I actually think OP is one of the better ones when it comes to debating/arguing. My short time here on this board, I've seen people advocating war crimes, homophobia, blatant racism, etc. The OP is definitely much better imo.

GE is all about electoral college. Whoever gets 270 wins. The states below are Clinton states with high probability based on results from the past three elections; 04 Result, 08 Result, 12 Result. Total Electoral Votes: 353. I high-light the ones that are so blue no amount of Trump can turn them red. Also states like Nevada, Colorado, Florida, VA, and New Mexico were pale blue to begin with, and will likely be blue as they have a large amount of non-white voters. Ohio is likely to be blue if Trump is the nominee; Michigan will be blue especially after what happened in Flint and Rick Snyder. We are already close to the winning mark. Fact is Trump is unpopular one foot outside his base, with 0 popularity with the minority (of course it doesn't seem this way here ;). So I don't think the math is with him.
California (55) –(D) 54%-44%, (D) 61%-37%, 37%, (D) 60%-37%
Colorado (9) - (R) 52%-47%, (D) 54%-45%, (D) 51%-46%
Connecticut (7) – (D) 54%-44%, (D) 61%-38%, (D) 58%-41%
Delaware (3) – (D) 53%-46%, (D) 62%-37%, (D) 59%-40%
Florida (29) - (R) 52%-49%, (D) 51%-48%, (D) 50%-49%
Hawaii (4) – (D) 54%-45%, (D) 72%-27%, (D) 71%-28%
Illinois (20) – (D) 55%-45%, (D) 62%-37%, (D) 58%-41%
Iowa (6) - (R) 50%-49%, (D) 54%-44%, (D) 52%-46%
Maine (4) – (D) 54%-45%, (D) 58%-40%, (D) 56%-41%
Maryland (10) – (D) 56%-43%, (D) 62%-37%, (D) 62%-37%
Massachusetts (11) – (D) 62%-37%, (D) 62%-36%, (D) 61%-38%
Michigan (16) – (D) 51%-48%, (D) 57%-41%, (D) 54%-45%
Minnesota (10) – (D) 51%-48%, (D) 54%-44%, (D) 53%-45%
Nevada (6) – (R) 51%-48%, (D) 55%-43%, (D) 52%-46%
New Hampshire (4) - (D) 50%-49%, (D) 54%-45%, (D) 52%-46%
New Mexico (5) – (R) 50%-49%, (D) 57%-42%, (D) 53%-43%
New Jersey (14) – (D) 53%-46%, (D) 57%-42%, (D) 58%-41%
New York (29) – (D) 58%-40%, (D) 63%-36%, (D) 63%-35%
North Carolina (15) - (R) 56%-44%, (D) 50%-49%, (R) 50%-48%
Ohio (18) - (R) 51%-49%, (D) 52%-47%, (D) 51%-48%
Oregon (7) – (D) 52%-47%, (D) 57%-40%, (D) 54%-42%
Pennsylvania (20) - (D) 51%-49%, (D) 55%-44%, (D) 52%-47%
Rhode Island (4) – (D) 59%-39%, (D) 63%-35%, (D) 63%-35%
Vermont (3) – (D) 59%-39%, (D) 68%-30%, (D) 67%-31%
Virginia (13) – (R) 54%-46, (D) 53%-46%, (D) 51%-47%
Washington (12) – (D) 53%-46%, (D) 58%-41%, (D) 57%-41%
Wisconsin (10) - (D) 50%-49%, (D) 56%-42%, (D) 53%-46%

回复 [url=http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=1987505&postid=71129215#71129215]96楼icylava的帖子[/url] Oh dear Trump is no Reagan. And the dem party now is no Nixon era party. But you're right nothing is impossible. I will eat my words when I see blacks and Latinos come out in droves voting for Trump. :-)

kasich和cruz都是渔翁得利型的，Rubio和Jeb当董存瑞了。Rubio在没比手大手小的时候表现比Cruz还是略好的，Kasich一直debate中装哑巴没人注意到他才survive到现在，并不能说明他们自身多优秀（话说其实Cruz当个律师表现也还不错，这个要承认, supreme court露过好几次脸了）。但跟重要的是他们没有一个人能像Trump这样wild card不按常理出牌，所以没可能赢希拉里的

