Clinton/Trump Election Prediction Thread

I don't care who you WANT to win, I only care who you think will win and with what degree of confidence you have in your prediction. All responses should say:

Name
% probability of winning

Mod note (Andy):: More election "fun" here: http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/polls/who-do-you-t…

 

Clinton is going to win. The race won't be that close because she is facing a moron (politically). Corporations run American politics and it is shameful. There needs to be a strong (preferably Libertarian) third party to avoid this sort of "lesser of two evils" situation.

Array
 

Canadian living in American opinion (so can't vote and inherently [relative] left background).

I think pretty much across the board in all the topics you listed (tax policy, regulation, immigration, environment, foreign policy, social issues) Hillary would be better for the country (though I don't know much above Trump's regulatory proposals). Trump's policies I think all cater to his target demo (the poorly educated, whom he loves), whose interests I would in turn presume are out of sync with the the country's as a whole. i.e., bringing manufacturing jobs back from China in exchange for significantly reduced trade is a net negative for USA, but may benefit a few. Not that Hillary's policies are home run by any means, but I suppose what I am getting at is that they seem to be better constructed with more thought to the devil's advocate.

I don't think any commentary needs to be given on the social benefits of Hillary vs Trump/

The economy I touched on above but I don't see Trump's platform of bringing manufacturing back to the US, becoming more protectionist and mass tax cuts being constructive even in the short run, let alone the long run where they would presumably be hugely value destructive (from debt coverage, ballooning deficits from tax revenue losses, etc.)

The one question i would love to get asked to Trump is, since his entire campaign is built around him being a master businessman / negotiator, "why do you think you would be a better president than Warren Buffett / Bill Gates / numerous other businesspeople who have been empirically significantly more successful than you"

 

Of the 19 Republican candidates for president, Trump was the absolute worst--intellectually shallow, appealing to the lowest common denominator, with an incomprehensible foreign policy and morons for advisors. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton would be the most corrupt individual to hold the office of the presidency since Warren Harding, and perhaps the most corrupt individual since the 19th century. Both of these candidates are simply beyond awful and reflect an America that is dying a slow death as it declines into complete moral decay (and when I say "moral decay" I'm not talking about "abortion" and "no prayer in the classroom"--I'm talking about how our culture has become lazy, complacent, entitled and obsessed with celebrity).

For me, I have decided to reluctantly vote for Trump even though I abhor his position on free trade (and am more closely aligned with Clinton on the issue). Obama will have imported 1 million Muslims to the United States in his 8 years, a simply appalling legacy (more than half of American Muslims have said that they support governance by Sharia law--51% according to Pew). Assuming Clinton continues this policy, I simply cannot support her. While Clinton has a long history of opposing open borders, her party has pulled her to the left, and it's impossible to know where she will ultimately stand on immigration. Open borders policies essentially makes the United States not a nation. Finally, Clinton has put forth exactly zero ideas for realizing economic growth, to move us out of this vicious cycle of mediocrity. At least Trump has put forth a Larry Kudlow-backed tax plan that I think makes sense.

Either way, the next president will be a one-term president. We are heading toward recession and the next president will have to carry that yoke around his or her neck. On the bright side, I think both Clinton and Trump will be better presidents than Obama or Bush. Ironically, while both Obama and Bush have had amazingly dissimilar foreign policy, both presidents have been complete foreign policy failures.

Array
 
Virginia Tech 4ever:

Of the 19 Republican candidates for president, Trump was the absolute worst--intellectually shallow, appealing to the lowest common denominator, with an incomprehensible foreign policy and morons for advisors. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton would be the most corrupt individual to hold the office of the presidency since Warren Harding, and perhaps the most corrupt individual since the 19th century. Both of these candidates are simply beyond awful and reflect an America that is dying a slow death as it declines into complete moral decay (and when I say "moral decay" I'm not talking about "abortion" and "no prayer in the classroom"--I'm talking about how our culture has become lazy, complacent, entitled and obsessed with celebrity).

For me, I have decided to reluctantly vote for Trump even though I abhor his position on free trade (and am more closely aligned with Clinton on the issue). Obama will have imported 1 million Muslims to the United States in his 8 years, a simply appalling legacy (more than half of American Muslims have said that they support governance by Sharia law--51% according to Pew). Assuming Clinton continues this policy, I simply cannot support her. While Clinton has a long history of opposing open borders, her party has pulled her to the left, and it's impossible to know where she will ultimately stand on immigration. Open borders policies essentially makes the United States not a nation. Finally, Clinton has put forth exactly zero ideas for realizing economic growth, to move us out of this vicious cycle of mediocrity. At least Trump has put forth a Larry Kudlow-backed tax plan that I think makes sense.

Either way, the next president will be a one-term president. We are heading toward recession and the next president will have to that yoke around his or her neck. On the bright side, I think both Clinton and Trump will be better presidents than Obama or Bush. Ironically, while both Obama and Bush have had amazingly dissimilar foreign policy, both presidents have been complete foreign policy failures.

Who would have been better than Trump to run? Do you think Bible Thumping Cruz would have beat Hillary in battleground states? Do you think Kasich could have won when he came in 4th behind Cruz and Rubio? Who but Trump put forth bold statements and definitive action?

As far as trade goes, I have no worry that Trump will start a trade war. instead he will negotiate strong and help us on trade. Either way, do you think the majority of Americans are benefiting from trade with China or automation? Kerry said the same thing Trump is saying about China when he ran. We've had tariffs on steal and other goods that were being dumped. We do not have fair trade.

Other than that you have Trump with a tax plan that makes sense, someone who wants strong borders, who wants to stop the US from being the worlds policeman, someone who is pro-union, pro-american, ignores the social conservatism that Republicans need to let die.

He also calls it exactly like it is. While you have Obama talking about banning guns you have Trump saying things for how they are.

