Summations Only

Translation: "No I [marc9000] cannot take a stab at explaining Trump in any way that does not involve stupid conspiracy theories or juvenile attacks on Trump's critics.Your message contained a lot of comments, and I can tell that they are heart-felt. But you also proved my point. Quite frankly, I think I do understand the appeal of Trump, and I could explain it in terms that don't make folks look/sound like idiots to folks like me. Apparently, such a task is nigh impossible for most of the Trump supporters who post here. It's also apparent that from this thread that at least some Trump supporters (I definitely do not consider you in this insult) are idiots who believe just about every right wing conspiracy theory I they've ever heard. Well, no. I say that because of the ridiculous things he says that are clearly not facts. There are also some of his policies that I don't consider merely wrong, but also unconstitutional and racist/xenophobic. I don't know Trump personally, but he has a reputation for treating the folks he does business with poorly.Example. That nonsense he spouted about his electoral victory of 306 votes, which by the way was actually 304, being the greatest margin since Reagan was idiotic. His defense when called on that statement was equally idiotic. I'd make the same comment if Obama said the same thing.

I've made a couple of comments to the effect that Republicans by and large support Trump and that that support has not been much affected by post-election events. I think the reasons for that are fairly simple. Namely, that most of his supporters are in favor of Trump's policies even if they do have some misgivings about the president.The article below describes interviews with Trump supporters each of whom describes their reasons for supporting Trump. The reasons include their opinions of Hillary, their desire to have the general Republican agenda become the law of the land (including easing up of regulations, dismantling Roe v. Wade, and keeping foreigners out of the country). What you won't see much of is the ridiculous stuff that makes up the defense of Trump is this thread.These Republicans didn't like Trump at first. They do now. | CNN Politics

quote:

---

"So, I voted for Trump," she said when I called her this month. "I didn't care for his personality, and he doesn't think before he speaks and he's kind of rash. But I'm glad that I did. I'm glad that he's come down on the refugee immigration stance. I know it's difficult, but we have to protect our country....
"I have a good feeling about him," she said. "He seems like he's going to be good."
As for her previous trepidations, Francioli said, "I got to like his policies and I was able to put his personality aside."
Indeed, Francioli offered a substantial list of subjects on which she agrees with Trump. "He's going to increase the military, going to protect this country, build a wall, border control, Obamacare," she said. "He's bringing jobs back." A regular participant in church-led marches outside an abortion clinic, she added that she expects Trump to place further restrictions on the procedure.

---

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

If Trump does nothing, won't it be the folks who elected him who are complaining?With respect to Obama care, if there is indeed a catch 22, Trump and the Republicans basically put themselves in position to take a fall for what happens when if they don't replace it with something functional by making promises in the run up to the election. Trump seems to have figured this out before his colleagues in the House and Senate did. However what Trump has elected to do is try to make sure the ACA fails by pricking holes in it. So when it fails, why shouldn't he get the blame. My question to you is why should anyone discuss any topic with someone who repeatedly distorts.At this point folks have clarified what their meaning so often that your continued insistence that posters are claiming the constitution applies to the entire world is best labeled as a deliberate lie. What folks are instead claiming is explicitly stated in the 14th amendment which is that there are due process rights applicable to all any person within its jurisdiction. Yes that does happen. Perhaps not blowing up until you read the article would be a good way to proceed.

It failed with some help from the right in crippling the initiative.And even with that, it seems that most people currently do not want the ACA removed without a replacement. However, both of those observations and questions completely miss the point. If what Trump and his party come up with is "not as good as" that should be reported. That's your excuse for lying? Are you ever going to provide any meaningful Trump examples? I saw your examples about the "truck driver" who was actually a "pickup truck driver" and the other example where you decided that you did not like the photo. Both issues were easily cleared up by reading the article. Just what did you think was being conveyed when you thought the truck driver was an 18 wheeler operator? What difference would that make?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

What if in addition to the wing nut stuff Trump does, he manages to pull of some version of comprehensive immigration reform, while putting in place a half-way decent health care replacement (meaning something other than y'all poor folks hurry up and die)? Goodbye democrats forever?

