Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

looksee

No what he is saying is that Jewish people just don't vote for Democrats, but if they did...

Gbear

So he's calling 80% of American Jews ignorant and disloyal.

Of course they already hate the Republican party for the most party anyway, but I can't imagine, as with pretty much everything else he has done since getting into office, that it will improve his vote share in the demographic in question.

Thargor

I wonder if this swipe he took at Jewish voters will have any legs or if its just todays wacky Trump headline until its forgotten tomorrow when he says something even crazier? It is a pretty major statement even by current standards:

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump-called-out-for-deriding-most-jews-in-america-as-ignorant-or-disloyal-blatantly-anti-semitic/

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Enough of the "But, Hilary" stuff please. Ditto for just pasting links. Posts deleted.

aloyisious

JP Morgan on the tariffs: china tariffs will cost US households at least $1.000 annually. I'm not knowledgeable of how high JP Morgan is regarded where it comes to making comments on the state of US finances and if it's comments are taken very seriously by those in the know. Google tells me it's a bank with premises on Wall St.

So what I'm really asking is JP Morgan a heavy-hitter and will its comments be seen as siding with sections of the US economy and federal watchdogs on the state of the economy who have been targeted by Don as hindering his desire to control the running of the US economy? It seems to me that Don is fixated on getting control of the actions of the Fed beyond the norms.

http://www.city-data.com/forum/politics-other-controversies/3078209-tariffs-will-now-cost-american-households-3.html

Water John

Trump calls the NRA today, to tell them he is not pursuing background checks on firearm sales.
If you've spent $30m, you expect a return.

TomOnBoard

aloyisious wrote: »

JP Morgan on the tariffs: china tariffs will cost US households at least $1.000 annually. I'm not knowledgeable of how high JP Morgan is regarded where it comes to making comments on the state of US finances and if it's comments are taken very seriously by those in the know. Google tells me it's a bank with premises on Wall St.

So what I'm really asking is JP Morgan a heavy-hitter and will its comments be seen as siding with sections of the US economy and federal watchdogs on the state of the economy who have been targeted by Don as hindering his desire to control the running of the US economy? It seems to me that Don is fixated on getting control of the actions of the Fed beyond the norms.

http://www.city-data.com/forum/politics-other-controversies/3078209-tariffs-will-now-cost-american-households-3.html

Well, FWIW, Trump called 3 Wall St leaders last week when the markets were tanking... One of those was the head of JP Morgan Chase, Jaime Dimon...so, go figure!!!

TomOnBoard

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1163909975896416259?s=19

Here's the video

aaand, when the Washington Examiner calls those comments disgusting, you're in deep do-do!

aloyisious

Ta for the response above TOB. JD doesn't seem to be a Don team-player.

I wasn't surprised to see Don is talking about reducing the payroll tax on workers wages and salaries, thinking that he was doing the same as when he cut back on taxes from businesses to give workers a trickle-down increase in take-home pay. That did not seem to work out as advertised by him.

Looking at the various payroll deductions liable on workers and employers in the US, if I'm reading and understanding things correctly, I see that the worker deductions are supposed to finance social security programs such as social security and medicare. Given how the trickle-down didn't work out as it was apparently supposed to for the workers, If one cuts back on the payroll tax deductions, doesn't that also mean that there would be a reduction in finance to pay for medicare and other social service provisions for workers in their time of need?

Are the tax cuts being considered capital gains tax cuts or payroll tax cuts? The spokeperson for the White House seems to be confused as to which the cuts may be and what the President means when he talks about payroll tax cuts.

vetinari

I had to check a few news sources for this as I thought it was a joke
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49416740

Trump canceled his trip to Denmark because Denmark isn't interested in selling Greenland??!?
Think how bizarre that sentence sounds. He has to be losing the plot.

Timberrrrrrrr

vetinari wrote: »

I had to check a few news sources for this as I thought it was a joke
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49416740

Trump canceled his trip to Denmark because Denmark isn't interested in selling Greenland??!?
Think how bizarre that sentence sounds. He has to be losing the plot.

