Pretty much what I suspected. SMH.

 

What about his response caused you to shake your head?

My concern - Trump has NO credibility on Wall Street and in the global markets. NONE - and he isn't building any through his lack of transparency and lack of economic policy. I believe that Trump's election is more likely to hurt our national credit rating, diminish access to capital markets, and choke the economy of liquid capital that is fundamental to growth.

 

From everyone I've spoken to who is connected with banking, financial markets, and investment capital, Trump's election would have a far greater negative impact to the economy than HRC, who would be perceived more as business as usual.

 

Folks - while it's convenient to fall back on partisan politics and stereotypes, it's not the right path here. Trump is not a "Republican" in the mold of Reagan and Bush I/II - the man is a loose cannon with no experience with national economic policy and no credibility with the institutions and nations that will fund growth. Open your mind to the possibility that this man could reverse ANY positive momentum our economy has achieved. We've had bread lines with conservatives in office, too.

 

Considering HRC's relationship with Wall Street, I can understand why they would be more comfortable with her. After all, she is owned by Goldman Sach's.

 

Furthermore, I'm sure there is a lot of anxiety in the investment class regarding changes to free trade deals. This is a big reason Trump had so much resistance from the establishment GOP, and so much support form a GOP base largely ignored by its own party establishment.

 

The problem with America is that there is has been too much concern for Wall Street, and not enough for Main Street. The fact that you would be willing to elect HRC President at the cost of 4 or 5 Liberal Supreme Court Appoints tells me a lot about what you value. The problem with Free Trade deals is that they are written by people that have NO NATIONALISTIC INTEREST WHATSOEVER. Free Trade deals that turn America's Factory towns into ghost towns are not in the interests in the country and need to be rejected or renegotiated.

 

If you seek advice from those that work in the markets. Why don't you ask them about 8 months of declining jobs and GDP and ask them what the impact would be of continuing the present policies?

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/04/cramer-donald-trump-is-right-theres-a-bubble.html

Edited June 6, 201610 yr by Pioneer.Pride

What about his response caused you to shake your head?

 

The fact that it's nothing Obama has done but the fact that he is not Far Left. He admitted as much.

 

I voted for Bush but I can find many things he did that I didn't agree with. Seems many on the Left aren't able to do that. It's just very disheartening.

 

We we don't need Far Left or Far Right. We need moderates that can work together.

Cheadle says he is not a Trump supporter.

Considering HRC's relationship with Wall Street, I can understand why they would be more comfortable with her. After all, she is owned by Goldman Sach's.

 

Furthermore, I'm sure there is a lot of anxiety in the investment class regarding changes to free trade deals. This is a big reason Trump had so much resistance from the establishment GOP, and so much support form a GOP base largely ignored by its own party establishment.

 

The problem with America is that there is has been too much concern for Wall Street, and not enough for Main Street. The fact that you would be willing to elect HRC President at the cost of 4 or 5 Liberal Supreme Court Appoints tells me a lot about what you value. The problem with Free Trade deals is that they are written by people that have NO NATIONALISTIC INTEREST WHATSOEVER. Free Trade deals that turn America's Factory towns into ghost towns are not in the interests in the country and need to be rejected or renegotiated.

 

If you seek advice from those that work in the markets. Why don't you ask them about 8 months of declining jobs and GDP and ask them what the impact would be of continuing the present policies?

 

You are living in the 70's - denial of the global economy isn't the answer. At least I hope that's not what I'm hearing -it sounds like advocacy for backdoor socialism where our economy is propped up by policies protecting domestic products. That's not the free market - and I hpe that's not what you are advocating for - are you? That's not the Reagan-era nationalism that made this country great - that's isolationism that will cripple out economy for decades.

 

It's ironic that you advocate for these types of policies then discuss declining GDP. Who is going to buy our goods that aren't cost-competitive?