As far as intellectually stimulating, yeah, agree. Trump isn't Romney. He isn't going deep into the weeds with issues. Trump isn't making charts and listing an appendix. He also isn't putting people to sleep.

 

1) BobtheBaker is a fucking retard. Obama fanboi that doesn't even know the components of GDP. Shut the fuck up already.

Ok. One by one.

1) Trump is a moron.

Hmm. Ok. If you are a stuttering, inarticulate, ivy league educated liberal (aka Obama without a teleprompter) you are smart. If you are a Republican (not really), who went to an ivy league school, you are a moron.

Trump is a smart guy. He went to a great school. Runs a great business and has made a shit ton of money. He speaks simply because the majority of Americans speak this way. If you cannot explain something without complex statements you really don't know what you are talking about.

a) We need immigration reform. Illegal immigrants do not have a right to just come into this country. Go ask any of your Indian or Chinese friends what they go through to get a Visa.

b) We should ban immigration from Islamist countries until the FBI can get its head out of its ass. We have shut down immigration before (there is precedence) and we can do it again. Islamic beliefs are largely not in line with liberal, western thought. I am sorry, but women wearing burkas, stoning people, killing gays, are all not in line with the USA or Europe.

But trust me, if a Christian wants to define marriage as between a man and a woman they will be labeled radical all day.

c) we are losing on trade. Fact. Go talk to the vast majority of non-NYC/LA/SF Americans and see how this new service economy is helping people. Japan, China, etc are not open markets like we are.

Keep in mind that Trump's stance on trade is exactly the same as Kerry and other past DEMOCRAT candidates. His stance on Immigration is nearly the same as other REPUBLICAN presidential candidates.

2) Hillary is an abhorrent human being.

a) She sucked as Sect. of State. All her foreign experience is garbage.

b) Where there is smoke, there is fire. The Clinton's have had legal issues and shady dealings since Arkansas.

c) She flip flops more than a fish out of water. She is effectively a robot hooked up to a opinion poll machine.

Anyone who thinks Hillary will be good for this country must think continued, endless war in the ME is good, continued debt spending is good and further expansion of the government is good.

Trump was the best candidate this year. Romney was cardboard with good hair. Two time loser. Cruz was a bible thumping sleaze ball. Rubio was effectively Cuban Obama. Jeb Bush, get the fuck out of here. Low energy and a third Bush?!!

Trump has policies that are traditional Republican, traditional Democrat. He is a populist. He is a pro-union, pro-american worker, socially liberal, NYC Republicrat.

My prediction? Hillary wins. This country has gone down the tubes and the gimmie-state runs the show. Trump is this countries best shot at turning the course.

 

The funniest thing you put was about how Trump was smart. If you gave a donkey access to the S&P 500 he could've turned Trump's inheritance into billions. He's kind of a shitty business guy.

"It is better to have a friendship based on business, than a business based on friendship." - Rockefeller. "Live fast, die hard. Leave a good looking body." - Navy SEAL
 

Furthermore, this election comes down to 5 states. That is all that matters. Trump and Hillary are statistically tied in the battleground states.

IMO, whatever happens, Republicans are the superior party. Put forth over a dozen candidates, listened to the will of the people and stopped Bush from running. No fucking dynasties.

Democrats put two other candidates (Bernie and no one knows his name). Constantly fucked Bernie over and basically self selected Hillary. Completely predictable and boring. Another Clinton. Yay.

I just love Hillary's foreign "experience". So glad she helped overthrow Gaddafi. Libya is a much better place. No ISIS there. So happy Obama's admin pushed to overthrow Assad. No ISIS there now.

Bush is a piece of shit, but Obama continued and double downed on his garbage. I blame the guy who started it, but absolute shame on the person who continued it. Destabilized the ME, caused this migration invasion which will destroy Europe and put us on a course to bankrupt this nation.

imwithher

 
DickFuld:

We have that bizarre Trump-tard supporter back who writes pages of shit supporting one of the worst leading Presidential contenders in the history of the country. The guy acts like he's the second coming of Jesus even though he's just a silver spoon reality star.

Kim Kardashian for President in 2032!

What a moron you are.

1) I could careless about Trump himself. I care about his message. If Rubio or Cruz was saying what Trump is saying they would have had my support.

2) Trump made his money in real estate development. Calling him Kim Kardashian because he did a reality TV show late in his career is garbage. Is Mark Cuban a reality TV clown because of Shark Tank?

How about all the TV shows Obama and his wife were on? How about when the Obama's came out on the stage to fireworks like some fucking celebrity?

But I guess Republican (actually populist) = moron, but when a Democrat does it = justified media coverage.

3) Trump is the worst candidate in Presidential history? Interesting. At least Trump doesn't have blood on his hands (Hillary). At least Trump isn't married to one of only TWO presidents who have been impeached.

4) Trump is a silver spoon reality star. Interesting. I suppose Clinton's wealth, Bush's wealth, Kerry's wealth all mean nothing.

Once again. Trump wealth = silver spoon. Kerry, Clinton wealth = deserved funds.

I'll tell you what. If Kanye was talking about series illegal immigration reform, stopping illegals from entering this nation, calling the Orlando massacre exactly what it is, radical islamist terrorism, being a pro-US worker for the first time in Republican history, then I would vote for them.

Hate Trump? Cool. Blame both parties and endless policies that fuck hard working Americans.

Typical liberal though. Don't refute anything. Just call someone a retard for disagreeing and listing the points out in a systematic fashion.

Fucking loser.

 

Limited to no discussion on policy, "hot takes" on politicians & posters people don't agree with, throwaway troll accounts made specifically to spout largely baseless garbage. This is more like a political debate on the yahoo comment section, a complete shit show.

Array
 

I’ve finally had enough. The politics in this country have finally beaten me down to the point where I’m not going to vote for anyone in November. Yes, I will vote on the State amendments, but I will not be casting a single vote for anyone running for an elected office.

