Precisely, and I backed up this claim with real facts. The Obama admins response to rate hike threats is to figure out how to legally stop them rather than address the underlying issue. The next administration is going to be hit with a crisis in the first 100 days. A great leader is one who can admit when they are wrong. Still waiting on Obama.
Trumped
- Thread starter cloudsurf
- Start date
- Status
You are proving once again Leftist have no substance to their arguments other than accusing Conservatives of Bigotry and Racism which is a false charge to begin with.
Mr. Cloud500 (not to be confused with Cloudsurf) do you have proof that Donald Trump's father was a member of the KKK?
And the Hitler charge is rather ludicrous. Do you know what Hitler did? And how many lives he destroyed? Trump is not Hitler, but I can see a Leftist making such a ridiculous leap like you have.
Exactly. I can envision Mr. B. "I refuse to work with Congress" Obama signing an Exec-order (pen and phone) stopping all rate hikes and ordering United Healthcare and others who threaten to leave Obamacare. Guess what will happen?
The insurance companies would lower rates to Doctors and many more Doctors will retire.
It will become much more difficult to get an appointment with a Dr.
The US will become like Canada, the UK and the EU.
Thank God for the Circuit Court in New Orleans ruling on Immigration and Obama's Executive Order power.
Do you go out to spend some time in other countries? Go and you will see that America is already great my friend, fucking great if you ask me! Few country may be doing better but its easier because they are smaller country. No country is perfect, even Australia (or Canada
).This is a fucking sentence to make people believe that everything is wrong in the USA. It’s not. You guys do not know what being in a bad country is. I do think that if you continue with your Gun law, make false and wrong war like Irak and put your trust in a big ego racists will indeed bring you in a bad country, just give him a few years.
Cheers,
p.s. The fack that a pure racist could be president is quite funny when you think about it. The USA was built purely on vast immigration in just the last 100 years. It was ok I guess because they where white and did not speak Spanish
Do you go out to spend some time in other countries? Go and you will see that America is already great my friend, fucking great if you ask me! Few country may be doing better but its easier because they are smaller country. No country is perfect, even Australia (or Canada
This is a fucking sentence to make people believe that everything is wrong in the USA. It’s not. You guys do not know what being in a bad country is. I do think that if you continue with your Gun law, make false and wrong war like Irak and put your trust in a big ego racists will indeed bring you in a bad country, just give him a few years.
Cheers,
p.s. The fack that a pure racist could be president is quite funny when you think about it. The USA was built purely on vast immigration in just the last 100 years. It was ok I guess because they where white and did not speak Spanish
I agree, America is Great. Great not because it elected a losing bum (whose never had a real job) and idealogue like Barack Obama. But America is great because of the Constitution and society it created in late 18th Century.
The Left beginning with the Vietnam War has been increasingly tearing down the values that have made America Great. You don't understand that because you refuse to relate America's Greatness with its founding. Fact: America is the first country in the world to eliminate Slavery (which was rampant around the world) and a million people died fighting that battle, most who are White. That's another thing that makes the US great and not racist.
Obama has spent a large percentage of his presidency tearing down America's greatness and announcing America's flaws. That's why Trump came up with the slogan. It's a brilliant slogan by the way.
Furthermore, Leftists like you always bring in the Racist component in every subject. Take immigration for example as you brought it up, but you have simplistically made it a racist subject, which it is not.
Have you ever been to the Southwest part of the country? There are many, many 5th and 6th generation or more individuals who have Spanish surnames. They speak English. They are fully assimilated with the American culture.
The people currently immigrating to America don't want to assimilate. They don't want to learn English. Some who are of another religion want us to follow the laws of their religion. That's not how it has been in the last 100 years as you have said.
Let me ask you a fair question. I do not speak French. What if I were to immigrate to Quebec, refuse to learn French, and demand that you not speak French to please my laziness?
What would you say to me? I bet you would say to me to fuck off and go back home to the US where they speak English.
It has nothing to do with the person's race. It has to do with the willingness to assimilate. Plus, 14 million or more have come here without permission. That's the other problem you don't want to recognize.
