• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

This is what the US Voted For, Good Luck....

Trump has taken so many positions on minimum wage that it's impossible to tell what he believes. He's said that he'd leave it alone, he'd raise it to $10, and he'd let the states decide. He's said that wages are too high, and he's said we have to do something to help people making minimum wage, saying "I don’t know how people make it on $7.25 an hour."
Click to expand...
And since he's flip-flopped so much, its probably safe to say he doesn't really have a vested interest in the issue. So, if the republican-controlled house decides to abolish the Minimum wage, its likely Trump won't stand in their way.
 
I have just read on a French media that Steve Bannon could be appointed White House chief of staff ?

Is this really likley to happen ? And what could imply the fact to have a man like Bannon so close to the highest level of power in the US ?
 
Shiner said:
Gee you waste a lot of effort chastising people. I doubt I'd have even commented after my one line, had you not felt the need to express your dislike of a throwaway comment.

I'm using colloquial language incorrectly now? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yes, you are. And yes, it's annoying enough to complain about.

Almost as annoying as two utterly worthless posts in a row that could just as productively not been sent. PW wrote an analytical post with citations and it was rejected with "tldr" and "you made that up" horse tits by people unable or unwilling to read and learn other people's viewpoint.
 
Last edited:
Well, he's going to figure out he can't do a lot of what he promised right quick. I don't care what the Hair says, he can't build a wall without an appropriation. You can't spend that kind of money without Congress saying so. California and New Mexico will seek to frustrate his efforts and Mexico will not pay. In fact, I would not be the least surprised if Mexico hosts a very public high level trade and/or military delegation from China as a warning.
 
casebro said:
Trump bashing at this stage makes as much sense as the B.S. Peace Prize for Obama before he took office.
Click to expand...

Uh, no. Sorry, invalid comparison. Reading what President Elect Trump said on the campaign trail and what the GOP has said during the election is rational and reasonable. Its sensible to contemplate what a future president will do, once sworn in, by looking at past statements or policies.

Giving Obama a preemptive Nobel peace for getting elected while black was stupid, irrational, and NOT AN AMERICAN DECISION. It was the decision of a foreign national third party. And then he unilaterally bombed the moon in his first hundred days, so there's that.
 
Somebody mentioned Mexico hosting Chinese trade delegations. Well, given Trump's statements about NATO and our other allies, love affair with Putin, and praise for a variety of dictators and assorted authoritarian regimes, I think a lot of countries will be cozying up to China, which as a country can probably not believe its good luck right now. Basically, given Trump's views in foreign relations, disastrous economic proposals, and the contempt for science shared by him and the Republican leadership, we (the U.S.) are pretty much on track to give up the role of world leader.

PhantomWolf said:
Speaking of discrimination, following from the North Carolina HB2 Law, expect to see the overturning of Executive Order 13672, the banning of discrimination against LGBTQ by Federal Contractors, and the allowing of discrimination by employers based on Sexual Orientation.
Click to expand...

Even if this happens (which I doubt, even if Christian-Sharia enthusiast Mike Pence gets the reins), I can't see the big contractors undoing their express commitments to such antidiscrimination practices. I work for a midsize Beltway Bandit heavily into a variety of civil, military, and intelligence programs, and our corporate culture just wouldn't change like that. And this is not simply because our CEO is a woman; all of the similar mid-to-large outfits with which I'm familiar are like this. It's not just the Apples of the corporate world.

Odd to think of the Military-Industrial Complex, at least the Industrial part, as protector of certain civil liberties, but there it is.
 
Garrette said:
I have concerns about the domestic agenda and fear for much in the short term. My own daughter, voting in her first Presidential election, has been distraught over the prospect of losing access to birth control.
..............
Click to expand...


Really?

What does the President, or anyone else, have to do with the access to birth control?
 
Skeptical Greg said:
Really?

What does the President, or anyone else, have to do with the access to birth control?
Click to expand...

I think there was a time that Planned Parenthood was critical in delivering birth control. It still plays a big role. I would expect Planned Parenthood to lose a lot, possibly all, of its federal funding next year.

On the other hand, the role PP plays is a lot smaller than it used to be. Birth control is a lot more accessible than it once was. Moreover, if PP were to lose its funding, the left would mobilize to both ensure alternatives existed and score political points at the same time. They would stand on the street corners offering free condoms and diaphragms, and doctors standing by to write prescriptions.

What might happen is that FDA approval for any variation of new "morning after" or "crisis birth control", would be less likely to be approved.
 
theprestige said:
How much does FDA approval hinge on the personal opinion of the President?
Click to expand...

These days I think it depends more on the board members and the money they've made in the industry over the years and/or the cushy seat on the board of some 'charitable organization' slush fund they will receive as a golden parachute after their retirement.

ETA: To the larger point of banning contraceptives, they would likely meet some resistance. We'll see more clever 'defunding' of Title X related programs. They'll also pack the benches they've been keeping vacant, expect more Hobby Lobby decisions to attack the private sector access as well. That is a plan that does work in the industry's favor. It shifts sales from large bulk contracts to health care organizations down to individual purchases at prescription store counters

That is, of course, after first receiving a prescription, which requires consulting your doctor who will be compelled by law to tell you medically incorrect information written by their state legislature.

That last bit is just me putting a little sizzle on it, but the bulk I can foresee happening quite easily.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
How much does FDA approval hinge on the personal opinion of the President?
Click to expand...

I am assuming that the head of the FDA is either directly appointed bt y the President, or by the Secretary of HHS. When candidates for that office are approved by whoever it is that is vetting those candidates, their position of political hot button issues is a major part of that vetting.

A Republican President will get a report that checks out all of the key policy positions and says where the candidate stands. The anti-abortion wing of the Republican Party will be watching closely to see whom he appoints.
 
Again, the conservatives argument is "Trump really won't say what he said he'll do" or "he can't do what he said he'll do." Is that why they voted for him?
 
thaiboxerken said:
Again, the conservatives argument is "Trump really won't say what he said he'll do" or "he can't do what he said he'll do." Is that why they voted for him?
Click to expand...


Sort of.

A lot of what he says he will do is garden variety mainstream Republican stuff. Then, he also said some kind of outlandish, over the top, stuff. The mainstream Republicans wanted the mainstream stuff, but not the outlandish stuff, but they figured he wouldn't get the outlandish stuff, so he was a pretty safe vote. He might be an embarrassment, but he would cut taxes and nominate conservatives to the Supreme Court, just like any Republican would.

Meanwhile, the core Trump supporters, the people at the rallies, just ate up the outlandish stuff, and that was enough to put him over the top.

Although, "over the top" in this case probably isn't the right phrase to describe his victory. It's more like sliding in under the tag.
 
theprestige said:
If I may ask, what birth control would she lose access to?
Click to expand...
When religious bigots take charge, even in a democratic country, people can lose access to birth control. Here's the best known example.
Contraception was illegal in Ireland from 1935 until 1980, when it was legalised with strong restrictions, later loosened. The ban reflected Catholic teachings on sexual morality.​
 
Craig B said:
When religious bigots take charge, even in a democratic country, people can lose access to birth control. Here's the best known example.
Contraception was illegal in Ireland from 1935 until 1980, when it was legalised with strong restrictions, later loosened. The ban reflected Catholic teachings on sexual morality.​
Click to expand...

Is it a No True Scotsman to point out that Ireland is not a State of the Union?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom