Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

aloyisious

looksee wrote: »

To those of us who take it pretty much for granted that if you are sick you will get care, the whole business of Vets getting health care seems a little overstated. I would expect that if you were injured in the course of your work for the country - whether army, firefighter, police or any other public service - you would be treated, so that having specific healthcare for vets would not arise.

In the best of circumstances, it probably would be best that military have health insurance cover in the same way that most other people have but the cost versus salary has to be factored in. That probably would have been a major factor in the establishment of the VA. The actual presence on the streets of thousands of people coming home regularly with massive physical and mental care problems was a day-to-day ugly fact, not a worse case scenario set-up and that would probably have weighed in on the decision to set up the VA.

Putting it bluntly, it was thought better to have specific facilities to care for the wounded and not have them walking around hospitals used by civilians needing treatment for day to day injuries, not shellshock, limb-loss and defaced soldiers etc, the horror-face of war not being good for the public morale.

I don't know whether the US military always had the VA to provide medical care for persons once in service now out of service with medical care needs or whether it would have been something, at some stage, the responsibility of the US Medical Corp to provide it from enlistment to grave.

Ta Igotadose, for the difference-info between Medicare and Medicaid.

Igotadose

aloyisious wrote: »

I don't know whether the US military always had the VA to provide medical care for persons once in service now out of service with medical care needs or whether it would have been something, at some stage, the responsibility of the US Medical Corp to provide it from enlistment to grave.

It originally was left up to the states, not federal level, until the world war 1 era and at that point there were a few federal-level departments covering health care. The VA combined them all in 1930. A big influx of veterans post-WWII led to a big increase in the VA, and its rise to prominence. Veterans going back to the 19th century could attend the local veterans hospital for health care, whether or not it was due to injuries/illness contracted during the war.

everlast75

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1122810308488237056?s=19

There we go folks.

10,000. We have never had such a prolific liar in the White House. And he isn't done yet. And his supporters don't care.

No doubt those that went before him had their flaws and failings. To me however, this is rock bottom. I just hope the vast majority of the voting public learn their lesson from this sad excuse of a man.

looksee

And now he is mixing in on behalf of the NRA, making accusations against the NY Att Gen. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/29/politics/trump-nra-investigation-new-york/index.html

He has also passed the 10,000 lies marker. Any comment from his followers?

ancapailldorcha

Link dumps/One-liners deleted. No more please.

aloyisious

Joe didn't mention Don much, just what the Admin did for the bosses and not for the workers. It looks like he's securing labour as his base against what he described as Don's base. I'm wondering if he's trying to corner the labour side before the Dem Socialist gets them.

CNN just reported that Rod Rosenstein has resigned. If the Dems in the house can succeed in getting the former special Counsel to testify before a committee, can they do the same with Rod?

mattser

looksee wrote: »

And now he is mixing in on behalf of the NRA, making accusations against the NY Att Gen. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/29/politics/trump-nra-investigation-new-york/index.html

He has also passed the 10,000 lies marker. Any comment from his followers?

He must be the only person in history who some people with nothing better to do, decided they would do a tally on how many lies someone told.
Sad indeed.

DrumSteve

mattser wrote: »

He must be the only person in history who some people with nothing better to do, decided they would do a tally on how many lies someone told.
Sad indeed.

Not just someone...

Igotadose

Recent ABC News/WaPO showing 55% of respondents would not vote for Trump. Not surprising, mildly interesting but it's ages before the first primary let alone election.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/441103-poll-55-say-they-wouldnt-vote-for-trump-in-2020

everlast75

mattser wrote: »

He must be the only person in history who some people with nothing better to do, decided they would do a tally on how many lies someone told.
Sad indeed.

He is the President of the United States of America.

One of, if not the most powerful man in the planet.

He is (unfortunately) not some bloke sitting in a bar, telling BS stories to his small number of friends.

His words matter.

The fact that he is a prolific liar matters.

How you can't see that as a problem, I have no clue.

Danzy

Igotadose wrote: »

Recent ABC News/WaPO showing 55% of respondents would not vote for Trump. Not surprising, mildly interesting but it's ages before the first primary let alone election.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/441103-poll-55-say-they-wouldnt-vote-for-trump-in-2020

Yet he will go in to the 2020 campaign with a high probability of re-election.

