Reasons I cannot vote for Trump

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=flyer]I realize not everyone shares my opinions, as I do not share theirs, but I do think it’s very interesting to read what others think.

BG, we haven’t decided if we’ll vote in this election. If we don’t, it would be the first time in our lives, but we have serious concerns about the presumptive nominees on many levels, so we’ll see if anything changes between now and November. In our opinion, the positive things either candidate offers is far outweighed by the negative, so we’re not apathetic, just cautious.

That said, with regard to your other questions–we don’t believe in age discrimination–and are shocked to see that happening even to people in their 40’s–would I like to see changes legislated in that regard–absolutely–but until a more noticeable majority of younger people find themselves out of a job as they age–and the trends reveal they will–with the magic number appearing to be somewhere around 50 or so–I doubt if most politicians will be compelled to act on this issue.

We also don’t believe anyone is entitled to anything–including the home of their dreams–but if people want to go for it at all costs, including possibly jeopardizing their financial future–they have the right to do so–and I don’t know enough about the ACA to make any judgment calls on that.

Regarding other questions–Yes, we do understand what it’s like to raise a family in CA. My wife and I have raised three children who have all finished college and have great careers and homes.

As far as financial success or failure in life, I really think one major reason people (especially in CA) find themselves in difficult financial positions later in life is that they may have failed to admit they lived beyond their means most of their lives–because they chose to.

Admitting one can’t afford a particular lifestyle along the way may be the lesser of the evils in the long run. That, or don’t complain if you find yourself with zero options in the final lap of life.[/quote]

Even having lived frugally, you’re not gonna make it from 50 to 80 with no real job.

Not voting is voting.

Vermin supreme in 2016!

[an]

[quote=scaredyclassic]Even having lived frugally, you’re not gonna make it from 50 to 80 with no real job.

Not voting is voting.

Vermin supreme in 2016![/quote]Retirement age today is 67. So, if you retire at 50, then that mean you’re retiring early. Which probably mean you don’t need a real job.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=joec]
I agree that most people just spend and waste too much money, but since you aren’t a parent, I really think you have no clue what it is all about when you have kids and a family. Being single and managing yourself is easy. With a wife, becomes slightly harder, with kids, everything is out the window and most of your life is trying to do them the best you can.

This is all open for display when you write most anything that I read here…

As someone knowing other parents having kids who are having tough times at school now where kids are medically getting sick trying to compete, I think our problem is that EVERYONE is worried what the future holds. As it has been reported many times, I believe the trend of the standard of living will go down for most of the next generation. This is due to major problems with high educational expenses (and you might not even get a job) and healthcare. With the credits, it should help, but it can still be pricey if you aren’t super poor.

Also, given 100 people, not everyone will succeed and depending on the competition, your kid might not be the smartest/or most athletic. Since it’s not you, you can blame yourself for your failures, but if your kid fails, all the blame or pressure may have him or her just kill themselves so what do you have now?

The sad reality I think coming and why you read about high suicide rates with even wealthy/top performing areas (Palo Alto) is that everyone is stressed and concerned if they will even get to college or get a job…

For people living in life in Silicon Valley in a tech job, if that implodes, good luck trying to pay your 6k/month shared 2 bedroom apartment also.

At the end of the day, most people have very little control (like if you graduate at a poor time, it has been proven that most people NEVER catch up in wages/jobs, etc…).

Just pray you get lucky some day and best advice is don’t have kids (look at all the industrialized modern nations) until you can really afford it.[/quote]

Joec, you describe the struggles of families pretty well.

Maybe it didn’t come through but I was being sarcastic. Republicans have long embraced a Randian, Darwinist view of society. Bootstrap your way to prosperity and if you can’t do it, there’s something wrong with you, and you deserve less. In Trump’s world you’re a winner or a loser; so it strikes me as ironic that there are so many losers in Trump’s camp. They really ought to look in the mirror for the lightbulb WTF moment. Then maybe they can bootstrap their way to prosperity.

Granted, Trump is not consistent. He’s echoing Bernie Sanders lately.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-donald-trump-is-running-to-the-left-of-hillary-clinton/2016/05/09/ebde82da-147c-11e6-8967-7ac733c56f12_story.html

[no_such_reality]

The those in the know grapevine say Bernie is going to be Trump’s VP nod.

