Legitimate criticisms of each 2016 Presidential Candidate

[Midwest]

Clinton and Trump were neck and neck 3 weeks ago until Trump imploded.

I do not believe this is accurate. I saw this just this morning:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/08/its-end-august-hillary-clinton-lead-clear-steady

Every tracker shows a significant lead for Clinton three weeks ago.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo

538 had the odds roughly even after the repub convention.  Trend was moving his direction until he made some stupid remarks.  I think 538 at least attempts to be fair despite personal feelings.



She's improved significantly since then.

[Northwestie]

To be fair - Trump imploded when 1) he opened his mouth, 2) the campaign moved from the primary to the general, and 3) the voters turned their eyes toward him.

[Cressida]

Clinton and Trump were neck and neck 3 weeks ago until Trump imploded.

I do not believe this is accurate. I saw this just this morning:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/08/its-end-august-hillary-clinton-lead-clear-steady

Every tracker shows a significant lead for Clinton three weeks ago.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo

538 had the odds roughly even after the repub convention.  Trend was moving his direction until he made some stupid remarks.  I think 538 at least attempts to be fair despite personal feelings.

She's improved significantly since then.

Yes, they did. But that was five weeks ago, not three.

[thd7t]

Clinton and Trump were neck and neck 3 weeks ago until Trump imploded.

I do not believe this is accurate. I saw this just this morning:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/08/its-end-august-hillary-clinton-lead-clear-steady

Every tracker shows a significant lead for Clinton three weeks ago.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo

538 had the odds roughly even after the repub convention.  Trend was moving his direction until he made some stupid remarks.  I think 538 at least attempts to be fair despite personal feelings.

She's improved significantly since then.

Yes, they did. But that was five weeks ago, not three.

And Clinton's successful convention stood pretty starkly against Trump's. Not totally a misstep by him, but a product of inexperience and lack of party unity.

[forummm]

... we haven't gotten to Nazis yet.

Hitler made his first appearance on page 1, only 24 posts into this thread.

Damn, right you are.  Well what's left, then?
Moderator?  ...Moderator??

I do not believe porn has been mentioned even obliquely.  According to Internet law, all threads must eventually include explicit examples or references to Nazis, religion, politics, and sex.

I thought it was mentioned when the GOP party platform declared it a "national public health crisis".

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/11/politics/gop-platform-republican-convention-internet-pornography/

[yuka]

... we haven't gotten to Nazis yet.

Hitler made his first appearance on page 1, only 24 posts into this thread.

Damn, right you are.  Well what's left, then?
Moderator?  ...Moderator??

I do not believe porn has been mentioned even obliquely.  According to Internet law, all threads must eventually include explicit examples or references to Nazis, religion, politics, and sex.

I believe you're thinking of Hitler.

[deadlymonkey]

... we haven't gotten to Nazis yet.

Hitler made his first appearance on page 1, only 24 posts into this thread.

Damn, right you are.  Well what's left, then?
Moderator?  ...Moderator??

I do not believe porn has been mentioned even obliquely.  According to Internet law, all threads must eventually include explicit examples or references to Nazis, religion, politics, and sex.

I believe you're thinking of Hitler.

Godwin's law requires reference to the Nazi's, Hitler being reference by name is a corollary.  The law only requires Nazi.

[yuka]

... we haven't gotten to Nazis yet.

Hitler made his first appearance on page 1, only 24 posts into this thread.

Damn, right you are.  Well what's left, then?
Moderator?  ...Moderator??

I do not believe porn has been mentioned even obliquely.  According to Internet law, all threads must eventually include explicit examples or references to Nazis, religion, politics, and sex.

I believe you're thinking of Hitler.

Godwin's law requires reference to the Nazi's, Hitler being reference by name is a corollary.  The law only requires Nazi.

Indeed. Somewhere between being tired and wanting to share that picture, I may have missed a few important words in your post.

[Glenstache]

So, did Trump violate the Logan Act by meeting with the president of Mexico and discussing trade and immigration policy? I don't expect anything to come of it, but it does seem like he's pushing it, especially when he characterizes parts of the meeting as a preliminary negotiation.

Logan Act:

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

[MDM]

So, did Trump violate the Logan Act by meeting with the president of Mexico and discussing trade and immigration policy?

