"...someone sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds." Donald Trump...September 2016 presidential debate.
“Maybe it was someone lying on the couch who did it.” V V Putin, December 2016
Sounds like "Talking Points."
Was it "hacking", or was it "John Podesta falling for a simple phishing scheme after the DNC ignored multiple FBI warnings"?
Really, the Russians were just trying to help the Democrats deliver on their promise of transparency!
@dramsey. Phishing is hacking. It is certainly the problem with Dems and indeed other government agencies that they fell for these schemes and we need to tighten up on our cybersecurity. But let's not give Russia a free pass. All is far in love and war but they spied on us and hacked us and we need to treat them as spies.
Trump giving them a free pass can mean one of two things. Either he is the idiot many of us think he is or he has some personal financial reason for supporting Russia and Putin.
If HRC had been elected, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. All of a sudden the Russians are evil monsters when in fact they've been trying to influence our elections for years. Let's talk about our behind the scenes support for Boris Yeltsen as he was taking on Gorbachev, who we wanted to get rid of. And, what about the Chinese, Iranians and the North Koreans? Remember that Sony hack thing a couple years ago! Did the Dems go to General Quarters for those intrusions and others that compromised thousands of SS numbers and other personal information on government systems. Look, do we really want a crew running our country that is so unsophisticated about cyber security they conduct classified government business on unsecured private servers and click on links in Phishing emails?
I don't condone it, but whoever did the hacking did us a public service by exposing the corruption in the DNC as that supposedly neutral group had their thumb on the scale for HRC during the primaries. There was nothing particularly noteworthy in the Podesta emails other than exposing some disarray and sniping in the Dem campaign. Hardly vote changing information.
@steven - "If HRC had been elected, we wouldn't even be having this conversation."
I think Trump and the GOP would have if the table was turned.
I.e., RNC hacked and Trump lost.
Regardless, the Russians shouldn't have done what they did and the DNC shouldn't have done what they did.
@StevenM "Crew running our country...unsophisticated about cyber security"
"I have a son. He's 10 years old. He has computers. He is so good with these computers, it's unbelievable. The security aspect of cyber is very, very tough. And maybe it's hardly doable. " Donald Trump at presidential debate.
"I think that computers have complicated lives very greatly." Donald Trump, December 2016
"All of a sudden the Russians are evil monsters." Steven Maifert
"[Russians] ... are not our friends." "Sanctions are a good initial step." Mitch McConnell
Well there was the Dutch Airliner (298 dead)
Invasion of Crimea
Russian troops without insignia in eastern Ukraine.
It's amazing how many people wanted someone with zero government experience, take the top job.
So I guess that means they would be okay with someone who knows nothing about surgery, perform a heart transplant on them.
Maybe Trump will have good advisors. Oh wait....
Sigh. Is it 2020 yet?
At least our next President will know something about running something. What qualifies a "community organizer" or a career politician to be President any more than being a successful business man.
The Russians are evil monsters, but not because they hacked a couple of email accounts to influence a political campaign. You folks forgot about KAL Flight 007, but maybe none of you are old enough to remember that one.
Yes, cyber security is very, very tough. It's even harder when you're careless or clueless.
"Successful" is loosely applied here. He has bragged he hasnt paid federal taxes (due to losses), several bankruptcies to his name, his daddy gave him a huge head start, won't release his tax returns, tweets with the attitude of a 5 year old who sways opinions in a blink of an eye.
I mean come on.....why are so many people blind to this? If he had ran as a democrat (which he was for several years), you and the rest of the GOP would be screaming like crazy.
Oh well. Can't do much about it now. Americans have made their bed. Let's see where we are in 4 years.
@steven. Obama had some missteps but overall was a great president and understood what was happening in the world. He is of high intellect. Trump may have been highly successful in business even if some of his practices did not completely pass ethical muster. Does not translate into a successful president. Trump seems to be showing limited understanding or perhaps has reasons to go lightly on Russia. When your president elect says computers have complicated our lives it does not inspire me with much confidence. How about nukes? Are they complicated too or is it as easy as pushing a button when someone mocks your twitter statements?
"What qualifies a "community organizer" or a career politician to be President any more than being a successful business man."
Having held some sort of office means something. Changing his stance from one minute to the next is scary too. you can't believe any word he says because it will change at the drop of a hat.
But I digress. More people will "maybe" catch on as time passes.
I also find it humorous that people think that running a business is equal to running a government.
