Donald Trump

Donald Trump Calls for Ban on Muslim Entry Into U.S.

According to this article, at a political meeting held last week, Donald Trump (current presidential candidate) declared he wanted a “total and complete shutdown” of Muslims entering into the United States. This proposal will help eliminate the ongoing anxiety Americans have been having towards recent terrorist attacks. Although this proposal may eliminate some anxiety, it goes against ones religious freedom that is granted within the Constitution.

Trump goes on to claim that Muslims show a lot of hatred towards the United States and this is beyond comprehension. He claimed that until we can determine where this hatred stems from, we cannot sit back and do nothing. The dangers that could happen to the United States cannot be ignored.

Honestly, several accusations were made within this context. Muslims do not hate the United States or even Americans. The actions of a few cannot explain the behavior of an entire group. Islam means peace and that is what the true religion practices. Unfortunately terrorist groups are formed and they distort the real messages of Allah. I find it completely unacceptable that someone who wishes to run the country is completely oblivious to the truth. In every location throughout the world you will have the good people and the bad people. It seems however, bad representations of “Muslims”, are the only ones publicized.

These terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda , are not true Muslims contrary to belief. They are nothing more than terrorists. They claim to want to restore our country back to a peaceful state, but once in power, they deceive even us. Muslims are actually against killing, this is why when someone murders another in my country, and they are beheaded.

Trump also proclaimed that this ban would continue until a decision is made by government officials. These attacks are becoming very brutal, with the shootings that occurred a week ago in California. Fourteen people were found dead in this incident. I do agree that these problems deserve attention and caution, however, I don’t feel that banning all Muslims is going to solve these problems. As several critics claim, these ideas are in conflict with constitutional rights.

Within his speech he brought up several points about 9/11. Repeatedly, Trump bashed all Muslim people. It shocks me that anyone could actually be in agreeance with this man. He is very open with his racist ideas, and only those who are racist as well could possible believe the crap he says. I feel that a president should accept everyone and treat each and every single person equally.

Although Islam is a religion of peace, not many westerners can look past these terrorist groups. I feel as if the Middle East and the United States will most likely never resolve their issues. After countless wars and controversy, this task becomes difficult. I do not feel that handling this situation in the way that Trump plans to will be effective at all. If we want to obtain peace we must come to some sort of compromise. Banning certain religions and races from living somewhere is cruel. We all originate from somewhere else and must learn to integrate together as a whole. We are all human beings and deserve respect.

Donald Trump’s presidency has brought a lot of controversy with it. His constant tweeting, his blunt statements, and his act-now-think-later mentality have earned him both praise and criticism since the moment he announced he would run for United States President. One act that has stirred up a lot of mixed emotions is President Trump’s announcement of a ban that would prevent transgender individuals from serving in the military.

This ban, which was first announced via President Trump’s twitter account in late July, will override an Obama-era plan that was previously in place specifically to allow transgender individuals to serve in the military (Davis, 2017). Perhaps what is the most frustrating development of this ban for many people is the fact that it was revealed shortly after President Trump declared his great respect for members of the LGBT community and intentions to protect their individual rights and freedoms during his presidential campaign.

While many have cited discrimination as the reason behind this act, President Trump and his staff have ensured the public that this ban is purely for national security reasons, and he wanted to assure the LGBT community that this is not a betrayal (Cooper, 2017). This ban has been a hotly debated topic for quite a while. While both the Trump administration, supporters of the ban, and those opposed to the ban all have valid arguments, anyone who is willing to fight and die for his or her country and its freedoms should have the opportunity to do so. This statement holds especially true for Americans because the United States was founded on this very principle. While the military shouldn’t pay for gender reassignment surgeries and treatments, recruitment options should be open to all Americans, including transgender individuals.

There are many reasons why this is acceptable, including the fact that transgender people are already serving in the military, transgender individuals provide little to no disruption of military activities, and the transgender ban is currently being scrutinized in court for its constitutionality. Taking all of this into consideration, it’s hard to see a reason why transgender individuals shouldn’t be allowed to fight for the freedom our country provides. It’s difficult to argue that transgender individuals shouldn’t be allowed in the military simply because there are already transgender people serving in the military today. In fact, as of 2016, there are an estimated 6,630 actively serving transgender individuals in the military and anywhere from 2,030 to 7,160 individuals serving in reserves. Along with these numbers, an estimated 150,000 transgender individuals have served since the year 2012, which is about 21% of all transgender adults in the United States according to UCLA researchers.