Most voters boil down to one issue. Granted they’re all over the map for which ONE issue they pick, but they pick one issue.

In battleground coal country, that’s Coal. Clinton gaffs on Coal

The current pollster read on the electoral results (pending the presumptive nominees)

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=bearishgurl]

flyer, by your recent posts, you sound a bit apathetic to me. My main question is, do you plan on voting in the general election this year, and if so, will you vote for one of the “presumptive nominees” or will you cast a “protest vote” for president for an American Independent, Libertarian, Peace and Freedom or Green Party candidate? I’m not asking “who?” …. only if you plan on voting for POTUS in this year’s general election.

Do you not feel that Trump will be able to bring back living wage jobs to US soil? What are YOUR thoughts on what should be done about the ACA, if anything? And do you think CA coastal-dwelling millenials should all have the “home of their dreams” for their first home or should they be okay with buying a “starter home” for their first home … like the vast majority of their parents did (the boomers)?

And what are your views on age discrimination? Do you think it can be corrected with heavy-handed enforcement (via stronger language in EEOC, FEHA laws) looming over employer’s heads (i.e. having a “quota” of “over-50” employees for different-sized businesses when most of them would rather have none, regardless of the superior knowledge talent, experience, work ethic, punctuality and attendance of the over-50 former-worker set). How do you feel businesses can legally be compel to hire older workers when the vast majority of them don’t want any in their employ? Certainly, even a part-time job working in a field most of their experience was in would help a lot of retired and semi-retired people make ends meet or at the very least, make them a little more secure with a little extra to travel with, etc.

I see that a lot of people are finally hopeful this year (NO, I don’t believe for a minute that Americans think of POTUS candidates as their “saviors”). I believe that every vote can make a small difference … YES, even in (seemingly) “sewed up” CA. Certainly, you must be aware that it’s never, ever over until the “fat lady” sings at least 4 encores. Meanwhile, if you’re “enjoying the show,” more power to ya. In the end, one of the POTUS candidates will take the helm and we will ALL have to live with it :=][/quote]

BG, since you asked the questions, how about your answers?

1. I will vote for Hillary Clinton. She has the will and qualifications to improve the system.

2. Trump cannot bring jobs back. Nobody can. We need to create better jobs. Maybe construction jobs as we renew and improve our public infrastructure. Also back in the 1990s Bill Clinton talked about our own “emerging markets”, area of the country where we could encourage companies to relocate to instead of overseas. But since that’s a democratic proposal, it must be bad. Also, those areas are “red areas”, I say fxxx them. Why bother preaching to the deaf?

3. The ACA works. We need to improve it. Introduce a public option, rationing of health care, and not insignificant cash-back incentives to lower use.

4. Millenials don’t deserve dream homes, but we need to loosen zoning and permitting to allow supply to catch up with demand.

5. We don’t need more regulations re age discrimination. People should learn to save, then retire to make way for younger workers. It’s not about age but attitude. We just have to learn to adapt to new ways of doing business and adopt new technologies.

6. Finally, why are people hopeful with Trump? What are the concrete things Trump will do for them? Or it is a hopey changey thing?

[FlyerInHi]

Trump/Sanders would beat Clinton/Warren? That would be be interesting, but unlikely.

Coal is incredibly dirty. When I traveled to northern China, in small towns and villages, I saw piles of coal that people would burn for heating/cooking.

That map is interesting. I think that FL and AZ will be colored blue and TX purple.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-gops-electoral-map-problem-is-not-about-trump-its-about-demographics/2016/05/08/14cdf1fc-1523-11e6-924d-838753295f9a_story.html

[flyer]

Noting various generalizations being made concerning how Democratic voters are so much more prosperous than Republican voters.