No more than the Clintons both did after Hillary left office, e.g. Bill Clinton defends his charity's foreign government donors | Reuters.

[Glenstache]

Well, we can add this gem as a reason that Gary Johnson is not a credible candidate: Apparently he is unaware of the situation in Aleppo, which isn't exactly an obscure reference.

“What is Aleppo?” Mr. Johnson said when asked on MSNBC how, as president, he would address the refugee crisis in the war-torn Syrian city.

When pressed as to whether he was serious, Mr. Johnson indicated that he really was not aware of the city, which has been widely covered during the years that Syria has been engulfed in civil war. After Mike Barnicle, an MSNBC commentator who is often part of the “Morning Joe” program panel, explained that Aleppo was the center of Syria’s refugee crisis, Mr. Johnson struggled to recover.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo.html?_r=0

[GuitarStv]

Well, we can add this gem as a reason that Gary Johnson is not a credible candidate: Apparently he is unaware of the situation in Aleppo, which isn't exactly an obscure reference.

“What is Aleppo?” Mr. Johnson said when asked on MSNBC how, as president, he would address the refugee crisis in the war-torn Syrian city.

When pressed as to whether he was serious, Mr. Johnson indicated that he really was not aware of the city, which has been widely covered during the years that Syria has been engulfed in civil war. After Mike Barnicle, an MSNBC commentator who is often part of the “Morning Joe” program panel, explained that Aleppo was the center of Syria’s refugee crisis, Mr. Johnson struggled to recover.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo.html?_r=0

Actually, as a libertarian you should probably give him a pass on that.  The libertarian approach to foreign affairs is often just to completely ignore them.  He's being consistent.

[Jeremy E.]

Well, we can add this gem as a reason that Gary Johnson is not a credible candidate: Apparently he is unaware of the situation in Aleppo, which isn't exactly an obscure reference.

“What is Aleppo?” Mr. Johnson said when asked on MSNBC how, as president, he would address the refugee crisis in the war-torn Syrian city.

When pressed as to whether he was serious, Mr. Johnson indicated that he really was not aware of the city, which has been widely covered during the years that Syria has been engulfed in civil war. After Mike Barnicle, an MSNBC commentator who is often part of the “Morning Joe” program panel, explained that Aleppo was the center of Syria’s refugee crisis, Mr. Johnson struggled to recover.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo.html?_r=0

Actually, as a libertarian you should probably give him a pass on that.  The libertarian approach to foreign affairs is often just to completely ignore them.  He's being consistent.

I much prefer a candidate that asks questions when he doesn't know something, rather than be like Trump and act like you know what you're talking about when you don't know sh*t, there's been probably 20 times where Trump was asked a question and he gave a nonsense answer that guarantees he has no clue what he's talking about, and just guesses instead of asking.

[Jeremy E.]

did you guys see Bill Clinton fall asleep during Hillary's speech? that is just funny
http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/28/bill-clinton-apparently-falls-asleep-during-hillarys-convention-speech-video/
I'm not knocking Hillary, her husbands ability to stay awake has nothing to do with how she will do as president, I just think it's hilarious lol

[Glenstache]

Well, we can add this gem as a reason that Gary Johnson is not a credible candidate: Apparently he is unaware of the situation in Aleppo, which isn't exactly an obscure reference.

“What is Aleppo?” Mr. Johnson said when asked on MSNBC how, as president, he would address the refugee crisis in the war-torn Syrian city.

When pressed as to whether he was serious, Mr. Johnson indicated that he really was not aware of the city, which has been widely covered during the years that Syria has been engulfed in civil war. After Mike Barnicle, an MSNBC commentator who is often part of the “Morning Joe” program panel, explained that Aleppo was the center of Syria’s refugee crisis, Mr. Johnson struggled to recover.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo.html?_r=0

Actually, as a libertarian you should probably give him a pass on that.  The libertarian approach to foreign affairs is often just to completely ignore them.  He's being consistent.

I much prefer a candidate that asks questions when he doesn't know something, rather than be like Trump and act like you know what you're talking about when you don't know sh*t, there's been probably 20 times where Trump was asked a question and he gave a nonsense answer that guarantees he has no clue what he's talking about, and just guesses instead of asking.

I'd agree with that. Trump is a mind-blowingly terrible candidate for president.

