Why turn this into a left/right thing?

Up until a couple of years ago I was driving a 15+ year old vehicle. When it gave up the ghost I had to get a new one. Now, I desired Lamborghini Huracan because I thought it would best meet my transportation needs. I looked at the price, however, and realized it was not possible for me. Now, at this point, I had two possibilities: 1) take out a loan larger than a typical home mortgage to buy the Lamborghini; or, 2) go with something more affordable. I went with 2 and bought a small Honda (without a loan). It turns out that the Honda gets me from place to place just fine and not having a car loan has some considerable benefits.

Now, when it comes to college, people have to separate what they want from what they need. Sure, everybody wants to go to a top-flight school in a trendy city. But not everybody can afford that. So, people have to decide whether the actual education is more important than the cachet of the name and location of the school that they attended. For the vast majority of people who borrow to attend college, the benefits of emerging with smaller debt (or none at all) is far an excess of the benefit of attending a school with name recognition that is in a trendy city.

Is this perfect? Nope. But if you don't think that what I suggest is part of the solution to the student loan and cost of education crisis, then you are just sticking your head in the sand.

Trump and Clinton were arguably the two most hated presidential candidates to run in US presidential election history. They didn't need the "help" of fake news to have material on which to attack each other as there was no shortage of negative true information about them.

The key difference was that every little thing Trump did was held up by the media (and the Republican establishment) as a harbinger of the end of modern civilization if Trump were to get elected.

On the other hand, every thing that Hillary did (and there was lots: evading federal records laws, flipping on "don't ask don't tell", flipping on gay marriage, colluding with the DNC on debate prep, colluding with the DNC on subverting Sanders' campaign, the highly questionable financial arrangements of the Clinton foundation, etc.) was largely treated as non-news by the same media.

So, in summary, there was absolutely no shortage of negative news on Clinton, it was just getting ignored by the news media.