job? Yeah, that’s why I thought. Democracy is fragile, and it seems the secular progressives simply want it to end. Perhaps they should spend a year in Venezuela. If you think this is lunacy; how many medal ceremonies, for the United States, have you seen after a weeks worth of Olympic coverage? If you have children, remind them of how great a nation this is. Remind them that out of all the nations on earth, only the United States affords any law biding person the best place to live, or raise a family. That’s just a fact, and can not be disputed by rational folk.
Then comment on why that over half of my posts are from uber conservative sites like Ameriican Spectator and the National Review…..huh, crickets?
Ike, your myopic focus on the absurd surely outs you as a Kool-Aid king. This isn’t a dialogue. You’re hearing crickets because you’ve just od’ed on Kool-Aid. Lighten-up, and get some help.
The term drinking your own kool-aid refers to listening your own constituency or audience. However, what I post are media standard bearers for not just republicans but moreover, the ultra conservative of the party–huge difference. Let me summarize what that means–Trump is rejected by vast swaths even within the party he represents. Anything else you want me to breakdown or explain for you?
We Americans will be permitted to make our country great again, that’s what will happen.
It will be the apocalypse.
Oh, and from both a quantitative and qualitative side, one of the most recent polls taken, reflect the inane policies and continued meltdown of Trump, trailing even further:
The Monmouth University survey shows Clinton leading the flagging GOP nominee Donald Trump, 50 percent to 37 percent, among likely voters. Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson is at 7 percent, and Green Party nominee Jill Stein is at 2 percent. Only 3 percent of likely vo
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/poll-clinton-leads-by-13-points-among-likely-voters-226790#ixzz4GqtBq5FC
Chirp, chirp……all my sycophant crickets…awkward silence.
Trump is out of touch with reality. It’s disappointing and scary to continually read about his lack of basic government regulatory policies and procedures. Shockingly unprepared.
The ones who HAVE been “prepared”, are the same ones who have GOTTEN us into this mess. I’ll take the unprepared guy who’s coming in with a fresh set of eyes ready to evaluate what the “prepared” have done to us.
That’s because what you have chosen to read in the belief that it is “news” is in fact full-on non stop propaganda by a media who believe that their job is not to find and report news, but to (and I quote) comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.
In Vietnam this was known as Psy-War, in this case, a psychological warfare campaign intended to discourage voters to the point where they say ‘why bother to vote’. The very same Democrat Party that gets its knickers in a twist if a voter must produce a picture ID – – calling it ‘racist’ and voter suppression – – has no problem doing exactly the same thing to suspected Trump voters.
They problem the Dems have, of course, is that thanks to the internet that Al Bore claims to have invented, the rubes and marks (us) talk to each other and can see through the scam these grifters are trying to put into play. That, one suspects, is why Trump rallies are becoming much more intense rallies of the faithful – – who love the drama of a counter puncher taking on the so called ‘news’ media, the first time that has happened since my hero (Spiro) did so 47 years ago.
You go Don Trump!
NO PRISONERS!
Somewhat along the lines of Obama huh? Obama was really shocking and Cankles will be a continuation.
The number of tax brackets has nothing to with the excessive complexity of the tax code. Whether there are 3, 5, 10 or 20 tax brackets doesn’t matter. Your taxes are based on only one of them. After you determine your taxable income, you look up your tax rate in a simple list. Is that complex? No, it takes a few seconds. For the Trump fans to applaud and cheer when he says that he’ll have only 3 tax brackets shows how little they understand, but it makes a good sound bite. Meanwhile, while his low information fans are cheering, he is tilting the system even more in favor of the top 1/10th of 1%.
“At some point you can’t live in a world completely divorced from economic reality,” said Edward Kleinbard, a business and law professor at University of Southern California. He called Trump’s simultaneous tax cuts and new spending “fundamentally unrealistic.” So one liberal professor said his plan is unrealistic. Why does the headline imply that there were a lot of “experts” saying this? C’mon SA, why don’t you have a more balanced report? How about vetting Clinton’s plan? By the way, is she still alive? Is she in hiding? Three months till the election and HC’s silence is deafening.