Per the article below–it doesn’t look like that may be the case, but, perhaps subsidizing one’s way to prosperity will become the new norm for success going forward. After all, that’s so much easier than actually earning it. It will be interesting to see how long that works out in the real world.

http://www.people-press.org/2015/01/08/the-politics-of-financial-insecurity-a-democratic-tilt-undercut-by-low-participation/

[Anonymous]

[quote=flyer]After all, that’s so much easier than actually earning it. [/quote]

But not as easy as inheriting it.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=harvey][quote=flyer]After all, that’s so much easier than actually earning it. [/quote]

But not as easy as inheriting it.[/quote]

Living ones dream often involves a subsidy

[flyer]

Yeah, inheritances are great, and, even better, we made most of our money on our own merits.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=flyer]Noting various generalizations being made concerning how Democratic voters are so much more prosperous than Republican voters.

Per the article below–it doesn’t look like that may be the case, but, perhaps subsidizing one’s way to prosperity will become the new norm for success going forward. After all, that’s so much easier than actually earning it. It will be interesting to see how long that works out in the real world.

http://www.people-press.org/2015/01/08/the-politics-of-financial-insecurity-a-democratic-tilt-undercut-by-low-participation/
[/quote]

Nothing new. It makes sense that prosperous people would lean Republican because they want lower taxes and have more wealth to protect. At the top, the main goal is wealth protection.

But to win elections, Republicans reply on a base to whom they preach the gospel of prosperity, hard work, nationalism…, essentially “conservative values” that historically confer onto the white masses superior social standing.

It also makes and sense that lower income people are more disengaged from the political process.

Demographics and the economy have changed. Technology, globalization of education, etc… Tech is more meritocracy than old line industries, so people in tech lean Democrats. Same goes for Hollywood where successful people maybe were struggling young people at one time.

Academics are more democrats because they value intellectual curiosity and consistency.

Trump voters are the base who’s thinking WTF, we’ve been had. But their pride can’t allow them to switch sides. In the past, they were referred to as cannon fodder sent out to war by be elite. Unfortunately for Trump voters, they can’t take nationalism, a ban on Muslim or Merry Chrisrmas to the bank.

On middle class prosperity, the good jobs require that a good university education are in blue areas. They are for the more academically inclined. That’s where democrats are more prosperous.

[ltsddd]

[quote=no_such_reality]The those in the know grapevine say Bernie is going to be Trump’s VP nod.
[/quote]

Not after Bernie’s speech in Oregon tonight.

[mixxalot]

Personally, I cannot stand any of the candidates running. All of them really suck bad for different reasons. I wish a viable third party candidate like John McAfee or Jessie Ventura had a realistic shot at winning! Right now, the US election races are a two party oligarchy corrupted by special interests, and bought and paid for my Wall Street bankers and foreign oligarchs like the Saudi government.

[flyer]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=flyer]Noting various generalizations being made concerning how Democratic voters are so much more prosperous than Republican voters.

Per the article below–it doesn’t look like that may be the case, but, perhaps subsidizing one’s way to prosperity will become the new norm for success going forward. After all, that’s so much easier than actually earning it. It will be interesting to see how long that works out in the real world.

http://www.people-press.org/2015/01/08/the-politics-of-financial-insecurity-a-democratic-tilt-undercut-by-low-participation/
[/quote]

Nothing new. It makes sense that prosperous people would lean Republican because they want lower taxes and have more wealth to protect. At the top, the main goal is wealth protection.

But to win elections, Republicans reply on a base to whom they preach the gospel of prosperity, hard work, nationalism…, essentially “conservative values” that historically confer onto the white masses superior social standing.

It also makes and sense that lower income people are more disengaged from the political process.

Demographics and the economy have changed. Technology, globalization of education, etc… Tech is more meritocracy than old line industries, so people in tech lean Democrats. Same goes for Hollywood where successful people maybe were struggling young people at one time.

Academics are more democrats because they value intellectual curiosity and consistency.

Trump voters are the base who’s thinking WTF, we’ve been had. But their pride can’t allow them to switch sides. In the past, they were referred to as cannon fodder sent out to war by be elite. Unfortunately for Trump voters, they can’t take nationalism, a ban on Muslim or Merry Chrisrmas to the bank.

On middle class prosperity, the good jobs require that a good university education are in blue areas. They are for the more academically inclined. That’s where democrats are more prosperous.[/quote]

I wonder why, then, the stats reveal the majority of voters from both the left and right are so clearly struggling financially? Such an interesting conundrum.

[Anonymous]

What stats are those?

“Struggling financially” is a pretty subjective term.

[Author]

Posts