In contrast, only 10% of the general non-transgender population has served (Hamblin, 2017). The fact that a higher percentage of transgender individuals has served in the United States military compared to those who do not identify as transgender should serve as an eye-opener to many. After all, active military service poses many risks, especially during times of conflict or war. In fact, several American and British armed forces members in Afghanistan were asked about the threats that they faced. The statistics, which are represented by the above image, are quite shocking. Roughly half of all individuals interviewed said that they saw at least one person killed while actively serving. One in every six people witnessed a close friend being injured or killed. One in four were injured by an IED, three in four experienced long-range attacks with rockets or mortars, and half had been attacked at close range with machine guns (Gee, 2017).

The point of these statistics is that serving in the United States military can be dangerous, and if such a high percentage of transgender adults are willing to serve in the United States military and risk injury, they shouldn’t be denied the ability to do so. The decision to serve in the United States Military should be respected regardless of any drama created by gender. Along with the fact that transgender Americans have already proved that they are willing to make the same sacrifices as their military comrades, a large majority of transgender individuals cause little to no disruption of military activity while serving.

In fact, as far as disruption of military activity is concerned, transgender individuals who could possibly be disrupting military activity by getting reassignment surgery account for less than 1% of all available members. The actual number of all individuals estimated to have surgical treatments while actively serving was between 25 and 130 individuals – hardly enough to cause any meaningful hindrance to military activities (PBS, 2017). In regards to this same issue of military disruption, eighteen other countries were examined in a study to determine if transgender service members cause any noticeable problems. Overall, the study “didn’t find any readiness or cohesion implications” involving transgender individuals. Many countries revealed concerns about bullying issues at one point, but it was later determined that simple policy changes were able to deal with this issue (PBS, 2017).

If other countries are able to work around the minor ‘difficulties’ that transgender individuals may pose, then why can’t the United States as well? Surely if this situation is able to work for other countries, it can for Americans as well. Along with this information, President Trump’s proposed ban has received legal criticism as well. There are concerns that this ban would violate the Constitutional rights of those individuals affected by the ban. One example of the legal obstacles that this ban has faced occurred in August of 2017. Two gay rights groups filed a lawsuit to ‘ban’ the ban before it could be instated. This lawsuit was filed on behalf of five transgender women who are openly and actively serving in the military, for they feel strongly that this ban would violate their constitutional rights (Cooper, 2017).

Although the lawsuit itself wasn’t the cause, the individuals who filed the suit earned at least a temporary victory in late October, for the ban was temporarily blocked in court by a federal judge (Kheel, 2017). This same judge responsible for the blockage was quoted saying that the ban “does not appear to be supported by any facts.” Along with this, another federal judge reviewed this ban in court and halted the ban altogether (Marimow, 2017). He stated that active-duty transgender service men and women already suffer harmful consequences because of the president’s policy. Some examples of said consequences include being set apart as inherently unfit, facing the threat of discharge, the inability to move ahead with long-term medical plans, and the inability to commission as an officer.Due to these two federal court rulings, it is clear that there is much to be concerned about regarding the legality of the ban.

A third court case was carried out with the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NLCR) and the GLBTQ Legal Advocates ; Defenders (GLAD) as the plaintiffs. They argued that the ban violates the Fifth Amendment rights of all transgender service members, and they pushed for the removal of the ban on funds for gender reassignment surgery (which accompanied the transgender ban). Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly presided over the court. After the case ended, she wrote a 76-page memo emphasizing the fact that the plaintiffs’ Fifth Amendment claim is a strong one that will prove difficult to refute once it reaches the Supreme Court. The fact that this ban has been heavily criticized, and in some cases acted upon, by not one, not two, but three highly-esteemed judges only serves to prove that this ban is in violation of the Fifth Amendment and is highly discriminatory against transgender individuals who are only trying to serve their country.