The conservative Tax Foundation calculated that Trump’s original tax plan would add $10 trillion to the deficit over 10 years. His new plan, basically a recycled Paul Ryan, might cut that staggeringly negative impact on the economy in half. So Kleinbard, the former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation, said that simultaneous tax cuts and huge spending increases are “fundamentally unrealistic.” Does that make him a liberal? Are there conservatives who actually think this is realistic? Even with conservatives’ “dynamic scoring” (aka fairy dust), it makes no sense. For the party that cheers the mention of a balanced budget to simultaneously applaud Trump’s plan is symptomatic of a dangerously delusional view of our economic challenges.
Wether realistic or not, why not criticize Clinton’s plan? Yes, I make the assumption that the professor is liberal. Aren’t most professors at prestigious universities? My main point is that the media is so quick to point out Trumps deficiencies and not a peep about Clinton. I wonder what will be said in tomorrows paper about Mateen’s (Florida night club killer) father sitting right behind Clinton’s rally stage. Invited? Snuck in? I’ll bet we’ll hear crickets.
The writer, a Republican, represents Maine in the Senate.
I will not be voting for Donald Trump for president. This is not a decision I make lightly, for I am a lifelong Republican. But Donald Trump does not reflect historical Republican values nor the inclusive approach to governing that is critical to healing the divisions in our country.
When the primary season started, it soon became apparent that, much like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Mr. Trump was connecting with many Americans who felt that their voices were not being heard in Washington and who were tired of political correctness. But rejecting the conventions of political correctness is different from showing complete disregard for common decency. Mr. Trump did not stop with shedding the stilted campaign dialogue that often frustrates voters. Instead, he opted for a constant stream of denigrating comments, including demeaning Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) heroic military service and repeatedly insulting Fox News host Megyn Kelly.
With the passage of time, I have become increasingly dismayed by his constant stream of cruel comments and his inability to admit error or apologize. But it was his attacks directed at people who could not respond on an equal footing — either because they do not share his power or stature or because professional responsibility precluded them from engaging at such a level — that revealed Mr. Trump as unworthy of being our president.
Unworthy of being our President……chuckle, smirk and now turned into LMAO.
The parents of two of the Americans killed by Islamic terrorists in Benghazi have filed a lawsuit against Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, alleging her “extremely careless” handling of classified information when she was secretary of state contributed to their deaths.
Read more at … http://www.wnd.com/…/benghazi-victims-parents-sue-hillary-…/
Reminder, stay on topic. Here is a hint, it is usually contained in the heading of the article.
http://mauinow.com/2016/08/09/maui-world-champs-return-home/
FYI …I played on the first little league team to ever beat Taiwan in the sr. Little league World Series.
meanwhile, the female felon holds a rally in orlando, inviting and honoring seddique mateen, candidate for president of afghanistan, with backdrop seats right behind the female felon’s podium.
that’s orlando, where 49 gay patrons of pulse nightclub were murdered in a shooting.
that’s mateen, the father of omar mateen the shooter in the pulse club mass murders.
is this any way to run a country?
the female felon’s spiraling health may be causing more “short circuits” and periods of confusion.
That same father when interviewed outside the hall said that he wanted to show his support for Hillary as opposed to trump. And this is America where we don’t alienate a person because of another’s evil ways.
But there’s still conversation’s going on and the Clinton Campaign, disavowes ever inviting him. The campaign acknowledges a lack of screening by a young worker who ushered said person to the front behind Clinton.
“this is America where we don’t alienate a person because of another’s evil ways.”
seddique mateem is pro-taliban and anti-u.s. could be why the female felon is trying to disavow her invitation extended to siddique mateem and the preferred seating he was assigned. the female felon is quite adept at tossing people under the bus.
seddique mateem runs the durandjirga show. the show is known for “its anti-u.s. tirades” and “pro-taliban” remarks. mateen speaks favorably about the taliban: “Our brothers in Waziristan, our warrior brothers in Taliban movement and national Afghan Taliban are rising up,” he says.
