News Breaking Down the 2016 POTUS Race Contenders & Issues

[axmls]

Transcript:...
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-july-24-2016-n615706

US immigration lulls in the past:

This doesn't really say much. The world population is ~6 times higher now than it was in, say, 1850, and the American population is ~25 times higher. It's also easier now to get to America than it's ever been just in terms of transportation. This is exactly what one would expect, even including the understandable drop in immigration during the Great Depression and the largest war in human history. In fact, the amount of immigration as a percentage of the American population could be at a low point.

 

[mheslep]

This doesn't really say much. The world population is ~6 times higher now than it was in, say, 1850, and the American population is ~25 times higher. It's also easier now to get to America than it's ever been just in terms of transportation. This is exactly what one would expect, even including the understandable drop in immigration during the Great Depression and the largest war in human history. In fact, the amount of immigration as a percentage of the American population could be at a low point.

The graph shows that US immigration can be cut dramatically, as the cuts shown were largely an act of will, i.e. they were brought about largely by changes to US immigration law and policy at the time. With respect to legal immigration into the US, set by quotas: total US population, world population, and air travel are irrelevant.

1917
Added to the exclusion list were illiterates, persons of psychopathic inferiority, men as well as women entering for immoral purposes, alcoholics, stowaways, and vagrants.

1921
The first quantitative immigration law was adopted. It set temporary annual quotas according to nationality. A book review of Not Like Us: Immigrants and Minorities in America, 1890-1924, which discusses this period is available here.

1924
The first permanent immigration quota law established a preference quota system, nonquota status, and consular control system. It also established the Border Patrol.

1929
The annual quotas of the 1924 Act were made permanent.
...
1952
The multiple laws which governed immigration and naturalization to that time were brought into one comprehensive statute. It (1) reaffirmed the national origins quota system, (2) limited immigration from the Eastern Hemisphere while leaving the Western Hemisphere unrestricted, (3) established preferences for skilled workers and relatives of U.S. citizens and permanent resident aliens; and (4) tightened security and screening standards and procedures.

http://www.fairus.org/facts/us_laws

 

[mheslep]

Leonard Pitts commentary on the RNC.

who comments:

...so disconnected from fact, logic or decency...

and then goes on to say in a major newspaper, with police officers being assassinated in the streets and with mass terror attacks in Orlando and San Bernardino, that calls for "law and order" are actually unsubtle, recycled racism. The bit about the GOP's platform will 'commit it to support "conversion therapy"' in the GOP platform is factually untrue, it's not in there, and his comparison of ISIS like attacks on gays to the GOP platform is evil. Pitts has gone beyond being a race agitator to being out-there delusional.

 

[Rick21383]

who comments:

and then goes on to say in a major newspaper, with police officers being assassinated in the streets and with mass terror attacks in Orlando and San Bernardino, that calls for "law and order" are actually unsubtle, recycled racism. The bit about the GOP's platform will 'commit it to support "conversion therapy"' in the GOP platform is factually untrue, it's not in there, and his comparison of ISIS like attacks on gays to the GOP platform is evil. Pitts has gone beyond being a race agitator to being out-there delusional.

No offense to Atronuc personally but he continues to post "click bait" articles, that are often from questionable sources, soley because they fit his narrative. It's sad that so many otherwise intelligent people on here are completey brainwashed by the media and fail to form opinions based on actual facts. There are others on here doing the same thing... it's not just him. But they're living in a fantasy world.

The reality is that trump's speech was pretty darn good, his children showed amazingly well, giuliani brought down the house, christie was on point, pence was better than anyone expected, and cruz's nonsense was unifying. oh, and no--literally no--protest nonsense.

It helped, not at all hurt, that RIGHT after trump's speech, the next day, the media made a big to-do about the "darkness" of trump's vision AS people were dying from terror in germany.

But of course all of this went right over the heads of liberals.

The DNC leaks + Clinton hiring DWS as she resigns in shame... and she was just booed off the stage!

The DNC is looking like a complete disaster in comparison.

The only two people on here that seem to possesses the ability to look at all sides and form an objective opinion based on facts are Jim Hardy and Russ Watters. And the funny thing is, one seems to be leaning towards Trump and the other is not at all a "Trump fan" (based on my observations, I certainly don't know either of them personally).

