看 BBC 學英文
From the Thomas and Max Centre of University of Nevada,
I'm Chris Wallace of Fox News.
And I welcome you to the third
and final of the 2016 presidential debates
between Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton and Donald J. Trump.
This debate is sponsored by the Commission On Presidential Debates.
The commission has designed the format,
six roughly 15-minute segments
with two-minute answers to the first question,
then open discussion for the rest of each segment.
Both campaigns have agreed to those rules.
For the record, I decided the topics and the questions in each topic.
None of those questions has been shared
with the commission or the two candidates.
The audience here in the hall has promised to remain silent.
No cheers, boos or other interruptions
so we and you can focus on what the candidates have to say.
No noise except right now
as we welcome the Democratic nominee for president, Secretary Clinton,
and the Republican nominee for president, Mr. Trump.
Secretary Clinton, Mr. Trump, welcome.
Let's get right to it.
The first topic is the Supreme Court.
We, you both talked briefly about the court in the last debate,
but I want to drill down on this
because the next president will almost certainly have at least
one appointment and likely or possibly two or three appointments,
which means that you will in effect determine the balance of the court
for what could be the next quarter century.
First of all, where do you want to see
the court take the country?
what's your view on how the constitution should be interpreted?
Do the founders' words mean what they say
or is it a living document
to be applied flexibly according to changing circumstances?
In this segment, Secretary Clinton, you go first,
you have two minutes.
Thank you very much, Chris,
and thanks to UNLV for hosting us.
You know, I think when we talk about the Supreme Court
it really raises the central issue in this election,
namely, what kind of country are we going to be?
What kind of opportunities will we provide for our citizens?
What kind of rights will Americans have?
And I feel strongly that
the Supreme Court needs to stand on the side of the American people,
not on the side of the powerful corporations and the wealthy.
For me, that means that we need a Supreme Court
that will stand up on behalf of women's rights,
on behalf of the rights of the LGBT community,
that will stand up and say no to Citizens United,
a decision that has undermined the election system in the country
because of the way it permits dark, unaccountable money
to come into our electoral system.
I have major disagreements with my opponent
about these issues and others
that will be before the Supreme Court,
but I feel that at this point in our country's history,
it is important that we not reverse marriage equality,
that we not reverse Roe v. Wade,
that we stand up against Citizens United,
we stand up for the rights of people in the workplace,
that we stand up and basically say
the Supreme Court should represent all of us.
That's how I see the court
and the kind of people that I would be looking to nominate to the court
would be in the great tradition of standing up to the powerful,
standing up on behalf of our rights as Americans,
and I look forward to having that opportunity.
I would hope that the Senate would do its job
and confirm the nominee that President Obama has sent to them.
That's the way the constitution fundamentally should operate.
The president nominates
and then the Senate advises and consents or not.
But they go forward with the process.
Secretary Clinton, thank you.
Mr. Trump, same question.
Where do you want to see the court take the country
and how do you believe the constitution should be interpreted?
Well, first of all, it's great to be with you and thank you, everybody.
The Supreme Court, it's what it's all about.
Our country is so, so, just so imperative that we have the right justices.
Something happened recently where
Justice Ginsburg made some very, very inappropriate statements toward me
and toward a tremendous number of people,
many, many millions of people that I represent,
and she was forced to apologize and apologize she did.
But these were statements that should never ever have been made.
We need a Supreme Court that, in my opinion,
is going to uphold the second amendment
and all amendments but the second amendment,
which is under absolute siege.
I believe if my opponent should win this race,
which I truly don't think will happen,
we will have a second amendment which will be a very, very small replica
of what it is right now.
But I feel that it's absolutely important that we uphold
because of the fact that it is under such trauma.
I feel that the justices that I am going to appoint,
and I've named 20 of them,
the justices that I'm going to appoint will be pro-life,
they will have a conservative bent,
they will be protecting the second amendment,
they are great scholars in all cases
and they're people of tremendous respect.
They will interpret the constitution the way the founders wanted it interpreted.
And I believe that's very, very important.
I don't think we should have justices appointed
that decide what they want to hear.
