Is it even possible for Hillary to win a debate?

[theeedude]

If you brag about how great your resort is, don't claim the guy who architected it deserved to get stiffed.

 

[glenn1]

Just to be clear about what I was replying to with the statements about tax breaks & such, since there's been much confusion in that regard as of late:

And again to be perfectly clear here, are you expecting me to explain why you thought he was getting tax breaks? Have you considered asking yourself first?

Either you're a troll, or English isn't your first language, or you're one confused dude. Whatever it is you stopped making sense long ago.

As for 'why' he or anyone else gets tax breaks that something that will go to the grave of the tax break author and the person who gave them the contribution to pass it in the first place. Quite frankly most of them are monumentally stupid, counterproductive, and poor policy to begin with even overlooking the negative aspects of thousands of special tax code breaks and penalties. Especially for the personal income tax we'd all be hugely better off to repeal all the stupid credits and special tax provisions in favor of a much higher standard exemption. And the favored tax treatment for employer provided health insurance would be #1 on the list quickly followed by the mortgage interest deduction.

 

[agent00f]

Either you're a troll, or English isn't your first language, or you're one confused dude. Whatever it is you stopped making sense long ago.

As for 'why' he or anyone else gets tax breaks that something that will go to the grave of the tax break author and the person who gave them the contribution to pass it in the first place. Quite frankly most of them are monumentally stupid, counterproductive, and poor policy to begin with even overlooking the negative aspects of thousands of special tax code breaks and penalties. Especially for the personal income tax we'd all be hugely better off to repeal all the stupid credits and special tax provisions in favor of a much higher standard exemption. And the favored tax treatment for employer provided health insurance would be #1 on the list quickly followed by the mortgage interest deduction.

Also consider the possibility that you're not very good at making sense of things. Here is the sequence of replies:

1. "Maybe Trump is taking advantage of the solar power subsidies that Democrats love. Or the fossil fuel subsidies that Republicans love. Or who the hell knows what. The tax code is a fvcking joke with all the carve-outs to special interests and pet programs on both sides"

2. "Also, the special interest tax breaks you're talking about are a concession to the free market types. Tax incentives are how we do regulation in this country. "

3. "So which tax breaks that would be applicable to Trump's personal tax liability do you think are part of the 'regulatory regime'?"

It was making quite a bit of sense until 3, which I can hope you can recognize is you. I know you believe you're a great thinker, which is rather the problem in all these situations.

 

[flexy]

Trump supporters are SOOO stupid that they call not paying taxes, scamming small businesses and basically doing everything that fvcks over average Americans "navigating the system".

Tip: This "navigating the system" *IS* why America is where it is today, with ever more poor, lower and middle class suffering and a few 0,01%-ers getting richer because of it. This "navigating the system" *IS* why you even vote for your Übermonkey in the first place in the hope that things would change. If shitbags like Trump wouldn't "navigate the system", he wouldn't even be on the scene, people not be angry towards the establishment in the fist place.

 

[glenn1]

Also consider the possibility that you're not very good at making sense of things. Here is the sequence of replies:

1. "Maybe Trump is taking advantage of the solar power subsidies that Democrats love. Or the fossil fuel subsidies that Republicans love. Or who the hell knows what. The tax code is a fvcking joke with all the carve-outs to special interests and pet programs on both sides"

2. "Also, the special interest tax breaks you're talking about are a concession to the free market types. Tax incentives are how we do regulation in this country. "

3. "So which tax breaks that would be applicable to Trump's personal tax liability do you think are part of the 'regulatory regime'?"

It was making quite a bit of sense until 3, which I can hope you can recognize is you. I know you believe you're a great thinker, which is rather the problem in all these situations.

Solar power subsidies aren't related to regulation. Nor is EITC. Or mortgage interest deduction. Or Child Credit. Or deductions for student loan interest. For that matter, name any personal income tax credit or deduction that you feel falls into the "regulatory regime" space.

 

[werepossum]

Trump supporters are SOOO stupid that they call not paying taxes, scamming small businesses and basically doing everything that fvcks over average Americans "navigating the system".