This ban has only encountered setback after setback in court, yet the Secretary of Defense is still being pressured to produce a plan for both carrying out the ban and dealing with currently enlisted transgender individuals. Although President Trump is still pushing for action to be taken, the ban is still being processed through the courts as an appeal is being sought after due to the decisions made from past cases. Although there are many ‘arguments’ out there that support the idea of a United States Military with a transgender ban, they lack substantial evidence, and the evidence that is presented is far from accurate in most cases. President Trump’s two main reasons for the ban, disruption of military service and health and medical costs, are easily discredited when all of the facts are lined out.In regards to ‘disruption of services,’ it’s clear to see why this isn’t a legitimate issue for the United States Military.

First of all, there is roughly, on estimate, a total of 13,500 transgender individuals serving actively, in the reserves, or in the National Guard. Of these 13,500 transgender individuals, only an estimated 25-130 active members will ever undergo long-term surgical treatments that would cause disruption while serving. These numbers, compared with the estimated 1,281,900 total of all active service member, along with the 801,200 estimated to be in reserve, account for far less than even one percent of the military’s total service members (PBS, 2017). So, assuming that the highest estimate of 130 military members undergo surgical treatment while serving, an extremely insignificant fraction of all military members would be incapable of carrying out military duties while recovering.

This accounts for .0015% of all available ‘manpower’ at any given time for the military (PBS, 2017). That percentage is hardly worthy of being referred to as a ‘disruption.’ The second main ‘reason’ behind this ban is the potential costs. The President and his staff worry that the medical treatments and surgeries that transgender individuals require is an expensive and unnecessary cost to the United States Military budget. While gender reassignments and other surgeries are certainly expensive, as stated in the previous paragraph, only about 25-130 individuals will even have the operation done (PBS, 2017), and the military has historically not been required to pay for these surgeries unless they are proven medically necessary on a case-by-case basis. Along with this information, a study in The New England Journal of Medicine in 2015 found that the total costs for these surgeries and treatments would amount to somewhere between 4.2-5.6 million dollars, or roughly ten percent of the annual military healthcare budget.

For those that think this is a large amount of money, the annual amount of taxpayer dollars spent on medication for erectile dysfunction alone is over ten times this amount at 84 million dollars annually. Claiming that transgender medical costs are expensive and unnecessary is plain wrong. While not all treatments are medically ‘necessary,’ several treatments are. Denying transgender individuals from serving in the military due to medical costs would be the equivalent of denying a diabetic the ability to serve; it makes no sense.

President Trump has made a lot of changes since he was elected into Presidency. While his decisions usually at least make some sense, the transgender military ban makes no sense at all. His two main reasons for this ban, which were potential disruption of military activity and medical costs, are backed by little to no evidence, and his ban is coming across as discriminatory both in the public eye and in court so far.

Transgender individuals should not be denied the right to serve because they have been allowed to serve (not openly) for several years with little to no problem, they don’t cause any disruption or hindrance to military activity, and the ban itself is being reviewed for its potential violation of the Fifth Amendment and discrimination against transgender individuals. All of this effort for a ban that isn’t necessary should be spent on something more useful to America.

Donald Trump was born on the 14th of June 1946 to Fred Trump and Mary Anne MacLeod. Fred was of Germany descent while Mary was of Irish descent. Donald exhibited hyperactivity early on in life resulting in his parents’ decision to send him to the New York Military Academy (Trump ; Zimmerman 1987). He sometimes found it difficult to work with others due to immense believe in what he thought was right. The few friends he maintained are those who were willing to listen to him. A unique trait that he also exhibited early in life is his confidence to stand by his beliefs even if no one backed them.

This has proved useful in his investment decisions in the current business world. Trump attended Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania as well as Fordham University (Trump ; Zimmerman, 1987). His academic interest was in economics. It is after school that he got straight into his father’s real estate business. Initiation into the Business World: Donald Trump was introduced into the real world of business by his father, Fred Trump. Fred was a fairly successful real estate investor who had a considerable level of respect from the business community because of the investment decisions he made.

As the young Donald Trump joined the father’s business, Fred passed on in 1999 leaving the business in the hands of Donald Trump(Trump ; Zimmerman, 1987). It is important to note that Donald Trump joined the Trump Organization around the year 1967 while he was still in college. His early years in business were successful as evidenced by a renovation project he handled in New York that made more than five million dollars profit for the Trump Organization. Donald Trump’s Graph in Business as a Basis for Model Leadership: It has not been a success story all through for Donald Trump.

