[US-Politics] Will Trump turn out to be a "two-week President?"
GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
So why are we here? What was the point of this? What was accomplished, other than this: No evidence that Russia hacked or effected the election of 2016 and they refuse to say whether Obama ordered taps of Trump. And it’s the Roger Stone Show! What a colossal waste of valuable time.
FBI Director James Comey and NSA Director Admiral Michael Rogers were among the witnesses testifying at a House Select Intelligence Committee hearing on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Congressional Democrats and their media allies hope that Comey will deliver a “body blow” to the Trump presidency by telling lawmakers Russia somehow undermined the 2016 presidential election and that Trump’s claim that Obama wiretapped Trump Tower is groundless. They never said that. They just couldn’t comment or verify. Nice, huh?
But Democrats are worried that Comey will make other statements that could severely undermine their efforts to destroy Trump and possibly turn the tables on them. Since this will be a public hearing of the House Intelligence Committee, we were subjected to an endless series of self-righteous and preening questions by Democratic committee members on the wiretapping of Trump Tower charge inter alia. Democrats want this to be the lead story coming out of the hearing and will extract as many sound bites as possible of Comey debunking this charge for CNN, The New York Times and the Washington Post — Democratic apparatchiks and propaganda units. Democratic committee members pressed Comey on Russian interference in the 2016 election and contacts between Trump campaign officials and Russians but learned nothing of consequence or importance.
TL;DW - If dems are so upset that Trump is president, they shouldn't have let Hillary cheat Sanders - chickens are coming home to roost @ dems - 'ya dun goofed'
But let us learn from this early, rather than late: elections must be done using paper.
The first time that we seriously tried to use "paperless" election machines – thankfully, not throughout the nation as a whole – "the wrong candidate won."
... and there was no way to audit the results.
So we just pulled our favorite boogerman out from under the bed, and blamed them.
The Russians must be looking at us very strangely right now. "Don't the Americans know how to carry out an election?"
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 03-21-2017 at 07:55 AM.
But let us learn from this early, rather than late: elections must be done using paper.
The first time that we seriously tried to use "paperless" election machines – thankfully, not throughout the nation as a whole – "the wrong candidate won."
... and there was no way to audit the results.
Well the only persons that will not learn from this is the dems, and thus why H.A. Goodman indicated that the dems deserve to have Madame Cyberhack run again, to assure their loss, because they have learned nothing - since people who outright cheated in the Democratic primary to get Hillary as their queen. I mean even now, why is Donna Brazile and Debbie Wasserman Schultz there? Why do they still work at the DNC? They couldn't even get Keith Ellison as head, they still voted for Tom Perez, when everyone knows if you are a supporter of the dems, it SHOULD have been Sam Ronan (he got a whopping 0 votes!) Probably because he wasn't a corporate shill. So yes the dems haven't learned shit, and that is also why at this point even after the 4 years - I would actually be casting my vote for Trump as I have threatened before - no matter what these first 4 years end up like, and this time I will be sure to have my MAGA hat (or whatever new hat might come by) - and a t-shirt of Pepe in some form or another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs
So we just pulled our favorite boogerman out from under the bed, and blamed them.
Except they are not the 'commie' bogeyman that the dems paint them out to be. This whole neo-Mccarthyism is beyond ridiculous - even if say there is an average person in the USA who may hold some sort of bias or grudge against the Russian Federation - especially lets say if they were a hardcore anti-commie back in the day of the USSR. I am sure they would have been on top of world events, NATO etc - and even they would tell you probably the same thing. NATO has been antagonising the Bear, USSR is dead - Russia has their own problems now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs
The Russians must be looking at us very strangely right now. "Don't the Americans know how to carry out an election?"
