This tax reform will add between $1.3 trillion to $1.7 trillion to the deficit. Magic math “hopes” economics will reduce our deficit, which isn’t likely. Not sharing this tax gift to the top 1 percent and corporations with "all" members of Congress is wrong.

All those who sign this mess will hear from the angry public when 2018 elections arrive. Of course folks like Paul Ryan may pay back his hefty contributors and decide not to run.

The corporations have told those who ask that they plan on stock buy backs and spreading dividends. No new jobs or any pay increases, just blatant greed.

That’s right, a new vacation home in France for the overindulged uber rich.

Call your senator and congressman, and if they sign it anyway start supporting a “clean” candidate.

J.K. Langlois

Galveston

Locations

(89) comments

Carlos Ponce

JK, when you see none of your "gloom and doom" predictions materialize will you write again? The deficits will be offset with economic growth. CBO never figures them into the equation. Already we see the Dow Jones increasing 5000 points in one year. Has that ever happened before- any president? No. And that's just because Trump rolled back regulation to pre-Obama levels. Lowest unemployment in over a decade especially for Blacks and Hispanics. Watch out, JK, the booming economy will not pass you by! Smile, have a sip of your favorite beverage and enjoy!

Emile Pope

Trickle down economics has never worked in the history of this country. Now we have the Republican garbage plan: Cut taxes on the rich, increase spending on the military, drive up the deficit, and then claim that that their plan didn't work because the Democrats refused to eliminate Social Security, Medicaid, and other social programs. Just a con job. It's like telling someone that they will sell you a pill that will make you lose weight but it won't work unless they diet, exercise regularly, and avoid excess sugar and salt. America, you've been played for a fool...

Carlos Ponce

"Trickle down economics has never worked in the history of this country. "
Once again, TRUE, EMILE! It has never been implemented in this country. Nor has Supply side economics. You need to study economics to see what you're posting about. What passed last night is not "trickle down" nor "Supply Side" Economics.Time to start studying.

Emile Pope

Garbage. The Republcian con: "Give us more money in tax cuts (with no conditions on how it's spent) and somehow, someday, someway the economy will prosper and the middle class will see some benefit. But if it doesn't, we'll still get to keep the money!!!"

Carlos Ponce

If you want real garbage listen to Chuck Schumer, AKA Chuck Schemer.
Emile, how about figuring out how much you will be saving in 2018. Go to:
http://taxplancalculator.com/
and get back with your findings.

Emile Pope

How much is Trump saving? The Koch brothers? Sen. Corker? Don't throw me a penny while you collect a dollar and expect me to approve simply because i got something...

Carlos Ponce

Is Trump a salaried employee? Yes he is but will DONATE his Presidential salary. He makes most of his money on investments. They are taxed differently.
At least you now admit you're getting something from this tax cut.[beam]

Gary Miller

Emile! AT&T just anounced what they will use their tax cut. $1,000 bonus for 200,000 employees this year. Those 200,000 employees will still get their personal tax cut. How many other companies will do the same or more?

Emile Pope

Just a gesture. Hasn't happened yet. And most of the tax cuts to the wealthy will end up in the executive's pockets and the rest used to ship jobs overseas...

Gary Miller

Five more large companies announced bonus or pay increases for more than 2 million workers based on how the tax plan affects them. One announced $15 an hour would be the minimum wage for their employees.

Robert Braeking

JK is parroting the classic argument against tax cuts - that the economy is static therefore a cut in taxes is a reduction in revenue. That has not held true in Kennedy's tax cuts nor Reagan's tax cuts. The fact is that less dollars in the 'government waste machine' means more dollars for investment in plant, equipment, and labor. All of which grows the number of tax payers thus growing the revenue.
If you sell widgets (or government) for a dollar then you only sell to those who are willing or able to pay a dollar. If the price is reduced to 75 cents then there are more who are willing and able to pay so you sell more widgets.

Emile Pope

Except that they don't invest in "plant, equipment, and labor". They move the money offshore or build plants overseas and ship jobs over there. And Reagan's tax cuts balloned the deficit so your comment is unsupported...

