SPOILER

Vice President - Mike Pence

Het kabinet
Secretary of State - Mike Pompeo
Secretary of Treasury - Steven Mnuchin
Secretary of Defense - General Jim 'Mad Dog' Mattis
Attorney General - Jeff Sessions
Secretary of the Interior - Ryan Zinke
Secretary of Agriculture - Sonny Perdue
Secretary of Commerce - Wilbur Ross
Secretary of Labor - Alexander Acosta
Secretary of Health and Human Services - Alex Azar
Secretary of Housing & Urban Development - Ben Carson
Secretary of Transportation - Elaine Chao
Secretary of Energy - Rick Perry
Secretary of Education - Betsy DeVos
Secretary of Veterans Affairs - Ronny Jackson??? Robert Wilkie (Acting)
Secretary of Homeland Security - Kirstjen Nielsen

Cabinet-level officials:
White House Chief of Staff - John F. Kelly
Trade Representative - Robert Lighthizer
Director of National Intelligence - Dan Coats
Ambassador to the UN - Nikki Haley
Director of the Office of Management & Budget - Mick Mulvaney
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency - Gina Haspel
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency - Scott Pruitt
Administrator of the Small Business Administration - Linda McMahon

Andere kopstukken:
Ivanka Trump (Advisor to the President), Jared Kushner (Senior Adviser Strategic Planning), Stephen Miller (Senior Adviser Policy), John Bolton (National Security Adviser), Kellyanne Conway (Counselor), Donald McGahn (White House Counsel), Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Press Secretary), Christopher Wray (Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation), Robert Mueller (Special Counsel), Rod Rosenstein (United States Deputy Attorney General).

Verdwenen of voormalige kopstukken:
Kabinet: Tom Price (HHS), David Shulkin (VA), Rex Tillerson (State)
DOJ/FBI: Sally Yates, James Comey, Preet Bharara, Andrew McCabe
Communicatie WH: Mike Dubke, Sean Spicer, Anthony Scaramucci, Hope Hicks
Adviseurs enzo: Michael Flynn, Herbert McMaster, Reince Priebus, Rob Porter, Gary Cohn, Steve Bannon, John McEntee

SPOILER: juni

SPOILER: 8 augustus

SPOILER: 14 september

SPOILER: juni

SPOILER: 8 augustus

SPOILER: 14 september

SPOILER: juni

SPOILER: 8 augustus

SPOILER: 14 september

SPOILER

quote:

Justice Dept. charges Russian woman with interference in midterm elections

The Justice Department on Friday charged a Russian woman for her alleged role in a conspiracy to interfere with the 2018 U.S. election, marking the first criminal case prosecutors have brought against a foreign national for interfering in the upcoming midterms.

Elena Khusyaynova, 44, was charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States. Prosecutors said she managed the finances of “Project Lakhta,” a foreign influence operation they said was designed “to sow discord in the U.S. political system” by pushing arguments and misinformation online about a host of divisive political issues, including immigration, the Confederate flag, gun control and the National Football League national-anthem protests.

The charges against Khusyaynova came just as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence warned that it was concerned about “ongoing campaigns” by Russia, China and Iran to interfere with the upcoming midterm elections and the 2020 race — an ominous warning just weeks before voters head to the polls.

In a statement, the ODNI said officials “do not have any evidence of a compromise or disruption of infrastructure that would enable adversaries to prevent voting, change vote counts or disrupt our ability to tally votes in the midterm elections.” But the statement noted: “We are concerned about ongoing campaigns by Russia, China and other foreign actors, including Iran, to undermine confidence in democratic institutions and influence public sentiment and government policies. These activities also may seek to influence voter perceptions and decision making in the 2018 and 2020 U.S. elections.”

The announcement, which was joined by the Justice Department, FBI and Department of Homeland Security, came on the eve of a trip national security adviser John Bolton is making to Moscow, where he is expected to raise the issue with his counterparts.

Court papers said Khusyaynova’s operation was funded by Russian oligarch Yevgeniy Prigozhin and two companies he controls: Concord Management and Consulting, and Concord Catering. A criminal complaint filed against the woman charges that she managed the finances of Project Lakhta, including detailed expenses for activities in the United States, such as paying for activists, advertisements on social media, the registration of domain names, the purchase of proxy servers and the promotion of news postings on social media.

Between 2016 and 2018, Project Lakhta’s proposed operating budget exceeded $35 million, although only a portion of that money targeted the United States, prosecutors said.

Investigating Russian interference in U.S. elections has largely been the purview of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, though his probe is focused on the 2016 election and the Trump campaign.

Mueller, whose work is ongoing, charged a dozen Russian military officers with hacking Democrats’ computers, as well as 13 people and three companies that his prosecutors allege ran an online propaganda operation to push voters away from Hillary Clinton and toward Donald Trump in 2016. What remains to be seen is how and whether Mueller can connect President Trump or his campaign to those efforts.

The Justice Department has separately been assessing how it should respond to foreign influence operations targeting U.S. elections, and this summer it issued a lengthy report on the topic. U.S. officials have warned repeatedly about foreign attempts to influence the 2018 midterms.

The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security have set up foreign-influence task forces to detect such operations and share threat information within the government, with technology firms and with state and local election officials. Senior officials have said that while foreign actors continue to engage in activities targeting social media and election systems, they have not seen the level of activity that they witnessed in 2016.

Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein in July announced a new policy to alert the public to foreign operations targeting U.S. democracy, such as the one Russia undertook in 2016. Trump also signed an executive order last month authorizing additional sanctions against countries or people that interfere in U.S. elections, though some lawmakers say the measure does not go far enough.

The issue is a particularly fraught one for federal prosecutors. Justice Department policies call for investigations of election-related crimes to be conducted in such a way that minimizes the impact the probe could have on the election, and prosecutors are generally instructed to avoid taking overt steps in cases near in time to an election. The Justice Department’s recent report, though, noted that “public exposure and attribution of foreign influence operations can be an important means of countering the threat and rendering those operations less effective.”

Former FBI Director James B. Comey faced criticism for talking publicly on the eve of the election about the bureau resuming its investigation of Hillary Clinton, while keeping secret the separate probe into possible ties between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign.

Laughter as Trump lauds politician's body slam of Guardian journalist

twitter:

whca twitterde op vrijdag 19-10-2018 om 17:33:14 WHCA Statement on President’s Remarks in Montana https://t.co/vOwn6riBES reageer retweet

SPOILER

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 oktober 2018 21:40 schreef Arcee het volgende:
Mijn TT zou '#JobsNotMobs!' zijn geweest.

quote:

Beto O’Rourke is a total lightweight compared to Ted Cruz, and he comes nowhere near representing the values and desires of the people of the Great State of Texas. He will never be allowed to turn Texas into Venezuela!

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 19-10-2018 om 20:41:29 #JobsNotMobs! https://t.co/U1suRW5j6G reageer retweet

quote:

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise has been on TV, Twitter and writing op-eds criticizing Democrats for inciting violence, but on Friday he defended President Donald Trump’s comments about a congressman’s assault on a reporter as simply a joke.

https://www.rollcall.com/(...)ssaulting-a-reporter

quote:

Georgia officials removed an estimated 107,000 people from voter rolls because they decided not to vote in prior elections, according to a new report.

An APM Reports analysis found the voters were removed under the state's "use it or lose it" law, which starts a process for removing people from voter rolls if they fail to vote, respond to a notice or make contact with election officials over a three-year period.

After that three-year span, those who don't vote or make contact with authorities in two elections can be purged from the voter rolls under the Georgia law.

The APM investigation concluded that many people struck from voter rolls under "use it or lose it" laws do not know that they have been dropped and are likely to be surprised if they are turned away from the polls on Nov. 6.

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 oktober 2018 22:17 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
De republikeinse hypocritie kent geen grenzen... klagen over "mobs", terwijl journalisten neergeslagen zouden moeten worden. Stelletje bruinhemden.

[..]

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 oktober 2018 22:18 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

[..]

Goede grap ook, zo in de week van Kashoggi's dood.

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 oktober 2018 22:31 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Ja, echt schandalig. Maar hey, Nintex en andere fans interesseert het geen reet dat ze langzaamaan tot bruinhemden gebrainwashed worden, zolang er maar wat te juichen is.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 19-10-2018 om 22:30:23 Q: "Do you regret bringing up, last night at your rally, the assault on a reporter by a Congressman?"TRUMP: "No, not at all." (via @tictoc) https://t.co/MSiCQdNBkr reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 oktober 2018 22:18 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

[..]

Goede grap ook, zo in de week van Kashoggi's dood.

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 oktober 2018 22:36 schreef Nintex het volgende:
Weheheh zo'n huilend journalistje en een goeie grap van Trump.

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 oktober 2018 23:04 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Dit is wel erg sneu hoor

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 oktober 2018 23:17 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
En zo gaat de normalisatie verder. De verbruinhemdisering van de republikeinen.

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 oktober 2018 23:47 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Een journalist krijgt een duwtje en gelijk komen de Nazi vergelijken weer boven tafel.

Er zijn jaarlijks meer dan 1000 town halls en andere politieke events. Er is wel geteld een keer een aanvaring geweest tussen een journalist en politicus. No big deal.

Zie ook de Trump rallies. 10k, 20k soms 30k mensen op een evenement. En ja dan vallen er wel eens klappen. Het is vrediger daar dan op menig dansfeest, maar iedere poep en scheet is door de media breed uitgemeten.

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 oktober 2018 23:55 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Wat loop je nou te lullen man? Volgens Fox News verslaggevers die erbij waren greep Gianforte hem bij zijn nek met beide handen en knalde hem op de grond.

twitter:

JackPosobiec twitterde op vrijdag 19-10-2018 om 23:51:53 Stunning image as the caravan of migrants stack up on the bridge into Mexico after breaking through police barricades. Mexican border guards blocking their progress for now https://t.co/EJuKpI9EPv reageer retweet

twitter:

JackPosobiec twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 00:24:49 First Trump said he would build a WallThen he said Mexico would pay for the Wall Now Trump got Mexico to become the Wall https://t.co/zMSEhCJvDU reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:34 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Allemaal moordende drugdealers toch?

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:31 schreef Nintex het volgende:
Het is toch gestoord, zoveel mensen op de been.

De VS heeft het maar te accepteren, want Zuid Amerika is een teringbende.

Maar blijf vooral weg uit Nazi Amerika onder Trump jongens... huh wat? Geloven die linkse gekkies zichzelf nog inmiddels?

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:36 schreef Houtenbeen het volgende:

[..]

Allemaal illegale migranten

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:38 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Levensgevaarlijk! En ze gaan ook allemaal op de Democraten stemmen

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:39 schreef Houtenbeen het volgende:

[..]

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:40 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Ja, nee echt hoor, snel registreren vanuit de kampen, desnoods vanuit de woestijn, zelfs zonder dat ze Amerikanen zijn.

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:39 schreef Houtenbeen het volgende:

[..]

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:41 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

De Democraten wilden deze Caravan! Toevallig net voor de midterms! Aldus Trump

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:42 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:

[..]

Ja, want ze willen open borders!

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:43 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Laat het stemvee tot ons komen!

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:46 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Welke klootzak heeft het heden links gezet in deze grafiek? Hoe dan ook, economisch richting de midterms is het gunstig voor de republikeinen, wat iedereen wel wist.

[ afbeelding ]

Het is jammer dat staatsschuld niet meer boeit of natuur, etcetera.

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 oktober 2018 23:17 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
En zo gaat de normalisatie verder. De verbruinhemdisering van de republikeinen.

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:51 schreef Re het volgende:

[..]

och we weten allemaal wat we na de oorlog met die moffenhoeren deden, komt goed

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:49 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:

[..]

Waar/wat is de Y-as?

twitter:

mikiebarb twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 00:25:04 “a fistfight that led to his death.”That does not sound plausiblehttps://t.co/PeBLzvS3ii reageer retweet

quote:

A former head of MI6 has said all the evidence suggests Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman was behind the death of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and that the theory that rogue elements in the Saudi military were responsible was “blatant fiction”.

Sir John Sawers told the BBC his assessment was based on conversations with senior Whitehall sources and his knowledge of the Turkish intelligence services.

The comments came after Donald Trump said he presumed Khashoggi, a Washington Post columnist, was dead and that the consequences for Saudi Arabia would be “very severe” if its leaders were found to have ordered the dissident journalist’s killing.

