was Hiliary Clinton prefarable than Donald Trump ?

Dee

To me they are both dreadful human beings , I remember on holiday several years ago watching Hillary and Don go at each other in a debate and it was truly embarrassing like watching two spoiled children in a schoolyard fighting over candy , I truly felt sorry for decent Americans who had these two despicable human beings as the best options for president.

I think from that night on America lost an awful lot of international respect as people worldwide watched as one of these despicable wretches became president and turned the U S into a big international joke  

MayCaesar

People do not seem to realise that who the president is has very little impact on the actual policies. If you look at the last 30 years, there have been no major upsets there, and the overall political trends towards slow expansion of the government have been fairly steady.

The US is a fairly unique country in that the free market here is the determinant of policy changes. We are not, say, the UK, with their traditional governmental supremacy. Here, private companies and individuals have a huge impact on the political process, and their interests do not change much over time.
In addition, decentralisation is fairly strong, and states and municipalities have a lot of power to counter undesirable federal proposals.

In this context, the difference between Clinton and Trump is mostly rhetorical. If Clinton was the US president and not Trump, barely anything would have changed. Perhaps some policies would be different, but those differences would be remedied after the next election.

Life becomes much easier once you realise that all these political games are mostly just that - games - and your life is barely affected by who is currently in the White House. I immigrated to the US when Obama was president and lived under his "rule" for 2.5 years; now it has been 3 years of living under Trump's "rule", and I do not see any difference. Chances are, I will not see any difference after 2020 either, even if someone insane like Sanders or Yang wins. They can talk all they want, but they are not kings and cannot do whatever they want just because they promised something to the voters.

YUVRAJBHOSALE

this debate is about the contrary between this two. so who is better?

Dee

@YUVRAJBHOSALE

How can one say when they’re  both terrible? It like asking which is preferable cancer or a stroke 

BaconToes

MayCaesar said:

Chances are, I will not see any difference after 2020 either, even if someone insane like Sanders or Yang wins. They can talk all they want, but they are not kings and cannot do whatever they want just because they promised something to the voters.

There is a reason why there is an executive branch of the government. If you truly believe that they have no lasting effect over the country, you are misguided. 

Again, Yang isn't "insane" nor is Bernie, although he is a lot more liberal than Yang. UBI is a non-partisan issue and Yang is similarly pragmatist. 

See: https://debateisland.com/discussion/4231/should-the-u-s-provide-a-universal-basic-income-to-its-citizens

MayCaesar

@BaconToes

Neither Yang nor Bernie have anything to do with liberalism, in my opinion. They are both soft authoritarians who want to put people's lives under control and make everyone dependent on the government. It is not liberalism, it is authoritarianism.
Trump is somewhat authoritarian as well, but it seems that his enterpreneurial experience holds his controlling urges back.

The executive branch merely does the bidding of the legislative branch. Presidents may talk big, but at the end of the day their power is limited by the Congress, and they have to constantly compromise to get anything done.

Mark my words: 10 years from now the situation in the US will be largely the same as it is now, and aside from the new technologies available and higher quality of life due to economical growth, people will not see any difference in their lives. You can quote me on this. Politics in the US and other free market-based systems does not play as big a role in people's lives as the sensationalist media would have you think, and while on very large time scales (i.e. 20-30 years) some systematic effects may arise, mostly the system is balanced. Only in the exceptional cases, such as California run by hardcore statists for 30+ years straight, can politics truly affect people's lives significantly, and even then the effects are usually blown out of proportion.

AlofRI

That's like asking if life is preferable to death, if a Russian type oligarchy is preferable to our democracy!  We are losing the latter, and times a wastin' ! The free world can't help laughing about Donald Trump, while wondering about our sanity!

Hillary's gone. We must not make a second mistake. For all her faults ….. we ended up with hundreds more!

John_C_87

YUVRAJBHOSALE said:

I AM AGAINST IT.

We can’t fight bat sh!t crazy with sanity and politics is some crazy as$ crap. I’m voting for Donna Tulip and whoever wants my vote must legally change their name. By the way what is it that you do not favor nd are against?