What would you like to see during President Trump's first 100 days?

[raildogg]

Is it possible that Trump is not the one in charge at all?

Maybe his ultra rich son-in-law is the one in charge? I mean, Trump married his daughter to the guy, she converted to Judaism (LOL) and says their children will be Jews. That tells you that the guy has plenty of sway.

This whole thing is shady. I mean, why would you put such an inexperienced person as your adviser in chief unless there's more the story.

 

[IronWing]

^ <sigh>

 

[brycejones]

Is it possible that Trump is not the one in charge at all?

Maybe his ultra rich son-in-law is the one in charge? I mean, Trump married his daughter to the guy, she converted to Judaism (LOL) and says their children will be Jews. That tells you that the guy has plenty of sway.

This whole thing is shady. I mean, why would you put such an inexperienced person as your adviser in chief unless there's more the story.

Seriously stop. It's very common for people to convert to a new spouses religion.

The rest of your post is lame tin foil wearing bs. I don't like the guy but pick on him for valid reasons instead of his grandchildren will be Jews and his son in law is Jewish.

 

[raildogg]

It's quite telling. The Kushners are powerful people and I'm sure the conversion to Judaism was not taken lightly. It's probably a calculated move. Who knows though.

But what we do know is that this will be the most pro-Israel US government in a long, long time. You have AIPAC member Kushner along with others in his administration. You have Pence, another Israel supporter.

Also, remember that Trump says he loves Netanyahu and vice versa.

 

[nickqt]

Trumpcare, which delivers much more than the ACA, at a fraction of the cost.

 

[raildogg]

Trumpcare, which delivers much more than the ACA, at a fraction of the cost.

How will this happen? At a fraction of the cost? How so?

Right now, from what I understand, the relatively healthy people are paying for the relatively unhealthy people. That makes the healthcare rise of the relatively healthy people. But in the process, many people who would otherwise not get healthcare, can now get it. I think that's basically what ACA is - please correct me.

How will Trump's plan be different?

 

[ivwshane]

How will this happen? At a fraction of the cost? How so?

Right now, from what I understand, the relatively healthy people are paying for the relatively unhealthy people. That makes the healthcare rise of the relatively healthy people. But in the process, many people who would otherwise not get healthcare, can now get it. I think that's basically what ACA is - please correct me.

How will Trump's plan be different?

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm. Its telling that it was hard to do spot (that's a dig at the current political climate and trump supporters).

 

[nickqt]

How will this happen? At a fraction of the cost? How so?

Right now, from what I understand, the relatively healthy people are paying for the relatively unhealthy people. That makes the healthcare rise of the relatively healthy people. But in the process, many people who would otherwise not get healthcare, can now get it. I think that's basically what ACA is - please correct me.

How will Trump's plan be different?

I don't know, you'll have to ask Strongman Trump, who said we'd have excellent healthcare after the repeal of the ACA, for a fraction of the cost.

 

[crashtech]

I'd like to continue not being bothered. Even the Obama Administration seemed to do okay on this one, so I suspect the Trump Administration will meet my expectation. The only real impact I can recall from Obama was that temporary 2% reduction in the employee SS tax contribution. I didn't mind that until I realized my matching portion was still 6.2%. Oh well.

 

[colonel]

openly declares that he is a friend of Russia_Putin regime.

 

[crashtech]

Russia used to be considered nominally a part of Western civilization.

 

[MongGrel]

Russia used to be considered nominally a part of Western civilization.

They used to have a Royal Family also, before the Communist Party killed em all

 

[IronWing]

They used to have a Royal Family also, before the Communist Party killed em all

The second best thing the commies ever did, that.

 

[crashtech]

Honestly I think the smartest long-term strategy would be to revive that old kinship instead of disparage it. I know that current events make an objective read difficult, though.

 

[werepossum]

Honestly I think the smartest long-term strategy would be to revive that old kinship instead of disparage it. I know that current events make an objective read difficult, though.

There's not actually been any kinship since at least the twin revolutions. In World War II, Stalin planned to let the free West Allies and Germany's Axis forces fight each other to exhaustion, leaving his fresh forces to sweep in and take the whole of Europe. He turned to us after he was invaded, but even then there was no kinship. The Western Allies (especially America) saved the Soviet Union from collapse - Soviet troops ate American wheat and canned rations, wore American-made uniforms and boots, used American and British trucks and rolling stock - yet Stalin continued to make demands based more on his desire to seize more nations than from any real need. For example, throughout the war the USA and the UK sent tanks to the Soviet Union even though they out-produced us, and with tanks which by most metrics were quite superior to Western models. (By 1945 anyway - British heavy tanks early in the war comprised a large percentage of the USSR's heavy tanks, though then the early Soviet heavies were generally better tanks.) He didn't need the tanks so much as he just wanted us to have fewer of them.

It's been a hundred years since we have had any real kinship with the Russians, and I don't think any real progress can be made as long as they are ruled by a KGB thug.

 

[crashtech]

There's not actually been any kinship since at least the twin revolutions. In World War II, Stalin planned to let the free West Allies and Germany's Axis forces fight each other to exhaustion, leaving his fresh forces to sweep in and take the whole of Europe. He turned to us after he was invaded, but even then there was no kinship. The Western Allies (especially America) saved the Soviet Union from collapse - Soviet troops ate American wheat and canned rations, wore American-made uniforms and boots, used American and British trucks and rolling stock - yet Stalin continued to make demands based more on his desire to seize more nations than from any real need. For example, throughout the war the USA and the UK sent tanks to the Soviet Union even though they out-produced us, and with tanks which by most metrics were quite superior to Western models. (By 1945 anyway - British heavy tanks early in the war comprised a large percentage of the USSR's heavy tanks, though then the early Soviet heavies were generally better tanks.) He didn't need the tanks so much as he just wanted us to have fewer of them.