Sawers, who was head of the British secret intelligence service until 2014, also claimed that the crown prince would only have acted if he believed he had licence from the White House to behave as he wished.

“I think President Trump and his ministerial team are waking up to just how dangerous it is to have people acting with a sense that they have impunity in their relationship with the United States,” Sawers said.

“If it is proven, and it looks very likely to be the case, that [Prince Mohammed] ordered the killing of the journalist it is a step too far – one that the UK, the EU and the US are going to have to respond to.”

He said the “rogue elements” theory of Khashoggi’s death “simply doesn’t hold water” and that it“further undermines respect for America when it panders to such a blatant fiction”.

[..]

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 01:36 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Godskolere, wat verlang ik terug naar een president die ballen had .. dit is het statement: [ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 01:36 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Godskolere, wat verlang ik terug naar een president die ballen had .. dit is het statement: [ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 01:42 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

'Tragic accident'

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 01:46 schreef Szura het volgende:

[..]

Incident

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 02:30:51 "The world should take note that it is the free press, not the Saudi government or the White House, that has doggedly searched for the truth about what happened to Mr. Khashoggi," Patrick Leahy said. "A free press is an essential check against tyranny." https://t.co/u9hM94YznX reageer retweet

quote:

The Trump administration’s struggles to curtail illegal immigration have exposed a deep rift among the president and his top advisers, one that could lead to changes in the Cabinet and undermine the government’s response to a record surge of migrant families at the southern border.

Even as President Trump continues to consider immigration to be a political winner next month in helping turn out his conservative base for the midterm elections, tensions in the West Wing have reached a boiling point. A profane shouting match over immigration this week among top aides prompted Chief of Staff John F. Kelly to storm out of the White House and marked the culmination of weeks of mounting anxiety, several senior administration officials said.

Trump’s own escalating frustration has led him to excoriate aides for not taking more aggressive actions and to offer his own ideas, officials said. He has ruminated this week over the possibility of sending more soldiers to the border, even though thousands of National Guard troops have been deployed there since April with no evidence of a deterrent effect.

In the summer, the president was so upset by the border numbers that he proposed sealing the entire 1,954-mile U.S.-Mexico border, including shuttering legal ports of entry, blocking trade flows and halting tourism and travel, according to the senior administration officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal deliberations.

“Close the whole thing!” Trump demanded at one point during an Oval Office meeting, the officials said. He was talked out of it by advisers who highlighted the effect such a measure would have on more than $600 billion in U.S.-Mexico annual trade, as well as the potential damage to bilateral relations, according to the officials.

The worsening immigration numbers are particularly fraught for Trump, who centered much of his 2016 campaign around incendiary vows to build a border wall — which has not been built — and has begun focusing on immigrants as a dire threat in the final weeks before the Nov. 6 midterms.

Experts said the White House is straining under the same political dilemma that past administrations encountered in trying to manage the massive U.S. immigration system despite Congress’s inability to strike a comprehensive legislative reform package. Trump is hitting the limits of what he is legally able to do through executive authority, they said, and the United States has relatively few tools to deal with the gang violence, poverty and hunger propelling a mass exodus of Central American migrant families over the past five years.

SPOILER

“The tension between the White House and the Department of Homeland Security reminds me of when people tried to characterize stopping illegal immigration as a willingness problem — and accused the Obama administration of not wanting to stop it,” said John Sandweg, who served as a high-ranking DHS official under President Barack Obama. “This administration is learning the hard way — it’s not a lack of willingness. It’s just our ability [as a government] to do so that is limited.”

White House officials have sought to play down the tensions. After news broke Thursday about the squabble just outside the Oval Office between Kelly and national security adviser John Bolton over the performance of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, press secretary Sarah Sanders issued a statement saying Bolton and Nielsen had patched things up.

But Kelly was audibly cursing as he left the White House grounds and he did not return that day, according to people with knowledge of the situation.

The blowup came after Nielsen, during a White House meeting, had touted an effort by the Mexican government to enlist help from the United Nations’ Refugee Agency to process asylum claims from a caravan of thousands of Honduran migrants traveling north toward the United States. Trump has demanded that the Mexican government disband the group and threatened to cut off foreign aid or upend a new trade deal if it fails to do so.

Nielsen characterized the U.N. involvement as a significant measure that could help stem the flow, according to administration officials. Bolton, a longtime critic of the U.N., responded that the international body was ineffective and expressed disbelief at Nielsen’s view, the officials said, prompting an argument over the DHS chief’s performance.

Kelly, who served as the head of that agency for the first six months of Trump’s tenure and handpicked Nielsen to replace him, jumped in to defend her.

“The White House wants to see more passion, energy and a more proactive approach, rather than waiting for the president to get pissed off and then come up with a solution,” one senior DHS official familiar with the dispute said of Nielsen.

Trump backed Bolton and another influential senior White House aide, Stephen Miller, who also has been critical of Nielsen. The conflict has reverberated through DHS amid speculation that Nielsen is among the Cabinet members most at risk of losing her job after the midterms.

Kelly has defended Nielsen repeatedly, drawing eye-rolls from other staff members. At senior staff meetings, he has often praised Nielsen even though her name had not come up, according to two people who have attended the meetings.

“It was counterproductive for her,” one of these people said. “Kelly’s overprotection of her actually hurt her.”

A former colleague of Nielsen’s said things could get worse if she departs, noting that the deputy DHS secretary role has been vacant since Elaine Duke’s departure in February.

“I’m sure she’s exhausted, but I think she would like to stay a little bit longer, at least to serve for a year,” the person said, noting that Nielsen has been in the role for only 10 months.

The internal strife threatens to make an already challenging situation even more arduous. In 2014, the Obama administration faced a humanitarian crisis at the border when tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors and families with children overwhelmed patrol stations. The situation prompted a broad emergency response from the federal government that included Congress approving new resources, including additional money to house the children, and a $750 million aid package to Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras — the Northern Triangle nations where most of the migrants were coming from.

The numbers of families and children this year have surpassed the 2014 totals. Trump has responded by threatening to cut off foreign aid to those nations, a move experts said would only exacerbate the problems.

Amy Pope, who as deputy homeland security adviser under Obama helped coordinate the 2014 response, said that crisis sparked some disagreements among agencies, including DHS, the State Department and Health and Human Services — though she did not recall any shouting matches.

“Trump threatening to curtail all foreign assistance to Honduras is actually counterproductive,” Pope said. “All evidence shows a couple dominant reasons why people leave — violence and a lack of economic opportunity and no judicial accountability. It’s what foreign assistance is meant to address.”

At campaign rallies and on Twitter, Trump has sought to blame Democrats and foreign leaders for the mounting number of families at the border. In private, he has summoned Nielsen to the West Wing for regular meetings, aides said.

Trump is pushing for a more muscular response, and he favors sending more U.S. soldiers to the border. About 1,600 National Guard troops are deployed in four states after Trump ordered the move in the spring, according to Homeland Security officials.

But DHS officials say they need more legal and legislative firepower. The vast majority of Central American migrants who reach the border are turning themselves in to Border Patrol agents, claiming a fear of return and a desire to seek asylum. More National Guard troops and the border wall that Trump has proposed would be largely irrelevant, experts have said.

By Friday afternoon, video clips showed the Honduran migrants, having made their way through Guatemala, attempting to cross into Mexico, some wading through a river.

Back in Washington, one senior DHS official put the scene into perspective.

“We see the equivalent of a caravan cross our border every day,” the official said. “We’re catching 1,500 people a day.”

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 04:05:21 Reporter: "What evidence do you have that these are hardened criminals that are coming to the United States?"Trump: "Oh, please. Please. Don't be a baby. OK?" https://t.co/CpEewUIJwh reageer retweet

quote:

The Trump administration is preparing to tell Russian leaders next week that it is planning to exit the landmark Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, in part to enable the United States to counter a Chinese arms buildup in the Pacific, according to American officials and foreign diplomats.

President Trump has been moving toward scrapping the three-decade-old treaty, which grew out of President Ronald Reagan’s historic meeting with Mikhail Gorbachev in 1986. While the treaty was seen as effective for years, Russia has been violating it at least since 2014 in an effort to menace other nations.

But the pact has also constrained the United States from deploying new weapons to respond to China’s efforts to cement a dominant position in the Western Pacific and to keep American naval forces at bay. Because China was not a signatory to the treaty, it has faced no limits on developing intermediate-range nuclear missiles, which can travel thousands of miles.

The White House said that no official decision had been made to leave the treaty, known as I.N.F., which at the time of its signing was considered a critical step in defusing Cold War tensions. But in the coming weeks, Mr. Trump is expected to sign off on the decision, which would mark the first time he has scrapped an arms control treaty, the American officials said.

Now that the treaty is largely in tatters, the question is whether the decision to leave it will accelerate the increasingly Cold War-like behavior among the three superpowers: the United States, Russia and China.

SPOILER

As Russia has flown bombers over Europe and has conducted troop exercises on its borders with former Soviet states, the United States and its NATO allies have been rotating forces through countries under threat. Ukraine has become a low-level battleground, with ground skirmishes and a daily cyberconflict. China and the United States are jostling for position around reefs in the South China Sea that Beijing has turned into military bases, and they are both preparing for any possibility of war in space.

For the past four years, the United States has argued that Russia is in violation of the treaty because it has deployed prohibited tactical nuclear weapons to intimidate European nations and former Soviet states that have aligned with the West. But President Barack Obama chose not to leave the agreement because of objections from the Europeans — particularly Germany — and out of concern that it would rekindle an arms race.

Mr. Trump appears not to share such hesitation. His national security adviser, John R. Bolton, will warn the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, on a trip to Moscow early next week that the United States plans to leave the treaty, the American officials said.

Mr. Bolton declined to comment on his forthcoming trip. But a senior administration official issued a statement saying that “Russia continues to produce and field prohibited cruise missiles and has ignored calls for transparency.”

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has publicly brought the subject up several times in recent weeks, saying that Russia’s violations were “untenable” and signaling that the administration was reviewing its options. The preparations to leave the treaty were described by foreign diplomats who have been briefed on the matter and by American officials with knowledge of the plans.

In a lengthy nuclear strategy document published early this year, the administration detailed the Russian violations and concluded that the country’s “decision to violate the I.N.F. treaty and other commitments all clearly indicate that Russia has rebuffed repeated U.S. efforts to reduce the salience, role and number of nuclear weapons.”

The Pentagon has already been developing nuclear weapons to match, and counter, what the Chinese have deployed. But that effort would take years, so, in the interim, the United States is preparing to modify existing weapons, including its non-nuclear Tomahawk missiles, and is likely to deploy them first in Asia, according to officials who have been briefed on the issue. Those may be based in Japan, or perhaps in Guam, where the United States maintains a large base and would face little political opposition.

The last time the United States withdrew from a major nuclear arms control treaty was in 2002, when President George W. Bush fulfilled a campaign promise and scrapped the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. While Mr. Trump withdrew from the Obama-era deal with Iran this year, that agreement was not a treaty, and it governed only Iran’s production of nuclear materials. Tehran has no nuclear weapons.

Mr. Bush’s pullout from the ballistic missile treaty led to a buildup of antimissile defenses — still an irritant in relations with Russia. But it also led to a modest arms control agreement with Russia, reducing the overall number of weapons possessed by each country.

But such an agreement seems unlikely to emerge from the demise of the I.N.F. treaty. For cash-constrained Russia, tactical nuclear weapons, along with cyberweapons, are cheap offensive options. Just last week, Mr. Putin, in an annual speech, reported that Russia was preparing to deploy a new hypersonic missile, reinforcing the sense that the long hiatus in the nuclear arms race is over. Such missiles step around current arms control limits.

Mr. Trump himself has not publicly criticized the Russian arms buildup, in line with his generally deferential approach toward Mr. Putin. But he is surrounded in the administration by hawks on the nuclear issue, none more outspoken than Mr. Bolton, and the administration’s decision to brief allies this week on the issue was viewed by key NATO partners as a sign that the decision had been made, even if it had not been formally acknowledged.

“The collapse of the treaty would likely open up a missile race in Europe and elsewhere,” said Hans M. Kristensen, the director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, a private group in Washington. “It would signal a new phase where countries would compete to deploy and counterdeploy weapons.”

Jon Wolfsthal, a nuclear expert on the National Security Council during the Obama administration, said a withdrawal would roil Europe.

