I was wrong about Trump.

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.

Urgent family matters have kept me from the forum over the last week or so. Thus, I wasn't able to join the fun on election night or immediately afterwards. Although I never formally endorsed either candidate, I think it's fair to say that my dislike of how Donald Trump ran his campaign didn't really endear me to him. The Donald Trump that ran for the presidency didn't come across to me as the same Donald Trump who co-authored the book, "Why I Want You to Be Rich". Had that Donald Trump been ever-present throughout the GOP primaries and general election, there's no doubt I would have voted for him. Instead, I saw a very different, very dark, very non-unifying/non-inclusive Donald Trump and that person gave me extreme pause and reason enough to worry for my country and my fellow countrymen.

Earlier this year, I read a story (can't remember which news source it was) that projected a Republican would win the White House. The reasoning was that after every 8-year term, America always wants a change in the White House and that change rarely if ever comes from the same party. The only exceptions in modern history were Pres. Truman following FDR and Pres. GHW Bush following Reagan. The election projectors determined Americans wanted someone who was bolder, louder, more straight-forward and was perceived as someone who could get Congress to fall in line and instill fear abroad. When the dust settled after the GOP primaries and a very contentious general election, that person wound up being Donald J. Trump.

I, like millions of Americans (half the country, in fact), read the tea leaves wrong. Just as Mitt Romney under-estimated the turnout of the minority vote in 2012, the fervent Hillary supports (of which I was not) and never-Trump crowd failed to gauge just how disappointed rural America was that they weren't receiving a piece of the economic pie. In addition, many voters - Republicans in general - felt they'd been duped by their duly elected officials in Washington, DC. As such, Trump's election was a very clear middle-finger to the GOP-establishment. And that brings me to my overall observations of the 2016 election.

As mentioned above, rural America came out in droves in support of Donald Trump. My first clue that rural America would be a target for the GOP in 2016 came during the 2012 Republican Primaries in Florida. Back then it came down to Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. Gingrich spent alot of time campaigning in the Florida panhandle. Although Mitt was ahead, he wanted to maintain his lead. So, he, too start campaigning in the FL panhandle to blunt Newt's efforts. It didn't work exactly as he planned as Newt won that part of the state. Still, Mitt's efforts were enough to defeat Newt and secure the GOP nomination for the presidency. However, when the 2012 general came around, Mitt lost FL (but not by much) despite the fact that he won all of Florida's rural areas. It wasn't until after the 2012 presidential election and the exit poll data came out and journalist talked about how Iowa voters who are largely rural inhabitants felt they'd been left behind economically did I look back to Mitt Romney's efforts in rural FL. Upon hearing that, I though back to Mitt Romney's efforts in rural FL. I never really shook that notion that somehow if things didn't change, rural America would come back to bit a 2016 candidate in the butt.

I've been reading Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" (studying it really) and over the summer, I came across a section of his book where he talked about manufacturing jobs and their absence in rural parts of an advanced, industrialized country. (Remember: In Smith's day, an "advanced" country meant a civilized society compared to a country that was still barbarous.) What he said was (paraphrasing), "If manufacturing left rural areas, country folk couldn't migrat to the cities and town as easily to find work because of the distance. And as such, they would find it more difficult to have their basic survival needs met." That somewhat parallels to what I wrote in my book, "Break the Debt Cycle in Three Simple Steps", where I wrote:

For nearly a generation, income inequality has been an accepted norm among the middle-class where wages have remained flat and disposable income has been consumed by mounting debt. For the working poor, prosperity has remained elusive, whereas income among the wealth-class has continued to rise even during these hard economic times. (Referring to the fallout from the Great Recession of 2007-2008)

Click to expand...

(Continued...)

(...Continued...)

So, when I heard that Hillary Clinton, near the end of her presidential campaign, had gone to Pennsylvania in an effort to build her "Blue Firewall" against Trump's campaign efforts in Michigan and Wisconsin, I had a sense that desperation had set in for her campaign. However, I thought it was a good strategy because I didn't think there were enough votes to be had in rural parts of the "Rust Belt" to put Donald Trump over the top. Boy was I wrong!

Now, I don't think those voters turned against Hillary on their own. I firmly believe they had help from a last minute "October Surprise". But whether they came to the conclusion that Trump was the better candidate on their own or their voting decision was influenced by Comey's memo is something that historians will have to determine. The fact remains that "the rural voter" was grossly under-estimated this election cycle much as the Black vote was under-estimated in 2008 and 2012.

For me personally, I'm a patriot first, party loyalist second (although I want it to be known that I've often voted across party lines; hence, the reason I consider myself to be a Moderate as opposed to a Democrat or Republican). I kept hearing about Trump's Gettysburg speech. So, I took the time just prior to election day to watch him speak on YouTube. With a few exceptions, I thought it was a very good speech. I can get behind many of his 100-day initiatives. I just wish that that measured, comprehensive and detailed Donald Trump had been around throughout the entire 2016 campaign cycle. That Donald Trump would have easily got my vote.

