Elections have consequences

[drusso]

Those who promoted Obamacare, top-down control of health care, expansion of hospital-health system networks, and activist Federal agencies (CDC, EPA, HSS) learned an important lesson from this election. Big Government is not the solution. Instead, deregulate the insurance industry, abolish faux-EBM/"one-size-fits all" population-based health care, and return local control to county medical societies, hospital medical staff committees, and prioritize the sanctity of the personalized patient-physician relationship.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[willabeast]

Those who promoted Obamacare, top-down control of health care, expansion of hospital-health system networks, and activist Federal agencies (CDC, EPA, HSS) learned an important lesson from this election. Big Government is not the solution. Instead, deregulate the insurance industry, abolish faux-EBM/"one-size-fits all" population-based health care, and return local control to county medical societies, hospital medical staff committees, and prioritize the sanctity of the personalized patient-physician relationship.

not so fast my conservative friend. please do not forget, Bernie Sanders would have obliterated Trump. and Bernie is way to the left of Hillary. this election was about the populist vote versus status quo. Trump is right wind populist. Sanders is left wing populist. given the choice between business as usual (Hillary) and right wing populist, the voters chose right wing. rest assured, 4 years from now the liberals will run a populist left winger, and if Trump does not fix things fast, he will be a short timer.

 

[lonelobo]

Those who promoted Obamacare, top-down control of health care, expansion of hospital-health system networks, and activist Federal agencies (CDC, EPA, HSS) learned an important lesson from this election. Big Government is not the solution. Instead, deregulate the insurance industry, abolish faux-EBM/"one-size-fits all" population-based health care, and return local control to county medical societies, hospital medical staff committees, and prioritize the sanctity of the personalized patient-physician relationship.

In theory sounds good, but the cat is out of the bag and I don't think there will be substantive changes, no matter who the next president is.

 

[hyperalgesia]

The biggest victory is against the "political class" and mass media. Trump showed that you don't have to be a member of that special club to get elected.

 

[clubdeac]

Was watching Good Morning America and one of the "pundits" said Trump won b/c the middle class, slightly below average intelligent, white American came out to vote! Wow... had a conservative said this about any other demographic they would have been obliterated and ruined by the liberal left leaning media. Can we now vote the media out of existence please

 

[drusso]

not so fast my conservative friend. please do not forget, Bernie Sanders would have obliterated Trump. and Bernie is way to the left of Hillary. this election was about the populist vote versus status quo. Trump is right wind populist. Sanders is left wing populist. given the choice between business as usual (Hillary) and right wing populist, the voters chose right wing. rest assured, 4 years from now the liberals will run a populist left winger, and if Trump does not fix things fast, he will be a short timer.

My prediction: Trump has a populist mandate to turn our country away from Obama-care's ill-conceived, socialized/one-size-fits all model of health care, to claw back the egregious cash transfers that went from the US Treasury to large hospital networks (causing market disruption by direct physician employment, practice acquisition, and the corporate practice of medicine), unburden the insurance industry vis-a-vis deregulation (no more one-size-fits no one Obama-care insurance products), allow insurance to be sold across state lines, reform medical malpractice laws, and allow patients and employers to use pre-tax money for health saving accounts any way they please.

Health system based physician employers will be taking a hard look at their employed physicians' productivity and their entire Medicaid "book of business" to determine if the financial juice is worth the squeeze. Those working in that kind of system will be told to do more with less. And, after the Republican Congress and Trump execute their vision of health care reform, it will be a very bad time to be a Medicaid Doc-in-a-Box working for McHospital. No more cross-subsidies from bloated HOPD "facility fees" to support above MGMA-market salaries. This morning I opened my email and found a forwarded message from a colleague employed by a large physician employer in my region--I excerpted the following:

"We’re doing what we can to minimize the impact. We are not filling open positions that are non-critical. We are reducing other costs across our regions. For our caregivers in transition, we are supporting them by:

• Offering them hiring priority within our organization. We are closing most positions to external applicants through the end of the year (exceptions will be critical positions affecting patient safety and quality care).

• Providing guidance and job search resources

• Developing support tools needed to apply for a new position, e.g. resume, LinkedIn profile, etc.

• Providing 60-day notice and severance based on years of service"

In other words, "thank you for your service to McHospital and Doc-in-the-Box." Here's your LinkedIn account. The lesson for new graduates is, "Beware: When you abrogate your professional autonomy as a physician in order to do the bidding of your employer, don't expect a return in loyalty when the rules of the game change."