The period between 1987 and 1996 was a low moment for this business leader. His profile was characterized by unpaid loans, property seizures due to unpaid loans and bad publicity that came as a result of the business tumble. But as already noted elsewhere in this paper, his entry into business was marked by initial success and the fact that his father gave him a level of autonomy in his business operations discloses leadership abilities that will be examined later on in this paper. From 1997 to 2008, Donald Trump has managed to keep his name not only clean but also respectable as far as business is concerned.

His investments have been both well planned, well executed and profitable (Trump & Zimmerman, 1987). He has shown great investment versatility whereby his entry into the media business has been successful. The Apprentice is a popular show that has become synonymous with Donald Trump. It is not possible to point out successful or rich investors who have managed to put their hands in more than one area of investment. Bill Gates, the man who has remained among the five richest people in the world for a long time, has put his concentration in one field only; his Microsoft Corporation, which is religiously dedicated to computers.

Is there any significance in being able to engage in more than one area of investment? This shall be uncovered elsewhere in this assessment. What are some of the well known investment projects that are associated with Donald Trump? The Trump World Tower in New York is Donald Trump’s property. The same applies to the Trump Tower in New York, the Trump International Hotel and Tower in Chicago, Illinois, and the Trump International Hotel and Tower in Honolulu. The miss Universe Pageant that is responsible for Miss USA and Miss Teen USA are also owned by Donald Trump.

Besides these, Trump has a collection of casino investments in Atlantic City as well as golf courses. How can one describe Donald Trump’s personality? Donald Trump’s Personality: Trump is a flamboyant leader with a penchant for display of power and influence. He is what Carl Jung would call an extravert given the fact that he seeks to know as a way of getting more influence and dominion (Jung, 1971). He has a confident gait and a strong sense of determination that is present in every person who comes back to the battlefield even after a bruising defeat.

Does this make any practical connection to Trump’s business experience? The business failure Trump experienced in the late 80s and early 90s did not deter him from coming back to the business world. This is the determination that is present in people whose personality displays an indomitable fighting spirit (Alport, 1956). Donald Trump’s Style of Leadership: Success in business does not come accidentally. The person at the top of nay business organization is a crucial factor in the determination of the success of the business. Donald Trump’s style of leadership is highly participatory.

This means that he calls for the input of other people within the organization (Hofstede, 1977). What leadership theory applies in this case? Leadership Theory in Donald Trump’s case: The participative leadership theory is quite applicable in the case of Donald Trump. There is however something unique with Donald Trump’s participatory style of leadership (Tannenbaum& Schmidt, 1973). He reserves the right to ask for the input of the other members in the team (Schriesheim, 1982). It is very possible for other people to mistaken Donald Trump for a high handed autocratic type of leader who asks his employs to do what he wants.

But this is not the case. He consults openly and confidently and always listens to what people who have experience in what he wants to do have to say. He also allows a high degree of independence to the people who manage the numerous projects that he has initiated during his time as one of the top real estate investors in the United States. What are the advantages of the participatory style of leadership that have made Donald Trump such a sensational figure in real estate, not only in the United States, but also in the world? Advantages of Donald Trump’s Participatory Style of Leadership:

The employees feel Respected: There is nothing as bad as being part of an organization and yet be told what to do at all times without anyone trying to find out what you think about the action being suggested. This is a sure way of making the people in the organization feel that they are not respected and therefore not part of the organization. In Donald Trump’s case, he asks his employees what they think about the projects they are supervising and their opinions are taken seriously because they are the ones who are on the ground in any case.

This has made the employers working in his projects develop both a high sense of self respect as well as self esteem due to the fact that they know that their employer respects their input (French ,Israel & As, 1960). The Motivation Levels Are Always High: This is a function of the respect that Donald Trump shows the employees by seeking their views regarding the various projects that they are in charge of. By feeling that their employer respects them, the employees get motivated and put maximum effort to whatever project they are doing (Coch & French, 1948).

