

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Following a Hillary Clinton speech highly critical of his economic acumen and business record, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump on Tuesday responded with an epic Twitter tirade which offered a possible preview of a speech aimed at his Democratic rival scheduled for Wednesday.
Clinton's remarks were a clear effort to put into question Trump's claim of being "very smart" and "very successful in business," something many of his backers cite as a key reason for their support.
As The Hill reported:
A Gallup poll earlier this month found 53 percent of voters would prefer Trump as president when it comes to the economy, compared with 43 percent who would prefer Clinton, making it one of the few areas where Trump has a distinct advantage.
[Clinton] sought to close that gap in her speech, arguing at length that Trump's success in the business world isn't what it seems.
"You might think that because he has spent his life as a businessman he'd be better prepared to handle the economy. It turns out, he's dangerous there too," she said. "Just like he shouldn't have his finger on the button, he shouldn't have his hands on the economy."
Clinton repeatedly chided Trump for driving his business ventures into the ground, often by filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and for leaving a path of economic destruction and injured workers in his wake.
"We can't let him bankrupt America like it's one of his failed casinos," Clinton said. "We can't let him roll the dice with our children's futures."
However, as TIME magazine's Rana Foroohar notes, it's not as though Clinton has a particularly hard case to make.
From the few details that are available, writes Foroohar, Trump's economic plany is pretty much "Reaganomics on steroids -- and that's without considering anything truly crazy he might do. The upshot of his plans are: reduce taxes on individuals and corporations, while throwing the public a bone by closing some tax loopholes used by the rich."
What's missing, according to Foroohar, is that Clinton's speech failed to offer "a vision of the future that gets people excited" - an implication that her campaign may be leaning too much on fear-mongering over Trump and too little on inspiring potential voters about what her economic plan would be.
Regardless, Clinton's speech seemed enough to ignite the passions of Trump, who shortly after Clinton's speech unleashed a series of tweets against his presumed general election rival:
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Following a Hillary Clinton speech highly critical of his economic acumen and business record, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump on Tuesday responded with an epic Twitter tirade which offered a possible preview of a speech aimed at his Democratic rival scheduled for Wednesday.
Clinton's remarks were a clear effort to put into question Trump's claim of being "very smart" and "very successful in business," something many of his backers cite as a key reason for their support.
As The Hill reported:
A Gallup poll earlier this month found 53 percent of voters would prefer Trump as president when it comes to the economy, compared with 43 percent who would prefer Clinton, making it one of the few areas where Trump has a distinct advantage.
[Clinton] sought to close that gap in her speech, arguing at length that Trump's success in the business world isn't what it seems.
"You might think that because he has spent his life as a businessman he'd be better prepared to handle the economy. It turns out, he's dangerous there too," she said. "Just like he shouldn't have his finger on the button, he shouldn't have his hands on the economy."
Clinton repeatedly chided Trump for driving his business ventures into the ground, often by filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and for leaving a path of economic destruction and injured workers in his wake.
"We can't let him bankrupt America like it's one of his failed casinos," Clinton said. "We can't let him roll the dice with our children's futures."
However, as TIME magazine's Rana Foroohar notes, it's not as though Clinton has a particularly hard case to make.
From the few details that are available, writes Foroohar, Trump's economic plany is pretty much "Reaganomics on steroids -- and that's without considering anything truly crazy he might do. The upshot of his plans are: reduce taxes on individuals and corporations, while throwing the public a bone by closing some tax loopholes used by the rich."
What's missing, according to Foroohar, is that Clinton's speech failed to offer "a vision of the future that gets people excited" - an implication that her campaign may be leaning too much on fear-mongering over Trump and too little on inspiring potential voters about what her economic plan would be.
Regardless, Clinton's speech seemed enough to ignite the passions of Trump, who shortly after Clinton's speech unleashed a series of tweets against his presumed general election rival:
Following a Hillary Clinton speech highly critical of his economic acumen and business record, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump on Tuesday responded with an epic Twitter tirade which offered a possible preview of a speech aimed at his Democratic rival scheduled for Wednesday.
Clinton's remarks were a clear effort to put into question Trump's claim of being "very smart" and "very successful in business," something many of his backers cite as a key reason for their support.
As The Hill reported:
A Gallup poll earlier this month found 53 percent of voters would prefer Trump as president when it comes to the economy, compared with 43 percent who would prefer Clinton, making it one of the few areas where Trump has a distinct advantage.
[Clinton] sought to close that gap in her speech, arguing at length that Trump's success in the business world isn't what it seems.
"You might think that because he has spent his life as a businessman he'd be better prepared to handle the economy. It turns out, he's dangerous there too," she said. "Just like he shouldn't have his finger on the button, he shouldn't have his hands on the economy."
Clinton repeatedly chided Trump for driving his business ventures into the ground, often by filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and for leaving a path of economic destruction and injured workers in his wake.
"We can't let him bankrupt America like it's one of his failed casinos," Clinton said. "We can't let him roll the dice with our children's futures."
However, as TIME magazine's Rana Foroohar notes, it's not as though Clinton has a particularly hard case to make.
From the few details that are available, writes Foroohar, Trump's economic plany is pretty much "Reaganomics on steroids -- and that's without considering anything truly crazy he might do. The upshot of his plans are: reduce taxes on individuals and corporations, while throwing the public a bone by closing some tax loopholes used by the rich."
What's missing, according to Foroohar, is that Clinton's speech failed to offer "a vision of the future that gets people excited" - an implication that her campaign may be leaning too much on fear-mongering over Trump and too little on inspiring potential voters about what her economic plan would be.
Regardless, Clinton's speech seemed enough to ignite the passions of Trump, who shortly after Clinton's speech unleashed a series of tweets against his presumed general election rival: