I was wrong about Trump.

Dittohead not! said:

Could be, but we still don't know just what other parts will be kept.


I think he'll do what Obama said needed to be done, work on Obamacare and fix what is wrong with it.

Of course, it won't be Obamacare any more. Trumpcare?

Click to expand...

the ACA has hundreds of things to it. Coverage requirements for plans is one .. every plan has to cover certain specific things regardless of the beneficiaries age, gender or situation..
For instance every plan has to cover maternity and newborn care... so even if you are 80 you have to get a plan that covers those things and that is part of what hikes up your premium.
It has to cover pediatric services... even if you have no kids and have had a historectomy or vasectomy...
Plans must include birth control and breastfeeding coverage.. so even if you were a gay man, or a senior etc etc.. you have to get a plan that covers those things...

Another thing that we haven't even seen yet which will further drive up health insurance costs is the medical device tax. surgical tools, cpap machines, knee replacements, and all kinds of other devices are to be taxed 2.9% ( at the manufacturing level ) per the ACA but that provision was delayed until 2018.. one of the many provisions delayed by the administration.
In fact there are still 4 provisions of the ACA that haven't been implemented yet.

One of the first provisions that was established was the FDA was allowed to give pharma companies a 12 year exclusive deal before generics can be developed (generally 7 years previously)... that one seems contrary to making things cheaper.

There are tons of provisions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provi...fordable_Care_Act#Effective_January_1.2C_2017

Trump built his campaign upon dividing Americans.

To hope he will unite them, strikes me as misguided wishful thinking.

Oh, for his own political expediency he'd like those he pissed on to forgive & forget!

But all one needs to do is turn-on the news for reports of the latest demonstrations, to see his unity results in action.

Mr Person said:

But how much do they know about what they are already handed?

Do they not realize that if they are indeed very poor, they pay somewhere between no and very little taxes? Do they realize that if they get medicaid or medicare, they ARE being handed things?

The fundamental issue I'm taking aim at is that it seems that quite a lot of the people who oppose government benefits get quite a lot of various benefits, but are at least assured of the possibility of doing so if a health problem sends them through the cracks, for example.

Click to expand...

This is shows the clear divided between Liberals and rural America. As a person who grew up in rural America (in PA) and got out of it to a big city, it's a different way of thought. Rural America doesn't want handouts, they want jobs, jobs they use to have. Jobs that paid them better then most (adjusting for COLA) in cities. A coal miner in PA, WV, and Ohio getting $60,000 a year plus is like making $100,000 in a city in the Rustbelt. They voted for jobs because they grew up learning hard work pays off and it's that work ethic they believe in. Their government benefits doesn't pay the mortgage, put enough food into their families bellies. Coal did that for them.

Hillary Clinton lost Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and PA the minute she said she would kill Coal at the DNC debate in Columbus, Ohio.


I was at the my local watering hole in Columbus.. when this debate was happening and I told everybody in the bar that night, Hillary will never be President as she just went to war with the Coal Industry. She lost the Coal industry counties by huge numbers in these States. Ohio and Michigan especially.. because what Hillary doesn't understand and what Liberals don't understand, Coal pays more. Hell, even Politico wrote about it in June.

Dittohead not! said:

Do you think he and his Republican Congress are likely to do any of that?

Come to think of it.. he's proposing keeping a large part of Obamacare, and spending a trillion bucks on infrastructure, so maybe he will.

Click to expand...

Republicans actually agree with those things in Obamacare Trump wants to keep. It's part of the Republican bill that was written up before Trump. Republicans can swallow $1t on infrastructure if it went there. Republicans aren't against improving infrastructure, they are against wasteful spending that a large part of the Obama stimulus was.

austrianecon said:

Republicans actually agree with those things in Obamacare Trump wants to keep. It's part of the Republican bill that was written up before Trump. Republicans can swallow $1t on infrastructure if it went there. Republicans aren't against improving infrastructure, they are against wasteful spending that a large part of the Obama stimulus was.

Click to expand...

They will soon be in charge, not just of the Congress, but of the White House as well. So, let's wait and see if they can come up with a better plan than the ACA. They might find some stiff resistance from the insurance lobby for some of the cost saving measures, but, maybe they'll stand up to them better than the Democrats did. Can they actually spend money more efficiently than Democrats? We'll know, at least by 2018 or so. They're supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility, so a large increase in spending should go against their ideology regardless of what it's for. Republicans have been railing about the economy for some time, while the Republican controlled Congress did squat to better it, instead blaming everything on a Democratic president. After January 20, that option will be off the table.