It's all about the constitution of...
and so important, the constitution the way it was meant to be
and those are the people that I will appoint.
Mr. Trump, thank you.
We now have about 10 minutes for open discussion.
I want to focus on two issues
that in fact by the justices that you name
could end up changing the existing law of the land.
First is one that you mentioned, Mr. Trump, and that is guns.
Secretary Clinton, you said last year, and let me quote,
the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment.
And now, in fact, in the 2008 Heller case,
the court ruled that there is a constitutional right to bear arms
but a right that is reasonably limited.
Those were the words of the Judge Antonio Scalia who wrote the decision.
What's wrong with that?
Well, first of all, I support the Second Amendment.
I lived in Arkansas for 18 wonderful years.
I represented upstate New York.
I understand and respect the tradition of gun ownership.
It goes back to the founding of our country.
But I also believe that there can be and must be reasonable regulation.
Because I support the Second Amendment,
doesn't mean that I want people who shouldn't have guns
to be able to threaten you, kill you or members of your family.
And so when I think about what we need to do,
we have 33,000 people a year who die from guns.
I think we need comprehensive background checks,
need to close the online loophole, close the gun show loophole.
There are other matters that I think are sensible,
that are the kind of reforms that would make a difference
that are not in any way conflicting with the Second Amendment.
You mentioned the Heller decision,
and what I was saying that you reference, Chris,
was that I disagreed with the way the court
applied the Second Amendment in that case.
Because what the District of Columbia was trying to do
was protect toddlers from guns.
So they wanted people with guns to safely store them,
and the court didn't accept that reasonable regulation,
but they've accepted many others.
So I see no conflict between saving people's lives and defending the Second Amendment.
Let me bring Mr. Trump in here.
The bipartisan Open Debate Coalition got millions of votes on questions to ask here,
and this was, in fact, one of the top questions that they got.
How will you insure the Second Amendment is protected?
You just heard Secretary Clinton's answer.
Does she persuade you that,
while you may differ on regulation,
that in fact she supports a Second Amendment right to bear arms?
Well, the DC v. Heller decision was very strongly...
and she was extremely angry about it.
I watched. I mean, she was very, very angry when upheld.
And Justice Scalia was so involved,
and it was a well-crafted decision,
but Hillary was extremely upset, extremely angry,
and people that believe in the Second Amendment and believe in it very strongly
were very upset with what she had to say.
Let me bring in Secretary Clinton. Were you extremely upset?
Well, I was upset because, unfortunately, dozens of toddlers injure themselves,
even kill people with guns
because, unfortunately, not everyone who has loaded guns in their homes
takes appropriate precautions.
But there's no doubt that I respect the Second Amendment,
that I also believe there's an individual right to bear arms.
That is not in conflict with sensible, common-sense regulation.
And, you know, look, I understand that Donald's been strongly supported by the NRA,
the gun lobby's on his side,
they're running millions of dollars of ads against me.
And I regret that
because what I would like to see is for people to come together and say,
of course, we're going to protect and defend the Second Amendment,
but we're going to do it in a way that tries to save
some of these 33,000 lives that we lose every year.
Let me bring Mr. Trump back into that.
Because, in fact, you oppose any limits on assault weapons,
any limits on high-capacity magazines,
you support a national right to carry law.
Well, let me just tell you before we go any further,
in Chicago, which has the toughest gun laws in the United States,
probably you could say, by far, they have more gun violence than any other city.
So we have the toughest laws and you have tremendous gun violence.
I am a very strong supporter of the Second Amendment.
And I don't know if Hillary was saying it in a sarcastic manner,
but I'm very proud to have the endorsement of the NRA.
It's the earliest endorsement they've ever given
to anybody who ran for president.
I'm very honored by all of that.
We are going to appoint justices.
This is the best way to help the Second Amendment.
We're going to appoint justices
that will feel very strongly about the Second Amendment,
that will not do damage to the Second Amendment.
Another issue which divides you
and the justices that whoever ends up winning this election appoints
could have a dramatic effect there,
- and that's the issue of abortion. - Right.
Mr. Trump, you're pro-life.
