45th President of the United States, Donald Trump. Vol 2
Discussion
Carl_Manchester said:
From a technical standpoint it was an impossible job to replace Obamacare, anyone who understands the U.S medical system will know that its just too complicated to un-wind the Obamacare act in short order regardless of political will.
On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
In terms of the important stuff, not to repeat past posts as I feel I have posted enough on that. The main thing Trump/Bannon want is tied to the $1trn USD Infrastructure plan and to start to un-wind the affects of globalisation on the working class, everything else is window dressing.
That is perhaps the most bizarre analysis of this I have seen. On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
In terms of the important stuff, not to repeat past posts as I feel I have posted enough on that. The main thing Trump/Bannon want is tied to the $1trn USD Infrastructure plan and to start to un-wind the affects of globalisation on the working class, everything else is window dressing.
Greg66 said:
Carl_Manchester said:
From a technical standpoint it was an impossible job to replace Obamacare, anyone who understands the U.S medical system will know that its just too complicated to un-wind the Obamacare act in short order regardless of political will.
On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
In terms of the important stuff, not to repeat past posts as I feel I have posted enough on that. The main thing Trump/Bannon want is tied to the $1trn USD Infrastructure plan and to start to un-wind the affects of globalisation on the working class, everything else is window dressing.
That is perhaps the most bizarre analysis of this I have seen. On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
In terms of the important stuff, not to repeat past posts as I feel I have posted enough on that. The main thing Trump/Bannon want is tied to the $1trn USD Infrastructure plan and to start to un-wind the affects of globalisation on the working class, everything else is window dressing.
Bannon has a clue, but the same attitude towards the working classes and his agenda appears to be simply to destroy and disrupt the US and other Western democracies and institutions. I'm not sure he has a goal beyond that.
Donald was never going to be interested too much in this, not his forte, the tax reductions are the big deal for him, in his eyes it will get the people who voted for him rich again and if it does not his own corporation run now by his sons will....
The problem is without less money spent on health care how does his promise to do tax cuts weigh against more money spent on infrastructure ($1 trillion) and the armed forces work? His tax cuts will have to make the US economy go into overdrive. Without any trade wars of course.
It just does seem to add up on the $ side. The national debt I feel will get a lot bigger to prove Donald right about getting him in a good light in his supporters eyes.
The problem is without less money spent on health care how does his promise to do tax cuts weigh against more money spent on infrastructure ($1 trillion) and the armed forces work? His tax cuts will have to make the US economy go into overdrive. Without any trade wars of course.
It just does seem to add up on the $ side. The national debt I feel will get a lot bigger to prove Donald right about getting him in a good light in his supporters eyes.
Zod said:
Greg66 said:
Carl_Manchester said:
From a technical standpoint it was an impossible job to replace Obamacare, anyone who understands the U.S medical system will know that its just too complicated to un-wind the Obamacare act in short order regardless of political will.
On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
In terms of the important stuff, not to repeat past posts as I feel I have posted enough on that. The main thing Trump/Bannon want is tied to the $1trn USD Infrastructure plan and to start to un-wind the affects of globalisation on the working class, everything else is window dressing.
That is perhaps the most bizarre analysis of this I have seen. On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
In terms of the important stuff, not to repeat past posts as I feel I have posted enough on that. The main thing Trump/Bannon want is tied to the $1trn USD Infrastructure plan and to start to un-wind the affects of globalisation on the working class, everything else is window dressing.
Bannon has a clue, but the same attitude towards the working classes and his agenda appears to be simply to destroy and disrupt the US and other Western democracies and institutions. I'm not sure he has a goal beyond that.
Draining the swamp may have got the executive branch sidetracked from bigger issues.
Gandahar said:
Zod said:
Greg66 said:
Carl_Manchester said:
From a technical standpoint it was an impossible job to replace Obamacare, anyone who understands the U.S medical system will know that its just too complicated to un-wind the Obamacare act in short order regardless of political will.
On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
In terms of the important stuff, not to repeat past posts as I feel I have posted enough on that. The main thing Trump/Bannon want is tied to the $1trn USD Infrastructure plan and to start to un-wind the affects of globalisation on the working class, everything else is window dressing.
That is perhaps the most bizarre analysis of this I have seen. On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
In terms of the important stuff, not to repeat past posts as I feel I have posted enough on that. The main thing Trump/Bannon want is tied to the $1trn USD Infrastructure plan and to start to un-wind the affects of globalisation on the working class, everything else is window dressing.
Bannon has a clue, but the same attitude towards the working classes and his agenda appears to be simply to destroy and disrupt the US and other Western democracies and institutions. I'm not sure he has a goal beyond that.
Draining the swamp may have got the executive branch sidetracked from bigger issues.
Not quite Trump, but I am sure he has his bit to play, US politicians have voted to remove rules that demanded ISPs got permission from customers before selling their browsing histories.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39365308
Would you agree to sell you and your family browsing history?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39365308
Would you agree to sell you and your family browsing history?
Baron Greenback said:
Not quite Trump, but I am sure he has his bit to play, US politicians have voted to remove rules that demanded ISPs got permission from customers before selling their browsing histories.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39365308
Would you agree to sell you and your family browsing history?