I for one am waiting to see just what the so called "conservatives" are able to do.

Mr Person said:

Nonetheless, they vote for a guy with a history of stiffing workers just like them in his personal businesses and for a party that does its best to take away every last protection for people who do fall on hard times.

Click to expand...

True, but I think what Trump supporters looked at was "So...once manufacturing jobs come back to the America, we won't be working for Trump anyway. So, what he did to his (contract) employees is on him. I just want to work at a job that pays well again." So, for them it didn't matter that the Republican Party of old approved tax policies that allowed corporations to get bigger and bigger through mergers and acquisitions, destroy employee unions that ensured health wages for employees or fostered private equity rules that worked more to gut small businesses than it did to revamp them. (Of course, trade bills like NAFTA signed under Pres. Clinton didn't help either, but the focus here is what Congressional Republicans have done since the 80's to bring about today's economic conditions.)

[Trump] gave them concrete targets (even if inaccurate ones) upon which to take out their woes....

Click to expand...

True, but again his supporters didn't care. To them, his election was one-part a middle-finger to establishment Republicans who broke their so-called "contracts" to the America worker and one-part "at least 'he's' not a 'she'". (Hillary's characters and national security issues aside, there are alot of people who are now coming out publicly saying that they didn't want a woman as POTUS; they wanted a man in that role regardless of what Hillary did or didn't do.)

[quote]Anger is one hell of a strong emotion.[/QUOTE]

It blinds you to many truths.


[QUOTE="Mach, post: 1066546754, member: 3564"]Trump has specifically said things such as wanting to change tax loopholes for the ultra-rich, that would specifically require him to pay more.

Remember, from the other perspective, its is true that many, many jobs go overseas because of our trade agreements.
Trump wants to change that in a big way.

They go overseas because of profit sheltering.
Trump wants to change that.

They simply make crappy deals that need to be fixed but have sat around for years without change.
He claims he wants to fix this.

Since illegal immigrants are allowed to stay currently, in the millions, this impacts our entitlements programs and costs us more in taxes. Remember, unless they are doing really well financially, even if they pay taxes, they are likely net beneficiaries of tax over the long run. (actual numbers is a big debate in itself)
Trump wants to fix this.

I could go on.
Your view is simplistic and seems more like liberal propaganda/rhetoric works well on you. I assume conservative rhetoric doesn't. This is no accident, they compete so they differentiate.
Remember [B]the rhetoric has nothing to do with actual policy/changes[/B], and policy/actual changes may not have the desired real effect either. Its not black and white.[/QUOTE]

I can agree with you on all points above. Let's hope Trump's policy changes moves the country forward and not backwards. I'll take a wait and see approach. Who knows...maybe his policies will be better than any of us expected. :shrug: Still...I'll be watching...

Objective Voice said:

I can agree with you on all points above. Let's hope Trump's policy changes moves the country forward and not backwards. I'll take a wait and see approach. Who knows...maybe his policies will be better than any of us expected. :shrug: Still...I'll be watching...

Click to expand...

Yes, I think there are still so many unknowns with Trump. He could just give up/meltdown, he could create impeaching scandal, he could have good policy but be unable to execute, he could execute but the final policy so distorted its pointless...all we can do is sit and wait apparently. I suppose we could put pressure on congress when its time. Other than that, we get to watch as liberals burns cars and beat people up in anger at being a loser.

Mach said:

Yes, I think there are still so many unknowns with Trump. He could just give up/meltdown, he could create impeaching scandal, he could have good policy but be unable to execute, he could execute but the final policy so distorted its pointless...all we can do is sit and wait apparently. I suppose we could put pressure on congress when its time. Other than that, we get to watch as liberals burns cars and beat people up in anger at being a loser.

Click to expand...

Awww...why'd you have to go and ruin a perfectly good, amiable post?

You had me 100% in line with you're way of thinking until that last line.

(Okay, I can still agree with you, but that last line kinda took away the "credibility and reconciliation quotient".)

Dittohead not! said:

They will soon be in charge, not just of the Congress, but of the White House as well. So, let's wait and see if they can come up with a better plan than the ACA. They might find some stiff resistance from the insurance lobby for some of the cost saving measures, but, maybe they'll stand up to them better than the Democrats did. Can they actually spend money more efficiently than Democrats? We'll know, at least by 2018 or so. They're supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility, so a large increase in spending should go against their ideology regardless of what it's for. Republicans have been railing about the economy for some time, while the Republican controlled Congress did squat to better it, instead blaming everything on a Democratic president. After January 20, that option will be off the table.