真心没觉得欧洲人民现在安居乐业。。。可能MM每次都去买爱马仕看到的和我等穷游的学生是不一样的吧

至于宏观政策，我个人觉得欧洲加拿大现在的福利政策已经远超过了“适度“两字，财富均分的结果就是资源配置效率严重低下，经济增长失去动力，因为不付出劳动也可以获得相等的财富。MM如果读完101再看看别的就会发现政府干预的初衷是要减轻市场的不完善，使得市场更有效率，而不是取代市场进行资源配置


lilpurple 发表于 3/18/2016 9:28:15 PM [url=http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=1987505&postid=71129498#71129498][/url]

为啥mm觉得社会现状是福利造成 而不是贫富不均造成？.1% has like 60% of the wealth ?You don't have to answer my question .. I told myself I will stay away with talking politics on huaren :p

政府干预会加剧社会的福利损失，因为减低了人们就业的积极性，既然有低保可以吃，何必去费事找工作呢，还要交税。所以这一部分人永远在贫困线上徘徊，反而加剧了贫富分化

还有就是论坛上和媒体上说过很多次的了，福利的资金来源于税收，很大一部分是中产在支付，而不是那1%，1%的各种社会和政治资源能够在很大程度上规避税收负担。这样对中产是最不公平的。


lilpurple 发表于 3/18/2016 9:42:13 PM [url=http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=1987505&postid=71129614#71129614][/url]

So the solution is to cut the 1%er even more taxes? Under the illusion that they're gona create jobs and trickle the wealth down to the middle and lower classes? Reagan sold it to the public, JWB perpetuated it. But every single stat has proven them wrong.

举个最简单的例子，以现在的法律，美国公司的海外盈利只要不拿回美国本土就不用交税，那谁还会拿回来给美国政府交税。你看看苹果在海外有多少钱不拿回来交税。美国的税收基础哪里来，对美国的经济和就业没有任何好处。

ScottishFold 发表于 3/18/2016 9:52:50 PM [url=http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=1987505&postid=71129701#71129701][/url]

I posted this awhile back but it seems fitting here
'
Not sure if you know much about corp finance, but I will try:

Most big companies are in fact a collection of subsidiaries, and the tax rates for the subsidiaries depend on where they reside. A company could have a parent company based somewhere, but the geography the parent doesn't help the company not pay tax at the subsidiary level. Simply put, if Google domiciled to Cayman, its parent company might pay a lower rate of corporation tax but its US subsidiary would still pay US rates for the business conducted in the USA. They would not leave the USA, because it is by far the largest market in the world, and for most US companies their principal source of income. They could choose to move its parent companies, but that would have minimal effect on jobs or actual tax paid, and if the US could simply change taxation treaties to remove any potential benefit from doing so.

Additionally, leaving the US means leaving the stability of the US financial system.

Finally, If they leave, new businesses will take their place. They don't want to risk the extra competition.
'

我发现天涯这些赞习近平的帖子，把习近平都改成Trump，简直就是量身定做的：

紧跟trump走，
58届春风凯奏。
反腐倡廉，
O8拉里皆大贪。
trump怒吼!
全逮双开贪吏抖。
风口浪尖，
法不容情收监。

朵朵花儿向太阳，
古稀人意志刚强。
希明独舞高歌唱，
trump的恩情永不忘。


盛世归休世一流，
琴棋书画极娱优。
能歌善舞倾杯乐，
笑傲风情度百秋。


trump真擎，
大众称。
无私无畏好，
奋斗一生荣。
引领潮流先，
高新实干胜。
军民财第一，
欧亚日呆瞪

真福神 发表于 3/19/2016 12:31:18 AM [url=http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=1987505&postid=71131088#71131088][/url]

噗嗤 财神mm表闹了