Voters praise Clinton’s pro-poor economic plans

Democrat presidential aspirant Hillary Clinton gained praises from US citizens for her pro-poor economic proposals in the first leg of the three-part presidential debate held last Monday night, September 26, 2016, at Hofstra University in New York.

Clinton bared her plan of building an economy for everyone by creating new jobs with good salary, boosting small and medium enterprises, raising the national minimum wage, pushing for equal pay for women, and obliging the wealthy to pay higher share of taxes should she win the November 8 elections.

Filipino expatriate Felix Talabis of Springfield, Virginia said Clinton’s plans were on point, particularly mentioning the plan of lowering interest rates of educational loans of students who graduated a decade ago but still paying for their tuition until now.

He said she was able to directly say what the people want to hear and she gives a clear direction of where she wants to bring the country.

“She has been consistent in her work for legal rights and healthcare of children and underprivileged Americans. Clinton’s plan for middle class – centered economic growth is far more likely to succeed and independent experts do not expect it will damage the economy in the same way as his (Trump) plan,” added Herbert Donovan, a Japan-based educator from Westchester County, New York. He will vote from Tokyo through absentee voting system.

Contrary to their reaction to Clinton’s speech, Talabis and Donovan denounced Republican candidate Donald Trump’s economic plan, saying that his program of reducing taxes of big companies to stop them from leaving US will just benefit him and other wealthy individuals. Donovan, who votes in the same county as Clinton, commented that Trump’s business “success” seems to be ‘an illusion based on clever manipulation of bankruptcy law and aggressive unethical practices.’

On the other hand, Joey San Andres, a registered voter of Las Vegas, Nevada, said that both proposals have economic benefits, but Americans should not only focus on proposals but also on how well they think the presidential candidates can implement and execute their programs once elected to office.

San Andres’ view is shared by Thomas Lee Gwynn of Tarrant county, Texas. “Neither Hillary or Trump’s tax plan would stand up to the test if it stands alone. It will be a combination of tax plan, job creation, forcing companies to keep work here in America instead of elsewhere, and taxing commodities coming from companies on America that make their products overseas,” he said.

Clinton and Trump met face-to-face in the first of the three-part presidential debate televised worldwide last Monday night. Issues on jobs, economic programs, birther, and racism were discussed by the two presidential candidates with opposing views.

In the opinion poll of CNN, Clinton was highly favored by American televiewers with 62% rate while Trump got only 27%. Time.com poll, on the other hand, said the Republican candidate outnumbered his opponent with 52% to 48%, after more than 1.3 million votes were cast.

The second presidential debate will happen on October 9, 2016 at the Washington University of St. Louis, Missouri while the last installment will be on October 19, 2016 at the University of Nevada in Las Vegas.

Advertisements