Even if there was proof you would discredit it. You discounted all facts provided anyways. It would be irrelevant in this case. And your arguments lack any sense or credibility. They are ludicrous and only those kinds of people support rightist nutjobs like Trump. As for the comparison to Hitler that is quite accurate. Keep in mind Nazism is part of far right politics. This I do not say this is official document that I have found. Why not do a search on Wikepedia about far right politics. I am sure you will say something like Wikepedia is a leftist biased source :rant:
Is that why he allowed Ivanka to convert to Judaism ?......so that he can have some Jewish grand kids to hate
You don't provide facts, Cloud500. That's your problem. Nazism was far LEFT politics., meaning Hitler used the appeal of Socialist politics to get elected. The Nazis were the National Socialists Party. Leftism = Totalitarianism with both the Nazis and the Communists in USSR. Hitler was no different than Stalin. You were either with the Fuherer (Leader) or Dictator - Stalin, or you were hauled off to the goolag or Concentration camp and eventually murdered. There was no difference in the methods of either Stalin or Hitler.
Yes, you're probably right about Wikipedia but Wikipedia can be authored by anyone and is most often authored by Leftist who falsely label murderous movements like Nazism as Right wing, which they are not.
Hitler's party was labeled the Socialist party but he hated both Socialism and Private Property owners. He was anti-Church. American Right wing politics is very much religious base but allows for the freedom of religion or freedom from religion on a personal basis.
In Mein Kampf, Hitler railed against both the Left and the Right. Hitler's first targets were Socialists. But Nazis confiscated property from all individuals deemed enemies of his empire.
Here's a very good essay about whether Hitler was Left or Right wing.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/417926/was-fascism-right-wing-again-jonah-goldberg
The Right of today is about Freedom and personal property rights. So your comparison using Hitler is so wrong and misguided.
Is that why he allowed Ivanka to convert to Judaism ?......so that he can have some Jewish grand kids to hate
Very astute cloudsurf ... don't think Cloud500 can understand your logic though.
I was doing business in Alabama just a few days before Obama was elected. I heard many times that a fucking nigger was about to get elected... Anyhow I have no problem with willingness to assimilate immigrant, but do you have to do it by building a fucking wall againsts Mexico? By banning all Muslim from the Country? You are dead right when you say the 5th and 6th generation as assimilate. That's great. But that prooves that assimilation takes time. You cannot do it overnight. You cannot do it like fucking ego maniachal Trump wants to do it. That will only bring a little bit more hated towards american people. As if they need more.
You would stay and learn French anyhow because of the great amazing woman here!!
Seriously it's important for Quebec to have some basic law so we keep our language. Funny how the most radical changes were brought up by leftist here in Quebec, to acheive the same goal towards assimilation as you republicain rightist!The president of the United State should be a respected man. He should be a gentleman. Trump only cares about one person, himself, Donald Trump.
Cheers,
p.s. by the way stop calling me a leftist. I voted Harper twice...
About Alabama. There are racists in Alabama because it's the South. The South lost the Civil War. They lost but they really didn't concede in their hearts because up until 50 years ago segregation still existed.
About Mexico. There are thousands of illegal immigrants pouring across the border daily. There are un-escorted children coming across the border. That's very dangerous. Do you really care about that? A wall would cut the stream of people coming from Mexico and other Central America countries. That's the reason for the wall.
About Assimilation. You're dead wrong about assimilation taking time. Three of my 4 grandparents were born in Europe. One came here as a baby. He learned English as his first language. One came here as a teenager. She was eager to learn English. One came here as an 8 year old boy. He learned English in school. My great grandparents learned English, although it was a broken English and it took them time. Some of the people coming here are learning English, but many are not. Some schools are coddling the children by providing them classes in Spanish. This hinders Assimilation.
About Muslims. Trump has qualified his statement many times by saying he is for curtailing Muslim immigration until they figure out how to vet Muslim immigrants to determine who may be a Terrorist and who is not. He is never quoted completely. Why? Because the Left has an agenda in misquoting him and making him sound like a racist. The head of the FBI has said there is no way the FBI can determine the terrorists from the non-terrorists among the immigrants coming from Syria. Trump's statement shows responsibility. Obama's approach does not.
You would stay and learn French anyhow because of the great amazing woman here!!
The president of the United State should be a respected man. He should be a gentleman. Trump only cares about one person, himself, Donald Trump.
Cheers,
p.s. by the way stop calling me a leftist. I voted Harper twice...
