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.
jrkliny, you might consider giving it a rest, in constantly expressing your political opinions. The views, interpretations, and analysis you write are very simplistic and simple-minded and often inaccurate. Your interpretations are not based on any extensive knowledge, and cannot be characterized as even having surface knowledge. Including your post at #173.
Seniors/retirees and everyone else should ask themselves whether they want a Republican agenda or a Democrat agenda in the White House.
If one wants one or the other - a Republican agenda or a Democrat agenda - in the White House, then being willing to vote for Trump or a Democrat (Sanders or Clinton) makes no sense.
I don't think it's as simple or monolithic as a "Republican or Democrat" agenda, there is overlap and many people (myself included) do not march in lockstep with either party's "agenda" or even their stance on essential issues.
As for your insults to the OP, why don't you just be honest enough to admit that it grates on your nerves to read comments expressing political perspectives that you disagree with? You might not like it, but others have the same rights as you do to express their opinions, and responding with insults just shows your lack of abilty to intelligently discuss the issues.
Thanks for the information. Although that is weird to me coming from a closed primary state like Florida. So those old yellow dog Democrats in states in North Carolina can ask for a Republican ballot and vote for Trump. Just on the spot. When they show up to vote. I'll have to pay more attention to this closed/open primary stuff as the primaries take place. Robyn
Yes, that is correct. I have heard of quite a few people crossing their usual party line and voting for someone on the opposite ticket.
Of course, the presidential candidates are not the only ones on the ballot as there are other state offices, including governor, involved in the primary.
It's does not matter whether you disagree with some issues of each political party or of each candidate or whether you do not agree with the full list of agenda items & beliefs & intent to push certain legislation, in the presidential elections you still must choose just one presidential candidate in the primary or caucus, and then just one presidential candidate in the general election.
You must choose a Republican agenda or a Democrat agenda in the presidential primary/caucus & then in the general election, by choosing one presidential candidate or another, unless you choose an Independent candidate for president, or write-in a candidate. (and each candidate within a political party can vary a bit on the issues)
Last edited by matisse12; 03-15-2016 at 07:47 PM..
...you still must choose just one presidential candidate ...
You must choose a Republican agenda or a Democrat agenda...
Dead wrong.
You do not need to make a choice. You do not need to choose either candidate or either a Republican or Democrat agenda. Many of us will not vote for a bad candidate or a bad platform just because it is the lesser of two evils.
In any case this thread is about the effect of the upcoming election on retirees.
We have thousands of years of data on 0 Level Economies (Agriculture), plus centuries of data on 1st Level (Natural Resources) and 2nd Level Economies (Manufacturing). However, we have very little data on 3rd Level (Light/Clean Manufacturing) and 4th Level (Technology & Services) Economies.
If we look at the historical record of the US since 1960 we find:
1961-1970 4.22% (Expansion of 3rd Level Economy/Transition to 4th Level Economy)
1971-1980 3.21%
1981-1990 3.27%
1991-2000 3.41% (Expansion of 4th Level Economy with no Transition to 5th Level Economy)
2001-2010. 1.68%
Average 2.89%
If we look at GDP for the Euro-States, we find the same thing.
Just because 1st and 2nd Level Economies typically grow at 5%-12% annually, it doesn't logically following that such growth is sustainable. That's especially true for a Technology & Service-oriented economy which produces nothing.
4 years (2003-2006) we grew at over 5% GDP.
1992-2000: every year (except 1995) we grew over 5%.
1971-1989 every year (except 1982 and 1986) we grew over 5%.
I'm not seeing where a system that rewards the best and brightest, like Germany or Romania does, is Socialist.
Suppose we simply allowed qualified students to deduct tuition from their AGI or take tax credits, would that make you feel better?
Not sure which Romania you're talking about -- pre-1989, when you were sipping slivovitsa at the Embassy in Bucuresti, while I was getting indoctrinated in Das Kapital cover-to-cover? Or post-1989, which is a corrupt cluster****, and nobody knows what it is.
Obama's 2016 budget cuts Medicare--again, in 2008 and 2112, the voters rejected Republican candidates' changes to Medicare and SS that would only have impacted young, future retirees, and today's Fed has picked seniors' pockets to the tune of thousands of dollars via near-zero interest rates and the ensuing artificially robbust stock market.
So since you asked, there you go.
I don't see any cuts by Obama that impact medicare recipients negatively. In late 2015 a provision was signed into law that would disallow hospital owned physician groups from charging in hospital rates for tests conducted in the physicians office. This became an issue in Reno a few years ago, the hospitals bought up a bunch of physician groups - in fact one hospital brought in every cardiologist in Reno. They did testing, i.e EKG's in the doctors office but charged the rate that would be billed for an inpatient procedure done in the hospital and that rate was about 10 times the office rate. The change only affects medicare, but I wish they would pass a law that bans that BS from affecting anyone, particularly self pay patients or those with a high deductible.