 

[Rick21383]

and now we have a DNC spreadsheet showing plans to reward big donors with federal appointments...

I'd say the DNC is not doing much better! :D

 

[Dotini]

IMO, the DNC email revelations have changed everything. If the Clinton nomination/Democratic convention is to be salvaged, Bernie must be on the ticket.Latest polling:

According to a CNN/ORC poll:

- Donald Trump leads Hillary Clinton, 48 percent-45 percent.

- Trump leads Clinton, 44 percent-39 percent. Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein trail both at 9 percent and 3 percent, respectively.

According to an LA Times/USC poll:

- Trump leads Clinton, 45 percent-41 percent.

According to a CBS News poll:

- Trump leads Clinton, 44 percent-43 percent.

- Trump leads Clinton, 40 percent-39 percent. Johnson trails both at 12 percent.

According to an Economist/YouGov poll:

- Clinton leads Trump, 47 percent-42 percent.

- Clinton leads Trump, 40 percent-38 percent. Johnson and Stein trail both at 5 percent and 3 percent, respectively.

So a major shift in favor of Trump coincidentally after Clinton chose her running mate.

 

[Evo]

IMO, the DNC email revelations have changed everything. If the Clinton nomination/Democratic convention is to be salvaged, Bernie must be on the ticket.Latest polling:

Trump is enjoying what is known as a
convention bump", not much, overall, Trump average is 44.3, Clinton is 44.1

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

With Sanders throwing in with Clinton now, we'll see.

I can imagine what an e-mail hack of Trump would do. It hasn't changed my mind at all, from what I've been reading, it hasn't changed the minds of many people. The fact that the Russians fear Clinton enough to want to get Trump into office says it all. Watching now on tv the experts say no doubt the fingerprints clearly show it was from Russian intelligence. It should scare anyone into voting for Clinton, IMO. The Russians want Trump, per watching the news, sorry no link to that yet, live broadcast, I'm sure we'll have it in writing in the next day or two.

Here's a link. http://abcnews.go.com/International/reasonable-doubt-russians-hacked-dnc-analyst/story?id=40863292

 

[russ_watters]

IMO, the DNC email revelations have changed everything. If the Clinton nomination/Democratic convention is to be salvaged, Bernie must be on the ticket.

I doubt that will matter to many people. I would expect that most people assume the "establishment" of their party does its best to get their favored candidate nominated. For my part, I preferred McCain over Bush in the Republican primary in 2000 and while I was annoyed by my perception that the "establishment" supported Bush over McCain I voted for Bush in the general election anyway.

 

[Evo]

I doubt that will matter to many people. I would expect that most people assume the "establishment" of their party does its best to get their favored candidate nominated. For my part, I preferred McCain over Bush in the Republican primary in 2000 and while I was annoyed by my perception that the "establishment" supported Bush over McCain I voted for Bush in the general election anyway.

I voted Bush, I just felt he was the best choice. I will always vote what I feel is the best choice. And that includes the VP. When McCain went up against Obama and chose Palin, it was worse than choosing Bozo the clown.

 

[nsaspook]

The start of day one.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/us/politics/dnc-speakers-protests-sanders.html?_r=0

Democrats were supposed to be forging a unified front this week to take on Donald J. Trump, the Republican nominee. But instead, more than 1,000 supporters of Mr. Sanders took to the scalding streets of Philadelphia to vent their frustration, with some adopting a Republican rallying cry about Mrs. Clinton: “Lock her up!”

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-idUSKCN105101

Trump gloated at the Democrats' opening day disorder.

"Wow, the Republican Convention went so smoothly compared to the Dems total mess," he wrote on Twitter.

Great entertainment.

 

[Astronuc]

NAIROBI (Reuters) - "President Barack Obama's half-brother, Malik Obama, says he will vote for Republican nominee Donald Trump in the U.S. election in November because he likes the candidate and he is unhappy with his brother's leadership."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/obamas-brother-says-vote-trump-111755691.html

Malik, a U.S. citizen, has lived in Washington since 1985 where he worked with various firms before becoming an independent financial consultant.

He criticized President Obama's record in the White House saying he had not done much for the American people and his extended family despite the high expectations that accompanied his election in 2008, both in the United States and Kenya.

