Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

For me, the most important thing in any election, above all else, is Economy.
Economy. Economy. Economy. Everthing else falls into that.

How about yours? If you can choose only one issue or position you're president should have, what would it be?

Foreign policy. Everyone since FDR has been screwing it up royally.

Economy.

Capitalism of the 21st century is reinventing itself, and we need to shift out policies and priorities to reflect that. The consequences could be dire if we miss the boat on this one.

The above people are being too vague. By this logic you could then go on to say "Economy, because we need to help the rich get richer."

The main issue that should be attacked foremost before anything else in my eyes, is the general meme deficit the issue of elections being rigged to not be one-person-one-vote democracies. Gerrymandering districts to favor parties is wrong, having state votes summarized into electoral votes rather than being added as individual votes into a national pool of votes for a single president is wrong, and having superdelegates that represent over ten-thousand votes each vote for anyone they want to is wrong. Furthermore delegates as a whole are wrong -it should simply be adding a sum of votes together NOT representative delegates.

Or because a better economy tends to benefit most people instead of the rich.
OH and by the way, the "rich getting richer" bit is tiresome. The number of people that are making 75,000 dollars in constant 2009 value has doubled sine 1970s.

The fact of the matter is, w hen the economy grows, so does the prosperity of MOST people.
As a matter of fact, the collective wealth of the middle class essentially doubled under the GWB years, and although the financial crisis took it's toll, the collective wealth of the middle class is still ridiculously higher today than it was in 2002.

So what can that wealth do on a political scale? Well, you only need to look at the minorities in the US that have general wealth, and how much they have gained in the process.

Let's take a look at the gay population of America. Look at where they were 30-40 years ago and compare them to today. Why is it that our society has made a sudden, and radical, shift in our support for gay marriage, and gay lifestyles? What has radically changed amongst the gay community? How about gay couples having an average of 20% more net worth than straight couples.

What does that translate to? It translates to wider accessibility to commercial ties, i.e businesses want to cater to the gays because they got money. This in turn fosters inclusion and acceptance. It also makes them an incredibly powerful political force, since they have the capital and resources necessary for greater representation, and because there is a larger pressure of accepting them.

Same applies to Asians, who have statistically been far wealthier, far more included.

NOw I am not saying that wealth alone is the factor. However, when comparing the wealthier minorities to the less wealthy ones, you can clearly see how much more acceptance, and inclusion they have.

So yes, to me, economy and in turn, wealth, is the single biggest issue, since everything else stems from that, and stands to gain from that.

The above for mentioned problems you commented can all be radically shifted by a stronger more wealthier communities having the political and economic capital to invoke change.

I think that is an excellent choice too. I would say that's second for me, for sure.

I think economy is of huge importance, and by extension, relieving the national debt. Some things would need to go, but I think if people can be rewarded for hard work, then I think we can be a great nation.

I'll have to go with foreign policy as well here. With the situations in North Korea, our deteriorating relations with Russia, and the current mess in the Middle East; we need someone in the office that can seriously deal with these kinds of people and keep the US in a strong spotlight.

I'd like my president to have bipolar disorder.

Do you feel that anyone in the current presidential potential line ups have the ability to deal with this?

As president I actually plan on destroying the entire middle east so people stop fighting over it. I will put a dinosaur theme park in its place.

The only ones I can see being able to handle these are Trump and Rubio. I was going back and forth putting Clinton in here, seeing that she has dealt with Russia before, and I still am. On one hand, she has the experience and on the other I don't really think she's capable of improving the U.S. relationships with Russia or the European countries.

With Rubio, he seems to be more on the aggressive side. Looking at the current situations, that is something that will definitely be needed especially when it comes to dealing with Putin and the Middle East. That being said, in my own opinion, I think Trump has the most solid ground in foreign policy. He's not as aggressive as Rubio is, but from what I see he has the best chances with really actually going to the table with Russia and actually start setting hard boundaries along with the U.S.' European allies.

Probably foreign policy.

Considering how many women are getting raped by immigrants over in Europe, I am not planning on watching that happen here in the US.

Also a president that actually doesn't try to bomb the middle east since the past 16 years would be nice.

clean energy.

that said i have neither the years nor the interest to become a citizen, so fuck.

I think clean energy is an important aspect. But what kind? I am in big favor of building more nuclear energy.

Considering how many women are getting raped by immigrants over in Europe, I am not planning on watching that happen here in the US.

I think immigration stuff falls under domestic policy.

I'm from a country were the president is a "paternal" figure, is purpose is to nominate a prime minister who will govern the country.
The president should be someone who calls out the government if necessary, even if they are in the same political spectrum.
The focus of the prime minister that I would like to exist in my country would be the one who focus on education

what country are you from?

His memes must be dank enough. I refuse to have a commander and chief with weak ass memes

I dunno, when it comes to dank memes, we got a good chunk of em this election cycle.

How about….Ensuring that Free Speech (especially on the internet) is protected from bills like SOPA, TPP, ACTA, etc.

Copyright reform is a related issue

I am from Cape Verde.
My flag av should have helped you guessed the answer

It should have. But I am very ignorant.