Although there are lots of things not to like about California - I think it has a neat primary system (at the state level). Best I understand it (I could be wrong) - everyone from every party runs on a single primary ballot. And the top 2 vote-getters in the primary face off in the general election. Really encourages candidates to move to the middle. Which is where most voters are IMO. Robyn
Election results are more of a function of turnout than "where voters are." Turnout explains for example Obama's victories. In fact most victories.
As a general rule, 1/3 of population are for something, 1/3 are against, and 1/3 couldn't care less. If you have a cause, you can energize your third, you could be heading into a landslide, because most people can't be bothered.
That's why I think if Dems nominate Hillary, they will have trouble turning out their voters. Bernie does.
Maryland is a closed primary state. More importantly, we don't get to vote until April 26th or two weeks before if we choose to vote early.
Immediately before New Hampshire's primary I seriously considered driving up there and declaring residency so I could vote in the primary. It's depressing that a lot of the candidates drop out before the rest of us have a chance to vote.
All of the candidates appeared on our ballot - whether or not they were still in the race. All got at least some votes - although only Bush got (slightly) more than 1%.
It was interesting looking at our county results this morning. We live in a small very red county in NE Florida. Mostly white - upper middle class. People are well educated (our school system is ranked #1 in the state). Yet we went overwhelmingly for Trump. With Rubio second - and Cruz and Kasich a distant third and fourth. FWIW - our current congresscritter (who will be running for Rubio's Senate seat this year) is pretty much a tea party candidate. Yet Cruz (the "tea party" guy) didn't do well here (15%). So it seems like the conventional wisdom about Trump voters may be wrong. FWIW - you can find all the Florida results here:
My main issue is trade - which has destroyed economic underpinnings for the middle class worker - and certain professionals, as well. US Main Street is NOT better off - regardless of how the r-wing likes to spin the "overall" positive effects to the country of NAFTA, CAFTA, et al. I hear these think tank pundits on C-Span every week - and it is clear even they do not believe the garbage they spout. Just party parrots doing their job - repeat a lie often enough and some will believe it.
Hillary still won't admit NAFTA was the beginning of the end, instead walking all around the issue, blah, blah, blah.
Bears repeating, over and over and over: "that giant sucking sound" - "in the meantime, you've wrecked the country with those kind of deals." ~Ross Perot
For those on SS and Medicare and not personally concerned about jobs, lower paying jobs - and loss of jobs - because of these UNFAIR trade deals means lower FICA contributions, which means the weakening of Social Security and Medicare, more people on food stamps, SSDI and Medicaid, which will give the GOP yet another reason to attack "entitlements."
Trade and loss of manufacturing and other jobs to offshoring, H1-B, and all other manner of chicanery is the common ground for Trump and Sanders voters, which is why so many older Sanders people say they'll vote for Trump if Sanders isn't the Democratic nominee - even though Trump's views on immigration are diametically opposed to Sanders'. Immigration reform has a much lower priority (often NO PRIORITY) for those who've lost jobs to foreigners - whether they be illegals here or offshored overseas. Further, many see illegals as further undermining our entire fabric of life with their calculated use of social safety nets available to - yes - even illegals.
The other day on C-Span a well-educated Indian woman spoke on the advantages of foreign trade. She referred to job loss effects cited by the viewers through personal experience and observation as anecdotal, and stated that the data was clear, overall trade was beneficial to the country. C-Span callers can be very rude - fortunately, she escaped the vitriol. Nonetheless the anger came through in many callers' voices and their euphemistically veiled statements. Hearing about the advantages of "trade" from a person who clearly is not from the US (albeit now a 'citizen') rubbed salt in the wound, and was beyond insulting, imo. C-Span chose its 'expert' poorly that day.
This is why many Sanders people will vote for Trump even though it is "illogical."
+1.
Especially the part I bolded. The area where I live is - partially - a way station for jobs that are leaving the country. We have companies relocating large numbers of workers from higher cost parts of the country to this area. Mostly "out of sight" jobs. Call centers - customer service - and the like. Some of these jobs then leave this area for even lower cost places overseas. I mean when is the last time anyone called a customer service center and someone located in the US answered?
And almost no one is safe from outsourcing (except perhaps the people who clean your house or mow your lawn). Not lawyers:
Yes, that is correct. I have heard of quite a few people crossing their usual party line and voting for someone on the opposite ticket.
Of course, the presidential candidates are not the only ones on the ballot as there are other state offices, including governor, involved in the primary.
Our regular primaries (for the Senate and other seats) weren't held yesterday. They're scheduled for late August. Robyn
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.