I am sure they are asking that very question, and remember Putin's quip about hoping the USA is not some sort of 'banana republic?' What irks me even more, is that these dems would put us in another cold war, and possibly worse for their own ends with a nuclear power. They hope continuation of proxy wars, and maybe a confrontation - which if it were to come to that, the Russians have explicitly stated they would not be drawn into a conventional war, and just start pressing buttons - guess what that means? Then again I can't be surprised since they are politicians after all, not like they really do give a shit about us. So in this case, I am in agreement with H.A. Goodman. I do hope Madame Cyberhack will run again in 2020, and when she loses I wonder who the bogeyman will be after that.
Also to further expand on your quip about Americans carrying an election - I am fairly sure the entire world is just looking at us with raised eyebrows, and maybe a few facepalms. Perhaps the USA might benefit from election monitors - and maybe we really do need to look at all this gerrymandering throughout our own country, for both parties. The dems are just sore because they not only lost hard, emails exposed them for just how corrupt they are - treatment of third party progressive candidates (Sanders) - Nixonian tactics, etc. They got caught with their hands in the cookie jar and just throwing tantrums.
So again when Madame Cyberhack does run again, and loses because nobody really likes her at all - I wonder who the next bogeyman will be instead of 'Muh Russians.' Perhaps the Chines or North Koreans...
Like FDR, Trump connects with mainstream, Main Street and the Heartland in a way that the elite media cannot — note, CANNOT — understand. They cannot see how anyone could actually care about jobs, factory closings, crime, immigration crises and making America great again. The man is simply a genius.
What was that all about? So why are we here? What was the point of this? What was accomplished, other than this: No evidence that Russia hacked or effected the election of 2016 and they refuse to say whether Obama ordered taps of Trump. And it’s the Roger Stone Show! What a colossal waste of valuable time.
The enemy. NEOLIBERALISM is a policy model of social studies and economics that transfers control of economic factors to the private sector from the public sector. It takes from the basic principles of neoclassical economics, suggesting that governments must limit subsidies, make reforms to tax law in order to expand the tax base, reduce deficit spending, limit protectionism, and open markets up to trade. It also seeks to abolish fixed exchange rates, back deregulation, permit private property, and privatize businesses run by the state.
Why did Trump’s healthcare plan fail? Simple. Paul Ryan. Blame workout boy. If you insist on immediate and easy blame. The corporatist shill. Wall Street’s manservant. He is the posterboy and architect of the corporatocracy. You know where his allegiance lies. And that allegiance never elected Trump Prez. He’s into a sphere and world that have nothing to do with Trump’s constituency. Or you. Tax relief is of little concern to a country where half pay no taxes. Yep, that’s the primary reason it failed but it’s a tad more complicated than that. Trump has to now tone down the swagger, the hubris, the brio and bravado and understand that Washington is a parallel universe that has absolutely nothing to do with that of common sense. He’s busy noshing on some crow-filled humble pie. DC’s a Potemkin village of pretend representation and constituent ideology. Behind the flutter and flash of flags waving there’s the brutal world of a coarse and callous disregard for anything resembling representative governance. And that goes for both sides of the mythical and illusory left-right paradigm. Two sides of the same coin. Left-Right. Diet Coke or Diet Pepsi. McDonald’s or Wendy’s. Wow. Such diversity. What a panoply of choice and opportunity.
The healthcare reform dance has been abandoned altogether. Trump has been portrayed as failing miserably and he is now presented an opportunity that is golden. He can reformulate his position and win but not with his coterie and troupe of usual suspects advisors and minders. These are neoliberal elites who trumpet tropes and shibboleths but all remained mired in and moored to hoary and concertized said neoliberal policies that are the parenthetical mission of our once brave republic. Trump’s no leftist or socialist (which may be the problem), he’s a hard right warrior set on implementing nationalist policies but even the neoliberal elites won’t let him do that. Everyone in power wants him to lose and to be perceived as the loser. And be not swayed by the Lamont Cranston of the Demo-gogues. He calls Trump a One Percenter but he represents the 1% of the 1% in shouldering the mission statement for global elites. What a profound con this master of on-off crocodile tears is. The laughable lachrymose louse.