But I want to ask you specifically,
do you want the court, including the justices that you will name,
to overturn Roe v. Wade which includes,
in fact, states a woman's right to abortion?
Well, if that would happen, because I am pro-life
and I will be appointing pro-life judges,
I would think that that would go back to the individual states.
But I'm asking you specifically, would you like...
If they overturned it, it will go back to the states.
What I'm asking you, sir, is do you want to see the court overturn?
You just said you want to see the court protect the Second Amendment.
Do you want to see the court overturn Roe v. Wade?
Well, if we put another two or perhaps three justices on,
that's really what is going to be... and that will happen,
and that will happen automatically, in my opinion,
because I'm putting pro-life justices on the court.
I will say this, it will go back to the states
and the states will then make a determination.
Well, I strongly support Roe v. Wade,
which guarantees a constitutional right to a woman
to make the most intimate, most difficult, in many oases, decisions
about her health care that one can imagine.
And in this case, it's not only about Roe v. Wade.
It is about what's happening right now in America,
so many states are putting very stringent regulations on women
that block them from exercising that choice
to the extent that they are defunding Planned Parenthood,
which, of course, provides all kinds of cancer screenings and other benefits
for women in our country.
Donald has said he's in favor of defunding Planned Parenthood.
He even supported shutting the government down to defund Planned Parenthood.
I will defend Planned Parenthood.
I will defend Roe v. Wade
and I will defend women's rights to make their own health care decisions.
And we've come too far to have that turn back now.
Indeed he said women should be punished,
that there should be some form of punishment for women who obtain abortions.
And I could just not be more opposed to that kind of thinking.
I'm going to give you a chance to respond,
but I want to ask you, Secretary Clinton,
I want to explore, how far you believe the right to abortion goes.
You have been quoted as saying that the fetus has no constitutional rights.
You also voted against a ban on late-term partial birth abortions.
Because, Roe v. Wade very clearly sets out
that there can be regulations on abortion
so long as the life and the health of the mother are taken into account.
And when I voted as a senator,
I did not think that that was the case.
The kinds of oases that fall at the end of pregnancy
are often the most heartbreaking, painful decisions for families to make.
I have met with women who toward the end of their pregnancy,
get the worst news one could get,
that their health is in jeopardy if they continue to carry to term
or that something terrible has happened or just been discovered about the pregnancy.
I do not think the United States government should be stepping in
and making those most personal of decisions.
So you can regulate, if you are doing so
with the life and the health of the mother taken into account.
Mr. Trump, your reaction
and particularly on this issue of late-term partial birth abortion.
Well, I think it's terrible if you go with what Hillary is saying,
in the ninth month you can take the baby
and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother just prior to the birth of the baby.
Now, you can say that that's okay, and Hillary can say that that's okay,
but it's not okay with me.
Because based on what she's saying and based on where she's going and where she's been,
you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb in the ninth month,
on the final day.
And that's not acceptable.
Well, that is not what happens in these cases.
And using that kind of scare rhetoric is just terribly unfortunate.
You should meet with some of the women that I've met with.
Women I've known over the course of my life.
This is one of the worst possible choices that any woman and her family has to make.
I do not believe the government should be making it.
You know, I had the great honor of traveling across the world on behalf of our country.
I've been to countries where governments either force women to have abortions
like they used to do in China
or force women to bear children
like they used to do in Romania.
And I can tell you that the government has no business in the decisions
that women make with their families
in accordance with their faith, with medical advice,
and I will stand up for that right.
All right. Just briefly, I want to move on to another segment.
And honestly, nobody has business doing what I just said,
doing that as late as one or two or three or four days prior to birth,
nobody has that right.
All right. Let's move on to the subject of immigration
and there is almost no issue that separates the two of you
more than the issue of immigration.
Actually, there are a lot of issues that separate the two of you.
Mr. Trump, you want to build a wall.
Secretary Clinton, you've offered no specific plan
for how you want to secure our southern border.
Mr. Trump, you are calling for major deportations.
Secretary Clinton, you say that within your first hundred days as president,
you'll offer a package that includes a pathway to citizenship.