Robert Braeking

They absolutely shall invest now that the corporate rate is reduced. There is no longer an incentive for moving money offshore. Also the 179 benefits are more favorable so there will be a BUNCH of investment in plant, equipment, and labor. Cheap advice.....buy steel.

Gary Miller

Hooray! Democrats who were OK with $1 trillion a year deficits are worried about a ten year $ trillion deficit. 80 % of US taxpayers will find ' less withheld from their first paycheck in 2018. Reducing the top rate to 37 % from 39.6 % was for small businesses not for the really rich who pay very little "income taxes." They pay 'capital gains taxes' and this reform made no changes to capital gains rates. Reducing the 'corporate tax rate' to 21 % from 35 % doesn't save the rich a cent. That tax is a consumer tax corporations are forced to collect as higher prices. Will they cut prices? Yes when a competitor cuts prices. When Shell drops a dime a gallon, Texico will drop 11 cents. No company will let a competitor undercut them.

Jim Forsythe

We have enjoyed a long sustained growth in the dow average, which started on March 2009 when it was at  6,930. At some point we will have a bear market, which is over due. If that happens in 2018, it will wipe out all the gains of 2017.

Jan. 20, 2009                 7,949.09    
January 20,2017            19,732.40
December 19,2017        24,754.75
The percent of increase under Trump is not close to being the largest in history. Just as Trump's first year is about 25% increase, Obamas was at 18.8 %. This would make Trump about number 20 on the all time percent gain list.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wGi6bLh8Vhw/TjyYagml90I/AAAAAAAABIQ/fF-CaCqvB3s/s1600/Best%2BDow%2BYearly%2BReturns.jpg

Gary Miller

Jim! I hope your math isn't used to count new jobs. 18.8 % is not more than 25% and Trump's 25 % is for 11 months, Obama's was 2.? % a year for 88 months.

Jim Forsythe

Gary , this do the math.
7,949.09  into 19,732.40 = 148% which is the percent, that the dow went up during Obama's 8 years.
19,732.40 into  24,754.75  =25% which is the percent, that the dow has gone up under Trump.
No where did I say 18% is was 1915more than 25%. .
Trump will  be in the range of number 20, on the list of highest gain for one year at the end of January.
The real test will be, will Trump be able to do 25% or more percent increase in the dow, for all four years? 
 
1915 was the all-time one year increase in the  Dow Jones,at 80% for one year.
Just having the highest percent does not mean all is well. The Unemployment rate was  8.5%
The Dow Jones increased more than 80% in a single year, the largest increase in the last century.

1933  The Dow Jones increased 66.7%
Unemployment: was  25.2%

The link I provided before is not good. Use this one, if you want to see the top ten all-time 
leaders for a one year  increase in the dow.
http://247wallst.com/investing/2010/12/29/the-ten-greatest-stock-market-years-of-the-last-century/

Robert Braeking

Despite the tight reigns of the past administrations. The horse has its head. You'd best stand aside or you will get trampled.

Carlos Ponce

Find out how much you will save under the tax plan. Go to:
http://taxplancalculator.com/
Tell us how much you will be saving.

Gary Miller

I, as a retired senior with no dependents, expect to save the tax on $12,000 more I and wife can now deduct. $2,000 is not much but every little bit helps.

Robert Braeking

Add the increased standard deduction which changes tax bracket which is reduced as well. Life is good.

Steve Fouga

I'm reserving judgment on the tax bill. I hear Republicans trumpeting its benefits, and Democrats decrying it as a disaster. I have a hard time believing it will be as impactful as either party claims. [cool]

Carlos Ponce

Good man, wait and see. Liberal leaders were decrying the tax plan before it was even written.

Jim Forsythe


The question is not how much your tax bill will be in 2019, but what will it be in 2021,2022,2023 and so on. By front loading the personal tax savings in 2019, the amount a person pays will increase as the years go on, to a time where your tax bill will be higher than now.
This will get it past the midterm elections next year. As Steve said, we will see.

The challenging landscape is partly the result of choices Republicans made with their tax bill and partly the result of deeper economic forces in the economy. The GOP decided to cut taxes without offsetting spending cuts, driving up the deficit.