I have voted in every presidential election since I turned 18 years old, and I always felt like it was a privilege to do so. What has led me to this decision? Politicians on both sides of the aisle. They have effectively turned off my ability to care about the outcome, and they have made me realize that it really doesn’t matter who ends up in office because they always end up catering to the lobbies that funded their campaigns. Politicians simply do not….repeat; do NOT….care about the average American. They care about how they APPEAR to the average American, but this only applies to an election year. In 2016 politicians only care about one thing: themselves. They will cater to the lobbies that fund their campaigns with little or no regard how it will affect the country and the people in it. I can almost hear the democrats reading this post…. “This guy doesn’t realize all the things the democrats do for the poor and working poor….” really? There is not one social program that has been put in place that has actually helped the poor in this country. Every social program in America serves to keep the poor in their own economic class, just where the democrats want them. All democrats want from the poor is their vote, and how better to get their vote than by giving them ‘free’ money and other ‘free’ programs? I once saw a CNN reporter talking to two unemployed men about finding jobs. They replied, “No, we want our Obama checks!”

The republicans are no better…. they love to chant about how they want to see America grow by lowering the tax burden on businesses. Really?The same businesses that use whatever tax loop holes they can to outsource jobs overseas? The same businesses that take advantage of their workers in a bad economy by making them work longer hours for less pay and benefits because they can??

I could go on and on about both parties, and how they’re both in bed with big oil, etc. but the end result would be the same. Until the people of this country truly wake up and realize that neither political party really gives a rat’s ass about them we will never see this country move forward. The answer to this problem is to do exactly what they have done in countries like Egypt and demand reform at every level. But this will never happen here because: the people of this country don’t mind being herded about like sheep. As long as they have the latest Apple gadget, they’re happy…. as long as they can post something on Facebook, they’re happy…. politicians know this. That’s why they love it when the ‘sheep’ are busy being happy with things that don’t matter. So I will not participate in this charade anymore, and I will not vote for any one.

 

1) Nice article. Plain fact is we will not payment default. We will simply inflate our currency and repay debt with a lower valued currency. This is default. It is going to happen. Interest rates will rise which will increase the cost of carrying debt. As our national debt increases so will our cost of borrowing. Taxes will go up, the US will be less competitive and eventually we will default.

What Trump is saying is an eventual reality. Everything is absurd until it happens. Bailing out investment banks with US taxpayer funds was pretty absurd until it became policy.

2) Diversity does not make anything great. Bringing in people who not only do not assimilate with western values, but actively work to change them is what makes countries bad. See what is happening in the UK with Sharia law.

Muslims can come, but they should be vetted and they should assimilate. Islam is not the same as Christianity or Judaism. It is anarchic.

Interning US citizens is wrong. That was a violation of their US rights. Non-citizens do not have rights. Denying entry to the US is not harming them or denying their rights. Love the straw man though.

3) I support free trade. I think it is good. What we have is not free trade. We allow foreign countries to freely sell into the US. We allow US companies to outsource and seek cheaper labor elsewhere. The same is not done for the US.

Furthermore, listening to displaced Americans isn't being a demagogue, it is being a politician. Trump is pro-US labor. Companies are outsourcing for higher profit and cheaper labor. How is that benefiting anyone but the Company and shareholders?

Always love how Liberals idolize Europe, but only selectively. Europe protects their workers and industries. Europe understands about having a mixed economy. Trump supports fair trade. Simple.

4) John Oliver is shit. He is garbage. The majority of gun violence is concentrated in inner city neighborhoods. We could cut gun violence in half by simply helping these unfortunate people. We don't need to restrict a fundamental American right.

Ultimately, I don't care how many people die from gun violence. I don't care how many schools are shot up. The issue is about freedom. Millions of Americans died on foreign soil protecting the idea of America, our constitution, our fundamental rights. This country was formed because of it. Just because you like watching sensationalized news and not realizing how statistically small gun violence really is, doesn't mean taking a formative right away from citizens is correct.

I reiterate, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Just because you are afraid doesn't mean you can eliminate rights. Frankly, I wish the 1st amendment would be repealed. Nothing but fucking morons spewing shit nowadays. Leave it to liberals to want to restrict freedoms. The true fascists.

5) Frankly, I could careless if Obama has a birth certificate. He isn't representative of this nation. He has a distaste for this country and what it is about. His background is foreign to the vary majority of this country. The people he associates are unAmerican people. His comments reek of disdain. He was elected for a simple reason we all know of. And he has failed at being President. He is one of the top 5-10 worst Presidents and his gift to this country is division.

It truly is a shame that the first black president and possibly the first female president will both be the utterly worst human beings around.

You don't debate because you don't understand the facts. And for your information I don't watch TV "news". Fox is trash along with all the others.

 

"Muslims can come, but they should be vetted and they should assimilate. Islam is not the same as Christianity or Judaism. It is anarchic."

Ill just leave this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

"We allow US companies to outsource and seek cheaper labor elsewhere. The same is not done for the US."

The same not being done is a small exception, not the rule.

"Furthermore, listening to displaced Americans isn't being a demagogue, it is being a politician."

Demagoguery is an appeal to people that plays on their emotions and prejudices rather than on their rational side. Demagoguery is a manipulative approach — often associated with dictators and sleazy politicians — that appeals to the worst nature of people.

The Mexican rapist comments, Muslim ban, comments on the Judge ruling the TrumpU case are all based on prejudice

"Trump is pro-US labor. Companies are outsourcing for higher profit and cheaper labor. How is that benefiting anyone but the Company and shareholders?"

You dont understand economics. Free trade allows for imports to be cheaper allowing all Americans to purchase more.

Yes, some jobs will be replaced by competing labor forces abroad. But imagine if instead of continuing innovation, which is good for everyone in the country, we stopped because people in professions likely to be automated, like loan officers and telemarketers, were losing their jobs? What needs to happen is these people train themselves in professions in which we have the competitive advantage - we have unmatched access to education so becoming an educated professional is how you obtain job security and success while still reaping the lower cost of goods from abroad.