The question really is
why are you right and your opponent wrong?
Mr. Trump, you go first in this segment. You have two minutes.
Well, first of all, she wants to give amnesty, which is a disaster
and very unfair to all the people who are waiting in line for many, many years.
We need strong borders.
In the audience tonight, we have four mothers of...
I mean, these are unbelievable people that I've gotten to know over a period of years
whose children have been killed,
brutally killed by people who came into the country illegally.
You have thousands of mothers, fathers, and relatives all over the county.
They're coming in illegally.
Drugs are pouring in through the border.
We have no country if we have no border.
Hillary wants to give amnesty, she wants to have open borders.
As you know, the border patrol agency,
16,500-plus ICE last week endorsed me.
First time they've ever endorsed a candidate.
It means their job is tougher,
but they know what's going on. They know it better than anybody.
They want strong borders. They feel we have to have strong borders.
I was up in New Hampshire, the biggest complaint they have,
with all the problems going on in the world,
many of the problems caused by Hillary Clinton and by Barack Obama,
all of the problems,
their single biggest problem is heroin
that pours across our southern borders, just pouring and destroying their youth.
It's poisoning the blood of their youth and plenty of other people.
We have to have strong borders.
We have to keep the drugs out of our country.
Right now, we're getting the drugs, they're getting the cash.
We need strong borders. We absolute...
We cannot give amnesty.
Now I want to build a wall. We need the wall.
And the border patrol, ICE,
they all want the wall.
We stop the drugs, we shore up the border.
One of my first acts will be to get all of the drug lords,
all of the bad ones.
We have some bad, bad people in this country that have to go out.
We'll get them out, we're going to secure the bother,
and once the border is secured,
at a later date, we'll make a determination as to the rest.
But we have some bad hombres here and we're going to get them out.
Mr. Trump, thank you.
Same question to you, Secretary Clinton.
Basically, why are you right and Mr. Trump is wrong?
Well, as he was talking, I was thinking about
a young girl I met here in Las Vegas, Carla...
who was very worried that her parents might be deported
because she was born in this country, but they were not.
They work hard. They do everything they can to give her a good life.
And you're right, I don't want to rip families apart.
I don't want to be sending parents away from children.
I don't want to see the deportation force that Donald has talked about
in action in our country.
We have 11 million undocumented people.
They have 4 million American citizen children,
15 million people.
He said as recently as a few weeks ago in Phoenix
that every undocumented person would be subject to deportation.
Now, here's what that means.
It means you would have to have a massive law enforcement presence
where law enforcement officers would be going school to school,
home to home, business to business
rounding up people who are undocumented
and we would then have to put them on trains, on buses,
to get them out of our country.
I think that is an idea that is not in keeping with who we are as a nation.
I think it's an idea that would rip our country apart.
I have been for border security for years.
I voted for border security in the United States Senate,
and my comprehensive immigration reform plan
of course includes border security.
But I wanna put our resources where I think they're most needed,
getting rid of any violent person,
anybody who should be deported, we should deport them.
When it comes to the wall that Donald talks about building,
he went to Mexico.
He had a meeting with the Mexican president.
Didn't even raise it. He choked.
And then got into a Twitter war
because the Mexican president said,
"We're not paying for that wall."
So I think we are both a nation of immigrants
and we are a nation of laws
and that we can act accordingly.
And that's why I'm introducing comprehensive immigration reform
within the first hundred days
with a path to citizenship.
I'm introducing comprehensive immigration reform
within the first hundred days
with a path to citizenship.
Thank you, Secretary Clinton. I wanna follow up--
- Chris, I think I should respond to them. - Okay.
First of all, I had a very good meeting with the president of Mexico.
Very nice man.
We will be doing very much better with Mexico
on trade deals, believe me.
The NAFTA deal signed by her husband,
it's one of the worst deals ever made of any kind signed by anybody.
It's a disaster.
Hillary Clinton wanted the wall.
Hillary Clinton fought for the wall in 2006 or thereabouts.
Now she never gets anything done,
so naturally the wall wasn't built.
But Hillary Clinton wanted the wall.
