If free college was an on-line university, I would be okay with it. Instead, we will get amusement park universities with private suites in mega football stadiums and water parks so they can compete with the universities with big fancy dorms and maid service

Professors will extol the benefits of extracurricular activities such as sororities and fraternities as well as volunteerism which are almost inaccessible to those working full time jobs.

I urge you to consider taking a walk on the wild side. Even Warren Buffet says the U.S. would survive a President Trump. We could try it for four years just to get it out of our system. And who knows? It might be ok.

Here's a question on Clinton. We know that she has a long history of being untrustworthy. But, in 2007 she learned how to smile and has been working it like a celeb ever since. It could be completely fake. Or, is it possible for her to have also altered her character and philosophy so as to be a leader we can trust? Leadership without trust is no leadership at all. It's kind of a science question - can her brain have been rewired? And how would we know?

I'm with Mae West: "When given a choice between two evils, I always pick the one I never tried before."

How do they even think this will work? DO they think those of us still paying on hefty student loans, are going to continue to do so after others are getting it free? Fuck no! (I am absolutely against "free" tuition, but damned if I'll keep paying if others don't have to).

> I urge you to consider taking a
> walk on the wild side. Even Warren
> Buffet says the U.S. would survive

Well then! I would urge you to consider blowing your brains out with a pistol. I bet I could find an arbitrageur who'd affirm that it's at least possible that you'd "survive," which you apparently regard as sufficient aspiration. I'm certain I could find one who'd explain that it wouldn't, in your case, matter anyway.

Look, we've all been through this conversation with an asshole or two this year, so let's just shuck right down to the cob: Since you want him to win, are you going to contribute financially to his campaign?

I mean, you believe in him, don't you. 'I urge you to consider taking a walk' where your mouth is.

Something tells me, if this comes to be, there will be more students than ever majoring in the hegemonics of Foucaultian pottery theory. (And no, I have not a fucking clue what that means, either.)

One wonders what people think Clinton or Sanders is actually proposing. Do prospective students really think they're going to get four years of partying, drinking, and copulation (with a communications degree at the end) on somebody else's dime? Remember, the Clinton proposal only talks about paying tuition. I'd expect that if a proposal like this were actually passed, room and board prices would skyrocket ever higher.

But really, you could almost do something like Clinton and Sanders are proposing: four years of tuition at State U. But to be cost effective, you'd have to make the scholarships competitive, and only for certain fields of study, neither of which would play well with a lot of people.

I paid my student loans. Why do I have to pay yours?

I resent being forced to put my hard-earned money toward a 4-year bacchanal for some grievance studies major who will graduate and, at 22 year of age, tell me I'm the source of all the problems in America.

There was an earlier thread on this blog about how helicopter parenting is creating the special snowflakes who need safe spaces in adulthood. Well, politicians pandering to the 18-24 year old set ain't helping - inflating our least experienced cohort's sense of entitlement and giving it an overinflated sense of its own value to the world.

No one has yet said how this would be paid for, least of all Hillary.

With bloody stupid ideas like this, do I want Hillary to win? No. The thing is, I also don't want Trump to win. Can we have a presidential race with two losers?

Perhaps the best we can hope for is that neither of them gets the required Electoral votes and the election is kicked to the House of Representatives which is then free to chose anyone.

Unfortunately, the general consensus is that the Republican-majority House would pick Mitt Romney, who says he wants to be president. Sorry Mittens, but if you were serious about wanting to be president, you should have run a damned campaign, not tried to sneak in the back door.

The House scenario seems unlikely as most states award all of their Electoral votes to the candidate winning a simple majority of the state's popular vote. Bill Clinton never won the popular vote in two three-way races and was still elected by a wide margin twice.

Look, we've all been through this conversation with an asshole or two this year, so let's just shuck right down to the cob: Since you want him to win, are you going to contribute financially to his campaign?

I mean, you believe in him, don't you. 'I urge you to consider taking a walk' where your mouth is.