Is there a better way of getting better results apart from high motivation levels? A high degree of motivation among employees is one of the surest ways of bringing the best out of them and thus achieving high levels of success in the organization’s business undertakings. Aggressive business leaders who disrespect employees always lower the employees motivation levels (Lewin et al, 1939). Different Points of View that lead to informed Decisions: It is not possible for one man to have all the wisdom in the world. What then is the best way to do things so that the best results are realized?

The way to go about doing whatever that is being done so as to succeed is to seek the input of different people and then examining all the contributions before making the decision. Chances are that one of the people who’s opinion the leader is seeking will have a highly beneficial perspective that will lead to high levels of success. The fact that Donald Trump is fond of seeking the advice of various individuals both within his business empire and outside his territory is evidence that he understands the significance of seeking the opinions of others. This is why most of his projects have turned out to be huge success.

Are there any unique attributes that Donald Trump’s participatory leadership style exhibits that may be hard to spot in other business leaders who are participatory in their day to day business leadership? Donald Trump’s Unique attributes that Characterize his Participatory Leadership Style: High Levels of self Confidence: Some people within and without the business world will be forgiven for classifying Donald Trump as cocky. This is because of the high degree of self confidence that he exhibits as he goes about his duties. The reality is that business leadership requires maximum confidence.

Is it possible for employees to implement the decisions made by a business leader who lacks self confidence? It is not possible for the workers within an organization to zealously work to implement a strategy that has been decided upon by a manager or chief executive officer who is not confident. The reason for this is that the employees will think that the ideas that the leader has given them to implement are not the best since he or she seems to be lacking confidence in himself or herself. The fact that Donald Trump has a high degree of self confidence means that the people who work with him are sure of whatever Trump asks them to do.

Therefore they implement it with similar levels of surety and maximum dedication that leads to success. Good Level of Control: It has already been noted elsewhere in this leadership assessment that Donald Trump’s participatory style of leadership is characterized by the reservation of the right to make the final decision regarding the direction business actions are to take. What is the advantage of good levels of control? A house with a clear leader means that decision making is not going to be a bargaining business. Therefore when it is time to make decisions and move into action, no time is wasted.

The fact that Donald Trump has good level s of control in his business actions means that he does not have to wait for long periods to make investment decisions. All he has to do is listen to the opinions of others, incorporate what he thinks can make the action better and direct the people to what is supposed to be done. This saves not only time but also other resources. It also ensures that prime business moments or profitable investments seasons are not lost due to delays. It is important to note that Donald Trump had good levels of control and not high levels of control.

The difference is that high levels of control is comparable to micromanagement which can be bad for business in that the leader has to look into each and every small detail that has been done or is supposed to be done. This is a sure recipe for long delays and employee demoralization as they are made to feel that they are not responsible enough to oversee even small affairs. Conclusion: Donald Trump is a confident individual whose participatory leadership style is a sure way of motivating the people who work with and for him.

As an extravert, he always wants to extend his influence and the versatility in investment that has taken him to the media world, which is drastically different from his real estate specialization, is evidence of his search for influence. The huge success he has realized in his real estate business is partly due to the style of leadership that he exercises in his business undertakings.

References:

Alport, F. H. ; Tannenbaum, A. S. , 1956. Personality structure adn group structure: An interpretive structure of their relationship through an event structure hypothesis. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 53, 272-280

Whether you love or hate Donald Trump, there’s one thing you cannot deny: His lack of impulse control is costing him dearly.

The most recent indicator is this past weekend’s Washington Post revelations: Trump (in what he later defended as mere “lockerroom” banter) with then-Access Hollywood reporter Billy Bush, picked up by a live mic, discussing how and where he would grope beautiful women, simply because he could.

But those revelations were hardly an isolated incident. Consider Trump’s previous 3 a.m. Twitter rants, his name-calling and the fact that during the first presidential debate, he interrupted his opponent Hillary Clinton more than .

In short, it seems that the GOP candidate for president simply cannot help himself, and that’s become one of the greatest threats to his candidacy. Before the first presidential debate, according to the political website FiveThirtyEight.com,

Next to come will be this week’s polls, post-Trump tape, post-second debate, and they may well be even worse for the candidate – considering not only his comments about abusing women but the reaction from his own party: a virtual stampede of GOP leaders away from his camp.

There’s a reason for all this anti-Trump feeling, says Andrew Shatté, chief science officer at our company, , which offers digital coaching to counterract employee stress.