"John Oliver is shit. He is garbage"

More of a question here, why do you feel this way?

"He is one of the top 5-10 worst Presidents and his gift to this country is division."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/02/16/new-rank…

"You don't debate because you don't understand the facts"

What facts am I not comprehending? Are you questioning my sources or do you feel I dont understand the point you are trying to make?

 

Don't necessarily agree with banning Muslims immigration, but the sharia law stats are legit. Just google pew research sharia law / Islam xyz for sourcing - it's pretty scary actually. As far as other things that can be done, Republicans and Democrats alike can tell the NRA to pull their heads out of their asses and support some reform. There's no reason a civilian needs body armor, and there's no reason that someone on the terror watch list shouldn't be banned from owning/purchasing guns. Right now, people on the terror watch list can be put on no-fly and host of other things, but they can still purchase body armor, AR15S, etc.

I'm not saying this is solely a gun issue, but there has to be some common sense middle ground. Everyone needs to realize how extreme Islam is / combat that AND some common sense measures need to be taken.

Also, both candidates suck, but I think there may be some electoral reform coming for the next cycle. So, this won't be a complete loss.

 

Put me in charge ...

Put me in charge of food stamps. I’d get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho’s, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.

Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I’d do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligations. Then, we’ll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine and document all tattoos and piercings. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, smoke or get tats and piercings, then get a job.

Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your “home” will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.

In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a “government” job. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the “common good.”

Before you write that I’ve violated someone’s rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules.. Before you say that this would be “demeaning” and ruin their “self esteem,” consider that it wasn’t that long ago that taking someone else’s money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.

If we are expected to pay for other people’s mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

Alfred W. Evans, Gatesville, TX

 

Scanned some of the replies here. I think the problem is people take everything Trump (and every politician) says at face value. Political campaigns are not won through facts and logic but by persuasion and emotion. Trump saying he doesn't believe in global warming doesn't actually say much about his true beliefs. Every politician says what the people want to hear and moderate their positions as the election draws closer. I highly suggest reading Scott Adams' (creator of Dilbert) blog to see the invisible game Trump's been running.

 

RunBloombergRun

Director of Finance and Corporate Development: 2020 - Present Manager of FP&A and Corporate Development: 2019 - 2020 Corporate Finance, Strategy and Development: 2011 - 2019 "An investment in knowledge pays the best interest." - Benjamin Franklin
 

computerized how are we supposed to assess him then? He has no voting record like a congress-person would... I love how the people claiming they will vote for the dude are doing so under the assumption that he WON'T do many of the things he has stated he will do (trade war, defaulting on debt)... this begs the question, why the fk are you voting for him then... if you have to hope his policies won't pass then you probably shouldn't vote for him, if you have to hope he will reverse stance/ lighten his views then you probably shouldn't vote for him. Unless you agree with draconian tariffs, govt. sponsored surveillance of Muslims (both American citizens and otherwise), large tax cuts with no way to pay for them, and a completely unclear foreign policy you shouldn't vote for him. Moody's just released a report stating his policies (as they could ascertain since he is not-so-coincidentally vague) on trade/taxation will send the United States into recession, I had to sit and listen to someone on CNBC talk about how congress won't allow him to pass his proposals so he will "hold his nose" and vote Trump. This is the kind of partisan bullshit I'm talking about, who votes for someone and actively hopes Congress does not pass their policies. Just ridiculous.

Array
 

It's true it's hard to assess how Trump will actually do and what kind of proposals he'll actually pull out in office. But you can say the same for pretty much every political candidate. Just look at Obama and compare what he promised to what he actually did.

Think of it this way: When things are smooth sailing, you generally want to keep the status quo and avoid risk. So if you like the direction the US has been going in and want to see largely more of the same, vote for Hillary. If you dislike how it's been going, vote for Trump.

I say all this as an outsider that can't vote (Canadian living in the US) so I'd like to think I'm somewhat unbiased. In fact it might even be better for me personally if Trump weren't elected because apparently he wants to eliminate NAFTA which would eliminate the TN Visa.

 

"I'm a fiscal conservative and am socially liberal (small government, legalize everything, that sorta thing), so I have no idea who I'm voting for (or if I'm even voting)."

Fiscally conservative and socially liberal is the definition of a libertarian. Throw in small government and legalization and you are a libertarian. While I strongly dislike Hillary and Trump I like the Libertarian nominee, Gary Johnson, who is running with Bill Weld. They are both former republicans and Johnson is currently the governor of New Mexico and a former entrepreneur. He wants to cut taxes and make huge cuts to the national debt. As a free-market capitalist I was immediately hooked after reading about Libertarians and I strongly suggest you do some research. Johnson just did a town hall with CNN.

 

I love most of the Libertarian stances and I would have no problem voting Libertarian in the pre-9/11 world (I have voted Libertarian before). The problem for me is that they are way to liberal on the migrant/muslim situation. I don't want the United States to ever lose it's culture i.e. London and I cannot stand these people looking to remove all borders, "global citizen" types. It's an insane idea to me. If we start letting in millions of muslim Syrians who cannot clearly be vetted as to safety it will be disastrous for this country. Beside the possible ISIS threat, Muslims refuse to assimilate and as @Virginia Tech 4ever" mentioned, their beliefs do not jive with the US constitution, especially the giant percent of Sharia law promoters.

If it wasn't for that I could vote Libertarian every election.

 

adapt or die 1.) The culture of the United States is a culture of having multiple cultures... 2.) Less borders = less war, the EU essentially removed borders and that continent that was constantly at war with one another has been chill all of a sudden. 3.) I love this discussion of "millions" of Syrians being allowed in the country, this yr. we will take in around 10,000, 67% of those being women and children. 4.) Assimilation for non-white immigrants is just not that simple, how "assimilated" are Vietnamese immigrants? How "assimilated" are indian immigrants? Coexistence/ integration should be the goal not "assimilation".