Crid at July 9, 2016 8:14 AM

Ok Crid, even though I think spending in traditional media markets is going to be less valuable this election than it ever has been, you have convinced me to send Trump money.

I suspect watching Hillary do her best imitation of a senile alcoholic regarding her email and national security convinced a lot of people to send Trump money. She certainly convinced me that Trump is the better choice.

But of course I'm a party voter anyway. The individual at the top of the ticket only matters if their party is a criminal enterprise.

The republicans are stupid. The democrats are criminal and stupid. Easy choice.

Ai-yi-yi....

No tears.

“ . . . we've all been through this conversation with an asshole or two this year, . . .”

My comment wasn’t meant to be Cridbait. Look, there’s no upside to voting for Clinton. For one thing she’s into gun control – I couldn’t blow my brains out with a pistol.
And no, Trump hasn’t asked for my money, just a vote.

"Free" college means govt control over every aspect of a college education, including:
-Choosing who is admitted and where they attend,
-Your choice of major study.

So, govt says, " Sorry, kid. We have too many English Majors, so you have to major in math instead. And FSU, your first choice, is full, so we're sending you to Texas Tech.

Senators and Reps have the influence to get your child admitted to West Point. If the Hillary College Plan becomes law, Senators and Reps will have the influence to get your child admitted to where you think best. The new admission game will be " Call Your Congressman."

Nick has it dead to rights there. University of Texas already does this. They have to accept the top 10% of any high school in Texas who apply. So what do they do? You may be accepted to UT but you aren't accepted by any major. Want to be an electrical engineer but don't have the grades or personal contacts, guess what, your a violinist. It doesn't matter you've never played the violin. That is the only major open to you. Have fun flunking out.

Now Hillary want to bring those same dirty tricks to college admissions everywhere. Yay.

"Libertarian" Gary Johnson wants to give parents of school-aged children $3500 per year per child. Because... well, because reasons. And many who deplore the free college okeydoke are just fine with Uncle Sugar vouchers for their own kids. They're all in it to some extent. But suggesting parents pay for their own issue seems to be a third rail in American politics.

Go Green.

http://www.jill2016.com/

Reason Number 14 Why Hillary Clinton Should Be Our Next President: Hillary’s New College Compact would mean students would never have to borrow to pay for tuition to attend a four-year public college in their state—and the millions of Americans who have student debt can refinance.

Wait, "in their state" ... hmmm. So, free tuition at Cal State Bakersfield for the proles and all expenses paid vacations at UC Berkeley for the elite.

What about private universities "in their state?"

And what about those "millions of Americans who have student debt" refinancing. Their younger siblings get free college and they get a refi? Sounds fair. How's that social justice thing working out for you?

She needs a shappy name, that's easy to remember. And, she'll need some quotable talking points. How about:

The "Affordable College Act" ?

And,

"If you like your college, you can keep your college" ?

> For one thing she’s into gun
> control – I couldn’t blow my
> brains out with a pistol.

Oh shit... I forgot.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

> Trump hasn’t asked for my
> money, just a vote.

Dood/Gal/Bro... The thing is, this is the same test I always want to offer to liberals (and Republicans) who demand government investment and regulation to make some corner of life better: How is your concern about this matter reflected in your personal investments and expenditures?

If Trump is to win, your most genuine expression of trust is what will make it happen, right?

"We'll get more of the same crap we've gotten for the past eight years (with a big scooping of Clinton cronyism) -- but at least it won't be "Risky Business goes to the White House" (crossed with Kim Jun Un with goldilocks and a spray tan)."

Okay. Justify your position in the face of this observation:

"Trump has five decades of acting rational in business dealings, and getting along with people all over the world, including China and Russia. (including their govt. agencies - R) By now you would have heard stories of Trump being a loose cannon in his business dealings if such a thing had happened. We are hearing no stories of that nature.
How risky is Trump? Consider that Trump has never had an alcoholic beverage. He was against the Iraq war. He doesn’t want boots on the ground in Syria. He wants a strong military to discourage war. Trump personally gains nothing from war, but he has a lot to lose, including every building with his name on it.

