US Politics: 2017 Edition

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Cothonian**

TheArmorOfContempt wrote:

Proof that policy was irrelevant was pretty much the debates themselves. It makes me feel like a dick to say it but anyone who watched the debates and thought Trump would be a good President is straight up an idiot.

Could we stop with the insults?

Moving along...

In regards to the ethics committee. I always thought that it was weird that our government could have an office that could decide, on its own without oversight, what is and is not "ethical." The problem is that whoever the governing power is could quite easily "adjust" what is ethical, and proceed to persecute whomever they see fit.

For example, during the last 8 years... I was never a fan of Obamacare, never wanted it to pass. I had seen other government healthcare programs and never liked the way they were run, also heavily disliked the almost guaranteed price/tax increases that would inevitably come with it.

For that, people flat out called me racist to my face. Racist, because I did not like a proposed government policy. So by not liking a bill, words on paper, that involved tax increases, I was a racist. Apparently it was not "ethical" to be against a proposed change to how healthcare worked.

Thus, that is why I am fine with calls for the ethics committee to be disbanded. I'd rather leave investigations to the many law enforcement agencies currently available. Law enforcement at least operates based on set guidelines, and everything they do is consistently under strict scrutiny. Some lawmaker does something bad, let the FBI take them down. That's what they're there for.

**whembly**

Heh... he seems dejected:

.@VP Biden: "It is over."#ElectoralCollege pic.twitter.com/36AdKAS72Z

— CSPAN (@cspan) January 6, 2017

Congress has certified the EV for President-elect Drumpf.

**Kilkrazy**

Ketara wrote:
Just Tony wrote:
Historically in the US, though, if there is a welfare program that allows the poor to have access to a free service, then a majority of people will use it instead of being bothered to get the same thing on their dime.

The issue I have with "free" entitlements as such is that it doesn't motivate someone to better themselves, it motivates them to stick their hand out further. Even more so if they don't have to contribute themselves.

That's the beauty of state funded healthcare, it's paid for from central taxation. So as long as they're earning, they ARE buying it on their dime. It's not free.

Plus, who ever decides to get injured or become seriously ill in order to get some "free healthcare, hurr hurr!" ??

/rhetorical, completely obviously.

**d-usa**

whembly wrote:
Heh... he seems dejected:

.@VP Biden: "It is over."#ElectoralCollege pic.twitter.com/36AdKAS72Z

— CSPAN (@cspan) January 6, 2017

Congress has certified the EV for President-elect Drumpf.

From the whole story, he seems more annoyed at House Democrats for making challenges without meeting the requirements of actually making them. The "it's over" was a reply to these challenges that he kept on shooting down.

**whembly**

d-usa wrote:
whembly wrote:
Heh... he seems dejected:

.@VP Biden: "It is over."#ElectoralCollege pic.twitter.com/36AdKAS72Z

— CSPAN (@cspan) January 6, 2017

Congress has certified the EV for President-elect Drumpf.

From the whole story, he seems more annoyed at House Democrats for making challenges without meeting the requirements of actually making them. The "it's over" was a reply to these challenges that he kept on shooting down.

Aye... there needs to be a Senator to be there to voice objections. Not sure what that 'objection' means with respect to slowing down/stopping the EV certification... (a filibuster like?).

**d-usa**

I think the requirements are "written down, signed by house member, signed by senator" before it was considered. I think the first house democrat made his complaint, Biden reminded him of the requirements to file the complaint and asked him if he has a senators signature, and then struck down the complaint because it didn't meet. When the second guy spoke to make a complaint he didn't even let him finish before asking him if he had a signature of a senator. It felt like the "it's over" was more of a "shut up and sit down" to the house democrats than a dejected acknowledgement of defeat IMO.

I was trying to remember what actually happens if you have a challenge that meets the requirements, but I'm not sure. I was thinking that we had a challenge in 2008, but I'm probably mistaken. I think it goes to a committee and is sorted out right then and there though, no long delay. Although the certification is far enough away from the swearing in that it wouldn't disturb things too much I think.