 

[Stim4me]

My prediction: Trump has a populist mandate to turn our country away from Obama-care's ill-conceived, socialized/one-size-fits all model of health care, to claw back the egregious cash transfers that went from the US Treasury to large hospital networks (causing market disruption by direct physician employment, practice acquisition, and the corporate practice of medicine), unburden the insurance industry vis-a-vis deregulation (no more one-size-fits no one Obama-care insurance products), allow insurance to be sold across state lines, reform medical malpractice laws, and allow patients and employers to use pre-tax money for health saving accounts any way they please.

Health system based physician employers will be taking a hard look at their employed physicians' productivity and their entire Medicaid "book of business" to determine if the financial juice is worth the squeeze. Those working in that kind of system will be told to do more with less. And, after the Republican Congress and Trump execute their vision of health care reform, it will be a very bad time to be a Medicaid Doc-in-a-Box working for McHospital. No more cross-subsidies from bloated HOPD "facility fees" to support above MGMA-market salaries. This morning I opened my email and found a forwarded message from a colleague employed by a large physician employer in my region--I excerpted the following:

"We’re doing what we can to minimize the impact. We are not filling open positions that are non-critical. We are reducing other costs across our regions. For our caregivers in transition, we are supporting them by:

• Offering them hiring priority within our organization. We are closing most positions to external applicants through the end of the year (exceptions will be critical positions affecting patient safety and quality care).

• Providing guidance and job search resources

• Developing support tools needed to apply for a new position, e.g. resume, LinkedIn profile, etc.

• Providing 60-day notice and severance based on years of service"

In other words, "thank you for your service to McHospital and Doc-in-the-Box." Here's your LinkedIn account. The lesson for new graduates is, "Beware: When you abrogate your professional autonomy as a physician in order to do the bidding of your employer, don't expect a return in loyalty when the rules of the game change."

Yes he's a populist president with a massive mandate. He's not technically a true republican... I would foresee a single payer still, with a competitive commercial health care insurance system...

 

[SSdoc33]

Yes he's a populist president with a massive mandate. He's not technically a true republican... I would foresee a single payer still, with a competitive commercial health care insurance system...

?

he lost the popular vote

 

[bedrock]

Yes he's a populist president with a massive mandate. He's not technically a true republican... I would foresee a single payer still, with a competitive commercial health care insurance system...

Agree with ssdoc that trump has no mandate, he lost the popular vote. He won the election.......barely, only due to the archaic idea of an electoral college.

He doesnt have a mandate, just supporters living in the right states of the electoral college.


Help me understand your single payer system + commercial insurance? Do mean single payer for all, and then elective private commercial insurance coverage for the stuff the single payer doesn't cover? Basically a two-tiered system like in the UK?

 

[lobelsteve]

Barely won? Looks like he might have over 300 ev when done. that is same as Obama winning.

 

[Ligament]

Was watching Good Morning America and one of the "pundits" said Trump won b/c the middle class, slightly below average intelligent, white American came out to vote! Wow... had a conservative said this about any other demographic they would have been obliterated and ruined by the liberal left leaning media. Can we now vote the media out of existence please

Yup, more racisim towards whites. The entire Democratic party is a racist movement against whites, and a sexist movement against males. We are aware of it and will tolerate it no longer. Very interesting how they preach tolerance and diversity as long as it excludes whites and white males.

 

[Stim4me]

Agree with ssdoc that trump has no mandate, he lost the popular vote. He won the election.......barely, only due to the archaic idea of an electoral college.

He doesnt have a mandate, just supporters living in the right states of the electoral college.


Help me understand your single payer system + commercial insurance? Do mean single payer for all, and then elective private commercial insurance coverage for the stuff the single payer doesn't cover? Basically a two-tiered system like in the UK?

Republicans won all branches of government. First time since 1928... that's a mandate. Trump wants all citizens covered period. He also wants commercial interstate health plans. Call it two tiered or fusion of patient care act with ACA. Point is that he's a populist and will make it happen.

When you come across the two liberals soc and lonelobo, they owe me $1000k. I block their antisocial nonsense . I kindly will have the money donated to Steve's favorite charity....

 

[hyperalgesia]

I hope Ben Carson gets a prominent position. He's an awesome role model.

 

[bedrock]

Republicans won all branches of government. First time since 1928... that's a mandate. .

Not sure what you mean by this as the last time republicans controlled all branches of government was the last term of George W Bush, 9 years ago, not 90.