Just seen this myself snd thought it had to be a wind up but nope, here's the tweet

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1163961882945970176?s=19

duploelabs

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Just seen this myself snd thought it had to be a wind up but nope, here's the tweet

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1163961882945970176?s=19

Ah the aul Greenland switcheroo when he said something bad or needs to fill the news's cycle with something daft

Christy42

duploelabs wrote: »

Ah the aul Greenland switcheroo when he said something bad or needs to fill the news's cycle with something daft

It says something when even his distraction techniques would be a major blow to a presidency. Here he is insulting an ally and pulling a tantrum over not being able to buy the nationality away from a load of people? Remember the Denmark trip was meant to be separate from this nonsense.

And yet as bad as it is it is a distraction from the economy, his failing tariffs, his outright racism.

Igotadose

aloyisious wrote: »

Looking at the various payroll deductions liable on workers and employers in the US, if I'm reading and understanding things correctly, I see that the worker deductions are supposed to finance social security programs such as social security and medicare. Given how the trickle-down didn't work out as it was apparently supposed to for the workers, If one cuts back on the payroll tax deductions, doesn't that also mean that there would be a reduction in finance to pay for medicare and other social service provisions for workers in their time of need?

They're distinct. You pay Medicare and Social Security based on your salary, it's a separate amount from your income tax. So, one year, if you make $10,000 you might pay $100 in Medicare, $100 in SS and $1000 in Income Tax.

The following year,
$100 in Medicare, $100 in SS and $500 in Income Tax, if the Income Tax rates go down which is what happened in the 2017 tax cut.

You can also choose not to deduct Income Tax per paycheck but rather pay for it in one lump sum at tax time. Most don't as its a fairly large amount.

The term for the sequestration of the $$ for these things is "withholding". If you live in a state that collects income tax, you withhold for them as well.

Stallingrad

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Just seen this myself snd thought it had to be a wind up but nope, here's the tweet

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1163961882945970176?s=19

Waterford Whispers couldn't do any better, I had to read it twice it seemed so outlandish.

duploelabs

Christy42 wrote: »

It says something when even his distraction techniques would be a major blow to a presidency. Here he is insulting an ally and pulling a tantrum over not being able to buy the nationality away from a load of people? Remember the Denmark trip was meant to be separate from this nonsense.

And yet as bad as it is it is a distraction from the economy, his failing tariffs, his outright racism.

Like Boris and his homemade painted busses

Quin_Dub

Christy42 wrote: »

It says something when even his distraction techniques would be a major blow to a presidency. Here he is insulting an ally and pulling a tantrum over not being able to buy the nationality away from a load of people? Remember the Denmark trip was meant to be separate from this nonsense.

And yet as bad as it is it is a distraction from the economy, his failing tariffs, his outright racism.

Here's an example of the stuff that he's distracting people from..

The Trump administration just took an important step that may well increase the abortion rate, lead to unintended pregnancies, push women toward self-induced and potentially unsafe abortions and curb free speech -- all with a single rule. How very "pro-life" of them.

Abortion is a legal medical procedure in the United States. But a new Trump administration rule tells health care workers that they are barred from referring patients to safe, legal abortion providers if they want to receive federal Title X family planning funding. Title X funds go toward a variety of reproductive health services for the country's poorest women: contraception, HIV and sexually transmitted infection testing, and cancer screenings, among others. These services save lives. They also help women plan their lives.

As a result of this new rule, Planned Parenthood and other reproductive health providers were given an impossible choice: They could have continued to receive Title X funds, but that would have required them not just to stop providing the safe, legal abortions to which American women are entitled but to refuse to even tell women where they could get legal abortion procedures.