They are and should be treated different. Yes, we need to cut wasteful spending. But government needs to also put the good of the people ahead of making large profits. Government is not a profit center (nor should it be a major loss of course). After all, the Flint water issue was to save money regardless of the health impact. Well...we see where that got us. And this is only the beginning.
And think of it this way, holding some other office is a good trial run to see how a person would do.
To find this out for the first time for the toughest job, seems crazy.
It would also be different if he had military experience leading command. But Trump hasn't. He has never answered to anyone.
"At least our next President will know something about running something. What qualifies a "community organizer" or a career politician to be President any more than being a successful business man."
The key difference is the perspective of "consensus building"vs "top down authority".
A CEO can TELL is people what to do, and Trump gets frustrated when people don't respond to his every whim... "It was UNFAIR" when students protested his election????????????
Trump's whole life has been the opposite of consensus building; confrontational PoV, doing what's best for HIS side of the deal, leaving others in the lurch when it benefited HIM (breached contracts, bankruptcies, etc)
Imagine a top down org chart that represents a typical CEO's view of his power structure. Then imagine the many partially overlapping circles that represent the interests of the diverse groups of people and power in this country. A good politician needs to find as much common ground as possible in those overlapping circles to build consensus. Do you start to see the complete mis-match in Trump's style, perspective and fundamental suitability to the task?
Is it reasonable to assume that not one person in either Trump's campaign nor the Republican National Committee (RNC) had been subject to a "spearphishing" attack? Are they all, every single one of them, absolutely so brilliant and so cautious that not one accidentally gave up a password? I know I'm not writing about known facts, but is that a reasonable assumption?
I believe the answer is "no"...again, opinion. Which means there are RNC and Trump campaign emails somewhere. For what possible reason would such emails be held?
"Phishing is hacking."
Well, not in my book, but I'm an old-school computer guy who was a hacker way back when that meant "counting bytes and clock cycles to fit your program in the insanely small amounts of memory we had to work with back in the day."
I think the news keeps reporting it as "hacking" rather than "password stealing from a dummy who ignored warnings" because it sounds more sinister, and gives the subliminal impression that the Russkies might have tweaked vote counts or something more sinister.
"Trump giving them a free pass can mean one of two things. Either he is the idiot many of us think he is or he has some personal financial reason for supporting Russia and Putin."
You are too generous; I think it's more likely both are true.
@Dramsey. Looks like we are on the same page as regards Trump. Would be imprudent for me to argue with the inventor of Paint2 computer terms. I think you are being semantic but it seems phishing could be a form of computer hacking. As we learn in life it is easier to take advantage of stupid people than smart people but the end result is the same. In other words if phishing works no reason to hack. You can get a dummy to willingly hand over all his money vs. needing to break into a bank to steal a smart man's money.
Soudman_S90D - "Having held some sort of office means something [Really? What?]. Changing his stance from one minute to the next is scary too. you can't believe any word he says [you mean like if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor? Oh wait, that wasn't Trump] because it will change at the drop of a hat." Good point. HRC and O were both against gay marriage before they were for it. Yes, yes, I know... They evolved :)
SUN 2 DRV - Ulysses S. Grant and Dwight D. Eisenhower were both military generals who never held public office before becoming President. In their life before the Presidency, do you think they practiced "consensus building" or "top down authority"? When they moved into the Oval Office, they adapted. Trump impresses me as a pragmatic leader who wants to get things done. We'll see. He's not an ideologue which is a good thing. I suspect he will adapt and use his negotiating skills to build consensus. Give him a chance. There are so many here that have already declared a failure before he even takes the Oath of Office.
steven: But even a military leader is making decisions (and great sacrifices) for the benefit of the entire nation. CEO...not so much... They (appropriately) are driven for their own financial benefit and that of their shareholders... totally different perspective, goals and criteria than a nation's leader... Trump never had to figure out win-win scenarios and has the backgroud of always pushing as hard as he can for what's best for him.
Yes, I do hope he is successful making the country better... unlike the Reps attitude towards Obama 8 years ago, I'm rooting for Trump's success, because at this point we're all in this together.
@steven. Obama and Hillary both evolved positions from what were potentially politically suicidal at the time to what is probably their true opinion as regards gay marriage. Not an ideal position but certainly prevalent politically. Not even close to Trump changing positions 180 degrees every 15 secs. It never ceases to amaze me that every major transgression of Trump is somehow justifies by a minor indiscretion by the Democrats. Every time Trump did something totally unacceptable his supporters used the word email and that apparently justified everything. There is absolutely no moral equivalence to Trump's wrongdoings and that of either Obama or Hillary. It's actually been much better since Hillary left the scene because Trump can no longer justify his actions by yelling email or Bill Clinton's affairs. His actions need to be judged on their own merits or demerits.
