EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 7101
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23876 Posts
On March 11 2017 09:09 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/AlecMacGillis/status/840269455016022017 I'm convinced Ryan pulled one on Trump with this. No idea how he got Trump to say he would support the bill but he did. I think establishment Republicans are making their move to undermine Trump's presidency now. Step 1. Drive a wedge between the tea party and Trump. Both of Trump's plans to push the bill or leave Obamacare in place and blame Democrats for problems are not what the tea party wants. Next they'll try to undermine his credibility, that's what the pushing from Republicans on the "tapped my wires" has been about and they will push on this "Flynn the foreign agent" thing and find more buttons to push. This is intended to push "seriously minded" Republicans further away. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22237 Posts
On March 11 2017 09:18 GreenHorizons wrote: I'm convinced Ryan pulled one on Trump with this. No idea how he got Trump to say he would support the bill but he did. I think establishment Republicans are making their move to undermine Trump's presidency now. Step 1. Drive a wedge between the tea party and Trump. Both of Trump's plans to push the bill or leave Obamacare in place and blame Democrats for problems are not what the tea party wants. Next they'll try to undermine his credibility, that's what the pushing from Republicans on the "tapped my wires" has been about and they will push on this "Flynn the foreign agent" thing and find more buttons to push. This is intended to push "seriously minded" Republicans further away. Its easy to get Trump to support the bill. I doubt he is able to read and understand it on his own. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23876 Posts
On March 11 2017 09:22 Gorsameth wrote: Its easy to get Trump to support the bill. I doubt he is able to read and understand it on his own. Trump likes to do adversarial decision making iirc, which would mean he had someone argue for it and someone argue against it. Whoever argued against it failed in spectacular fashion. Like how do you think telling seniors they might have to pay nearly half their income for insurance isn't political suicide? If Trump wasn't set up to fail on this, his staff is even more incompetent than we think. | ||
KwarK
United States43898 Posts
On March 11 2017 09:22 Gorsameth wrote: Its easy to get Trump to support the bill. I doubt he is able to read and understand it on his own. The left could use the opportunity to seize the presidency without a fight. If Trump's preferred altnews is criticizing his plan then he might be forced to go an hour or two without external validation. If Huffington Post, or some equally slanted source, then ran a praise piece on Trump's universal healthcare plan then it could capture his attention. Five minutes later we have a tweet talking about how all the losers have come around to his amazing idea. The following morning Spicer is insisting that the Obamacare repeal was always for single payer and it's a done deal. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On March 11 2017 09:28 GreenHorizons wrote: Trump likes to do adversarial decision making iirc, which would mean he had someone argue for it and someone argue against it. Whoever argued against it failed in spectacular fashion. Like how do you think telling seniors they might have to pay nearly half their income for insurance isn't political suicide? If Trump wasn't set up to fail on this, his staff is even more incompetent than we think. Its funny to see how the establishment was trying to protect the party all along and now suddenly the crazy side got the reins. If I may make an analogy: If you are the parent, and your kids are always begging you to light fireworks inside because "it would be the coolest thing ever", you don't deny it would be fucking lit. But you also let them know that it would eventually lead to the house burning down. So while you totally recognize how sweet it would be, you will never let your children do it. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
Roger Stone, President Trump's former campaign adviser, on Friday admitted to having private conversations with a hacker who helped leak information from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) during last year's campaign. Stone insisted to The Washington Times that the conversations were "completely innocuous." “It was so perfunctory, brief and banal I had forgotten it,” Stone told The Times of a private Twitter conversation he had with a hacker known as Guccifer 2.0. Roger Stone strikes again. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 11 2017 05:14 LightSpectra wrote: The wiretap allegations are almost 100% guaranteed bullshit at this point. And whistleblowing/leaking is precisely what bureaucrats are supposed to do if their superior is breaking the law, it's a necessary element of republican government in order to function. So which members of the "deep state" (as you say) have been removed due to insubordination? Other than Sally Yates, who was scheduled to leave anyway. I wonder how they got transcripts of Flynn's conversations? I'm talking about the leaked classified info, not from illegal wiretaps but wiretaps, surveillance, photographs, and verbal leaks. And what do they have? Flynn mislead the VP on something that was neither illegal nor improper. Sessions did nothing abnormal for other senators to do. It's all been heavy on suggestion and light on actual wrongdoing. So yeah, we're viewing a campaign from within the unelected agencies to undermine the democratically elected ones. It's not very much short from a disagreement on who the American people sent to office, so they're registering their disapproval. I really hope Trump gets a handle on his agencies and has the wherewithal to see it through. The tables would really be turned if it was a Republican-leaning bureaucracy mucking up the actions of a Hillary presidency. On March 11 2017 05:44 ticklishmusic wrote: 1. immediate deflection to "wow violent liberals!" 2. perhaps you're unaware, but south korea actually gave their president the boot. impeached, guilty, upheld by their high court. 3. presumably the hypothetical trump scenario would follow that. you brought up clinton for... some reason? giving you the benefit of the doubt, the situation you'd be referring to is that the (presumably republican controlled) congress decides to impeach trump... and clears him? idk dude. superciliousness doesn't make up for having a shitty post. Excuse me, who are you quoting again? Seriously, you're unhinged. Re-read what Ayaz2810 wrote and how I responded to it. He glossed over the whole what-happens-after-impeachment to transition scenarios. I see no point in continuing to engage with you if you're stabbing about at comparisons without having comprehended a damn thing. Don't invent what I'm not saying in order to have an argument. | ||
|
Scarecrow
Korea (South)9172 Posts