I for one am waiting to see just what the so called "conservatives" are able to do.

Click to expand...

Well, remember RNC has a plan it's put out before. Health Insurance lobby will fight it, they didn't fight Obamacare that much.

Republicans can spend efficiently if they stick with the basics and don't get cute. Republicans will get a pass on a stimulus bill.

Democrats screwed the pooch in 2009. They did a lot of horse trading and stupid spending. Obama had a free reign to do a real stimulus/infrastructure bill.. yet wasn't targeted. Something like I proposed here.. would work.

Dittohead not! said:

I was a Republican since the first Reagan campaign, 36 years. I left the party when they nominated you. I didn't want to be associated with you in any way. Now, I and my fellow Americans have no choice. You are our president elect. Moreover, you have a Congress dominated by Republicans.

Click to expand...

Reagan was the only president I ever voter for. All other elections, voted for the lesser of the evils. I have never changed my political affiliation. My card says "not affiliated" on the party box.

Dittohead not! said:

I thought the election day was a sad one for America.

Click to expand...

Worse than if Hillary was elected?

Wow...

Mr Person said:

I'm bookmarking a number of these threads.

I really want to see what Trump supporters have to say in 1 year, in 4 years.........especially since Mr. "anti-establishment" and "anti-media" has already surrounded himself with establishment lackeys and given a top post to a media boss because that boss directed his media to favor him.

Click to expand...

I'm not making any predictions yet, and probably won't. I just hope he is what we need to set this country straight. I can at lest say I don't see him making things already worse than they are for our nation. As for bringing in "established" players, you need people that have been in the political circles so you aren't totally in the dark of haw things transpire.

Dittohead not! said:

I didn't think a man like Trump could possibly be nominated by either of the major parties. I was wrong.

I didn't think Trump could possibly win the election. Wrong again.

I was a Republican since the first Reagan campaign, 36 years. I left the party when they nominated you. I didn't want to be associated with you in any way. Now, I and my fellow Americans have no choice. You are our president elect. Moreover, you have a Congress dominated by Republicans.

Click to expand...

Since Dec. 2009 you've been Dittohead not!, which obviously refers to your dislike of Rush Limbaugh since his listeners are known as 'dittoheads'. Sorry, Donald Trump wasnt nominated for president in 2009.

Mr Person said:

"Allowed to stay"? To round-up, imprison, drag through the court system, and deport 12 million people? (For the record: our prison system houses 2.3 million criminals. Look at the cost just to do that). Then keep them out?

Click to expand...

You're right that it does no good to deport them, because they just sneak back in with very little trouble. Kate Steinle's killer was deported at least 6 times, and managed to sneak back in every time.

. We deport 300-400k a year. We deport the ones we catch via enforcing our criminal laws.

Click to expand...

Obama somehow decided to cut that number in half to 200k a year. Hmm, I wonder why?

Total deportations dropped 42 percent since 2012.

Click to expand...

U.S. Deportation Rates Hit A 10-Year Low | The Huffington Post

There's a reason no Rs or Ds have focused on Trump-level deportation desires: their constituents, and in turn you, actually benefit financially. ...

Click to expand...

This is the biggest pile of **** I've read on DP in quite a while. I believe that you don't live where much illegal immigrants do, so let me tell you about California, the capital of your precious illegal immigration:

- The state is so infested with criminals, we are now being forced to let them out of prison by the 10's of thousands. Mexican nationals and their children dominate the state prison population in California.
- LA county alone pays $1,000,000,000 per year for welfare and food stamp payments to illegal immigrants to support their children.
- Rental prices are skyrocketing. With 40,000,000 people living here, unless we change things, prime farm land will be developed for housing/development. This farmland contains some of the most fertile soil in the world. Once its gone, it ain't coming back.
- 1/3 of all welfare recipients live in California. Where's that financial benefit that you were raving about earlier?
When Gov. Jerry Brown and the Legislature overhauled the state’s welfare program last month, some people learned a jarring fact for the first time: California has one-third of the nation’s welfare recipients.
Is California the welfare capital? - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Lord of Planar said:

Reagan was the only president I ever voter for. All other elections, voted for the lesser of the evils. I have never changed my political affiliation. My card says "not affiliated" on the party box.


