Hillary Clinton could still win the presidency

[Eol Sha]

How to conduct international relations is a subjective. And you can be too weak and passive. Again this is a welcome change. Clearly acting weak and passive before China does not work. Some one needs to stand up to them.

I'm sorry I'm getting some whiplash here. Weren't Trump voters in favour of closer ties between the US and Russia to prevent war, but now they're happy the US is standing up to China?

Near 0%.

So you're telling me there's a chance.

Yes, I am. It's microscopic, but even microscopic organisms can be seen.

[Arlenton]

Let me ask you this, what are the chances of the electoral collage going against trump?

If by that you mean enough EC electors going against Trump to make him not be president, I'd say about .04%.

[Eol Sha]

How to conduct international relations is a subjective. And you can be too weak and passive. Again this is a welcome change. Clearly acting weak and passive before China does not work. Some one needs to stand up to them.

I'm sorry I'm getting some whiplash here. Weren't Trump voters in favour of closer ties between the US and Russia to prevent war, but now they're happy the US is standing up to China?

Well, the point of standing up to China is to pressure companies and corporations to bring back jobs to dying and dilapidated towns. Not to start a world war over Syria.

[Mad hatters in jeans]

I'm sorry I'm getting some whiplash here. Weren't Trump voters in favour of closer ties between the US and Russia to prevent war, but now they're happy the US is standing up to China?

Well, the point of standing up to China is to pressure companies and corporations to bring back jobs to dying and dilapidated towns. Not to start a world war over Syria

So instead of starting a world war over Syria Trump wants to start a world war over Taiwan?

And somehow this translates to jobs in the Rust belt how?

[Novus America]

How to conduct international relations is a subjective. And you can be too weak and passive. Again this is a welcome change. Clearly acting weak and passive before China does not work. Some one needs to stand up to them.

I'm sorry I'm getting some whiplash here. Weren't Trump voters in favour of closer ties between the US and Russia to prevent war, but now they're happy the US is standing up to China?

Near 0%.

So you're telling me there's a chance.

Yes, because China is cause a huge amount of damage to the US, Russia is not. Sure Russia has done some messed up things to Ukraine and Syria but those are not in the US. Also China's nuclear arsenal is small. Now I am not as pro Russia as many people, and I think Trump is too pro Russia, but I am against starting a war with them over Syria. I do not want a war with China either, just a more equitable trading relationship. And them to stop being dicks to Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines. I would also like Russia to stop being a dick to Ukraine and Georgia, but trade is more important to the US.

[Arlenton]

Well, the point of standing up to China is to pressure companies and corporations to bring back jobs to dying and dilapidated towns. Not to start a world war over Syria

So instead of starting a world war over Syria Trump wants to start a world war over Taiwan?

And somehow this translates to jobs in the Rust belt how?

The demand for military equipment would skyrocket. Workers would need to build tanks, aircraft, ships, weapons, etc.

[Novus America]

Well, the point of standing up to China is to pressure companies and corporations to bring back jobs to dying and dilapidated towns. Not to start a world war over Syria

So instead of starting a world war over Syria Trump wants to start a world war over Taiwan?

And somehow this translates to jobs in the Rust belt how?

Umm that is not going to start a World War. China is not going to start a World War over Taiwan.

Also China does not have any military forces in Taiwan, and nobody is talking about bombing Taiwan. Just talking to their president. I am supportive of talking to people. Not bombing them unless absolutely necessary.

[Uxupox]

Well, the point of standing up to China is to pressure companies and corporations to bring back jobs to dying and dilapidated towns. Not to start a world war over Syria

So instead of starting a world war over Syria Trump wants to start a world war over Taiwan?

And somehow this translates to jobs in the Rust belt how?

No fly zone over Syria or talking with the ROC President. Hmmmmmmmmmmm

[Eol Sha]

Well, the point of standing up to China is to pressure companies and corporations to bring back jobs to dying and dilapidated towns. Not to start a world war over Syria

So instead of starting a world war over Syria Trump wants to start a world war over Taiwan?

And somehow this translates to jobs in the Rust belt how?

I think you're connecting a yellow dot and a red square and claiming it's part of the same data set.

I think Trump's diehard supporters would happily toss Taiwan over to China if it meant the return of jobs that left for other states or other countries.

[Eol Sha]

So instead of starting a world war over Syria Trump wants to start a world war over Taiwan?

And somehow this translates to jobs in the Rust belt how?

Umm that is not going to start a World War. China is not going to start a World War over Taiwan.

At most, it'd be a regional war concentrated in East Asia.