“Things are just now calming down,” he said. “This would be another hand grenade in the middle of NATO to split the allies.”

The 1987 treaty between Washington and Moscow bans all land-based missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers, or 310 to 3,420 miles. Missiles that go that far are known as short- and intermediate-range. The treaty covers land-based missiles carrying both nuclear and conventional warheads. It does not cover air-launched or sea-launched weapons.

The main impetus for the pact was Moscow’s deployments of the SS-20 — a mobile, concealable missile that could loft up to three nuclear warheads. When lifted into a vertical position atop its mobile launcher, the missile stood more than five stories high.

It terrified the Europeans, and the treaty emerged as a compromise proposal at the historic 1986 summit meeting in Reykjavik, Iceland, where Mr. Gorbachev favored a ban on all ballistic missiles. Reagan demurred, intent on continuing work on the Strategic Defense Initiative, which he viewed as a shield against all attacks.

The weapons ban — signed in Washington in December 1987 by both men — resulted in the destruction of 2,692 missiles. Washington demolished 846, and Moscow 1,846.

The American side destroyed missiles it had sent to Western Europe in response to the SS-20, including Pershing II ballistic missiles and ground-launched cruise missiles. The low-flying weapons hug the ground to avoid enemy radars and air defenses.

The Obama administration was the first to charge publicly that Moscow was violating the treaty. The offending weapon was identified as a land-based cruise missile, the SSC-8. Russia has consistently denied any violation.

“The I.N.F. treaty was rightly viewed as a remarkable achievement by President Reagan when it was ratified over 30 years ago,” said Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas, who has urged exiting the treaty, and is sometimes named as a possible replacement for Mr. Mattis. “But today the Russians are openly cheating, and the Chinese are stockpiling missiles because they’re not bound by it at all.”

If the Trump administration leaves the treaty, it is likely to deploy a version of the Tomahawk cruise missile that is redesigned to be launched from land. Ships and submarines now carry Tomahawks armed with conventional warheads; experts say that eventually a nuclear warhead could be designed to fit the Tomahawk.

twitter:

rgoodlaw twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 05:17:08 CIA has the audio tapes“CIA officials have listened to an audio recording ... If verified, the recording would make it difficult for the White House to accept the Saudi version that #Khashoggi’s death was effectively an accident.” https://t.co/bdYhTfuL4n reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 01:42 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

'Tragic accident'

quote:

Latest: President Trump said "I do" believe Saudi explanation is credible

quote:

Ted Cruz just tried to do a Facebook Live but his staff seems to have no idea how an iPhone camera works — here’s two minutes of bizarreness https://t.co/vyol4pQqXx

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 07:15 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

rgoodlaw twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 05:17:08 CIA has the audio tapes“CIA officials have listened to an audio recording ... If verified, the recording would make it difficult for the White House to accept the Saudi version that #Khashoggi’s death was effectively an accident.” https://t.co/bdYhTfuL4n reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 10:09 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Welke van de verschillende verklaringen?

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 10:40 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Ergens wel treurig dat dit tot meer ophef leidt dan de honderdduizenden dode Yemenieten.

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 10:22 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:
Ach, het kan iedereen overkomen dat je in een vuistgevecht belandt en er toevallig een forensisch team met een zaag klaar staat, toch?

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 13:07 schreef Ulx het volgende:
De rechtse snowflakes huilen nu tranen met tuiten omdat Jim Acosta "Fuck off!" twitterde naar een of andere trumpfan. Beledigen mag je als Potus of Milo of whoever, maar voor hem gelden de hoge standaarden.
Wat een slappe bitches zijn dat toch ook. Laat ze lekker in hun safespace gaan grienen.

twitter:

Acosta twitterde op vrijdag 19-10-2018 om 18:28:03 Is this that “owning the libs” thing? https://t.co/VIX4Gwk3OM reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 15:00:01 Putin gave his annual foreign policy speech on Thursday — and he used it to hail the end of a US-dominated world: 'Luckily this monopoly is disappearing. It’s almost done.' https://t.co/u9WwcwEqWe reageer retweet

quote:

Russian president Vladimir Putin shrugged off worsening relations with the west and talked up Moscow’s burgeoning diplomatic friendships in Asia and the Middle East, as he hailed the end of a US-dominated unipolar world.

Giving his annual foreign policy address on Thursday, Mr Putin stressed Russia’s military clout and offered a range of handouts to Moscow’s allies. He said his country was always ready to talk despite a mounting list of accusations of impropriety against his regime from western countries.

“Building up tension and hysteria is not our way . . . We are not creating problems for anyone,” Mr Putin said. “I hope we can build dialogue.”

Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 was the start of western sanctions against Moscow that have been broadened since in response to its military actions in Syria, its alleged meddling in the US presidential election, and its alleged use of a chemical weapon to attack a former spy in the UK.

In a wide-ranging exposition at the annual Valdai forum, Mr Putin continually returned to the idea that US hegemony was the cause of many global ills — but that its twilight offered opportunities for Russia and its friends.

“Empires often think they can make some little mistakes . . . because they’re so powerful,” he said. “But when the number of these mistakes keeps growing, it reaches a level they cannot sustain.”

“A country can get the sense from impunity that you can do anything,” he told an audience at a ski resort close to the southern city of Sochi. “This is the result of the monopoly from a unipolar world . . . Luckily this monopoly is disappearing. It’s almost done.”

SPOILER

Mr Putin said president Donald Trump had listened to his arguments and was not impervious to advice as suggested by some US media, adding that he still thought the US leader was working to restore a good US-Russian relationship.

“It’s better to talk, to have a conversation, than to be like cats and dogs that keep fighting each other,” he said.

More than four years of souring relations with the west has seen Moscow pivot east, strengthening diplomatic and trade ties with China and building influence with Middle Eastern countries such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

In his first comments on the disappearance and suspected murder of Saudi dissident Jamal Khashoggi in the country’s Istanbul consulate earlier this month, Mr Putin gave a show of support to the kingdom, saying he currently saw no reason to worsen his warm relations with Riyadh, and suggesting that the US bore some responsibility for his fate.

“He did not live in Russia, but in the US. In this sense, the US bears some responsibility for what happened to him,” Mr Putin said. “In truth, we do not know what happened. So why should we take any steps that could harm our relations with Saudi Arabia?”

The Russian president also announced Moscow would provide Egypt with a $45bn loan to pay for a Russian-built nuclear power project, and outlined plans to supply military technology to Beijing and allow Chinese agriculture companies to invest in Russia’s Far East.

In an extensive section dedicated to outlining why Russia’s nuclear weapons programme was the world’s best, Mr Putin said a new hypersonic missile would be delivered to the Russian army within “a few months”, but that Russia would only use nuclear arms to retaliate after an enemy strike.

twitter:

jonathanchait twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 15:34:00 New reports show more and more evidence Michael Flynn ran a collusion channel to Russia for Trump's campaign https://t.co/upgnbTAkAh https://t.co/6LNtrXaSf7 reageer retweet

quote:

The alliance between the Trump campaign and Russia had many nodes of contact. One of the least known, but potentially most significant, is the work that ran through Republican operative Peter W. Smith. Much of the reporting on Smith has been broken by The Wall Street Journal, and its accumulated reports are building an incriminating story.

Smith is a Chicago-based operative with a taste for the political dark arts, who set out in 2016 to obtain Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails, which he believed had been stolen by Russian hackers. Smith died under somewhat odd circumstances last year — he committed an apparent suicide days after being contacted by a reporter, citing an expiring life-insurance policy, but seemed to be in good spirits just hours before his death.

But the most important mystery involving Smith is how important his work was to the campaign, and where it led. When he met with a cybersecurity expert in 2016, Smith represented himself as working on behalf of Michael Flynn, Trump’s chief national security adviser during the campaign. Flynn, of course, had ties to Russia and was forced to resign very shortly after starting as national security adviser for lying about his contacts with Russia.

But Smith, unlike Flynn, was not a famous figure, and initially some people assumed that he might have been working on his own. The Journal has fleshed out Smith’s role, and every new report has suggested that his work was significant. An October 7 report found that Smith raised at least $100,000, from at least four donors, for his work on the emails. An October 10 follow-up confirmed that Smith and Flynn were in regular, close contact.

Today’s report is more explosive still. Investigators have evidence that Smith “may have had advance knowledge of details about the release of emails from a top Hillary Clinton campaign official by WikiLeaks,” according to the Journal.

If true, this would mean that Smith wasn’t merely attempting to get ahold of stolen Clinton emails. He got through to WikiLeaks and was, in some form, a channel of collusion between the hackers and the Trump campaign.

Flynn long ago started cooperating with Robert Mueller. So if Flynn discussed any of this information with Trump during the campaign, the special counsel probably knows about it.

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 15:40 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 15:00:01 Putin gave his annual foreign policy speech on Thursday — and he used it to hail the end of a US-dominated world: 'Luckily this monopoly is disappearing. It’s almost done.' https://t.co/u9WwcwEqWe reageer retweet

Vladimir Putin uses speech to herald end of US hegemony

Russian leader shrugs off poor western relations and stresses growing eastern ties

[..]

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 16:35:39 If the Democrats would stop being obstructionists and come together, we could write up and agree to new immigration laws in less than one hour. Look at the needless pain and suffering that they are causing. Look at the horrors taking place on the Border. Chuck & Nancy, call me! reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 22-06-2018 om 13:06:30 Republicans should stop wasting their time on Immigration until after we elect more Senators and Congressmen/women in November. Dems are just playing games, have no intention of doing anything to solves this decades old problem. We can pass great legislation after the Red Wave! reageer retweet

quote:

Miami GOP Chairman leads Proud Boys in attack on Democrat

The Miami-Dade Republican Party’s County Chairman led an angry mob of partisans, alongside the local leader of national hate group the Proud Boys, in an attack on a Democratic campaign office this week.

Miami GOP Chairman Nelson Diaz planned the event (image below) and local Congressman Carlos Curbelo publicized the protest heavily, before and after.

“This is beyond reprehensible and it must be condemned in the strongest of ways,” said Pelosi campaign spokesman Jorge Aguilar who attended the event.

“Anything short of it is simply an endorsement of their violent tactics,” he said.
A chaotic mob scene ensued as the Republican party leader and his spewed expletives at House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi while she entered a Democratic Congressional campaign office.

Ironically, Diaz and his followers demonstrated an utter lack of respect for private property to shout “communista” while trespassing in a narrow alleyway, before demanding entry to the Democratic event.

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 05:39 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
U.S. to Tell Russia It Is Leaving Landmark I.N.F. Treaty

[..]

quote:

We call on the Russian Federation to address serious concerns regarding its compliance with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in a substantial and transparent way. We ask the United States and the Russian Federation to remain engaged in active dialogue to preserve the INF Treaty and ensure its full and verifiable implementation which is crucial for Europe’s and other regions’ security.

quote:

US expects Russia to observe its INF Treaty commitments — Department of State

US Permanent Representative to NATO earlier said her country was ready to "take out" Russian missiles, perceived to be in violation of the INF Treaty

quote:

"Recently, we hear more and again statements from the US military command that the country requires intermediate- and short-range missiles to deter China," Antonov said. "Could it be that the United States is looking for a pretext to abandon the INF Treaty, while, obviously, blaming Russia for it?"

quote:

A meeting of Nato defence ministers earlier this month in Brussels issued a joint statement saying the INF “has been crucial to Euro-Atlantic security and we remain fully committed to the preservation of this landmark arms control treaty”.

However, the US defence secretary, James Mattis, made it clear that all options were on the table in Washington’s response to Russian violations.

“Our discussions here were to ensure that we answered all questions that any of the nations had, and that we look at what options do we have, and to make certain that all the nations had input to me as I go into the discussions in Washington,” Mattis said. “This will be a decision obviously made in concert with our allies by the president, and we’ll take it from there.”

Arms control advocates argue that walking out on the INF is premature before any detailed negotiations between US and Russian specialists on resolving the row over compliance. They said it would also hand a propaganda victory to Moscow.
Trump denounced nuclear arms treaty in phone call with Putin – sources
Read more

Alexandra Bell, a former senior arms control official at the state department, now at the Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, said that in informal, “track two” discussions, Russian arms control experts suggested Moscow might be ready for a compromise to salvage the INF.

“You should be able to get somewhere with the Russians, but Bolton doesn’t seem interested,” Bell said.