So, to those who supported Donald Trump throughout this campaign season, I commend you for standing firmly with your candidate. To everyone else, including myself, who didn't vote for him, let's try to emulate First Lady Mitchelle Obama's words and "go high" - taking the high ground even in defeat. And to everyone no matter who you voted for, let's hold our duly elected official's feet to the fire. For the Republican Party firmly believes it has a mandate to do whatever they want to do in Washington, DC - same as Democrats did in 2008-2010. I'll tell you here and now I'm not for obstructionist politics, but I am for keeping politicians honest. So, stay informed, stay engaged and stay involved.

Good Luck, Donald J. Trump on a successful presidency.

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.




It will be the bitterest sort of shadenfreud, but I suspect I'll be saying "I told you so" a lot in the future. I too hope I'm wrong again...

Objective Voice said:

Just as Mitt Romney under-estimated the turnout of the minority vote in 2012, the fervent Hillary supports (of which I was not) and never-Trump crowd failed to gauge just how disappointed rural America was that they weren't receiving a piece of the economic pie.

Click to expand...

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.

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...

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.

Mach said:

I don't think these rural types want government to hand them anything more, is the point.

Click to expand...

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.

Mach said:

Your view is simplistic and seems more like liberal propaganda/rhetoric works well on you. I assume conservative rhetoric doesn't.

Click to expand...

Save the insults for the end, eh?

So let us look at this disgusting alleged habit of mine, this responding to propaganda.

Mach said:

Trump has specifically said things such as wanting to change tax loopholes for the ultra-rich, that would specifically require him to pay more.

Click to expand...

The only factual thing you have to go on is that Trump SAID he wants to do that DESPITE having done it himself for his entire career and bragging about it. But you believe him because he said it.

But I'm the one who listens to propaganda?

Mach said:

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.

Click to expand...

So, do you either want to get rid of worker protections so that Americans can compete by working in virtual slave conditions? OR are you prepared to pay $100 instead of $10 for a t-shirt?

You do understand the extent of personal benefits you have enjoyed your entire life from these "trade deals", yes?

Mach said:

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.

Click to expand...

Why are the deals crappy beyond your saying so? Are the defense deals crappy?

You know why we have them, don't you? It's pretty obvious if you analzye it: so that any future conflagration will take place on European soil, between our European allies and our "enemies." That way, it's THEIR infrastructure that gets destroyed. THEY lose more of their people.

We aren't doing it to be candy*** "liberals". We're doing it so we come out ahead, just like we did in WWI and WWII.

It's insurance.

Politicians won't put it that way because think of the uproar, but that's the real reason. Look beyond what Trump screamed at you.

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...

Awesome!

Mach said:

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.

Click to expand...

Talk about simplification.

"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?

It's delusional. They stay because it would cost WAY more to do what you want than to tolerate the ones that stay and deport the criminals, WHICH BY THE WAY WE DO.

That's another massive lie that Trump simplified for his supporters. We deport 300-400k a year. We deport the ones we catch via enforcing our criminal laws.



There's a reason no Rs or Ds have focused on Trump-level deportation desires: their constituents, and in turn you, actually benefit financially. But then, if one prefers the "simplistic" version...

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...

Well, Trump has already created jobs. Soros is hiring thousands of protesters at $1500/wk and they are working hard on the streets of our cities. All this and Trump hasn't even been sworn in yet. Just think of what he'll do when he actually takes Office.

As for the rest...do you want it all done before he gets into Office? Or is there some amount of time you'll allow him to show improvement?

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...

Every company out there has employee complaints, and sub contractor complaints.....................big effing deal.

I stiffed a drywall guy last week for not honoring the "scope of Work" that he signed & agreed with. Ended up costing me more to go over his work than the original bid.

Mycroft said:

Well, Trump has already created jobs. Soros is hiring thousands of protesters at $1500/wk and they are working hard on the streets of our cities. All this and Trump hasn't even been sworn in yet. Just think of what he'll do when he actually takes Office.

As for the rest...do you want it all done before he gets into Office? Or is there some amount of time you'll allow him to show improvement?

Click to expand...

Two years. That gives him until the next congressional election.

Dittohead not! said:

Two years. That gives him until the next congressional election.

Click to expand...

Sounds fair to me. It's more than most left-wingers will give him. (I'm not calling you left-wing, though)

Mr Person said:

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

Click to expand...

They also don't want you telling them they are ignorant. You don't get it yet.

Do they not realize that if they are indeed very poor,

Click to expand...

No, I'm sure they absolutely no ****ing idea they are poor. Calling them ignorant again, you do realize that?

The only factual thing you have to go on is that Trump SAID he wants to do

Click to expand...

Yes, in elections candidates state what they would like to accomplish if elected. Some people listen to that and may vote based on that.

You do understand the extent of personal benefits you have enjoyed your entire life from these "trade deals", yes?

Click to expand...

You do understand you have no idea what personal benefits I would have enjoyed with different trade deals.
Your argument is that the status quo is best because its the status quo. It's absurd.