Worse than if Hillary was elected?

Wow...

Click to expand...

Yes, even worse than that.

truthatallcost said:

Since Dec. 2009 you've been Dittohead not!, which obviously refers to your dislike of Rush Limbaugh since his listeners are known as 'dittoheads'. Sorry, Donald Trump wasnt nominated for president in 2009.

Click to expand...

and Rush Limbaugh is a poor representative of the Republican Party.

Dittohead not! said:

I didn't think a man like Trump could possibly be nominated by either of the major parties. I was wrong.

I didn't think Trump could possibly win the election. Wrong again.

I was a Republican since the first Reagan campaign, 36 years. I left the party when they nominated you. I didn't want to be associated with you in any way. Now, I and my fellow Americans have no choice. You are our president elect. Moreover, you have a Congress dominated by Republicans.

I thought the election day was a sad one for America.

Prove me wrong, please. Bring back those jobs that have gone overseas, like you promised. That one might be tough for a variety of reasons, including low wages in third world nations and automation reducing the number of jobs.
Defeat ISIS. You said you had a way to do that. It shouldn't be all that difficult, as ISIS is already on the run in Iraq at least. I have no idea what to do about Syria, though.
Secure the border. Build a border wall, if you can and if you must, but by all means stop illegal immigration. That one shouldn't be too difficult either, as illegal immigration has slowed to a trickle anyway. Then, get Congress to come up with a practical way to deal with the illegals who are already here.

It would be great if you could pick the Constitution up off of the floor, dust the footprints off of it, and put it back in its rightful place. Let's start with asset forfeiture and giving Congress back the power to declare war.

and above all:

Unite the country, starting with Washington. We are more divided now than at any time with the possible exceptions of the Civil War and the War in Vietnam. It's time to work together. Let's bring the parties together and stop the incessant partisan gamesmanship that has rendered Congress dysfunctional. The other guys aren't evil, after all, they just have a different world view.

Above all, don't get us into another war, please.

Do just those last two, and I for one will be your supporter, which will be a real change.

I'd love to be proven wrong.

at least this time.

Click to expand...

The New President doesn't need to unite anybody because he controls Congress and (even if he didn't) the Democrats only co-operate (as much as they can.)

Mr Person said:

Nonetheless, they vote for a guy with a history of stiffing workers just like them in his personal businesses and for a party that does its best to take away every last protection for people who do fall on hard times; he gave them concrete targets (even if inaccurate ones) upon which to take out their woes....



Anger is one hell of a strong emotion.

Click to expand...

It really doesn't matter what he did in the past.

This trait might be useful here or there or all over the place, I don't know.

Right now for the new President he has risen in achievement to a totally new height. He should want to capitalize and take greatest advantage of his new position. What is important to him now?

The most important thing to a President other than taking care of his People is his legacy. How will history remember him?

How stupid you people are. Politics demand it's member to say things that are not true. That's why it's called politics. They campaign to get elected right? Well now define campaign. Good grief Charlie Brown!! Remember this line, "You'll get to keep your own physician".

Mach said:

I don't think these rural types want government to hand them anything more, is the point.
Trump running his companies as a charity, would be unethical. If he's running them legally, why would it matter?
Trump has specifically said things such as wanting to change tax loopholes for the ultra-rich, that would specifically require him to pay more.

Remember, from the other perspective, its is true that many, many jobs go overseas because of our trade agreements.
Trump wants to change that in a big way.

They go overseas because of profit sheltering.
Trump wants to change that.

They simply make crappy deals that need to be fixed but have sat around for years without change.
He claims he wants to fix this.

Since illegal immigrants are allowed to stay currently, in the millions, this impacts our entitlements programs and costs us more in taxes. Remember, unless they are doing really well financially, even if they pay taxes, they are likely net beneficiaries of tax over the long run. (actual numbers is a big debate in itself)
Trump wants to fix this.

I could go on.
Your view is simplistic and seems more like liberal propaganda/rhetoric works well on you. I assume conservative rhetoric doesn't. This is no accident, they compete so they differentiate.
Remember the rhetoric has nothing to do with actual policy/changes, and policy/actual changes may not have the desired real effect either. Its not black and white.

Click to expand...

Trump is not looking to change ANYTHING that would mean his buddies make less money. Saying otherwise is just propaganda.

I have a feeling you'll either be very disappointed, or doing some pretty big mental gymnastics in 6 months or so.