However, this seemed like a pretty obvious thing for Johnson to know. I'd buy it if he said he'd been campaigning, was a bit tired and took a second to get on that track. But, to not know after follow ups is a bit disappointing.

[Jack]

Well, we can add this gem as a reason that Gary Johnson is not a credible candidate: Apparently he is unaware of the situation in Aleppo, which isn't exactly an obscure reference.

“What is Aleppo?” Mr. Johnson said when asked on MSNBC how, as president, he would address the refugee crisis in the war-torn Syrian city.

When pressed as to whether he was serious, Mr. Johnson indicated that he really was not aware of the city, which has been widely covered during the years that Syria has been engulfed in civil war. After Mike Barnicle, an MSNBC commentator who is often part of the “Morning Joe” program panel, explained that Aleppo was the center of Syria’s refugee crisis, Mr. Johnson struggled to recover.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo.html?_r=0

Actually, as a libertarian you should probably give him a pass on that.  The libertarian approach to foreign affairs is often just to completely ignore them.  He's being consistent.

I much prefer a candidate that asks questions when he doesn't know something, rather than be like Trump and act like you know what you're talking about when you don't know sh*t, there's been probably 20 times where Trump was asked a question and he gave a nonsense answer that guarantees he has no clue what he's talking about, and just guesses instead of asking.

My main takeaway from that article is that the author and/or the NY Times is invested in the two-party system and wants to undermine Johnson any way they can, which is why they chose to write an article sensationalizing what is a pretty reasonable response while ignoring everything of substance he said otherwise.

[nereo]

Well, we can add this gem as a reason that Gary Johnson is not a credible candidate: Apparently he is unaware of the situation in Aleppo, which isn't exactly an obscure reference.

“What is Aleppo?” Mr. Johnson said when asked on MSNBC how, as president, he would address the refugee crisis in the war-torn Syrian city.

When pressed as to whether he was serious, Mr. Johnson indicated that he really was not aware of the city, which has been widely covered during the years that Syria has been engulfed in civil war. After Mike Barnicle, an MSNBC commentator who is often part of the “Morning Joe” program panel, explained that Aleppo was the center of Syria’s refugee crisis, Mr. Johnson struggled to recover.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo.html?_r=0

Actually, as a libertarian you should probably give him a pass on that.  The libertarian approach to foreign affairs is often just to completely ignore them.  He's being consistent.

I much prefer a candidate that asks questions when he doesn't know something, rather than be like Trump and act like you know what you're talking about when you don't know sh*t, there's been probably 20 times where Trump was asked a question and he gave a nonsense answer that guarantees he has no clue what he's talking about, and just guesses instead of asking.

I'd agree with that. Trump is a mind-blowingly terrible candidate for president.

However, this seemed like a pretty obvious thing for Johnson to know. I'd buy it if he said he'd been campaigning, was a bit tired and took a second to get on that track. But, to not know after follow ups is a bit disappointing.

I accept his explanation and give him a pass for that fumble.  Immediately before the question they were discussing Ralph Nader, and it's easy to freeze in the spotlight.
However, even after the drawn out explanation of what & where Aleppo was I was pretty dissatisfied with his answer. He didn't seem to know very much about our (genearl lack of) military intervention in Syria, and seemed to dwell on regime change (more similar to Libya or Iraq) and less about the humanitarian crisis or civil war there.

[jrhampt]

Yeah, I was just coming here to post the Aleppo article, but I see it's already been done.  I would expect Trump to have no idea where/what Aleppo is.  I expect Hillary knows a lot about it.  I expect most people who have been going about their business and not living under a rock to know where/what Aleppo is, so it does surprise me that Gary Johnson appeared not to know.

[Cyaphas]

I expect most people who have been going about their business and not living under a rock to know where/what Aleppo is, so it does surprise me that Gary Johnson appeared not to know.

You would be very wrong.

[Jack]

I expect most people who have been going about their business and not living under a rock to know where/what Aleppo is, so it does surprise me that Gary Johnson appeared not to know.

You would be very wrong.

Yeah, I do a poor job of following the "low information diet," and even I learned about it from this thread.

[Glenstache]

I expect most people who have been going about their business and not living under a rock to know where/what Aleppo is, so it does surprise me that Gary Johnson appeared not to know.