 

Explain the math. Don't bother - it doesn't work. It's too bad that so many are so dis-enfranchised that the only logical answer they see is to bury our head in the sand.

Edited June 6, 201610 yr by Don't_Hate_the_Playa

You are living in the 80's - denial of the global economy isn't the answer. At least I hope that's not what I'm hearing -it sounds like advocacy for backdoor socialism where our economy is propped up by policies protecting domestic products. That's not the free market - and I hpe that's not what you are advocating for - are you? That's not the Reagan-era nationalism that made this country great - that's isolationism that will cripple out economy for decades.

 

It's ironic that you advocate for these types of policies then discuss declining GDP. Who is going to buy our goods that aren't cost-competitive?

 

Explain the math. Don't bother - it doesn't work. It's too bad that so many are so dis-enfranchised that the only logical answer they see is to bury our head in the sand.

 

We operate at such a massive trade deficit that concerning ourselves with who is going to buy our products is nearly irrelevant. And when you factor out our number 1 export, Cinema, the trade deficit is even more massive. And no one overseas is going to stop buying movies. Trade agreements that ignore national interests are just plain stupid.

 

In addition, its not just the economic impact. Losing manufacturing capacity and expertise is dangerous since the folks we call trade partners today can easily become our enemies tomorrow.

 

Does the fact that HRC has accepted Foundation and Campaign contributions from The Peoples Republic of China even bother you!!!!! Whose interests do you think HRC is advocatiing? Her campaign contributors or the citizens that elect her?

We operate at such a massive trade deficit that concerning ourselves with who is going to buy our products is nearly irrelevant. And when you factor out our number 1 export, Cinema, the trade deficit is even more massive. And no one overseas is going to stop buying movies. Trade agreements that ignore national interests are just plain stupid.

 

In addition, its not just the economic impact. Losing manufacturing capacity and expertise is dangerous since the folks we call trade partners today can easily become our enemies tomorrow.

 

Does the fact that HRC has accepted Foundation and Campaign contributions from The Peoples Republic of China even bother you!!!!! Whose interests do you think HRC is advocatiing? Her campaign contributors or the citizens that elect her?

 

I see - a little neuroses to sweeten the economic policy - very nice. We can declare a cold war on the world.

 

It's pointless to argue with you - we don't inhabit the same reality. Think hard on 11/8. And make sure your bunker is stocked for 18-24 months of underground living.

The fact that it's nothing Obama has done but the fact that he is not Far Left. He admitted as much.

 

I voted for Bush but I can find many things he did that I didn't agree with. Seems many on the Left aren't able to do that. It's just very disheartening.

 

We we don't need Far Left or Far Right. We need moderates that can work together.

 

I'm one of those who believes that errors of omission are just as egregious as errors of commission.

I'm one of those who believes that errors of omission are just as egregious as errors of commission.

 

As am I. The difference is those are just things you would like to see happen. That doesn't make those things correct or what is best for the country.

As am I. The difference is those are just things you would like to see happen. That doesn't make those things correct or what is best for the country.

 

No, it doesn't. It's merely my opinion that those things would be best for the country.

Cheadle says he is not a Trump supporter.

 

:lol2: :lol2:

As am I. The difference is those are just things you would like to see happen. That doesn't make those things correct or what is best for the country.

 

That goes both ways.

That goes both ways.

 

Absolutely.

 

When one is sold a bill of goods, like Obamacare, and it turns out to be a disaster, can one not just admit it?

Absolutely.

 

When one is sold a bill of goods, like Obamacare, and it turns out to be a disaster, can one not just admit it?

 

Not everyone thinks it is a disaster though. It just depends on where individuals fall in the scope of things. For some people Obamacare has been a success. For others, not so much. Every situation is different.

 

I can't call it a success or a failure. It doesn't affect me one iota.

Cheadle says he was not offended. Says he was holding the Trump sign only to block the sun.

 

Says he also attended a Bernie rally but couldn't get in. Says he's not chained to any party.