Array
 

That's crazy. The historic culture of the United States is immigrants coming for better opportunities. To claim that the EU is peaceful right now because of an open border policy is hysterical. Plenty of countries have physical borders and eastern European countries are building their own as well. Immigration is probably one of the most important things dividing the EU because of Merkel. Even the UK, which has been filled with refugees/immigrants for ages, voted out of the EU. What happens when figures much stronger than Farage, like Le Pen, start their crusade to leave?

Hillary looks to increase refugee intake tremendously. Terrorism isn't restricted to one gender and all the immigrants you've listed have assimilated just fine. Assimilation is not a complete surrender of your original culture.

 

gezora look at the educational split in the EU vote for Britain and tell me a lot of these antiEU/ anti-immigration aren't the uneducated. Also, that article is from Nov. 2015... I am just exhausted of the hyperbole going on in this campaign. People are acting like they just let anyone in, untrue. A majority of refugees are not even combat-age males (26%). You have people talking about millions of Syrians being let in when in reality it isn't even 1% of that number. Let's just agree to disagree.

Array
 
BobTheBaker:

@gezora look at the educational split in the EU vote for Britain and tell me a lot of these antiEU/ anti-immigration aren't the uneducated. Also, that article is from Nov. 2015... I am just exhausted of the hyperbole going on in this campaign. People are acting like they just let anyone in, untrue. A majority of refugees are not even combat-age males (26%). You have people talking about millions of Syrians being let in when in reality it isn't even 1% of that number. Let's just agree to disagree.

From my personal observations, leftist opinion correlates heavily with age, and education also heavily correlates with age, so I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that anyone of a more conservative opinion is less intelligent. I typically find that people become more right leaning as they age. Many of those uneducated pro-brexit voters may have been very left leaning in their early twenties.
 

Let’s look at why the tax system is so unfair shall we?

Joe loser never did shit in school and has no motivation so he has a 20k a yr job.

So he makes 20k, but gets a 3700.00 exemption and a 5950.00 standard deduction.

So he pays TAXES on $10,350.00

He pays 10% on his income up to 8700.00 so that’s $870.00 in taxes. He pays 15% on the amount over 8700 which is $247.50.

Total federal taxes owed…$1117.50 / $20,000 is 5.5875% tax.

Same scenario single mom….well she would be MAKING MONEY on the tax system…

$20,000-$8700 head of household standard deduction, minus her 3700 exemption, minus baby 3700 exemption, is $390 in tax owed. Plus the $1000 child credit…

She just paid ZERO FEDERAL INCOME TAX and got $610 from some other taxpayer. She paid -3% tax!!!

 

After the Paris Attacks, the hashtag #notallmuslims became popular on twitter and for solid reasoning, no person should be villanized or singled out for the actions of someone else who happens to share religion. But if we agree on this set of logic, the issue occurs because the same people who use this argument then argue that all cops are pigs despite only isolated cases of police brutality.

People became furious about a private business refusing to serve gays but then defend Facebook's censoring of conservative news.

The "Stop Victim Shaming" crowd yells that Trump fans deserve to be attacked.

I had a professor show a clip about how the racist English drew borders that grouped different ideologies and peoples in the Middle East and how that is the cause of the turmoil. But then she argues in favor of multiculturalism for the E.U.

Arguments that fail to hold the same logic are also present on the right but you won't be called a dumb racist for failing to agree with them.

 
adapt or die:

I'm wondering what the liberal think tank here (border free, global citizens) think about the bombing in Istanbul. Still ready for the migrants to move into your neighborhood unvetted?

Don't worry. They'll be here soon enough to call you racist for even asking about it.

UTDFinanceGuy:

The funniest thing you put was about how Trump was smart. If you gave a donkey access to the S&P 500 he could've turned Trump's inheritance into billions. He's kind of a shitty business guy.

The funniest thing is that you're in finance. Or maybe your qualifications begin and end with Reddit Wall St Bets. If Trump had indexed the 1 million, he would've had $20 million.

If he had liquidated his father's company he would've had $40 million which, at very best (and very unlikely), would've earned him 3 billion. Safest bet would be $800 billion The S&P 500 has only grown 20-fold since he's taken over. Why do people come here who aren't even in the field?

 

I'm not a U.S. citizen so I cannot vote, but if I had the right, I would've been on the Trump train simply because he at least acknowledges that America is going into a wrong direction and that Obama and Hilary will only exacerbate the problems. Also, a president is just one pillar of power in the U.S. (and for many other countries) so he cannot simply implement all his presidential promises, one of the reasons why people opposes to him.

For trade, he's right in some aspects and wrong in some others. For issues related with China, he cannot move back the cheap-labor based manufacturing jobs to the U.S. However, he is right that China is heavily subsidizing their companies which give them unfair advantages: this is not free trade and he needs deal with this problem. Sooner or later, China will kill every company and every people in the world because of their low environmental standards in manufacturing that are polluting the earth unabated. China's air and water pollution situation is almost catastrophic. Also with the money they have earned by the generous world letting them in the free trade, these guys are building a Fortress in the middle of sea and acting as a bully to neighbor countries. Also they are testing all kind of nuclear weapons and keep assaulting Tibet. The world should no longer tolerate these behaviors even though we get into an outright military war with these guys. Also, Trump is right that China is protecting their domestic market in many silly ways. If this continues, the world should unite and ban any trade with China even though the world experiences a -10% slump in GDP for many years to come.