Barack Obama deserves no respect because Barack Obama does not respect the laws of the United States. He has repeatedly tried to circumvent the Constitution. This last 4-4 vote from the Supreme Court on Obama's Executive Order on giving illegal immigrants work permits upheld the ruling by the lower court which ruled Obama's action Unconstitutional. Congress passes laws, not the President. The Executive Branch confirms laws by signing them into law.
In my family, they have always said you earn respect. Obama has not respected US Law and therefore deserves no respect from US Citizens. I don't what type of government you have in Canada, but our elected leaders are not dictators.
I done my research and most sites place it on the far-right spectrum. You just are too arrogant to accept it.
Mr.Daydreamer41, do you have any proof of this?
The label is irrelevant what is relevant if it actually was a socialist party which it was not. Other example of misnomers were Democratic People's Republic of Korea and German Democratic Republic none of which that.
Even though fascism opposed the church they created their own religion called positive Christianity which incorporated racial elements and the swastika, and was intended to gradually move Germany away from Christianity toward "mystical Darwinist vitalism" based on ancient Vedic rituals. Sounds like rightist thought patterns to me. It is funny you mention about religious base but a number of your friends defined themselves as Conservative Atheist? It seems very contradictory to what you wrote.
Obviously. Do you think current US would allow ISIS to run a business in the US?
The article you presented as interesting info but lacks empirical evidence and logic which to say whether Hitler was left or right. Fascism carried certain elements of left-wing but it is largely right-wing. It belongs to far right politics. Sorry to burst your bubble but both the far left and far right are about big government with one major different... The far-left are about egalitarianism and the right are about inequality as in monarchism. Right-wing people are also about control and oppression by the rich elite and aristocrat and also they are very paternalistic in that they is are strict laws to regulate behavior to traditional family values and the church. So the fact you are even on this board is weird. This board represents everything that no true rightist would ever support. Rightists are about social conservatism while leftists are about social progression and centrists about liberalism. So do not think that anyone is naive or delusion to think that the right are about freedom because you are not. Do you even know the meaning of Statism and Corporatism? Look it up. The both are essentially the same except in statism the government is running everything and in corporatism the corporations are running everything. Right wing politicians have hijacked the word freedom. They use it as a political tool to gain votes. It sure works with you. But they are about anything but freedom.
As for Hitler I already wrote an extensive post explaining with logical facts so instead I will post links that I found. Just to clue you in I did not enter a biased term on google I simply used is Hitler left-wing or right-wing. Here are my results.
One great article-> https://pseudoerasmus.com/2015/05/03/fascism-left-or-right/
Another one-> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
And this one. This one is my favorite as it clearly and accurately explained with reference to what left-wing and right-wing politics are-> http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm
About personal property rights you do realize how silly this is? Corporations are not people therefore they cannot have personal property rights. You do realize that they have been using the 14th amendment to have the same rights as a person and to own property. Corporations are a collective organization serving the interests of the few powerful just like a government so in reality you support the same thing as leftist except you accept control and regulation by corporations. Weird.
Here is a great article on this-> http://www.crisismagazine.com/2012/corporate-personhood-and-14th-amendment-rights
Most people would not care but there are still enough xenophobic extremists in Quebec that will take offense. Me who lives in Quebec I do not speak much French but I got by for many years and held many jobs. Either way if you lived here you would need to know some French otherwise you would remain unemployed.
I agree. Plus it's only mostly in Montreal (and surroundings) that someone speaking strictly english can get by. Outside of Montreal, it's all mostly french and many quebecers outside Mtl barely speak any english at all.
I have gotten by with no problem as a unilingual Anglophone tourist in Montreal for a long time, but if I lived or did business in Montreal it would be a different story. In all the hotels, restaurants, bars, strip clubs, department stores and movies in Montreal I have always found someone who spoke English. I do recall a few occasions when lost motorists or pedestrians asked me for directions in French, and I asked them to switch to English. One poor bastard, a tractor trailer driver who looked awfully confused, pulled his rig over to the side of the road on Rene Levesque, stopped and jumped out and around his vehicle to excitedly ask me for directions in French. It was like 7 am, I was walking to a coffee shop and nobody else was around. I could tell by the excitement level in his voice and the agitation in his face that he was late with his delivery. I said, "sorry, I only speak English". I could see he was dejected and deflated by my response; realizing the conversation could not continue, he waved me away, saying "it's good", probably two of the few words he could say in English.
Hitler is really a poor example of the extreme Right as Stalin is a poor example of the extreme Left. Both were psychotic dictators with delusions of self-deification.
