Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[redwallzyl]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/18/us/bathroom-bill-texas-abbott-straus.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

looks like Texas is going full Carolina and coupling it with an attempted purge of everyone with a shred of sanity left.

[nenjin]

Otherwise known as Tuesday in Texas.

[MrRoboto75]

Place bets on how long it takes in Trump's "Made in America" event before Trump just starts making it more about himself.

[smjjames]

Trump's new plan for Obamacare: "Fuck it"

And not in the sexual sense, though I suppose, with Trump, take it as you will.

He also says that he won't "own it". Sounds like he's attempting to defy political gravity.

Also, McConnell wants to try and do a procedural vote on it next week. Why not today or this week? I suppose it's the best escape route they have, though it'll open them to attacks from both sides, kind of a three way 'damned if you do, damned if you don't'.

[smjjames]

Trump's new plan for Obamacare: "Fuck it"

They did polls on this. Polls indicate that the electorate (relevant number- something around 50% of Republicans alone) would blame Republicans if Obamacare failed now.


Hell, if it failed because it was flawed from the start and nothing that Trump did, they'd still blame Trump. First rule of politics- it's the President and his party's fault for everything. No matter what.

The only exception to this rule that I'm aware of is government shutdown with the senate and house are held by the opposition party.

For 2013? Only the House was opposition party and it was pretty blatantly a certain segment of the Republicans, not all of them. Don't know about earlier times that it happened.

[misko27]

It's hard to speculate what Trump might do. I'm reasonably certain that most of the people (not all, but probably most) who work for him think it's a horrible idea and will work hard to stop it. But I'm sure he feels the desire to do something, and that worries me. I mean, sometimes he does go out of his way to pick the option people don't think he'll do (pulling out of Paris, pulling out of TPP, bombing Assad, etc), other times his more moderate aides and underlings seem to win out (recertifying that Iran is compliant with the nuclear deal, hasn't built a wall, not pulling out of NAFTA, etc.). I mean he can try and sink Obamacare in a number of ways: the most likely is to just "let it fail" as he has promised, but he can also take very active and immediate steps that would instantly send the markets into a death spiral (such as stopping certain subsidies, or not enforcing the mandate.) The problem is that the latter, while more effective, also dramatically increases his culpability in the "failing" part, and most Republicans are very, very aware of that. On the other hand, if the Senate hands him a bipartisan fixes bill, what does he do with that? Would he oppose it? Would they veto? Who even knows.

[sluissa]

He also says that he won't own up to it. Sounds like he's attempting to defy political gravity.

He said "own it" not "own up to it"

At the risk of another discussion of language there is a distinction.

[smjjames]

Speaking of speculating what Trump might do, Trump had a second undisclosed (bolded for emphasis) conversation with Putin while they were at the dinner at G20. The fact that he talked with Putin isn't the issue, that's what they're all there to do, the issue is that they didn't disclose it. There weren't any staffers there (none of the leaders and representatives at the dinner did either), but with Trump, you kind of have to babysit him because you don't know what he'll do or whatever.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/342589-ian-bremmer-trump-and-putin-held-second-informal-meeting-during-g-20

https://www.vox.com/2017/7/18/15994056/trump-putin-second-meeting-g20-bremmer

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/18/politics/trump-putin-g20/index.html

He also says that he won't own up to it. Sounds like he's attempting to defy political gravity.

He said "own it" not "own up to it"

At the risk of another discussion of language there is a distinction.

Oh yeah, you're right. It turned into "own up to it" in my head.

[sluissa]

It's hard to speculate what Trump might do. I'm reasonably certain that most of the people (not all, but probably most) who work for him think it's a horrible idea and will work hard to stop it. But I'm sure he feels the desire to do something, and that worries me. I mean, sometimes he does go out of his way to pick the option people don't think he'll do (pulling out of Paris, pulling out of TPP, bombing Assad, etc), other times his more moderate aides and underlings seem to win out (recertifying that Iran is compliant with the nuclear deal, hasn't built a wall, not pulling out of NAFTA, etc.). I mean he can try and sink Obamacare in a number of ways: the most likely is to just "let it fail" as he has promised, but he can also take very active and immediate steps that would instantly send the markets into a death spiral (such as stopping certain subsidies, or not enforcing the mandate.) The problem is that the latter, while more effective, also dramatically increases his culpability in the "failing" part, and most Republicans are very, very aware of that. On the other hand, if the Senate hands him a bipartisan fixes bill, what does he do with that? Would he oppose it? Would they veto? Who even knows.