A mandate is an overwhelming win, However in this election republicans will actually overall lose seats in both houses of congress, 1-2 in the senate and 8 in the house. Not enough seats taken away to lose the majority, but overall losing congressional seats isn't a mandate, and losing the presidential popular vote isn't a mandate.

 

[lobelsteve]

Republicans won all branches of government. First time since 1928... that's a mandate. Trump wants all citizens covered period. He also wants commercial interstate health plans. Call it two tiered or fusion of patient care act with ACA. Point is that he's a populist and will make it happen.

When you come across the two liberals soc and lonelobo, they owe me $1000k. I block their antisocial nonsense . I kindly will have the money donated to Steve's favorite charity....

The human fund. george costanza.

If actually going to happen, animal rescue.

 

[Stim4me]

Not sure what you mean by this as the last time republicans controlled all branches of government was the last term of George W Bush, 9 years ago, not 90.

A mandate is an overwhelming win, However in this election republicans will actually overall lose seats in both houses of congress, 1-2 in the senate and 8 in the house. Not enough seats taken away to lose the majority, but overall losing congressional seats isn't a mandate, and losing the presidential popular vote isn't a mandate.

Biased...
Bush did not come into office with all three branches in 2001, look it up... Obama did. Bush obtained it a few years later. Makes a difference in that the first 100days are critical. Again per Rove 1928 is first time a republican comes into offic with all three branches.

If you don't think a party with all three branches and the ability to determine up to two scotus candidates, is a mandate, I have a rainbow unicorn to sell you (half off)....

 

[Ducttape]

According to wikipedia, House of Representatives in 2000 elections, there were 223 Republicans and 211 Democrats. US Senate it was 50-50, with the tiebreaker being the Republican VP.

so technically, Republicans did have POTUS and the 2 branches of Congress from the 2000 elections.....

i think were someone will say that Republicans did not have control of the Senate is because there was a defection in June - Jim Jeffords.

 

[SSdoc33]

Biased...
Bush did not come into office with all three branches in 2001, look it up... Obama did. Bush obtained it a few years later. Makes a difference in that the first 100days are critical. Again per Rove 1928 is first time a republican comes into offic with all three branches.

If you don't think a party with all three branches and the ability to determine up to two scotus candidates, is a mandate, I have a rainbow unicorn to sell you (half off)....

stim, please take a civics course. nobody "wins" all 3 branches of government. we dont elect the supreme court. the judicial system is both the supreme court and the lower courts.

trump has a lot of power right now. that is different than a mandate.

and i never bet anybody anything.

 

[pmrmd]

HRC won popular vote because 4m votes peeled off for Johnson. No Johnson and DT wins popular as well.

 

[Ducttape]

HRC won popular vote because 4m votes peeled off for Johnson. No Johnson and DT wins popular as well.

that's a specious statement.

one cannot assume that those who voted for Johnson would have necessarily voted for DT. it is equally likely that they would not have voted at all.

 

[pmrmd]

that's a specious statement.

one cannot assume that those who voted for Johnson would have necessarily voted for DT. it is equally likely that they would not have voted at all.

Not really. She won the popular by some 233k votes. The left votes left. Always. DT gets 6% of that vote if there was no other option.

 

[SSdoc33]

HRC won popular vote because 4m votes peeled off for Johnson.

incorrect. HRC won the popular vote because more people voted for her.

also, your assumption that johnson voters would have gone to trump is wrong.

then again, the polls never lie.....


http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/09/gary-johnson-jill-stein-voters-clinton

CBS News' exit poll posed the hypothetical question of who third party voters would support if the race were only Clinton and Trump, and both Johnson and Stein supporters appeared to support Clinton over Trump by about 25 percent to 15 percent. But 55 percent of Johnson's supporters would have just sat out the election, as would 61 percent of Jill Stein supporters. According to New York Times exit polling, a whopping 63 percent of voters who declined to cast their ballot for the two major party candidates said they would have not voted at all in a two candidate race.

 

[Ligament]

HRC won popular vote because 4m votes peeled off for Johnson. No Johnson and DT wins popular as well.

She had millions of illegal invaders voting for her in California. Those votes need to be nullified.

 

[lonelobo]

She had millions of illegal invaders voting for her in California. Those votes need to be nullified.