If you want to know where extreme groups like Nazis belong ask where they feel very comfortable today. It's not the Left.
Personally I think all the back and forth on who belongs where has gone over the top. In Trump's case ask what he has said, how he has projected himself in the present and what he has done in the past. Isolationist, nationalist, anti-government, with tints of racism, misogyny, xenophobia...yet he has been fully involved in many things such as using lobbyists to get what he wants, contradicting what he says and how he tried to represent himself. I see him as a egotistical self-absorbed opportunist. Some will say I'm just against him. True because of what he is, but that oddly puts me on the same side of many top Republican leaders.
The only place you would have a problem is in the public system most notiably public transit like STM. It seems the organization is not English friendly and there are many xenophobic separatist employees. There have been numerous incidents of Anglophones getting abused... One woman was assaulted because she was asking the ticket booth guy in English. Another university exchange student was asking a bus driver for the time in English but the drive refused to speak English. I mean really she could have just showed him her watch. But she apparently called the police. Apparently the STM does not discipline employees who refuse to speak English and abuse them. It is not a big crime in Quebec courtesy of Bill 101. The STM also stated that it is not mandatory for their employees to speak English. Also there was this hospital the name escapes me right now but there have been some patients who are Anglophone and the hospital staff refused to speak to them in English and service them. This is a French hospital. Bill 101 was created to promote the French language but the seperatists use the bill as a tool to enforce it on everyone to ensure that it dominates all other languages. Quebec has the Office de la Langue Francais aka the language police and it has a budget of several million dollars a year to enforce French on all businesses. There are really two sides to this story. But I stick with what I wrote most people really do not care and really these are isolated incidents but still numerous enough worth mentioning and these were on the news. Me myself I speak functional French but have gotten by in Montreal for years and held all types of employment.
On this I could not agree with you more. Extremism is always psychotic but Mr.Daydreamer41 always seems to bring up the extreme examples like Venezuela. I was never promoting communism but I also do not promote unregulated Capitalism aka Corporatism.
Obviously Nazism and Fascism are examples of far-right politics.
I agree let us say these characteristics you wrote are all examples of extreme social conservatism. As for the Republicans this was a good party in the old days it was based on freedom but the right have hijacked this party.
Mr.Daydreamer41,
You talk about freedom, free market capitalism which is what the right are about. You could not be more wrong they are about corporatism. Here is a great article that explains this very well-> http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/corporatism.htm
You talk about freedom, free market capitalism which is what the right are about. You could not be more wrong they are about corporatism. Here is a great article that explains this very well-> http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/corporatism.htm
You're right, George Will: GOP isn't your party
by Dean Obeidallah
Donald Trump loves to brag that "millions and millions of people have come to the Republican Party" because of his campaign. Like many of Trump's claims, that one appears be questionable, according to Politico's analysis of primary voting data.
But one thing is demonstrably true: Trump is driving Republicans out of the GOP. On Friday, well-known conservative commentator George Will announced he was ditching the GOP to become "an unaffiliated voter" because he did not believe the Trump-headed GOP represented his views. Will went even further in his statements, urging his fellow conservatives to "make sure" Trump loses this election. The question now is: how many more Republicans will leave the party by November?
Will is far from alone in setting aside his GOP identification, at least through November's election. Former state Rep. David Ramadan of Virginia, who supported Ted Cruz in the primary, stated recently on my SiriusXM radio show that he would not identify as a Republican as long as Trump remains either the presumptive or official GOP nominee.
In fact, over the last few weeks we have seen a parade of high-profile Republicans distancing themselves from Trump in various ways. On Saturday, U.S. Rep. Mia Love of Utah, the first African American woman ever elected to Congress as a Republican, announced she would not attend the GOP convention and was actually giving up her place as a Republican delegate.
Love, who still will not commit to voting for Trump in November, joins other big name Republicans who have said they will not attend the July convention, including George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, Mitt Romney and John McCain. It's simply jaw-dropping that multiple former Republican presidents and presidential nominees all refuse to stand up as part of the coronation of Trump as the GOP stander-bearer.
And more Republicans are going further, not just refusing to support Trump but also publicly endorsing Hillary Clinton. Just this past weekend, Former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson -- who served under George W. Bush -- declared that he would be voting for Hillary Clinton, noting that "a Trump presidency is unthinkable." Paulson added, "To my Republican friends: I know I'm not alone."