We are a country of laws--
No, wait, I'd like to hear from-- I'd like to hear from-
I'd like to hear from Secretary Clinton.
I voted for border security,
And the wall.
There are some limited places where that was appropriate.
There also is necessarily going to be new technology
and how best to deploy that.
But it is clear when you look at what Donald has been proposing,
he started his campaign bashing immigrants,
calling Mexican immigrants rapists
and criminals and drug dealers,
that he has a very different view about
what we should do to deal with immigrants.
Now, what I am also arguing is
that bringing undocumented immigrants out from the shadows,
putting them into the formal economy will be good
because then employers can't exploit them
and undercut Americans' wages.
And Donald knows a lot about this.
He used undocumented labour to build the Trump Tower.
He underpaid undocumented workers
and when they complained
he basically said what a lot of employers do.
"You complain, I'll get you deported."
I want to get everybody out of the shadows,
get the economy working,
and not let employers like Donald
exploit undocumented workers
which hurts them but also hurts American workers.
President Obama has moved millions of people out.
Nobody knows about it, nobody talks about it.
But under Obama, millions of people have been moved out of this country.
They've been deported.
She doesn't want to say that, but that's what's happened.
And that's what's happened big league.
As far as moving these people out and moving-
We either have a country or we don't.
We're a country of laws.
We either have a border or we don't.
Now, you can come back in and you can become a citizen,
but it's very unfair.
We have millions of people that did it the right way.
They're on line. They're waiting.
We're gonna speed up the process big league
because it's very inefficient.
But they're in line, and they're waiting to become citizens.
Very unfair that somebody runs across the border,
becomes a citizen.
Under her plan, you have open borders.
You would have a disaster on trade,
and you will have a disaster with your open borders.
But what she doesn't say is that President Obama has deported
millions and millions of people just the way it is.
- Secretary Clinton- - We will not have open borders.
That is a rank mischaracterization.
We will have secure borders, but we will also have reform.
And-- This used to be a bipartisan issue.
Ronald Reagan was the last president to sign immigration reform
and George W. Bush supported it as well.
Secretary Clinton, I want to clear up
your position on this issue
because in a speech you gave to a Brazilian bank
for which you were paid 225,000 dollars
we've learned from the WikiLeaks that you said this,
and I want to quote,
"My dream is a hemispheric common market
with open trade and open borders."
- So that's the question. - Thank you.
That's the question. Please, quiet, everybody.
Is that your dream, open borders?
Well, if you went on to read the rest of the sentence,
I was talking about energy.
You know, we trade more energy with our neighbours than
we trade with the rest of the world combined.
And I do want us to have an electric grid and energy system
that crosses borders.
I think that would be a great benefit to us.
But you are very clearly quoting from WikiLeaks,
and whats really important about WikiLeaks is
that the Russian government has engaged in espionage against Americans.
They have hacked American websites,
American accounts of private people, of institutions,
then they have given that information to WikiLeaks
for the purpose of putting it on the Internet.
This has come from the highest levels of the Russian government,
clearly from Putin himself,
in an effort, as 17 of our intelligence agencies have confirmed,
to influence our election.
So I actually think the most important question of this evening,
Chris, is finally will Donald Trump
admit and condemn that the Russians are doing this
and make it clear that he will not have the help of Putin in this election,
that he rejects Russian espionage against Americans,
which he actually encouraged in the past?
Those are the questions we need answered.
We've never had anything like this happen in any of our elections before.
That was a great pivot off the fact
that she wants open borders, okay?
- How did we get off to Putin? - Hold on.
Hold on, folks,
because this is going to end up getting out of control.
Let's try to keep it quiet so-
For the candidates and for the American people.
- So just to finish on the borders. - Yes.
She wants open borders.
People are going to pour into our country.
People are going to come in from Syria.
She wants 550 per cent more people than Barack Obama,
and he has thousands and thousands of people.
They have no idea where they come from
and you see, we are going to stop radical Islamic terrorism
in this country.
She won't even mention the words
and neither will president Obama.
So I just want to tell you, she wants open borders.
Now we can talk about Putin.
I don't know Putin.