You would be very wrong.

Yeah, I do a poor job of following the "low information diet," and even I learned about it from this thread.

True that the average person in US may not know about Aleppo, but they would probably know this:
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160818142212-05-omran-daqneesh-aleppo-syria-exlarge-169.jpg
(photo graphic, but on cover of a lot of news sources in August).

I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect a person who wants to be president to at least some level of awareness one of the bigger current humanitarian crises in the world (add to that list South Sudan, etc). 

[infogoon]

I like that there are two different corrections on the NY Times article highlighting Johnson's ignorance, both of which deal with their own misidentification of Aleppo. Grey Lady, heal thyself.

[jrhampt]

I expect most people who have been going about their business and not living under a rock to know where/what Aleppo is, so it does surprise me that Gary Johnson appeared not to know.

You would be very wrong.

I mean, maybe...but it seems like you'd have to be actively avoiding the news or have gone on vacation for a while.  There was the picture of that kid from Aleppo just a couple of weeks back that was on every news network.  But I've also been reading a book recently about the role Aleppo played in the Turks' genocide of the Armenians in the early 1900s, so maybe that's partly it. 

[Kris]

I expect most people who have been going about their business and not living under a rock to know where/what Aleppo is, so it does surprise me that Gary Johnson appeared not to know.

You would be very wrong.

I mean, maybe...but it seems like you'd have to be actively avoiding the news or have gone on vacation for a while.  There was the picture of that kid from Aleppo just a couple of weeks back that was on every news network.  But I've also been reading a book recently about the role Aleppo played in the Turks' genocide of the Armenians in the early 1900s, so maybe that's partly it.

Many, many Americans are shockingly ignorant about what is going on in the world. Or in their own backyards, for that matter.

Hence, Trump.

[Mississippi Mudstache]

I expect most people who have been going about their business and not living under a rock to know where/what Aleppo is, so it does surprise me that Gary Johnson appeared not to know.

You would be very wrong.

I mean, maybe...but it seems like you'd have to be actively avoiding the news or have gone on vacation for a while.  There was the picture of that kid from Aleppo just a couple of weeks back that was on every news network.  But I've also been reading a book recently about the role Aleppo played in the Turks' genocide of the Armenians in the early 1900s, so maybe that's partly it.

Many, many Americans are shockingly ignorant about what is going on in the world. Or in their own backyards, for that matter.

Hence, Trump.

I'm more informed than your average American on international issues, but that's not really saying a whole lot. I haven't watched "the news" in several years. I don't get cable at all, actually. The internet news sites that I frequent lean heavily towards domestic issues. Point being, when I first saw the stuff about Johnson not knowing what Aleppo was, my first thought was, "What's Aleppo?" Then I read that it was a Syrian city, and suddenly I remembered that it was a Syrian city. Given the nature of the question ("What would you do about Aleppo?", rather than "What would you do about Syria?") I'm not at all surprised by Johnson's response. It's been ridiculously overblown. It's pretty obvious the media has been waiting for something like this to pounce on.

[Kris]

I expect most people who have been going about their business and not living under a rock to know where/what Aleppo is, so it does surprise me that Gary Johnson appeared not to know.

You would be very wrong.

I mean, maybe...but it seems like you'd have to be actively avoiding the news or have gone on vacation for a while.  There was the picture of that kid from Aleppo just a couple of weeks back that was on every news network.  But I've also been reading a book recently about the role Aleppo played in the Turks' genocide of the Armenians in the early 1900s, so maybe that's partly it.

Many, many Americans are shockingly ignorant about what is going on in the world. Or in their own backyards, for that matter.

Hence, Trump.

I'm more informed than your average American on international issues, but that's not really saying a whole lot. I haven't watched "the news" in several years. I don't get cable at all, actually. The internet news sites that I frequent lean heavily towards domestic issues. Point being, when I first saw the stuff about Johnson not knowing what Aleppo was, my first thought was, "What's Aleppo?" Then I read that it was a Syrian city, and suddenly I remembered that it was a Syrian city. Given the nature of the question ("What would you do about Aleppo?", rather than "What would you do about Syria?") I'm not at all surprised by Johnson's response. It's been ridiculously overblown. It's pretty obvious the media has been waiting for something like this to pounce on.