**NinthMusketeer**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
sebster wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The richest nation on the world seeing some of its citizens with the begging bowl, and a few miles away, the Pentagon, CIA HQ and all the billions of dollars wasted on people and organisations who couldn't find their rears without a 3 man search party...

You're right that US healthcare is absurd, but it isn't for a lack of money. And not just rich people money, there's more government money in US healthcare than in most public systems around the world (more thany public system in the world if you account for the cost of exempting employee healthcare schemes). The issue is about as far as possible as you can get from money. The issue is with the extraordinary waste within the system, with overpayments and general accounting chaos, and with denied or delayed access.

Your CIA thing is getting weird, by the way.

My CIA thing is not getting weird.

Having recently read some books about them, I'm still shocked at the level of incompetence within the agency that has existed since day 1

Every president has hated them, they themselves admit that they're not as good as they could be, and so on...

In any other walk of life, job, business, they would have been run out of town, sacked, liquidated, made bankrupt, dissolved, jailed, exiled to Mars, what ever the hell you want to call it.

In any other walk of life, failure on such a gargantuan scale is rewarded with nothing but defeat and despair.

And yet, these people are rewarded for their failure to the tune of billions of dollars every year...

I don't get it.

America, I have failed at a lot of things in life - throw some dollars my way

Banks.

**WrentheFaceless**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
sebster wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The richest nation on the world seeing some of its citizens with the begging bowl, and a few miles away, the Pentagon, CIA HQ and all the billions of dollars wasted on people and organisations who couldn't find their rears without a 3 man search party...

You're right that US healthcare is absurd, but it isn't for a lack of money. And not just rich people money, there's more government money in US healthcare than in most public systems around the world (more thany public system in the world if you account for the cost of exempting employee healthcare schemes). The issue is about as far as possible as you can get from money. The issue is with the extraordinary waste within the system, with overpayments and general accounting chaos, and with denied or delayed access.

Your CIA thing is getting weird, by the way.

My CIA thing is not getting weird.

Having recently read some books about them, I'm still shocked at the level of incompetence within the agency that has existed since day 1

Every president has hated them, they themselves admit that they're not as good as they could be, and so on...

In any other walk of life, job, business, they would have been run out of town, sacked, liquidated, made bankrupt, dissolved, jailed, exiled to Mars, what ever the hell you want to call it.

In any other walk of life, failure on such a gargantuan scale is rewarded with nothing but defeat and despair.

And yet, these people are rewarded for their failure to the tune of billions of dollars every year...

I don't get it.

America, I have failed at a lot of things in life - throw some dollars my way

Perhaps this will interest you:

Spoiler:

**Co'tor Shas**

So reports are coming in that, after going on about Benghazi for four years, the Republicans in congress are slashing embassy security funding. Because it was always about the security of our diplomatic staff.

**whembly**

Ooooooooooooooooo:
US intel releases declassified report on Russian hacking.

Still reading... no real specifics other than the ICs believe that Russia preferred Trump and believed Clinton would win... thus, worked via propaganda tactics to undermine a future Clinton Presidency.

If Drumpf takes this to heart, that he didn't win "cleaningly" on his own "merits" based on the ICs' assessment, he may stop humping Putie-poo's legs.

Or, start WW3.

**LordofHats**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Just Tony wrote:
Historically in the US, though, if there is a welfare program that allows the poor to have access to a free service, then a majority of people will use it instead of being bothered to get the same thing on their dime.

The issue I have with "free" entitlements as such is that it doesn't motivate someone to better themselves, it motivates them to stick their hand out further. Even more so if they don't have to contribute themselves.

It's not free.

It's free at the point of use. Everyone pays in, and everyone can take out as and when it becomes necessary. Here's the four things that nearly killed me, all sorted by the NHS.... mum had pre-eclampsia. So I was induced. Shortly after birth, a birth defect was discovered. In short, my stomach had no plug hole. Fast forward 14 years, and my arm goes through a window. Blood everywhere. Stitched up, booked in for physio. I still lack some feeling in my left hand, but at least I'm not dead. Two years later! Appendix ruptures during an exam - mmmm. Peritonitis. All very much life threatening issues - none of them self or lifestyle inflicted. If it hadn't been for the NHS, I'd either be dead already, or Mum and Dad would have a ridiculous mountain of debt.

