ThinkerX

Members
  • Content count

    3,962
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ThinkerX

  • Rank
    Council Member
  • Birthday 04/25/1963

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Alaska

Recent Profile Visitors

3,492 profile views
  1. Coming soon to the Presidents Cabinet: 'Secretary of Amazon Affairs' Because Amazon is that big. And we live in a corporate oligarchy with democratic trimmings.
  2. About a week ago, I made the suggestion, that given Trumps erratic nature, there was a slight but real possibility he would Veto the AHCA should it reach his desk. To support that, I pointed out that he'd gone so far as to call the legislation 'mean.' I also pointed out that what Trump really cares about is personal popularity, and the AHCA is highly unpopular. Trump is starting to figure this out, so he *might* elect to veto the bill to prevent that unpopularity from transferring to him - veto a republican bill and then blame the democrats. However, then and now, I put the odds of Trump actually vetoing the AHCA as 'very low.' Also, since it is not possible to 'out crazy' Trump, even normally insane options must be given at least some consideration. Anyhow, that is what Dr Pepper and Mexal, along with one or two others, have been debating.
  3. I did say 'not likely.' But, Trump did call the bill 'mean' last week. Plus, Trump wants to be popular. He seems to have almost figured out that the AHCA is hugely unpopular, and that by championing it, he risks that unpopularity transferring to himself. Those two points, combined with Trumps inherit craziness, is what made me consider this possibility. My guideline here is 'You cannot out crazy Trump.' Therefor, where Trump is involved, even normally insane notions must at least be looked at.
  4. One thing sort of lost in the AHCA plotline is the current POTUS. Rule of thumb - which posters here keep forgetting or glossing over: You CANNOT outcrazy Trump. Apparently people writing television series set in an overly dramatized white house are complaining about this. So, not likely, but at least possible: Suppose the AHCA makes it all the way to Trumps desk - and he Vetoes it? Republican reaction?
  5. Might be premature. Might be a hoax. The website that appeared on my Facebook Feed is highly unreliable at best - and too dangerous to link too. Still: Word is Trumps motorcade was involved in a serious accident mere minutes ago. Anybody able to confirm/deny this?
  6. I have been saying (and posting) this for years. Real easy to see that top 20% sliding enmass into the Republican Camp and doing everything they can to protect that status. More, they have a point. http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/the-hoarding-of-the-american-dream/ar-BBCKMQq?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=msnclassic
  7. Ok. Three telephone polls over the past three days dealing with the AHCA, each with a distinct negative slant. The one offered to put me directly in touch with Senator Murkowski's office. This is a heavily Conservative area (small town Alaska) I am reaching the conclusion that should the AHCA pass, the Republicans responsible will have Hell To Pay back home, even if they try to hide from their (Republican) voters. Hell To Pay including possible grievous violence against their persons. It's starting to look that ugly.
  8. Those talking points look a little weak to me. Deflection all the way, and pray that Trump doesn't blow things up?
  9. Might be interesting to see if this goes anywhere. The sheer number of congress people involved is telling. Maybe a few Republicans will jump on board. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/nearly-200-lawmakers-to-sue-trump-citing-business-conflicts/ar-BBCElJF?ocid=ob-fb-enus-580
  10. Ok, take these two articles: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-calls-health-care-bill-he-celebrated-in-the-rose-garden-‘mean’/ar-BBCDKMs?ocid=msnclassic (Trump calls version 1.0 of the AHCA 'mean') http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-gop-health-care-bill-will-be-generous-kind-and-with-heart/ar-BBCDtT8?ocid=msnclassic (Trump promises GOP bill will be kinder, gentler, needs more money) Add Trump himself, who puts personal popularity before almost all else, and can smell what a stinker the AHCA is. Also assume that the republicans are trapped - the AHCA abomination they have created is the ONLY thing that will pass muster without making major concessions to the democratic party. So, the revamped AHCA passes both houses on a squeaker of a party line vote. Then it lands on Trumps desk. Normally, one would expect him to sign it with a smile and declare victory - it makes him a winner. But, he also realizes this bill is deeply unpopular, and that by signing it, it makes him unpopular. So... ...not likely, but at least possible given Trumps lunacy - - suppose Trump vetoes the AHCA? Likely Republican reaction? Democratic reaction? Say, Trump repeats his 'kinder, gentler' spiel when issuing the veto. This puts the republicans in a position of not being able to pass a bill acceptable to Trump (at least at that moment) without democratic assistance. The AHCA becomes a revamped version of the ACA. Forced bipartisanship. And yes, this is unlikely. But Trump is so crazy its at least possible.
  11. I have to disagree with this. Even with a majority, the republicans have been unable to pass major legislation because of disputes between the different factions. I would also point out - yet again - that Republican Congressmen pushing for the AHCA caught a huge amount of flack from Republican voters in town halls back home. Once or twice to the point of violence. Add in tidbits like the Kansas Republicans effectively repudiating supply side economics, and it is just barely possible a overall leftward shift is possible. A slight shift.
  12. Some folks saw this coming during the Campaign. Does make one wonder if the two-party system will be viable even in name only much longer: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrats-in-split-screen-the-base-wants-it-all-the-party-wants-to-win/ar-BBCubXv?li=BBnbcA1&ocid=msnclassic
  13. Ok, people, I know its Friday, but you are falling down on the job. First up, a downright sane (or bizarre) admission from Trumps EPA chief: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-environmental-agency-chief-says-humans-contribute-to-global-warming/ar-BBBPWmm?ocid=ob-fb-enus-611
  14. Anecdotal, but... Guy I work with was all for pulling out of the Paris agreement. Said 'it was too much money for too little gain.' Plus, while he acknowledges global warming might exist, he sees that as a good thing - warmer winters here in the far north. That 'global warming' meant 'global climate change with lots of nasty effects' didn't interest him.
  15. Comey to testify next week about being pressured by Trump. Conservative posters on that article are attempting to argue such testimony would be perjury, and Comey broke the law by not immediately reporting the conversation. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/comey-to-confirm-trump-pressured-him-on-flynn-investigation-cnn/ar-BBBJZWu