Mr Person said:

I really want to see what Trump supporters have to say in 1 year, in 4 years.........especially since Mr. "anti-establishment" and "anti-media" has already surrounded himself with establishment lackeys and given a top post to a media boss because that boss directed his media to favor him.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. However, I will be comparing how his administration is vs. how it could have been under that crooked hag's administration. Personally, I'm thinking I'll still be glad the Hildabeast lost.

Exquisitor said:

The New President doesn't need to unite anybody because he controls Congress and (even if he didn't) the Democrats only co-operate (as much as they can.)



It really doesn't matter what he did in the past.

This trait might be useful here or there or all over the place, I don't know.

Right now for the new President he has risen in achievement to a totally new height. He should want to capitalize and take greatest advantage of his new position. What is important to him now?

The most important thing to a President other than taking care of his People is his legacy. How will history remember him?

Click to expand...

He has a Congress that has a Republican majority. He doesn't control Congress. He has already alienated a lot of prominent Republicans.

Dittohead not! said:

He has a Congress that has a Republican majority. He doesn't control Congress. He has already alienated a lot of prominent Republicans.

Click to expand...

When you're him you control Congress.

They'll get over it.

How about those Democrats, they co-operate.

If those Reprobates just want to cut revenue then there's no hope.

If the new President comes across to Democrats to raise the minimum wage and raise revenue like Reprobates were so screaming against then how wouldn't they help him with his program to bring jobs back to America?

Dittohead not! said:

I didn't think a man like Trump could possibly be nominated by either of the major parties. I was wrong.

I didn't think Trump could possibly win the election. Wrong again.

I was a Republican since the first Reagan campaign, 36 years. I left the party when they nominated you. I didn't want to be associated with you in any way. Now, I and my fellow Americans have no choice. You are our president elect. Moreover, you have a Congress dominated by Republicans.

I thought the election day was a sad one for America.

Prove me wrong, please. Bring back those jobs that have gone overseas, like you promised. That one might be tough for a variety of reasons, including low wages in third world nations and automation reducing the number of jobs.
Defeat ISIS. You said you had a way to do that. It shouldn't be all that difficult, as ISIS is already on the run in Iraq at least. I have no idea what to do about Syria, though.
Secure the border. Build a border wall, if you can and if you must, but by all means stop illegal immigration. That one shouldn't be too difficult either, as illegal immigration has slowed to a trickle anyway. Then, get Congress to come up with a practical way to deal with the illegals who are already here.

It would be great if you could pick the Constitution up off of the floor, dust the footprints off of it, and put it back in its rightful place. Let's start with asset forfeiture and giving Congress back the power to declare war.

and above all:

Unite the country, starting with Washington. We are more divided now than at any time with the possible exceptions of the Civil War and the War in Vietnam. It's time to work together. Let's bring the parties together and stop the incessant partisan gamesmanship that has rendered Congress dysfunctional. The other guys aren't evil, after all, they just have a different world view.

Above all, don't get us into another war, please.

Do just those last two, and I for one will be your supporter, which will be a real change.

I'd love to be proven wrong.

at least this time.

Click to expand...

What aspect of Trump's policy proposals made him un-electable? You're not making any sense. Are you saying that an individual who promises to not get us into wars, bring jobs back into this country, and fight back against illegal immigration couldn't get nominated or even win?

reinoe said:

What aspect of Trump's policy proposals made him un-electable? You're not making any sense. Are you saying that an individual who promises to not get us into wars, bring jobs back into this country, and fight back against illegal immigration couldn't get nominated or even win?

Click to expand...

Politicians always make wonderful promises. Trump's simply weren't credible. He was, to put it mildly, short on details about how to accomplish all of the promises he made.

Now, we'll see. Will he deliver? What do you think?

Dittohead not! said:

Politicians always make wonderful promises. Trump's simply weren't credible. He was, to put it mildly, short on details about how to accomplish all of the promises he made.

Now, we'll see. Will he deliver? What do you think?

Click to expand...

He's been successful so far, his team is impressive, I'm hoping for the best, I am directing the best job he can do for my sake, and yours, and mein feuer's.

Do you want to see the best wrecking job, best gut job, best jobs job?

Dittohead not! said:

Politicians always make wonderful promises. Trump's simply weren't credible. He was, to put it mildly, short on details about how to accomplish all of the promises he made.

Now, we'll see. Will he deliver? What do you think?

Click to expand...

Hillary is far worse on her credibility.

She has none what so ever!