How can you expect one to better one's self when one has a debilitating, but easily treated condition, but one that prevents the obtaining of a job, or being able to afford the necessary medical care to rectify? Do you want a healthy, well cared for workforce with little excuse to slack off due to ill health?

II genuinely don't mean to sound rude, but people need a better understanding of how an underwriter comes to a premium. The biggest thing! It's not just your lifestyle. If you're a fitness fanatic, and seriously take care of yourself, that matters naught if you have relatives who have bum tickets from a lifetime of say, over-eating. That's taken into account. Your zip-code is taken into account. The ever rising cost of pills, treatments and that is taken into account - because its their profit and not your well being that comes first.

I work in insurance these days (well, kind of. Can't say what my job is because we're asked no to do so, but I do have an Inquisitorial Mandate. Which is cool!), and I see lots of issues where an Insurer has dodged a claim they had no right dodging. In most cases, I'll help ensure things are put right. But in very sad cases, the policyholder passes away before things are sorted out. Sometimes from the very condition they were claiming for.

To expand on this;

A guild leader I know in Elder Scrolls Online recently had to pay $5000 for surgery for his wife. She had a blood clot in her brain that was causing frequent seizures but was otherwise non-life threatening. That is unless the blood clot burst (which is called an Aneurysm which when they pop commonly cause strokes which are incredibly life threatening and even if they don't kill you tend to make your quality of life absolute crap). In the US however an Aneurysm waiting to happen is not generally qualified as life threatening (which is absolutely bonkers) so health insurance generally won't pay for it and fixing it before it becomes life threatening is commonly classified as elective surgery. To add a real kicker to this stupidity fixing an Aneurysm before it happens is massively cheaper than dealing with what comes after (but doesn't profit hospitals as much). The guys wife is pregnant, so there's just more cream on the pie.

He pays for the surgery out of pocket and with a payday loan. His wife has to stop working. He got laid off one month later from his job when a service station closed down. He was unable to pay rent. He's 22 years old, with a wife who is still on bed rest and pregnant, and he's being evicted today because fixing death waiting to happen is qualified in this country as "elective" surgery.

Healthcare in this country is fething broken.

**d-usa**

whembly wrote:
Ooooooooooooooooo:
US intel releases declassified report on Russian hacking.

Still reading... no real specifics other than the ICs believe that Russia preferred Trump and believed Clinton would win... thus, worked via propaganda tactics to undermine a future Clinton Presidency.

If Drumpf takes this to heart, that he didn't win "cleaningly" on his own "merits" based on the ICs' assessment, he may stop humping Putie-poo's legs.

Or, start WW3.

He already takes these allegations to heart, IMO, that's why he is so opposed to them and fights them at every point. Not because of any love he might have for Putin, but because his ego can't handle the possibility that his win wasn't 100% his own.

**whembly**

d-usa wrote:
whembly wrote:
Ooooooooooooooooo:
US intel releases declassified report on Russian hacking.

Still reading... no real specifics other than the ICs believe that Russia preferred Trump and believed Clinton would win... thus, worked via propaganda tactics to undermine a future Clinton Presidency.

If Drumpf takes this to heart, that he didn't win "cleaningly" on his own "merits" based on the ICs' assessment, he may stop humping Putie-poo's legs.

Or, start WW3.

He already takes these allegations to heart, IMO, that's why he is so opposed to them and fights them at every point. Not because of any love he might have for Putin, but because his ego can't handle the possibility that his win wasn't 100% his own.

Well...to be fair... it wasn't 100% on his own.

His opponent was HRC.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

LordofHats wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Just Tony wrote:
Historically in the US, though, if there is a welfare program that allows the poor to have access to a free service, then a majority of people will use it instead of being bothered to get the same thing on their dime.