Trump is borrowing ideas from Liberals!! Lowering corporate taxes– Obama tried to do that remember? Republicans shot it down. Borrowing and deficit spending to rebuild our infrastructure– Hilary wants to do that and Liberal economist Paul Krugman just said the same thing– time to borrow because USA can borrow at 0.64% just like Trump said. Republicans do not want Federal spending on infrastructure but want states to do it. Remember Neal Abercrombie and the black caucus wanting to cut out the estate tax? Now Trump wants to!! Childcare deduction from Trump is same as Hilary. Trump is becoming a democrat and a supporter of unions on trade– so no wonder Republicans do not like him.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) just joined a small but growing list of Republican members of Congress who won’t vote for GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump come November because of his temperament and rhetoric.
“Donald Trump does not reflect historical Republican values, nor the inclusive approach to governing that is critical to healing the divisions in our country,” Collins wrote in a Washington Post article published Monday.
Other Republican senators who stand in firm opposition to Trump include Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), and Ben Sasse (R-Neb.).
Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.) has said he can’t envision himself voting for Trump at this time. “I’ll give him a chance, but at this point, I have no intentions of voting for him,” he said in June.
Another senator deeply critical of Trump is Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who warned the brash businessman could lose Arizona, which has been a GOP enclave for years. But the senator stopped short of saying he would not vote for him.
Like Flake, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has not said explicitly that he would not vote for Trump. But in a speech at the GOP convention in Cleveland last month, Cruz urged delegates to vote their conscience “up and down the ticket,” signaling his opposition to the nominee.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), a friend of Cruz who hails from a state that has proven resistant to Trump, has also not offered his endorsement yet.
Just incredible how much time you have on your hands to write so much BS. It’s obvious you love to hear yourself. Bet you’re glad you can stay on your parents health plan until you’re almost an adult. Try being a volunteer somewhere. It will help you feel relevant.
Hmmmmn, I’ve done more in my life than even your pithy dreams could project…..again, where again did you go to school?
Let’s stay on topic. This isn’t the Ike show.
“Donald Trump does not reflect historical Republican values”. These people always talking about values are hilarious. If they want values go to the swap meet. There’s a good one next to boola’s place.
Ikefromeli,
Did you see Senator Collins on TV today? Ask your learned wife what she has early signs of.
Trump is not just trailing, he is trailing badly.
We’ve reached that stage of the campaign. The back-to-school commercials are on the air, and the “unskewing” of polls has begun — the quadrennial exercise in which partisans simply adjust the polls to get results more to their liking, usually with a thin sheen of math-y words to make it all sound like rigorous analysis instead of magical thinking.
If any of this sounds familiar — and if I sound a little exasperated — it’s probably because we went through this four years ago. Remember UnSkewedPolls.com? (The website is defunct, but you can view an archived picture of it here.) The main contention of that site and others like it was that the polls had too many Democratic respondents in their samples. Dean Chambers, who ran the site, regularly wrote that the polls were vastly undercounting independents and should have used a higher proportion of Republicans in their samples. But in the end, the polls underestimated President Obama’s margin.
Now the unskewers are back, again insisting that pollsters are “using” more Democrats than they should, and that the percentage of Democrats and Republicans should be equal, or that there should be more Republicans. They point to surveys like the recent one from ABC News and The Washington Post, in which 33 percent of registered voters identified as Democrats compared to 27 percent as Republicans. That poll found Hillary Clinton ahead by 8 percentage points.
But let’s say this plainly: The polls are not “skewed.” They weren’t in 2012, and they aren’t now.
The basic premise of the unskewers is wrong. Most pollsters don’t weight their results by party self-identification, which polls get by asking a question like “generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as a….” Party identification is an attitude, not a demographic. There isn’t some national number from the government that tells us how many Democrats and Republicans there are in the country. Some states collect party registration data, but many states do not. Moreover, party registration is not the same thing as party identification. In a state like Kentucky, for example, there are a lot more registered Democrats than registered Republicans, but more voters identified as Republican in the 2014 election exit polls.