So , if a medical facility wants to receive Government funding for "family planning" it can't discuss abortion with people. This despite the fact that abortion is 100% legal in the US and is a tiny percentage of the work done by these places. Without that funding they will be severely restricted in their ability to provide Contraceptive supports and general reproductive healthcare supports , leading to more unplanned births , backstreet abortions and more women dying from things like cervical cancer etc.

People can talk about tax cuts for the rich or the state of the stock market , but this kind of medieval crap actually costs lives...

Dohnjoe

So the US president has just cancelled a state visit to Denmark because they "won't sell Greenland to him"

It's so surreal it's almost difficult to process.

Dytalus

Quin_Dub wrote: »

People can talk about tax cuts for the rich or the state of the stock market , but this kind of medieval crap actually costs lives...

No surprise that a rampant, proven misogynist removes rights and safety from women. And not just any women, in particular the disadvantages and poorest women. Which makes sense, since he and his cronies at the very least don't care about the peasants. At the very worst they actively hate them.

The Greenland thing is evidence of his idiocy and narcissism. This is evidence of his (and the GOP's) cruelty and sociopathy. It bothers me that the former is getting more conversation time over the latter.

jaykay74

I'm not sure I buy the distraction narrative. I just don't think a story that makes you look this mentally unhinged/laughing stock makes sense. If you are looking for a distraction it can be done without putting yourself in the firing line to this extent at the same time.

pixelburp

This seems to be almost a daily remark, but the sitting US President is a remarkably petty, adolescent individual. Who does something like that? I wouldn't even care, but the Greenland idea was a LEAK; it was something unofficial going by the insider talking to a newspaper, it's not official White House policy and just something Trump was fascinated with, IN PRIVATE. Yet here we are, Trump doing his impression of "hardball" who thinks being a tough negotiator is to walk out of the room all the time, every time.

I'd wager that the Danes - or more specifically, the government and its equivalent security services - are probably relieved mind you. Saves the headaches and costs in trying to keep an incredibly unpopular president safe. And I doubt the Danish Prime Minister wants to sit beside the man as he once again goes off on a tangent about NATO spending (Trump seems to be convinced NATO is some kind of protection racket)

circadian

The fact that he reacted like this actually confirms what was nothing more than speculation.

aloyisious

circadian wrote: »

The fact that he reacted like this actually confirms what was nothing more than speculation.

If one goes along with the notion that Don is a misogynist, let alone a male with a tender ego, then having one's public offer rejected publicly by a woman, there's a chance that he would get into a huff and tweet about it. As pixelburp wrote, the savings for the Danes state coffers is great, given how much we paid for his visit here.

aloyisious

Igotadose wrote: »

They're distinct. You pay Medicare and Social Security based on your salary, it's a separate amount from your income tax. So, one year, if you make $10,000 you might pay $100 in Medicare, $100 in SS and $1000 in Income Tax.

The following year,
$100 in Medicare, $100 in SS and $500 in Income Tax, if the Income Tax rates go down which is what happened in the 2017 tax cut.

You can also choose not to deduct Income Tax per paycheck but rather pay for it in one lump sum at tax time. Most don't as its a fairly large amount.

The term for the sequestration of the $$ for these things is "withholding". If you live in a state that collects income tax, you withhold for them as well.

OK ta, they are separate payments from income tax and specific for the purpose of getting a return [for medical needs or s-s out of work subsistence payments]. Different to income tax here [knowing that here one can also make voluntary extra payments to one's s-s stamps].

aloyisious

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Here's an example of the stuff that he's distracting people from..



So , if a medical facility wants to receive Government funding for "family planning" it can't discuss abortion with people. This despite the fact that abortion is 100% legal in the US and is a tiny percentage of the work done by these places. Without that funding they will be severely restricted in their ability to provide Contraceptive supports and general reproductive healthcare supports , leading to more unplanned births , backstreet abortions and more women dying from things like cervical cancer etc.

People can talk about tax cuts for the rich or the state of the stock market , but this kind of medieval crap actually costs lives...