Trent Houseboat

Igotadose wrote: »

Recent ABC News/WaPO showing 55% of respondents would not vote for Trump. Not surprising, mildly interesting but it's ages before the first primary let alone election.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/441103-poll-55-say-they-wouldnt-vote-for-trump-in-2020

45% 18 months out is pretty good no? When you consider all the Republicans who don't really like him but will be turned off from Aborty McVenezuela-face as the Democratic nominee is sure to be painted.
Generic R and Generic D both have about 45% these days

EltonJohn69

The U.S. president suing banks is a bit mad isn’t it ?

Gbear

EltonJohn69 wrote: »

The U.S. president suing banks is a bit mad isn’t it ?

Not just suing banks, but suing banks to prevent basic oversight by Congress.

AbusesToilets

EltonJohn69 wrote: »

The U.S. president suing banks is a bit mad isn’t it ?

Headed for a real crunch moment for US politics. Is Congress going to back down in the face of WH defiance of their subpoenas?

Will Senate Republicans allow Trump to completely ignore the separation of powers? Could you have ever imagined a situation where the head of US law enforcement could be facing the prospect of being arrested by Congress for contempt?

rossie1977

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

45% 18 months out is pretty good no? When you consider all the Republicans who don't really like him but will be turned off from Aborty McVenezuela-face as the Democratic nominee is sure to be painted.
Generic R and Generic D both have about 45% these days

It's not 45% though. 28% said they would and 14% said they would consider it.

That's bad given state of the economy and Dow number. If any sort of down-turn happens between now and October 2020 Trump's likely in big trouble. A major terror attack on the US could either help or hinder his chances of re-election, hard to tell.

Had Trump kept off Twitter and kept his mouth shut he would be looking at 60+% saying they vote for him again.

EltonJohn69

I think they must be something really bad in his finical records, every time anyone goes near them he freaks out. Didn’t he try to fire Muller because he was looking in to it ? Didn't Michael Wolff say that if they investigate his bank records he is finished ?

Can’t wait to hear his explanation if and when his bank records come out

Trent Houseboat

rossie1977 wrote: »

It's not 45% though. 28% said they would and 14% said they would consider it.

That's bad given state of the economy and Dow number. If any sort of down-turn happens between now and October 2020 Trump's likely in big trouble. A major terror attack on the US could either help or hinder his chances of re-election, hard to tell.

Had Trump kept off Twitter and kept his mouth shut he would be looking at 60+% saying they vote for him again.

It's not a poll of Trump voters though. It's just a general poll, I'd imagine the number of 2016 Trump voters who intend to vote for him in 2020 is greater than 95%.
That doesn't make him unassailable, but I certainly don't think that poll is particularly bad.

rossie1977

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

It's not a poll of Trump voters though. It's just a general poll, I'd imagine the number of 2016 Trump voters who intend to vote for him in 2020 is greater than 95%.
That doesn't make him unassailable, but I certainly don't think that poll is particularly bad.

Given state of economy it's not good. There is no reason only 28% are sure of voting him now, it should be far higher for a sitting incumbent where economy isn't falling apart or a disastrous international crisis isn't occuring.

Latest poll has Biden leading Trump by 1 in Texas which to me is insane. Trump is -12 in Wisconsin and Michigan in approval, states he won in 2016, -9 in Iowa where he won big. Those are places that will determine 2020 election.

everlast75

Gbear wrote: »

Not just suing banks, but suing banks to prevent basic oversight by Congress.

Yep.

He can't be prosecuted because he is the president.

He can only be impeached.

However, he says he should not be investigated with a view to impeachment as he is a private citizen.

Did I get that right?

Stallingrad

Anyone else glaze over when people start quoting polls and percentages? It is utterly pointless at this stage, or at any stage. Did you learn nothing from election night?

Quin_Dub

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

45% 18 months out is pretty good no? When you consider all the Republicans who don't really like him but will be turned off from Aborty McVenezuela-face as the Democratic nominee is sure to be painted.
Generic R and Generic D both have about 45% these days

##Mod Note##

Cut out the silly nickname stuff please.

Thanks

rossie1977

Stallingrad wrote: »

Anyone else glaze over when people start quoting polls and percentages? It is utterly pointless at this stage, or at any stage. Did you learn nothing from election night?

National polls were almost spot on. National average had Clinton winning by 3, she won by 2. Issue was local polling especially in Midwest.

eire4

Danzy wrote: »

Yet he will go in to the 2020 campaign with a high probability of re-election.