He said nice things about me.
If we got along well, that would be good.
If Russia and the United States got along well
and went after ISIS, that would be good.
He has no respect for her.
He has no respect for our president.
And I'll tell you what, were in very serious trouble
because we have a country with tremendous numbers of nuclear warheads,
1,800, by the way,
where they expanded and we didn't.
Eighteen hundred nuclear warheads, and she's playing chicken.
- Look, Putin- - Wait.
From everything I see, has no respect for this person.
Well, that's because he'd rather have a puppet - as president of the United States.
No puppet. No puppet.
- And it's pretty clear-- - You're the puppet.
It's pretty clear you won't admit -
that the Russians have engaged in cyber attacks against the United States of America
that you encouraged espionage against our people,
that you are willing to spout the Putin line,
sign up for his wish list,
break up NATO, do whatever he wants to do,
and that you continue to get help from him
because he has a very clear favourite in this race.
So I think that this is such an unprecedented situation.
We've never had a foreign government
trying to interfere in our election.
We have 17, 17 intelligence agencies,
civilian and military,
who have all concluded that these espionage attacks,
come from the highest levels of the Kremlin,
and they are designed to influence our election.
I find that deeply disturbing. And I...
She has no idea whether it's Russia,
China, or anybody else.
- I am not quoting myself. - She has no idea.
- I am quoting 17- - Hillary, you have no idea.
Seventeen intelligence...Do you doubt?
17 military and civilian agencies.
- Yeah, I doubt it. I doubt it. - He'd rather believe Vladimir Putin
than the military and civilian intelligence professionals
who are sworn to protect us.
I find that just absolutely- She doesn't like Putin
because Putin has outsmarted her at every step of the way.
- Putin has outsmarted her. - Mr. Trump-
In Syria, he's outsmarted her every step of the way.
- I do get to ask some questions. - Yes, that's fine.
And I would like to ask you this direct question.
The top national security officials of this country
do believe that Russia has been behind these hacks.
Even if you don't know for sure whether they are,
do you condemn any interference
by Russia in the American election?
By Russia or anybody else.
You condemn their interference?
Of course I condemn.
Of course I con-- I don't know Putin.
I have no idea-- I never met Putin.
This is not my best friend.
But if the United States got along with Russia,
wouldn't be so bad.
Let me tell you, Putin has outsmarted her
and Obama at every single step of the way.
Whether it's Syria. You name it.
Take a look at the start-up that they signed.
The Russians have said,
according to many, many reports,
I can't believe they allowed us to do this.
They create warheads and we can't.
The Russians can't believe it.
She has been outsmarted by Putin
and all you have to do is look at the Middle East.
They've taken over.
We've spent 6 trillion dollars.
They've taken over the Middle East.
She has been outsmarted and outplayed
worse than anybody I've ever seen
in any government whatsoever.
We're a long way away from immigration,
but I'm gonna let you finish - this topic,
you got about 45 seconds.
- Well, I-- - Yeah, I've-- - And she always will be.
I find it ironic that he's raising nuclear weapons.
This is a person who has been very cavalier,
even casual about the use of nuclear weapons.
- He's advocated more countries. - Wrong.
Getting them, Japan, Korea,
even Saudi Arabia.
He said, "Well, if we have them,
why don't we use them?"
Which I think is terrifying.
But here's the deal, the bottom line on nuclear weapons is
that when the president gives the order, it must be followed.
There's about four minutes between the order being given
and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so.
And that's why 10 people who have had that awesome responsibility have come out
and in an unprecedented way said
they would not trust Donald Trump with the nuclear codes
or to have his finger on the nuclear button.
I have 200 generals and admirals,
21 endorsing me, 21 Congressional Medal of Honour recipients.
As far as Japan and other countries,
we are being ripped off by everybody indoor,
we're defending other countries.
We are spending a fortune doing it.
They have the bargain of the century.
All I said is we have to
renegotiate these agreements
because our country cannot afford to defend Saudi Arabia,
Japan, Germany, South Korea, and many other places.
We cannot continue to afford.
She took that as saying nuclear weapons.