The issue I have with "free" entitlements as such is that it doesn't motivate someone to better themselves, it motivates them to stick their hand out further. Even more so if they don't have to contribute themselves.

It's not free.

It's free at the point of use. Everyone pays in, and everyone can take out as and when it becomes necessary. Here's the four things that nearly killed me, all sorted by the NHS.... mum had pre-eclampsia. So I was induced. Shortly after birth, a birth defect was discovered. In short, my stomach had no plug hole. Fast forward 14 years, and my arm goes through a window. Blood everywhere. Stitched up, booked in for physio. I still lack some feeling in my left hand, but at least I'm not dead. Two years later! Appendix ruptures during an exam - mmmm. Peritonitis. All very much life threatening issues - none of them self or lifestyle inflicted. If it hadn't been for the NHS, I'd either be dead already, or Mum and Dad would have a ridiculous mountain of debt.

How can you expect one to better one's self when one has a debilitating, but easily treated condition, but one that prevents the obtaining of a job, or being able to afford the necessary medical care to rectify? Do you want a healthy, well cared for workforce with little excuse to slack off due to ill health?

II genuinely don't mean to sound rude, but people need a better understanding of how an underwriter comes to a premium. The biggest thing! It's not just your lifestyle. If you're a fitness fanatic, and seriously take care of yourself, that matters naught if you have relatives who have bum tickets from a lifetime of say, over-eating. That's taken into account. Your zip-code is taken into account. The ever rising cost of pills, treatments and that is taken into account - because its their profit and not your well being that comes first.

I work in insurance these days (well, kind of. Can't say what my job is because we're asked no to do so, but I do have an Inquisitorial Mandate. Which is cool!), and I see lots of issues where an Insurer has dodged a claim they had no right dodging. In most cases, I'll help ensure things are put right. But in very sad cases, the policyholder passes away before things are sorted out. Sometimes from the very condition they were claiming for.

To expand on this;

A guild leader I know in Elder Scrolls Online recently had to pay $5000 for surgery for his wife. She had a blood clot in her brain that was causing frequent seizures but was otherwise non-life threatening. That is unless the blood clot burst (which is called an Aneurysm which when they pop commonly cause strokes which are incredibly life threatening and even if they don't kill you tend to make your quality of life absolute crap). In the US however an Aneurysm waiting to happen is not generally qualified as life threatening (which is absolutely bonkers) so health insurance generally won't pay for it and fixing it before it becomes life threatening is commonly classified as elective surgery. To add a real kicker to this stupidity fixing an Aneurysm before it happens is massively cheaper than dealing with what comes after (but doesn't profit hospitals as much). The guys wife is pregnant, so there's just more cream on the pie.

He pays for the surgery out of pocket and with a payday loan. His wife has to stop working. He got laid off one month later from his job when a service station closed down. He was unable to pay rent. He's 22 years old, with a wife who is still on bed rest and pregnant, and he's being evicted today because fixing death waiting to happen is qualified in this country as "elective" surgery.

Healthcare in this country is fething broken.

Okay... that's mindboggling bonkers.

I just checked... in Missouri, that's not an "elective" surgery. We even have specialty blood management clinics in the major cities just to treat all that.

So, that's gotta be a state/regional/specific plan thing.

**Peregrine**

Just Tony wrote:
Historically in the US, though, if there is a welfare program that allows the poor to have access to a free service, then a majority of people will use it instead of being bothered to get the same thing on their dime.

The issue I have with "free" entitlements as such is that it doesn't motivate someone to better themselves, it motivates them to stick their hand out further. Even more so if they don't have to contribute themselves.

So what you're saying is that rich people are all selfish

s because they don't buy their own personal fire department and just leech off of the free service provided by the government? Or does this concern over entitled people only apply to things that you personally don't think should be funded by taxes?

**Prestor Jon**

sebster wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The richest nation on the world seeing some of its citizens with the begging bowl, and a few miles away, the Pentagon, CIA HQ and all the billions of dollars wasted on people and organisations who couldn't find their rears without a 3 man search party...