The right loves the mindless chant and rant of “free market” everything. That’s the answer. Throw into the mix the lovable, laughable libertarian spin that is basically hard-right with the occasional pepper of “freedom” or its cousin “liberty.” Bannon and his crew are rhetoricians of the first stripe and while the left is howling with delight today, the right are laughing as well . . . while America cries, sick and tired.
You’ve been had again. Sound familiar? Looking for the quick fix, the bumper sticker prince. It ain’t gonna happen without a revolution and while I still see Trump monumentally better than Hillary, he’s nowhere near the answer. But you knew that. I hold on to the fact that anyone the left and right loathe must be on to something.
So what’s the answer? Simple. Medicare for everyone.
And be not mistaken. That’s called SOCIALISM. Get used to it. Embrace it.
I'm disappointed. What became of the great dealmaker? He proved incapable of making a deal with his own party in the House. Now a major pillar of his campaign lies in ruins.
Whether you like Trump or not (and I don't particularly like him), he did look like someone who could change things. What is going to happen to all that mass support when they find out that he is no more capable of making America great again than anybody else?
I'm disappointed. What became of the great dealmaker? He proved incapable of making a deal with his own party in the House. Now a major pillar of his campaign lies in ruins.
Whether you like Trump or not (and I don't particularly like him), he did look like someone who could change things. What is going to happen to all that mass support when they find out that he is no more capable of making America great again than anybody else?
Now I find myself defending him, then again I did threaten to vote for him next time around - only because the dems have not come up with anything in response to him, except 'Muh Russians.' The Republicans did not want him as candidate at all, it is no secret - and I am sure Paul Ryan and Mccain are out to sabotage him in their own way too. Trump is just as much a threat to the Republicans as he is to the Democrats. The Republicans in general did not expect someone to come and hit the ground running, they wanted a few months of just doing nothing, this is why Trump is different. He is using his business instincts - and in business obviously you cannot just 'ease' into things, it is the 'time is money' mindset.
Also as far as the Republicans are concerned they just look like fools - like always, because they actually have had plenty of time to hash out something to counter the ACA(Obamacare) - they did nothing and Paul Ryan comes up with a half-assed bill - in this case it was DoA, and I agree with the video I linked in my previous post - Paul Ryan needs to be purged.
this is why Trump is different. He is using his business instincts - and in business obviously you cannot just 'ease' into things, it is the 'time is money' mindset.
The point is that his business instincts don't seem to deliver in this context. If he can't get his policies through, what use is he?
The point is that his business instincts don't seem to deliver in this context. If he can't get his policies through, what use is he?
He actually does not make policies - that is what the Legislative Branch is for, he is the Executive Branch. So your question should be redirected to those proposing the Bills in the first place, not him. He just puts the final stamp of approval or denial.
Again, the Republicans had years to come up with something 'better' than Obamacare and they did nothing (as usual) - so what good are they? Ryan-care basically was something that probably was hashed up on a napkin or something and tried to be presented as an alternative, so it was doomed from the start.
The Executive cannot make law: this is the purview of the Legislature.
And, certain members of this Legislature – specifically, Paul Ryan and his insurance-company backed cronies – tried hard to use this initial "wave of angst" to slip through a bill that they'd been working on for years without success. They hoped that the House would be persuaded, even by strong-arm tactics, to pass it virtually-unread. But plenty of Ryan's colleagues had seen this bill in various forms before.
It's not going to be that easy. The ACA was transformed, by for-profit-health-care "lobbyists," from a bill that would have begun to put America down the right-road of single-payer health care, into one that would use the US Government as its collection agency while simultaneously allowing the still-for-profit industry to choose just what "health coverage" would mean. Millions of Americans voted with their wallets and paid the penalty for not purchasing this flawed product. (A proposed clause of the ACA that would have made this a criminal offense was briefly considered, but rejected.)