I would not at all be surprised to find that if I asked 100 people on the street what Aleppo is, at least half of them would have no idea. But this guy is running to be president of the United States. It's a pretty shocking lapse for a candidate. I'm not sure when we stopped thinking that our presidential candidates should actually be smarter than the average American.

[Northwestie]

Disagree.  I read a paper and have no cable.  You would have had to been asleep or dead to not know what was Aleppo.  Especially if you are running for federal office.

[Mississippi Mudstache]

Disagree.  I read a paper and have no cable.  You would have had to been asleep or dead to not know what was Aleppo.  Especially if you are running for federal office.

I am neither dead, asleep, nor running for federal office. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Seriously, nobody - nobody - who is voting for Johnson gives a rat's ass about his response to that question. A vote for Johnson is either:

A) a sincere vote for the candidate that they feel is best suited to run the country, which means that the voter likely agrees with Johnson's non-interventionist policy and doesn't give a damn about Aleppo aside from not dealing with it, or

B) a protest vote against Clinton and/or Trump, in which case Johnson's minor gaffe pales in comparison to the questionable ethics/profound stupidity of the candidate from the party whom they would otherwise support.

[Kris]

Seriously, nobody - nobody - who is voting for Johnson gives a rat's ass about his response to that question. A vote for Johnson is either:

Yup. And therein lies the problem with Johnson and his voters.

The same way that no one who is voting for Trump gives a rat's ass that he has no idea what he's doing.

[Northwestie]

Seriously, nobody - nobody - who is voting for Johnson gives a rat's ass about his response to that question. A vote for Johnson is either:

Yup. And therein lies the problem with Johnson and his voters.

The same way that no one who is voting for Trump gives a rat's ass that he has no idea what he's doing.

A sad state of affairs, but true.

[Vertical Mode]

Seriously, nobody - nobody - who is voting for Johnson gives a rat's ass about his response to that question. A vote for Johnson is either:

Yup. And therein lies the problem with Johnson and his voters.

The same way that no one who is voting for Trump gives a rat's ass that he has no idea what he's doing.

A sad state of affairs, but true.

or, C) both A and B above.

As someone who will be voting for the Johnson/Weld ticket, I'll chime in here briefly.

Yes, if a candidate truly did not know about Aleppo or have any awareness of what is going on there or Syria at-large, that would be very concerning to me. I learned a lot about him from his handling of the fallout afterwards though - he stepped up and took responsibility, explained what happened, and expressed regret and humility. He acted as I would hope a leader would and didn't run from it, or pull a Trump and say "I never said that". I don't think for one second that Gary Johnson doesn't know about Aleppo or generally what's going on in Syria, I think he's human and had a brain fart, albeit a very public one. It is disgraceful that he is being roundly taken to task in the media for this, while Trump and Clinton skirt by despite real ethical and/or judgment issues that should disqualify both of them. I'm pretty surprised that the first person to be arrested this election cycle is Jill Stein, considering the legal drama that has followed both of the frontrunners.

Speaking of which, how the hell has Trump avoided repercussions for pretty obviously bribing state AG's?

[GuitarStv]

Seriously, nobody - nobody - who is voting for Johnson gives a rat's ass about his response to that question. A vote for Johnson is either:

Yup. And therein lies the problem with Johnson and his voters.

The same way that no one who is voting for Trump gives a rat's ass that he has no idea what he's doing.

A sad state of affairs, but true.

or, C) both A and B above.

As someone who will be voting for the Johnson/Weld ticket, I'll chime in here briefly.

Yes, if a candidate truly did not know about Aleppo or have any awareness of what is going on there or Syria at-large, that would be very concerning to me. I learned a lot about him from his handling of the fallout afterwards though - he stepped up and took responsibility, explained what happened, and expressed regret and humility. He acted as I would hope a leader would and didn't run from it, or pull a Trump and say "I never said that". I don't think for one second that Gary Johnson doesn't know about Aleppo or generally what's going on in Syria, I think he's human and had a brain fart, albeit a very public one. It is disgraceful that he is being roundly taken to task in the media for this, while Trump and Clinton skirt by despite real ethical and/or judgment issues that should disqualify both of them. I'm pretty surprised that the first person to be arrested this election cycle is Jill Stein, considering the legal drama that has followed both of the frontrunners.

