Either way as an Australian I have way more than enough to worry about the last ten (please note 10 is an arbitrary number it is probably a great deal larger) years of our political clownery, that I have little sympathy for the what the US citizenry has given itself in the form of either the Democratic or Republican nominees. There are so many layers of onion to both sides of the debate that unravelling one layer will only lead to another layer and at the end of the day will only lead to tears because no one seems able to cut through the crap without finding another layer of some new/old drama deeper down. He said, she said, I said, you said....nothing changes when people won't accept that not just everyone else's agenda needs to change.

Voters in either camp made up their mind months ago (probably based on their economic situation).

Ratings today are based on "tabloid gossip" rather "real issues". Talk about issues instead of gossip and watch politics improve.

But first thing's first; unemployment has go down. If Hillary wasn't such a "Republican" :wink: and showed she was in favor of trade-restriction to promote job growth domestically, then she would win, no problem. But she doesn't want to oppose her biggest campaign donors.

Brexit

Give it some more time, and you'll be glad Brexit was a success. Strong local opportunity is very important in any country.

I don't see why millions of Americans would be in favor of unrestricted free-trade unless they didn't fully understand the consequences of globalization. Sure, you get cheap stuff immediately (short-term gain), but as industry starts leaving, your long-term employment prospects suffer (and I've witnessed this on both sides of the equation), which also affects taxes (so you end up keeping less of what you earn, unless you understand tax loopholes :wink:). There are countries right now that serve as an example/warning on how this can ruin a seemingly safe/strong economy. I could not in good conscience be in support of such a devastating outcome.

Once you solve the problem of unemployment (give back people their opportunity [and therefore their freedom]), then you can focus on other issues. I just wish Hillary wasn't doing the biding of her donors (who don't need any more congressional influence - they've done quite enough fleecing.).

But since we can't get off the topic of gossip: Did you miss this story? http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-ally-aids-campaign-of-fbi-officials-wife-1477266114

Or if you're not a WSJ subscriber: http://nypost.com/2016/10/24/clinton-ally-gave-500k-to-wife-of-fbi-agent-on-email-probe/

It is comical how many job opportunities there are in the UK. Education is a bigger problem imo, at least in the UK.

I seem to have the opposite impression - that they're going extremely soft on her simply because she is running for president.

This.

Everybody else would either already be in jail or in court, fearing to get jailed.

Note that we're not just talking about a private email being sent to the wrong recipient by accident, or such. We're talking about several cases of leaking classified information that may impair national security (or may not, I couldn't tell how big the impact really is, quite possibly they're just overly paranoid with their petty secrets).

Once may have happened out of stupidity (benefit of doubt), which doesn't make it alltogether null and void, but it allows you to at least be forgiving and say: "Oh well, that's not great, but... shit happens". However, that excuse doesn't work for two cases, and in at least one of these it was deliberate -- you can assume that setting up your own server counts as "deliberate", you don't just wake up in the morning and have a server set up by accident, and without knowing. So that's an entirely different ballpark.

That, and there's this story (allegations, truth, who knows?) about some millions disappearing in charity funds run by herself and her husband, the same husband who became famous for perjury and obstruction of justice (I am deliberately not saying "for sex stuff" because in my opinion, if he had just been truthful, then whoever he fucked or didn't fuck would have been purely something between him and his wife).
Plus this smut affair story (which involved some religious stuff) to sabotage her party comrade Sanders. That's maybe not actionable (though it might very well be, why not?), but in any case, it is undoubtly indecent.

And then, those various other stories

Don't get me wrong, she might be innocent after all, but usually when there is smoke, there is fire. And with her, there is an awful lot of smoke, repeatedly. She just doesn't look like a very honest and innocent person.

(Of course, Trump doesn't precisely look like an innnocent, honest altruist either, I'll agree to that. But at least he doesn't pretend being anything different from what you can see. With him, you know exactly what you're buying, he is making no secret about what he is.)

Specifically, the original investigation that cleared Hilary may well have been an example of "going soft on her"

Oh wait, wait, wait... that's not at all what happened. She was by no means "cleared", on the contrary.

It was concluded by the FBI that despite having stated the exact opposite on July 2 (and for several months before), she demonstrably had sent and received classified emails, and had extensively used her private account for that, also from abroad. The FBI's evaluation stated that Clinton was "extremely careless" and that it was likely that "that hostile actors gained access".

However, the FBI did at that time not deem any charges "appropriate". Read as: "guilty, but walks (because president candidate)", not "innocent, cleared". This is a big difference.

Now there's that story with 50-year-old men dating underage girls on top. Which is, especially in the USA, a really ugly, sticky thing.

While it sure isn't Clinton's fault where Weiner puts his weiner, there's nevertheless the relation to her with those new emails that were found. And while she is probably innocent of Weiner's teen girl affair, the whole thing still doesn't shed a very favourable light onto her (whether that's fair or not).

In any case, it certainly allows the FBI (in fact, not just allows, but compels -- investigation of a suspected crime is not an optional thing, they must do this) to further investigate on what other Clinton-related emails they've found during that search.

Take it easy, phantom.

Don't blame a drop in the British Pound Sterling on Brexit. Years before the IMF suggested it was valued a little too high, now the IMF got their wish. (Not that the IMF cares a jot about the long term prosperity of any nation, anyway.) The IMF, by the way, are totally against Brexit (which is good sign, actually.)

You can't measure the benefits of Brexit so soon anyhow. Brexit prevented an economic disaster from happening sooner (It doesn't have a trade surplus like Germany, ~82 Billion). It gives ministers some time to think of solutions to the problems they are facing. Whether or not your ministers take advantage of this opportunity and act is another matter entirely. I know I would be trying to get unemployment down to 2% and I know it can be done. Question is; do your ministers know? :lol:

As for the political discourse of the U.S.A., I know the media is biased even in the UK, but please don't tell me that's the impression the you've been left with. It's, um... a bit extreme.

currency has dropped 20% in value

Well, to be fair...

This is not really Brexit's fault, the drop is well within the trend.