And remember who's funding Trump and Bannon ... Robert Mercer; Mr Big Data = political power.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39365308
Would you agree to sell you and your family browsing history?
a billionaire businessman 'does not know what globalisation is' ?
i have put a question mark at the end but i find the concept rediculous.
did we enter some parallel dimension where Trump did not make winning over Detroit a priority ?
some of the posters here have short memories he won michigan, not exactly the reference model for white elite metro liberalism. he did not win michigan because of obamacare he won michigan because he promised to do what nobody else has done for 30 years - be on their side.
not repealing obamacare is a boost for factory worker Joe in Detroit not a kick in the teeth.
Just read this article from the guy who wrote Trump's 'autobiography': http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donal...
It certainly tells you everything you need to know to understand Trump attitude to truth.
It certainly tells you everything you need to know to understand Trump attitude to truth.
Ghostwriter said:
If he were writing “The Art of the Deal” today, Schwartz said, it would be a very different book with a very different title. Asked what he would call it, he answered, “The Sociopath.”
...
Schwartz says of Trump, “He lied strategically. He had a complete lack of conscience about it.” Since most people are “constrained by the truth,” Trump’s indifference to it “gave him a strange advantage.”
The article is from last year, but I'd missed it. Well worth reading, I think...
Schwartz says of Trump, “He lied strategically. He had a complete lack of conscience about it.” Since most people are “constrained by the truth,” Trump’s indifference to it “gave him a strange advantage.”
king president should be able to say what he meant.Carl_Manchester said:
a billionaire businessman 'does not know what globalisation is' ?
i have put a question mark at the end but i find the concept rediculous.
did we enter some parallel dimension where Trump did not make winning over Detroit a priority ?
some of the posters here have short memories he won michigan, not exactly the reference model for white elite metro liberalism. he did not win michigan because of obamacare he won michigan because he promised to do what nobody else has done for 30 years - be on their side.
not repealing obamacare is a boost for factory worker Joe in Detroit not a kick in the teeth.
Any more predictions before you have 20:20 and tell us that's what he meant to do all along?i have put a question mark at the end but i find the concept rediculous.
did we enter some parallel dimension where Trump did not make winning over Detroit a priority ?
some of the posters here have short memories he won michigan, not exactly the reference model for white elite metro liberalism. he did not win michigan because of obamacare he won michigan because he promised to do what nobody else has done for 30 years - be on their side.
not repealing obamacare is a boost for factory worker Joe in Detroit not a kick in the teeth.
Hindsight. What a wonderful thing.
unrepentant said:
Rumors abound that Flynn may have made some kind of deal with FBI. If so that could be very bad news for Trump.
https://twitter.com/juliettekayyem/status/845673079611187204Is the source of that rumour apparently. Take it with a pinch of salt given who she's worked for in the past (Obama), but she seems to be very well informed on national security issues, and it's odd that he's not been very visible since he was binned.
Alpinestars said:
Any more predictions before you have 20:20 and tell us that's what he meant to do all along?
Hindsight. What a wonderful thing.
I said in January it could not be done and obviously I am not an expert on U.S politics and do not pretend to be. So it must have been even clearer to the people on the inside that this was doomed.Hindsight. What a wonderful thing.
its just politics mate, no different to the Prime Minister being defeated on tax credits, with about the same impact as this defeat : sod all.
As I also posted previously, I don't think he is above reproach. I personally think their Military spending plans over this current presidential term are un-sustainable. It seems like they want to keep spending money like its going out of fashion.
If you tee up the defeat of this bill with the impending tax reforms, its all set for quite a battle now because I don't think the USA can afford it all.
Russia Truther tears are going to flow for the second time this week.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkChOSdOgcc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkChOSdOgcc
Carl_Manchester said:
From a technical standpoint it was an impossible job to replace Obamacare, anyone who understands the U.S medical system will know that its just too complicated to un-wind the Obamacare act in short order regardless of political will.
On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
Precisely what I said a few posts back. As soon as he set the ultimatum, the agenda was clear. On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
scherzkeks said:
Carl_Manchester said:
From a technical standpoint it was an impossible job to replace Obamacare, anyone who understands the U.S medical system will know that its just too complicated to un-wind the Obamacare act in short order regardless of political will.
On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
Precisely what I said a few posts back. As soon as he set the ultimatum, the agenda was clear. On this particular issue, from a political standpoint Trump has played himself into a win-win situation on this because he has kept grass roots working class voters happy whilst giving the hard-liner republicans (backed by big pharma) clear backing by trying to get the changes through.
Now he can open his hands to both sides of the party and say to them - I tried but we lost the vote. Privately it will be a relief because he can park this come re-election and actually win more votes because he won't campaign on this issue again.
rscott said:
Your predictions then - which of Trump's other campaign promises does he also never have any intention of actually following through on?
Not a matter of "no intention", more like an "inability to deliver". The jobs that are supposed to be "coming back to America" were (mostly) never exported....they were "automated out of existence". Hard to see how they are "coming back".Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff