Donald Trump

[Pcdunn]

To make things more difficult...

Trump is probably convinced that consumers will stop buying products coming from Mexico because of the increased price. It won't be the case. At best, a short term reaction.

And products from Mexico are apparently not limited to things grown or made there, like avocados, tequila, and T-shirts, but also big-ticket items like appliances and autos, many of which are produced in Mexican factories contracted to American and international owners. Plus, in many cases, only portions of a car or electronic device are made in Mexico, while other parts may be made around the globe.

So how far do we take it? Does "made in America with imported materials" suffice to keep the American consumer tariff-free, or do we need to do more, such as stop visiting Walmart and Target altogether?

[Mayerling]

Have you heard that the State of California wants to withdraw from the United States and become independent?

http://www.ibtimes.com/will-california-leave-us-calexit-supporters-begin-secession-proceedings-plan-open-2449722

I was born and raised in California, and while I can see their reasons for not wanting to have to follow President Trump's orders, I also think that Northern California is more conservative than Southern Cal; this could lead to a very messy divide in their new "independent country"!

I think we once fought a small war to prevent several states from leaving the Union. I won't compare this idiot with our 16th President, but I'm sure he'll do the same. Interestingly, the NRA is headquartered in California. If it did succeed in seceding, would they outlaw it?

By the way, California was a Republic ("The Bear Flag" Republic) for about two months in 1848. So it does have a history of sorts as an independent nation (like Texas and Hawaii, and (briefly) Rhode Island and Vermont).

Jeff

[Hercule Poirot]

So it looks as though the Wall may be paid for via an import tax on Mexican goods:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38766662
However, that means, contrary to Trump's numerous promises, ultimately it is the American taxpayer who will pay for it via higher prices on imported goods. I mean, an import tax is basically equivalent to a sales tax, which is one of many reasons why protectionism doesn't work.

Trump is probably convinced that consumers will stop buying products coming from Mexico because of the increased price. It won't be the case. At best, a short term reaction.

[Pcdunn]

Have you heard that the State of California wants to withdraw from the United States and become independent?

http://www.ibtimes.com/will-california-leave-us-calexit-supporters-begin-secession-proceedings-plan-open-2449722

I was born and raised in California, and while I can see their reasons for not wanting to have to follow President Trump's orders, I also think that Northern California is more conservative than Southern Cal; this could lead to a very messy divide in their new "independent country"!

[John G]

So it looks as though the Wall may be paid for via an import tax on Mexican goods:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38766662
However, that means, contrary to Trump's numerous promises, ultimately it is the American taxpayer who will pay for it via higher prices on imported goods. I mean, an import tax is basically equivalent to a sales tax, which is one of many reasons why protectionism doesn't work.

[Patrick S]

Actually the point to me is that such walls prove totally inadequate. We all marvel at the "Great Wall of China" to this day, or the mechanized marvels of the old "Maginot Line" still in France, but the Great Wall failed to keep outsiders (particularly the Mongols) out of China, and we all know how effective the "Maginot" (with it's underground rail system) was in June 1940 against Gudarian's tanks flanking it. I am certain this one will fail too.

The only "funnier one to contemplate is the scheme in Israel for a security perimeter wall around the whole country. Do you know how long it took the Jews to break down the ghetto system in Europe, with the walled off areas allowed the Jews for their residence? About six or seven hundred years. And here they are turning the world's only Jewish country into the biggest walled ghetto in history. When I heard that I just couldn't believe they were that stupid.

Jeff

I completely agree that the wall will not be as effective as many - Trump included - think that it may be. However, I would say that since he successfully campaigned on building the wall, he's bound by that promise. Thus, he should build it.

I don't really care about the wall. Build it. Don't build it. The cost - to me - is inconsequential. As a taxpayer (and former defense contractor who was exposed to a mere fraction of it) I've given up fretting over how much money the government wastes. That's what the United States government does. I will say that I loved one thing that came out Trump's mouth yesterday. He said, "We don't need new immigration laws. We just need to enforce the laws we have." Good enough for me. Enforce the law. If you don't like the law, change the law. Or.....build a wall. I guess.

[Mayerling]

Last time I checked the numbers it was around 10 million, after projections by the administration hovered above 30 million, but hey, what's 20 million, right?. But, you understand that's not even close to the point, right? The point is the statement "If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance", and the fact that the press - like you - focus on "positives" (i.e. 10 million insured) while ignoring (or telling you why you shouldn't care about ) the "negatives" rather than presenting both and allowing their consumer to decide.

So, you're talking about oranges. I'm talking about apples. Two different things. Remember the Iraq War? I'm SURE you do. "Bush lied, Kids died!", "No Blood for Oil!". Really good times, right? I'm wondering if when people discussed the fact that 100,000 or so Iraqi civilians died in the war you asked, "But how many TERRORISTS died?"

Actually the point to me is that such walls prove totally inadequate. We all marvel at the "Great Wall of China" to this day, or the mechanized marvels of the old "Maginot Line" still in France, but the Great Wall failed to keep outsiders (particularly the Mongols) out of China, and we all know how effective the "Maginot" (with it's underground rail system) was in June 1940 against Gudarian's tanks flanking it. I am certain this one will fail too.

The only "funnier one to contemplate is the scheme in Israel for a security perimeter wall around the whole country. Do you know how long it took the Jews to break down the ghetto system in Europe, with the walled off areas allowed the Jews for their residence? About six or seven hundred years. And here they are turning the world's only Jewish country into the biggest walled ghetto in history. When I heard that I just couldn't believe they were that stupid.

Jeff

[Batman]

What's stopping the Mexican government from knocking the crap out of it on the other side? Automated gun towers?

[Patrick S]

How many people gained coverage through the ACA?