For immigration policies, I think he's absolutely right. Documentation needs to be in place because America needs to protect their citizens from potential "trojan horses." The gun issue is already killing the life quality in the States, so why make it worse by letting them in? Instead, as what Trump proposed, set up a special zone in Syria and let the world take care of them there. Also, the so-called "anchor baby" should be abolished. America can only prosper as a nation when the immigrants know the value of what is being an American, not by letting immigrants to cunningly obtain citizenship and let them pass along their cunning behaviour to their children. The children of these cunning moms do not deserve this at their birth. For H1B Visa issue, I also agree with Trump. Many coveted entry level jobs should belong to the American citizens. However, in STEM majors, which requires master's or phd, America should try hard to keep them and Americanize them so that they cannot pass along their knowledge and experience in their respective countries. For these areas, America should actually expand and make it easier for them to stay in the U.S.

Foreign policy is where I differ from Trump the most, but it doesn't mean that Obama or Hilary would be any better. In fact, Obama's and Hilary's foreign policy has been a complete failure. Marco Rubio said that Obama viewed America as an arrogant power so that its influence should be reduced and that's how Obama gradually reduced its clout in foreign matters. The reality is, the world needs America's leadership because without it, we will only allow bully countries like China to take over. The world does not deserve this, especially given that it is the world as a whole who has given rise to China, and America, along with its allies, should get serious on containing the power of this new communist BSD (big swinging dXXX). However, what Trump is trying to do is, he is trying to isolate itself from the rest of the world at a time when he needs work together with its allies. Yes, America is a self-sustaining economy so it can do without the world to some extent, but prosperity will decline even for the U.S if they lose their allies or their allies being killed by China or Russia. So, maintain NATO and contain Russia, maintain troops in Asia to contain China. What I expect is though, Trump will not pull out any of its troops and will maybe probably get a better deal out of it and will still maintain the integrity of the world stability by containing bully nations. This is why I would still vote for Trump even though he says dangerous and politically unpalatable statements. And again, he's only one pillar of the political system. With checks and balances and smart advisors around, he will make sensible decisions that are unaffected by any special interest groups.

 

I think this post does not look past an economic standpoint, although obviously important, on Trump. Simply put, the man is sexist, as he says "it must be a pretty site when you are on your knees" and multiple other references to woman. I know some of you are thinking "haha that's kind of funny," but at the same time you are probably going to be that guy who is a father one day and whose daughter is called a slut at school, or simply referenced to as a piece of meat that guys want to have sex with and don't care about at all. I am sure this will change your perspective from when you work a first year analyst coughing up a week's salary to impress some girls that you bought a table at a club for doing excel work anyone could do.

In addition, Trump is racist in the sense that he calls for a ban on all Muslims, including those who would be intelligent, hardworking, and tax paying citizens, instead of just calling a ban on immigration from places where there has been radical Islam (which I might disagree with but could understand the other side of that argument). Also, on social policy, who gives a fuck if gay people marry its fucking 2016, how the hell does that effect your life. And abortion was settled like 40 years ago, just let it go, if a girl who is 19 and can't afford a baby but has a career ahead of her let her make that decision by herself.

As far as economic policies, sorry but the U.S. will never be a manufacturing country again, so high tariffs and trade restrictions would only hurt the U.S. in the future. Also, I think people forgot how the world has changed since the 1950's, when Europe was devastated and Asia was a fucking backwater swamp. The U.S. accounted for around 50 percent of the GDP in the world and had a competitive advantage in almost everything. The world economy is a global one and unfortunately some people are being left behind who lack the skills needed to compete. That's why we need extensive reeducation efforts for backwoods rednecks, instead of trying to bring coal mining back.

Hope you enjoyed some of my points. Welcome to criticism, as long as its well thought out of course.

 

I have an opinion on Trump v Hillary that I'll leave aside but if Trump's the nominee the Senate Repubs should really think about letting Scalia's replacement go to a vote and approving someone because they'd at least have a say and get a moderate in there. I think there's a real danger of the Dems taking back the Senate if Trump's at the top of the ticket and if Hillary's nominating with a Dem controlled Senate they can shove a real liberal justice in there, and have another 2-3 possible SC nominations in the coming years. If over the next few week it looks like Trump could get the nod I'd play the odds if I were the GOP and get the SC process going.

But I, like a lot of other people, have been so dead wrong on Trump since he first threw his hat in the ring that there's a good possibility I'm wrong.

 

The guy is an EXTREMELY good persuasive debater. I don't know whether or not he will become president but he is slamming the GOP nominees pretty good and putting everyone in between a rock and hard place in the debates.

 

As a strong conservative, I'd end up voting for Clinton if it came down to her vs Trump. Everything Trump pushes is off of the basis of fear. I mean look at this whole iPhone scandal, his comments about muslims, and so on. Sure Hilary is shit, I'm not denying that, but at least she is respectable in the sense that she maintains herself and does not belittle entire demographics. On top of that, Hilary will just hold the office for 4 years. That's the "positive" with her being elected. No damage done sort of speak. She's pro-wallstreet too. No matter how many times she says she isn't, we all know she is. Hell, she even spoke at GS. At the end of the day, Trump isn't a politician, he's a businessman who nows how to sell. And right now, he's selling himself to the GOP voters. Doing a pretty good job too. Now if Bernie wins the nomination, I'll be voting for Trump. I refuse to let a man into office who is against the very principles this country was founded on.

 

Trump is an absolute genius at persuasion and rhetoric. In fact, I'd say his persuasive abilities are eerily similar to those of Adolf Hitler. This is scary, given the parallels between his policy positions and rhetoric, and those of fascists like Hitler.

If you listen to the way Trump speaks, he is the complete opposite of politicians. Politicians speak, yet say nothing. Trump speaks and at the same time, says EVERYTHING. In the same, vague response, he will say one thing and also say the exact opposite. He does it because it allows the people listening to tailor what he says to whatever it is they want to hear.

One day he will advocate for war crimes and say that not only should we bomb terrorists, but we should also bomb their families and children, regardless of whether or not they are innocent. The next day he will turn around and say that we should get out of the middle east and let Putin do all of the work, and instead spend all of that money on crumbling infrastructure back home.

