• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Mooch states the case. The President Is Having A ‘Total Mental Breakdown’

Also, what on God's green earth would make anyone listen to a shameful opportunist like Scaramucci?

He'd be knocking old ladies and nuns over to get back in the White House if Trump called him back.

I don't buy anything he's saying. He's anybody's dog that'll hunt.

What’s more important to you? Sticking it to ex trump supporters for having been on trump’s side? Or taking your allies wherever you can (within reason) if it means eating into trump’s chances of getting a second term?
 
This administration has the highest turnover of any administration in history. That reveals there is a problem with the man at the top, not with the staff.
Trump is used to firing people who prove unfit. I see no problem with that.
 
“It’s odd how people on here desperately ask why Republicans don’t do anything about Trump, and then when one jumps in to actually primary him, they spend their time downplaying him. He’s a Republican. Of course you don’t agree with @WalshFreedom. I certainly don’t.”

-Neera Tanden
 
Opportunist? He learned from Trump's playbook. He sees an opportunity to fleece folks and grabs it with both slimy hands. Trump 'University', anyone?

Of course he learned from Trump.

You do realize that I can be anti-Trump and anti-Scaramucci at the same time, right?
 
What’s more important to you? Sticking it to ex trump supporters for having been on trump’s side? Or taking your allies wherever you can (within reason) if it means eating into trump’s chances of getting a second term?

I can (and choose to) dislike both. I don’t have to dislike one in order to like the other.

I appreciate what he is doing, but I certainly don’t trust him.

He reminds me of the frog and the snake parable. “You knew I was a snake when you picked me up, so you can’t be surprised that I bit you.” Trust has to be earned. He’s done nothing to earn trust yet, except splash his face all over the news.

I will wait to see how this turns out, before I jump on the bandwagon.
 
I can (and choose to) dislike both. I don’t have to dislike one in order to like the other.

I appreciate what he is doing, but I certainly don’t trust him.

He reminds me of the frog and the snake parable. “You knew I was a snake when you picked me up, so you can’t be surprised that I bit you.” Trust has to be earned. He’s done nothing to earn trust yet, except splash his face all over the news.

I will wait to see how this turns out, before I jump on the bandwagon.

Welcoming ex trump supporters into the anti-trump fold doesn’t require giving them a handy. All you have to do is say, “Hey, glad you oppose trump now. Give him hell.”
 
This administration has the highest turnover of any administration in history. That reveals there is a problem with the man at the top, not with the staff.

It reveals there is a sickness at the heart of our sham of a political system.

Carry on.

:)
 
“It’s odd how people on here desperately ask why Republicans don’t do anything about Trump, and then when one jumps in to actually primary him, they spend their time downplaying him. He’s a Republican. Of course you don’t agree with @WalshFreedom. I certainly don’t.”

-Neera Tanden

Neera Tanden! :lamo

OMG!!! :lamo

Hillary's fellow gang-rape cheerleader & inner circle sociopath.

Hater of all on the actual left.

Candidate for Sleaziest Democrat of the Century.

Neera Tanden!

Seriously bra?

:lamo
 
I'm not a mooch fan but your point was precisely the point I was trying to make.

As for illegals I believe the more correct position should have been to organize Charities to help them and not let them be the burden to the American taxpayer.

Yes, definitely, the American taxpayer being burdened with health care for illegal aliens, either indirectly like it happens now with insured people subsidizing hospitals for their lost costs treating illegals in emergency rooms, or directly like these candidates are proposing, is preposterous.

Some people who don't know how healthcare works are under the mistaken impression that if elective care (non-emergency care, scheduled surgeries, treatment for chronic conditions and ongoing diseases) were covered, it would avoid conditions getting worse with more expensive trips to the emergency room when things explode; and hospitals would collect more money.

Sure, it would be good for hospitals... but not for the tax payer, for a very simple reason: the unintended consequence of people coming illegally to the United States just to get free healthcare. Medical tourism would be the norm. Anybody with some very expensive need - say, quadruple cardiac bypass surgery, brain surgery, cancer chemotherapy, organ transplant (care that is actually way more expensive than ER visits, to the tune of several hundred thousand dollars or more) - from anywhere in the world would be able to simply get to the United States on a tourist visit, overstay it, and present to hospitals for free healthcare for illegals. Who would have to pay for it? The American taxpayer and the American insured population, of course! And also, Americans would have to compete with these foreigners for the surgical spots and so forth. Stupid plan, and very unpopular. If the Dems keep proposing this kind of stupidity, they will lose the election.

Yes, charities, sure, why not?

But government-sponsored free elective care for illegals? That's one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. Just think of it. Why would we, American taxpayers, be willing to pay for, say, $600,000 worth of cancer chemotherapy for some guy from Belarus who overstayed his visa just for this reason?

Foreigner: "I'm very sick. I need very expensive care that I can't afford. Oh, I know what to do: I'll just go to the United States, become an illegal immigrant there, and they'll treat me for free."

Yeah, right.

Emergency room care is a humanitarian issue. I hate it that our hospitals get burdened with this, but it's at least understandable that if a human being is in real trouble and is about to die if not helped, we'll help him regardless of legal status and ability to pay. But elective treatments? That's pushing it way too far.

Anyway, for emergency room care, there should be a way to bill the illegal alien's country for the care provided.
 
Last edited:
Trump is used to firing people who prove unfit. I see no problem with that.

Many are bailing. Many competents. Unfits are being hired all the time.

The truth is the opposite is true.

But, without mentioning the above, your comment doesn't actually refute my point.
 
Opportunist? He learned from Trump's playbook. He sees an opportunity to fleece folks and grabs it with both slimy hands. Trump 'University', anyone?

I think Trump was wrong to fleece people with Trump University. That reminds me of others who fleece people into donating to their foundations which they claim are doing some worthy thing worthy of donating to.
 
Many are bailing. Many competents. Unfits are being hired all the time.

The truth is the opposite is true.

But, without mentioning the above, your comment doesn't actually refute my point.

Americans are free to assume that either Mooch or Trump must be a loser. Trump was elected President of the US by tens of millions of American voters. Mooch was not.
 
I think Trump was wrong to fleece people with Trump University. That reminds me of others who fleece people into donating to their foundations which they claim are doing some worthy thing worthy of donating to.

Like churches?
 
What’s more important to you? Sticking it to ex trump supporters for having been on trump’s side? Or taking your allies wherever you can (within reason) if it means eating into trump’s chances of getting a second term?

This is about the flawed messenger, not the message. At what point is the message damaged by the quality of the people promoting it?
 
This is about the flawed messenger, not the message. At what point is the message damaged by the quality of the people promoting it?

Oh, there's a point alright. But let's be clear: this isn't Roy Moore or Joe Arpaio territory here.
 
Like churches?

Leftists don't mind that crooked democrat politicians hide their ill-gotten pay-to-play wealth in tax-exempt foundations, but they despise the thought of churches not being taxed for monies they receive from after-tax contributions from congregants.
 
Back
Top Bottom