 

[Evo]

The start of day one.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/us/politics/dnc-speakers-protests-sanders.html?_r=0http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-idUSKCN105101Great entertainment.

A few nuts not allowed inside the convention, considering the numbers in the convention.

 

[Evo]

A few nuts not allowed inside the convention, considering the numbers in the convention.

I've been watching the Democratic convention, WOW, I've been brought to tears several times, awesome!

 

[Astronuc]

DNC chair will no longer speak at her party's convention after damaging email revelations
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/dnc-chair-no-longer-speak-161024338.html

"Well, I think it's outrageous, but it is not a great shock to me. I think, as I said, it's what we talked about six months ago," Sanders told CNN on Sunday. "I mean, there's no question to my mind and I think no question to any objective observer's mind that the DNC was supporting Hillary Clinton, was in opposition to our campaign."

The leak is certain to http://hsrd.yahoo.com/RV=1/RE=1470710734/RH=aHNyZC55YWhvby5jb20-/RB=/RU=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5idXNpbmVzc2luc2lkZXIuY29tL2RlbW9jcmF0cy11bml0ZWQtY29udmVudGlvbi1zYW5kZXJzLTIwMTYtNwA-/RS=%5EADAmBuTCWeIUCNW5r0dJByA1c5VwhI- and Sanders supporters as the party attempts to unify itself this week at the Philadelphia convention.

This morning I heard members of the Florida delegation, ostensibly Sanders supporters, jeering/booing Wasserman Schultz. Later this afternoon, I heard reports of Clinton's name receiving jeers/boos from some convention members, again apparently Sanders supporters, but also some opposed to TPP.

 

[Evo]

Michele Obama's speech was incredible. It will be something that will be spread around, maybe Trump's wife will want her speech writer to check it out. Also the speech by Sen. Cory Baker, I think he will be the next Presidential candidate, I cried, heck I'd vote for him now. It looked like he made Bill Clinton cry.

 

[jim hardy]

The Russians want Trump, per watching the news, sorry no link to that yet, live broadcast,

only 51 seconds


this one is ~ 5 minutes, first 1:49 , and 3:28 thru end are worth the time.


here's a snip of the end

 

[jim hardy]

i fixed my inappropriate link in post 794 , if anybody was curious .

 

[Rick21383]

I've been watching the Democratic convention, WOW, I've been brought to tears several times, awesome!

Were you crying because Bernie was outted as a fraud or because they shamelessly paraded out a girl in a wheelchair?

Michelle did an excellent job though, I'll give you that.

 

[1oldman2]

A quote popular from the days of R. Nixon keeps coming to mind as our latest political crisis unfolds, "What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive"

 

[Evo]

Were you crying because Bernie was outted as a fraud or because they shamelessly paraded out a girl in a wheelchair?

I don't like Bernie, and I don't know what you're talking about., nor do I care. I missed the girl. What's wrong with handicapped people?

Michelle did an excellent job though, I'll give you that.[/QUOTE]So did Sen. Cory Baker.

 

[DiracPool]

i fixed my inappropriate link in post 794 , if anybody was curious .

Well, that's no fun. Now I don't know what was inappropriate about it because you fixed it.

 

[jim hardy]

I don't know what was inappropriate about it because you fixed it.

https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...contenders-issues.831913/page-40#post-5527522

It cited an article that appeared in "The Washington Examiner" which is a niche journal not a mainstream source.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Examiner

The target market for the weekly magazine is the "45,000 government, public affairs, advocacy, academia and political professionals in Washington, DC, and state capitals."[2]

The Examiner has a politically active audience. The Examiner's readership was found to be more likely to sign a petition, contact a politician, attend a political rally, or participate in a government advocacy group than the readerships of other political publications including The Weekly Standard, Roll Call, Politico, and The Hill.[8]

The Examiner has a high earning and highly educated audience with 26% holding a master's or postgraduate degree and a large percentage earning over $500,000 annually, likely to be working in executive or senior management positions.[8]

.. found their source and used it instead.
"Always drink upstream from the herd."

 

[DiracPool]

"Always drink upstream from the herd."

Ha, see, now I'm the wiser. The upstream water does taste a little sweeter.