Why are the deals crappy beyond your saying so? Are the defense deals crappy?

Click to expand...

Trump said so, not me. And the voters elected him, not you.

Mr Person said:

Talk about simplification.

Click to expand...

It is an elaboration of your original simplification. Neither of which is relevant.

"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...

Obviously the cost of this is high now, because we kicked the can for so long. You propose continuing to kick the can, and not address immigration.
This is not acceptable to many trump supporters, so they voted for him to NOT do what you prefer. They want to do three things.
1. get caught up on immigration enforcement for 1/3 of illegals
2. improve border security to reduce future illegal immigration
3. consider what to do with the remaining 2/3.

Kicking the can, is the simply, lazy "solution" from that perspective. Is it not?

It's delusional. They stay because it would cost WAY more to do what you want than to tolerate the ones that stay and deport the criminals, WHICH BY THE WAY WE DO.

Click to expand...

Things always cost "too much" according to the opposition. Executives often fire people who claim "it cannot be done for less".

There's a reason no Rs or Ds have focused on Trump-level deportation desires: their constituents, and in turn you, actually benefit financially. But then, if one prefers the "simplistic" version...

Click to expand...

So its good they have been not enforcing the laws so that we benefit from breaking the law?
You do understand that's the mindset of nearly all criminal activity. They ignore crimes because it benefits them. This is why some opt instead for you know, the rule of law.

I like that liberals try to argue that something should NOT be done, because it selfishly doesn't benefit you. The party of selfish argumentation, I love it.

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...

It's liberals who are opposing Trump for the sake of opposing Trump. He could expand healthcare, give free tuition to all college student, legalize all illegal immigrants. They'd still find a reason to piss and moan. To hell with them.

reinoe said:

It's liberals who are opposing Trump for the sake of opposing Trump. He could expand healthcare, give free tuition to all college student, legalize all illegal immigrants. They'd still find a reason to piss and moan. To hell with them.

Click to expand...

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.

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...

??? A "large part of Obamacare" ???

Out of almost 3000 pages of legislation, he would...maybe...keep two features. That's not a large part of Obamacare. LOL!!

Mr Person said:

Nonetheless, they vote for a guy with a history of stiffing workers just like them in his personal businesses .

Click to expand...

Yeah, because at the end of the day, Hillary portrayed an image of outright hatred towards rural Americans.

Mycroft said:

??? A "large part of Obamacare" ???

Out of almost 3000 pages of legislation, he would...maybe...keep two features. That's not a large part of Obamacare. LOL!!

Click to expand...

Like most modern legislation, a very little is said in a lot of words. There are only a few parts of Obamacare. One part is keeping children on the parent's policy until age 26. One is the requirement that people with pre existing conditions be covered. One is the people who don't have insurance pay a tax to offset their care paid for by the taxpayers/ratepayers in general. there are five or six more. I don't recall them all right now. One is eliminating the lifetime benefits cap.

Dittohead not! said:

Like most modern legislation, a very little is said in a lot of words. There are only a few parts of Obamacare. One part is keeping children on the parent's policy until age 26. One is the requirement that people with pre existing conditions be covered. One is the people who don't have insurance pay a tax to offset their care paid for by the taxpayers/ratepayers in general. there are five or six more. I don't recall them all right now. One is eliminating the lifetime benefits cap.

Click to expand...

Well, there is a LOT more to Obamacare than the 8 or 9 items you allude to, but even if that was all of it the two mentioned by Trump is only 22% of Obamacare. That leaves 78% to toss in the trash. I'd say the part that is tossed is a large part. Not the part that is kept.

Trump already did one thing for us: he kept that national embarrassment Bill Clinton from resuming residence in the White House.

And it appears the joint chiefs may be realizing that Trump's made them safer from otherwise perhaps having to endure a little Presidential smack or two should they have disagreed with Madam President's demand to bomb Assad into oblivion.

The big question is whether Trump has the balls to do the needed thing: ride herd on a new Constitutional amendment to ban American citizenship from anyone who has ever had illegal alien status here unless they first leave, get in line, and wait their turn.

If he doesn't, then one day soon his party will cease to exist after someone like, oh, Elizabeth Warren, makes all illegal aliens citizens in, perhaps, early 2021.

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...

I have to say, it is so entertaining to watch libs melt down. It's been a long time coming, and they deserve every last drop of it.

Mycroft said:

Well, there is a LOT more to Obamacare than the 8 or 9 items you allude to, but even if that was all of it the two mentioned by Trump is only 22% of Obamacare. That leaves 78% to toss in the trash. I'd say the part that is tossed is a large part. Not the part that is kept.

Click to expand...

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?

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...

I think differently.

I think the Republican Congress is going to send him a bill that tosses Obamacare...in it's entirety...onto the ashheap of history and immediately send him another bill that will make it easier for insurance consumers to make their own decisions. This other bill might include one or two items that were part of Obamacare.

That's really the only way to "fix" something that massive and that ****ed up.