CID1990 wrote: JohnStOnge wrote:
It's not like Uranium One and the Clinton Foundation at all. There never was anything to that. Acting like there was some kind of process by which Hillary Clinton controlled whether or not the Uranium One deal was approved or not is ridiculous. And it's even more ridiculous to compare the Uranium One thing to having something like what's described at https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/16/the-ass ... rtner.html
happen then have Trump start talking about saving a Chinese company as he did.
It's a good thing that voters are more concerned with the economy than anything else.
Yes you can troll me on that and I will respond. In the 2016 election it wasn't that a lot of people didn't care about the economy. They did.
In exit polling, when people were asked which was most important between foreign policy, immigration, the economy, and terrorism the economy was by far the one most people chose. 52% said the economy was most important. Terrorism was a distant second at 18%.
The problem is with saying that Trump won because of the economy. That's because, among that 52% who said the economy was most important, Clinton won by 52% to 41%.
Meanwhile, among the 18% who said terrorism was most important, Trump won by 57% to 40%. And among the 13% who said immigration was most important, Trump won by 64% to 33%.
It's not that the economy wasn't an important issue. It's that it's NOT the reason Trump got enough votes to get an electoral college win. What the left calls "Xenophobia" is what got Trump over the top.