Carlos Ponce

"The question is not how much your tax bill will be in 2019, but what will it be in 2021,2022,2023 and so on."
That depends on your salary during those years, Jim. You should know that! The tax rates are set for ten years and may be extended by a future congress just like Obama extended the Bush tax cuts.

Steve Fouga

Exactly. The bill was designed to give ordinary citizens a small break for the next few years to get them past the midterms, to give their donors a big enough reason to keep donating, and to create a large enough deficit to give them an excuse to attack Medicare and Social Security.

Carlos Ponce

A 10 year limit will get them pass the midterms, pass the next presidential election, pass another set of midterms, pass another presidential election and pass another set of mid-terms. Then the next Republican Congress and President can extend them. Or are you suggesting that a future Democrat run Congress and president would not????

Steve Fouga

Unless something drastic happens to change public opinion of Trump, he will not be re-elected in 2020, and probably not even nominated. Unless the republican-led congress does something good for the general population before the 2018 midterms, the House will turn blue. Possibly even the Senate.

If Democrats gain control of congress and the presidency, they will repeal most of this tax bill in a heartbeat.

Carlos Ponce

Don't worry about Trump. He'll be re-elected in 2020. And there'll be some realignment of Congress but that's normal.

Emile Pope

So why not make the middle class tax cuts permanent and the corporate tax cuts temporary? It would cost less. Because they have no intention of extending the middle class tax cuts.

Steve Fouga

Wow, I just noticed the Dow and S&P declined again today, after passage of the bill. Normally a bill like this one would cause a 200-300-point jump in the Dow. I guess the effect of the tax decrease is already baked into the overpriced stock market.

Carlos Ponce

The Byrd Rule.
http://archives-democrats-rules.house.gov/archives/byrd_rule.htm

Carlos Ponce

"Because they have no intention of extending the middle class tax cuts."
Republicans want to extend them. Hopefully they will be made permanent like the Bush tax cuts in 2012.

Jim Forsythe

Steve, PAYGO is where the money will come from. We will have to come up with $150 billion,each year for the next ten years.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported that the legislation could put billions of dollars in Medicare spending in danger.
Because the bill would add an estimated $1.5 trillion to the federal deficit over the next decade, the CBO said in a letter to Congress, the government would be required to automatically cut mandatory spending should the bill pass, under "pay-as-you-go" rules, also known as PAYGO.
To make up for the deficit increase, the government would have to cut $150 billion in spending every year for the next decade.
Under PAYGO, Medicare spending could legally be cut by up to four percent, amounting to $25 billion dollars in cuts next year for the program under which senior citizens are provided with health insurance.

Jim Forsythe

The Senate parliamentarian blocked the Republicans' $1.5-trillion tax cut plan hours before it was set to pass because the legislation violated the Byrd rule which prohibits provisions that are viewed as “extraneous” to the budget.
As a result, several provisions of the so-called “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” will be removed and the House, which had passed the bill in a party-line vote earlier Tuesday, will vote again on the truncated bill on Wednesday. 
The two excised provisions included one that dictated the criteria used to determine whether private university endowments are subject to excise tax, and another that allowed the use of 529 plans to cover home-schooling expenses, which was pushed by Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas.

Emile Pope

More garbage. If they wanted to make the individual tax cuts permanent they would have. Why didn't they? Why did they make the corporate tax cuts permanent instead of the individual. Saying they they wanted to is false when they had the opportunity to do so and failed.

Carlos Ponce

Whatever you say, Emile. Those are the rules. The rules formulated by that infamous Democrat Klan member, Robert Byrd, Hillary's mentor.

Emile Pope

In case you couldn't comprehend...Show me where the individual tax cuts had to made temporary and the corporate cuts had to be made permanent. The Republicans deliberately decided to do this. Where in the Byrd rule does it say that individual tax cuts have to be temporary and corporate ones permanent...

Emile Pope

I'll answer it for you. If they made the corporate and individual tax cuts permanent, then it would explode the deficit so much that rules would require democratic votes to pass, which they knew they wouldn't get. So in order to keep the permanent tax cuts for corporations, they decided to make the individual tax cuts temporary to keep the cost down.

