Jump to content

Donald Trump 2020

Francisco 2.0

By Francisco 2.0
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 43.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mrs Whiggins

    1391

  • Biff Tannen

    1374

  • 4th&Five

    1222

  • WhatTheBuck

    910

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Thatguy
Thatguy

Let me be candid and honest here my man. I cannot be sympathetic to your comments because this is how adult life has always been. From the moment I stepped out of my home and headed off to college I h

Francisco 2.0
Francisco 2.0
henrygandorf
henrygandorf

it won't matter if his taxes ever come out.  it won't matter if his taxes don't ever come out.  you wanna know why?  because we already know what's in them. since early 2017 when people starting

Posted Images

mchookem

mchookem 16,336

Posted
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

This brings up an interesting dilemma. The "I don't know her, never heard of her" line is going to be out so will he call her nasty?

some dictators kill their family members if they cross them 🤨

Edited by mchookem
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 19,206

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, ultimaton said:

Russia taking in and giving sanctuary to an American president in exile while he's facing political persecution from an illegitimate regime -- which is what Trump will claim if he loses -- probably gives Putin sexual release every time he thinks of it. Trump will continue being useful to Russia even long after he's dead. 

Hell, regardless of what happens in November, half the country is going to believe to their dying days that this election was stolen from them, while the other half is going to believe their guy won in spite of the other side's attempt to rig it. If that damage isn't permanent, it's something that isn't going to be healed for generations. Putin and Trump have already won, even if they lose on 11/3.

Would the CIA kill him before he could defect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13,050

Posted
Posted

 If this was any other time I would be understanding of landscape designer, horticulture professionals, et al at trying to make a landscape redo in a short amount of time. Plants grow at their own pace as well as other factors and I would be patient before offering up criticism to allow time for things to settle in and fill out. But I really don't care for the changes so much. The tree removal might have been due to them getting older (I don't know the lifespan of what type it was) or diseased but this comment below described my feelings at the moment:

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JohnnyRage

JohnnyRage 1,617

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, DDD Dad said:

As a rule I do not comment on any political FB posts.  (Well that's not entirely true.  I do comment on truly local, community stuff.)

She's going on ignore.

I don't understand the concept of 'ignoring' someone. It's seems like a pussy half-ass thing to do. Just delete them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38,129

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, JohnnyRage said:

I don't understand the concept of 'ignoring' someone. It's seems like a pussy half-ass thing to do. Just delete them.

There are more than a dozen mental disorders that post on this message board. Oh you’re just talking about Facebook? Never mind but the ignore function is entirely necessary oh Surly. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27,578

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Two potential hurricanes, worst pandemic in 100 years, economy in the toilet. Hell it would be better if he was even bothered enough to prep full time for his upcoming convention. 

 

From an extreme distance he’s still as big as a house

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burt

Burt 4,085

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

So did Melanie cut down the cherry trees in the rose garden? If so, not a shock and totally on brand. 
 

After trump loses the election he is going to torch the White House. 

After housing that cocksucker and his family for the past 4 years, that place will be in NEED of a torching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 32,998

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, maninblack said:

Refute the Forbes article instead of being an insufferable douche then fuck stick

The article is correct in that government run healthcare models such as Medicare are able to enact these kinds of regulations to the benefit of patients and taxpayers. Although I must say I'm surprised that you're so eagerly pointing out the advantages of government involvement and regulation. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9,939

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

The article is correct in that government run healthcare models such as Medicare are able to enact these kinds of regulations to the benefit of patients and taxpayers. Although I must say I'm surprised that you're so eagerly pointing out the advantages of government involvement and regulation. 

The prescription drug racket has does not act as a market - it siphons off the spice for institutional and international capital. Capitalism ≠ Neoliberal economics. Enforcement of antitrust anti-corruption laws might achieve the same result. There are left libertarians who use reason to challenge orthodox right libertarianism.

I know I am speaking to experts on liberty who know Minarchists or "Night Watch"  libertarians make the vast majority of libertarians in my opinion (YMMV). But when a market is captured, there must be limits. Efficient markets eliminate the need for arbitrage. And when a government prohibits arbitrage in a market, the market forces are wildly out of balance. Arbitrage is a safety valve that encourages efficiency - which should lower costs. 

Trump doing this only means the issue will be ever associated with political wrangling. That is not good news. The continued use of EO's is out of whack as well.

Congress needs to do their job and legislate. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
maninblack

maninblack 7,974

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

The article is correct in that government run healthcare models such as Medicare are able to enact these kinds of regulations to the benefit of patients and taxpayers. Although I must say I'm surprised that you're so eagerly pointing out the advantages of government involvement and regulation. 