 

[Rick21383]

I don't like Bernie, and I don't know what you're talking about., nor do I care. I missed the girl. What's wrong with handicapped people?

Michelle did an excellent job though, I'll give you that.

That was directed more at the convention itself rather than you personally. But the fact that you said you were in tears proves the point... that their game plan was to go all out on emotional manipulation.

The fact that they paraded out a crippled immigrant like a puppet, script and all, for the sole purpose of gaining sympathy, is beyond pathetic in my opinion. There is nothing wrong with handicapped people... there is something very wrong with taking advantage of one for a political agenda, which is exactly what they did.

I'm not a fan of Bernie either. But I find it hilarious that Hillary thought she'd be able to buy him off and snatch his supporters. She did successfully buy him off, but the vast majority of his supporters are irate... especially after the email leak.

 

[DiracPool]

Is it just me, or does this Anthony Wiener guy just give you the creeps? He seems like a tense powder keg that's going to explode at any second:

 

[RonL]

Ha, see, now I'm the wiser. The upstream water does taste a little sweeter.

But you miss out on all the sweet tea nutrients that the cows developed

 

[DiracPool]

But you miss out on all the sweet tea nutrients that the cows developed

Kind of like the good bacteria you get in store-bought lowfat yogurt?

 

[jim hardy]

But you miss out on... nutrients that the cows developed

not to mention the bulls...

 

[DiracPool]

I'm voting for Hillary Clinton, how about you? I know Jim is voting for Trump.

I think I actually voted for Hillary in 2008, but I don't remember

 

[OCR]

Inappropriate source... _↓ ...Not a mainstream source....

I know Jim is voting for Trump.

 

[jim hardy]

I'm voting for an originalist to supreme court
and against WW3

apologies to garyvarvel for replacing his caption

 

[Rick21383]

Donald Trump encourages Russia to hack Hillary Clinton!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/27/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-hack-hillary-clinton/index.html

lol when will the libs learn. It's starting to look like Trump is playing 3-D chess and they're playing tic tac toe. Once again he's dominating the news cycle because this will SURELY be his undoing! (unlike the other 1000 times this has been said)

and, once again, liberals will be screeching "OMG did he really say that?!"

Edit: deleted old link not part of current news or campaign.

I can't believe they think this is a smart attack angle for them. They keep getting dumber as the desparation grows.

 

[mheslep]

Donald Trump encourages Russia to hack Hillary Clinton!

Provocative. Did CNN clear that headline with the appropriate Democratic staffer? Something like "Trump Mocks Clinton's Missing Server Emails" is the more accurate headline from my take on the press conference videos, though the "Mocks" headline would be a reminder of the Clinton-FBI investigation and, well, we can't have that message in the DNC media.

 

[Evo]

Donald Trump encourages Russia to hack Hillary Clinton!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/27/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-hack-hillary-clinton/index.html

lol when will the libs learn. It's starting to look like Trump is playing 3-D chess and they're playing tic tac toe. Once again he's dominating the news cycle because this will SURELY be his undoing! (unlike the other 1000 times this has been said)

and, once again, liberals will be screeching "OMG did he really say that?!"

I can't believe they think this is a smart attack angle for them. They keep getting dumber as the desparation grows.

What exactly are the democrats doing that you supposedly posted about? Your last link is from the period of 2009-2013 and has to do with the Clinton Foundation, something "I" brought up previously, it's not Current news, please notice that this is the Currents News forum.

 

[Rick21383]

What exactly are the democrats doing that you supposedly posted about? Your last link is from the period of 2009-2013 and has to do with the Clinton Foundation, something "I" brought up previously, it's not Current news, please notice that this is the currents news forum.

So you have an issue with me linking an article from the NY TIMES (which you deleted) that is directly related to an event that happened hours ago. Am I understanding this correctly?

 

[Evo]

So you have an issue with me linking an article (which you deleted) that's directly related to an event that happened hours ago. Am I understanding this correctly?

I deleted a link to an article from April 23, 2015 about an event that took place during 2009-2013. Maybe you posted the wrong link?

 

[CalcNerd]

lol when will the libs learn. It's starting to look like Trump is playing 3-D chess and they're playing tic tac toe. Once again he's dominating the news cycle because this will SURELY be his undoing! (unlike the other 1000 times this has been said)

and, once again, liberals will be screeching "OMG did he really say that?!"