Okay. Look, she's been proven to be a liar
on so many different ways.
This is just another lie.
Well, I'm just quoting you. When you were -
There's no quote. You're not gonna find a quote from me.
About nuclear competition in Asia,
you said, you know, "Go ahead, enjoy yourselves, folks."
- That kind of language that... - And defend yourselves.
And defend yourselves. I didn't say nuclear.
And defend yourselves.
The United States has kept the peace through our alliances.
Donald wants to tear up our alliances.
I think it makes the world safer
and, frankly, it makes the United States safer.
I would work with our allies in Asia,
in Europe, in the Middle East and elsewhere.
That's the only way we're going to be able to keep the peace.
We're gonna move on to the next topic, which is the economy.
And I hope we handle that
as well as we did immigration.
The next topic, which is the economy.
And I hope we handle that
as well as we did immigration.
You also have very different ideas
about how to get the economy growing faster.
Secretary Clinton, in your plan,
government plays a big role.
You see more government spending,
more entitlements, more tax credits,
more tax penalties.
Mr. Trump, you wanna get government out -
- with lower taxes and less regulation. - Yes.
We're gonna drill down into this a little bit more.
But in this overview, please explain to me
why you believe that your plan
will create more jobs and growth for this country
and your opponent's plan will not.
In this round, you go first, Secretary Clinton.
Well, I think when the middle class thrives, America thrives.
And so my plan is based on growing the economy,
giving middle-class families many more opportunities.
I want us to have the biggest jobs programme
since World War II,
jobs and infrastructure and advanced manufacturing.
Well, I think we can compete with high-wage countries,
and I believe we should.
New jobs and clean energy
not only to fight climate change,
which is a serious problem,
but to create new opportunities and new businesses.
I want us to do more to help small business,
that's where two-thirds of the new jobs are going to come from.
I want us to raise the national minimum wage.
Because people who live in poverty, should not-
Who work full-time should not still be in poverty.
And I sure do wanna make sure women get equal pay for the work we do.
I feel strongly that we have to have an education system
that starts with preschool and goes through college.
That's why I want more technical education in high schools
and in community colleges,
real apprenticeships to prepare young people
for the jobs of the future.
I wanna make college debt free.
And for families making less than 125,000 dollars,
you will not get a tuition bill from a public college or university
if the plan that I worked on
with Bernie Sanders is enacted.
And we're gonna work hard to make sure that it is.
Because we are going to go where the money is.
Most of the gains in the last years since the great recession
have gone to the very top.
So we are gonna have the wealthy pay their fair share.
We're going to have corporations
make a contribution greater than they are now to our country.
That is a plan that has been analysed by independent experts
which said that it could produce 10 million new jobs.
By contrast, Donald's plan has been analysed to-
Conclude it might lose three and a half million jobs.
Why? Because his whole plan is to cut taxes
to give the biggest tax breaks ever
to the wealthy and to corporations
adding 20 trillion dollars to our debt
and causing the kind of dislocation that we have seen before
because it truly will be
trickle-down economics on steroids.
So the plan I have, I think will actually produce greater opportunities.
The plan he has will cost us jobs
and possibly lead to another great recession.
Secretary, thank you. Mr. Trump...
why will your plan create more jobs
and growth than Secretary Clinton?
Well, first of all, before I start on my plan,
her plan is going to raise taxes and even double your taxes.
Her tax plan is a disaster.
And she can say all she wants about college tuition
and I'm a big proponent,
we're gonna do a lot of things for college tuition,
but the rest of the public's gonna be paying for it.
We will have a massive, massive tax increase
under Hillary Clinton's plan.
But I'd like to start off where we left
because when I said Japan and Germany and I'm not to single them out,
but South Korea,
these are very rich, powerful countries.
Saudi Arabia, nothing but money.
We protect Saudi Arabia.
Why aren't they paying?
She immediately, when she heard this,
I questioned and I questioned NATO,
why aren't the NATO questioned
why aren't they paying,
because they weren't paying.
Since I did this, a year ago,
all of a sudden they're paying.
I've been given a lot of credit for it.
All of a sudden they're starting to pay up.
