The reason Trump won in 2016... (illegal, healthcare, extremist, racism)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The hate for Obama from all the racists. Now the hardcore racists have a voice with Trump Trump never says I do not need their support he should but will never do it.
Trump won because of immigration - a backlash to unchecked immigration. His signature issue was "build that wall" for a reason. He knew what the American public wanted to hear. Everything else - hurt him.
Maybe so, but about that wall. It isn't practical and it will cost an arm and a leg. Also, it will anger the property owners whose land is taken using eminent domain.
But no matter how tall and thick a wall will be, illicit flows will cross.
Undocumented workers and drugs will still find their way across any barrier the administration ends up building. And such a wall will be irrelevant to those people who become undocumented immigrants by overstaying their visas—who for many years have outnumbered those who become undocumented immigrants by crossing the U.S.–Mexico border.
Nor will the physical wall enhance U.S. security.
The border, and more broadly how the United States defines its relations with Mexico, directly affects the 12 million people who live within 100 miles of the border. In multiple and very significant ways that have not been acknowledged or understood it will also affect communities all across the United States as well as Mexico.
Quote:
Immigrant workers are actually having a net positive effect on the economy. Because of a native–born population that is both declining in numbers and increasing in age, the U.S. needs its immigrant workers. The portion of foreign–born now accounts for about 16 percent of the labor force, with immigrants and their children accounting for the vast majority of current and future workforce growth in the United States, If the number of immigrants to the United States was reduced—by deportation or barriers to further immigration—so that foreign–born represented only about 10 percent of the population, the number of working–age Americans in the coming decades would remain essentially static at the current number of 175 million. If, however, the proportion of foreign–born remains at the current level, then the number of working–age residents in the U.S. will increase by about 30 million in the next 50 years. We need these workers not just to fill jobs but to increase productivity, which has diminished sharply. We also need them because the number of the elderly drawing expensive benefits like Medicare and Social Security—the costs of which are paid for by workers’ taxes—is growing substantially. Nearly 44 million people aged 65 or older currently draw Social Security; in 2050 that number is estimated to rise to 86 million. Even undocumented workers support Social Security: Since at least 1.8 million were working with fake Social Security cards in 2010 in order to get employment but were mostly unable to draw the benefits, they contributed $13 billion that year into the retirement trust fund, and took out only $1 billion.
Quote:
The administration’s approach threatens years of binational environmental border cooperation that has protected not only many wild species, but also agriculture on both sides of the border. Take the boll weevil, a beetle that flies between Mexico and the United States and devastates cotton crops. In the late 1890s, the boll weevil nearly wiped out the U.S. cotton industry. Since then, the United States and Mexico have spent decades trying to eradicate the pest and almost succeeded. But the wall may so sour U.S.–Mexico environmental and security cooperation that Mexico may simply give up on eradication efforts. This will cause little damage to those in Mexico, since there is little cotton cultivation along that part of the Mexican border, but it will result in significant damage to US Farmers.
Maybe so, but about that wall. It isn't practical and it will cost an arm and a leg. Also, it will anger the property owners whose land is taken using eminent domain.
These are just Democratic talking points - done without any concrete study or evidence. But what's clear is the American people want something done about immigration. Trump was far from a perfect candidate but because he's the only one willing to talk about stopping unchecked immigration, he won.
The rest of the politicians only offer empty slogans - "Give me your tired" nonsense or my favorite: "build a 15 foot fall, and they will bring a 20 foot ladder."
Trump won because we have a certain portion of the electorate that wanted a reality TV star pseudo tough guy as a President, because they have short attention spans. They are angry and wanted to be entertained by negativity towards things/people they hate.
Obama won because a certain portion of the electorate wanted a charismatic newcomer and the first black President...and it seemed it was time for that.
Neither reasoning is really sound for electing someone to the highest office in the land.
Trump is a lifelong, ostentatious con artist, provocateur, showman and self-promoter who lies prolifically and without compunction and promises whatever to whomever. He plays on both the hopes and fears of others because he thinks all people are gullible and, as a candidate, he appealed to those who are willing to put self-gain over ethics.
He sells them schtick and scams. If something actually accidentally benefits someone other than him and his--oh, well. All hail Trump. (Choke! Choke!)
He tapped into a simmering, seething segment of such people in the electorate. There were some legitimately hopeful, hard working people who were willing to sell their soul to the flashy devil to improve their lot. If he had all that Trump wealth, he would trickle some of it down. Then there were the scum emboldened by Trump's own anti-social behavior given a voice, a wink and a nod to rise toward the top--the racists, misogynists, the amoral and ethically devoid.
The massive Russian smear campaign to toxify and taint his opponent beyond redemption using clandestine methods and targeting those who believe such conspiracies, confabulations and fabrications.
Other Russian disruption of the U.S. electoral process agreed upon by SEVENTEEN intelligence agencies.
A big unintentional boost by James Comey's email announcements-- TRYING to do the right thing.
Hillary's campaign. She talked more about the unmet needs of women and children. Authoritarian Trump men wanted to hear about themselves. Women and kids can get in line BEHIND THEM.
Immigration is, to varying degrees, an issue for many Americans. Unlike Trump, who consolidated his base of "build the wallers", Hillary's voters are much more diverse. They would not trust Trump to do much of anything except fluff his hair up in the morning and cheat at golf. Certainly not to "fix" something as complicated as immigration-- INVOLVING HUMAN BEINGS. Hillary's voters are not unilaterally about themselves and hold a range of views on what will remediate immigration. If she suggested any particular action, unlike Trump and his bloc of voters, she wouldn't unite her voters but would have lost some--who knows how many. It takes thoughtful, widely inclusive planning to suggest an agreeable fix for such a deeply ingrained and divisive issue.
Yet, Hillary got three million more votes despite being slammed and smeared right and left with falsehoods. Minus that army of Russians and their trolls working 24/7 to benefit Trump and lure voters to him and the Comey contribution, Hillary would more than likely have gained those 77,000 votes in three key states needed to bridge her way to an electoral college win. And we would have a president that doesn't love chaos, that would have forged coalitions, that would have been a steadying influence with a history of working "across the aisle". And that knew what she was doing. She would not have daily shamed us, weakened us and made us a laughingstock in the world. She wouldn't continue to boggle the mind of the world's citizens about what the hell is wrong with a chunk of our own that finds Trump desirable. And she would have striven to unify and not constantly divide us. What a concept!
Last edited by mollyblythe; 11-12-2018 at 05:36 PM..
Trump won because he is amazing, smart, likeable, charismatic and wait for it........America wanted Trump!
Hillary lost because she was a nobody, a real snake in the grass, opportunistic, power-hungry witch!
Amen. He wisely realized the Red Wall was rock solid, and just needed a region added to it, the rural dominate, Pa, Wi, & Mi strip. Any one of them plus the Blue Wall and Fl = 270 plus.
people are clueless. Gerrymandering doesn't affect Senate races, governors races or Presidential races.....it only affects elections by districts.
it is incredibly stupid not to know all POTUS races are statewide votes.
A few states assign an elector to subsets, but still the overwhelming majority of the 538 are decided statewide, or in DC's case, District wide.
The House is Gerrymandered, and has been many decades-going back to when Dems had majority due to that tactic.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
