US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4649

On August 05 2016 03:50 Introvert wrote:
The expanding power of the presidency.



www.washingtonpost.com

On August 05 2016 03:59 farvacola wrote:
When the President unilaterally pushes for an international ban on nuclear testing and your first thought is "what a power grab," you may not understand the executive's diplomacy powers.

On August 05 2016 04:02 Introvert wrote:


Wish I had more time for this. The treaty was submmited to congress and never ratified. Should be end of story.

"Pushes for" is generous language. And we already know that Obama has a penchant for seeing how far hw can push his authority. It being Obama is reason enough for concern.

On August 05 2016 03:52 GreenHorizons wrote:


I think you misunderstood what I was saying. "Represents" as in 10's of millions of Americans agree with him, no matter how ridiculous what he says is or how he got there.

He should be a walking example of how America isn't a meritocracy, but that seems to fly right over most people's heads.

Donald Trump is not having any sort of "intervention" with the likes of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus or former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Giuliani said Thursday, pointing to Gingrich as the source of the term.

"So first of all I find the word intervention completely out of line," Giuliani said during a discussion on Fox Business' "Mornings with Maria."

Giuliani then singled out Gingrich specifically.

"That word, I think, honestly I love him dearly, but I think that word was used by Newt in a memo that got around," Giuliani said. " What a ridiculous word. An intervention is for a drug addict and it's for someone who's an alcoholic and I've had to do them with people at times. There's nothing wrong with them, if that's the case. Donald Trump doesn't drink or smoke, by the way. We don't have that problem."

NBC News first reported Wednesday that the trio close to Trump were hoping to push the GOP nominee into a reset of his campaign after a calamitous week that led to a subsequent drop in the polls and high-profile Republicans defecting to Hillary Clinton.

Maggie Haberman of the New York Times tweeted Wednesday that Gingrich emailed her that no intervention was taking place.

Gingrich did not immediately return a request for comment.

On August 05 2016 04:09 Velr wrote:



Yeah, i most likely misunderstood. But its kinda hard these days to diffrentiate your "bernie has lost and it wasn't fair" (which i think myself is sad but well, he did lose cause he was a total unknown and lacks Obamas charisma, not due to some fraud) and your more "real/sarcastic/ironic" posts .


But imho.. If you make less than 200-300k a year and think Trump even nearly can understand you, your just a dumb (or extremly undereducated) person.
And with the 200-300k/year i am probably WAY off, he most likely only "gets" multibillionaires...

On August 05 2016 04:09 Velr wrote:



Yeah, i most likely misunderstood. But its kinda hard these days to diffrentiate your "bernie has lost and it wasn't fair" (which i think myself is sad but well, he did lose cause he was a total unknown and lacks Obamas charisma, not due to some fraud) and your more "real/sarcastic/ironic" posts .


But imho.. If you make less than 200-300k a year and think Trump even nearly can understand you, your just a dumb (or extremly undereducated) person.
And with the 200-300k/year i am probably WAY off, he most likely only "gets" multibillionaires...

“As the FBI said, everything that I’ve said publicly has been consistent and truthful with what I’ve told them.”
— Hillary Clinton, interview with Brandon Rittiman of KUSA, Aug. 3, 2016

One would think the talking points would change after receiving Four Pinocchios from The Washington Post Fact Checker, “Pants on Fire” from PolitiFact and “false” from FactCheck.org.

But, nope, Clinton fell back on a claim that has been roundly debunked by fact checkers.

Washington’s powerful drug lobby is gearing up to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a post-election ad war pushing back against politicians from both parties who have savaged its members over drug prices.

The massive campaign by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America — expected to start positive by highlighting drugs that save or prolong lives — will dwarf the $20 million that health insurers spent on the iconic "Harry and Louise" campaign credited with sinking Hillary Clinton's health reform plan in the early 1990s.

Targeting politicians is not part of the initial plan, but lobbyists say the organization is prepared to do so if members of Congress or the executive branch push agendas that are seen as detrimental to the industry.

And that’s just one part of a larger effort by the K Street lobbying powerhouse to seize control of the public narrative over drug prices and to reassert its dominance in Washington after several years in which it has taken a public shellacking over prices, with even reliable political allies in Congress questioning its pricing strategies. Both Clinton and Donald Trump, for instance, are urging changes in the law that would allow the government to negotiate drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries.

PhRMA wants to drive a broader discussion on health costs, emphasizing that other players must play a role in tamping down costs and offering to work with insurers and others to find solutions, senior company officials and lobbyists said.

"The reality and the message and the playbook used for a number of years is over," said Bill Pierce, senior director of the public affairs firm APCO Worldwide, which represents several drug companies, and a former HHS official under President George W. Bush.

On August 05 2016 05:56 OuchyDathurts wrote:
I believe the meme is something along the lines of Brutal. Savage. Rekt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZ9_BM5c8Xc

On August 05 2016 06:12 Sent. wrote:
There is nothing contradictory in outsourcing jobs as a businessman and advocating protectionism as a politician. It's like that case where Clinton successfully defended a pedophile. It was her job to defend him but it doesn't mean she as a politician shouldn't try to change the law to make the legal system less faulty.