 

[Stim4me]

Not really. She won the popular by some 233k votes. The left votes left. Always. DT gets 6% of that vote if there was no other option.[/

She had millions of illegal invaders voting for her in California. Those votes need to be nullified.

voter ID verification system is essential like all civilized nations. Obama had the audacity to imply illegals can vote without ramifications prior to Election Day.... thug

 

[powermd]

I hope Ben Carson gets a prominent position. He's an awesome role model.

They're talking about giving him Secretary of Education.

He's a creationist. Wonderful.

 

[hyperalgesia]

They're talking about giving him Secretary of Education.

He's a creationist. Wonderful.

Do you still think we should have a US Dept of Education even thought they will be forcing creationism down your kids' throats? Or would you favor a more local approach? Live by the sword...

Anyway, I would prefer HHS for Carson.

 

[pmrmd]

incorrect. HRC won the popular vote because more people voted for her.

also, your assumption that johnson voters would have gone to trump is wrong.

then again, the polls never lie.....


http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/09/gary-johnson-jill-stein-voters-clinton

CBS News' exit poll posed the hypothetical question of who third party voters would support if the race were only Clinton and Trump, and both Johnson and Stein supporters appeared to support Clinton over Trump by about 25 percent to 15 percent. But 55 percent of Johnson's supporters would have just sat out the election, as would 61 percent of Jill Stein supporters. According to New York Times exit polling, a whopping 63 percent of voters who declined to cast their ballot for the two major party candidates said they would have not voted at all in a two candidate race.

I can see that more people voted for her. I can also see that a libertarian is the polar opposite of a big government leftist and has more in common with the political right except the social issues. I don't believe any poll from the MSM but even the poll you cited said 63% would not vote. So that means 37% would and all DT would need is 6% of the 3rd party vote, who if they were going to vote share more values with DT than HRC.

 

[Ligament]

They're talking about giving him Secretary of Education.

He's a creationist. Wonderful.

Who cares. I'm an atheist and think the world of Dr. Carson. He can be secretary of anything and we need not worry about his creationist beliefs...who cares? Our public school system SUCKS since the introduction of the no child left behind movement. If he gets our students do perform even 5% better he can teach them all about KEK and pepe for all I care.

 

[vm26]

Yup, more racisim towards whites. The entire Democratic party is a racist movement against whites, and a sexist movement against males. We are aware of it and will tolerate it no longer. Very interesting how they preach tolerance and diversity as long as it excludes whites and white males.

This morning I heard a protestor (20-something female) on CNN saying that unless you're a white male, you now are fearful for your safety with Trump as president-elect, pretty amazing...as a white male, I would hate being in my 20's these days

 

[Ducttape]

I can see that more people voted for her. I can also see that a libertarian is the polar opposite of a big government leftist and has more in common with the political right except the social issues. I don't believe any poll from the MSM but even the poll you cited said 63% would not vote. So that means 37% would and all DT would need is 6% of the 3rd party vote, who if they were going to vote share more values with DT than HRC.

Your presumed logic misses the point that some of these - or actually, most of these - votes are not votes for libertarianism, but votes against DT. Without Johnson, if they still wanted to vote, they would vote anti-Trump, ie HRC.

It's not about their values. It's about their perception of his.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[powermd]

Do you still think we should have a US Dept of Education even thought they will be forcing creationism down your kids' throats? Or would you favor a more local approach? Live by the sword...

Anyway, I would prefer HHS for Carson.

Some centralized planning is probably a good thing to ensure equal access to high quality schools. I don't know much about how the DOE works though. But equal access to a high quality school experience is something I value for all Americans. An educated populace is a good thing.

 

[Ducttape]

An educated populace is a good thing.
then Trump might not have been elected...

 

[pmrmd]

Your presumed logic misses the point that some of these - or actually, most of these - votes are not votes for libertarianism, but votes against DT. Without Johnson, if they still wanted to vote, they would vote anti-Trump, ie HRC. It's not about their values. It's about their perception of his.
Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Your post makes no sense whatsoever. If the votes were not for libertarianism and merely against Trump, they could have simply voted for Clinton in the first place.

 

[pmrmd]

An educated populace is a good thing.
then Trump might not have been elected...

Cute comment and so original, but more apt for the typical leftist voter seemingly unaware of the failures of liberal policy for the past 8 years.

 

[Stim4me]

An educated populace is a good thing.
then Trump might not have been elected...

Youre just as arrogant and ignorant as the media...that's why your party lost. please consider moving to Canada and take your two progressive buddies with you ...