.
While I have to admit that Hillary is a poor choice for president, I feel Donald Trump is probably worse (and very sadly, that says a lot!).
.
Your welcome to dig up all the dirt on Hillary you want, I certainly have too. She is a pig that Bill used a couple of gallons of lipstick to cover last night. (One pig, painting another!).
.
However, you should do some real research on your candidate too, so that you can make a more informed decision when you vote. I didn't like what I found out about Donald and still feel (for me) that Hillary is the better choice. When you discover all the ugly history Donald has, you might still consider him a better candidate than Hillary (he is certainly better than Cruz). But your glowing claims of his candidacy infer you don't know as much about this Mega real estate broker as you should. I suggest you look at his history during the 80's and 90's for some particularly nefarious deeds, although pretty much any time frame in the last 30 years will yield a story of his integrity or lack thereof.
.
There were several Republican candidates that I would have gladly voted for over Hillary this election, but Trump isn't one of them.

 

[Rick21383]

I deleted a link to an article from April 23, 2015 about an event that took place during 2009-2013. Maybe you posted the wrong link?

Do you realize that you literally posted about the event between 2009 and 2013 in your post #715? It's there to view, assuming you don't delete it. You did the exact same thing you're telling me that I am not allowed to do. And you are now deleting my posts because they don't fit your personal agenda.

 

[Evo]

Do you realize that you literally posted about the event between 2009 and 2013 in your post #715? It's there to view, assuming you don't delete it. You did the exact same thing you're telling me that I am not allowed to do. And you are now deleting my posts because they don't fit your personal agenda.

That's what I said. I sent you the link to my post #715 dated July 6th that I referred to, so why are you pretending you found it and that I might delete it and hide it? Why are you acting surprised when I told you all of this in the PM I sent you? Why are you pretending things are not as they are? MY link was to a current story dated July 6th by Politico. I followed the rules, you didn't. And you know this.

 

[jim hardy]

I rather liked this quote from the CNN link in post 833

"Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press,"

I really admire a good sense of humor ...

Edit: no source, removed by moderator

 

[Evo]

It's funny that Trump's campaign is based on trying to discredit Hillary since he has no credibility, IMO, it would take so little effort to take Trump down for all of his shady dealings. What was it that was said at the DNC the other night? Michelle's speech "when they go low, we go high". Go Hillary!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/26/polit...-obama-speech-democratic-national-convention/

Also, Jim, I need the link to the article that came from please, then we can put it back up.

Thank you!

 

[Evo]

Also, let's stop the mud slinging and leave that to the candidates. Let's discuss the issues, the economy, education, social security, aging infrastructure, you know the issues that are important that actual candidates should be focused on.

 

[jim hardy]

Also, Jim, I need the link to the article that came from please, then we can put it back up.

Thank you!

Okay, no hard feelings if you guys remove it , Lew Rockwell is i understand "out there" sometimes. .....................

I admire a good sense of humor.

Yesterday Pat Buchanan observed at Lew Rockwell (not regarded here as a mainstream source but to offer his observation as my own would be plagiarism) :
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/07/patrick-j-buchanan/will-putin-get-pulitzer/

Will the press cooperate?
...
In 1971, The New York Times published secret documents from the Kennedy-Johnson administration on how America got involved in Vietnam. Goal: Discredit the war the Times had once supported, and undercut the war effort, now that Richard Nixon was president.

The documents, many marked secrets, had been illicitly taken from Defense Department files, copied, and published by the Times.

America’s newspaper of record defended its actions by invoking “the people’s right to know” the secrets of their government.

Well, do not the people have “a right to know” of sordid schemes of DNC operatives to sink a presidential campaign?

...

For publishing stolen Defense Department secrets, the Pentagon Papers, the Times got a Pulitzer Prize.

If the Russians were helpful in bringing to the attention of the American people the anti-democratic business being done at the DNC, perhaps the Russians deserve similar recognition.

By the Times’ standard of 1971, maybe Putin deserves a Pulitzer.