Tip: This "navigating the system" *IS* why America is where it is today, with ever more poor, lower and middle class suffering and a few 0,01%-ers getting richer because of it. This "navigating the system" *IS* why you even vote for your Übermonkey in the first place in the hope that things would change. If shitbags like Trump wouldn't "navigate the system", he wouldn't even be on the scene, people not be angry towards the establishment in the fist place.

It is mind-bogglingly stupid to decry those using the exemptions whilst celebrating those who created the exemptions.

 

[agent00f]

Solar power subsidies aren't related to regulation. Nor is EITC. Or mortgage interest deduction. Or Child Credit. Or deductions for student loan interest.

For example, instead of simply regulating/forcing energy supplier to go green or whatever, we instead incentivize them to do the same. Is this not your example from 1?

For that matter, name any personal income tax credit or deduction that you feel falls into the "regulatory regime" space.

You're going to have to ask yourself and not me where the "personal income tax credit" comes from. I'm pretty sure the solar power subsidies you meant in 1 are not personal income.

 

[IGBT]

She can't debate the "issues" because she's done absolutely nothing positive in her so called political career. Her finger prints are all over everything that's festering and diseased in Liberal America. The only thing she's advanced is her retirement benefit.

 

[glenn1]

For example, instead of simply regulating/forcing energy supplier to go green or whatever, we instead incentivize them to do the same. Is this not your example from 1?

You're going to have to ask yourself and not me where the "personal income tax credit" comes from. I'm pretty sure the solar power subsidies you meant in 1 are not personal income.

Please refer to "Form 5695 - Residential Energy Credits" to understand how solar power installations reduce your personal income liability. And even if we stipulate for sake of argument the "regulation" angle you're referring to then you're using the tool rather poorly. Seems rather counterproductive to undermine that "incentivizing energy supplies to go green" regulatory goal by simultaneously giving tax subsidies to fossil fuel producers which would incentivize energy suppliers to NOT go green. Indeed a 2009 study by the Environmental Law Institute examined energy subsidies from 2002 to 2008 and estimated them to be $72 billion vs $29 billion in favor of fossil fuels.

 

[agent00f]

She can't debate the "issues" because she's done absolutely nothing positive in her so called political career. Her finger prints are all over everything that's festering and diseased in Liberal America. The only thing she's advanced is her retirement benefit.

Looks like a real issues debater is here to tell everyone what that's all about.

Please refer to "Form 5695 - Residential Energy Credits" to understand how solar power installations reduce your personal income liability. And even if we stipulate for sake of argument the "regulation" angle you're referring to then you're using the tool rather poorly.

No, it's pretty clear "Maybe Trump is taking advantage of the solar power subsidies that Democrats love" isn't talking about the solar panels on trump's roof any more than "Or the fossil fuel subsidies that Republicans love" refers to the refinery in his back yard. Again, trying to copy me by pointing out other's thinking mistakes doesn't work when it's you doing the copying.

Seems rather counterproductive to undermine that "incentivizing energy supplies to go green" regulatory goal by simultaneously giving tax subsidies to fossil fuel producers which would incentivize energy suppliers to NOT go green. Indeed a 2009 study by the Environmental Law Institute examined energy subsidies from 2002 to 2008 and estimated them to be $72 billion vs $29 billion in favor of fossil fuels.

That's because the incentives aren't polar opposites even though they might appear so on the surface to idiots. For example, the "oil industry subsidy" might be tradable carbon credits or incentive to clean up a refinery (instead of forcing them to).

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

so are there any sane trump supporters here that actually think he won the debate? I will hand it to him for the first 20 mins or so he was on point and on message, and then, well...

 

[glenn1]

No, it's pretty clear "Maybe Trump is taking advantage of the solar power subsidies that Democrats love" isn't talking about the solar panels on trump's roof any more than "Or the fossil fuel subsidies that Republicans love" refers to the refinery in his back yard. Again, trying to copy me by pointing out other's thinking mistakes doesn't work when it's you doing the copying.

When you're talking about someone's personal income tax then yeah you don't include subsidies your business takes advantage of. Unless you're a S-Corp filer or something. Either way you're completely obfuscating the point which is that the rich generally have access to more and higher quality tax credits and subsidies for both their personal income taxes and those of their businesses. The tax code has been deliberately built to be gamed by people like Trump and in turn screw over people like Indus.