A significant part of why what you said there is correct is due to the broken nature of their not very democratic system. Given it is a 2 party duopoly on power that increases his chances massively as well as the fact that the almost complete corruption of the system with money not much more then half the population will even bother to vote. Turnout at next years election will be in the mid to upper 50's at best. So over 40% of the potential electorate will not vote. There will also of course in Republican controlled states also be as much voter suppression as they can manage to help as well.

amandstu

EltonJohn69 wrote: »

I think they must be something really bad in his finical records, every time anyone goes near them he freaks out. Didn’t he try to fire Muller because he was looking in to it ? Didn't Michael Wolff say that if they investigate his bank records he is finished ?

Can’t wait to hear his explanation if and when his bank records come out

Any chance the secret services already know the details?

Quin_Dub

To be honest I really don't think that there will be anything really illegal in his finances.

I'm sure that there might be evidence of seriously dubious tax avoidance techniques etc. but I highly doubt there's anything "criminal" in there.

The risk for Trump is the ruination of his entire value of "self"

He tells the world that he's an ultra successful businessman that makes money as easy as breathing and that he has built this multi-billion dollar empire with his own bare hands.

Based on lots of information that has been floating around there for many years there is an extremely high probability that the reality is very very different.

If his finances show that in reality he's up to his neck in debt , that he isn't really a billionaire (and maybe never was?) and that his businesses are actually pretty mediocre , would his fragile ego survive the absolute torrent of ridicule and mockery that would come his way??

If the entire edifice of "Donald J Trump , Playboy Billionaire extraordinaire" is shattered by the release of factual details of his finances, what else is he left with??

Eric Cartman

Quin_Dub wrote: »

To be honest I really don't think that there will be anything really illegal in his finances.

I'm sure that there might be evidence of seriously dubious tax avoidance techniques etc. but I highly doubt there's anything "criminal" in there.

The risk for Trump is the ruination of his entire value of "self"

He tells the world that he's an ultra successful businessman that makes money as easy as breathing and that he has built this multi-billion dollar empire with his own bare hands.

Based on lots of information that has been floating around there for many years there is an extremely high probability that the reality is very very different.

If his finances show that in reality he'd up to his neck in debt , that he isn't really a billionaire (and maybe never was?) and that his businesses are actually pretty mediocre , would his fragile ego survive the absolute torrent of ridicule and mockery that would come his way??

If the entire edifice of "Donald J Trump , Playboy Billionaire extraordinaire" is shattered by the release of factual details of his finances, what else is he left with??

I would agree with most of that, however I don't so much think its ego as keeping investors and banks lending to him based on what they think he's worth.

Quin_Dub

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I would agree with most of that, however I don't so much think its ego as keeping investors and banks lending to him based on what they think he's worth.

You are right about the other lenders/investors of course , but everything about Trump is built on his ego and his currently unbreakable vision of himself.

Take away the bravado and braggadocio that that facade he has built creates for him , what's actually left?

A 70+ year old, living off his long departed Daddy's money and reputation?

duploelabs

Quin_Dub wrote: »

To be honest I really don't think that there will be anything really illegal in his finances.

I'm sure that there might be evidence of seriously dubious tax avoidance techniques etc. but I highly doubt there's anything "criminal" in there.

The risk for Trump is the ruination of his entire value of "self"

He tells the world that he's an ultra successful businessman that makes money as easy as breathing and that he has built this multi-billion dollar empire with his own bare hands.

Based on lots of information that has been floating around there for many years there is an extremely high probability that the reality is very very different.

If his finances show that in reality he's up to his neck in debt , that he isn't really a billionaire (and maybe never was?) and that his businesses are actually pretty mediocre , would his fragile ego survive the absolute torrent of ridicule and mockery that would come his way??

If the entire edifice of "Donald J Trump , Playboy Billionaire extraordinaire" is shattered by the release of factual details of his finances, what else is he left with??

Well he's produced financial statements to support his insurance/loans, if a release of these factual financial records conflict with the financial statements he produced then he's on the hook for fraud, quite a bit of this was covered during the Cohen testimony (and paper evidence produced)

Eric Cartman

Quin_Dub wrote: »

You are right about the other lenders/investors of course , but everything about Trump is built on his ego and his currently unbreakable vision of himself.

Take away the bravado and braggadocio that that facade he has built creates for him , what's actually left?

A 70+ year old, living off his long departed Daddy's money and reputation?

who has cameo'd in multiple films, was a very popular man in hollywood circles for a long time, who had a pretty successful reality tv career, who has his name plastered on the side of multiple buildings, who became president of the united states.

Despite the loath for him from most corners, the chap achieved a hell of a lot off his own bat / paying the right people and has lived a life most of us could only dream of. Most narcissists can only dream of being able to execute the sheer amount of ego masturbation the guy has continuously subjected himself to.