It's been a hundred years since we have had any real kinship with the Russians, and I don't think any real progress can be made as long as they are ruled by a KGB thug.

So, the alternative is continued confrontation, high nuclear readiness, and all that entails. After what, over three generations of that crap hanging over our heads, you'd think cooler heads might finally prevail, but no, now we have the most unlikely party of torch bearers to continue the blood feud. Do we really need to lean on the now ancient history of Stalinism and the USSR to make the case against Russia today? How about we indict them on their current rap sheet instead. Hacking? I think we're up to the challenge. Is that really so scary? Worth continued saber rattling and the threat of nuclear annihilation? Madness.

 

[MongGrel]

So, the alternative is continued confrontation, high nuclear readiness, and all that entails. After what, over three generations of that crap hanging over our heads, you'd think cooler heads might finally prevail, but no, now we have the most unlikely party of torch bearers to continue the blood feud. Do we really need to lean on the now ancient history of Stalinism and the USSR to make the case against Russia today? How about we indict them on their current rap sheet instead. Hacking? I think we're up to the challenge. Is that really so scary? Worth continued saber rattling and the threat of nuclear annihilation? Madness.

You seriously think Trump has a cool head, and agree with his Russian affiliations ?

 

[werepossum]

So, the alternative is continued confrontation, high nuclear readiness, and all that entails. After what, over three generations of that crap hanging over our heads, you'd think cooler heads might finally prevail, but no, now we have the most unlikely party of torch bearers to continue the blood feud. Do we really need to lean on the now ancient history of Stalinism and the USSR to make the case against Russia today? How about we indict them on their current rap sheet instead. Hacking? I think we're up to the challenge. Is that really so scary? Worth continued saber rattling and the threat of nuclear annihilation? Madness.

Cooler heads DID prevail. Eventually we learned that the Cold War never ended, it was just Russia temporarily getting so weak that they could not make us notice them.

Personally I think the current saber rattling is just silly and I'm glad that Trump will end it, but that doesn't mean there is or can be any real kinship between America and Putin. As far as the threat of nuclear annihilation, I agree with Reagan: Peace through strength.

 

[crashtech]

Cooler heads DID prevail. Eventually we learned that the Cold War never ended, it was just Russia temporarily getting so weak that they could not make us notice them.

Personally I think the current saber rattling is just silly and I'm glad that Trump will end it, but that doesn't mean there is or can be any real kinship between America and Putin. As far as the threat of nuclear annihilation, I agree with Reagan: Peace through strength.

I'd rather the Cold War be finally dead and buried, an historic blunder of colossal proportions. Your reply makes it sound like the USA was the one keeping the Cold War flame burning, and maybe that is so. We might need that clear existential threat to help justify our gargantuan defense expenditures, at least until China becomes a more credible bogeyman. And I agree that there ought not be kinship with Putin and the USA, that old guard authoritarian KGB operative is not doing his country any favors. But what about us as a people? Russians and Americans, everyday people, what is our reason to hate one another?

 

[werepossum]

I'd rather the Cold War be finally dead and buried, an historic blunder of colossal proportions. Your reply makes it sound like the USA was the one keeping the Cold War flame burning, and maybe that is so. We might need that clear existential threat to help justify our gargantuan defense expenditures, at least until China becomes a more credible bogeyman. And I agree that there ought not be kinship with Putin and the USA, that old guard authoritarian KGB operative is not doing his country any favors. But what about us as a people? Russians and Americans, everyday people, what is our reason to hate one another?

I think the vast majority of us would prefer that the Cold War be over, but Russia also has a vote in that. And so far, Russia votes for continued Cold War.

As far as needing a "clear existential threat to help justify our gargantuan defense expenditures", perhaps you missed the part where Bush I and Clinton together reduced the American military by half because the Cold War was over.

 

[crashtech]

I think the vast majority of us would prefer that the Cold War be over, but Russia also has a vote in that. And so far, Russia votes for continued Cold War.

As far as needing a "clear existential threat to help justify our gargantuan defense expenditures", perhaps you missed the part where Bush I and Clinton together reduced the American military by half because the Cold War was over.

And yet, as of 2015:

 

[MongGrel]

The US spending on the Military is way over the top, I'll agree.

It is ridiculous what you could do with 1/4 of that money applied to social programs and health care, schools, NASA, etc.

And I have no children.

The complete infatuation with the military spending these days is pretty outrageous, and I'm pretty pro military.

Trump wanting to increase that is ridiculous.

Ronny even cut it back when he took office, I saw several people when I was in the Marines at the time purged.

 

[crashtech]

I propose that the Russian people would prefer to ally with Europe over China, and we ought to get the hell out of the way to facilitate that. Just a little long-range thinking that certainly runs counter to just about anything on the table right now. But glance at that military expenditure graph one more time, if you will.

 

[MongGrel]

I propose that the Russian people would prefer to ally with Europe over China, and we ought to get the hell out of the way to facilitate that. Just a little long-range thinking that certainly runs counter to just about anything on the table right now. But glance at that military expenditure graph one more time, if you will.

If you are speaking to me I have already agreed.

Yet we still throw money at F35's etc.

One F35 could fund a lot of social programs for a very long time.

One B2 a lot longer.

But the funding to build them is a major point in manufacturing.

 

[crashtech]

If you are speaking to me I have already agreed.

Yet we still throw money at F35's etc.

Actually I wasn't, but your edits after the fact might make it seem so. I notice that I might need to wait a while to reply to you, as you like to add to what you originally post. I do that too, but mainly to correct grammatical or code parsing errors.