Today it's repeated in Tulsa World, Google news, Dekalb County Dispatch, New Hampshire Union Leader, and scores of fringe sites
http://www.bing.com/search?q=pat+bu...475E6E41D39CBB24AF43D4B67B&first=25&FORM=PORE

Might make mainstream yet !

old jim

 

[Evo]

I'll accept this since it was a broadcast, but you owe me a shrubbery.

 

[jim hardy]

Deal .

 

[axmls]

Legitimate question here: why does the Democratic Party rarely, if ever, talk about the national debt? I just searched both party's official platforms, and there's no mention of the national debt at all in the Democratic Party platform. Certainly many of the Democratic Party's proposals will end up costing more money (is it possible to pay for a free-college plan solely by raising taxes on the rich?). Is the national debt, in reality, actually not something to be concerned with, and that's why they're not mentioning it?

 

[Astronuc]

I don't either party is talking enough about debt reduction.

From the Democratic Party 2016 Platform

Strengthening Management of Federal Government


Democrats understand responsible fiscal stewardship is key to American democracy and to the country’s long-term economic prosperity. We believe that by making those at the top and the largest corporations pay their fair share we can pay for ambitious progressive investments that create good-paying jobs and offer security to working families without adding to the debt. This stands in contrast to Donald Trump, whose plans could add more than $30 trillion to the debt and who casually suggests defaulting on America’s debt, ending more than 200 years in which the full faith and credit of the United States has been sacrosanct.

We will also ensure that new spending and tax cuts are offset so that they do not add to the nation’s debt over time. We will tackle waste, fraud, and abuse to make sure government dollars are spent wisely and efficiently. Democrats believe that we should not be contracting, outsourcing, or privatizing work that is inherently governmental in nature, including postal services, school services, and state and local government services. We are committed to a strong, effective, accountable civil service, delivering the quality public services Americans have every right to expect.

https://www.demconvention.com/wp-co...emocratic-Party-Platform-7.21.16-no-lines.pdf

Seems kind of thin on details, but it certainly looks like increased taxes. I'm not sure where they get that Donald Trump's plans would add more than $30 trillion to the debt.

 

[mheslep]

I don't either party is talking enough about debt reduction.

• Speaker Paul Ryan Discusses Entitlement Reform (May 2016)
• CBO analysis of Ryan's deficit/debt plan, "Roadmap for America's Future", which reduces the 2040 debt to 99% of GDP from 223% of GDP on the current trend.
• Senator Ted Cruz campaign, https://www.tedcruz.org/five-for-freedom-summary/; tax code reform; balanced budget constitutional amendment; elimination of 25 federal organizations.
• GOP 2016 Platform, references federal debt, deficit and budget dozens of times.
• CRFB analysis of Kasich plan to reduce deficits, cutting $2.6T, 2018 - 2025.
• Gov John Kasich pledges to balance the federal budget in eight years as president. Kasich claims in debate that he took "Ohio from an $8B budget hole to $2B surplus."
• Gov Rick Perry, spending caps at 18% of GDP, balanced budget constitutional amendment, cuts for entitlements.

The DNC 2016 platform has many references to student debt, has no reference to the debt incurred over the last 8 years, states that Democrats will not add to the future debt. The term "deficit" does not appear.

Googling for plans to balance the federal budget has lots of hits, none of them from Democrats.

 

[gleem]

US Govt budget deficit, 2016: $620M (up $180M from 2015)

This seems a bit small.

 

[CalcNerd]

Sorry to highjack a thread, but when the national debt issue comes up, I like to provide an excellent link.
.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
.
is a debt clock that monitors nearly all of the costs and revenues of good ole Uncle Sam. It also shows the history of growth if you dig a bit. Has other interesting data on the bottom of the page as well.
.
The national debt is a huuuuge problem (sorry to plagiarize, Donald). It really needs to be addressed. Unfortunately, it will take a decade or perhaps more to pay down in a responsible manner IF WE WERE TO START TODAY. The idea of paying this type of debt off by a single administration in a single term is just simply not feasible short of financial and social upheaval (It is easy to say that as president I will pay it down, but for Ted Cruz to actually do it, was his one redeeming election issue. However presidents don't get to make the budget/spend/save your money, it is your congressmen that do.). Whichever president attacks this monster will likely lose any re-election bid. But this country needs to address this issue and not poke our heads in the sand.