That's because the incentives aren't polar opposites even though they might appear so on the surface to idiots. For example, the "oil industry subsidy" might be tradable carbon credits or incentive to clean up a refinery (instead of forcing them to).

LOL at you thinking oil subsidies somehow are a regulatory attempt to do "carbon credits" or any such thing. Such wishful thinking is normally reserved for 4 year olds and Santa or the Easter Bunny. Feel free to peruse a list of subsidies and you'll quickly realize that it's hardly a list of things that support an environmental "regulatory regime."

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/55/22/48786795.pdf

 

[agent00f]

When you're talking about someone's personal income tax then yeah you don't include subsidies your business takes advantage of. Unless you're a S-Corp filer or something. Either way you're completely obfuscating the point which is that the rich generally have access to more and higher quality tax credits and subsidies for both their personal income taxes and those of their businesses. The tax code has been deliberately built to be gamed by people like Trump and in turn screw over people like Indus.

If you can figure this out why did you keep asking me about Trump's personal deductions? More obfuscation won't be your best plan of action for an answer.

LOL at you thinking oil subsidies somehow are a regulatory attempt to do "carbon credits" or any such thing. Such wishful thinking is normally reserved for 4 year olds and Santa or the Easter Bunny. Feel free to peruse a list of subsidies and you'll quickly realize that it's hardly a list of things that support an environmental "regulatory regime."

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/55/22/48786795.pdf

"Page not found - Page introuvable", did you paste the link from wiki or something without even checking what it says?

Maybe first try to figure out how you manage to think of yourself as smart or competent.

 

[glenn1]

If you can figure this out why did you keep asking me about Trump's personal deductions? More obfuscation won't be your best plan of action for an answer.

They were rhetorical statements, not a direct request "agent00f please do answer this question for me." E.g. "Perhaps he used a solar subsidy." Et cetera. Without having his tax return in front of us we can only speculate how he arrived at the tax liability he did.

I"Page not found - Page introuvable", did you paste the link from wiki or something without even checking what it says?

Maybe first try to figure out how you manage to think of yourself as smart or competent.

Here you go, have at it. Go get some learning about actual subsidies to fossil fuel rather than your wishful thinking ideas about them and then come back and talk. Or go to the page where the link is embedded if you don't want to click through directly. http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/

http://priceofoil.org/content/uploa...ft-the-Subsidies-database-as-of-May-2016.xlsx