Carlos Ponce

Emile, I've already shown you and even provided a web site.

Emile Pope

Let's see. It's called a middle class tax cut although most of the tax cuts go the the extremely wealthy and corporations. And the middle class tax cuts are set to expire while the corporate tax cuts and cuts to the wealthy are permanent. Talk about Orwellian! And the Republicans, in order to protect the corporate and wealthy from ever expiring, put a limit on how long the middle class cuts would last. And someone says that the Republcians were "forced" to make the middle class tax cuts temporary because of Democratic rules. But no one has given a single explanation as to why they chose to make the individual tax cuts temporary and the corporate tax cuts permanent. So, why did they make the corporate tax cuts permanent instead of the individual tax cuts?

Carlos Ponce

"It's called a middle class tax cut although most of the tax cuts go the the extremely wealthy and corporations."
"A rising tide lifts all boats." - President John F. Kennedy

Emile Pope

When the water comes from the bottom not the top. When it comes from the top the smaller boats are flooded and sunk...

Carlos Ponce

Homework for Emile. Compare the JFK tax cuts to those recently passed. Interesting how Liberals never mention JFK's tax cuts

Emile Pope

Unless you can show me why they made the corporate tax cuts permanent and the individual tax cuts temporary then you have no case...

Carlos Ponce

"Unless you can show me why they made the corporate tax cuts permanent and the individual tax cuts temporary then you have no case..."
BYRD, BYRD!
BYRD,BYRD,BYRD,BYRD is the word.
Look up the Byrd Rule. That's the reason. I gave you the link. If it goes over your head, can't help you.

Emile Pope

I'll write slower since you obviously are having trouble understanding. Why did the Republicans make the corporate tax cuts permanent and the individual tax cuts temporary instead of the other way around? The Byrd rule does not require corporate tax cuts to be made permanent so why do you keep making the ridiculous argument that it does? So unless you can show me a rule or law that requires permanent corporate tax cuts then bye...

Carlos Ponce

Question already answered, Emile. Better that ALL tax cut be made permanent but the Byrd rule prevents that. After 10 years a Republican Congress will extend them. A Democratic Congress??? By not voting for tax cuts they show they wee for the higher taxes. This will be the albatross around Democratic necks in November 2018.

Emile Pope

Apparently you’re deaf...

Carlos Ponce

Emile, I can hear perfectly.

Emile Pope

I was trying to be kind...

Carlos Ponce

Emile must have a strange definition of "kind".

Kelly Naschke

It’s REALLY got to suck to be part of a party that wants the president and the average American to fail. To think Hillary called US deplorables! When the tax plan works...and 80% of us have more money in our pockets thanks to conservatism...the demb demb”s are sunk. And they know it! This is going to be sweet as sugar watching the dumbocrats go bye bye.

Steve Fouga

Yeah, but Leroy it'll be bittersweet knowing I got the money because the federal government borrowed against our future. Usually I don't get too riled up about deficit increases, but when it's simply to fund a tax reduction I start to worry. Like I said, I'm reserving judgment.

It'll feel good having a few extra bucks, but I'll wait to see how much the economy improves before I call it a success. If I were getting thousands and thousands, I might feel differently. A problem, if that's the right word, is that the economy is already improving, and has been for several years. To me, it doesn't seem like the right time to stimulate the economy with a tax cut, if it adds to the deficit.

BUT, we'll see.

Bill Cochrane

I’m just curious? The tax bill was voted on, and the majority of the Republicans voted YES. Not one of the Democrats voted yes. All of the Demos voted NO. It appears that this issue, no matter how good or how bad it is, must be a Republican vs. Democrat issue. How can ALL Demos claim it’s a total disaster? Are all Demos automatically, magically die-hard liberals? Demos just suddenly lose all of their common sense? To make matters worse, now, again, we have the issue of “government shutdown!” I wish Trump would issue an executive order mandating that if Congress allows a shutdown all Congressmen lose one years pay, and are banned from being re-elected to any government position.

Emile Pope

Because every reputable economist says it will be. And tax cuts on corporations and wealthy individuals have never worked and ended up blowing up the deficit and causing a depression or recession. And executive orders were so bad when President Obama was in office. Why the change?

