Me think, why waste time say lot word when few word do trick?

New budget has nearly $1 trillion in Medicare cuts.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...=.667c830ed982

And as always, there is a tweet for that.

I was the first & only potential GOP candidate to state there will be no cuts to Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid. Huckabee copied me.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 7, 2015

It is bizarre. It is a DOA budget (Dems were never going to agree to it). There was no reason to not just (as previous Presidents have done) make it all sugar and no medicine.

You propose the unpopular things your party wants to do when you are actually crafting the laws that will come into existence. Just floating "we want to cut your Medicare" for no real reason seems so strange that I am wondering what the other shoe that is going to drop is.

Possibly a shot at Medicare-for-all? "Try to give it to all and we will gut it."

On other news, Stacy Abrams suggested today on twitter than she is probably running for President. I find it strange that her and Beto, two people who couldn't win their home state elections, are thinking of running for a national office. "Loser" looks good on the resume?

Stacy Abrams scored the highest percentage this century as a democrat in statewide GA election, and in a year with no presidential election with high turnout. As a black female in GA. Not saying she is a viable candidate on the national level, but to ignore what she actually did is a bit shortsighted (plus, I believe she was the first black female candidate ever for a gubernatorial election).

I'll try to help you out with your seemingly honest second question. Think of a dollar as either spent or saved. If it is spent on something produced in the US, it remains here and is still either spent (again) or saved. If it is spent on something outside of the US it doesn't count toward US savings.

Same things for non-US money spent on US goods. That becomes a dollar in the US that is either spent or ultimately saved.

So under Krugman's paragraph, if we have more spending than saving, that definitionally is the same thing as the trade deficit.

Not sure what to tell you on your first point.

Mulvaney and Pence are true believers and Trump is too damned lazy to participate.

I am not arguing she did nothing. Beto made a Texas senate seat competitive, which was impressive as well. But, almost winning doesn't qualify you for President, IMHO.

But marginally winning in a sure-thing state would ? :confused: How is it even relevant what happened in 1 state ? And if anything the phrase should be “qualify you for becoming president“ at best.

How many more candidates for president do we need? I'm fine with nearly any of the ones running

I'm not sure what you mean by qualify. Both of them are clearly smart enough to be President. It would be dumb to hold it against them that they came from red states. Warren won her first election by 6 points in a heavily blue state. Abrams and Beto had far more impressive performances in their runs.

Pilotman: I hear planes are too complex to fly now. Thoughts?

Out of all the candidates that have declared so far, the only one that's mildly resonated with me is Pete Buttigieg.

He only has Mayor on his resume, but there's something about the guy that makes me feel like when I first heard Obama speak at the 2004 Democratic convention. I actually remember that day well as I was hauling big square hay bales and when that guy with the weird name came on the radio of my tractor something hit me.... I was becoming a Democrat.

Buttigieg at least gives me a reminder of that vibe.

Lmao, you saw my fb post didn't you?

We need an All Things Flight thread. :)

I don't know. I think it goes something like this.


Democrat thinking: "Look how close they lost a state election. Imagine how close they can lose a national election."

I would imagine the thinking is:

This person almost took a red state that has not seen a close election in 25 years, imagine the appeal they may have in a swing state.

I think there's a difference between asking whether someone can win and whether someone would be a good president. I realize most of the country is only going to worry about number one because number two doesn't matter so long as the map is the right color, but maybe I hold out fancy hopes.

Manafort currently in front of the judge in his second sentencing. Can get a max of 10 years here

Ten more years! Ten more years!

about to be handed down, judge does not sound like she will be lenient

Judge is pretty much slamming every point of Manafort's defense. Even his family, who wrote letters to her (manafort did not) asking for leninecy did not get spared. Says that they have the means to sustain their family while he's in jail.

He got 7 years, with the first 30 months running concurrent with the Virginia sentence.

BREAKING: Paul Manafort has been sentenced to:
- Count 1: 60 months, with 30 months concurrent with EDVA sentence
- Count 2: 13 months, to run consecutive to count 1 and the EDVA sentence

— Zoe Tillman (@ZoeTillman) March 13, 2019

BREAKING: Paul Manafort has been sentenced to: - Count 1: 60 months, with 30 months concurrent with EDVA sentence - Count 2: 13 months, to run consecutive to count 1 and the EDVA sentence


So not the max 10 years after slamming all his attorney's points. Some of this served concurrent with his other trial, then about a year more, But at lease he's in prison for a while.