I understand that folks often dismiss petro's posts, but his opinion seems to match that of ninety percent of Republican voters. Everything that appears inane and stupid to his detractors seems genius to folks like Petro, marc9000, and Faith as well as millions of others.Trump is going to be a two-term president. Most of us are underestimating his appeal by applying logic, reason, and truth to what he says and are missing the fact that his attacks on the press and wild conspiracy theories regarding his opposition, just confirm things they already believe and make them feel good about themselves. Facts alone are not going to convince his base.It also turns out that you really can make a country work better by scapegoating the weak, depriving folks of heath care and safety nets, and exploiting nationalism, putting coal dust into rivers and streams, and punishing/discriminating against folks without due process as long as you paint them as the enemy. History shows that such things work at least in the short term. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

My understanding is that Trump has instructed the IRS not to enforce this penalty or tax, or whatever you need to call it. The result will likely be even more folks not signing up.

Didn't almost all of those 'diverse' Republicans already vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act something close to 50 times? Your answer would not seem to be much cover for not coming up with an acceptable solution sometime over the last seven years.

Not to worry. Trump did manage to get out the golf club Sunday.

quote:

---

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump headed to one of his golf courses again Sunday, marking his 13th visit to one since taking office and the eighth consecutive weekend he has spent at properties bearing his name.

---

Are you advocating for some kind of rationing of health care?I agree that there is a problem with the expensive healthcare, but I would submit that it is a combination of expensive research, as well as the failure of unregulated commerce to generate a profit motive for economic care.But the primary problem most people face is the inability to access routine care, both emergency and preventative, at a reasonable price. Everything in health care grows at much more than the rate of inflation. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Stop trying to make ineptitude look like genius. There never was a plan. Everybody knows that now.Do you have any interest whatsoever in telling the truth or are is defending the Republican party your only aim.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

That's right. However the purpose of the penalty is to modify behavior. It is the case that you don't get anything for the penalty, but that is how penalties work. And of course the really poor folks were supposed to be covered by Medicaid expansion which was intended to be mandatory. Unfortunately, a full 1/3 of the states opted out of coverage for poor folks.And again, there is no need to fix that before fixing the rest of the ACA. The penalty is not being enforced right now. I think we know the answer to that. At this point, it is pretty obvious that any advocacy for single payer by Trump is an insignificantly low priority because he did not ask his party for any such thing. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Maybe. But Flynn's request has been refused.http://www.nbcnews.com/...cts-immunity-michael-flynn-n741061

quote:

---

The Senate Intelligence Committee turned down the request by former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn's lawyer for a grant of immunity in exchange for his testimony, two congressional sources told NBC News.

​

A senior congressional official with direct knowledge said Flynn's lawyer was told it was "wildly preliminary" and that immunity was "not on the table" at the moment. A second source said the committee communicated that it is "not receptive" to Flynn's request "at this time."

---

In my view, turning down Flynn's request is the right thing to do. Flynn is implicated, and if you accept his plea without knowing the facts, Flynn could just fall on his sword without implicating anyone else. Investigate some more, and then make a call on offering Flynn immunity once you've gotten some details.Or at least get a proffer from Flynn regarding what he would say. Absent that, no immunity.

I wouldn't let marc9000 get away with quite so much. He is cherry picking his founders. Hamilton is no less a "prominent" founder than the others. The current interpretation is squarely in the center of the Hamiltonian view. The earlier interpretation was closer to the Madison interpretation. Neither view is some new fangled concoction of liberals. [1]ABE:[1] General welfare clause - Wikipedia
Hamilton's view actually prevailed during the first two presidential administrations (Washington and Adam) before being overtaken by the less expansive view.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

In a new low, Trump's administration manages to draw seemingly valid human rights criticism from Russia:

quote:

---

"Absurd statements of the Pentagon representatives justifying civil casualties caused by American bombing in Iraq give more information on the operation planning level and the alleged supremacy of the American "smart" bombs," the statement reads.

​

The Russian ministry's statement references coalition spokesperson Col. Joseph Scrocca's comments from last week, when he told reporters that ""ISIS is smuggling civilians into buildings so we won't see them and trying to bait the coalition to attack."

​

Scrocca said the coalition had observed the new ISIS tactic on video surveillance, but US officials have not released the footage. The Russian ministry statement questions why the US military is only now revealing ISIS' alleged new tactic -- and asks why the coalition proceeded with the strike despite knowing about it.

​

"First, what are the motives of the American Command putting the veil of confidentiality and keeping secret the crimes of terrorists from the international community? Second, why (did) the US-led coalition, having this information, make strikes with their 'smart' bombs on buildings with civilians dooming them to a terrible death?"

---

It appears that the calculation of "acceptable loses" vs "killing terrorists" has changed a bit. There are no claims of any significant killing of terrorists in this attack, and some dubious excuses for why a school was targeted.signed Ghost of Dronestar.