“His lack of emotion regulation, his inability to contain his feelings and impulse control, and the ability to delay gratification are serious drags on his ability to bear up under stress,” Shatté says of Trump. 

This problem isn’t limited to politics, either. It can cost those leading companies, too. When you lack impulse control, hitting the brakes isn’t easy.

Certainly, we all are capable of losing our cool: Consider that in the first presidential debate,   (Let’s face it: Courtesy was in short supply that night.)

So, yes, we all have our less than stellar moments. But making a habit of lacking impulse control can lead to too many instances of saying what you later regret and engaging in behaviors that get you into hot water. And that habit can hurt our resilience, not to mention affect our reputations. “We are not born with impulse control,” leadership coach and stress resilience expert , told me. “When we’re kids, we’re upset when we don’t get what we want. But, over time, we learn that following some impulses is not a good idea.”

The frontal lobe, which is responsible for impulse control, is the seat of executive function and rational thought. “And it’s more brakes than gas pedal,” says Ackrill. Meaning: The better your brakes, the more capable you are of stopping yourself from saying or doing things you’ll regret.

While the occasional blip in impulse control doesn’t signal a disorder, it’s worth noting that, as , one in three adults in this country suffer from some kind of mental disorder (a total of more than 75 million people). And 10 percent of them struggle with impulse control. That’s significant.

What these numbers tell us is that Trump is hardly the only one with this problem – so chances are good that you have encountered someone like this in your workplace, too. If that’s true, here’s what to do:

How lack of impulse control could affect your office

When an employee lashes out, reacts emotionally or exhibits other unpredictable behavior, a culture of fear can be created — and that can ramp up collective stress levels.

Anxiety and frustration are two of the most viral negative emotions, says science officer Shatté. “Someone in the workplace who fails to regulate these two emotions will infect others, and it will spread rampantly through an entire organization,” he says.

Jude Miller Burke, author of , echoes Shatté. “The ability to manage our emotions is key to creating a healthy work culture and managing employees,” says Miller Burke, a business psychologist and executive coach. A boss or coworker with impulse control issues makes others feel “unsafe,” she explains, making it difficult for others to focus on work, not to mention shutting down creativity, collaboration and trust.

What managers can do to keep this behavior in check

“If someone has thrown their computer against the wall or is blurting out inappropriate things, a referral to the employee assistance psychologist or human resources department is appropriate,” says Miller Burke. “Practice compassionate accountability by expressing support for whatever the employee says their issue is, but set firm limits about appropriate behavior at work.”

Also, she adds, be careful not to unwittingly “reward” bad behavior. Examples would include leaving the moody and angry person alone or letting a bully dominate meetings so that everyone else gives up and lets him have his way.

How to reduce your own risk

Chronic stress makes it harder to control our impulses. “It’s like riding your brakes down a steep mountain,” says Ackrill. “Sooner or later, they’re going to wear out.”

So, if you yourself have an impulse control issue, here are a few ways to practice impulse control and strengthen your brakes.

1. Tune in to your own behaviors. Do you say things that come back to bite you? Do you get upset easily and often? “Other signs of a lack of impulse control include overspending, overeating or anything else that’s not in your best interest,” says Ackrill.
2. Trap the feeling, map the thought. When you feel the urge to act out emotionally, acknowledge the sensation, and follow it back to the thought that initiated it. When you can train yourself to do this before you act, you can prevent doing things you’ll regret.
3. Get plenty of rest. It’s no surprise that the less sleep you get, the more emotionally reactive you’ll be. Practice good “sleep hygiene”: Shut off electronics an hour before bedtime, and create an evening ritual that relaxes you, whether it’s a hot bath, stretching or meditation.
4. Don’t take it on. When someone exhibiting a lack of control triggers you, remember that it’s not about you. “Recognize that this is their problem, not yours,” says Ackrill. “Take a deep breath and visualize a kind of virtual space suit around you that repels bad energy.”
5. Consider Plan B. You can’t change another person, but you can seek help if the situation becomes untenable. Escalate the issue to a manager, or re-route the call or refer the customer to someone else who can help. You must be aware of your own limits and be willing to ask for help so that you don’t wear out your own brakes, too.

