| Rpruett said: I disagree. President of the United States is 100% CEO. Except, you really can't be fired and your business is essentially too big to fail . Every skill-set that a high-level executive has, is essential to being President of the United States. That doesn't ensure that Trump would make a good president, but his skill-set far more closely mirrors the President of the United States than Hillary Clinton. Questioning Trump's qualifications for the position compared to Hillary Clinton? It's not even close. Trump has been making global deals since he was 30 years old. Hillary Clinton I agree with his high level economic concepts (Bringing back the manufacturing industry..Repealing NAFTA, focusing on the economy, ensuring that America is coming out in the advantageous position in global trade deals. (My opinion is that no candidates have any idea of the 'inner workings' enough to pitch a truly informed policy.). I agree with securing the countries borders and mostly agree with his immigration policy. I agree that common core needs replaced. I don't agree with many of his social issues (However -- I think in order to secure the GOP nomination, he will have to act more conservative in the primaries but ultimately will be far more left socially than any of the other Republican candidates). I'd flip the same question to you? What policies of Hillary Clinton do you support? If her last name was Smith, would she be as qualified? What makes her trustworthy? (After constant lie, after lie). She has waffled on many, many issues and really doesn't give a firm answer on anything. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrJ3fG5iATc |
It is simply not 100% CEO. To avoid getting into it, I'll just use a simple example, the military. From a business perspective, the military is useless. While it does create jobs, it is a huge drain on the economy. In a business sense it would make sense to cut it out completely. But of course, there is a security issue as well. Social issues are something typically not in the realm of a CEO in the same way, nor is border control. And even economic issues are far different. The government is ultimately (or at least shouldn't be) a money making endeavor. Again there are some skills that crossover, but it's just not the same thing.
On the issues, those are really broad statements. A lot of people agree with securing borders, but you need a plan to do that. His idea of forcing Mexico to build a fence is silly. It doesn't account for the changing demographics in immigration (less immigrants are coming from Mexico as opposed to other regions) and the idea of having Mexico build a fence is laughable enough that even right wing pundits like Bill O Reilly have pointed out its stupidity. Replace common core with what exactly? I find that most people opposed to common core are more opposed to what they think Common Core is as opposed to what it actually is (I'm a teacher btw). I'm not a huge fan of common core, but it's hardly the boogeyman people make it out to be. But, what does Trump want to replace it with? Because if we leave it to each school district to decide, we're going to have an educational disaster.
On the subject of flip flopping, see Trumps ideas from his pseudo campaigns from 2000, and see them now. He's been consistent in few things (tariffs for instance), but has switched in many issues from tax reform to abortion and so on.
I'm not a big fan of Hilary. I'm aware of her general positions, but I'm not quite aware of the specifics. I do support the Iran deal she brokered, her stance on abortion and gay rights, raising the minimum wage, stem cell research, and so on. I'm going on the assumption that she's better than Trump, because Trump has showed an utter disregard for any form of research (for exmample him fumbling around when asked where he got his information about immigration during the debate), outright looniness (for example that climate change is a chinese conspiracy... Even IF you don't believe in climate change, the idea that China has that degree of control over the global scientific community to organize a conspiracy is fucking insane), and his stance on social issues. Maybe it's naive to take him at his word on that, but I'm not going to chance voting for someone so backwards on those issues. I'd have to brush up on her a bit more, but I'm more familiar with the republicans since they've gotten a bit more press because of a more competitve race, earlier debates, and so on.
I'm actually pulling for Sanders right now, so I could do a bit of a better job on explaining policies I support. Firstly, his opposition to citizens united, and the plan to introduce a constitutional ammendment.... which of course would be a tough sell in politics, but he may very well be appointing justices to the supreme court, so it's not unfeasible to overturn that. I support the DISCLOSE act, his stance on energy (securing money for clean energy in the stimulus package), the too big to fail act, breaking up big banks, reversing trade agreements (yeah I know Trump does too), expanding stem cell research, and so on.
Removed quote trees - SamuelRSmith