“The decision has been taken in the NSC [National Security Council] that the US should withdraw, and they are trying to persuade other parts of the administration. There has been no formal Trump decision yet,” said Hans Kristensen, the director of the nuclear information project at the Federation of the American Scientists. “Very little good will come of this, other than another round of nuclear escalation with Russia.”

Daryl Kimball, the head of the Washington-DC based Arms Control Association, said: “For the US it would be a disastrous own goal to pull out when it has been Russia that has been in non-compliance for some time. It will open the door for Russia to expand its small and relatively insubstantial ground-launched missile arsenal.”

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 18:19 schreef Ulx het volgende:
De VS wil weer oorlogsschepen door de Straat van Taiwan sturen. Wat een lekkere warmonger is Trump toch.

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 21:56 schreef Vader_Aardbei het volgende:
Lion Ted gaat Beta O'Cuck keihard verslaan.

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 22:03 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Dikke kans van wel ja. Maar laat er geen misverstand over bestaan dat Cruz van deze twee de beta cuck is. Die laat Trump zijn vrouw belachelijk maken en kust daarna zijn reet.

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 22:36 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Het mag inmiddels toch wel duidelijk zijn dat de deplorables niks anders kunnen dan projecteren?

Ook wel grappig dat in het deplorable universum er van uit gegaan wordt dat Trump een typefout heeft gemaakt en eigenlijk "Lion Ted" bedoelde i.p.v. "Lyin Ted"

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op woensdag 23-03-2016 om 02:53:05 Lyin' Ted Cruz just used a picture of Melania from a G.Q. shoot in his ad. Be careful, Lyin' Ted, or I will spill the beans on your wife! reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 22:42 schreef Mike het volgende:
Ik heb de acht afleveringen gekeken van het programma van Tom Arnold,

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 22:52 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Òh, was dat die Lion?!

Lol, hoe bizar. Hoe "verklaren" ze de apostrof en dat het consequent gebruikt is?

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 23:58 schreef Zwoerd het volgende:
Je weet nu al wat er gaat gebeuren. Cruz gaat winnen en de gebruikelijke trolletjes komen langs met de boodschap: "Haha Ted Cruz heeft gewoon gewonnen, jullie zaten er allemaal naast '

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 23:58 schreef Zwoerd het volgende:
Je weet nu al wat er gaat gebeuren. Cruz gaat winnen en de gebruikelijke trolletjes komen langs met de boodschap: "Haha Ted Cruz heeft gewoon gewonnen, jullie zaten er allemaal naast '

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 00:41 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Maar vrijwel iedereen hier roept toch ook gewoon dat Cruz hoogstwaarschijnlijk aan het langste eind trekt?

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 23:53 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Dat gok ik waarom zou trol aardbei Cruz anders lion noemen

twitter:

KevinCate twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 03:24:10 Floridians are voting.DEM: 303,645GOP: 346,356NPA: 144,659Through 10/18 via https://t.co/RhUBGRcNXf https://t.co/9k5ZCNuLlx reageer retweet

twitter:

maggieNYT twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 18:19:59 A companion piece to ⁦@rachaelmbade⁩ reporting that while unlikely, GOP could not only marginally grow a senate majority but hold the House. Kavanaugh impact was real. https://t.co/S9UWQKl7Dk reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 02:11 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

KevinCate twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 03:24:10 Floridians are voting.DEM: 303,645GOP: 346,356NPA: 144,659Through 10/18 via https://t.co/RhUBGRcNXf https://t.co/9k5ZCNuLlx reageer retweet

Team rood al op voorsprong in Florida. Tot zover de blue wave.

quote:

NYT tikte vandaag ook een stukje over hoe de Republikeinen weer alles kunnen winnen

twitter:

maggieNYT twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 18:19:59 A companion piece to ⁦@rachaelmbade⁩ reporting that while unlikely, GOP could not only marginally grow a senate majority but hold the House. Kavanaugh impact was real. https://t.co/S9UWQKl7Dk reageer retweet

quote:

Trump doubts Saudi account of journalist’s death: ‘There’s been deception, and there’s been lies’

President Trump strongly criticized Saudi Arabia’s explanation for the death of journalist Jamal Khashoggi late Saturday, saying that “obviously there’s been deception, and there’s been lies.”

At the same time, Trump defended the oil-rich monarchy as an “incredible ally” and kept open the possibility that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman did not order Saudi agents to kill Khashoggi.

“Nobody has told me he’s responsible. Nobody has told me he’s not responsible. We haven’t reached that point . . . I would love if he wasn’t responsible,” Trump said in a phone interview with The Washington Post.

The kingdom’s claim that Khashoggi was killed after a fistfight escalated inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul was met with a torrent of international skepticism Saturday over how a team of Saudi agents could fly to Istanbul to meet Khashoggi and eventually kill him without the knowledge or consent of the crown prince, the de facto leader.

Trump had told reporters Friday that the Saudi explanation was credible, but U.S. officials said he has privately grimaced that his son-in-law Jared Kushner’s close relationship with the crown prince has become a liability and left the White House with no good options.

In the interview, Trump defended Kushner as doing a “very good job” but acknowledged that he and the crown prince, both in their 30s, are relatively young for the amount of power they wield.

“They’re two young guys. Jared doesn’t know him well or anything. They are just two young people. They are the same age. They like each other I believe,” Trump said.
...

quote:

A key piece of evidence is the audio recording that led Turkish investigators to conclude days ago that Khashoggi was killed and dismembered by a Saudi team dispatched to Istanbul. Trump on Saturday denied that any U.S. officials have heard audio, seen video or read any transcripts from the Turks.

But CIA officials have listened to an audio recording that Turkish officials say proves the journalist was killed and dismembered by the Saudi team, according to people familiar with the matter. If verified, the recording would make it difficult for the United States to accept the Saudi version that Khashoggi’s death was effectively an accident. Officials agreed to speak for this article on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic.

If Secretary Pompeo was offered to listen to the audio recording, he was smart to say no,” said Soner Cagaptay, a Turkey scholar at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “You can’t unlisten to it, and once you listen to it, you can’t say certain things.”

One diplomat who deals with the issue said that if Pompeo had heard the audio, it would be a “total game changer” and require a much more forceful U.S. response.

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 02:11 schreef Nintex het volgende:
NYT tikte vandaag ook een stukje over hoe de Republikeinen weer alles kunnen winnen

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 05:31 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:

[..]

En wat moet dat voorstellen, die stijgende cijfers van sept 19 tot okt 18?
Registratie deadline was okt 9,
absentee ballots send period: 2 - 9 okt
Early Voting Period: begint ten vroegste maandag 22 okt.

Het toont stijgende cijfers in een periode waarin er niets te tellen viel, geen registraties, geen stemmen..

twitter:

ShellyLicari twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 23:45:14 @KevinCate Also, looking at the IP info, the site was created in Oct 2016, and is non-renewable, set to expire next week. So I'm guessing it shows turnout for the disastrous election that gave us the Cheeto-in-Chief. #VoteBlueNoMatterWho reageer retweet

twitter:

RalstonReports twitterde op zondag 21-10-2018 om 05:38:26 Been watching early voting a long time and I don’t think I have ever seen Dems win Washoe by 15 points — 49-34. It’s NV’s swing county, GOP has 2 percent edge. It’s only one day, we still need to see Clark. But that is a bad omen for Repubs. reageer retweet

twitter:

RalstonReports twitterde op zondag 21-10-2018 om 07:22:06 Huge day for Dems in Clark, too. Almost 3 percent over reg lead. Thanks, @sorceror43! https://t.co/WnPM4vm1Ko reageer retweet

twitter:

RalstonReports twitterde op zondag 21-10-2018 om 07:26:47 I’ll have analysis on my blog tomorrow, but big first day of really voting for Dems in Nevada. Turnout was close to presidential year levels. We will know in a few days if anomaly or trend. reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 08:58 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

twitter:

RalstonReports twitterde op zondag 21-10-2018 om 07:26:47 I’ll have analysis on my blog tomorrow, but big first day of really voting for Dems in Nevada. Turnout was close to presidential year levels. We will know in a few days if anomaly or trend. reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 09:13 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

[..]

Dit zie je in veel staten terug, kiezers lijken ongewoonlijk actief te zijn voor deze midterms. Zie hier NC

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 09:23 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Enig idee waarom 2012 ontbreekt in die grafiek?

quote:

Marc Bessems, correspondent Latijns-Amerika, denkt van niet. "Deze karavaan wordt al jaren georganiseerd om aandacht te genereren voor de omstandigheden in Honduras. Normaal gezien keken er niet veel media naar om, tot Trump er van alles over ging zeggen. Nu duikt de internationale pers op de tocht."

Door de aandacht is het aantal immigranten dat zich bij de karavaan aansluit volgens Bessems enorm gestegen. Vorig week begon de tocht in San Pedro Sula, een stad in Honduras waar veel geweld is, met een paar honderd man. Nu lopen er naar schatting 3000 tot 4000 immigranten mee in de karavaan. Vrijdag kwamen de eersten aan bij de Mexicaanse grens.

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 11:19 schreef Chewie het volgende:
Trump heeft een aanzuigende werking op Hondurese vluchtelingen.

[..]

https://nos.nl/artikel/22(...)n-ze-te-stoppen.html

quote:

In March, Trump said the Saudi military deals would produce 40,000 jobs.

A week ago, he made it 450,000 jobs. Wednesday, 500,000 jobs. Yesterday afternoon, 600,000 jobs.

Yesterday evening: "The million jobs."

https://t.co/yLQBWeozim

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 00:41 schreef Houtenbeen het volgende:

[..]

quote:

Op zaterdag 20 oktober 2018 21:56 schreef Vader_Aardbei het volgende:

[..]

Ja joh even je spierballen tonen is hetzelfde als een land de OORLOG verklaren.

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 14:01 schreef Ulx het volgende:
https://www.politico.com/(...)chin-midterms-920027

Aardig stuk over de blunder van McConnell. Door aan te geven dat de GOP medicare, medicaid en social security als oorzaak ziet van het begrotingstekort kunnen de Dems dat prima gebruiken tegen die partij. Zelfs in zijn eigen eigen staat spreken die kiezers McConnell erop aan, zoals laatst in dat restaurant.

(Ik ben overigens geen voorstander vvan dit gedrag, maar McConnell en veel Republikeinen verbergen zich voor de kiezer. In combinatie met gerrymandering en voter suppression die het lastig maken iemand anders te kiezen vraag je er dan wel om om je kiezers te woord te moeten staan als ze je ergens tegenkomen.)

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 14:47 schreef Ulx het volgende:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45931231

Poetingod waarschuwt Trumpgod dat uit het INF stappen een gevaarlijk idee is.

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 14:49 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

De Russen hebben het pact al verbroken dus de vraag is in hoeverre het zin heeft om het in deze vorm in stand te houden.

SPOILER

The department argued in its memo that key government agencies needed to adopt an explicit and uniform definition of gender as determined “on a biological basis that is clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable.” The agency’s proposed definition would define sex as either male or female, unchangeable, and determined by the genitals that a person is born with, according to a draft reviewed by The Times. Any dispute about one’s sex would have to be clarified using genetic testing.

“Sex means a person’s status as male or female based on immutable biological traits identifiable by or before birth,” the department proposed in the memo, which was drafted and has been circulating since last spring. “The sex listed on a person’s birth certificate, as originally issued, shall constitute definitive proof of a person’s sex unless rebutted by reliable genetic evidence.”

The new definition would essentially eradicate federal recognition of the estimated 1.4 million Americans who have opted to recognize themselves — surgically or otherwise — as a gender other than the one they were born into.

Breaking big stories requires support.

Subscribe to The New York Times
“This takes a position that what the medical community understands about their patients — what people understand about themselves — is irrelevant because the government disagrees,” said Catherine E. Lhamon, who led the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights in the Obama administration and helped write transgender guidance that is being undone.

The move would be the most significant of a series of maneuvers, large and small, to exclude the population from civil rights protections and roll back the Obama administration’s more fluid recognition of gender identity. The Trump administration has sought to bar transgender people from serving in the military and has legally challenged civil rights protections for the group embedded in the nation’s health care law.

Several agencies have withdrawn Obama-era policies that recognized gender identity in schools, prisons and homeless shelters. The administration even tried to remove questions about gender identity from a 2020 census survey and a national survey of elderly citizens.