Putin already seems to like Trump. They are similar characters in terms of their persuasion talents. And it wouldn’t hurt to be on good terms with Russia while we go after ISIS. Trump seems to have that relationship covered.

Trump has been negotiating with the Chinese for years, with no problems yet. And the Chinese leaders are not children. They got their positions by being great deal-makers, like Trump. They might not want to negotiate against Trump, but they aren’t afraid of his personality type. Trump often tells us that his first bid in any negotiation is super-aggressive. China knows it too. They are not naive. They can tell the difference between a negotiator and a madman."

Trump has five decades of acting rational in business dealings...

By now you would have heard stories of Trump being a loose cannon in his business dealings if such a thing had happened.

...But there'd be no point. If, in July 2016, you're impressed by rhetoric like "By now you would have heard," then the problem isn't that the information hasn't been made available to you. The problem is that you're engaged in something which can't be bothered with reality testing.

...Though most of Amy's commenters, we're pleased to note, are sober enough to avoid contributions to the daydream.

Raddy, despite sincere effort by you and your readers, it's often very difficult to understand what you're getting at.

Are you sincerely suggesting that American voters should let Putin's tastes guide their choices?

Raddy, despite sincere effort by you and your readers, it's often very difficult to understand what you're getting at.

Are you sincerely suggesting that American voters should let Putin's tastes guide their choices?

Crid at July 9, 2016 7:37 PM

I'm sure Putin would rather see Hillary as president. He has all her emails, and most probably has been donating to the Clinton foundation in return for US government favors.

Crid, did you notice I quoted somebody?

Hillary's detractors have no problem at all listing her failures and tactics - and our hostess can only offer "petulant" as a Trump negative?

Meanwhile, if you enjoy Obama policies, you may continue them by voting for Hillary.

Yes, but there was no link... Should we not have presumed the cite represented your own beliefs? We don't love you enough to google your sources to find out who's putting goofy thoughts into that pretty little head of yours.

Here in Switzerland University is very cheap as it is almost entirely paid for by the State.

The catch? Only a very few people go. Most don't even go to college prep, at age 16, they go to apprenticeships. They take classes (I believe these are paid for by the state) while they work for an actual company that pays them. Then they have a different kind of diploma and a license to work in the field they worked in.

Of the ones who do go to Uni, about a third flunk out. The courses are designed that way.

So when talking about free or heavily subsidized college, keep in mind that countries that do this only pay for a very few people.

As I've been explaining, like Trump, she's corrupt, but at least she's a corrupt adult.

I wonder how that's going to work out when Putin threatens to blackmail her because he has a pristine copy of her email server?

The fun will happen when another state actor with a copy of that server tries to blackmail her to go in a different direction than what Putin demands.

"We don't love you enough to google your sources to find out who's putting goofy thoughts into that pretty little"

Bullshit. You're always searching anyway.

Again: Meanwhile, if you enjoy Obama policies, you may continue them by voting for Hillary.

If you like your government, you can keep it!

> You're always searching
> anyway.

What does that even mean?

Raddy, arguing would be more fun if you were coherent, but about seven, maybe eight of your last responses to me have been unreadable and inane. Who wants to vote for Hillary? Searching for what?

"The fun will happen when another state actor with a copy of that server tries to blackmail her to go in a different direction than what Putin demands."

Why blackmail her? Just pay the standard bribe to the Clinton Foundation and you are good to go. On the level nation states work she isn't that expensive. I just don't have a spare billion lying around to take care of myself.

The ironic thing is that the proposal won't cut much ice with the target audience. The response will go like this: "Be seen attending State U? I'd rather be dead! I expect free tuition to Harvard!" And M4 has a great point: The support won't be sufficient without also promising amnesty to the older millennials that are now stuck with six-figure loans. Hello, federal bankruptcy and/or Weimar-level inflation.

Free college for everyone! (What's a few trillion dollars amongst friends?)

The result? Education inflation. Welcome to the new high school diploma. Value? Hahahahahahahahahahah!