I don't think anyone knows for SURE what he'd do. And there's a solid chance someone like Kushner or Bannon would have the real sway over it, but I think Trump is a bit more pragmatic... at least in regards to his own ego. If he can spin it like he's the first president in a long while that's gotten both parties to work together and actually succeed on something as major as health care. He might take that win.

[hector13]

Well, we know that's only going to happen after he's fucked over the system that his opponents put in place, either through action or inaction, and his opponents won't let people forget that, regardless of whether he and how party "own it".

They will likely not let him forget that, either, particularly when it comes to compromises.

At the risk of pointing out the obvious, for the nth time: he's a fucking moron.

[smjjames]

Huh, the Russian lawyer that met with Trump jr. says she is willing and ready to testify before Congress if Congress wishes her to. It seems rather unusual, but everybody knows what she is going to say anyway, so, I don't see it being very useful.

[Folly]

Trump's Voter Fraud Panel

I can absolutely support an investigation to ensure that the voting process has been carried out in a fair and legitimate manner. However, under no circumstances should it be the White House overseeing this investigation. An independent and unbiased panel needs to be assigned to put this matter to rest once and for all.


Regarding Health Care, Obamacare is not getting enough money to sustain itself. Trump's solution, make the poor people go deep into debt in order to obtain the basic services they need to survive, while handing out free Health Care for the rich. A majority of senators, including all Dem's and several Repub's, say Trumpcare is insane, they would rather repair Obamacare, but lacking any proposed repair options they will just stick with failing Obamacare. Trump's counter, he's perfectly content to wait, confident that all the people dying under the failing system will eventually force the opposition to accept Trumpcare. And if not, he can just wait it out until the 2018 Senatorial elections when he can start throwing his presidential weight around to replace the opposition with puppets who will do whatever he says.

[Lord Shonus]

The only reason that Obamacare is in trouble is that the GOP has been deliberately trying to kill it. Left alone, it would be more than capable of supporting itself. Either that, or the stories of failure are outright lies.

[RedKing]

Trump's Voter Fraud Panel

I can absolutely support an investigation to ensure that the voting process has been carried out in a fair and legitimate manner. However, under no circumstances should it be the White House overseeing this investigation. An independent and unbiased panel needs to be assigned to put this matter to rest once and for all.


Regarding Health Care, Obamacare is not getting enough money to sustain itself. Trump's solution, make the poor people go deep into debt in order to obtain the basic services they need to survive, while handing out free Health Care for the rich. A majority of senators, including all Dem's and several Repub's, say Trumpcare is insane, they would rather repair Obamacare, but lacking any proposed repair options they will just stick with failing Obamacare. Trump's counter, he's perfectly content to wait, confident that all the people dying under the failing system will eventually force the opposition to accept Trumpcare. And if not, he can just wait it out until the 2018 Senatorial elections when he can start throwing his presidential weight around to replace the opposition with puppets who will do whatever he says.

His Presidential weight (unlike his physical mass) is getting smaller and smaller. For all his threats of throwing his support behind primary challengers to Republicans "disloyal" to him, I don't think you're going to see much effect.

Races are won by money. Metric fucktons of it. The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) holds the ridiculously fat checkbook that can make or break a candidate, and they have a stated policy of supporting incumbent Republicans. Trump could endorse an upstart challenger, but at ~30% approval rating, a Trump endorsement doesn't outweigh millions upon millions of dollars of ad spending. I suppose he could put pressure on the NRSC to withhold funding from an incumbent, but to do so would piss off pretty much ALL the Republican Senators, many of whom already dislike Trump. Good luck getting anything passed when you piss off your own team.

He could also, conceivably, funnel money from his own campaign coffers to primary challengers, but that would be a breathtaking breach of political decorum and invite the same or even higher level of outrage from Senate Republicans as the above option.

Plus, except for a few deep-red states, replacing a moderate Republican incumbent with a hard-right Tea Party challenger is very well likely to result in losing the seat to the Dems (counterbalanced by the Democrats' remarkable ability to blow a race that a five-year old could win).

He might have more clout in House races, where the districts may be gerrymandered such that Trumpanzees are a bigger chunk of the electorate, and where campaign budgets are smaller and more easily affected by an infusion of outside money (and where the RNC has to spread its money much more thinly). But so far, the House hasn't been his problem -- those guys will vote for ANYTHING.

[EnigmaticHat]

With the healthcare bill they had to choose which of the two rogue groups to appeal to.  They chose to appeal to the far-right group and leave the moderates to put their feet down.  Guess which group has voters that won't care about defying Trump?  The Republican Senators seem pretty good at looking out for their own.