Editors’ Picks

Remarkable People We Overlooked in Our Obituaries

What it Was Like to Be One of the First Female Fighter Pilots

The Bright Future and Grim Death of a Privileged Hollywood Daughter
For the last year, health and human services has privately argued that the term “sex” was never meant to include gender identity or even homosexuality, and that the lack of clarity allowed the Obama administration to wrongfully extend civil rights protections to people who should not have them.

Image
Roger Severino, now at the Department of Health and Human Services, was among the conservatives who blanched at the Obama administration’s expansion of sex to include gender identity.CreditAaron P. Bernstein/Getty Images
Roger Severino, the director of the Office for Civil Rights at the Department of Health and Human Services, declined to answer detailed questions about the memo or his role in interagency discussions about how to revise the definition of sex under Title IX.

But officials at the Department of Health and Human Services confirmed that their push to limit the definition of sex for the purpose of federal civil rights laws resulted from their own reading of the laws and from a court decision.

Mr. Severino, while serving as the head of the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at the Heritage Foundation, was among the conservatives who blanched at the Obama administration’s expansion of sex to include gender identity, which he called “radical gender ideology.”

In one commentary piece, he called the policies a “culmination of a series of unilateral, and frequently lawless, administration attempts to impose a new definition of what it means to be a man or a woman on the entire nation.”

“Transgender people are frightened,” said Sarah Warbelow, the legal director of the Human Rights Campaign, which presses for the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. “At every step where the administration has had the choice, they’ve opted to turn their back on transgender people.”

The Department of Health and Human Services has called on the “Big Four” agencies that enforce some part of Title IX — the Departments of Education, Justice, Health and Human Services, and Labor — to adopt its definition in regulations that will establish uniformity in the government and increase the likelihood that courts will accept it.

The definition is integral to two proposed rules currently under review at the White House: One from the Education Department deals with complaints of sex discrimination at schools and colleges receiving federal financial assistance; the other, from health and human services, deals with health programs and activities that receive federal funds or subsidies. Both regulations are expected to be released this fall, and would then be open for public comment, typically for 60 days. The agencies would consider the comments before issuing final rules with the force of law — both of which could include the new gender definition.

Civil rights groups have been meeting with federal officials in recent weeks to argue against the proposed definition, which has divided career and political appointees across the administration. Some officials hope that health and human services will at least rein in the most extreme parts, such as the call for genetic testing to determine sex.

After more than a year of discussions, health and human services is preparing to formally present the new definition to the Justice Department before the end of the year, Trump administration officials say. If the Justice Department decides that the change is legal, the new definition can be approved and enforced in Title IX statutes, and across government agencies.

The Justice Department declined to comment on the draft health and human services proposal. The Justice Department has not yet been asked to render a formal legal opinion, according to an official there who was not authorized to speak about the process.

But Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s previous decisions on transgender protections have given civil rights advocates little hope that the department will prevent the new definition from being enforced. The proposal appears consistent with the position he took in an October 2017 memo sent to agencies clarifying that the civil rights law that prohibits job discrimination does not cover “gender identity, per se.”

Harper Jean Tobin, the policy director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, an advocacy group, called the maneuvering “an extremely aggressive legal position that is inconsistent with dozens of federal court decisions.”

Image

A transgender flag outside a bar in Brooklyn. The agency’s proposed definition would define sex as either male or female, unchangeable, and determined by the genitals that a person is born with.CreditAnnie Tritt for The New York Times
Health and human services officials said they were only abiding by court orders, referring to the rulings of Judge Reed O’Connor of the Federal District Court in Fort Worth, Tex., a George W. Bush appointee who has held that “Congress did not understand ‘sex’ to include ‘gender identity.’”

A 2016 ruling by Judge O’Connor concerned a rule that was adopted to carry out a civil rights statute embedded in the Affordable Care Act. The provision prohibits discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability in “any health program or activity” that receives federal financial assistance.

But in recent discussions with the administration, civil rights groups, including Lambda Legal, have pointed to other court cases. In a legal memo presented to the administration, a coalition of civil rights groups wrote, “The overwhelming majority of courts to address the question since the most relevant Supreme Court precedent in 1998 have held that antitransgender bias constitutes sex discrimination under federal laws like Title IX.”

Indeed, the health and human services proposal was prompted, in part, by pro-transgender court decisions in the last year that upheld the Obama administration’s position.

In their memo, health and human services officials wrote that “courts and plaintiffs are racing to get decisions” ahead of any rule-making, because of the lack of a stand-alone definition.

“Courts and the previous administration took advantage of this circumstance to include gender identity and sexual orientation in a multitude of agencies, and under a multitude of laws,” the memo states. Doing so “led to confusion and negative policy consequences in health care, education and other federal contexts.”

The narrower definition would be acutely felt in schools and their most visible battlegrounds: locker rooms and bathrooms.

One of the Trump administration’s first decisive policy acts was the rescission by the Education and Justice Departments of Obama-era guidelines that protected transgender students who wanted to use bathrooms that correspond to their gender identity.

Since the guidance was rescinded, the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights has halted and dismissed discrimination cases filed by transgender students over access to school facilities. A restrictive governmentwide definition would cement the Education Department’s current approach.

But it would also raise new questions.

The department would have to decide what documentation schools would be required to collect to determine or codify gender. Title IX applies to a number of educational experiences, such as sports and single-sex classes or programs where gender identity has come into play. The department has said it will continue to open cases where transgender students face discrimination, bullying and harassment, and investigate gender-based harassment as “unwelcome conduct based on a student’s sex” or “harassing conduct based on a student’s failure to conform to sex stereotypes.”

The Education Department did not respond to an inquiry about the health and human services proposal.

Ms. Lhamon of the Obama Education Department said the proposed definition “quite simply negates the humanity of people.”

twitter:

steveschale twitterde op zaterdag 20-10-2018 om 06:54:31 @jlq529 @jonfavs @whoisgarylee I don't have 2014 by day broken out, but according to my 2016 spreadsheet from Hell, when early voting started (so 2 days from now by election calendar), it was 50.3% R, 34.2%D, 15.5% NPA, so looks pretty close to 2016. reageer retweet

quote:

Day 16 Florida updates (no memo today):

* 3,236,439 total ballots requested.
* 28.5% of all requested ballots have been returned.

* 923,652 ballots returned
* GOP lead is 52.062 (43.97%-38.33%)

* 113,996 more Dem ballots unreturned.

To quote @BarackObama, "Don't boo. Vote."

https://twitter.com/steveschale/status/1054035946486878209

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 17:15 schreef nostra het volgende:
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is considering narrowly defining gender as a biological, immutable condition determined by genitalia at birth, the most drastic move yet in a governmentwide effort to roll back recognition and protections of transgender people under federal civil rights law.

A series of decisions by the Obama administration loosened the legal concept of gender in federal programs, including in education and health care, recognizing gender largely as an individual’s choice and not determined by the sex assigned at birth. The policy prompted fights over bathrooms, dormitories, single-sex programs and other arenas where gender was once seen as a simple concept. Conservatives, especially evangelical Christians, were incensed.

Now the Department of Health and Human Services is spearheading an effort to establish a legal definition of sex under Title IX, the federal civil rights law that bans gender discrimination in education programs that receive government financial assistance, according to a memo obtained by The New York Times.

SPOILER

The department argued in its memo that key government agencies needed to adopt an explicit and uniform definition of gender as determined “on a biological basis that is clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable.” The agency’s proposed definition would define sex as either male or female, unchangeable, and determined by the genitals that a person is born with, according to a draft reviewed by The Times. Any dispute about one’s sex would have to be clarified using genetic testing.

“Sex means a person’s status as male or female based on immutable biological traits identifiable by or before birth,” the department proposed in the memo, which was drafted and has been circulating since last spring. “The sex listed on a person’s birth certificate, as originally issued, shall constitute definitive proof of a person’s sex unless rebutted by reliable genetic evidence.”

The new definition would essentially eradicate federal recognition of the estimated 1.4 million Americans who have opted to recognize themselves — surgically or otherwise — as a gender other than the one they were born into.

Breaking big stories requires support.

Subscribe to The New York Times
“This takes a position that what the medical community understands about their patients — what people understand about themselves — is irrelevant because the government disagrees,” said Catherine E. Lhamon, who led the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights in the Obama administration and helped write transgender guidance that is being undone.

The move would be the most significant of a series of maneuvers, large and small, to exclude the population from civil rights protections and roll back the Obama administration’s more fluid recognition of gender identity. The Trump administration has sought to bar transgender people from serving in the military and has legally challenged civil rights protections for the group embedded in the nation’s health care law.

Several agencies have withdrawn Obama-era policies that recognized gender identity in schools, prisons and homeless shelters. The administration even tried to remove questions about gender identity from a 2020 census survey and a national survey of elderly citizens.

Editors’ Picks

Remarkable People We Overlooked in Our Obituaries

What it Was Like to Be One of the First Female Fighter Pilots

The Bright Future and Grim Death of a Privileged Hollywood Daughter
For the last year, health and human services has privately argued that the term “sex” was never meant to include gender identity or even homosexuality, and that the lack of clarity allowed the Obama administration to wrongfully extend civil rights protections to people who should not have them.

Image
Roger Severino, now at the Department of Health and Human Services, was among the conservatives who blanched at the Obama administration’s expansion of sex to include gender identity.CreditAaron P. Bernstein/Getty Images
Roger Severino, the director of the Office for Civil Rights at the Department of Health and Human Services, declined to answer detailed questions about the memo or his role in interagency discussions about how to revise the definition of sex under Title IX.

But officials at the Department of Health and Human Services confirmed that their push to limit the definition of sex for the purpose of federal civil rights laws resulted from their own reading of the laws and from a court decision.

Mr. Severino, while serving as the head of the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at the Heritage Foundation, was among the conservatives who blanched at the Obama administration’s expansion of sex to include gender identity, which he called “radical gender ideology.”

In one commentary piece, he called the policies a “culmination of a series of unilateral, and frequently lawless, administration attempts to impose a new definition of what it means to be a man or a woman on the entire nation.”

“Transgender people are frightened,” said Sarah Warbelow, the legal director of the Human Rights Campaign, which presses for the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. “At every step where the administration has had the choice, they’ve opted to turn their back on transgender people.”

The Department of Health and Human Services has called on the “Big Four” agencies that enforce some part of Title IX — the Departments of Education, Justice, Health and Human Services, and Labor — to adopt its definition in regulations that will establish uniformity in the government and increase the likelihood that courts will accept it.

The definition is integral to two proposed rules currently under review at the White House: One from the Education Department deals with complaints of sex discrimination at schools and colleges receiving federal financial assistance; the other, from health and human services, deals with health programs and activities that receive federal funds or subsidies. Both regulations are expected to be released this fall, and would then be open for public comment, typically for 60 days. The agencies would consider the comments before issuing final rules with the force of law — both of which could include the new gender definition.

Civil rights groups have been meeting with federal officials in recent weeks to argue against the proposed definition, which has divided career and political appointees across the administration. Some officials hope that health and human services will at least rein in the most extreme parts, such as the call for genetic testing to determine sex.

After more than a year of discussions, health and human services is preparing to formally present the new definition to the Justice Department before the end of the year, Trump administration officials say. If the Justice Department decides that the change is legal, the new definition can be approved and enforced in Title IX statutes, and across government agencies.

The Justice Department declined to comment on the draft health and human services proposal. The Justice Department has not yet been asked to render a formal legal opinion, according to an official there who was not authorized to speak about the process.

But Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s previous decisions on transgender protections have given civil rights advocates little hope that the department will prevent the new definition from being enforced. The proposal appears consistent with the position he took in an October 2017 memo sent to agencies clarifying that the civil rights law that prohibits job discrimination does not cover “gender identity, per se.”

Harper Jean Tobin, the policy director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, an advocacy group, called the maneuvering “an extremely aggressive legal position that is inconsistent with dozens of federal court decisions.”

Image

A transgender flag outside a bar in Brooklyn. The agency’s proposed definition would define sex as either male or female, unchangeable, and determined by the genitals that a person is born with.CreditAnnie Tritt for The New York Times
Health and human services officials said they were only abiding by court orders, referring to the rulings of Judge Reed O’Connor of the Federal District Court in Fort Worth, Tex., a George W. Bush appointee who has held that “Congress did not understand ‘sex’ to include ‘gender identity.’”

