Donald Trump and US politics

My respect for Adam Schiff keeps growing and growing. Is he as clean as I think he is, or am I missing something?

Also, his tweets just keep getting better :P

Art of the Squeal: I blame Democrats for a bill Republicans couldn't pass. I blame Obama. I blame Australian Prime Minister & Meryl Streep..

"

Manocean wrote:

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

Where did YOU get the idea that "people get the idea that there is this huge support behind it"?

Ironically, from fake news articles liberals shared on my Facebook making fun of "Trump supporters" for standing behind it. I fell for it.

Even deathflower said that he thought people liked Trumpcare... so I'm not just blowing smoke, some people legitimately believe it.

Do I?

"

DalaiLama wrote:

It's important to try and bring down the costs of Obamacare, and it's important to keep it from collapsing. Market based reforms will be a big part of fixing it, and this bill really didn't utilize them.

It didn't pass because they tried to have a small team write it and then push it on everyone else. If they involved more people - including the democrats - they would end up with a bill that would pass with some bilateral support. It might not be everything the GOP wants, but compromise is not a dirty word.

Obamacare work because of huge government subsidies, if you cut the subsidies, it will collapse because it isn't profitable. It never is.

Democrats and Republicans are doing different things. I would think Too many cooks spoil the broth. More healthcare mean more cost. You can cut cost but you also cut healthcare. Not hard to figure that out. The problem is more about passing it when you have people going different directions.

"

deathflower wrote:

Obamacare work because of huge government subsidies, if you cut the subsidies, it will collapse because it isn't profitable. It never is.

Democrats and Republicans are doing different things. I would think Too many cooks spoil the broth. More healthcare mean more cost. You can cut cost but you also cut healthcare. Not hard to figure that out. The problem is more about passing it when you have people going different directions.

The elephant in the room is for profit healthcare.

"

Manocean wrote:

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

Where did YOU get the idea that "people get the idea that there is this huge support behind it"?

Ironically, from fake news articles liberals shared on my Facebook making fun of "Trump supporters" for standing behind it. I fell for it.

Even deathflower said that he thought people liked Trumpcare... so I'm not just blowing smoke, some people legitimately believe it.

Did you think of that all by yourself?

"

deathflower wrote:

[snip]...

Obamacare work because of huge government subsidies, if you cut the subsidies, it will collapse because it isn't profitable. It never is.

[snip]...

So, if/when Donald cuts government subsidies and ObamaCare "explodes" Donald can preen for a few more seconds, because Donald predicted it would "explode"!

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

"

deathflower wrote:

Obamacare work because of huge government subsidies, if you cut the subsidies, it will collapse because it isn't profitable. It never is.

Democrats and Republicans are doing different things. I would think Too many cooks spoil the broth. More healthcare mean more cost. You can cut cost but you also cut healthcare. Not hard to figure that out. The problem is more about passing it when you have people going different directions.

The elephant in the room is for profit healthcare.

There are many arguments to be made in favor of for-profit healthcare. For example, most medical innovation (even in Europe) would mostly dry up without a for-profit American market in which to recoup investment.

Not that I think things are good as they are, because the big for-profit corporations are backed up by a US government that trounces would-be competitors with regulation and is friendly to Big Pharma efforts to move jobs overseas. But one does not simply disregard the profit motive, not if one has the slightest economic sense.

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

My respect for Adam Schiff keeps growing and growing. Is he as clean as I think he is, or am I missing something?

Also, his tweets just keep getting better :P

Russia didn't do shit and everyone saying they did is a willing or unwilling pawn in a neocon warmongering propaganda push.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

My respect for Adam Schiff keeps growing and growing. Is he as clean as I think he is, or am I missing something?

Also, his tweets just keep getting better :P

Russia didn't do shit and everyone saying they did is a willing or unwilling pawn in a neocon warmongering propaganda push.

I always keep that possibility in mind. But at this point I'm doubting it more than ever.

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

My respect for Adam Schiff keeps growing and growing. Is he as clean as I think he is, or am I missing something?

Also, his tweets just keep getting better :P

Russia didn't do shit and everyone saying they did is a willing or unwilling pawn in a neocon warmongering propaganda push.

I always keep that possibility in mind. But at this point I'm doubting it more than ever.

There haven't been any new revelations. Flynn and Sessions talking to Russian ambassador isn't news (Flynn lying to Pence about it is). No new compelling argument has been made. All they're doing is repeating the lie, repeating the lie, repeating the lie until it gains the familiarity of truth. And you're falling for it.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

There haven't been any new revelations. Flynn and Sessions talking to Russian ambassador isn't news (Flynn lying to Pence about it is). No new compelling argument has been made. All they're doing is repeating the lie, repeating the lie, repeating the lie until it gains the familiarity of truth. And you're falling for it.

It depends on what a revelation is. No new utterly condemning evidence? Yeah, no utterly condemning evidence at all in fact. But there is a steady stream of circumstantial. If I'm to believe Schiff, there is now more than circumstantial, but until I know what that is or if it even exists., it isn't a factor.

If I had to put money on it, I'd say there's a huge there, there.


One question I ask myself and urge everyone else to ask themselves. If there were 3 files on a table and you had the option of picking one of them and the others would be destroyed. The one you picked would then go public. Written on the cover of the file is a short description of the contents.

The first: Contains convincing, indisputable proof that Trump, knowingly colluded with Russia, peepeegate was real, treason galore among Trump and a large number of his cabinet and associates. No illegal spying, Michelle Obama in fact has no cock and Trump has an IQ confirmed to be that of a goldfish.

The second: Contains convincing, indisputable proof that Trump and all his team, all his cabinet, all his associates were 100% innocent. Everything was a frame by a deep state of which Obama is second in command only to his man-wife Michelle who was indeed hung like a pantomime horse. Pizzagate was real and dozens of democrats were outed as pedos.

The third: Contains the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Which would you pick?