[Eol Sha]

I'm sorry I'm getting some whiplash here. Weren't Trump voters in favour of closer ties between the US and Russia to prevent war, but now they're happy the US is standing up to China?



So you're telling me there's a chance.

Yes, because China is cause a huge amount of damage to the US, Russia is not. Sure Russia has done some messed up things to Ukraine and Syria but those are not in the US. Also China's nuclear arsenal is small. Now I am not as pro Russia as many people, and I think Trump is too pro Russia, but I am against starting a war with them over Syria. I do not want a war with China either, just a more equitable trading relationship. And them to stop being dicks to Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines. I would also like Russia to stop being a dick to Ukraine and Georgia, but trade is more important to the US.

Rodrigo Duterte seems to disagree with you on his nation's relationship with the Philippines.

[Novus America]

Yes, because China is cause a huge amount of damage to the US, Russia is not. Sure Russia has done some messed up things to Ukraine and Syria but those are not in the US. Also China's nuclear arsenal is small. Now I am not as pro Russia as many people, and I think Trump is too pro Russia, but I am against starting a war with them over Syria. I do not want a war with China either, just a more equitable trading relationship. And them to stop being dicks to Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines. I would also like Russia to stop being a dick to Ukraine and Georgia, but trade is more important to the US.

Rodrigo Duterte seems to disagree with you on his nation's relationship with the Philippines.

Well he is not the Philippines. Yes, he seems willing to let China fuck over the Philippines. Just like Clinton, Bush II and Obama were eager to let China fuck over the US.
Just because a president is willing to sell out a country does not make it good.

[Novus America]

So instead of starting a world war over Syria Trump wants to start a world war over Taiwan?

And somehow this translates to jobs in the Rust belt how?

I think you're connecting a yellow dot and a red square and claiming it's part of the same data set.

I think Trump's diehard supporters would happily toss Taiwan over to China if it meant the return of jobs that left for other states or other countries.

And honestly I would too. I mean it is mean, but if China got Taiwan and we got our jobs back, that is a trade I would make. But it is not as simple as that of course, and being friendly with Taiwan gives us leverage to use against China.

[East Klent]

I think you're connecting a yellow dot and a red square and claiming it's part of the same data set.

I think Trump's diehard supporters would happily toss Taiwan over to China if it meant the return of jobs that left for other states or other countries.

And honestly I would too. I mean it is mean, but if China got Taiwan and we got our jobs back, that is a trade I would make. But it is not as simple as that of course, and being friendly with Taiwan gives us leverage to use against China.

Yes, it very well could give us leverage. It could also just as easily piss them off enough to retaliate, beyond rhetoric and flybys.

[Eol Sha]

I think you're connecting a yellow dot and a red square and claiming it's part of the same data set.

I think Trump's diehard supporters would happily toss Taiwan over to China if it meant the return of jobs that left for other states or other countries.

And honestly I would too. I mean it is mean, but if China got Taiwan and we got our jobs back, that is a trade I would make. But it is not as simple as that of course, and being friendly with Taiwan gives us leverage to use against China.

The issue being that those jobs are unlikely to return to the places they were moved even if they were moved back to the US at all.

[Novus America]

And honestly I would too. I mean it is mean, but if China got Taiwan and we got our jobs back, that is a trade I would make. But it is not as simple as that of course, and being friendly with Taiwan gives us leverage to use against China.

Yes, it very well could give us leverage. It could also just as easily piss them off enough to retaliate, beyond rhetoric and flybys.

Well them retaliating would hurt us more than them. On trade for example, it is already so lopsided in their favor, they have no room to maneuver. It could cost as 100 billion, but could cost them half a trillion. We need as much leverage as possible to shift things back to a more equitable stance.

[The Scarian Defense Fronts]

She is not going to win the election.
Most of the "muh Russia" argument is hearsay that only became popularized by the DNC (btw, there is no solid evidence the Russians even got involved)
The rogue elector argument is the only practical way of her winning, and it is slim to none.

Trump will be the next president, folks.
Stop rolling around, if you wanted someone else, you should've campaigned harder and in key blue states as well.

By God, quit whining already.

AND A QUICK NOTE

Moving on rather than screaming and crying over a past election guarantees you a better chance in 2020.

[Eol Sha]

Yes, it very well could give us leverage. It could also just as easily piss them off enough to retaliate, beyond rhetoric and flybys.

Well them retaliating would hurt us more than them. On trade for example, it is already so lopsided in their favor, they have no room to maneuver. It could cost as 100 billion, but could cost them half a trillion. We need as much leverage as possible to shift things back to a more equitable stance.

