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 outstanding votes in Michigan are blue; Hillary is down about 47,000 (per NYT) but she can easily make it up in the parts not yet counted.
Ultimate winner in Michigan will have a margin of less than 15,000 votes.
Hillary conceded the election. Donald Trump won. Not sure at this point whether Hillary gets MI or not will really matter to that major outcome. But, thanks again.
What I find amusing is that the shills were predicting a "landslide" by Hillary...they were putting her ECV up in the 300s, telling us there was NO CHANCE that Trump was going to win. They laughed, they mocked, they insulted....
And come to find out, it was a landslide by Trump, and he will be in the 300s, or very close to it, when all is said and done.
Tomorrow, after I'm done working, I'm going to go through old threads in the P&OC Elections forum and laugh. And laugh, and laugh, and laugh at all of the hateful people who told us Trump would never win. All the lies they told, all the fake outrage, all the insults they threw our way...
I did say that I could not wait for the day that the liberals lost it all.
TODAY IS THAT DAY!
(This excludes all liberals who hopped on board the Trump Train and joined us to MAGA.)
Good night, Trump supporters....and where the hell was Waldo Kitty?!
What I find amusing is that the shills were predicting a "landslide" by Hillary...they were putting her ECV up in the 300s, telling us there was NO CHANCE that Trump was going to win. They laughed, they mocked, they insulted....
And come to find out, it was a landslide by Trump, and he will be in the 300s, or very close to it, when all is said and done.
Tomorrow, after I'm done working, I'm going to go through old threads in the P&OC Elections forum and laugh. And laugh, and laugh, and laugh at all of the hateful people who told us Trump would never win. All the lies they told, all the fake outrage, all the insults they threw our way...
I did say that I could not wait for the day that the liberals lost it all.
TODAY IS THAT DAY!
(This excludes all liberals who hopped on board the Trump Train and joined us to MAGA.)
Good night, Trump supporters....and where the hell was Waldo Kitty?!
They are saying the truth. Trump said he would spend all this money on infrastructure but Republicans have refused for years. That highways are pure tax money. That would grow our debt huge which is what he said he would NOT DO. Is Trump going to pay for all the nation's infrastructure?
Well, to be fair, that was one of the first things Obama said he would do too. The democrats applauded and cheered when Obama called for more infrastructure spending and said it was a GREAT idea, no worries about increasing the debt to do it.
So, my hunch is that was just something Trump dumped into his speech that he thought might appeal to dems and not be too controversial, since dems loved it when Obama (and for that matter other dems too) suggested it (and did it over the last 8 years).
That said, I have never understood the idea that "infrastructure" adds permanent jobs. Roads get built; no more jobs necessary. And it's not like you can just put a bunch of unemployed software programmers or unemployed factory workers out building roads --- a lot of those jobs require skill and training (and also being in the right union.)
But again, I suspect that was just a non-controversial thing to say in a late night speech.
Well, to be fair, that was one of the first things Obama said he would do too. The democrats applauded and cheered when Obama called for more infrastructure spending and said it was a GREAT idea, no worries about increasing the debt to do it.
So, my hunch is that was just something Trump dumped into his speech that he thought might appeal to dems and not be too controversial, since dems loved it when Obama (and for that matter other dems too) suggested it (and did it over the last 8 years).
That said, I have never understood the idea that "infrastructure" adds permanent jobs. Roads get built; no more jobs necessary. And it's not like you can just put a bunch of unemployed software programmers or unemployed factory workers out building roads --- a lot of those jobs require skill and training (and also being in the right union.)
But again, I suspect that was just a non-controversial thing to say in a late night speech.
I hope you are wrong. It is my belief that Trump will start to shift things around so that we spend a LOT less on some things (i.e. departments in the government that will need far less staffing if he does it right) and balance it out - and I also believe, though it may take a bit to get up steam, that he will bring in industry/restart industry (and heck, pay those people who are going to build the roads and bridges, etc. so they can spend the money and pay taxes back on it) to bring in the revenue to support it all. I think this is very possible.
As for the permanency .. no - not permanent .. but what is these days .. these are not 2 week projects he was talking bout. And we have a HUGE number of these projects that should be done/could be done - and many industries that will need to support that effort. We could create a huge number of jobs for quite a while.
Did you know that as of what I read today, we have MORE government employees than we have in manufacturing in this country - and the number astounded even me? I don't want to just see people in one sector out of jobs and another with too many - but, I think it may be well past time for us to shift some jobs around out of government and back into the private sector.
The tech sector - those are the creative guys who are making apps and phones, right? Why would they be affected at all by a bridge building project? They can sink or swim in their own rivers. Factory workers - depends on what needs to be made but bridges and buildings and transportation lines, etc. need a lot of bits and pieces, no?
I hope you are wrong. It is my belief that Trump will start to shift things around so that we spend a LOT less on some things (i.e. departments in the government that will need far less staffing if he does it right) and balance it out - and I also believe, though it may take a bit to get up steam, that he will bring in industry/restart industry (and heck, pay those people who are going to build the roads and bridges, etc. so they can spend the money and pay taxes back on it) to bring in the revenue to support it all. I think this is very possible.
As for the permanency .. no - not permanent .. but what is these days .. these are not 2 week projects he was talking bout. And we have a HUGE number of these projects that should be done/could be done - and many industries that will need to support that effort. We could create a huge number of jobs for quite a while.
Did you know that as of what I read today, we have MORE government employees than we have in manufacturing in this country - and the number astounded even me? I don't want to just see people in one sector out of jobs and another with too many - but, I think it may be well past time for us to shift some jobs around out of government and back into the private sector.
The tech sector - those are the creative guys who are making apps and phones, right? Why would they be affected at all by a bridge building project? They can sink or swim in their own rivers. Factory workers - depends on what needs to be made but bridges and buildings and transportation lines, etc. need a lot of bits and pieces, no?
So you want fewer government jobs, but you want more government jobs? You want the government to suddenly spend money on infrastructure, something Obama wanted very very much and was told no way, you want Trump to get his way and grow government while also shrinking government? You want some people to get fired but other people hired? How does that grow employment? I can tell you I know someone in the EPA that already plans to quit. Said they don't think the will to keep pesticides out of food will be there and many others in the EPA are saying the same thing.
Really surprised, I thought Trump had very little chance but he defied the odds again just like he has all along. I am not a Trump supporter but he's certainly better than Hillary Clinton.
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.
Why would they be affected at all by a bridge building project? They can sink or swim in their own rivers. Factory workers - depends on what needs to be made but bridges and buildings and transportation lines, etc. need a lot of bits and pieces, no?