Who Are You Voting For This Election

[Ariana]

I am Canadian and the only thing I know about your politics is what I learned from House of Cards

very interesting discussion!

Go Bernie

[DaveA]

I've hesitated posting on this thread because the one thing I NEVER do is say "I'm voting for ......", especially online. Plus I'm from central IL, which means we're pretty much at the mercy of Chicago's "Vote early and often" stuff in national/ statewide elections. So for me this election is almost a spectator sport.

That being said, then only word I can think of to describe this time is a "mess". Both parties tried to shove their favorite candidate (Bush/ Clinton) on their voters and it got shoved back up their collective a@@es. On the R side, Trump is a direct result of party leadership dumping on conservative/ libertarians. So when Trump popped up it was the chance for a big ol' middle finger to Washington. On the D side, I believe Sanders was a "prop"- running just to show that Clinton could overcome a "challenge" in the primary. Problem is- either he wasn't in on the joke or enough people really don't like her so he almost took her out. As is, I think she's irreparably damaged.

If the Republicans don't nominate Trump, it's President Clinton because they'll lose so much of their base they'll get crushed. If the Democrats nominate Clinton, start saying "Hello President Trump". If neither get nominated get out the popcorn, because this election will make Star Wars look realistic by comparison.

It just leaves me shaking my head. When this started there were people that I trusted the judgement regardless of if I liked or disliked their policies (Webb, Carson) or thought could be an effective leader of a divided government (Walker). Now that it's basically down to 2 I'm like "300 million people and this is the best we could come up with?":confused:

[mommyneedsadayoff]

I've hesitated posting on this thread because the one thing I NEVER do is say "I'm voting for ......", especially online. Plus I'm from central IL, which means we're pretty much at the mercy of Chicago's "Vote early and often" stuff in national/ statewide elections. So for me this election is almost a spectator sport.

That being said, then only word I can think of to describe this time is a "mess". Both parties tried to shove their favorite candidate (Bush/ Clinton) on their voters and it got shoved back up their collective a@@es. On the R side, Trump is a direct result of party leadership dumping on conservative/ libertarians. So when Trump popped up it was the chance for a big ol' middle finger to Washington. On the D side, I believe Sanders was a "prop"- running just to show that Clinton could overcome a "challenge" in the primary. Problem is- either he wasn't in on the joke or enough people really don't like her so he almost took her out. As is, I think she's irreparably damaged.

If the Republicans don't nominate Trump, it's President Clinton because they'll lose so much of their base they'll get crushed. If the Democrats nominate Clinton, start saying "Hello President Trump". If neither get nominated get out the popcorn, because this election will make Star Wars look realistic by comparison.

It just leaves me shaking my head. When this started there were people that I trusted the judgement regardless of if I liked or disliked their policies (Webb, Carson) or thought could be an effective leader of a divided government (Walker). Now that it's basically down to 2 I'm like "300 million people and this is the best we could come up with?":confused:

[TomCopeland]

Voting?

I'm surprised people aren't looking at the candidates' position on child care, family leave, child care tax credits, and other policies that would help children and families.

Clinton does have positions on these issues that are supportive of children and families:https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issue...ood-education/ Bernie's website says he's working on a plan to make child care affordable, but doesn't say much: https://berniesanders.com/issues/fig...womens-rights/

Trump says nothing about this on his website.

[Blackcat31]

I carefully considered every candidates view on early childhood.

It's exactly why I am NOT voting for Hillary.

[e.j.]

I'm like "300 million people and this is the best we could come up with?":confused:

I've been saying this very thing for quite some time now. In past elections, I at least felt I could vote for the candidate I least disliked. This is the first time I've felt I that I couldn't vote for anyonewho was running.

[e.j.]

I carefully considered every candidates view on early childhood.

It's exactly why I am NOT voting for Hillary.

Among other reasons!

[TomCopeland]

Hillary

I carefully considered every candidates view on early childhood.

It's exactly why I am NOT voting for Hillary.

Please explain.

[Michael]

Please explain.

HRC has stayed at 8 in our poll for sometime. We definitely could use some stumping for her on here. Some of the members probably don't wish to talk politics openly and I have seen that with a lot of my friends.

Perhaps Tom, you could give us your viewpoints on her statements for improving childcare.

I think the separation on opinion would not be so much the candidate but whether providers want limited government in our businesses.

[Blackcat31]

Please explain.

This will be hasty because I am on my phone so pardon the typos....


These are the 3 highlighted topics (I bolded them below) from the link on H Clintons page: (My replies to them are in blue)

Invest in early childhood programs like Early Head Start.

Head Start is a fundamental failure. I don't understand why we invest so much money for a program that can't SHOW and prove their own worth. The amount of money spent on HS could be used for so many other things. The salaries of it's workers and how they allocate their funding is laughable. For Ex, as a Head Start Assistant Teacher, I wanted to use some of our classroom money to purchase a few board games. Candyland/Chutes and Ladders.