Last time I checked the numbers it was around 10 million, after projections by the administration hovered above 30 million, but hey, what's 20 million, right?. But, you understand that's not even close to the point, right? The point is the statement "If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance", and the fact that the press - like you - focus on "positives" (i.e. 10 million insured) while ignoring (or telling you why you shouldn't care about ) the "negatives" rather than presenting both and allowing their consumer to decide.

So, you're talking about oranges. I'm talking about apples. Two different things. Remember the Iraq War? I'm SURE you do. "Bush lied, Kids died!", "No Blood for Oil!". Really good times, right? I'm wondering if when people discussed the fact that 100,000 or so Iraqi civilians died in the war you asked, "But how many TERRORISTS died?"

[Svensson]

How many people gained coverage through the ACA?

[Patrick S]

So now Trump tells ABC News that American taxpayers will pay for the wall initially.

Like we didn't know that already!!!

The problem is, Trump has not figured out yet how to make Mexico pay for it.
Meanwhile, China moves into south America making trade deals worth billions.

What did someone say about 'a great businessman'?

So. I happened to see a clip of that interview. A few campaign promises were touched upon. Are you really going to build a wall? The answer was yes. Trump campaigned that he was going to make this is top priority of his administration. He said he's REALLY going to build it, even though most in the media though he was kidding, I guess. Trump voters are likely to see this as - at least to this point - a campaign promise (being) met. Next question. So, when are you going to start building the wall? It's being planned now and we'll begin construction in a matter of months. I'd say those who voted for him liked hearing that. They'll probably give him another gold star.

That leaves the questions of cost. Who's paying for it? His answer was the U.S. government/taxpayer (you know the same people who paid nearly 3 trillion in entitlements in 2016, so we're used to it) initially, but that the money would ultimately be recouped from Mexico.

So, you're quick to jump on this travesty of Trumpian proportions. Will you be so quick to celebrate his success if he builds the wall on the taxpayer dime, then recoups those funds plus interest from Mexico? Oh, and did you rush out here and post outrage when you found out that 2.6 million people lost their coverage after the ACA marketplaces opened, after Obama said, "If you like your healthcare you can keep it." I just want to make sure your spreading your outrage over broken political promises around in equal measure.

[Wickerman]

So now Trump tells ABC News that American taxpayers will pay for the wall initially.

Like we didn't know that already!!!

The problem is, Trump has not figured out yet how to make Mexico pay for it.
Meanwhile, China moves into south America making trade deals worth billions.

What did someone say about 'a great businessman'?

[ChrisGeorge]

I read a great story once; not sure whether it's true, but I hope it is.

As German troops marched into Vienna at the beginning of the Anschluß, a young private was ordered to destroy a bust of Mendelssohn; part of a display of great composers in the foyer of the Musikverein. Telling his officer that he didn't know what Mendelssohn looked like, he was told "Of course, Mendelssohn will be the one with the biggest nose". The private saluted, turned and headed for the Musikverein, where he duly smashed up a statue of Richard Wagner.

Ha ha. Great story. Of course a number of the Nazis had Jewish blood and took measures to hide that fact.

[Sam Flynn]

A reporter mistakenly tweeted out that the bust of Martin Luther King had been removed from the Oval Office but he was wrong and apologized for his mistake.

I read a great story once; not sure whether it's true, but I hope it is.

As German troops marched into Vienna at the beginning of the Anschluß, a young private was ordered to destroy a bust of Mendelssohn; part of a display of great composers in the foyer of the Musikverein. Telling his officer that he didn't know what Mendelssohn looked like, he was told "Of course, Mendelssohn will be the one with the biggest nose". The private saluted, turned and headed for the Musikverein, where he duly smashed up a statue of Richard Wagner.

[Patrick S]

Well. Let's be clear. And let's be fair. "Alternative facts" is a nonsensical term. Conway's boss is nuts and she's is very likely in over her head. It's true that Trump is a boorish buffoon, a narcissist, a liar, a con man, and - as best those of us who don't know him personally can tell - a horrible guy.

What's also true is that Chuck Todd, like nearly all American journalists, is a dyed-in-the-wool liberal who has never gone after an Obama toady in the way he went after Conway even when the topic was Benghazi, Syria, the abject failure of "Obamacare", and the commutation of traitor's and terrorist's prison terms rather than the size of inauguration day crowds. It's also a particularly sad fact that Trump may succeed in peddling his propaganda to the masses because the press who should exist to stop him has delegitimized itself by peddling their own propaganda on behalf of democrats for the past twenty-five years while still maintaining that they are objective, impartial, nonpartisan. Although, it does seems as if over the past eight years they've been unable to do so and maintain a straight face.

In my view the press is responsible for the past two presidents: Obama and Trump. The press simply did not vet Obama. They allowed him to craft a narrative in his two self-serving autobiographies and they didn't challenge it. His life prior to seeking public office was allowed to remain very murky and go uninvestigated. The press was content to take a cursory peek and say, "Ah. Nothing to see here." Thus, America got it's first president with - in my opinion - no love for America. He weakened it's ability to defend itself, he demeaned it's history and values on the world stage, and he greatly deepened divides among it's citizens. The press popularized the terms "post-partisan" and "post-racial" to describe a deeply partisan senator turned president who did as much inflame racial tensions and undo cultural progress on that front than anyone in the past half century. What is that, if not propaganda?

In the end, the press reduced itself to parody and could not longer be taken seriously. Rather than report on Trump, they threw hissy-fits, they called names, they laughed out loud. The electorate was afforded the opportunity to see something extraordinary and instructive: How the press treated Obama and Trump, side-by-side, concurrently. Thus, now we have Trump. Yay, America.