@ND
Ok, let's say WE ARE rewarding a criminal.
will she be better for this country than Trump?
Economics:
not good in a budgetary standpoint but she's not as bad as Trump. she's not against destroying state lines for insurance companies which i disagree with, but she isn't also wanting to put tariffs up against other countries, which would stifle our consumption base- 70% of our GDP.
edge: Clinton. Given we're in a recovery stage right now, her plans won't help accelerate that, but Trump is overestimating America's stability.
Healthcare:
Clinton has constantly said she wants to keep the "good parts" of the AFA, thus the workplace equality. However, she has said that she wants to keep, and only change Obamacare. Trump says take it all apart, and reimplement the good parts. Why do they disagree? Because Hillary wants 100% coverage, and she will bleed us dry to get it. IT's an appeal to the lower class (and thus subsequently a large African American faction) made ever since the 30s and FDR. Obamacare has been a disaster, the idea of expanding Obamacare in specific states would have left the state with a HUGE tab after 5 years, them they attacked the states who wouldn't sign on. Trump says make a free market completely on health insurance. This will destroy coverage, but bring down prices. Better economics, less better healthcare. However, taking into account long-term inefficiencies of the current plans created, it's better to restart than stick with this mess we have
Edge: Trump. Clinton's actually the more stubborn one on this, which rarely happens. It's been her agenda for decades
Foreign Policy:
It's ironic to think Republicans couldn't find ANYONE to beat CLINTON. but let's take a look. Clinton has had awful judgement of the middle east. She completely disregarded terrorist factions that have gained power: most notable ISIS. Her agreements with Obama in Syria, Libya and Iran have all been disastrous from our perspective on cooling tensions. Although there were some economic upsides for Iran, those don't apply to us beyond the space race (we can make a different thread for that). She has accepted millions from foreign leaders through the Clinton Foundation while secretary of State, and has a giant bias towards Turkey and China. And now Trump: I've looked into the "he supported the Iraq war, and here's what i found. he did reply "i guess so" to whether or not we should go in, then immediately followed up saying the economy was more important. Honestly, we gets TOO MUCH CRAP for that, but at the same time, his stubbornness is a zero sum game for him. Nonetheless, he is has been cleared by the FBI for connections with Russia
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html?_r=0
as for Ogion's SLATE article that said there was a secret server connecting the two: fabricated. No named sources, they phrased their words carefully, and it has no substantial ground. However, many of his comments on foreign policy have been viewed as inflammatory. Wanting to "ban all muslims" and put up economic tariffs, have ALREADY hurt the USA's worldwide reputation. It is in this area he most notably shows his lack of knowledge on specific. The simple fact of the matter is Trump has no formal education in this area, and if anything his business ventures overseas have had many failures, and created many enemies.
Edge: depends on view
isolationism: Trump
globalism: Clinton
moderatism: ... fuck me