You're right that US healthcare is absurd, but it isn't for a lack of money. And not just rich people money, there's more government money in US healthcare than in most public systems around the world (more thany public system in the world if you account for the cost of exempting employee healthcare schemes). The issue is about as far as possible as you can get from money. The issue is with the extraordinary waste within the system, with overpayments and general accounting chaos, and with denied or delayed access.

Your CIA thing is getting weird, by the way.

The issue with a lack of modern hospitals located in sparsely populated rural areas is more about basic economics that's the same in every country than all of the inherent flaws in the healthcare system. People in rural counties in VA and any other state are underserved because nobody is going to build a hospital or dentists office or other healthcare provider in a sparsely populated rural area where most people have a low income, usually in the form of a fixed income from the govt. Nobody is going to spend the tens of millions of dollars to construct and staff a modern hospital in the middle of nowhere and operate it at a loss to provide services to a small rural population, that doesn't happen anywhere. There's huge swathes of Canada that are sparsely populated rural areas where people are far removed from modern hospitals and healthcare and Canada is a first world country with money an a national socialized healthcare system. Do I Not Like That is comparing apples and oranges as the various pros and cons of socialized vs private healthcare systems won't change the fact that rural populations are underserved.

**whembly**

whembly wrote:
d-usa wrote:
whembly wrote:
Ooooooooooooooooo:
US intel releases declassified report on Russian hacking.

Still reading... no real specifics other than the ICs believe that Russia preferred Trump and believed Clinton would win... thus, worked via propaganda tactics to undermine a future Clinton Presidency.

If Drumpf takes this to heart, that he didn't win "cleaningly" on his own "merits" based on the ICs' assessment, he may stop humping Putie-poo's legs.

Or, start WW3.

He already takes these allegations to heart, IMO, that's why he is so opposed to them and fights them at every point. Not because of any love he might have for Putin, but because his ego can't handle the possibility that his win wasn't 100% his own.

Well...to be fair... it wasn't 100% on his own.

His opponent was HRC.

Continuing on about this intel report...

There's a lot of noise from the IC/NatSec crowd that this declassified report is underwhelming, as it's just a list of bullet point assertions without any of the supporting evidence.

I guess the thing they want is the actual classified report made public that supports those assertions. Goes back to my previous stance a few pages ago... if you're going to burn intel sources/methods, doing so that indisputably proves a foreign actor (ie, Russia) did indeed attempt to incur election chaos... that's the time to do it.

Otherwise, it's still a he said/she said proposition and many people has a heaping amount of skepticism of anything the intel agencies says/does (i.e., the whole WMD thing prior to Iraq war?) or people will be conviently and adamantly biased.

**Ahtman**

Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman seemed ok out in rural areas.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:
There's a lot of noise from the IC/NatSec crowd that this declassified report is underwhelming

The people who don't want to believe that a foreign power intervened in an election won't believe any evidence given. I also have my doubts that somehow you are the one with his finger on the pulse of the Intelligence Community.

**Prestor Jon**

Ahtman wrote:
Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman seemed ok out in rural areas.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:
There's a lot of noise from the IC/NatSec crowd that this declassified report is underwhelming

The people who don't want to believe that a foreign power intervened in an election won't believe any evidence given. I also have my doubts that somehow you are the one with his finger on the pulse of the Intelligence Community.

I don't think the public will ever see indisputable evidence of Russsian involvement in the hacking and spread of disinformation during the 2016 election. However, it's pretty easy to connect the dots and believe that Putin, who complained loudly and vociferously of US involvement in Ukraine politics while Hillary Clinton was SecState (confirmed by Wikileaks) would use assets at his disposable to try to influence our election to the detriment of Hillary Clinton. Even if Putin/Russia wasn't involved Putin will want to take the credit for it anyway.

**whembly**

Ahtman wrote:
Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman seemed ok out in rural areas.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:
There's a lot of noise from the IC/NatSec crowd that this declassified report is underwhelming

The people who don't want to believe that a foreign power intervened in an election won't believe any evidence given. I also have my doubts that somehow you are the one with his finger on the pulse of the Intelligence Community.