Carlos Ponce

"Because every reputable economist says it will be."
Reputable does not mean partisan, Emile. Check their credentials.

Keith Gray

Carlos, I went to the web site and it says that I will pay $6200 less... so I get to keep $6200 more of the money I earn... If Emile and the others feel I don't deserve to keep my money, then please feel free to kick in my share from each of you... BTW, I am going to SPEND the crap out of $6200 more in 2018 on just plain stuff I want. I wonder what part of the economy I will stimulate?

Gary Miller

Bill! There are still a few liberals in the Democrat party. Most today are progressives, far worse than liberal.

Jim Forsythe

Be sure to add Donald Trump to your list of progressives
And, thanks to the efforts of  Jonah Goldberg and Glenn Beck in explaining the ugly history of American progressivism, “progressive” has become a term of abuse, too, especially on the talk-radio/cable-news right, which is why some people get so very upset when you point out that Donald Trump is a progressive.


 William F. Buckley (himself no stranger to the practical uses of populism) and National Review opposed Wallace energetically, but not all conservatives did. And the same dynamic played out with Trump, with one important difference. Trump won.

Gary Miller

Bill! The government can't be "shutdown" Treasury has income to keep necessary part running. Shutting down part of the fed government would be the best thing GOP could do. If the quarter or third that wasn't funded were shut down for two or three months we would be able to see how much we don't need we are borrowing to keep spending on. The treasury has enough real income to fund 3/4 of the budget during any partial shutdown. No needed part of government would lose a cent. The part we borrow to finance might not be restarted. A partial shutdown might be an instant balanced budget and a start on repaying the national debt..

Jim Forsythe

The choice was, who did they want to reward the most.
Big companies, or the people of the USA.
One can hire them or other incentives, after they are out of the Government, and the other just votes.
Oh wait a minute,some in Congress have business that won big time with the pass thru provision, such as the President and his Son in Law and his family.
Some have big, really big money that will not be taxed after death.
Some in one group will end up with a zero effective tax bill forever. Most in the other group will end up with a larger tax bill in just a few years.
Which group are you in?
Republicans are taking a large chance, passing the tax cuts bill that is not popular, just before midterms. 

Carlos Ponce

"Big companies, or the people of the USA."
Currently companies are run by PEOPLE, even those with robots. All benefit.

Gary Miller

Jim! 30 % say they don't like this tax reform. 30 % is just about the number who get all or part of their money from government. Part of them think if government gets less their welfare check must be less.

Jim Forsythe

I found polls from 24% TO 40 % saying that people liked the tax cuts. The following is one example.  
"Only 24 percent of Americans think the GOP tax plan is a good idea, NBC/WSJ poll says"
You stated that 70% like the tax cut's. It would take all  24% that identified as Republican.' Also all or most of the 42% that are Independent and then some Democrats to add up to 70%. Do you Gary , think this is going to happen?
As of October 2017, Gallup polling found that 31% of Americans identified as Democrat, 24% identified as Republican, and 42% as Independent.Additionally, polling showed that 46% are either "Democrats or Democratic leaners" and 39% are either "Republicans or Republican leaners" when Independents are asked "do you lean more to the Democratic Party or the Republican Party?"[

Robert Braeking

Most polls are 'push' polls and have absolutely nothing to do with public opinion. I am going to enjoy my tax cut. So will 80% of the taxpaying population. Others will complain that it is a cut for the 'rich'. I suppose all of us who work for a living and actually PAY taxes are considered the 'rich' by the left. The rest of all y'all must be on welfare.

Carlos Ponce

Knowing how poorly polls reflect reality you still believe them? Check the polls' demographics. They are found on page 19:
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/17505%20NBCWSJ%20December%20Poll.pdf
Once again they poll more Democrats than are in the general population. 43 Dem I5 Ind 33 Rep. Considering how many polled identify with the Democratic Party it is doubtful that their Liberal vs Conservative percentages are accurate. 26 Lib 36Mod, 34 Cons. Conservatives don't vote Democrat. But people can call themselves whatever they want.