People are going crazy she didn't go for the maximum after what she said to him and his lawyers, but she did add time that he will be in jail. He'll be in his 70's when he gets out and hopefully no one will want to touch him with a 10 foot pole after what came out in these trials. So justice was served-if you aren't happy with the results push your congresman/women to change sentencing guidelines for white collar crime.



And there's still a chance for unpardonable state crimes from NY too,

About that.

I tried to tell u @Giants fans Dave was your problem but u laughed and called me bitter! Well welcome to the salt wagon jump on and let’s ride together lol

— DeAngelo Williams (@DeAngeloRB) March 13, 2019

BREAKING: Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance unseals 15 fraud and conspiracy charges against Paul Manafort.

Indictment here: https://t.co/WXMBZgG793

Background here at @CourthouseNews: https://t.co/V82PfWQ5IH pic.twitter.com/H3AyLl3ll3

— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) March 13, 2019

Well that was quick :)

Can't edit my post for some reason. The giants tweet is a copy/paste holdover from the NFL thread lol

Leave it. Much more funny to pretend that DeAngelo Williams is trolling Manafort on Twitter.

+1

We literally just elected a failed businessman who's claim to fame was being a reality TV host. I don't think the requirements for President are what they used to be.

In a Presidential election, if a Democrat only lost Texas by 2.6 points or Georgia by 1.4 points, they'd win the electoral college in a landslide.

And not surprisingly, Beto O'Rourke announces he will be running for President.

House passed a non-binding resolution that the Mueller report must be released publically 420-0


House votes 420-0 to demand Robert Mueller's report be public

I'm so old I remember when a president suggesting that the police, military and a biker gang might have to violently attack the political opposition would have been a big problem.

Senate voted 59-41 to block emergency declaration-Trump is sure to veto.

It is completely lost on me how the media is calling this an embarrassing rebuke of Trump. There's no question in my mind that he LOVES getting to show off his power by vetoing something.

I agree he does love it. It won't phase him one bit. I'd say it's more of an embarrassment for Mitch McConnell.

McConnell has backed himself into a corner with no escape. He had to end the shutdown by promising to rally senate around his emergency declaration, but he doesn't want trump to use those Emergency Powers. He's always been able to keep Senate Republicans on the same page, but now he's backing something he doesn't believe in and this Republican Senate is probably more split than we've seen them under McConnell.

Then again, I believe McConnell is arguably the most destructive national politician in 40 years.

Yeah, he'll veto it and then Republicans will vote on the Lee bill to take the power away from future Preisdents. And Democrats will be spineless and go along with it.

How hilarious would it have been if he tweeted BETO instead of VETO!? I mean they are just a letter apart.

I don't think there's anything spineless about it. Unlimited Emergency Power is bad for the country. "We want our turn to shit on the Constitution too" shouldn't be the rally cry for Dems.

He just tweeted "VETO!" which I like to think is like Michael Scott shouting "I DECLARE BANKRUPTCY!"

This is probably overthinking it, but I do wonder about the wisdom of Trump putting Senate GOPers in a position to vote against him.

It's almost like getting a shot. You are afraid of it because you think it will hurt, so you avoid it at all costs. Then you get a shot. And it does not hurt that bad, and you are not as afraid next time.

I wonder if the next time Senate GOPers are in a position to vote against Trump on a contentious issue, they will be quite as afraid of the needle.

Meh, if Republican Senators aren't afraid of the needle, then Trump will just threaten to have biker gangs beat the shit out of them the way he just threatened to do that to Democrats.

The Trump tweet (the army supports me, so...) and the White House tweet (the WaPo are liars) are both totally mortifying things to come from our government. And will flow right under the bridge like everything else.

With the Veto, Trump is on the verge of literally spunking money up the Wall

I predict Chelsea will run one day.

Kudos to her for putting up with that crap. I wouldn't have had that patience and would have certainly pushed back.

Chelsea Clinton is berated by Muslim students who blame her for New Zealand mosques attack | Daily Mail Online

Blech. I hope not. Nothing against her personally so much (and certainly not negatively judging her reaction in this instance), as I just want the Dems to have a serious culture scrub. For once the Dems are in a position of power and also in relative solidarity, while the GOP is pretty fractured to a degree we haven't seen for 40 years.

There are plenty of current Dem front runners that I would totally support in a vacuum, but the vast majority have also spent the last couple of decades deeply entrenched in a political culture based on immediately compromising away the easiest of wins. Even if those folks have great, progressive ideas and present super strong platforms I'm not convinced that anyone even slightly connected to the old guard understands how to operate from a position of power, and I dread watching them trot out that same tired playbook for this new era, frittering away whatever advantages and goodwill they've collected recently.

Don't trust Daily Mail website, Microsoft browser warns users | Media | The Guardian