Speaking of which, how the hell has Trump avoided repercussions for pretty obviously bribing state AG's?

Jedi mind trick.  (The same way he avoided people calling him on his lies about not supporting the Iraq war.)

[Jack]

Jedi Sith mind trick.  (The same way he avoided people calling him on his lies about not supporting the Iraq war.)

FTFY.

[Jeremy E.]

One slip up isn't going to keep me from voting for Johnson, even with this slip up, he's the one presidential candidate who's values have matched mine more than any other presidential candidate in my lifetime.
He's the only candidate who wants to stop the NSA from invading our privacy,
the only candidate who would reduce military spending,
the only candidate that will reduce spending in general,
the only candidate who will get congresses approval before starting a war,
the only candidate that would focus on defense rather than offense,
the only candidate who has held political office and did what he said he would do,
and the only candidate who will walk between party lines and not base a large part of his decisions based on what the major political parties are doing.

[Jack]

One slip up isn't going to keep me from voting for Johnson, even with this slip up, he's the one presidential candidate who's values have matched mine more than any other presidential candidate in my lifetime.
He's the only candidate who wants to stop the NSA from invading our privacy,
the only candidate who would reduce military spending,
the only candidate that will reduce spending in general,
the only candidate who will get congresses approval before starting a war,
the only candidate that would focus on defense rather than offense,
the only candidate who has held political office and did what he said he would do,
and the only candidate who will walk between party lines and not base a large part of his decisions based on what the major political parties are doing.

Sanders ticked most of those boxes too (all except the "reduce spending in general" part, I think). For me, Johnson is perhaps the second-best candidate since I became eligible to vote and started paying attention.

[Squirrel away]

Disagree.  I read a paper and have no cable.  You would have had to been asleep or dead to not know what was Aleppo.  Especially if you are running for federal office.

+1.

[Jeremy E.]

Myself, I had no clue what Aleppo was, even though I watched 4 GOP debates and 2 democratic debates, as well as having read about each potential candidates policies etc. I also watched many interviews with Trump/Clinton/Sanders/Rand Paul/John Kasich/Cruz/Gary Johnson.

Johnson has been asked about Syria before,
"Should the U.S. prevent Russia from conducting airstrikes in Syria?"
Gary Johnson’s answer: "No, we should not get involved"

Good enough for me.

[arebelspy]

I also could not have told you what Aleppo was before catching up on this thread.

I am aware of Syria, and the refugee crisis (specifically with regards to Europe, and details regarding its impact on various countries there), but Aleppo was a new one on me.

/shrug

[Cyaphas]

Is 85 degrees THAT hot up there?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/11/politics/hillary-clinton-health/index.html

[arebelspy]

Is 85 degrees THAT hot up there?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/11/politics/hillary-clinton-health/index.html

When it's hot, you're in a suit, standing in the sun, becoming overheated and dehydrated happens, sure.  Getting pneumonia from that seems weird to me, but I don't know enough about how one gets that to say anything one way or the other.

Doesn't look good though after Trump's been hammering the health issue, even if it really is nothing.

[HPstache]

The video of her getting in the bus is pretty scary... she does not look good:

https://youtu.be/FVDyciOQCak

[MDM]

Is 85 degrees THAT hot up there?

85 degrees, in the sun, high humidity, etc. could be enervating, but according to the NY Times, "[t]emperatures were in the high 70s on Sunday morning in New York, and humidity was high."

77-78 is a lot nicer than 85, and one wouldn't expect heat exhaustion at those temperatures.  But so what if she got overheated/has pneumonia/whatever - FDR managed well enough from a wheelchair.  Of course, it's not the illness itself but the changing reasons offered by her staff that reinforce some negative perceptions.

[NoStacheOhio]

When it's hot, you're in a suit, standing in the sun, becoming overheated and dehydrated happens, sure.  Getting pneumonia from that seems weird to me, but I don't know enough about how one gets that to say anything one way or the other.

Doesn't look good though after Trump's been hammering the health issue, even if it really is nothing.

It's a little odd for a normal person when it isn't respiratory season, but pneumonia is basically what happens when you get a respiratory infection and don't take care of yourself. It happened to my healthy, late 20s wife two winters ago.