A 2016 ruling by Judge O’Connor concerned a rule that was adopted to carry out a civil rights statute embedded in the Affordable Care Act. The provision prohibits discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability in “any health program or activity” that receives federal financial assistance.

But in recent discussions with the administration, civil rights groups, including Lambda Legal, have pointed to other court cases. In a legal memo presented to the administration, a coalition of civil rights groups wrote, “The overwhelming majority of courts to address the question since the most relevant Supreme Court precedent in 1998 have held that antitransgender bias constitutes sex discrimination under federal laws like Title IX.”

Indeed, the health and human services proposal was prompted, in part, by pro-transgender court decisions in the last year that upheld the Obama administration’s position.

In their memo, health and human services officials wrote that “courts and plaintiffs are racing to get decisions” ahead of any rule-making, because of the lack of a stand-alone definition.

“Courts and the previous administration took advantage of this circumstance to include gender identity and sexual orientation in a multitude of agencies, and under a multitude of laws,” the memo states. Doing so “led to confusion and negative policy consequences in health care, education and other federal contexts.”

The narrower definition would be acutely felt in schools and their most visible battlegrounds: locker rooms and bathrooms.

One of the Trump administration’s first decisive policy acts was the rescission by the Education and Justice Departments of Obama-era guidelines that protected transgender students who wanted to use bathrooms that correspond to their gender identity.

Since the guidance was rescinded, the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights has halted and dismissed discrimination cases filed by transgender students over access to school facilities. A restrictive governmentwide definition would cement the Education Department’s current approach.

But it would also raise new questions.

The department would have to decide what documentation schools would be required to collect to determine or codify gender. Title IX applies to a number of educational experiences, such as sports and single-sex classes or programs where gender identity has come into play. The department has said it will continue to open cases where transgender students face discrimination, bullying and harassment, and investigate gender-based harassment as “unwelcome conduct based on a student’s sex” or “harassing conduct based on a student’s failure to conform to sex stereotypes.”

The Education Department did not respond to an inquiry about the health and human services proposal.

Ms. Lhamon of the Obama Education Department said the proposed definition “quite simply negates the humanity of people.”

Link

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 07:33 schreef Trumpinator het volgende:

[..]

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-chromosoom

Gewoon even naar de chromosomen kijken. Dan weet je wie een man is en wie een vrouw is. Heel wetenschappelijk. De rest is kwakzalverij

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 14:47 schreef Ulx het volgende:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45931231

Poetingod waarschuwt Trumpgod dat uit het INF stappen een gevaarlijk idee is.

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 08:13 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:

[..]
Sterker nog, binnen de evolutionaire biologie is de consensus dat het Y-chromosoom uiteindelijk zal gaan verdwijnen.

quote:

Op zondag 21 oktober 2018 14:47 schreef Ulx het volgende:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45931231

Poetingod waarschuwt Trumpgod dat uit het INF stappen een gevaarlijk idee is.

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 07:33 schreef Trumpinator het volgende:

[..]

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-chromosoom

Gewoon even naar de chromosomen kijken. Dan weet je wie een man is en wie een vrouw is. Heel wetenschappelijk. De rest is kwakzalverij

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 08:52 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Bron?
Puur uit interesse in genetica, niet omdat ik het niet geloof

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 09:40 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Is niet direct een consensus over.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10577-011-9252-1

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 08:58 schreef icecreamfarmer_NL het volgende:

[..]

Nu ben ik het niet met Trump eens maar hier heeft hij volgens mij wel een punt. De Russen ontwikkelen alweer jaren nieuwe kernkoppen en raketten.

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 08:58 schreef icecreamfarmer_NL het volgende:

[..]

Nu ben ik het niet met Trump eens maar hier heeft hij volgens mij wel een punt. De Russen ontwikkelen alweer jaren nieuwe kernkoppen en raketten.

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 10:23 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Maar als je dan uit het verdrag stapt is er ook helemaal geen reden meer voor de Russen om daar mee op te houden, en kan je via die weg ook geen druk meer op ze uitoefenen.

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 11:00 schreef icecreamfarmer_NL het volgende:

[..]

Tja als de andere partij zich er toch al niet aan houdt wat is de waarde van dat verdrag dan nog?

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 07:33 schreef Trumpinator het volgende:

[..]

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-chromosoom

Gewoon even naar de chromosomen kijken. Dan weet je wie een man is en wie een vrouw is. Heel wetenschappelijk. De rest is kwakzalverij

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 11:03 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Het kan bijvoorbeeld zijn dat het ze nog beperkt in de omvang van de productie, omdat ze het een beetje stiekem moeten doen. Het kan ook zijn dat er controlemechanismen of sancties in het verdrag staan die je eerst aan kunt roepen, maar je kunt met het verdrag in de hand ook de publieke opinie proberen mee te krijgen.

Als je het verdrag opzegt is eigenlijk het enige directe voordeel dat je hebt dat je zelf die raketten ook weer kan gaan produceren.

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 13:21 schreef aquawoman het volgende:

[..]

De heren dictators kunnen de wapenhandel weer goed in het zonnetje zetten dus die kunnen weer wat miljoenen hun zaak steken. Zo'n verdrag is daar een beetje onhandig bij.

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 07:33 schreef Trumpinator het volgende:

[..]

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-chromosoom

Gewoon even naar de chromosomen kijken. Dan weet je wie een man is en wie een vrouw is. Heel wetenschappelijk. De rest is kwakzalverij

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 16:00 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:

[..]

En wat is het nut van het geboortegeslacht op documenten? Zeker bij de Departments of Justice, Health and Human Services kan dat tot vergissingen leiden.
- Als een beklaagde niet opdaagt en opgespoord moet worden zullen agenten die op zoek gaan naar Ricky Jones, 35, male, waarschijnlijk geen vrouwen checken.
- op de ER liggen één man en één vrouw, twee patientenfiches, de dokter neemt de bovenste, leest "man" (of vrouw) en behandelt de man (vrouw) voordat ie de volgende fiche neemt die ook van een man (of vrouw) blijkt te zijn.. (merk op dat het in zo'n geval altijd de niet-transgender zal zijn die de foute behandeling krijgt)

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 13:19 schreef aquawoman het volgende:

[..]

Ik snap die obsessie over transgenders niet zo. Er is zat ellende om je druk over te maken als republikeinen en transgenders doen niemand kwaad.

Dat hele gelul over die toiletten ook, is dat in Nederland ooit een punt geweest? Of in de rest van de wereld?

quote:

In fact, laws in the US did not even address the issue of separating public restrooms by sex until the end of the 19th century, when Massachusetts became the first state to enact such a statute. By 1920, more than 40 states had adopted similar legislation requiring that public restrooms be separated by sex.

So why did states in the US begin passing such laws? Were legislators merely recognizing natural anatomical differences between men and women?

I’ve studied the history of the legal and cultural norms that require the separation of public bathrooms by sex, and it’s clear that there was nothing so benign about the enactment of these laws. Rather, these laws were rooted in the so-called “separate spheres ideology” of the early 19th century – the idea that, in order to protect the virtue of women, they needed to stay in the home to take care of the children and household chores.

In modern times, such a view of women’s proper place would be readily dismissed as sexist. By highlighting the sexist origin of laws mandating sex-separation of public restrooms, I hope to provide grounds for at least reconsidering their continued existence.

Bron

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 16:40 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Ik snap dat hele gelul over gescheiden toiletten niet. Waarom zou je die willen hebben? Heb je dat thuis ook? Of is het gewoon omdat je het nou eenmaal gewend bent?

Het werd (in de VS) ook pas een punt aan het einde van de 19e eeuw. Daarvoor maakten ze zich daar echt niet druk over

[..]

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 16:54 schreef icecreamfarmer_NL het volgende:

[..]

Naja vrouwen zijn wel smeerkezen dus ik ben blij dat ze in openbare gelegenheden niet naar hetzelfde toilet gaan.

twitter:

tedcruz twitterde op vrijdag 19-10-2018 om 23:26:10 The left-wing Chron—to the surprise of nobody—endorsed every single Dem they think has even a prayer of winning. They endorsed Beto b/c is an ”unapologetic progressive,” supporting open borders, gun control & impeaching the President. Plus (unmentioned) higher taxes on oil & gas. https://t.co/MFoZEAPC3f reageer retweet

twitter:

KateBennett_DC twitterde op maandag 22-10-2018 om 20:49:42 "He's not lying Ted anymore. He's beautiful Ted." - @realDonaldTrump just now reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 21:07 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

KateBennett_DC twitterde op maandag 22-10-2018 om 20:49:42 "He's not lying Ted anymore. He's beautiful Ted." - @realDonaldTrump just now reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 07:33 schreef Trumpinator het volgende:

[..]

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-chromosoom

Gewoon even naar de chromosomen kijken. Dan weet je wie een man is en wie een vrouw is. Heel wetenschappelijk. De rest is kwakzalverij

SPOILER

quote:

“I told our Russian colleagues that their meddling in our election process had hardly had any real effect”, Bolton told during an interview with the radio station Echo of Moscow.

Reuters

twitter:

Reuters twitterde op maandag 22-10-2018 om 20:09:07 How the man behind Khashoggi murder ran the killing via Skype https://t.co/e6dDPBwqj7 reageer retweet

quote:

Turkish security sources say he was immediately seized inside the consulate by 15 Saudi intelligence operatives who had flown in on two jets just hours before.

According to one high-ranking Arab source with access to intelligence and links to members of Saudi Arabia’s royal court, Qahtani was beamed into a room of the Saudi consulate via Skype.

He began to hurl insults at Khashoggi over the phone. According to the Arab and Turkish sources, Khashoggi answered Qahtani’s insults with his own. But he was no match for the squad, which included top security and intelligence operatives, some with direct links to the royal court.

A Turkish intelligence source relayed that at one point Qahtani told his men to dispose of Khashoggi. “Bring me the head of the dog”, the Turkish intelligence source says Qahtani instructed.

It is not clear if Qahtani watched the entire proceedings, which the high-ranking Arab source described as a “bungled and botched operation”.

The Arab source and the Turkish intelligence source said the audio of the Skype call is now in the possession of Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan. The sources say he is refusing to release it to the Americans.

Erdogan said on Sunday he would release information about the Turkish investigation during a weekly speech on Tuesday. Three Turkish officials reached by Reuters declined to comment ahead of that speech.

The senior Saudi official who laid out the official version of events – that Khashoggi had got into a fight – said he had not heard about Qahtani appearing via Skype, but that the Saudi investigation was ongoing.

Reuters

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 21:45 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Wel een interessant fenomeen dat tegelijk Trump sinds anderhalf jaar niet zo goed pollt, waar ik wel benieuwd naar ben waardoor dat dan komt, en tegelijk de kansen voor het Huis voor de Democraten nog nooit zo hoog zijn ingeschat als we fivethirtyeight kunnen geloven.

quote:

Trump’s advisers have warned him that if he lets the Saudis get away with such a barbaric extrajudicial killing with impunity, the Saudis would not respect him as a strong leader — nor would other authoritarian regimes https://t.co/0tFGVv9pKD

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 22:10 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Hij zal d'r niet naar luisteren, maar het klopt natuurlijk wel. Trump zal gezien worden als een slappe zak die als puntje bij paaltje komt toch niets durft te doen.

twitter:

AriFleischer twitterde op maandag 22-10-2018 om 21:17:17 POTUS just gave Beto his new nickname. "Overrated O'Rourke" reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 13:19 schreef aquawoman het volgende:
Ik snap die obsessie over transgenders niet zo.

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 23:29 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

AriFleischer twitterde op maandag 22-10-2018 om 21:17:17 POTUS just gave Beto his new nickname. "Overrated O'Rourke" reageer retweet

Of zoals Scott Adams zou zeggen

Linguistic Killshot

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 00:00 schreef Szura het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 23:33 schreef Arcee het volgende:

[..]

Net als abortus is transgenders een emotioneel onderwerp en daardoor erg geschikt voor politiek gewin. Republikeinen mobiliseren er grote groepen Christenen mee en kunnen zo de rest van hun conservatieve agenda erdoor drukken, want daar gaat het om.