Thanks to the tireless Librarians of Congress, you can read the actual text of H.R. 1628 here, and it would be a very good idea for all of you to do just that. (Start with the summary, then grind through the text. It's all there.)
As you can see for yourself, this is not "a bill to 'repeal Obamacare.'" Quite the opposite. Some interesting bits in the summary show how public money would begin to be paid tofor-profitcompanies in the name of "stability":
Quote:
This bill amends the SSAct to establish the Patient and State Stability Fund to provide funding to states for the stabilization of health insurance premiums and other purposes.
¶2206(6): "Providing payments, directly or indirectly, to health care providers for the provision of such health care services as are specified by the Administrator."
So, the Federal Government (very quickly ... as "Uncle Sugar™" always does) begins to pay for health care, in the name of "stabilizing" premiums. Except, it does so by paying money to private, for-profit companies who can continue to dictate to you whether you and your loved ones get to live or get to die, all the while making profits for their shareholders even though those profits came straight from taxpayers. Hospitals and insurers continue to make their for-profit decisions while "suckling at the teat of the taxpayer." Meanwhile, "the taxpayer" has no say in the matter.
It doesn't take any imagination at all to know that premiums, once "stabilized," will shoot through the Moon in order to reap as much do-re-mi from "Uncle Sugar" as possible. (Wouldn't you?)
Nice try, Paul ...
This and several other bills are being pushed through Congress in hope of "catching the wave," (such as a pure-pork "encouraging innovations" act attached to Homeland Security), but the defeat of Ryan's bill might be the first signal that this "wave" is ending and that both Congress and the Executive must settle down to work.
The President can't tell Congress what to do, and the Congressional leaders are not telling the President the whole truth of what they're up to. They're manipulating the Press in the usual way as the Press likewise seeks to manipulate the opinions of the public. However, if you care to read it, the facts of everything that is going on, and the text (as well as a summary) of every scrap of paper being considered either on the Floor or in any Committee, is all right there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by This is what I think:
The right to health care is an inalienable human right guaranteed by the Constitution: the right to "Life." It must not be done "for profit," nor must it be paid-for through companies who also "seek profit" (even if, as in the case of Blue Cross of Tennessee, they are still on the books as "non-profit" corporations who pay no corporate taxes), whose profits are earned only when they don't pay.
There is no way to "make these numbers work." Health Care cannot be provided "for profit," nor paid for "profitably." Profit must have nothing to do with standing in the way of people getting the medical care they need. Foundational health care services must be paid for and administered by the Government and provided equally to all persons, removing all concerns of profit from all who provide it, and focusing only on meeting the medical need of "We, the People of the United States"... who collectively pay for it.
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 03-26-2017 at 08:08 AM.
Donald Trump should be impeached for a) falsely accusing obama for wire tapping Trump Towers during the 2016 election and b) strong evidence of collusion with Russia.
I've head in the news that these two items if proven is enough for him to be impeachable.
IMHO, Trump should go. He has no political experience and it shows in his actions and thinking. He's just a rich man who wanted to be President or better, a dictator like his friend Vladimir Putin.
Donald Trump should be impeached for a) falsely accusing obama for wire tapping Trump Towers during the 2016 election and b) strong evidence of collusion with Russia.
Based on what? There has to be more than an agency stating they are "highly confident". What about Clinton's dealings with Russia? What about the rigging at the DNC? I am fairly certain that would be illegal. Oh and if we are on the subject of false accusations - since no actual evidence of any Russian involvement with the elections, how about that?
Why hasn't the DNC allowed the FBI to analyze their servers? But we are just supposed to take their word for it, that it was all Russia....K....
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyHBrice
I've head in the news that these two items if proven is enough for him to be impeachable.
Which source was that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyHBrice
IMHO, Trump should go. He has no political experience and it shows in his actions and thinking. He's just a rich man who wanted to be President or better, a dictator like his friend Vladimir Putin.
Well it is probably clear that you have really downed the Russia narrative kool-aid, whats the flavor?
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