Google is your friend... former IC/Natsec folks are all over this.

John Schlinder is my fav... he equally despises both Trump and Clinton... who comes off as an extreme IC honk.

There's a huge debate among themselves whether or not it's worth burning the assets/sources to validate this report's assertions.

**A Town Called Malus**

Prestor Jon wrote:

I don't think the public will ever see indisputable evidence of Russsian involvement in the hacking and spread of disinformation during the 2016 election.

Well, they will at some point when enough time has passed for the dossier to get declassified and some historian puts in a freedom of information request. I imagine many people thought that we'd never see indisputable evidence that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was fabricated/heavily distorted in order to cover up bad intel yet here we all are, knowing that it was

**whembly**

A Town Called Malus wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:

I don't think the public will ever see indisputable evidence of Russsian involvement in the hacking and spread of disinformation during the 2016 election.

Well, they will at some point when enough time has passed for the dossier to get declassified and some historian puts in a freedom of information request.

Sure... maybe when my grandkids are old enough to retire...

**Sarouan**

whembly wrote:

Google is your friend... former IC/Natsec folks are all over this.

John Schlinder is my fav... he equally despises both Trump and Clinton... who comes off as an extreme IC honk.

There's a huge debate among themselves whether or not it's worth burning the assets/sources to validate this report's assertions.

Guess you already stopped reading the actual report and rather focus on what people said on the Internet.

I almost had a hope. Almost.

It won't matter much for the result, anyway.

I really wonder how the R team will manage President Trump's twitter "lil storms". Hopefully, they will manage to make him understand that's not a good idea to keep using it while being at the White House.

Let's watch what happens next.

**BigWaaagh**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
So reports are coming in that, after going on about Benghazi for four years, the Republicans in congress are slashing embassy security funding. Because it was always about the security of our diplomatic staff.

My shocked face... Anybody who thought that enormous waste of time/waste of money witch hunt had any merit is the same kind of person that still thinks Russia wasn't meddling with our electoral process. There is just a degree of willful self-delusion that defies logic.

Meanwhile on that latter issue front: "We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election," the report said. "We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. We have high confidence in these judgments."
The report assessed with "high confidence" that the GRU, Russia's military intelligence agency, had used those intermediaries to release "US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks."

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has said he did not receive emails stolen from the DNC and top Hillary Clinton aide John Podesta from "a state party." Assange did not rule out the possibility that he got the material from a third party.

The report was produced by the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. But what do they know...our exaggerator-in-chief prefers Assange's take on the matter.

**d-usa**

The point was to attack Hillary, so they probably consider it resources well spend.

**BigWaaagh**

d-usa wrote:
The point was to attack Hillary, so they probably consider it resources well spend.

Are you kidding?! This result was the best ROI they'll ever see! They got a politically naïve dupe elected that will provide a quicker avenue to sanction relief than they'd ever see via HRC as POTUS.

**Just Tony**

Peregrine wrote:
Just Tony wrote:
Historically in the US, though, if there is a welfare program that allows the poor to have access to a free service, then a majority of people will use it instead of being bothered to get the same thing on their dime.

The issue I have with "free" entitlements as such is that it doesn't motivate someone to better themselves, it motivates them to stick their hand out further. Even more so if they don't have to contribute themselves.

So what you're saying is that rich people are all selfish s because they don't buy their own personal fire department and just leech off of the free service provided by the government? Or does this concern over entitled people only apply to things that you personally don't think should be funded by taxes?

No, my issue is people not being motivated to better themselves. I could easily milk the system right now with the number of children I have, especially with one of them being special needs. Instead, I pay for insurance through the military and worked to get a better paying job than what I had ($24.28/hr as opposed to the $13/hr) to make sure I take care of my family's needs. In contrast, I know of more than a few people in my area right now (Lafayette, IN) that will NOT look for work as they are getting a better deal sponging off the system. I still pay taxes on that, and I know that there are families that DO need that kind of assistance, but I also know beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are people breaking that system.