He's right. In the past few days other Republicans have made similar statements endorsing Clinton, including Richard Armitrage, who served in the State and Defense Departments under George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan. Another is Brent Scowcroft, who served as a top national security adviser for Republican presidents dating back to Gerald Ford.
These are principled stands by people of conscience. But it's also their recognition of the reality that the Republican Party these people know and love is gone -- at least for now. George Will said as much upon declaring his departure: "This is not my party."
The truth is that it hasn't been Will's party for a long time. Trump didn't persuade the GOP base to embrace his extreme and at times bigoted views -- he didn't have to. Those views match up well with what the rank and file of today's Republican Party already believes.
For example, nearly 70 percent of Republicans support Trump's ban on Muslims coming to the United States. On immigration, 70 percent of Republicans support building a wall along the Mexican border and a 2015 CNN poll found that 63 percent of Republicans support deporting all of the approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants -- both positions Trump has vocally championed during his campaign.
Trump and the majority of the GOP are even on the same page on the issue of Trump's calling federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who was born in Indiana, a "Mexican" and demanding he step down as the judge in the Trump University lawsuit. While 51 percent of Americans overall found Trump's statement that Curiel's Hispanic heritage was "an absolute conflict" was "racist," only 22 percent of Republicans agreed.
True, Paul Ryan dubbed Trump's remarks on Curiel as the "textbook definition" of a racist comment, and he has slammed Trump's Muslim ban. According to polling data, however, less than a quarter of Republicans share Ryan's views.
Win or lose, Trump will come and go -- but his views truly represent a solid majority of today's Republican Party. The bigger question for Republicans like Rep. Love, Romney, Paulson, and others is: do they try to change the GOP from within or is time for them to find a new political party?
Top conservative voice George Will quits GOP out of disgust for Trump
by Dean Obeidallah
Donald Trump loves to brag that "millions and millions of people have come to the Republican Party" because of his campaign. Like many of Trump's claims, that one appears be questionable, according to Politico's analysis of primary voting data.
But one thing is demonstrably true: Trump is driving Republicans out of the GOP. On Friday, well-known conservative commentator George Will announced he was ditching the GOP to become "an unaffiliated voter" because he did not believe the Trump-headed GOP represented his views. Will went even further in his statements, urging his fellow conservatives to "make sure" Trump loses this election. The question now is: how many more Republicans will leave the party by November?
Will is far from alone in setting aside his GOP identification, at least through November's election. Former state Rep. David Ramadan of Virginia, who supported Ted Cruz in the primary, stated recently on my SiriusXM radio show that he would not identify as a Republican as long as Trump remains either the presumptive or official GOP nominee.
In fact, over the last few weeks we have seen a parade of high-profile Republicans distancing themselves from Trump in various ways. On Saturday, U.S. Rep. Mia Love of Utah, the first African American woman ever elected to Congress as a Republican, announced she would not attend the GOP convention and was actually giving up her place as a Republican delegate.
Love, who still will not commit to voting for Trump in November, joins other big name Republicans who have said they will not attend the July convention, including George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, Mitt Romney and John McCain. It's simply jaw-dropping that multiple former Republican presidents and presidential nominees all refuse to stand up as part of the coronation of Trump as the GOP stander-bearer.
And more Republicans are going further, not just refusing to support Trump but also publicly endorsing Hillary Clinton. Just this past weekend, Former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson -- who served under George W. Bush -- declared that he would be voting for Hillary Clinton, noting that "a Trump presidency is unthinkable." Paulson added, "To my Republican friends: I know I'm not alone."
He's right. In the past few days other Republicans have made similar statements endorsing Clinton, including Richard Armitrage, who served in the State and Defense Departments under George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan. Another is Brent Scowcroft, who served as a top national security adviser for Republican presidents dating back to Gerald Ford.
These are principled stands by people of conscience. But it's also their recognition of the reality that the Republican Party these people know and love is gone -- at least for now. George Will said as much upon declaring his departure: "This is not my party."
The truth is that it hasn't been Will's party for a long time. Trump didn't persuade the GOP base to embrace his extreme and at times bigoted views -- he didn't have to. Those views match up well with what the rank and file of today's Republican Party already believes.