A person’s party identification can shift, and therefore the overall balance between parties does too. Democrats have typically had an advantage in self-identification — a 4 percentage point edge in 2000, a 7-point advantage in 2008 and a 6-point edge in 2012, according to exit polls — but they had no advantage in the 2004 election. Since 1952, however, almost every presidential election has featured a Democratic advantage in party identification.
Here’s the margin that Democrats have had in self-identification since 1952, according to the American National Elections Studies and, starting in 1972, exit polls.
enten-democratic-edge-1
And it’s not crazy to think Democrats will have an advantage in party identification in 2016. With a controversial nominee, many Republicans might not want to identify with the GOP, and may be calling themselves independents.
You should also be skeptical of other attempts to reweight pollsters’ data. One website, LongRoom, claims to “unbias” the polls using “actual state voter registration data from the Secretary of State or Election Division of each state.” The website contends that almost every public poll is biased in favor of Clinton.
Think about what that means: The website is saying that a large number of professional pollsters who make their living trying to provide accurate information — and have a good record of doing so — are all deliberately biasing the polls and aren’t correcting for it. Like many conspiracy theories, that seems implausible.
In a speech billed as a blueprint for stimulating growth and creating jobs, Mr. Trump offered a grab bag of ideas that borrow from discredited supply-side economics, the fossil fuel industry’s wish list and “America First” isolationism. He also criticized Hillary Clinton and President Obama for what he called their “job-killing, tax-raising, poverty-inducing” agenda. It was vintage Trump, full of promises of greatness and victories backed by fantastical proposals.
Mr. Trump told the Detroit Economic Club that he would cut taxes to an extent not seen since Ronald Reagan was in the White House. He said he would slash the corporate tax rate to 15 percent, arguing that the current statutory 35 percent is one of the highest among developed countries. He did not mention that the average effective corporate tax rate was 18.1 percent in 2015, including state and local taxes, according to the White House and the Treasury Department. He claims he would help workers by getting rid of the estate tax, though repealing it would have almost no effect on working families. Under current law, that tax doesn’t touch 99.8 percent of all estates because it applies only to that portion of an estate that exceeds $5.4 million for an individual or $10.9 million for a married couple.
The big problem with Mr. Trump’s tax ideas is that they would leave a multitrillion-dollar deficit for no benefit. Proponents of supply-side economics argue that cutting tax rates encourages people to work and businesses to invest. But the gains are much more modest than proponents claim because many businesses won’t invest unless demand for their products is growing and many people are not motivated by lower tax rates to work more.
Sign Up for the Opinion Today Newsletter
Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, The Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.
On the other hand, significant tax cuts exact very real costs. Mr. Trump’s previous tax plan, released last year, would have reduced federal revenue by $9.5 trillion over 10 years, according to the Tax Policy Center, meaning that Mr. Trump would have to slash government spending or increase borrowing substantially. George W. Bush pushed big tax cuts through Congress in 2001 and 2003 with the promises of strong growth that never materialized.
Mr. Trump also promises to take a machete to existing federal regulations and put a moratorium on new rules. He wants to get rid of environmental policies that he says are driving up the cost of electricity by restricting the production and use of coal and other fossil fuels. In fact, electricity rates, adjusted for inflation, have increased just 2.2 percent, to 12.82 cents per kilowatt-hour, from 2008 to 2015 and are expected to decline to 12.64 cents this year, according to the federal Energy Information Administration.
Increasing fossil fuel production, and the carbon dioxide emissions associated with it, is exactly the wrong strategy at a time when the world has become increasingly concerned about global warming and its disastrous consequences. But this is of little concern to Mr. Trump, who has dismissed climate change as a hoax and whose “energy revolution,” as he outlined it on Monday, made no mention of carbon-free renewable energy sources.