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 23:29 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

AriFleischer twitterde op maandag 22-10-2018 om 21:17:17 POTUS just gave Beto his new nickname. "Overrated O'Rourke" reageer retweet

Of zoals Scott Adams zou zeggen

Linguistic Killshot

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op dinsdag 23-10-2018 om 00:44:08 https://t.co/VjBURpCuYv reageer retweet

SPOILER

quote:

An explosive device was found on Monday near the Westchester County home of George Soros, the billionaire philanthropist who is a favorite target of right-wing groups, according to a law enforcement official.

The device did not explode on its own, and bomb squad technicians “proactively detonated” it, the official said.

Federal and state law enforcement officials responded to the scene in Katonah, N.Y., a hamlet in the upscale town of Bedford in northern Westchester.

The Bedford Police Department and the Westchester County Department of Public Safety said Monday night that they were investigating at that location. The police declined to answer questions but said that a hazardous device unit had been requested.

The F.B.I. and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives did not respond to requests for comment.

It is unclear if Mr. Soros was home at the time. His foundation did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Mr. Soros, who was born in Hungary, made his fortune running a hedge fund and is now a full-time philanthropist and political activist. He donates frequently to Democratic candidates and progressive causes and has given at least $18 billion to his Open Society Foundations to promote democracy and human rights around the world.

His activism has made him a villain to conservative groups and the target of anti-Semitic smears. Roseanne Barr called him a Nazi in an infamous tweetstorm, and Representative Matt Gaetz, Republican of Florida, falsely speculated that Mr. Soros had funded a caravan of migrants moving north toward Mexico.

The Only Secretary Of State Debate

quote:

Secretary of State William Galvin agreed to only one debate against election opponent Anthony Amore, but the single 30 minute engagement produced enough light and heat to illuminate the race for the state's top elections officer.

The two traded barbs and ad hominem attacks on everything from election security, President Trump's immigration policies and the frequency with which Amore did — or didn't — vote.

The debate ended with the challenger calling the 20-year incumbent a "liar", and Galvin calling Amore a "faker".

Amore came to the debate, moderated by WGBH's Jim Braude, armed with a litany of critiques of Galvin's years in office and focused his message on making the state's voting system more secure. The challenger said Galvin isn't doing enough to modernize the 12-year-old paper ballot system.

Amore said Galvin's request for funds from the federal Department of Homeland Security to enhance security shows that the system is vulnerable.

SPOILER

"Twelve years old is too old. That's why you requested more funding from Homeland Security," Amore said, before Galvin injected "It works."

"The only reason you're saying it works is because nothing's happened yet," Amore countered.

Galvin's debate tactic will be familiar to anyone who's seen Galvin's fellow Democrats in the gubernatorial and U.S. Senate races try to link their own opponents to the unpopular policies of the Trump White House.

"Republicans are into having fewer people vote. I'm into having more people vote," Galvin said, which Amore called "demagoguery."

Galvin accused Amore of supporting Trump's plan to stop access to the U.S. for nationals from several majority-Muslim countries soon after his inauguration. Galvin provided WGBH with screen captures of tweets from Amore's account that he says prove Amore's support for Trump's original travel ban, which was struck down by a federal court.

In one tweet directed at then-Trump adviser Sebastian Gorka and others, Amore wrote "Fortunately, there is no Muslim ban, as more than 1 billion Muslims aren't affected." In two tweets replying to then-acting-Attorney General Sally Yates, who openly opposed Trump's plan, Amore accused Yates of "grandstanding" and "you could have discussed it with him and resigned with dignity instead of seeking attention."

Amore's campaign spokesman Mark Steffen told WGBH News that the tweets do not amount to support for Trump's controversial travel ban.

"Amore was talking semantics, not the validity of a sweeping ban based on religion," Steffen said.

Amore, the former head of federal security at Logan Airport as well as the former security head at the Gardner Museum (post-heist) asked Galvin to produce a strategic plan for the future of election security and for the secretary's office in general.

"There's no strategic plan from this office. There's no vision. There's no mission statement. There's no plan that tells the people of Massachusetts what the secretary intends to do over the next few years. There's no plan to tell the stakeholders what he intends to do," Amore said.

Galvin called the strategic plans "bureaucratic babble" and said that voters have plenty of faith in the state's existing voting system in the age of vote tampering and digital hacking.

"They have a lot of confidence. They put their name on a paper ballot, put their mark on a paper ballot. Our lists are secure. Our system is not on the internet. We were not hacked when many states were," Galvin said.

Galvin repeated a technique he used against Democratic primary opponent Josh Zakim over the summer and used Amore's own voting record against him, saying that Amore has missed 14 elections and several town meetings in Swampscott, where he was an elected meeting member from 2008 to 2011.

Amore said family and work commitments kept him from voting regularly and attending town meetings.

The debate got testier as it went on. In the final minutes, Galvin accused Amore of exaggerating his role in the apprehension of "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid in late 2001. Galvin said Amore took responsibility for "collaring" Reid, a charge Amore denies.

"You're a liar," Amore said to Galvin.

"And you're a faker," Galvin replied.

A Boston Herald article about Amore from 2008 says of his Logan Airport role "he ran the show when shoe bomber Richard Reid was collared in December 2001." Amore himself is not quoted using the word "collared."

Election day is Nov. 6. Early voting is available in most communities until Nov. 2.

Debate between Sen. Elizabeth Warren and challenger Geoff Diehl

quote:

Democratic incumbent Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Republican challenger state Rep. Geoff Diehl met face to face for the second time in two days Sunday evening, this time in Springfield for a debate that took on a much more measured tone than the first and focused heavily on local issues.

The roughly one-hour debate moderated by WGBY’s Carrie Saldo, touched on a series of policy areas impacting western Massachusetts such as the state’s nascent marijuana business and expansion of the commuter rail service. The issues of social security and tenor of politics also provided for moments of stark disagreement between Warren and Diehl.

Warren, of Cambridge, frequently returned to her record in Congress as a reason she deserved another term and Diehl touted his knowledge of local issues and record as a state legislator from Whitman as an example of him being more in sync with Massachusetts voters.

On marijuana, Diehl and Warren both affirmed that the budding industry is vital to Western Massachusetts and believed the federal government, which outlaws the drug, should offer leniency to state that have legalized it.

SPOILER

“I think it can provide revenue, of course for the state, and I think it could provide jobs, obviously in our state as well. But at the same time, I want to make sure we don’t go about it in a way that’s reckless,” said Diehl, who noted he believes legalization is state’s rights issue.

The Republican added that he disagreed with the legislature’s decision to raise the tax on marijuana, arguing that doing that promotes a black market for the drug and making it harder for law enforcement.

Warren offered a more Washington-focused answer, touting a bipartisan bill she and Republican Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner have worked on that would ease federal pressure on state’s that have legalized marijuana.

“Why isn’t it law? Because right now the Republican majority with Mitch McConnell won’t bring it to a vote. So, if we actually want to see this solved we need a Democratic majority in the Senate,” she said before pivoting to highlight her legislative prowess in the Trump era.

Diehl retorted that Warren’s example was actually an argument for sending a Republican to Washington who can convince a Republican senate using the successes in marijuana policy in Massachusetts.

Warren later used the Republican Congress as a foil when the topic turned to expanding commuter rail options between Western Massachusetts and Boston.

“When they talk about ‘oh they have some infrastructure plan,’ turns out, it’s not real. It’s all smoke and mirrors,” she said. “The Republicans, Donald Trump, Mr. Diehl says make it work better and better for a thinner and thinner slice at the top instead of making the investments infrastructure that we need right here in Western Massachusetts.”

Diehl offered public-private partnerships as a solution to funding rail service and took a jab at Warren for past comments she has made about private-industry.

“I know Senator Warren said you didn’t build that when she first ran for office — she said it was government roads. Well, I have to tell you, it was the machine shops in Springfield and Holyoke, it was the shoe factories in Brockton, it was the fishing industry in Gloucester and New Bedford. That’s what built the private schools and private hospitals that first took care of people — provided the money to build those roads.”

But like most things in politics these days, many of the night’s jabs involved each candidate’s relationship with President Donald Trump.

For her part, Warren attempted to stay on offense by tying Diehl’s steadfast support for the president and his past role on Trump’s campaign, at every turn. Diehl, throughout the debate, repeatedly returned to his attack that Warren is more interested in taking on President Donald Trump in 2020 than representing Massachusetts for another six year term and knocked her for her out-of-state travel.

Asked about the tenor of Washington and controversial nicknames and comments made by the President, Diehl said “I certainly don’t follow the same path the president does in how I legislate, how I deal with people,” before pivoting to knock Warren for making past controversial comments about law enforcement.

Warren, when asked about her record of name calling, admitted to it but argued that disparaging comments made by Trump are often targeted at groups of people.

The debate was not without an unexpected moment. During an exchange where Diehl and Warren chided each other on Trump and his response to Puerto Rico, a protestor wearing a t-shirt promoting the independent Senate candidate Shiva Ayyadurai interrupted the candidates forcing the debate to pause temporarily.

Ayyadurai has not participated in either of the debates between Diehl and Warren so far.

The general election is November 6.

quote:

Trump’s continued talk of a middle class tax cut right before the midterms, like at tonight’s rally in Texas, apppears to be an acknowledgment that the GOP tax cut is not viewed by enough Americans as particularly helpful to them and perhaps more geared toward wealthier folks.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 06:41 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Aldus Jim Acosta op twitter.

Inderdaad, waarom wil de GOP dit nu? De Taxgrab was toch al zo'n succes? Of toch niet? Kreeg de middenklasse slechts wat kruimels?

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 07:26 schreef TheJanitor het volgende:
Early voting ziet er in ieder geval zeer goed uit!

AZ - repub: 44% democrat: 33%
FL - repub: 44% democrat: 38%
GA - repub: 52% democrat: 43%
IN - repub: 55% democrat: 39%
MT - repub: 46% democrat: 29%
NV - repub: 38% democrat: 45%
TN - repub: 63% democrat: 30%
TX - repub: 53% democrat: 43%

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 23:29 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

AriFleischer twitterde op maandag 22-10-2018 om 21:17:17 POTUS just gave Beto his new nickname. "Overrated O'Rourke" reageer retweet

Of zoals Scott Adams zou zeggen

Linguistic Killshot

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 07:33 schreef Lyrebird het volgende:

[..]

Reken je niet rijk. Zullen we wachten tot de buit binnen is?

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 07:26 schreef TheJanitor het volgende:
Early voting ziet er in ieder geval zeer goed uit!

AZ - repub: 44% democrat: 33%
FL - repub: 44% democrat: 38%
GA - repub: 52% democrat: 43%
IN - repub: 55% democrat: 39%
MT - repub: 46% democrat: 29%
NV - repub: 38% democrat: 45%
TN - repub: 63% democrat: 30%
TX - repub: 53% democrat: 43%

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 07:26 schreef TheJanitor het volgende:
Early voting ziet er in ieder geval zeer goed uit!

AZ - repub: 44% democrat: 33%
FL - repub: 44% democrat: 38%
GA - repub: 52% democrat: 43%
IN - repub: 55% democrat: 39%
MT - repub: 46% democrat: 29%
NV - repub: 38% democrat: 45%
TN - repub: 63% democrat: 30%
TX - repub: 53% democrat: 43%

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 08:48 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Dat is voor een belangrijk deel de absentee ballots / vote by mail. Die zijn stevig republikeins traditioneel. In-person early voting lopen democraten warmer voor (mits mogelijk) en dat begint op de veel plekken pas vanaf vandaag. Beter vergelijk je dus cijfers uit 2014 op dezelfde afstand van de verkiezingen met deze cijfers ipv absoluut gegeven.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 08:53 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

In 2014 hadden Democraten een voordeel qua aantal registered democrats die vroeg stemden, dat liep ook niet helemaal lekker voor ze af.

quote:

"You know, they have a word. It sort of became old-fashioned. It’s called a nationalist," he continued. "And I say really, we’re not supposed to use that word. You know what I am? I am a nationalist. Use that word."

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 08:59 schreef Tweek het volgende:
https://thehill.com/homen(...)-am-im-a-nationalist

[..]

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:08 schreef Klaphark het volgende:
Iemand nog tips voor goede Nederlandse podcasts over de Amerikaanse politiek? Of bestaan die niet.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:10 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Niet dat ik weet. En als ze er zijn, kun je er gif op nemen dat die onder Russisch beheer staan.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:02 schreef Refragmental het volgende:
Oh god... daar gaan echt veel mensen keihard over vallen

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:11 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Nog steeds achter iedere boom een rus/nazi?

