1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moderator1, Nov 12, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Hopefully she dials up Lena, and gets the whole band back together.

     
  2. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

  3. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    Is Trump going to hire her to give him something to talk about?
     
  4. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    Of all the things to deny from that article, Bannon eventually running for POTUS seems like it would be lower on the list.
     
  5. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    He had a ton of access to Bannon, and wrote an interesting article.

    But, of course, the only speculation that he might run in 2020, comes not from Bannon, and Bannon isn’t quoted, but from an anymous source.

    And, even here, it’s only if Trump were not running, which isn’t hinted at in the clickbait headline.

    In October, Bannon called an adviser and said he would consider running for president if Trump doesn’t run for re-election in 2020. Which Bannon has told people is a realistic possibility. In private conversations since leaving the White House, Bannon said Trump only has a 30 percent chance of serving out his term, whether he’s impeached or removed by the Cabinet invoking the 25th amendment. That prospect seemed to become more likely in early December when special counsel Robert Mueller secured a plea deal from former national security adviser Michael Flynn.
     
  6. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    This tax bill kills the personal mandate in the ACA. It was the least popular part of the law, and the part that helped pay for it. The rest is still there - the government subsidies to help pay for your insurance, pre-existing coverage, coverage of your children up to the age of twenty-six. Those are all the most popular parts of Obamacare. I don't think that the Republicans can (or dare) to try to kill them all off now.

    So correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that mean that all the Republicans have done is managed to leave the program in place while diminishing the funding for it, as well as owning the loss of health care as an issue due to their actions?
     
  7. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    As it’s now a world in which planning to tax yet-to-be-earned income at a lower rate is considered “looting,” I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised that someone no longer buying, because he/she is no longer forced to buy, a given product would consider that to be “losing” that product.
     
    SpeedTchr and QYFW like this.
  8. QYFW

    QYFW Well-Known Member

     
  9. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    Why clip the paragraph there and not include the last line?

    Bannon has also remarked on the toll the office has taken on Trump, telling advisers his former boss has “lost a step.” “He’s like an 11-year-old child,” Bannon joked to a friend in November.
     
  10. typefitter

    typefitter Well-Known Member

    You are so fucking dense. Learn how to spell "border," Hypoxia, before you try to school so much as a pigeon on international affairs.
     
  11. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    I am speaking of the people who will give up on coverage that they can no longer afford because the healthy part of the insurance pool goes away, causing rates to rise, or who no longer have an insurance carrier available.
     
  12. tapintoamerica

    tapintoamerica Well-Known Member

    If he were such a badass and so proficient, wouldn't he be able to convince more than 5.2% of all members and more than 6.6% of voting members to go along with him? Wouldn't he have been able to coax a few more allies?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page