On March 11 2017 10:11 Danglars wrote: So yeah, we're viewing a campaign from within the unelected agencies to undermine the democratically elected ones. It's not very much short from a disagreement on who the American people sent to office, so they're registering their disapproval. I really hope Trump gets a handle on his agencies It's amazing how far down the rabbit hole you've gone. You seriously think this is all just smoke and Trump's the innocent one? The media and intelligence agencies are both trying to bring Trump down cause he's a pussy grabbing Republican? Are you really this deluded? He's an incompetent, likely compromised, fraud who continues to hide his finances and directly profits off the presidency. The pussy grabbing, habitual lying and twitter idiocy are all window dressing.I guess you've just gotta double down on your beliefs rather than accept that you may have been duped by a used-car salesman puppet of Putin and the far Right. | ||
|
TheLordofAwesome
Korea (South)2655 Posts
On March 11 2017 10:11 Danglars wrote: I wonder how they got transcripts of Flynn's conversations? I'm talking about the leaked classified info, not from illegal wiretaps but wiretaps, surveillance, photographs, and verbal leaks. And what do they have? Flynn mislead the VP on something that was neither illegal nor improper. Sessions did nothing abnormal for other senators to do. It's all been heavy on suggestion and light on actual wrongdoing. So yeah, we're viewing a campaign from within the unelected agencies to undermine the democratically elected ones. It's not very much short from a disagreement on who the American people sent to office, so they're registering their disapproval. I really hope Trump gets a handle on his agencies and has the wherewithal to see it through. The tables would really be turned if it was a Republican-leaning bureaucracy mucking up the actions of a Hillary presidency. Excuse me, who are you quoting again? Seriously, you're unhinged. Re-read what Ayaz2810 wrote and how I responded to it. He glossed over the whole what-happens-after-impeachment to transition scenarios. I see no point in continuing to engage with you if you're stabbing about at comparisons without having comprehended a damn thing. Don't invent what I'm not saying in order to have an argument. Seriously, Danglars? It is extremely obvious at this point that something is up with Trump and the people close to him and the Russians. Sessions, Page, Manafort, Kushner, Flynn, Tillerson. In 2008, long before 2016 presidential election began, either Eric or Donald Jr. admitted that the Trump organization has a lot of money invested in it from Russia. There are multiple cases of Trump being massively overpaid for real estate by Russian oligarchs who are close to Putin. FBI/NSA had probable cause to collect the content of communications between a bunch of Russian businesses and any Americans they might be talking to. They just happened to be talking to Donald Trump. There is plenty of reason for looking into the Trump/Russia connection. The accusations of wiretapping were made by Trump. He has access to every secret in the government if he cares to go looking for it, but he's provided zero evidence to the public to back up his claim. (Spicer claimed Monday that Trump's evidence came from an ongoing investigation by DoJ, which if true is obstruction of justice. Not sure but I believe Spicer later retracted that statement.) But we should investigate a claim for which there is zero evidence over the tons of smoke pouring out of Trump's people about shady Russian connections? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Like for real? | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
When it comes to communicating with them, I don't think Flynn was fired for Russian connections (but rather the lack of communication between him and other WH officials), and neither will Sessions. The Sessions thing was especially ridiculous. Those accusations read to me as: "Russian ambassador to the US meets with US politicians". Big fucking deal. He may have accidentally sort of lied in that way, but to me it hardly seemed like it was his intention to cover up anything. If you genuinely believe there was a deliberate collaboration between Putin and Trump to get him into the White House I think you're just caught up in a Russophobic media frenzy. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On March 11 2017 11:10 Plansix wrote: I'm increasingly convinced that the DHS is overrun with racist and xenophobis. https://twitter.com/ap/status/840345306835353601 Like for real? I don't see that as DHS in general, but just the TSA being sucky and terrible, as the TSA largely is. plenty of known info about the TSA being terrible. | ||
|
TheLordofAwesome
Korea (South)2655 Posts
On March 11 2017 11:19 zlefin wrote: I don't see that as DHS in general, but just the TSA being sucky and terrible, as the TSA largely is. plenty of known info about the TSA being terrible. I read that as the TSA being the TSA. You know, one good thing Trump could do would be to fire everyone employed at the TSA and hand security back to the airlines/contractors. Saves 8 billion/year in gov spending and would 100% make his approval ratings go up too. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On March 11 2017 09:09 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/AlecMacGillis/status/840269455016022017 I don't see how this confuses people. The average medical bills for a 64 year old is probably way higher than 8k per year. The other day I was listening to a podcast and they estimated premiums for a 55-64 risk pool would be $25k+ per year. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43898 Posts
On March 11 2017 11:33 cLutZ wrote: I don't see how this confuses people. The average medical bills for a 64 year old is probably way higher than 8k per year. The other day I was listening to a podcast and they estimated premiums for a 55-64 risk pool would be $25k+ per year. When you give the old all you can eat socialized free healthcare then it works out roughly like this. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RzdCNMF.png) So yeah, the old are still consuming the lion's share, but it's not an impossibly unaffordable amount for society. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On March 11 2017 11:59 KwarK wrote: When you give the old all you can eat socialized free healthcare then it works out roughly like this. So  Yeah, the old are still consuming the lion's share, but it's not an impossibly unaffordable amount for society.That's looking at it backwards though. The UK has very rigourous cost control measures in place (basically they spend half what we do, and they aren't skimping on prenatal care). As is often the case, these half measures compound problems while only benefitting politicians (who get to blame insurance companies). If the government is going to pay for, or make people pay for these medical services they need to impose dictatorial price controls (the same runaway costs situation is seen in higher education tuition). Or, they can go the other direction and get the cost improvements through efficiency, while acknowledging that not everyone will get state-of-the-art care. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
| ||
| ||