They have to pay up. We're protecting people.
They have to pay UP-
I'm a big fan of NATO, but they have to pay up.
She comes out and said, "We love our allies, we think our allies are great."
Well, it's awfully hard to get them to pay up
when you have somebody saying we think how great they are.
We have to tell Japan in a very nice way, we have to tell Germany,
all of these countries, South Korea,
we have to say, "You have to help us out."
We have during his regime, during president Obama's regime,
we've doubled our national debt. We're up to twenty trillion dollars.
So my plan, we're gonna re-negotiate trade deals.
We're gonna a lot free trade.
We're gonna have free trade. More free trade than we have right now.
But we have horrible deals.
Our jobs are being taken out
by the deal that her husband signed, NAFTA,
one of the worst deals ever.
Our jobs are being sucked out of our economy.
You look at all of the places that I just left,
you go the Pennsylvania,
you go to Ohio, you go to Florida,
you go to any of them, upstate New York,
our jobs have fled to Mexico and other places.
We're bringing our jobs back.
I'm going to re-negotiate NAFTA.
And if I can't make a great deal,
then we're gonna to terminate NAFTA
and we're gonna create new deals. We'll have trade,
but we'll terminate it,
we'll make a great trade deal.
And if we can't, we're gonna go a separate way
because it has been a disaster.
We're gonna cut taxes massively. We'll cut business taxes massively.
They're gonna start hiring people.
Were gonna bring the $2.5 trillion that's offshore back into the country.
We're going to start the engine rolling again
because right now our country is dying at 1% GDP.
Let me translate that if I can, Chris.
- Because... - You can't.
Fact is, he's going to advocate for the largest tax cuts we've ever seen.
Three times more than the tax cuts under the Bush administration.
I have said repeatedly throughout this campaign,
I will not raise taxes
on anyone making $250,000 or less.
I also will not add a penny to the debt.
I have costed out what I'm going to do.
He will, through his massive tax cuts,
add $20 trillion to the debt.
He mentioned the debt.
We know how to get control of the debt.
When my husband was president,
we went from a 300 billion-dollar deficit
to a 200 billion-dollar surplus
and we're actually on the path to eliminating the national debt.
When president Obama came into office
he inherited the worst economic disaster since the great depression.
He has cut the deficit by two-thirds.
So yes, one of the ways you go after the debt. One of the ways you create jobs
is by investing in people.
I do have investment, investments in new jobs,
investments in education, skill training,
and the opportunities for people to get ahead and stay ahead.
That's the kind of approach...
- Secretary. - that will work.
Cutting taxes on the wealthy, we've tried that. It has not worked
- the way that it has been promised. - Secretary Clinton,
I want to pursue your plan.
Because in many ways it is similar
to the Obama stimulus plan in 2009,
which has led to the slowest
GDP growth since 1949.
- Correct. - Thank you, sir.
You told me in July when we spoke that the problem is...
that president Obama didn't get to do enough
in what he was trying to do with this stimulus.
So is your plan basically even more of the Obama stimulus?
Well, it's a combination, Chris. Let me say that...
when you inherit...
the level of economic catastrophe that president Obama inherited,
it was a real touch-and-go situation.
I was in the Senate before I became Secretary of State.
I've never seen people
as physically distraught as the Bush administration team was
because of what was happening to the economy.
I personally believe that the steps that president Obama took saved the economy.
He doesn't get the credit he deserves
for taking some very hard positions,
but it was a terrible recession.
So now we've dug ourselves out of it.
We're standing, but we're not yet running.
So what I am proposing is that
we invest from the middle out and the ground up,
not the top down. That is not going to work.
That's why what I have put forward doesn't add a penny to the debt,
but it is the kind of approach that will enable more people
to take those new jobs, higher paying jobs.
We're beginning to see some increase in incomes
and we certainly have had a long string of increasing jobs.
We've got to do more to get the whole economy moving,
and that's what I believe I will be able to do.
even conservative economists who have looked at your plan say that
the numbers don't add up, that your idea, and you've talked about
- 25 million jobs created, - Over a ten-year period.
4%...growth is unrealistic.