2016 Election. Policies

[DARKPLACE]

I've been trying to follow the run up to the election from the UK. As far as I can find neither of the big two have outlined anything that looks like a comprehensive list of policies they intend to follow once they are elected. Have they actually released such a thing?

[Cambronnne]

I think Hillary's policy is:


Vote For Hillary!




And no one gets hurt.

[slick_miester]

Both parties published "platforms" at their nominating conventions this past summer.

2016 Republican National Convention Platform

2016 Democratic National Convention Platform

These platforms are binding on neither the presidential nominees nor any party member running for any office at any level. Their production can be, nevertheless, quite contentious during the conventions.

[Arnold J Rimmer]

I've been trying to follow the run up to the election from the UK. As far as I can find neither of the big two have outlined anything that looks like a comprehensive list of policies they intend to follow once they are elected. Have they actually released such a thing?

This campaign is more about the candidates than policies. Part of that is the fact that campaign promises have become so discredited over the years that they don't garner a lot of voter support.

[Skoblin]

This campaign is more about the candidates than policies. Part of that is the fact that campaign promises have become so discredited over the years that they don't garner a lot of voter support.

This election really comes down to who is likely to be worse
Worst case scenarios
Trump: 4 years of dysfunctional government coupled with gaffes of various sorts
Clinton: 4 years of endemic corruption coupled with needless foreign wars
I'll take the former....

[The Exorcist]

Both parties published "platforms" at their nominating conventions this past summer.

2016 Republican National Convention Platform

2016 Democratic National Convention Platform

And that's how you answer a thread!

Good job, now on to the next thing.

[DARKPLACE]

Both parties published "platforms" at their nominating conventions this past summer.

2016 Republican National Convention Platform

2016 Democratic National Convention Platform

These platforms are binding on neither the presidential nominees nor any party member running for any office at any level. Their production can be, nevertheless, quite contentious during the conventions.

Cheers mate. So basically the US isn't going to know for sure till who ever gets elected tells them?

[DARKPLACE]

This campaign is more about the candidates than policies. Part of that is the fact that campaign promises have become so discredited over the years that they don't garner a lot of voter support.

Cheers for that,mste. I have to admit that it seems like a choice between the frying pan and the fire. I am really glad that I am not involved in it other than as an innocent bystander.

[17thfabn]

I've been trying to follow the run up to the election from the UK. As far as I can find neither of the big two have outlined anything that looks like a comprehensive list of policies they intend to follow once they are elected. Have they actually released such a thing?

To a large extent their policies are meaningless.

For example Mrs. Clinton has proposed free public college for the vast majority of people, lowering the age for medicare to 55 and making all your dreams come true. But if congress doesn't pass these things they don't happen.

[DARKPLACE]

To a large extent their policies are meaningless.

For example Mrs. Clinton has proposed free public college for the vast majority of people, lowering the age for medicare to 55 and making all your dreams come true. But if congress doesn't pass these things they don't happen.

So what's the story with Congress? Which way do you see that jumping? Because from outside it looks like your best result would be a deadlock? President from one party and Congress dominated by the opposition?

[17thfabn]

So what's the story with Congress? Which way do you see that jumping? Because from outside it looks like your best result would be a deadlock? President from one party and Congress dominated by the opposition?

The U.S. House of Representatives appears to be staying under Republican control.

The U.S. Senator looks like it could go either way.

So if the Democrat Mrs. Clinton doesn't lose she would face an opposition Congress and possibly also a Senate controlled by the other party.

If the trumpian party candidate doesn't lose he would face a congress controlled by a party that he is theoretically a part of and a senate that is in the hands of either the opposition or a party that is theoretically on his side.

Control of the senate is a bigger deal because they have more power than the house.

[DARKPLACE]

The U.S. House of Representatives appears to be staying under Republican control.

The U.S. Senator looks like it could go either way.

So if the Democrat Mrs. Clinton doesn't lose she would face an opposition Congress and possibly also a Senate controlled by the other party.

If the trumpian party candidate doesn't lose he would face a congress controlled by a party that he is theoretically a part of and a senate that is in the hands of either the opposition or a party that is theoretically on his side.

Control of the senate is a bigger deal because they have more power than the house.

Is there any chance of a swing to the republicans because of Trump do you think? I realise that the bulk of the party old guard seem to want to field any other candidate other than Trump. But from what I see from here Trump seems to be attracting the people who had stopped voting or become disenchanted with the political process. Do you think that that could have a knock on effect in that people might be going to vote for the Republicans because they see it as Trumps party?

You could end up with a president and his party at war or a complete shift within the republican party to bring it into line with whatever Trumps policy is.

[Jannie]

Hillary Clinton has an official website at https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/ where her issues are gone into.

This appears to be Donald Trump’s campaign site: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions

This may not be a neutral site but I do like AARP magazine and bulletin so here is a summation of each candidate’s positions
http://www.aarp.org/politics-society...cmp=AE-HP-WFY1

[G David Bock]

After paying the Intertest on The Debt, what's left of current revenue we spend to our own desire and what goes on the National Credit Card? The USA is basically broke and it's something of guess how long our politicians can play this game, but ...

Clinton and the Democrats come from the wealth redistribusion~Taker side of the economic equation, so don't look for policies that will grow wealth, GDP, or show real signifigant economic gain. If you are among those looking to get what you can before it's gone, here's your hope.

Trump has some experience and success at making/creating wealth so here's the candidate and party mostly likely to find a way to help the economy produce wealth, grow GDP, aquaire health, etc. Not a 100% quarantee and no way to gauge by how much this early on, but at least not the negative score most likey from his opposition.

Big question unanawered is how long these figures can continue to grow;
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

[slick_miester]

Cheers mate. So basically the US isn't going to know for sure till who ever gets elected tells them?

Pretty much. For one thing, all candidates promise things that, constitutionally, that can't deliver. Changes in taxes, for example, must be enacted by Congress. The executive alone can not change tax policy -- yet every presidential candidate makes all kinds of promises with regards to taxes. Are the voters dumb enough to swallow it? It only stands to reason that the great majority of voters took the same civics classes that I did, so they should know what a president can and cannot do -- yet even the talking heads in the Fourth Estate almost never declare a candidate's campaign platform unconstitutional. The shame of it is, both within the precincts of the media and the general electorate, we're no longer interested in laws, but in personalities. For all the smoke and noise, US political campaigns are not at all particularly revealing. They've proven to be a monumental waste of time.

So what's the story with Congress? Which way do you see that jumping? Because from outside it looks like your best result would be a deadlock? President from one party and Congress dominated by the opposition?

Like a previous poster said, it seems pretty unlikely that the US House of Representatives will change parties as a result of this election. The GOP's margin may change, but they'll still hold a majority after 8 Nov. The US Senate, on the other hand is much tougher to call. Currently the GOP enjoys an eight seat majority. According to Real Clear Politics, there are are 16 Senate seats in play, of which six are currently too close to call. It's conceivable that the "top of the ticket" (ie the presidential candidates) can influence some down-ticket races via the "coat-tail" effect, but under the present chaotic conditions, that can only be discerned on a race-by-race basis. If I were to guess, I'd say that Hillary's candidacy will prove more beneficial to various Democrats than will Trump's to various Republicans, but I'm no expert, and even if I were, this election cycle has pretty much broken all the rules, so even the experts have been left slack-jawed by this year's race.