U.S. Fossil Fuel Subsidies (in millions of dollars)
Avg 2000-02 Avg 2008-10 2008 2009 2010p
Total Coal Production 1395.5 710.74 1147.68 311.38 673.16
Total Coal Consumption 0 296.52 176.52 326.52 386.52
Total Coal General Support 373.31 1866.92 686.4 1008.75 3905.6
Total Coal
Total Oil Production 321.26 1709.71 1598.94 1917.21 1613.02
Total Oil Consumption 246.04 1087.47 790.46 1173.36 1298.62
Total Oil General Support 180.33 1429.92 1239.9 1758.34 1291.53
Total Oil
Total Gas Production 559.86 2710.7 2636.86 2841.17 2635.73
Total Gas Consumption 1200.64 2608.12 1526 3149.58 3157.06
Total Gas General Support 64.56 61.88 30.33 29.24 126.08
Total Gas
Total Production 2276.62 5131.15 5383.48 5069.76 4921.91
Total Consumption 1446.68 3992.11 2492.98 4649.46 4842.2
Total General Support 618.2 3358.72 1956.63 2796.33 5323.21
Total Fossi Fuel Subsidies 4341.5 12481.98 9833.09 12515.55 15087.32 NOTE: Total numbers here include Federal Support plus West Virginia, Texas, and Alaska
Table 25.1. Summary of fossil-fuel support to coal – United States TOTAL FOSSIL FEDERAL Avg 08-10
(Millions of U.S. dollars, nominal) Support element Jurisdiction Avg 2000-02 Avg 2008-10 2008 2009 2010p TOTAL FOSSIL FEDERAL (2010p):
Producer Support Estimate TOTAL FOSSIL FEDERAL 2009
Support to unit returns
Alternative Fuels Production Credit Federal 1143.33 273.33 590 60 170
Reduced Tax for Thin-Seamed Coal WV 0 37 37 37 37 (zero is n.c.)
Support for land (e.g. royalty concessions)
Capital Gains Treatment of Royalties on Coal Federal 90 76.67 110 70 50
Support for capital formation
Partial Expensing for Advanced Mine Safety Equipment Federal 0 6.67 20 0 0 (1st zero is n.a.)
Excess of Percentage over Cost Depletion Federal 162.17 317.07 390.68 144.38 416.16
Consumer Support Estimate
Consumption
Credit for Investment in Clean Coal Federal 0 150 30 180 240 (zero is n.a.)
Amortisation of Certain Pollution Control Facilities Federal 0 100 100 100 100 (zero is n.a.)
Industrial Expansion and Revitalization Credit WV 0 44.8 44.8 44.8 44.8 (zero is n.c.)
Credit for Reducing Utility Charges WV 0 1.72 1.72 1.72 1.72 (zero is n.c.)
General Services Support Estimate
Fossil Energy R&D Federal 373.31 1866.92 686.4 1008.75 3905.6
Table 25.2. Summary of fossil-fuel support to petroleum – United States
(Millions of U.S. dollars, nominal) Support element Jurisdiction Avg 2000-02 Avg 2008-10 2008 2009 2010p
Producer Support Estimate
Support to unit returns
Severance Tax Exemptions for Crude Oil TX 35.29 97.08 140.1 67.51 83.64
Development Credit for Certain Producers AK 0 11.8 8.35 13.53 13.53 (zero is n.a.)
Exclusion of Low-Volume Oil & Gas Wells WV 0 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 (zero is n.c.)
Income support
Exception from Passive Loss Limitation Federal 7.38 7.96 3.98 7.96 11.94
Support for capital formation
Expensing of Exploration and Development Costs Federal 32.55 489.35 656.44 652.47 159.14
Excess of Percentage over Cost Depletion Federal 105.64 170.91 210.59 77.83 224.32
Temporary Expensing of Equipment for Refining Federal 0 626.67 350 770 760 (zero is n.a.)
Aid to Small Refiners for EPA Capital Costs Federal 0 13.33 30 10 0 (first zero is n.a.)
Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit Federal 140.4 0 0 0 0
Sales Tax Exemption for Oil & Gas Equipment TX 0 41.31 25.62 49.77 48.54 (zero is n.c.)
Qualified Capital Expenditure Credit AK 0 207.01 155.56 232.74 232.74 (zero is n.a.)
Alternative Credit for Exploration AK 0 13.26 7.16 16.31 16.31 (zero is n.a.)
Support for knowledge creation
Amortisation of Geological Expenditure Federal 0 27.85 7.96 15.91 59.68 (zero is n.a.)
Consumer Support Estimate
Consumption
Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program Federal 265.73 463.6 250.35 570.23 570.23
Small Municipality Energy Assistance Program AK 0 0 48.69 0 0 (zeros are n.a.)
Power Cost Equalization AK 15.65 34.07 28.14 37.03 37.03
Alaska Heating Assistance Program AK 0 0 0 4.5 2.25 (zeros are n.a.)
Gasoline Tax Exemptions TX 73.45 78.07 77.7 77.6 78.9
Fuel Tax Exemptions for Farmers both 1187.98 988.08 1118.17 923.03 923.03
Consumer Support Estimate
Consumption
Fuel Tax Exemption for Aviation WV 0 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 (zero is n.c.)
Fuel Tax Exemption for Dyed Diesel WV 0 68.6 68.6 68.6 68.6 (zero is n.c.)
Fuel Tax Exemption for Propane WV 0 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 (zero is n.c.)
Fuel Tax Exemption for County Boards of Education WV 0 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 (zero is n.c.)
Fuel Tax Exemption for Certain Public Administrations WV 0 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 (zero is n.c.)
Fuel Tax Exemption for Certain Off-Highway Uses WV 0 84.8 84.8 84.8 84.8 (zero is n.c.)
General Services Support Estimate
Strategic Petroleum Reserve Federal 1262.57 1090.89 1101.47 1093.85 1077.35
Fossil Energy R&D Federal 85.57 11.4 10.45 6.43 17.32
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve Federal 6.88 10.54 15.55 12.84 3.22
Table 25.3. Summary of fossil-fuel support to natural gas – United States
(Millions of U.S. dollars, nominal) Support element Jurisdiction Avg 2000-02 Avg 2008-10 2008 2009 2010p
Producer Support Estimate
Support to unit returns
Severance Tax Exemptions for Natural Gas TX 201.36 1122.89 919.98 1133.79 1314.89
Development Credit for Certain Producers AK 0 17.86 12.65 20.47 20.47 (zero is n.a.)
Exclusion of Low-Volume Oil & Gas Wells WV 0 4.82 4.82 4.82 4.82 (zero is n.c.)
Coalbed Methane Exemption WV 0 4 4 4 4 (zero is n.a.)
Income support
Exception from Passive Loss Limitation Federal 9.28 12.04 6.02 12.04 18.06
Support for capital formation
Alaska Gasline Inducement Act AK 0 18.37 0 4.36 32.38 (first zero is n.a.; second zero is ..)
Expensing of Exploration and Development Costs Federal 40.78 740.65 993.56 987.53 240.86
Excess of Percentage over Cost Depletion Federal 132.18 258.68 318.73 117.79 339.52
Accelerated Depreciation of Distribution Pipelines Federal 0 93.33 80 80 120 (zero is n.a.)
Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit Federal 176.26 0 0 0 0
Sales Tax Exemption for Oil & Gas Equipment TX 0 62.52 38.78 75.33 73.46 (zero is n.c.)
Qualified Capital Expenditure Credit AK 0 313.32 235.44 352.26 352.26 (zero is n.a.)
Alternative Credit for Exploration AK 0 20.07 10.84 24.69 24.69 (zero is n.a.)
Support for knowledge creation
Amortisation of Geological Expenditure Federal 0 42.15 12.04 24.09 90.32
Consumer Support Estimate
Consumption
Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program Federal 1037.81 2340.73 1264 2879.1 2879.1
Alaska Heating Assistance Program AK 0 0 0 5.5 2.75 (zeros are n.a.)
Sales Tax Exemption for Natural Gas TX 162.83 247.81 242.42 245.4 255.63
Non-Utility Sales of Natural Gas WV 0 17 17 17 17 (zero is n.c.)
Credit for Reducing Utility Charges WV 0 2.58 2.58 2.58 2.58 (zero is n.c.)
General Services Support Estimate
Fossil Energy R&D Federal 64.56 61.88 30.33 29.24 126.08
Source (PDF): http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/55/22/48786795.pdf