The change seems to have come from the Health and Human Services Dept, [formerly HEW] under Alex Azar, a US born descendent of Lebanese extraction, a lawyer who clerked for Anthony Scalia. Alex was also president of the US division of Eli Lily, and a Pharma lobbyist. It seems he's of the Greek Orthodox faith, which opposes abortion believing abstention from sex is the only way to avoid pregnancy.

26000 Elephants

Water John wrote: »

Trump calls the NRA today, to tell them he is not pursuing background checks on firearm sales.
If you've spent $30m, you expect a return.

I think by the NRA's rate of exchange, $30m should equal about 5 mansions.

Or at least by Wayne LaPierre's reckoning!

serfboard

aloyisious wrote: »

It seems he's of the Greek Orthodox faith, which opposes abortion ...

... for poor people.

aloyisious wrote: »

believing abstention from sex is the only way to avoid pregnancy.

In other words, taking a totally different view to his boss, the President, but there's no limits to which people will debase themselves to serve this particular incumbent.

Quin_Dub

aloyisious wrote: »

The change seems to have come from the Health and Human Services Dept, [formerly HEW] under Alex Azar, a US born descendent of Lebanese extraction, a lawyer who clerked for Anthony Scalia. Alex was also president of the US division of Eli Lily, and a Pharma lobbyist. It seems he's of the Greek Orthodox faith, which opposes abortion believing abstention from sex is the only way to avoid pregnancy.

It's got nothing to do with faith - It's misogyny plain and simple..It's about keeping women barefoot and pregnant, tethered to the sink.

From the article I quoted earlier

According to an estimate by the Guttmacher Institute, publicly funded contraceptive services prevented a whopping 1.9 million unintended pregnancies and 628,800 abortions in 2015, the last year for which these estimates are available. Without publicly funded contraception, the US unplanned pregnancy, birth and abortion rate would have been 67% higher. The rate for teens would have been up 102%.
Richards: Trump administration worst for women


Why, then, are anti-abortion groups cheering this move? Because it's not about preventing abortions. It's about controlling women's lives.
The biggest anti-abortion groups in the United States -- National Right to Life, the American Life League and a long list of others -- are at best silent on contraception access and at worst hostile to it. The reason: These organizations, which often also adhere to traditional ideas from the past about gender and a nuclear family hierarchy, correctly see that contraception enables a variety of freedoms for women. Women who can plan their families and prevent pregnancy until they're ready (or end a pregnancy they aren't ready for) are less reliant on men. They are more economically independent. They have an easier time completing their educations and pursuing higher degrees.

They are also more likely to leave abusive relationships. According to one study of women living with domestic abusers, those who were able to obtain abortions were much more likely to leave the relationship than those who sought abortions but weren't able to get them. The women who were forced to have children when they didn't feel equipped to were also more likely to be impoverished and stuck with abusive men.


Contraception isn't just about preventing pregnancy. When women can make their own decisions about their own bodies and reproductive lives, they are more financially secure. They are physically safer. They have more room to grow and achieve what they want. This is what Title X, and Planned Parenthood, fight for: a universe in which women are the primary decision-makers about their own lives and their own bodies. That's also what the Trump administration and its "pro-life" friends are fighting.

tl;dr

Access to proper Reproductive healthcare gives women control and autonomy over themselves and their lives.

It's this independence that scares these "Pro-Life" people , it's got absolutely nothing to do with "the right to life of the unborn".

everlast75

*Check into twitter*

*see Trump thanking and quoting a guy who claims Trump is akin to the King of Israel and that he is loved like he is the second coming of God"

*uninstalls Twitter App*

*tosses phone into woodfire*

serfboard

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It's misogyny plain and simple

It's not just misogyny though - it's poor hatred with a misogyny chaser.

When the SCOTUS overturns Roe v Wade, by judges installed by the abstemious DJ Trump, that's when your pure misogyny kicks in. Until then they're only blocking abortions for poor people.