On trade, Mr. Trump renewed his pledge to kill the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an agreement that Mr. Obama negotiated with 11 countries. Mr. Trump claims he can bring back millions of manufacturing jobs to the United States by slapping retaliatory tariffs against China for manipulating its currency, offering illegal subsidies to its exporters and stealing intellectual property from American companies. But such actions would do nothing to recreate jobs that have been replaced by automation, and companies could move production to other developing countries. Mr. Trump’s earlier pledge to put a 45 percent tariff on all Chinese goods would almost certainly start a trade war that would harm American industries that export goods to China.
Mr. Trump considers himself a businessman, uniquely capable of improving the economy. But this list of misguided and risky proposals would reduce economic growth while showering the rich with tax breaks.
Misguided and risky…….buahahahahahahah.
Let’s try this one again in case it was missed. On Topic…Updated Aug. 9, 2016 2:33 p.m. ET
The longest slide in worker productivity since the late 1970s is haunting the U.S. economy’s long-term prospects, a force that could prompt Federal Reserve officials to keep interest rates low for years to come.
Nonfarm business productivity—the goods and services produced each hour by American workers—decreased at a 0.5% seasonally adjusted annual rate in the second quarter as hours worked increased faster than output, the Labor Department said Tuesday.
It was the third consecutive quarter of falling productivity, the longest streak since 1979. Productivity in the second quarter was down 0.4% from a year earlier, the first annual decline in three years. That was a further step down from already tepid average annual productivity growth of 1.3% in 2007 through 2015, itself just half the pace seen in 2000 through 2007, and the trend shows little sign of r
The fall in worker productivity was recent and began in 2010. Explanations for it are that companies anticipated the recovery that began in 2012 and hired workers in anticipation of the recovery that began in 2012 and business could afford to do this with better conditions in 2012. Since 2012 Obama has met or exceeded campaign promises made by Romney, Gingrich, and Bachman on job growth, lower gas prices, and increase in petroleum output (larger than any President). As output catches up the extra workers hired will be put to work and productivity will rise. This is particularly true of the Tech industry where startups hire in advance of income coming in, and in Tech so many products are free (free software and free websites) thus worker productivity looks low because of low output although workers are writing software for future profits.
You can make all the excuses you want but here are the facts.”It was the third consecutive quarter of falling productivity, the longest streak since 1979. Productivity in the second quarter was down 0.4% from a year earlier, the first annual decline in three years. That was a further step down from already tepid average annual productivity growth of 1.3% in 2007 through 2015, itself just half the pace seen in 2000 through 2007, and the trend shows little sign of reversing”.. The increase in petroleum output (larger than any President) was accomplished in spite of Obama. Huge improvements in the oil industry’s productivity over the last few years created an oversupply that resulted in low oil prices and saved the economy. Obama just lucked out.
You are one sick puppy. Keep it up.
Jennifer Rubin, the Washington Post’s ultra-conservative columnist in today’s paper: ” To put it bluntly, wonkish and intellectually honest Republicans of the type who would pay attention to an economic speech long ago figured out Trump is a fraud. They know his numbers don’t add up and his anti-globalism is bunk. “
Mike Pence, do us ALL a favor, convince him to drop out.
The unassuming governor of Indiana, Mr. Pence is in a powerful, if unenviable, position. Were he to publicly repudiate his own running mate, or question his fitness for office, the Trump campaign would be unsustainable. He does not need to take such a drastic action — not yet — but the prospect of his doing so, even if conveyed obliquely, might persuade his running mate to broker a withdrawal. At the very least, it might spur intermediaries, such as Mr. Trump’s friends and family, to have a candid conversation with the candidate on what lies ahead if he stays in.
The nominee has spent a lifetime equating the Trump name with success. Now he faces the prospect of a staggering defeat — recent polls suggest he could lose even in reliably Republican states like Arizona and Georgia. If such an outcome were to occur, he would be forever branded, fairly or not, racist, sexist and, worst of all in the Trump lexicon, a historic loser.
