Tramp and Klinton

[Igor]

Our media are writing that Trump has accused Clinton in creation of islamic state. He told that Obama trusted Clinton in this question thus Clinton is guilty.
KGB, Smursh and may be other Americans who is watching this primaries, what do you think about both contenders, who is who from them, what inner and foreign policy can they bring?

[Igor]

Surprised there is no comments here.
Would like to see Trump will win. Just interesting to see what he will do

[Moonknight]

Most people don't like either candidate, but Trump is a greedy, hot-headed bully.

I can see why you'd like to see him in office...although if I lived in another country and Trump was at the helm of nuclear missiles, I'd be very afraid. I know I'm afraid of what might happen.

[Igor]

If Trump will win, what policy can he bring to United States and to the world?
And what Clinton will do if she will win?

[smursh]

As usual election is between giant douche and a turd sandwich.

Personally I will vote for the giant douche because voting for a turd sandwich, well - it's a turd sandwich!

[Igor]

The same method I use for choosing a TV-channel to watch.
You guys love your candidates

[KGB]

The choices appear to be a 'self promoting blowhard' or a 'lying bitch who stands for nothing'.

In reality this election is a vote 'for' (Clinton) or 'against' (Trump) the political establishment. Trump is an outsider that both Republican and Democrat 'party' elites despise because he's not one of them and they can't control him (a lot of people think he'll suffer a JFK moment if he does win). That's exactly why he is so popular with his followers because they see someone who is going to shake things up for better or worse instead of the same old thing that we currently get from both parties.

Incidentally Trump will never go to war. At least not any kind that involves nuclear. The man's made a career out of being a deal maker so he's going to believe he can always broker a deal. On the other hand a trade war is a distinct possibility. Clinton most definitely will get the US into a ground war someplace because she's already done it before in Libya.

KGB

[Igor]

Looks that USA grows own debt from year to year when the country spends more than she earns. If so, may be USA realy need much to do before the country will step into financial catastrophe, and a candidate, who can stop the growth of the debt, will help the country much. What each of 2 candidates think of this?

I have also heared that election in USA is built by another way than one in Russia, when Americans choose only special persons who will then vote for one or for another candidate, thus the opinion of a chosen person can be different than opinions of mass of people which chose this person. If so, this can be easy field for corruption among these chosen special persons. What do Americans think about this system of election?

[KGB]

Neither candidate will do much about stopping the growth of debt. That's because much of that debt growth is related to the fact the US Dollar is the worlds reserve currency. This is a mathematical certainty dictated by global trade because for all countries that want to run an export surplus (Germany, China etc) some other countries MUST run an export deficit.

Americans alone do not determine their rates of savings and consumption. Think of an open, global economy as having one huge, aggregated amount of income that must all be consumed, saved or invested. That means individual countries must adjust to one another. If trade-surplus countries suppress their own consumption and use their excess savings to accumulate dollars, trade-deficit countries must absorb those excess savings to finance their excess consumption or investment.

Note that as long as the dollar is the reserve currency, America’s trade deficit can worsen even when we’re not directly in on the trade. Suppose South Korea runs a surplus with Brazil. By storing its surplus export revenues in Treasury bonds, South Korea nudges up the relative value of the dollar against our competitors’ currencies, and our trade deficit increases, even though the original transaction had nothing to do with the United States.

These articles by a PhD Economist explain it in more detail.

http://www.financialsense.com/contribut ... ant-burden
http://www.financialsense.com/contribut ... ystem-last


As for the election, you must first understand that the US is *not* a true democracy (Ancient Greece is the only example I know). It's is a representative one with the Electoral College. This comes from back in the 1700's when it was impractical for all the people to gather and vote. So each state would send representative's based on their population (eg, 1 representative for every 1 million people). So what happens is that each of the 50 states gets so many representatives based on it's population. Those representatives are supposed to ALL vote the same way: for the candidate who got the most votes in that state (so if in Florida, Trump gets 5,000,001 votes and Clinton gets 5,000,000 then Trump wins and gets all votes for that state (10).

It is possible all 10 wouldn't vote for Trump in my above example but because those votes are public it's not possible to 'cheat' without everyone knowing about it. Thus in reality it's not going to happen because if it did Trump would demand that the representatives get replaced with ones who would vote for him.

KGB

[Igor]

Many countries have reserves in Dollars. What USD will do if these countries will start to lose trust in Dollar and will start to sell Treasuries, will it be possible that USA will not be able to pay for the debt? If so USA will be forced to 'print' a lot of additional Dollars to pay for debt, price of Dollar will go down and other countries will also sell it. This looks like financial catastrophe when no one will trust Dollar anymore. Have USA a defense of this variant?

If Electoral College's votes are open this looks good and may be even more good than when everyone votes for himself where election commission can manipulate by votes.
In the same time our media tell that there is a variant that Trump will win among voters but can lose among electors. Is it a horror story or it has a real base?