All the discussion about the Xi-Trump meeting is coming from the US side. Trump tosses threats occasionally, then plays nice, but the Chinese appear to be having none of it. Usually these things are lined up months in advance. Moreover, Trump still has done nothing to indicate his capriciousness on China policy would calm after a meeting. My suspicion is no deep-level discussion will happen.
Trump said within a 24-hour period he expected to seal a “fantastic” and “good” and “fair” trade deal with Xi even as he warned that the sit-down might be put off. “I think we’re going to have a very successful meeting,” he said at a White House lunch before pivoting. “Maybe it won’t happen,” he added. “Maybe somebody will say, ‘I don’t want to meet. It’s too nasty’. But it’s really not nasty.”
This is all unlawful. The White House is supposed to seek approval from Congress and follow a process called “reprogramming” in order to legally shift funds …
Correction: This WAS unlawful, until John Roberts and his fellow GOP Toadies made trump KING.
In a letter addressed to Johnson the group of Republicans warned him that “millions of Americans are facing drastic premium increases“ as a result of the Obamacare subsidies expiring at the end of the year.
I’d be interested to see a list of names that shows who this group is and how they have voted on every vote to de-fund OBAMACare since its inception.
Yeah, that’s exactly the way it feels. That’s one of those Star Trek commentaries on life that are so memorable. I remember that line, too. When some negative person reminds us of iconic stories, I think it’s usually a pretty good sign that they’re really beyond the pale.
Plus, since they were old ladies at that point, they were full-grown adults when Social Security was invented, and they’d already been adults when it didn’t exist and the need for it was clearly visible across the society.
It’s particularly disheartening and actually frightening to me that people in that position --who, as adults, had seen the world without SS and had certainly seen something of the fights over FDR’s institution of it – had either already obliterated their own memories of its being government-instituted or, as adults, had never noticed that history when it was taking place.
. Both Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) have made similar remarks.
I see Susan Collins is very concerned once again, I guess she will write a strongly worded letter.
It’s not a stupid question at all. Earlier this year I talked to some academics who run political polling and survey operations. And one thing that they were all very anxious to impress on me was that most people virtually never vote based on ideas or feelings they have about the government/institutional/cultural policies. that are being talked about in the election cycle.
When the whopping majority of people vote for candidates, these polling experts said, no matter how hot some of the “cultural” issues (like abortion, for example) appear to be, they’ve voting only for their (largely emotion-based, instinct-based) feelings about the person who is the candidate, not at all about that person’s position on issues.
In fact, when they poll/survey to find out what people’s basis for their votes are, they often ask what the voter’s view is of, say abortion, and then what they believe their candidate’s view of abortion is…And people overwhelmingly reply that their preferred candidate’s view of the issue is the same as their own, even in cases where the candidate has a well-publicized view that’s the opposte of that voter’s view.
And the same goes for party affiliation surprisingly often as well, they said. Many habitual Republican voters who personally support legal abortion, for example,will state that the Republican party supports abortion rights, just as they do, when asked what their party of choice believes on the issue.
If people personally feel attracted to a candidate or they feel comfortable with the vibe of a party that they’ve long been attached to, most of the time they simply assert and believe that that candidate and/or that party support the same polices and take the same side on all issues as they do personally. The assumption that 'I like you so I’m sure you agree with me" is extremely widespread and rules most voting, I was told by several people. And they have the survey and polling data to show that.
So I’d say nature wins most of the time. Which is scary as hell to me in this very complicated world we live in, where humans and our isntitutions can wield so much power in so many ways.
1 Timothy 6:10For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and in their eagerness to be rich some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pains.
Just to note that Democrats controlled the state legislature and were far along in crafting legislation when Romney proposed his Heritage-inspired plan. More wrangling, with Sen. Ted Kennedy also playing a role. Finally:
In Fall 2005, the House and Senate each passed health care insurance reform bills. The legislature made a number of changes to Governor Romney’s original proposal, including expanding MassHealth (Medicaid and SCHIP) coverage to low-income children and restoring funding for public health programs. The most controversial change was the addition of a provision which requires firms with 11 or more workers that do not provide “fair and reasonable” health coverage to their workers to pay an annual penalty. This contribution, initially $295 annually per worker, is intended to equalize the free care pool charges imposed on employers who do and do not cover their workers.
On April 12, 2006, Governor Romney signed the health legislation.[23] He vetoed eight sections of the health care legislation, including the controversial employer assessment.[24] He vetoed provisions providing dental benefits to poor residents on the Medicaid program, and providing health coverage to legal immigrants who have a U.S. sponsor who is financially responsible for them.[25] The legislature promptly overrode six of the eight gubernatorial section vetoes, on May 4, 2006, and by mid-June 2006 had overridden the remaining two.[26][27]
Romney wasn’t being entirely disingenuous when, while running for president, he distanced himself from the ill-named “Romneycare” legislation.
On a pretty regular basis, MSNBC shows have guests like Lincoln Project (often former) Republicans and Dems like James Carville who express dismay at the tendency of Dem candidates and office holders to address voters as if they were conducting a college seminar class and not appealing more to voters’ emotions/gut feelings. Just the other evening Carville, on Ari Melber’s show, was heaping praise on Mamdani for the salience, simplicity, and clarity of his message, his ability to stay on message, and his ability to interact with people of all stripes and kinds – his likability.
I am going to submit that we have actually never seen a personality of so many extremes as Donnie. Maybe the better read or historians can point one out to me, but in my general awareness I cannot find someone worthy of being equivalent.
And until his arrival, we have never seen fully the type of people he has attracted to him. We think we have, but maybe not. They have been hidden to us until he allowed them to completely embrace their true nature. And if Godzilla has parasites, they are going to be equally monstrous.