I was pointing out to Sizzle that somebody doesn't think Trump's tweet was bullshit. Posting a link to an article does not equal advocacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bateshorn

Bateshorn 9,928

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

 If this was any other time I would be understanding of landscape designer, horticulture professionals, et al at trying to make a landscape redo in a short amount of time. Plants grow at their own pace as well as other factors and I would be patient before offering up criticism to allow time for things to settle in and fill out. But I really don't care for the changes so much. The tree removal might have been due to them getting older (I don't know the lifespan of what type it was) or diseased but this comment below described my feelings at the moment:

 

My problem with it, other than I generally prefer “informal” English style gardens formal  neo-classical gardens, is the crab apple trees they removed shaded the south facing portico, which means the sun will now reflect off that side and make the garden all but unusable from June through September, when it’s actually in bloom.  
 

The reason Bunny Mellon re did it the way it was in the 80s was to take advantage of DC’s nice springs, since our summers are swamp ass hellscapes. I understand Melania’s design choice, it just doesn’t account for the environment it inhabits. Which is completely on brand for her.

Edited by Bateshorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,496

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, maninblack said:

Refute the Forbes article instead of being an insufferable douche then fuck stick

Even the Forbes article says the most favored nation treatment applies only to drugs administered in physicians offices.  It does not apply to prescription drugs purchased by patients.

And, there are serious questions as to the ability of these EOs to actually change anything.  Most Presidents, who have an inkling how government works, would have led an effort at the legislature to do something like this across the board.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13,050

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

My problem with it, other than I generally prefer “informal” English style gardens formal  neo-classical gardens, is the crab apple trees they removed shaded the south facing portico, which means the sun will now reflect off that side and make the garden all but unusable from June through September, when it’s actually in bloom.  
 

The reason Bunny Mellon re did it the way it was in the 80s was to take advantage of DC’s nice springs, since our summers are swamp ass hellscapes. I understand Melania’s design choice, it just doesn’t account for the environment it inhabits. Which is completely on brand for her.

That's a good point. I wasn't looking at it from that perspective. I prefer the informal garden myself as nature does what nature is going to do. I can appreciate the beauty of the formal garden, but the wild random bounty of bluebonnets reminds me that life is short and control but an illusion .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Homercles

Homercles 10,206

Posted
Posted

On a random side note I think it’s absolute horse shit that companies can advertise publicly for prescription drugs...’ask your doctor if xyz is right for you’ pisses me off.  Those ad dollars raise the price of the drug, i want the medical community to make the judgement call on what medication is right for the situation, and with google leading you to believe everything is terminal brain cancer it seems dangerous to hype up medication to non-qualified people.  
 

image.thumb.jpeg.2c58134ef43b2ad13558e3d90e413a6c.jpeg

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SizzleChest

SizzleChest 8,284

Posted
Posted

The reality is that the EOs don't have a lot of teeth.  Big pharma is currently developing a response to the EOs, but the bottom line is this is just another outsized Trump electioneering claim, i.e. lie, that all is solved when in reality, nothing is solved.   None of this has or will take affect.  

The House developed a bill with teeth in 2019 (HB 3), but it got nowhere in the Senate.  The Senate now has a bill co-sponsored by Ron Wyden and Chuck Grassley, but it's still in committee.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,496

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, SizzleChest said:

The reality is that the EOs don't have a lot of teeth.  Big pharma is currently developing a response to the EOs, but the bottom line is this is just another outsized Trump electioneering claim, i.e. lie, that all is solved when in reality, nothing is solved.   None of this has or will take affect.  

The House developed a bill with teeth in 2019 (HB 3), but it got nowhere in the Senate.  The Senate now has a bill co-sponsored by Ron Wyden and Chuck Grassley, but it's still in committee.

Very accurate.  At the very most, this EO will move CMS to rulemaking, which will last beyond his current term in office.  Any effort to make this more effective than that will likely be met by successful litigation from Pharma, and so will any action by CMS.

One thing that this does kind of illustrate about Trump is his ability to act against his instincts and against big business at times because of the bizarre thrall in which he holds his "base."  Most politicians are afraid to cross big pharma this way (he is too for the most part), but he can act a bit more "independently" because of his "base."  It would be kind of cool if he had some integrity and intelligence.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13,050

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Homercles said:

On a random side note I think it’s absolute horse shit that companies can advertise publicly for prescription drugs...’ask your doctor if xyz is right for you’ pisses me off.  Those ad dollars raise the price of the drug, i want the medical community to make the judgement call on what medication is right for the situation, and with google leading you to believe everything is terminal brain cancer it seems dangerous to hype up medication to non-qualified people. 