Steve Fouga

Jim, I think most voters will come around to my point of view: wait and see, and don't worry in the meantime. Many don't like the tax bill right now because of the optics - lower taxes for the rich and corporations. But eventually most will enjoy their small tax break, while knowing the rich are getting a bigger one. And I bet the corporate tax reduction WILL spark the economy. Not enough to erase the deficit the bill created, but enough for Republicans to claim victory, even though most people won't feel it personally. Most people don't care a lot about the deficit, anyway.

Nobody will really feel their tax cut until long after the midterms, so what will the overall effect be? Probably not much. Democrats will bitch, Republicans will crow, and people will cast their votes in the midterms based on other factors, like whether the Republicans attack Social Security and Medicare. If they do that... well... it's over. They'll be done for a decade or so.

Carlos Ponce

"Nobody will really feel their tax cut until long after the midterms..."
Actually, when they see more money in their February 2018 paycheck........
Tax cuts will affect roughly 80% of workers in this country.
Steve, did you calculate how much you will save using the link provided?
http://taxplancalculator.com/

Steve Fouga

Yeah, they'll see a few bucks in February because of the withholding difference. A few bucks. That's what tax reductions always amount to.

I used a different source to calculate my tax reduction. I've always maintained that tax reductions for the "rank and file," like myself, are so small as to be for show. This one is no different. I'll barely notice it. On the other hand, I won't notice the deficit increase either.

Carlos Ponce

What was your source, Steve? Please share.

Steve Fouga

Carlos, my source was a New York Times calculator. Since you asked, I tried your link as well. They agreed pretty well, with the Times being $262/yr more optimistic. The average of the two yields a cut so small that it won't factor into household budgeting at all.

It will have the same effect on my life that previous tax cuts have: None. This illustrates my main argument against tax cuts: they produce no benefit at the macro level, and none at the micro level, so why do them?

If I had written the tax bill, it would have INCREASED the tax rate for wealthy individuals, LOWERED the corporate rate to bring it closer to the world average, and left yours and mine the same as it was.

Carlos Ponce

"If I had written the tax bill, it would have INCREASED the tax rate for wealthy individuals, LOWERED the corporate rate to bring it closer to the world average, and left yours and mine the same as it was."
Increasing the tax rate on the wealthy would not be fruitful since there are still methods of "sheltering" such income. Lowering corporate rates would be effective but keeping ours the same would make the Liberals throw a hissy fit like they're doing today. The tax bill was made out of compromise, not perfect but better than what we have today.

Jim Forsythe

There are roughly 55 million registered Republicans. There are roughly 72 million Democrats. 
Voter registration in America has soared to new heights as 200 million people are now registered to vote for the first time in U.S. history.

Carlos Ponce

How many registered Republicans in Texas? ZERO.
How many registered Democrats in Texas? ZERO.
In states like Texas you merely vote in the primary of choice. No registration by party needed. In only 32 states out of 50 you register by party.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tP_RcBjp_YoHH-tYimQFLSmjPLtmXSyvwLpqExaYIeI/edit#gid=0
But you are tied to that party for any runoffs if you vote in their primary. Not all states have presidential preferential primaries.

If you believe Gallup, their numbers read 25 Rep 42 Ind 30 Dem.
http://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx
From Pew Research
http://www.people-press.org/2017/10/24/political-typology-reveals-deep-fissures-on-the-right-and-left/
General Population: 42% Conservative, 51% Liberal
Registered Voters Conservatives 45 Liberals 55
Politically engaged 45% Con 55% Liberal
But consider like their poll results, these statistics are skewed to the Left.
In the 2016 election 46.1% voted for Republican Trump, 48.2% voted for Democrat Hillary.
And voter registration doesn't matter. Remember, only 55.7% of registered voters bothered to vote in the 2016 presidential election.

Jim Forsythe

 The actual number of registered to vote was close to 213 million in 2016. With the increase in registered voters , the number that actually voted should have gone up. The main reason for this decrease was the candidates.  A lot of people refused to vote for Trump or Clinton.
If in  2020,  two good candidates run, you should see record number of voters. If they are not quality candidates, voter turnout will not increase and  third party candidates will continue to increase in the number of votes they receive.
The Independent voters will determine the outcome of the race in 2020.
Unless the parties have better candidates in 2020, the vote total will remain low.. 