I accept that anyone can adapt. George Bush junior who we previously considered the "village idiot" adapted although was still a pretty lousy president. I must say that Bush looks like a genius next to Trump. Of course prior to Bush we had Dan Quayle. Remember that guy? Actually I think Trump seems to bring incompetence to a totally new level but hopefully he proves us wrong.
@steven - " Yes, yes, I know... They evolved."
I don't actually believe that Obama and Clinton personally believe anything any different. But I do think I can have a clear understanding on how they would vote on the said subject. Can you honestly say that about Trump?
@steven - "you can't believe any word he says [you mean like if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor? "
Many insurance plans covered basically nothing prior to Obamacare. So when minimums were not being met on those cheap/practically worthless plans, people lost those plans and doctors.
@Soudman is correct. How did Obamacare make people lose their doctors. It allowed those previously without insurance to get doctors that they previously didn't have
I do remember the US Navy shot down an Iran Airliner, remember that one? So we are as evil as the Russians. Militarism is evil. Check some history and see how many times Russia has been invaded and how many times the US has been invaded.
And remember US spends almost 10x what the Russians spend on the Military.
"So when minimums were not being met on those cheap/practically worthless plans, people lost those plans and doctors."
"@Soudman is correct. How did Obamacare make people lose their doctors."
I'm surprised this is still an issue that's not crystal clear, but I suppose it's not, so let's revisit what Obama said (many, many times):
NO MATTER HOW WE REFORM HEALTH CARE, WE WILL KEEP THIS PROMISE: IF YOU LIKE YOUR DOCTOR, YOU WILL BE ABLE TO KEEP YOUR DOCTOR. PERIOD. IF YOU LIKE YOUR HEALTH CARE PLAN, YOU WILL BE ABLE TO KEEP YOUR HEALTH PLAN. PERIOD. NO ONE WILL TAKE IT AWAY. NO MATTER WHAT.
There are no nuances of interpretation possible here; no subtlety or ambiguity. It's a very definitive, declarative statement and its meaning is crystal clear. Of course it was a lie (and Obama knew it at the time). The left-wing site Politifact rated it as the Lie of the Year for 2013:
Over four million people lost their existing health care plans under the Affordable Care Act, and, by extension, their doctors. You can argue that these were cheap, terrible plans; I have no data on the subject. But that's not the point: the point it we were sold this law on a lie. AND THAT WAS THE PLAN ALL ALONG.
Right-wing ravings? Perhaps. But don't believe me; instead, take the word of Professor Jonathan Gruber, one of Obamacare's principle architects:
"Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical to get for the thing to pass."
This is such a clear-cut issue I always find it hard to believe that some will still argue the point. And this sheer degree of mendacity necessary to stand up and tell this to the American people is such that I don't believe even Trump will ever rise to this level. As is, it's something to think about every time Obama says _anything_: for him, the end always justifies the means.
@Dramsey. Looks like what you are quoting is a right wing propaganda tool to discredit Obama. Changes do occur with such a large plan and some substandard insurance plans were discontinued. But they were offered alternate plans and no evidence they could not continue to see their doctors. Many flaws in the plan were the result of Republican obstructionism
Gruber was an idiot to say what he did. But essentially he is correct. And in this case, the ends do justify the means. Do you honestly believe that republicans do not think and do the exact same thing?!?!
Don't forget, he is also the same Gruber behind Romneycare.
God damn, the president lied to us? Never happened before. First politician I ever heard to actually lie. Surprise, surprise.
Haven't heard the insurance companies complain, or any of them going broke since this insurance reform. They seem to still seem to be rolling in the doe and the world's most expensive healthcare still yields sub-par results.
Corrections or updates anyone?
Lack of any profits? US suddenly in the top 3?
For those who trash Obamacare an interesting opinion piece from CNN about the consequences of repealing it
Repealing Obamacare affects everyonehttp://money.cnn.com/2017/01/02/news/economy/repealing-obamacare-health-...
"I think it was Russia..." President-elect Donald Trump, January 11, 2017.
@Sabbia. That still doesnt answer whether the 400 pound Russian was sitting on a bed or a couch. Rumor has it that it must be a bed because he may have been receiving a "golden shower"
If it was Russia, why hasn't Sarah P been subpoenaed as an eyewitness? She's been in Wasilla for most of this.
Because she cannot she Russia from her house. Only Tina Fey could. However if she was a responsible patriot she would have found a way to get the info. Perhaps she ignores 400 pound guys.