 

[Jhhnn]

Thanks a bunch for all the off topic blah blah blah, glenn 1.

Is it even possible for Hillary Clinton to win a debate?

Apparently it is, given the desperation with which you avoid talking about Monday night's performance, the cool, calm, collected & very efficient way in which she thrashed Trump's ass.

 

[Knowing]

I was at a client the other day. 2 executives and one employee of a blue collar firm were discussing the debate. The employee is an enthusiastic Hillary voter "Trump...big red button...ego...global war...cats and dogs living together, etc..." One executive thought it was a false choice and was going third party. The other executive I believe was in the hold your nose and vote Hillary camp.

They all agreed that neither candidate explained a plan for anything.

 

[ivwshane]

I was at a client the other day. 2 executives and one employee of a blue collar firm were discussing the debate. The employee is an enthusiastic Hillary voter "Trump...big red button...ego...global war...cats and dogs living together, etc..." One executive thought it was a false choice and was going third party. The other executive I believe was in the hold your nose and vote Hillary camp.

They all agreed that neither candidate explained a plan for anything.

I guess even executives need to have their hands held and be told what's going on instead of merely going to the candidates website to see the details. You would think that they would understand that the general publics eyes would glaze over if Hillary actually went into detail with her plans.

 

[Jhhnn]

I guess even executives need to have their hands held and be told what's going on instead of merely going to the candidates website to see the details. You would think that they would understand that the general publics eyes would glaze over if Hillary actually went into detail with her plans.

Too true. They prefer the shorter version from Fox.

She did go into some detail about taxes, citing various reports, quoting them quite accurately as well. Trump merely blustered & diverted.