 

[cbest]

Youre just as arrogant and ignorant as the media...that's why your party lost. please move to Canada and take your two progressive buddies with you ... good riddance

Given that the large majority of people voting for Trump were white people with high school education or less, it's a fairly accurate statement.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Stim4me]

Given that the large majority of people voting for Trump were white people with high school education or less, it's a fairly accurate statement.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Actually trump did much better with minorities, latinos, African Americans and educated college males than most republicans. He had LESS of the white vote than Romney...stats are relative though

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ople-of-color-than-romney-did-heres-the-data/

Oh don't forget the union families are sick of the democrats as well...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ot-reagan-like-support-from-union-households/

So it wasn't whitelash, it was several groups trending away from failed democratic policies.

 

[Ducttape]

still cant take a joke, even though your side won the election, eh, stim? there is a big grin smiley face after the comment.

maybe I should have put the whole thing in magenta.


fyi, the statement, tho said in jest, has truth to it, and as usual, unlike some others (not specifically targetting stim) on this board, I back up my statements with actual fact

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...s-victory-divisions-by-race-gender-education/

In the 2016 election, a wide gap in presidential preferences emerged between those with and without a college degree. College graduates backed Clinton by a 9-point margin (52%-43%), while those without a college degree backed Trump 52%-44%. This is by far the widest gap in support among college graduates and non-college graduates in exit polls dating back to 1980. For example, in 2012, there was hardly any difference between the two groups: College graduates backed Obama over Romney by 50%-48%, and those without a college degree also supported Obama 51%-47%.

Among whites, Trump won an overwhelming share of those without a college degree; and among white college graduates – a group that many identified as key for a potential Clinton victory – Trump outperformed Clinton by a narrow 4-point margin.

Trump’s margin among whites without a college degree is the largest among any candidate in exit polls since 1980. Two-thirds (67%) of non-college whites backed Trump, compared with just 28% who supported Clinton, resulting in a 39-point advantage for Trump among this group. In 2012 and 2008, non-college whites also preferred the Republican over the Democratic candidate but by less one-sided margins (61%-36% and 58%-40%, respectively).

Trump won whites with a college degree 49% to 45%. In 2012, Romney won college whites by a somewhat wider margin in 2012 (56%-42%). Trump’s advantage among this group is the same as John McCain’s margin in 2008 (51%-47%).

Due largely to the dramatic movement among whites with no college degree, the gap between college and non-college whites is wider in 2016 than in any past election dating to 1980.

and finally to pmrmd - im not sure how I can explain it any more simply than this: it appears that a vote for Johnson was a vote specifically against Trump. these voters probably couldn't stomach Clinton, but totally despised Trump.

 

[Stim4me]

still cant take a joke, even though your side won the election, eh, stim? there is a big grin smiley face after the comment.

maybe I should have put the whole thing in magenta.


fyi, the statement, tho said in jest, has truth to it, and as usual, unlike some others (not specifically targetting stim) on this board, I back up my statements with actual fact

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...s-victory-divisions-by-race-gender-education/



and finally to pmrmd - im not sure how I can explain it any more simply than this: it appears that a vote for Johnson was a vote specifically against Trump. these voters probably couldn't stomach Clinton, but totally despised Trump.

Haaaaahaaa... happy as can be, for sure. But really doesn't Canada seem like a better place for you to practice if hospital based?

 

[Ligament]

Given that the large majority of people voting for Trump were white people with high school education or less, it's a fairly accurate statement.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Did you see this as a problem when 93-96% of black people voted against the white republican candidates during the 2008 and 2012 elections? Were you concerned about the education level of the black voter during those elections?

 

[cbest]

Did you see this as a problem when 93-96% of black people voted against the white republican candidates during the 2008 and 2012 elections? Were you concerned about the education level of the black voter during those elections?

Not at all, but that's mainly because I was a med student then resident on student/work visas and didn't care at all about politics. You make a fair point for sure, Lig. Despite having lived in the US for almost a decade now, I still can't wrap my head around the views and attitudes of the right wing here. Some of the fiscal policies... maybe, but some of the other **** that the Republican base pumps out is bizarro and archaic. But hey, I'm just working here, paying taxes, and trying help a few people with back pain along the way. I can always head home if I so choose.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Stim4me]

Did you see this as a problem when 93-96% of black people voted against the white republican candidates during the 2008 and 2012 elections? Were you concerned about the education level of the black voter during those elections?

