Re: Trump to Win?

[vt]

Re: Trump to Win?

The same to you and yours Thrifty. Also to all the itulip community.

[bpr]

Re: Trump to Win?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-set...--finance.html

This is a campaign promise, even if it's one unlikely to gain much traction. Enforcement might be an issue (and the legal definition of "lobby" doesn't prevent these oligarchs from running things from afar, but, as with his other executive orders he's following through.

[Southernguy]

Re: Trump to Win?

This post could be titled: Why did Trump win?
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/big...a-brexit-trump

[jk]

Re: Trump to Win?

Interest in “1984” surged this week, set off by a series of comments from Mr. Trump, his press secretary, Sean Spicer, and his adviser Kellyanne Conway, in which they disputed the news media’s portrayal of the crowd size at his inauguration and of his fractious relationship with American intelligence agencies. Their insistence that facts like photographs of the crowd and his public statements were up for interpretation culminated in a stunning exchange that Ms. Conway had on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” when she said that Mr. Spicer had not lied about the crowd size but was offering “alternative facts.”

To many observers, her comment evoked Orwell’s vision of a totalitarian society in which language becomes a political weapon and reality itself is defined by those in power. The remarks prompted a cascade of Twitter messages referencing Orwell and “1984.” According to a Twitter spokesman, the novel was referenced more than 290,000 times on the social network this week. The book began climbing Amazon’s best-seller list, which in turn drove more readers to it, in a sort of algorithm-driven feedback loop. It amounted to a blizzard of free advertising for a 68-year-old novel.


"1984" is currently #1 seller on amazon.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/b...aids-tale.html

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: Trump to Win?

Thanks Southernguy.
I have read reports that alluded to those techniques, it's great to see them explained more fully.

[jk]

Re: Trump to Win?

Thanks Southernguy.
I have read reports that alluded to those techniques, it's great to see them explained more fully.

+1
a really interesting article

[Woodsman]

Re: Trump to Win?

So it goes. To paraphrase Roger Daltrey, we (read "I") got fooled again. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Clinton’s defeat was a stunning setback but the neocons never give up. They are both well-organized and well-funded, dominating Official Washington’s think tanks and media outlets, sharing some power with their junior partners, the liberal interventionists, who differ mostly in the rationales cited for invading other countries. (The neocons mostly talk about global power and democracy promotion, while the liberal hawks emphasize “human rights.”)

In dealing with the narcissistic and insecure Trump, the neocons and liberal hawks conducted what amounted to a clever psychological operation. They rallied mainstream media personalities and Democrats horrified at Trump’s victory. In particular, Democrats and their angry base were looking for any reason to hold out hope for Trump’s impeachment. Hyping alleged Russian “meddling” in the election became the argument of choice.

Night after night, MSNBC and other networks competed in their Russia-bashing to boost ratings among Trump-hating Democrats. Meanwhile, Democratic politicians, such as Rep. Adam Schiff of California, saw the Russia-gate hearings as a ticket to national glory. And professional Democratic strategists could evade their responsibility for running a dismal presidential campaign by shifting the blame to the Russians.

However, besides creating a convenient excuse for Clinton’s defeat, the anti-Russian hysteria blocked Trump and his team from any move that they might try to make regarding avoidance of a costly and dangerous New Cold War. The Russia-hating frenzy reached such extremes that it paralyzed the formulation of any coherent Trump foreign policy.

Now, with the neocons regaining influence on the National Security Council via NSC adviser Gen. H.R. McMaster, a protégé of neocon favorite Gen. David Petraeus, the neocon holding action against the New Détente has shifted into an offensive to expand the hot war in Syria and intensify the New Cold War with Russia. As Kagan recognized, Trump’s hasty decision to fire off missiles was a key turning point in the reassertion of neocon/liberal-hawk dominance over U.S. foreign policy.

It’s also suddenly clear how thoroughly liberal Democrats were taken for a ride on the war train by getting them to blame Russia for Hillary Clinton’s defeat. The liberals (and even many progressives) hated Trump so much that they let themselves be used in the service of neocon/liberal-hawk endless war policies. Now, it may be too late to turn the train around.

Neocons Have Trump on His Knees

Americans deserved one last shot and in hindsight it seems almost worth the price to keep HRC out of the White House and expose the Mockingbird state media once and for all as our American Pravda.

Nothing left now but to enjoy what remains of life as we wait for the flash and bang. And with iTulip in all appearances circling the drain, it seems fitting to close out this old thread and my last and final campaign with a last and final post. I was wrong about Trump's mettle, but to be fair, it takes the courage of a King or Jack to face the spooks without fear of consequences. A Joker doesn't have chance when the folks holding the cards deal the Ace of Spades.

And in the end, the choice was clear all along. We had no choice and never will again.

[jk]

Re: Trump to Win?

ever more clearly: gov't of the wealthy, by the wealthy, and for the wealthy.

jesse [at his cafe americain] wrote that the plan seems to be to run up the deficits even higher, then use that as an excuse to go after social programs, especially medicare and social security. it seems very plausible.

[wayiwalk]

Re: Trump to Win?

ever more clearly: gov't of the wealthy, by the wealthy, and for the wealthy.

jesse [at his cafe americain] wrote that the plan seems to be to run up the deficits even higher, then use that as an excuse to go after social programs, especially medicare and social security. it seems very plausible.

I don't think it is just about gov't programs that are going to be cut.

At work last week, the new "telehealth" benefit was rolled out. This allows me to see a doctor via an internet connection rather than haul my butt to a doctor in person. Better for keeping me in the office at work.