At the end of the day, I don't think the CCP would risk all the money they and their benefactors get just for a small island and 22 million rebellious Chinese people.

[San Lumen]

a attorney general who is a racist and is against the voting rights act? the exxon mobil CEO as Secretary of State a climate change denier as EPA administrator, a opponent of public schools as head of Education? What lovely qualified picks

Sounds good to me. I'm all for state's rights and gun rights(makes me racist for some reason but whatever) so Sessions looks great, I was skeptical of Tillerson because I didn't know him but now that Dick Cheney and Jeb Bush have endorsed him I figure he's got what it takes, I'm all for rolling back EPA, and I'm a supporter of school choice. And you didn't even mention General Mattis at all. Very nice picks indeed.

So your against the voting rights act and think everything it outlawed and changed should be brought back? And are against clean air and water?

[East Klent]

Yes, it very well could give us leverage. It could also just as easily piss them off enough to retaliate, beyond rhetoric and flybys.

Well them retaliating would hurt us more than them. On trade for example, it is already so lopsided in their favor, they have no room to maneuver. It could cost as 100 billion, but could cost them half a trillion. We need as much leverage as possible to shift things back to a more equitable stance.

Logically speaking yes, but Taiwan is such a cultural sore point with them I'm not entirely certain they wouldn't do something out sheer national pride despite the possible consequences.

[Novus America]

And honestly I would too. I mean it is mean, but if China got Taiwan and we got our jobs back, that is a trade I would make. But it is not as simple as that of course, and being friendly with Taiwan gives us leverage to use against China.

The issue being that those jobs are unlikely to return to the places they were moved even if they were moved back to the US at all.

Well some would probably. It is cheaper to build a factory on land already built, zoned, and prepared for a factory, or with a factory already there, then try to get it in a place that never had one before.
Some not, but some do not need to.
As long as the jobs come here, they do not have to go to the same exact spots obviously. In some case the factory has been converted to an apartment for example, and rezoned as residential. In that case it makes not sense to build a factory there. But we have no lack of good places to build factories.

[Novus America]

Well them retaliating would hurt us more than them. On trade for example, it is already so lopsided in their favor, they have no room to maneuver. It could cost as 100 billion, but could cost them half a trillion. We need as much leverage as possible to shift things back to a more equitable stance.

Logically speaking yes, but Taiwan is such a cultural sore point with them I'm not entirely certain they wouldn't do something out sheer national pride despite the possible consequences.

And if they did, it would actually hugely benefit US manufacturing and hurt Chinese manufacturing. So I am okay with that. If they want to be stupid and play into our hands, okay.

Exports are added to GDP, imports subtracted. If we lose 100 hundred billion in exports, and they lose 200 billion, US GDP goes UP 100 billion.

[East Klent]

She is not going to win the election.
Most of the "muh Russia" argument is hearsay that only became popularized by the DNC (btw, there is no solid evidence the Russians even got involved)
The rogue elector argument is the only practical way of her winning, and it is slim to none.

Trump will be the next president, folks.
Stop rolling around, if you wanted someone else, you should've campaigned harder and in key blue states as well.

By God, quit whining already.

AND A QUICK NOTE

Moving on rather than screaming and crying over a past election guarantees you a better chance in 2020.

People whined under Bill, they whined under W., they whined under Obama and they'll whine under Trump too. Freedom of speech means having the freedom to whine; whether you're in the right or not doesn't enter into it.

[Arlenton]

Sounds good to me. I'm all for state's rights and gun rights(makes me racist for some reason but whatever) so Sessions looks great, I was skeptical of Tillerson because I didn't know him but now that Dick Cheney and Jeb Bush have endorsed him I figure he's got what it takes, I'm all for rolling back EPA, and I'm a supporter of school choice. And you didn't even mention General Mattis at all. Very nice picks indeed.

So your against the voting rights act and think everything it outlawed and changed should be brought back? And are against clean air and water?

Voting rights act? Not necessarily. I'm all for voter ID laws though.

Clean air and water acts are reasonable and necessary, IMO. But increasing regulations and taxes on the fossil fuels industry I am against. Along with many other things of the EPA.

[East Klent]

Logically speaking yes, but Taiwan is such a cultural sore point with them I'm not entirely certain they wouldn't do something out sheer national pride despite the possible consequences.

And if they did, it would actually hugely benefit US manufacturing and hurt Chinese manufacturing. So I am okay with that. If they want to be stupid and play into our hands, okay.

War as a tool of economic benefit. Talk about a morally gray area.