But were Mr. Trump to leave the race now, on whatever pretext, he could state honestly that he bested a formidable Republican establishment and that he brought important issues like illegal immigration to the fore. He would win the gratitude of his party for putting its interests first. He could help his capable children rebuild the tarnished Trump brand. And with a little luck, his running mate, should he replace Mr. Trump as the nominee, might defeat Hillary Clinton, who has severe image problems of her own. In that event, Mr. Trump could reasonably boast that he hand-selected the next president.
If Mr. Pence truly believes Mr. Trump will be a capable president, then he should do nothing. But he owes it to his party, his country and the cause he has championed his entire life to reflect on this carefully. The worst-case scenario is that a man who may be wholly unfit for the office may actually win it. Mr. Pence is among the few who could stop this — now. And, if he has any question about whether Donald Trump can do the job, then he has a responsibility to step aside himself if Mr. Trump won’t.
Though it is against his nature and probably his instincts to turn against his running mate, Mr. Pence must put the country first. Besides, if the party chose him as Mr. Trump’s replacement, and if he managed to receive Mr. Trump’s blessing, Mr. Pence could yet salvage this mess. He could command support from the sizable Trump faction, establishment figures like Senator Mitch McConnell and Representative Paul Ryan, a personal friend, and fellow conservatives like Senator Ted Cruz, whom Mr. Pence originally endorsed. He could select a vice-presidential nominee who would broaden the ticket.
Mike Pence did not ask to be put in this position, to be sure, but neither did others to whom history handed daunting tasks. In a very real sense, the future of America is in his hands.
Gee Donald, what did you do, fall asleep at the beach?
Mike Cernovich at Danger and Play reported:
Hillary Clinton recently had a breakdown on TV. The media is of course covering this up rather than having an expert medical panel on to discuss her health. Yet what happened to Hillary was obviously a sign of a head injury and stroke.
When a protester appears, Hillary freezes. In psychology you learn that the flight-or-fight response is a myth. A stressful situation trigger a fight, flight, or freeze response.
“Freeze” is what we mean by saying someone has a “deer in the head lights look.” A prey animal freezes when it senses danger it cannot overcome and thus does not risk running away from. By freezing the deer hopes to not be seen.
Yet freezing is an instinctual response, as anyone who has driven a car through deer land knows. When you drive, your headlights hit a deer, it stops. Your choice is to keep driving or to swerve away, risking your own life.
Hillary’s health problems are well-known among the Secret Service.
While still FROZEN, Hillary is rescued by a male Secret Service agent, who reassures her, “You’ll be OK.”…
…Hillary has suffered a brain injury during a fall. She either had a stroke, causing her to fall, or the fall caused her stroke. (Doctors were unsure whether the fall was the cause or effect of the stroke.)
Hillary still suffers seizures.
Concern about HRCs health, please, y’all need to check this man’s LDL. Can we say advanced heart disease? President Obama is so disciplined that his wife has teased that he eats precisely seven lightly salted almonds each night.
George W. Bush was an exercise buff, obsessed with staying trim by mountain biking and clearing brush at his ranch in Crawford, Tex.
But Donald J. Trump is taking a different approach: A junk food aficionado, he is hoping to become the nation’s fast food president.
“A ‘fish delight,’ sometimes, right?” Mr. Trump told Anderson Cooper at a CNN town-hall-style meeting in February, extolling the virtues of McDonald’s. “The Big Macs are great. The Quarter Pounder. It’s great stuff.”
Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign is improvised, undisciplined, rushed and self-indulgent.
And so is his diet.
Cost of child-care spending deductions / credits does make some sense and worthy of further consideration, but everything else lacks common sense. Why do people keep subjecting themselves to this useless rhetoric?
HOW LOW CAN TRUMP GO? “If she gets to pick her judges ― nothing you can do, folks,” Trump said with a shrug at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina. “Although, the Second Amendment, people. Maybe there is. I don’t know.”