I remember what it was like before that was allowed. I agree with you.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,496

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Homercles said:

On a random side note I think it’s absolute horse shit that companies can advertise publicly for prescription drugs...’ask your doctor if xyz is right for you’ pisses me off.  Those ad dollars raise the price of the drug, i want the medical community to make the judgement call on what medication is right for the situation, and with google leading you to believe everything is terminal brain cancer it seems dangerous to hype up medication to non-qualified people.  
 

image.thumb.jpeg.2c58134ef43b2ad13558e3d90e413a6c.jpeg

I have long said that pharma's biggest problem is their marketing practices.  From reps and samples and hookers and gin to advertising.  It's bad juju and really adds to the price of drugs.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HenryJames

HenryJames 66,124

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, SizzleChest said:

The reality is that the EOs don't have a lot of teeth.  Big pharma is currently developing a response to the EOs, but the bottom line is this is just another outsized Trump electioneering claim, i.e. lie, that all is solved when in reality, nothing is solved.   None of this has or will take affect.  

The House developed a bill with teeth in 2019 (HB 3), but it got nowhere in the Senate.  The Senate now has a bill co-sponsored by Ron Wyden and Chuck Grassley, but it's still in committee.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SizzleChest

SizzleChest 8,284

Posted
Posted

If it were to actually get enacted (it won't), the payroll tax thing is the most cataclysmically dangerous and stupid thing Trump ever came up with.  No one really benefits (people or the government).  It's all harm and zero advantage.

He's pushed it other times during his term, but Cocaine Mitch told him to pound sand.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29,355

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

The article is correct in that government run healthcare models such as Medicare are able to enact these kinds of regulations to the benefit of patients and taxpayers. Although I must say I'm surprised that you're so eagerly pointing out the advantages of government involvement and regulation. 

One unfortunate side effect of bothsides disease is it makes you really stupid.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,496

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, SizzleChest said:

If it were to actually get enacted (it won't), the payroll tax thing is the most cataclysmically dangerous and stupid thing Trump ever came up with.  No one really benefits (people or the government).  It's all harm and zero advantage.

He's pushed it other times during his term, but Cocaine Mitch told him to pound sand.

It really is.  Any SS reform needs to be undertaken a lot more carefully than that.

But it serves the mantra of only giving benefit to the working.  Which is utterly idiotic at this point in time.

I have deep qualms about our profligacy in spending as a nation, but I have just about zero qualms about handing out money until we get a handle on this virus.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,496

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

The article is correct in that government run healthcare models such as Medicare are able to enact these kinds of regulations to the benefit of patients and taxpayers. Although I must say I'm surprised that you're so eagerly pointing out the advantages of government involvement and regulation. 

One of the supreme ironies of senior citizen Trumpkins.  They're all on Medicare.  Socialized.  Medicine.  What in the blue fuck are any of them going to do if Medicare goes away and they have to pay $2000/month plus-plus for their healthcare?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dbeasy

Dbeasy 15,068

Posted
Posted
Even the Forbes article says the most favored nation treatment applies only to drugs administered in physicians offices.  It does not apply to prescription drugs purchased by patients.
And, there are serious questions as to the ability of these EOs to actually change anything.  Most Presidents, who have an inkling how government works, would have led an effort at the legislature to do something like this across the board.

I didn’t even waste 30 seconds to look up whether his action was a real benefit or not because I knew he was lying. Again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pyrohornIII

pyrohornIII 4,815

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, SizzleChest said:

If it were to actually get enacted (it won't), the payroll tax thing is the most cataclysmically dangerous and stupid thing Trump ever came up with.  No one really benefits (people or the government).  It's all harm and zero advantage.

He's pushed it other times during his term, but Cocaine Mitch told him to pound sand.

The ones to benefit are the employers who wouldn't have to ante up their payroll contributions anymore.  It's unclear, but doubtful if they would be held accountable for them lump sum, like the taxpayer.   But yeah, it's basically another big tax cut for the rich, while cloaked as a blessing to the worker. 

19 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

wut 

So I am guessing this sunday morning, he's having brunch with Jesus before he hits the links?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 32,998

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, maninblack said:

I was pointing out to Sizzle that somebody doesn't think Trump's tweet was bullshit. Posting a link to an article does not equal advocacy.

You should probably try to explain your posts then rather than your new standard approach of a drive by link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...