This way, he doesn't need to convince anyone of any policy positions (regardless of the fact he has none, lol). People can convince themselves that he's advocating for whatever it is they want, even though he has no policy positions.

 

This quote from Trump is an example of some of the poorest English I've ever read.

Also Trump does specifically state that the "strong" people "can handle" seeing war, death, etc. Meaning the "weak" cannot and then encounter mental problems such as PTSD. This idea contributes to the view that having mental problems is somehow "weak," which is a terrible way to fix mental issues with our veterans.

 

He said that some veterans who witnessed combat could come home and be OK, but others couldn't. It was an effort to shine light on PTSD and the problems vets have.

Leave it to the worthless propaganda machine aka US "news" to spin it this way.

 

He said that some people are "strong" and come back fine. I think some people took that as implying that soldiers who get PTSD are weak. As a Clinton supporter, I didn't really read his speech that way but can totally see how someone could.

I think the more interesting thing to note here is how, even in fairly benign speeches, Trump cannot say the right things. If he can't get a simple speech about veterans' health right, imagine how much he could offend a foreign leader in a state dinner.

"There's nothing you can do if you're too scared to try." - Nickel Creek
 

Okay, just to clarify Trump's comments from yesterday:

I only posted this example because it was the most recent example of him putting his foot in his mouth. It was by no means his most egregious gaffe. I found it amusing because he can't even be respectful to one group (in this case, the group in front of him to whom he was pandering) without being disrespectful to another group of people (returning veterans who aren't as "strong" as the group he was pandering to). All of this coming from another rich kid who was too good to serve, a la Dick Cheney.

Again, by no means the worst thing he's said, only the most recent.

cc: Hugh Myron @TNA"

 

How is him answering a question on PTSD not being respectful? I'm fairly certain whatever gaffe he might have is far worse than actually sending service members to die ala Bush, Clinton, and Obama.

I'd also be willing to bet the military is going to overwhelmingly vote for Trump.

So Trump not serving is a dig against him huh. Didn't realize Hillary, Obama, Bush, Clinton, or Romney were in spec ops.

 
computerized:

Trump's words taken out of context has received more coverage than Hillary's apparent nixing of a Libya peace deal. Hard to take the mainstream media seriously these days.

Bingo. It's pretty pathetic that literally every single news agency is 24/7 anti trump news meanwhile Hillary who shows disdain for a large chunk of Americans on both sides, whose policies have caused havok in the ME, who pretends to not know about her email issue even though more and more comes out every day, who obviously implemented pay for play while in the dept of state, who has been under investigation since day one in office in Arkansas, whose husband is a rapist, who takes endless money from big banks and then condems Wells Fargo.

Best thing to come from this election cycle is to highlight how worthless the "news" is.

Can't wait for Hillary to get elected and a full scale war in Syria to begin. Hopefully the service members who she's paying to pretend to be offended are feeling great when we destabilize another ME country.

 

BTW. The joke that is CNBC has been talking about Trump all fucking week. God forbid a financial "news" station talks about financial news during market hours. Who cares about the pound going below $1.30, OPEC cuts, auto sales softening or anything relevant to the financial markets.

 

It's been a personal philosophy of mine to avoid consuming as much news as possible. It's depressing, misleading, and 99% irrelevant to your personal situation. For many people it's just another form of mindless entertainment. I don't buy into the notion that you have to keep up with the news to "be a good citizen" either. If an issue is truly important I'm going to hear about it one way or another and if I wanted to be informed on a particular subject I can read books/articles that will provide far greater education than soundbites or biased coverage will.

What's worse is that most people aren't even aware how biased most media is. You think of NYT/CNN/CNBC and you'd like to think these are orgs who care about factual, objective reporting, but then you see what's been happening this election season and realize they're all shills with their own interests in mind. People make fun of Fox for being obviously conservative-biased but some of the most important issues are literally only being covered by conservative media these days.

 
Eddie Braverman:

16 comments in and we still don't have a single one addressing the premise of the post.

This is why we can't have nice things.

I read about this a while back. I don't think it's an issue this election, but Trump basically running in a populist platform shows you could have three legit parties in the future. I forget the specifics, but if you win, but without a majority it goes to your scenario.

This election will go R or D. It's gonna be a small win for either side. The future looks a lot more uncertain though.

As for libertarian candidates, while I love and support it, you're not going to get more than a small number of people to support it. Too many people on both sides who depend on the dole to get behind a libertarian platform. Sad, but unfortunately true.

 

Defend Trump because you think he will upend the current political order, defend him because you think he has a real solution for immigration, defend him because you think some of his statements on allies contributing more are accurate, defend him because you believe China is waging economic war with us and he can do something about it. But to defend the ludicrous statements he makes (the Obama birther shit, the Khan family, his McCain comments, his Megyn Kelly feud, implying the election is rigged) as "media spin" tells me you are either a delusional moron or such a Trump sycophant that you're purposefully ignoring reality.

p.s. this electoral scenario is so improbable it probably isn't worth discussing but I suppose maybe a recall vote with no third party candidates in the ballot or just roll with who won the popular vote would be the best solution.

Array
 
BobTheBaker:

Defend Trump because you think he will upend the current political order, defend him because you think he has a real solution for immigration, defend him because you think some of his statements on allies contributing more are accurate, defend him because you believe China is waging economic war with us and he can do something about it. But to defend the ludicrous statements he makes (the Obama birther shit, the Khan family, his McCain comments, his Megyn Kelly feud, implying the election is rigged) as "media spin" tells me you are either a delusional moron or such a Trump sycophant that you're purposefully ignoring reality.

Didn't see where any of those topics were being covered. But cool.

Khan family, he should have ignored them. It was an obvious bullshit move by Hillary and he took the bait.