The good news is that you can get better at it, and boost your own resilience as a result. “You can train and strengthen your ability to resist impulsive behavior,” says Miller Burke. “It just takes work.”

 For the average American, following the ideas and proposals of presidential candidates isn’t always easy. likes to jump on the stories that garner the most attention, and focus laser-like on the hot-button issues. Think: Donald Trump’s comments about banning Muslim immigrants, and the heat Hillary Clinton has taken for her use of a private email server for official communications. 

Related: 

Meanwhile, the actual political positions of these candidates tend to go unnoticed by all except the most politically engaged citizens, who are meticulous in their research.

Certainly, you’ll hear a lot about tax reform, trade agreements, , minimum wage and immigration — the hot topics as the 2016 election gains momentum. But there’s a lot more to the candidates’ positions, and it directly impact the lives of Americans. With less than six months to go before the election, it’s worth digging into all of the issues to see how ’s or ’s policies might impact you and your family:

Trump vs. Clinton — the economy

After two elections dominated by economic issues, this one in 2016 is shaping up to be no different, as voters consistently rank the. While the unemployment rate has fallen since President Obama took office in 2009, and there has been, not all Democrats are eager to embrace the economic legacy of President Barak Obama. Their presumptive nominee sometimes sounds like one of them: During one economic speech, that the economy “still isn’t delivering.”

Clinton is standing up for workers who want equal and better pay, as she supports an increase in minimum wage across the country.And, thankfully, on and tax reform that will ease the burden on businesses and individuals, by aiming to put more money back into the pockets of working families, and hopefully allow for more job creation.

The environment and science

After years of cutbacks, federal spending on science is since World War II. That’s surprising, considering that climate change is one of the most partisan issues snaking its way through this presidential race.

Related: 

The Obama administration pledged to cut U.S. emissions by as much as 28 percent from 2005 levels, but the. The administration’s pledges have also brought about from industry groups, particularly those in coal-producing states.

Trump, meanwhile, says that  created by special interest groups that negatively affect businesses.

Clinton, however, proposes a push toward clean energy to make the United States a “.” She supports the administration’s pledge to lower greenhouse gas emissions.

Criminal justice

There hasn’t been a lot of debate around criminal justice issues among Republicans and Democrats, but it’s a growing issue for Americans with concerns about mass shootings, crime, police violence and prison sentencing.

Clinton is calling for “ending the era of mass incarceration” and praises the use of body cameras to record police interactions with civilians, in an effort to keep police officers accountable. Clinton also wants to expand background checks for guns and make it harder to purchase firearms online and at gun shows.

Trump firmly states that protecting Americans’ Second Amendment rights will make America great again, and offers no new gun regulations. On his platform website, regarding gun control,, “The Second Amendment to our Constitution is clear. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon. Period.”

When asked about the growing concern over police brutality, Trump has stated that more power should be given to the police.

“It’s a massive crisis,” Trump on Meet the Press. “Some horrible mistakes are made. At the same time, we have to give power back to the police, because crime is rampant . . . we have to give power back to the police, because we have to have law and order.”

Healthcare

The rising cost of healthcare, including the costs for pharmaceutical drugs, is a growing concern for Americans, and both candidates recognize that change is necessary.

Clinton supports the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, but she proposes changes that would make healthcare more affordable, including a move to put a $250 monthly cap on out-of-pocket drug spending and increased competition for specialty drugs.

Trump sees rising costs of pharmaceuticals as pure profiteering, and has called this phenomenon “.” He aims to disassemble the Affordable Care Act and create a marketplace designed to create competition among health insurance providers. He believes this would bring down the cost of insurance. He rejects the idea of forcing Americans to buy health insurance.

Education

Education is also not being widely discussed by the candidates, or Americans in general. According to Gallup polling, consider education to be the nation’s most important problem. But it is a problem.

Clinton is proposing a plan to make community college free. Trump and the Republican Party want to encourage colleges and universities to find ways to reduce costs by and making schools responsible for student loan interest.

The Common Core State Standards Initiative that details what kids should know in English and math is a big topic that has divided parents and educators on its effectiveness. Clinton says she has always supported national education standards, and wants to see the same set of common standards for all public schools across the nation.

Related: 

Trump strongly believes in limiting federal regulation and government overreach. He says that Common Core is “.”