I was told I could not purchase them at Walmart ($3.00 EACH game) but instead had to purchase them from specific sources that contract with HS. The cheapest was $14.97. Now WHY spend that amount of money when it was clear that it was such an overly inflated price? I dont understand that. Many Many times we were told "Gotta spend the grant money up or we won't any next year" and many similar statements.

That kind of spending is what is killing tax payers when it comes to these kinds of programs.

Ensure that every 4-year-old in America has access to high-quality preschool in the next 10 years.
Study after study as well as thread after thread on early childhood forums PROVE that children under age 5 do NOT need preschool or early education. They need the basics. Freedom to run and play and explore and be a child. Not produce memorized ABC's and 123's by age 2.
High Quality preschool is what will put good quality provider out of business unless they go earn a degree so they qualify as teachers and that is not fair considering the amount of money ECE teachers and family caregivers are paid.

Provide child care and scholarships to meet the needs of student parents

I currently provider care to several families receiving early learning scholarships through Parent Aware and I can tell you first hand that the parents these scholarships should have helped didn't. The parents and families it is helping are the ones already paying nothing for child care. The one family I have no longer has to pay a co-pay for their 3 children.

Instead due to the scholarship they receive their children now spend 15 hours MORE in child care than they did before and not because the parents are working more but simply because they no longer have to spend a single $1 on their child care costs. Which allows them to take vacations (without their children), have cosmetic surgery and buy a brand new vehicle.

I understand the goal of the program but sadly it missed it's mark.

So because Hillary Clinton supports the very things that are working providers out of business I will not vote for her.

[Blackcat31]

HRC has stayed at 8 in our poll for sometime. We definitely could use some stumping for her on here. Some of the members probably don't wish to talk politics openly and I have seen that with a lot of my friends.

Perhaps Tom, you could give us your viewpoints on her statements for improving childcare.

I think the separation on opinion would not be so much the candidate but whether providers want limited government in our businesses.

THIS^^^^^

[Thriftylady]

I carefully considered every candidates view on early childhood.

It's exactly why I am NOT voting for Hillary.

This. We don't need more government in childcare, we need less. Let us do our jobs without making it more costly. The more the government gets involved, the more home daycare providers are priced out of providing care. Hillary will almost certainly make sure there are no home daycare providers left. And I don't care what anyone says, center care is not always better care. I know there are a few great centers out there. But it is my understanding that many of the big corporate ones aren't that great!

[sleepinghart]

HRC has stayed at 8 in our poll for sometime. We definitely could use some stumping for her on here. Some of the members probably don't wish to talk politics openly and I have seen that with a lot of my friends.

Perhaps Tom, you could give us your viewpoints on her statements for improving childcare.

I think the separation on opinion would not be so much the candidate but whether providers want limited government in our businesses.

(^bolding^ by me)
~...^^This^^! happyface

[TomCopeland]

Government in child care

HRC has stayed at 8 in our poll for sometime. We definitely could use some stumping for her on here. Some of the members probably don't wish to talk politics openly and I have seen that with a lot of my friends.

Perhaps Tom, you could give us your viewpoints on her statements for improving childcare.

I think the separation on opinion would not be so much the candidate but whether providers want limited government in our businesses.

Yes, I think Hillary would bring more government money and involvement in the child care field vs. Trump. And I think this would be a good thing.

Head Start is not a failure. It helps millions of low income children and families.

The child care subsidy program helps millions of families enabling them to be able to work and support their families.

To ignore this is reckless. Our country provides free school education (K-12) for everyone. Our government (federal and state) heavily subsidize higher education.Tell me how a low-income family is supposed to afford high quality child care without some government assistance?

I do think there is a serious issue of whether or not more government involvement means a greater shift towards school based care and away from family child care. I do not support that trend. I think the family child care community needs to press hard to ensure that it doesn't.

To shun all government involvement in child doesn't make sense. Do you want to eliminate the Food Program? Do you want to eliminate the parent child care tax credit? Do you want to eliminate the special tax rules that allow providers to deduct house expenses? Do you want to eliminate the new $2,500 rule that allows providers to deduct expenses less than this amount in one year? I don't understand this anti-government attitude. It sounds like some folks are against government programs that benefit others, but not themselves.

Family child care, in general, is one of the lowest paid professions for people who must meet increasingly higher quality standards. Government programs don't always operate efficiently and can be improved. The proper role for government is a debatable issue that we reasonably disagree on. But, to say that we don't need government at all in the child care field doesn't make sense to me.

[NightOwl]

"I don't understand this anti-government attitude. It sounds like some folks are against government programs that benefit others, but not themselves." Tom Copeland.

Totally agree with this. The greater good is ignored by some in exchange for what will benefit the individual. This country won't function on an "every man for himself" mentality. It will crumble. It must be a "one for all, all for one" mentality to be truly successful.