McCain. I think he's a sell out, but he's definitely a war hero. Should have moved on.

Kelly fued - what's the issue? She went after him and he went after her. As if anyone voting for Hillary gives a shit about trump going after a fox news shill.

Now lets talk about the thousands who have died because of Hillarys foreign policy. I'm sure that's just as bad as talking shit.

 

Thoughtful and insightful. Thank You.

I would argue that "too much" Democracy has never been a bigger issue than it is right now. I would point to the current election, but that is too easy, and I think this is an anomaly for a number of reasons, rather than a consequence.

I think a better example would be to consider the high level trend of specialization. When the Constitution was written in 1787, government service comprised war heroes, aristocrats, writers, poets, merchants, industrialists, bankers, lawyers, and many people were many of these things. Nearly all educated. For the most part career politician did not exist (at least anywhere near the degree it does today).

I don't mean to minimalize the issues they faced, as they were of course very large and far above the head of an uneducated farmer. IE funding the national war debt with a central bank. Consolidating trade power on a federal rather than state level. The theory on these types of things was largely undeveloped, and definitely not well understood by the public. How could an uneducated farmer be given the power to elect someone who has no idea how to begin to think about these issues? This is part of the reason why "too much Democracy" was seen as a bad thing.

The other part was to ensure that the Majority could not conspire to steal the rights of the minority. In quasi- marxist terms, the bottom 51% of the population would take the property of the top 10%, Then the new 51% would take the new 10% ad infitum. No wealth allowed.

Given the chance, do you think that a simple majority in the US today would take everything from the top 1%? I do.

Back to the former point, the degree of specialization in today's society has only increased. Scientists are scientists, writers are writers, industrialists are industrialists. Almost the best one can do successfully is marry an industry expertise with a business expertise, (ie engineering - CEO of construction firm, Petroleum Engineer - A&D banker) and even being educated in this highly specialized manner does not prepare you to make good decisions on the economic benefits of soft-power aid to countries that fund our military enemies, and how about nuclear strategy during America's relative decline, Russia's international bad-acting and China's Rise?

The issues we face are hyper-specialized. In fact, the politicians do not understand them often I believe, and certainly the public cannot be expected to elect a politician to come down on the best side of the issue, when they don't understand it in the first place. Moreover, most of the best decisions are difficult and unpopular. More democracy will always choose the easier, softer path, and in today's world the right choice is harder to understand and more difficult given our relative decline.

 

I concur with realjackryan that I'm fairly skeptical of direct democracy--in fact, I think it's a demonstrable failure. California is a prime example of a basketcase government resulting largely from the referendum process (i.e. the electorate voting itself benefits but not increasing taxes enough to pay for those benefits).

Read this article today. While I disagree with the author on the Brexit and Hungarian immigration vote outcomes (I agreed with the electorate), his assertions about the weakness of direct democracy are immutable:

https://geopoliticalfutures.com/the-use-and-abuse-of-referendums/

The [American] founders did not trust politicians. They also did not trust the people. They understood that the public could be as venal, ignorant and corrupt as politicians. They also understood that the public could experience as much fractiousness and mutual hatred as politicians. There was nothing magical in the people, save that the people were to form a more perfect union.
Array
 

I think that the chances of Johnson winning a congressional vote is slim to none. If Congress were to vote for a candidate that didn't win the popular vote, there would be rioting. Congressmen/women know that their votes are public, and that voting against the popular vote would be a major black mark.

"There's nothing you can do if you're too scared to try." - Nickel Creek
 

If the election went to congress it gives me hope that they might award it to Evan McMullin - independent candidate, a congressional foreign policy analyst, former CIA officer, and former GS analyst. I think he was also on WSO at one point.

@VirginiaTech4ever halfway through Obama's presidency was also when Russia invaded Ukraine - maybe that had more to do with our anti-Russian sentiment than homophobia.

 
luv2speed:

If the election went to congress it gives me hope that they might award it to Evan McMullin - independent candidate, a congressional foreign policy analyst, former CIA officer, and former GS analyst. I think he was also on WSO at one point.

@VirginiaTech4ever halfway through Obama's presidency was also when Russia invaded Ukraine - maybe that had more to do with our anti-Russian sentiment than homophobia.

You're aware that Russia invaded Georgia in 2008 and continues to occupy it, right? You also realize that the Obama administration's backing of the anti-Russian coup pre-dated the invasion of Ukraine, right?

Array
 

And Braverman, nah sorry. Hillary is going to win. They are literally calling up Americans abroad to register and vote for her. They are speeding up naturalizations. They are even recruiting the dead.

Never discuss with idiots, first they drag you at their level, then they beat you with experience.
 

Eius dolor suscipit illum totam deserunt soluta nobis vitae. Animi tempore ipsa at quas neque. Non qui ipsum sunt est qui odit voluptatum.

Quos eum magnam autem. Numquam et est qui sit expedita. Ut officia debitis non eligendi facere aut aut consectetur.

Enim aspernatur doloribus et quaerat dolore eveniet dolores odio. Aut facere tenetur possimus quo nemo qui. Voluptate illum deleniti placeat aut doloribus incidunt labore.

Fugit debitis fuga quia est sit officiis ea. Voluptas numquam voluptas id numquam vitae veniam illum. Est illo dolor quia fugiat voluptatum.

 

Nulla molestias maxime minus rem impedit quae reiciendis numquam. Voluptatem architecto dicta eaque fuga dolor quas iste ut. Dolores ipsum blanditiis autem dolores error. Consequuntur voluptas illum amet. Hic ut nam aliquid architecto ipsam. Autem eligendi dolore aut sed. Mollitia velit doloribus consequuntur voluptatem.

Et doloribus facilis perferendis non beatae. Eaque minus nam nam sunt sed ex non. Ipsum aut et ab similique. Ratione voluptas numquam architecto magnam iusto.

Array

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
9
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”