And here's a couple questions for you: 1. Have you or anyone you know ever been on unemployment? 2. If so, how long did you or they wait to look for work? For most people with a drive to better themselves or at least be self sufficient, the answer would be "I started looking on day 1." However, there are many people who've been on that system for over a year without anything to show. Honestly, Family Express gas stations pay $10/hr in my area and are always hiring, and there is income adjusted housing. They aren't the only jobs being unfilled. You tell ME the system isn't broken. And you tell me that it wouldn't rile you to be supporting people like that.

**Tannhauser42**

whembly wrote:
d-usa wrote:
whembly wrote:
Ooooooooooooooooo:
US intel releases declassified report on Russian hacking.

Still reading... no real specifics other than the ICs believe that Russia preferred Trump and believed Clinton would win... thus, worked via propaganda tactics to undermine a future Clinton Presidency.

If Drumpf takes this to heart, that he didn't win "cleaningly" on his own "merits" based on the ICs' assessment, he may stop humping Putie-poo's legs.

Or, start WW3.

He already takes these allegations to heart, IMO, that's why he is so opposed to them and fights them at every point. Not because of any love he might have for Putin, but because his ego can't handle the possibility that his win wasn't 100% his own.

Well...to be fair... it wasn't 100% on his own.

His opponent was HRC.

And what about these opponents?

Spoiler:

Got an explanation for that?
Because you can't pin that one on the Democrats.

**whembly**

Sarouan wrote:
whembly wrote:

Google is your friend... former IC/Natsec folks are all over this.

John Schlinder is my fav... he equally despises both Trump and Clinton... who comes off as an extreme IC honk.

There's a huge debate among themselves whether or not it's worth burning the assets/sources to validate this report's assertions.

Guess you already stopped reading the actual report and rather focus on what people said on the Internet.

I almost had a hope. Almost.

It won't matter much for the result, anyway.

I really wonder how the R team will manage President Trump's twitter "lil storms". Hopefully, they will manage to make him understand that's not a good idea to keep using it while being at the White House.

Let's watch what happens next.

Uh... wat.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Donald Trump’s Statement After Intelligence Briefing on Hacking

Translation: Russian did it... but, we sure as feth won't admit it outright.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

BigWaaagh wrote:
d-usa wrote:
The point was to attack Hillary, so they probably consider it resources well spend.

Are you kidding?! This result was the best ROI they'll ever see! They got a politically naïve dupe elected that will provide a quicker avenue to sanction relief than they'd ever see via HRC as POTUS.

So you can show me that they change votes?

Cool... I'll wait.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tannhauser42 wrote:
whembly wrote:
d-usa wrote:
whembly wrote:
Ooooooooooooooooo:
US intel releases declassified report on Russian hacking.

Still reading... no real specifics other than the ICs believe that Russia preferred Trump and believed Clinton would win... thus, worked via propaganda tactics to undermine a future Clinton Presidency.

If Drumpf takes this to heart, that he didn't win "cleaningly" on his own "merits" based on the ICs' assessment, he may stop humping Putie-poo's legs.

Or, start WW3.

He already takes these allegations to heart, IMO, that's why he is so opposed to them and fights them at every point. Not because of any love he might have for Putin, but because his ego can't handle the possibility that his win wasn't 100% his own.

Well...to be fair... it wasn't 100% on his own.

His opponent was HRC.

And what about these opponents?

Spoiler:

Got an explanation for that?
Because you can't pin that one on the Democrats.

Erm... yes I can.

Know why? Those other candidates weren't on the ballot against Clinton.

**Ustrello**

Only a fool would think that the leaking of everything didn't change votes

**d-usa**

Trump hacking and leaking the emails had an impact on the votes. And the "email letter" had an impact on the votes as well.

Was the impact of either/or enough to swing the election to Trump? Who knows, maybe?

But if it did I would still lay the blame fully on Clinton for running a campaign that left the election so close that these things were able to swing it. If you leave the outcome in the hands of outsiders, then you can't bitch if it bites you in the ass.