[Northwestie]

When it's hot, you're in a suit, standing in the sun, becoming overheated and dehydrated happens, sure.  Getting pneumonia from that seems weird to me, but I don't know enough about how one gets that to say anything one way or the other.

Doesn't look good though after Trump's been hammering the health issue, even if it really is nothing.

It's a little odd for a normal person when it isn't respiratory season, but pneumonia is basically what happens when you get a respiratory infection and don't take care of yourself. It happened to my healthy, late 20s wife two winters ago.

I was a bit younger and got hammered from pneumonia - was doing a ton of backcountry skiing and just caught the bug somehow.  Felt like a train wreck for week but didn't miss out on a week-long trip a couple months later.  I could imagine he not wanting to miss the memorial thing, standing in the sun and feeling like crap. 

You know where Trump is going with this for lack of any substantial issues.

[Metric Mouse]

You know where Trump is going with this for lack of any substantial issues.

Trump can say whatever he wants about it - the big deal is that voters are running from Hilary. Sadly there aren't many places they can go...

[alsoknownasDean]

I'm a little concerned as to how Trump's approach towards free trade (in particular with China) would affect the world economy.

If he puts large tariffs on Chinese-made goods, it might not just be China that feels the repercussions.

Then again, it might revitalise US manufacturing. Who knows, really.

[protostache]

I'm a little concerned as to how Trump's approach towards free trade (in particular with China) would affect the world economy.

If he puts large tariffs on Chinese-made goods, it might not just be China that feels the repercussions.

Then again, it might revitalise US manufacturing. Who knows, really.

The President doesn't put tariffs on anything, Congress does. Trump is not likely to have a cooperative Congress.

[deadlymonkey]

I'm a little concerned as to how Trump's approach towards free trade (in particular with China) would affect the world economy.

If he puts large tariffs on Chinese-made goods, it might not just be China that feels the repercussions.

Then again, it might revitalise US manufacturing. Who knows, really.

Does anyone really think that even if we totally embargoed Chinese manufacturing we would suddenly open all of these factories in the US?  The Chinese primarily manufacture low skilled parts in mass quantities.  The US still does a lot of manufacturing but it is high end, difficult parts and final combination. 

First it would take a while to build up and retool US factories for the low level stuff china makes, second it would mostly be automated, so no new jobs.

[nereo]

Does anyone really think that even if we totally embargoed Chinese manufacturing we would suddenly open all of these factories in the US?  The Chinese primarily manufacture low skilled parts in mass quantities.  The US still does a lot of manufacturing but it is high end, difficult parts and final combination. 

First it would take a while to build up and retool US factories for the low level stuff china makes, second it would mostly be automated, so no new jobs.

I don't think those are the kinds of jobs we want to base our economy on in teh first place. Most of the manufacturing jobs that we're talking about are actually low-wage, low skill, high volume factories. It works in China because there's a huge population of unskilled workers who can be paid a fraction of what would be given in the US. To make it work in the US machines would replace the workers, and you'd be left with what most of US manufactoring already is; a few dozen highly-skilled technicians overseeing a largely mechanized factory that in previous decades would have employed a few thousand unskilled laborers.

What we want is high-skilled jobs designing and building complex parts, which is pretty much what we already have. Our biggest competitors in these sectors isn't China (though it could be soon), but countries lke Japan and Germany.

[infogoon]

I don't think those are the kinds of jobs we want to base our economy on in teh first place. Most of the manufacturing jobs that we're talking about are actually low-wage, low skill, high volume factories. It works in China because there's a huge population of unskilled workers who can be paid a fraction of what would be given in the US. To make it work in the US machines would replace the workers, and you'd be left with what most of US manufactoring already is; a few dozen highly-skilled technicians overseeing a largely mechanized factory that in previous decades would have employed a few thousand unskilled laborers.

I previously worked for a manufacturing company with factories all over the world. Our plant in the UK was totally automated and required only a few people to run, because labor is expensive in Europe. Our plant in China was very simple and used dozens of workers at a time, because labor was cheaper than automation.

The dream of returning to the days of every worker on an American assembly line making a middle-class income and retiring at 55 is just that, a dream. It was a historical aberration in the 1950s-70s, and it's never coming back unless another World War destroys every other manufacturing economy on the planet like the last one did.