The entire country needs a logic 101 course... they seem to have skipped that in high school and liberal safe space colleges. I see that the very educated/successful support republicans actually, as demonstrated on SDN. Most college grads are clueless

 

[Ligament]

Not at all, but that's mainly because I was a med student then resident on student/work visas and didn't care at all about politics. You make a fair point for sure, Lig. Despite having lived in the US for almost a decade now, I still can't wrap my head around the views and attitudes of the right wing here. Some of the fiscal policies... maybe, but some of the other **** that the Republican base pumps out is bizarro and archaic. But hey, I'm just working here, paying taxes, and trying help a few people with back pain along the way. I can always head home if I so choose.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Don't worry, the Republican party is dead. They failed their base by doing nothing over the past years when they had a majority in house and senate and did nothing to fight Obama. They just rolled over. The new party is something Trump has emerged as the figurehead for, but the old Republican party is dead.

And now that the Democrats cannot import millions of illegal invaders that will forever vote democratic, the Democratic party is likely dead as well. The Democratic plan for the future was to import lifelong democratic voters. Ain't happening now. Their current voter base are a bunch of spineless special snowflakes that need safe spaces and riot and loot and assault when they don't get the toy they want. They are destroying their own cities right now protesting...democracy.

I think the results of this election may be viewed as the second American revolution in the history books.

Trump usurped TWO dynasties in this election, the Bushes and the Clintons. They are gone forever, thank god.

 

[Yo GabbaPentin]

Some of the fiscal policies... maybe, but some of the other **** that the Republican base pumps out is bizarro and archaic.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Educate me on the archaic/bizarre ****. Truly interested to see each point of view. I lean right ever so slightly based solely on fiscal principles. Hollywood/media push the left but Im trying to figure out the appeal. Tons of the complete horse**** that all Republicans are racist/homophobic/xenophobes. Democrats promise free crap and wealth redistribution which is not feasible. The biggest problem on the right for me are social issues and including Christianity in everything unnecessarily.

 

[geauxg8rs]

Don't worry, the Republican party is dead. They failed their base by doing nothing over the past years when they had a majority in house and senate and did nothing to fight Obama. They just rolled over. The new party is something Trump has emerged as the figurehead for, but the old Republican party is dead.

And now that the Democrats cannot import millions of illegal invaders that will forever vote democratic, the Democratic party is likely dead as well. The Democratic plan for the future was to import lifelong democratic voters. Ain't happening now. Their current voter base are a bunch of spineless special snowflakes that need safe spaces and riot and loot and assault when they don't get the toy they want. They are destroying their own cities right now protesting...democracy.

I think the results of this election may be viewed as the second American revolution in the history books.

Trump usurped TWO dynasties in this election, the Bushes and the Clintons. They are gone forever, thank god.

The bushes and Clinton's might just be on pause.
George P Bush is a rising star in Texas And Chelsea is being groomed for congress. The 2036 debates will be interesting (unless ivanka messes up bush's coronation).

 

[bedrock]

Educate me on the archaic/bizarre ****. Truly interested to see each point of view. I lean right ever so slightly based solely on fiscal principles. Hollywood/media push the left but Im trying to figure out the appeal. Tons of the complete horse**** that all Republicans are racist/homophobic/xenophobes. Democrats promise free crap and wealth redistribution which is not feasible. The biggest problem on the right for me are social issues and including Christianity in everything unnecessarily.

Agree with much of this. I support being fiscally conservative and socially progressive in government.

This is why I'm an Independent voter as I support half of each parties agenda, so it's candidate specific for me.

 

[drpainfree]

regardless what each party stands for, and what DT stands for, I do not vote for HRC.

 

[Yo GabbaPentin]

Agree with much of this. I support being fiscally conservative and socially progressive in government.

This is why I'm an Independent voter as I support half of each parties agenda, so it's candidate specific for me.

I too am independent. Which is why when the media and Hollywood start making **** up about HRC being some savior and Trump being a molesting, homophobic, racist dictator, I end up voting for a guy I didn't want to vote for. Saying those things about him are as true as saying that HRC is a baby killing communist who will come into my home to steal all my money and guns. Both are total BS. I'm hopeful that he can bring this divided country together after Obama spend 8 years dividing it for political gain.

 

[PainDrain]

I hope Ben Carson gets a prominent position. He's an awesome role model.

Carson would be a joke for either position. I mean seriously, someone who thinks the earth is a few thousand years old and dinosaurs were living peacefully with humans should not be in a position dedicated to science, health or education. You can't solve problems when you don't believe in the solutions or the scientific method.