 

[MongGrel]

Yes I agree it's entirely possible in real life. But it's not in this rhetorical question that Indus posed that begins with the assumption that Trump is in a higher tax bracket than Indus. From that assumption the logic inevitably flows that Trump had income and it was enough to put him into a higher tax bracket. Well, let me slightly adjust that, Trump could have some passive income or something that wasn't subject to payroll taxes but that doesn't really change the nature of the question Indus asked which was about income taxes.

You are being rhetorical yourself non stop just speculating, as he is refusing to let anyone look at his taxes of course.

 

[Jhhnn]

You are being rhetorical yourself non stop just speculating, as he is refusing to let anyone look at his taxes of course.

I rather suspect his taxes don't look like the Clintons' taxes at all. They paid 30% in federal income taxes & donated another 10% to charity, didn't squeal at all, probably realize they've been more lucky than good, that they owe a debt of gratitude to the country that's given them so much.

Donald is all about Donald & nothing more. He's proud to just say FUGM to the nation & the people he wants to lead because he is, in his own words, "smart", & that's what "smart", boorish & entitled rich people get to say to the rest of us.

 

[nickqt]

She can't debate the "issues" because she's done absolutely nothing positive in her so called political career. Her finger prints are all over everything that's festering and diseased in Liberal America. The only thing she's advanced is her retirement benefit.

Hilarious analysis, clown.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Thanks a bunch for all the off topic blah blah blah, glenn 1.

Is it even possible for Hillary Clinton to win a debate?

Apparently it is, given the desperation with which you avoid talking about Monday night's performance, the cool, calm, collected & very efficient way in which she thrashed Trump's ass.

Yeah, when I made the topic I was kinda assuming Trump would be able to refrain from going full retard for once. Guess I was wrong

 

[agent00f]

They were rhetorical statements, not a direct request "agent00f please do answer this question for me." E.g. "Perhaps he used a solar subsidy." Et cetera. Without having his tax return in front of us we can only speculate how he arrived at the tax liability he did.

No, I mean really why did you ask me about his personal deductions when you're talking about corp ones? This is not a rhetorical question, so take a moment to read it a few times for understanding first before spewing forth.

Here you go, have at it. Go get some learning about actual subsidies to fossil fuel rather than your wishful thinking ideas about them and then come back and talk. Or go to the page where the link is embedded if you don't want to click through directly. http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/

Similarly, try to think about some of those lines in the context of regulation, eg. credit for this tech/method or that. The government can simply tell industry to do the same this or that, but instead chooses to incentives the same behavior via the tax system. Ponder for some while longer which kind of ideology might prefer and thus enact the latter to the former.

Then take a step back to reflect on how many times we've wrangled over issues, and the ratio of times you turned out right all along. Now compare that ratio to a passing test score. This is simply what happens when the not terribly educated meets education. Given this reality, consider adopting a more curious mindset instead of raging ignorance, for your own sake.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yeah, when I made the topic I was kinda assuming Trump would be able to refrain from going full retard for once. Guess I was wrong

Of course you were wrong. Lots of people want Trump to be somebody he's not, somebody he's incapable of being. I loved the part where the audience laughed as Trump was yelling about his wonderful temperament.

He lacks the basic self awareness & therefore the intellectual horsepower to be President.

He merely has an idiot savant gift at self promotion.

 

[zinfamous]

Yeah, when I made the topic I was kinda assuming Trump would be able to refrain from going full retard for once. Guess I was wrong

this was the ongoing concern from the dem party during the primaries--the concern that, with a surging Trump and his likely nomination, he will pivot and be normal. Thus, we can not nominate Sanders because he would never survive a relentless and focused attack on his "socialism." Any other repub candidate, and I think that would have been true.

we well know now that Trump is just too easily triggered, legitimately uneducated, lazy, and completely ambivalent to the world outside of his sphere, that he would have never been able to stay on point to take down Sanders. I think a large part of the "chaos voters" that support Trump simply because they hate politicians (or so they say--that could very well be a convenient excuse to hide bigotry) would flock to Sanders instead. But it's always hard to argue about situations that can never be known. At the very least, it is pretty clear that Bernie certainly would not be doing any worse than Clinton against citizen Trump.