Carlos Ponce

"The main reason for this decrease was the candidates. A lot of people refused to vote for Trump or Clinton." Only 55.7% of registered voters voted.
2012 Only 54.9% of registered voters voted. Would you say "A lot of people refused to vote for Obama or Romney" since a lesser percentage voted that year?


Jim Forsythe

Turnout declined in the 2012 presidential election from 2008. .The decline is not surprising since the 2008 turnout rate was the highest since 1964, or nearly half a century. The 2012 turnout rate is still higher than the entire 1972 to 2000 period. While turnout declined for Barack Obama’s reelection, this is typical for modern reelected presidents. Since World War II, only two of six presidents who were successfully reelected did not experience a turnout decline from their first to second election. 

2008
Barack H. Obama   69,499,428 votes, the most for any  Presidential candidate. ,John S. McCain, III  59,950,323 votes.

 2012 
President Obama was re-elected with 65,899,660 (51%) popular votes; his challenger Mitt Romney received 60,932,152 (47.2%).

More Americans voted for Hillary Clinton than any other losing presidential candidate in US history.
The Democrat outpaced President-elect Donald Trump by almost 2.9 million votes, with 65,844,954 (48.2%) to his 62,979,879 (46.1%), according to revised and certified final election results from all 50 states and the District of Columbia.201
It looks like the major party candidates in 2016, received a lower percent of votes then in 2012.

Carlos Ponce

Looking back to post 1968 the percentage of people voting
1972 55.2% 1976 53.6% 1980 52.6% 1984 53.3% 1988 50.2%
1992 55.2% 1996 49.0% 2000 51.2% 2004 56.7% 2008 58.2%
2012 54.9% 2016 55.7%
Average of last 12 elections was 53.8%.
So last year, Trump vs. H. Clinton had ABOVE Average.turnout.

Micheal Byrd

So now Democrats are all worried about deficit spending? That’s a hoot.

Steve Fouga

No, they just don't believe in deficit spending to fund a tax reduction. I don't either.

Carlos Ponce

Interesting that the CBO never computes probable economic growth when computing the effects of a bill on the deficit. It is difficult to compute but not impossible. That's why CBO reports are often wrong.

Gary Miller

I find a different count more interesting. 3070 counties voted for Trump, 57 counties voted for HRC. Every one of the 57 counties voting for HRC are dominated by sanctuary cities.

Steve Fouga

Yeah, this is just plain false. Those are bogus numbers. BUT, if your point is that Trump won a lot more counties than Clinton, you are right.

The Clinton counties are dominated by a lot more than sanctuary cities. High-productivity industry and lots of people, for example.

Jim Forsythe

Clinton won 487 counties  but as she did not win , it makes not difference.
Texas, Clinton went home with 27 of our 254 counties.,
Georgia, she  won 30 of its 159 counties.
West Coast states of California, Oregon, and Washington HRC won 53 counties.

Carlos Ponce

Take a look at the Texas map. You can't vote in the other 49, especially if you are Russian:
https://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president/texas/
Specifically look at Galveston County:
Trump 59.3% or 73,566 votes
Hillary 36.7% or 45,503 votes
But you Hillarites although a minority party state and county wide sure did make a lot of noise. Keep braying![beam]
2012 County results:
Romney 66.39% Romney got more than Trump because 3rd parties did not present any challenge
Obama 32.25%
And in 2008:
McCain 59.29% About the same as Trump
Obama 39.81%
And the GCDN editors preferred HILLARY???? What a laugh! Shows how much influence you wield! Question: Have you hired any Conservative editors who actually reflect the views of potential readership in this county???????
Hint: Don't sell snow blowers in the tropics nor surfboards in the Arctic Ocean.

Jim Forsythe

What does this have to do with "Texas, Clinton went home with 27 of our 254 counties.,"?

Carlos Ponce

And those 27 counties made a difference - no they did not.

Jim Forsythe

My reply was to Gary, and his misinformation about "57 counties voted for HRC." which is not true.
It had nothing to do with who won the election.
Accept that Trump won, and go on .

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.