Comments on August 2016 edition

Please comment below. Thanks.

Back to Yale ’62 Home

5 comments to Comments on August 2016 edition

  • It seems as if all today’s societies tend to increase beaurocracy and government spending. The real problem is lack of wealth creation. Look at countries with real wealth, such as Norway from oil and gas mining. So I think regardless of who becomes our next President, the federal gov’t will continue to expand, so why take a chance with a nut case?

  • Bill Boyer

    Of course former EPA directors will chime in for a big government regulator like Clinton. The Federal EPA, state EPAs under its mandates, the Army Corps etc have all grossly expanded their over-reach under Obama, and are busy shutting down businesses everywhere.

    As a victim of this governmental assault on private citizens and their property, I can only pray that some common sense advocates March these agencies back. If it is to be Trump, then sobeit.

    Somebody has to go to Washington and start using a machete on our ridiculous fat wasteful government.

    If they don’t, then God help our grandchildren. We may not like Trump’s public persona, but I pray for his election.

  • Bill Weber

    I am so opposed to the thought of Sir Donald being our President that any debate will somewhere between a farce and a load of bluster filled with lies and ignorant statements. Why people worry so much about Ms. Clinton’s “trustworthiness” is beyond me, when one considers that many scoundrels have been good chief execs of countries; they may have some weaknesses, but “can get the job done”. On the other hand the leaders with no particular knowledge or sense of history can easily destroy a society. Many examples of current disasters as well those of the past come to mind. So why the voters of this country can even imagine Trump as President is a tribute to telling people how bad things are and you will fix things up and go get the bad guys such as the Chinese, muslims and immigrants, etc. We will know in the near future if the dark side prevails.

  • Jim Stein

    An excellent idea — but who proposes the topics, each on a single resolution crafted to expose their fundamental differences? I think the candidates might be more willing to engage in this format if they were allowed to choose the topics. Clinton and Trump know which topics are their strengths — and the other’s weaknesses, and by allowing each side to choose the same number of topics, there would be no suggestion of bias on the part of those selecting the topics.

  • Chris Cory

    Gentllemen (and spouses/S.O.s if any of you are reading) –Please overcome your chronic hesitancy and comment here. Other members of our class will read with respectful interest, and who knows — your blue influence could change a vote or two. Best, Chris

Leave a Comment