Orlando shooter’s father attends Clinton rally
By LOUIS NELSON 08/09/16 12:01 PM EDT Updated 08/09/16 12:20 PM EDT
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
The father of the man who shot and killed 49 people inside an Orlando nightclub attended a Hillary Clinton rally in Florida on Monday night, seated on stage and in plain view behind the former secretary of state.
Wearing a red hat and carrying a small American flag in the breast pocket of his shirt, Seddique Mateen was spotted by WPTV, clearly visible over Clinton’s right shoulder throughout her rally Monday in Kissimmee, Florida. Mateen is the father of Omar Mateen, who shot and killed dozens of people inside a gay nightclub in Orlando in June.
Even if you couldn’t think it could go lower, Trumps goes lower, and I’m sure his polling will be sure to follow.
Donald Trump’s three days of relative calm ended dramatically on Tuesday, as he appeared to crack a joke about assassinating Hillary Clinton during a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina. Trump has argued that even conservatives who don’t like him should vote for him in order to prevent the Democrat from making Supreme Court appointments. It was in that context that Trump made the remark.
“Hillary wants to abolish, essentially, the Second Amendment,” he said. “By the way, and if she gets the pick—if she gets the pick of her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I dunno.”
The suggestion that the assassination of a presidential candidate—or the killing of Supreme Court justices, or an armed insurrection, depending on interpretation—could solve a policy dispute is a shocking new low for a campaign that has continually reset expectations. Trump’s defenders often scold the media for being humorless, or taking Trump’s comments too seriously. So let’s preemptively dismiss that counterargument: This aside was clearly intended to be a joke. It is also entirely shocking and appalling, even in that context.
At no point in recent American history has the nominee of one of the two major parties even jested about the murder of a rival. (Watch the man in the red shirt and white beard behind Trump to see his reaction in the clip above.) The recent prevalence of “lock her up!” chants at Trump events look, from some angles, like a disturbing echo of politics in less stable nations, where vanquished political rivals are imprisoned or worse. Trump’s comment today blows well past that line. Even unserious suggestions of killing can be a dangerous thing, as St. Thomas Becket might attest..
Trump is selling fantasy. When people buy it, it says a lot about them.
Desperation….
fool me twice…. Republicans lies have been uncountable…
Why are we listening to the people who got us into this pickle. Well, we know what Obama/Crooked Clinton can do. 20 trillion debt, true unemployment 12%, people unemployed or under employed. I’m willing to give Trump a go. I mean, how much worse can it get.
Sheriff Clarke, an outspoken black conservative, appeared on “Fox & Friends” to address Mrs. Clinton’s decision not to seek the endorsement of the biggest police union in the country, The Fraternal Order of Police.
“It’s a huge miscalculation, a huge political miscalculation on the part of Mrs. Bill Clinton,” the sheriff said. “Look, everyone running for public office, at any level, knows that you want and you have to have the support of not only law enforcement but other first responders. But she has made it clear from the convention that she is all in with the criminal element. She doesn’t care about victims of crime, she’s a straight-up cop hater, and so she is, like I said, rolling the dice on not having the support of law enforcement.
“The problem for her is that middle America, mainstream America, does not share her sentiment in having sympathy for criminals,” he said. “You’re talking a potential 3, 4, 5 million votes that she’s willing to risk just to get in bed with criminals.
“She thinks that the criminals are victims of a racist criminal justice system, which is a lie,” the sheriff said. “With her getting in bed with this Black Lives movement, this dangerous, hateful ideology, she is taking it out on good law-abiding black people that live in the American ghetto. They’re the ones who are victimized disproportionately by crime and violence.”
Strong words from a strong man.
Trump is an idiot.
WASHINGTON >> The State Department has turned over 44 previously-unreleased Hillary Clinton email exchanges that the Democratic presidential nominee failed to include among the 30,000 private messages she turned over to the government last year. They show her interacting with lobbyists, political and Clinton Foundation donors and business interests as secretary of state.
In the current system his goals are unrealistic. I won’t vote for him, but just maybe some things need to change!