They keep telling me I'm getting more, then why does it feel like I'm getting less?

Note, I work at a good company (formerly good??), but I anticipate the benefits of the company partly (~60%) provided health care will continue to diminish, until it is basically a HUGE tax I must pay (It is already about $10K annually for my portion of the premiums, and out of pocket, due to a pre-existing condition, another $6K) to basically have coverage via a company.....it is hardly worth it, but my view is you need to be covered for major medical.

But within a decade? I see that companies will continue to chip away at the healthcare benefit, just like they did on pensions, until it is basically gone.

[jk]

Re: Trump to Win?

the move to large deductible plans has already made health insurance unusable for many people. i've seen patients with ANNUAL deductibles up to $6000 or $7500. sometimes the employer has partially funded an hsa account for them, sometimes not. it discourages care except for the truly desperate.

[wayiwalk]

Re: Trump to Win?

the move to large deductible plans has already made health insurance unusable for many people. i've seen patients with ANNUAL deductibles up to $6000 or $7500. sometimes the employer has partially funded an hsa account for them, sometimes not. it discourages care except for the truly desperate.

My annual deductible for family is $9,000....which is why my out of pocket is so high, I don't quite reach the limit.

The sneakier part of the whole thing is that the negotiated rate in the plan with the insurance provider includes caps for services, particularly out of network, which is where my family takes it up the hoo hoo. The portion I'm paying out of pocket that counts towards the deductible is only the portion up until it reaches the cap. Anything above the cap, does not.....and in this case, the cap is $120 / visit for something that can't be touched for less than $200 / visit in my area of NJ. Lovely.

In network providers for this particular care needed is equivalent to voodoo doctors, not an option.

I've made up my mind that I must leave the state, and resign from my job; my wife is slightly saner, and disagrees. So far we have stayed put....but I don't believe this will last.

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: Trump to Win?

ever more clearly: gov't of the wealthy, by the wealthy, and for the wealthy.

jesse [at his cafe americain] wrote that the plan seems to be to run up the deficits even higher, then use that as an excuse to go after social programs, especially medicare and social security. it seems very plausible.

There may be another approach at work now.
Citizens United legalized unlimited amounts of undisclosed money to purchase election victories.
It's obvious and logical that foreign nations will secretly purchase the US government piecemeal to get us out of their way.

A nuclear aircraft carrier costs 13 billion dollars.
A Senate seat only costs 10 million dollars.

China can buy the whole US congress for less money than a single aircraft carrier.
The elected officials don't even need to know who is pulling the strings, they only know their big donors prefer certain policies.

[shiny!]

Re: Trump to Win?

So it goes. To paraphrase Roger Daltrey, we (read "I") got fooled again. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Americans deserved one last shot and in hindsight it seems almost worth the price to keep HRC out of the White House and expose the Mockingbird state media once and for all as our American Pravda.

It was worth the price. I figured Trump as a 'Hail Mary' pass with a 50/50 liklihood of turning things around. Although I'm disappointed, I don't regret my vote.

Nothing left now but to enjoy what remains of life as we wait for the flash and bang. And with iTulip in all appearances circling the drain, it seems fitting to close out this old thread and my last and final campaign with a last and final post. I was wrong about Trump's mettle, but to be fair, it takes the courage of a King or Jack to face the spooks without fear of consequences. A Joker doesn't have chance when the folks holding the cards deal the Ace of Spades.

And in the end, the choice was clear all along. We had no choice and never will again.

When I was fifteen I had the opportunity to go to Europe: Italy and Greece for a month plus a few days in Paris and London. I was amazed by ancient paving stones in the streets, and old buildings that over here would be museum pieces, but over there were still being used for day-to-day living. It made me realize that governments come and go, civilizations rise and fall, but life goes on, mostly.

It sucks to be growing old during the downward part of the cycle, but I've got hope that Spring will come again in some new form. We may or may not live to see it...

Please don't check out. I like your voice here.

[vt]

Re: Trump to Win?

There will be another.

[Woodsman]

Re: Trump to Win?

There will be another.

And another, and another after that, with each round producing ever more polarizing candidates who upon entry to office quickly adopt the neocon/neolib policies they excoriated in the election as Bush Jr. did for Clinton and Obama did for Bush Jr. and now Trump does for Obama.

We are a fake two-party state—one adopting the forms of social-democratic neoliberalism and the other the forms of neoconservatism—in which white-hot public battles are fought on divisive, symbolic issues of little consequence, while behind the scenes both parties are controlled by the same ruling elites. In that way, Americans are permanently divided and their popular dissatisfaction is safely channeled into meaningless dead-ends, permitting our rulers to maintain vast wealth and power for themselves, with little meaningful threat to their regime.

I knew that when I got back into the game but put the knowledge aside, hoping that the crack opened up by Trump's campaign could provide a finger hold for change. But that's over now and since none of us together or alone can do a damn thing about it, I can at the very least withdraw my participation in the con I had given up decades earlier. No regrets, albeit some disappointment and that will pass with enough sailing and surfing.

Enjoy your life, make a ton of cash, pray, party, do what you can to insulate you and yours. But forget about politics and macro-econ (ask yourself why EJ gave up to cultivate his VR garden), good people. Don't surrender the only free space you have left - that between your ears - to the grifters, be they Harvard and INSEAD trained biz-wizzes, street trained fast-talking NY real estate agents, or Georgetown/Camp Peary trained spooks.

It's a card trick and we're the mark. The only way to "win" is not to play.