For example, nearly 70 percent of Republicans support Trump's ban on Muslims coming to the United States. On immigration, 70 percent of Republicans support building a wall along the Mexican border and a 2015 CNN poll found that 63 percent of Republicans support deporting all of the approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants -- both positions Trump has vocally championed during his campaign.
Trump and the majority of the GOP are even on the same page on the issue of Trump's calling federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who was born in Indiana, a "Mexican" and demanding he step down as the judge in the Trump University lawsuit. While 51 percent of Americans overall found Trump's statement that Curiel's Hispanic heritage was "an absolute conflict" was "racist," only 22 percent of Republicans agreed.
True, Paul Ryan dubbed Trump's remarks on Curiel as the "textbook definition" of a racist comment, and he has slammed Trump's Muslim ban. According to polling data, however, less than a quarter of Republicans share Ryan's views.
Win or lose, Trump will come and go -- but his views truly represent a solid majority of today's Republican Party. The bigger question for Republicans like Rep. Love, Romney, Paulson, and others is: do they try to change the GOP from within or is time for them to find a new political party?
Top conservative voice George Will quits GOP out of disgust for Trump
Poll: Majority of GOP voters want someone other than Trump
by Nick Gass, Politico
Less than half — 45 percent — of Republican voters say they are satisfied with Donald Trump as their party's presidential nominee, according to the latest results from an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released Monday.
Another 52 percent said they would have preferred someone else as the GOP standard bearer, while the levels of satisfaction are reversed among Democratic voters, 52 percent of which said they are satisfied with Hillary Clinton as their party's nominee in November.
The results break down ideological and educational lines.
Among conservative Republicans, 53 percent said they would have preferred a candidate other than Trump, while 45 percent of that group said they are fine with the Manhattan real-estate mogul as the nominee. Moderate Republicans split at 49 percent each, while 58 percent of Republicans who have a high-school education or less said they are satisfied. Sixty percent with a college degree said they would like someone else.
On the issues, a majority of voters said Trump would be better than Clinton at "changing business as usual in Washington" (53 percent to 23 percent). Trump also led on economic issues (47 percent to 37 percent), "standing up for America" (45 percent to 37 percent), terrorism and homeland security (44 percent to 39 percent), guns (43 percent to 35 percent), "being effective at getting things done" (42 percent to 39 percent) and "being honest and straighforward" (41 percent to 25 percent).
Clinton, meanwhile, led on "having the ability to handle a crisis" (48 percent to 34 percent), "having the ability to unite the country" (40 percent to 26 percent), "handling foreign policy" (54 percent to 30 percent) and "being a good commander in chief" (44 percent to 32 percent).
The poll was conducted June 19-23, surveying 1,000 registered voters by landlines and cellphones, with an overall margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
Majority of GOP voters hate Trump
by Nick Gass, Politico
Less than half — 45 percent — of Republican voters say they are satisfied with Donald Trump as their party's presidential nominee, according to the latest results from an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released Monday.
Another 52 percent said they would have preferred someone else as the GOP standard bearer, while the levels of satisfaction are reversed among Democratic voters, 52 percent of which said they are satisfied with Hillary Clinton as their party's nominee in November.
The results break down ideological and educational lines.
Among conservative Republicans, 53 percent said they would have preferred a candidate other than Trump, while 45 percent of that group said they are fine with the Manhattan real-estate mogul as the nominee. Moderate Republicans split at 49 percent each, while 58 percent of Republicans who have a high-school education or less said they are satisfied. Sixty percent with a college degree said they would like someone else.
On the issues, a majority of voters said Trump would be better than Clinton at "changing business as usual in Washington" (53 percent to 23 percent). Trump also led on economic issues (47 percent to 37 percent), "standing up for America" (45 percent to 37 percent), terrorism and homeland security (44 percent to 39 percent), guns (43 percent to 35 percent), "being effective at getting things done" (42 percent to 39 percent) and "being honest and straighforward" (41 percent to 25 percent).
Clinton, meanwhile, led on "having the ability to handle a crisis" (48 percent to 34 percent), "having the ability to unite the country" (40 percent to 26 percent), "handling foreign policy" (54 percent to 30 percent) and "being a good commander in chief" (44 percent to 32 percent).
The poll was conducted June 19-23, surveying 1,000 registered voters by landlines and cellphones, with an overall margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
Majority of GOP voters hate Trump
- Status
Similar threads