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:13 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

tegenwoordig verstoppen ze zich achter IP- adressen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:14 schreef Refragmental het volgende:
Denk dat deze discussie naar BNW moet worden verplaatst.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:15 schreef Ringo het volgende:

[..]

Net zoʼn sprookje als klimaatverandering, hm?

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 08:59 schreef Tweek het volgende:
https://thehill.com/homen(...)-am-im-a-nationalist

[..]

quote:

Op maandag 22 oktober 2018 23:33 schreef Arcee het volgende:

[..]

Net als abortus is transgenders een emotioneel onderwerp en daardoor erg geschikt voor politiek gewin. Republikeinen mobiliseren er grote groepen Christenen mee en kunnen zo de rest van hun conservatieve agenda erdoor drukken, want daar gaat het om.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:35 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:
Bom in brievenbus Soros. Goedpraterij is al aan de gang op FP en zal snel zijn weg vinden naar dit topic.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:35 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:
Bom in brievenbus Soros. Goedpraterij is al aan de gang op FP en zal snel zijn weg vinden naar dit topic.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:40 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Ben je bang dat je echokamer begint te verbrokkelen?

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:48 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Denk dat niemand zo dom is om dit soort flauwekul goed te praten.
Dit is net zo verderfelijk als de keren dat vele republikeinen de dupe zijn geweest van schietpartijen, poederbrieven, etc, door links radikalen.
Lijkt me dat we het daar allemaal wel over eens zijn.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:48 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Denk dat niemand zo dom is om dit soort flauwekul goed te praten.
Dit is net zo verderfelijk als de keren dat vele republikeinen de dupe zijn geweest van schietpartijen, poederbrieven, etc, door links radikalen.
Lijkt me dat we het daar allemaal wel over eens zijn.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:48 schreef Refragmental het volgende:
Denk dat niemand zo dom is om dit soort flauwekul goed te praten.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:51 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:

[..]

Waarschijnlijk ken jij niet goed lezen, want er zijn al genoeg mensen die het goedpraten.

Geen probleem, je bent hopelijk beter in gamen

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:53 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Je onderschat hier aardig wat mensen mee.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:54 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Je had het specifiek over het de weg vinden naar dit topic. Dat verwacht ik zelf niet.
FP telt uiteraard niet. Dat snap je ook wel

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:56 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:

[..]

"Denk dat niemand zo dom is om dit soort flauwekul goed te praten."

Dat kan ik weinig anders interpreteren natuurlijk.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 09:59 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Dus jij neemt de FP wel serieus?

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 10:45 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:

[..]

Kom op, zelfs jij weet dat je nu ineens doelpalen aan het verzetten bent.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 08:48 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

Verder kan ik me letterlijk geen enkel beleid voor de geest halen waarmee ik zou denken dat stemmen voor de republikeinen een goed idee zou zijn.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 11:16 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Ja nee dus. Je had het over de weg vinden naar dit topic. Mijn reactie was daarop.
We zitten tenslotte op het forum hier, FP boeit me geen hol.

Dit is echt weer een gevalletje discussie voeren om niks.
Niet alles hoeft een discussie te zijn. Ik ben het eens met je dat een bom plaatsen verderfelijk gedrag is, en dat mensen die dit goedpraten dom zijn. Is dat niet goed genoeg? Moet er echt gegraven worden naar ook maar iets wat op 1 of andere manier anders geinterpreteerd kan worden om discussie over te voeren?

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 11:38 schreef Lyrebird het volgende:

[..]

Mag jij wel stemmen?

Grofweg 1 op de 2 Amerikanen denkt er trouwens anders over.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:01 schreef Nober het volgende:
Make America Great Again!

LIVE: President Trump in Houston, TX

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:03 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Waarom elke keer wanneer die seniele idioot op een podium staat een link posten? Zijn retoriek heeft dezelfde inhoud als in 2016. Er zijn meer republikeinen die campagne voeren! plaats daar een link van!

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 11:38 schreef Lyrebird het volgende:

[..]

Mag jij wel stemmen?

Grofweg 1 op de 2 Amerikanen denkt er trouwens anders over.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:14 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Ik mag daar niet stemmen, maar het staat je natuurlijk vrij om te verduidelijken wat je positief vindt aan de boodschap van de republikeinen.

Dat 1 op de 2 wat denkt zegt me niet zoveel. Ze stevenen hard af om qua demografie de partij voor uitsluitend de blanke man zonder college+ opleiding te worden. En voor zover ik kan inschatten op basis van bangmakerij en leugens ipv positief beleid.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:11 schreef Nober het volgende:

[..]

Daar is dit topic toch voor? Daarom dus. Die lokale politici boeit verder niemand.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:17 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Volgens mij trekken de Reps juist meer en meer blanke vrouwen, african-american mannen (vrouwen weet ik even niet), en hispanics aan. Het zijn iig groeiende groepen binnen de reps.
Dus dat "uitsluitend" klopt gewoon niet.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:22 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Bron hiervoor? Voor zover ik weet is dat niet significant veranderd sinds 2017, en toen was het ook niet significant anders dan 2014 of 2010.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:30 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Tis iets wat ik in de loop der tijd op meerdere plekken heb gelezen. Bron kan ik je helaas niet geven.
Dus neem maar met een korreltje zout.

Wat ik zo snel kan vinden.
https://eu.usatoday.com/s(...)sen-poll/1013212002/

Trump approval rating onder african americans is (was?) hoog, behoorlijk hoog ten opzichte van zelfde moment jaar eerder. En ja Trump != Reps, maar tis wel een teken aan de wand.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:40 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:
Amerikanen geilen echt op belastingverlagingen trouwens. Heb dat nooit zo begrepen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:50 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Wat is er mis mee om meer van je eigen geld te behouden?
Ik heb juist nooit begrepen hoe men het hier zo slaafs accepteerd dat de staat recht heeft op jou verdiensten.
Het is net alsof de staat hier heilig is en daar is in mijn optiek een gezonde wantrouwen naar de staat.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:50 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Wat is er mis mee om meer van je eigen geld te behouden?
Ik heb juist nooit begrepen hoe men het hier zo slaafs accepteerd dat de staat recht heeft op jou verdiensten.
Het is net alsof de staat hier heilig is en daar is in mijn optiek een gezonde wantrouwen naar de staat.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:40 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:
Amerikanen geilen echt op belastingverlagingen trouwens. Heb dat nooit zo begrepen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:50 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Wat is er mis mee om meer van je eigen geld te behouden?
Ik heb juist nooit begrepen hoe men het hier zo slaafs accepteerd dat de staat recht heeft op jou verdiensten.
Het is net alsof de staat hier heilig is en daar is in mijn optiek een gezonde wantrouwen naar de staat.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 13:10 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Zelfs voor een libertarier is dat niet echt een slim antwoord.

Zelfs al zou je helemaal geen overheid willen dan zou je nog in je gemeenschap mee moeten betalen aan bepaalde voorzieningen als je bij die gemeenschap wil blijven horen. Je zou veel dingen helemaal soeverein kunnen regelen maar dat is in veel gevallen financieel helemaal niet gunstig en dan is het verstandiger om de regels van de gemeenschap te accepteren.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 13:14 schreef AnneX het volgende:

[..]

What about infrastructure? Wegen, bruggen, tunnels, dijken

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 13:18 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Ja dat zijn dus zaken die individueel niet te doen zijn, betekend nog niet automatisch dat deze zaken alleen door een overheid geregeld kunnen worden trouwens en ook in een libertarische samenleving zul je daar aan mee moeten betalen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:14 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Ik mag daar niet stemmen, maar het staat je natuurlijk vrij om te verduidelijken wat je positief vindt aan de boodschap van de republikeinen.

Dat 1 op de 2 wat denkt zegt me niet zoveel. Ze stevenen hard af om qua demografie de partij voor uitsluitend de blanke man zonder college+ opleiding te worden. En voor zover ik kan inschatten op basis van bangmakerij en leugens ipv positief beleid.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:42 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

En approval ratings is iets heel anders dan een stem, natuurlijk.

Maar goed, als je naar recent onderzoek van Pew kijkt is het aantal (van alle) vrouwen dat zich als democraat identificeert inmiddels 56%, het meeste sinds 1992. In het geval van rassen zitten de Democraten bij de Afro-Amerikanen voor 84%, hispanics op 63% en Aziaten op 65% qua hoe ze zich identificeren. Republikeinen komen, ter vergelijking, bij Afro-Amerikanen op 8% uit tegenwoordig, bij die andere rond de 25%.

Republikeinen laten op die vlakken ook weinig verandering zien. Het verschilt bijvoorbeeld wel een paar procent ten opzichte van 2010 of iets dergelijks, maar dat komt voornamelijk omdat de samenleving als geheel ook een andere samenstelling krijgt. Er is geen hele duidelijke trek van die groepen naar de Republikeinen toe.

quote:

Er is wel een groep die duidelijk meer richting de Republikeinen trekt de afgelopen jaren, dat wel.

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:08 schreef Lord-Ronddraai het volgende:
Ah okay, dus onderwijs volgens is voor dombo's. Ja ik denk wel dat Amerika met zo'n instelling nog lang mee kan in de kennis economie.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:13 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Ja dat is precies wat ik zeg

(...)

Wat ik zeg is dat "Highschoolers" voor dom uitmaken nergens op slaat.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:04 schreef Refragmental het volgende:
Ik snap dat je een punt probeert te maken dat vooral domme mensen republikein stemmen.
Echter... zijn die mensen wel zo dom?

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:23 schreef zarGon het volgende:

[..]

Wel interessant dat jij dit zegt.

Die user (Ludachrist) post alleen vier grafieken, en geeft daarbij alleen aan "dat er wel een groep is die duidelijk meer richting de Republikeinen trekt de afgelopen jaren".

Hij zegt verder niets over die groep.

Jij daarentegen reageert daarop met:

[..]

De enige die het woord "dom" gebruikt, ben jij. .
En vervolgens ga je met jezelf in discussie. .

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 12:40 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:
Amerikanen geilen echt op belastingverlagingen trouwens. Heb dat nooit zo begrepen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:29 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

1776 hè. De VS begon met een groep slavenhouders die geen belasting wilden betalen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:28 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

We kunnen ook gewoon een toneelstukje opvoeren en dingen gaan bedenken wat er nou precies bedoeld werd.
Maar jij weet, net als ik, precies wat Ludachrist met die uitspraak probeert te zeggen.

Het wordt hier tenslotte wel vaker geroepen dat reps kiezers zo dom en laagopgeleid zijn.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:13 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Ja dat is precies wat ik zeg

Nee dus.
Wat ik zeg is dat "Highschoolers" voor dom uitmaken nergens op slaat.
Er is namelijk niks doms aan het enkel afronden van een highschool opleiding.
Vooral wanneer je kijkt naar de gigantische studieschulden die je opbouwt wanneer je voor een bachelor en/of master zou gaan.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:33 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Vanuit die slavenhouders is inderdaad de Democratic party ontstaan.
Apart stukje geschiedenis. Hier in nederland helaas wat minder uitgelicht.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:36 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

En vanuit de belastingontduikers de GOP.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:34 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:

[..]

Het is niet dom, maar nu ook niet net gaan doen dat kennis omhoog gaat of behouden blijft als mensen niet verder gaan dan high school.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 13:49 schreef Lord-Ronddraai het volgende:

[..]

Jawel vrijwel alle zaken die de overheid regelt zijn anders natuurlijke monopolies. Gezien libertariërs voor zover ik weet fan zijn van vrije markten hebben die dus ook een overheid nodig die vrijwel alles regelt. Probleem is alleen dat ze zelf vaak niet weten hoe markten werken, daarom zijn het ook libertariers.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:34 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:

[..]

Het is niet dom, maar nu ook niet net gaan doen dat kennis omhoog gaat of behouden blijft als mensen niet verder gaan dan high school.

En die schulden mag je heel rustig terugbetalen. Daarnaast geeft het veel mensen een kans op beter werk ipv in een kolenmijn staan. Laten we vooral alleen rijke mensen toestaan in het onderwijs.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 13:51 schreef Lyrebird het volgende:

[..]

Weet je, ik had niet zo veel met die partij, omdat ik fiscaal conservatief ben. Er zou niet meer mogen worden uitgegeven door de overheid, dan dat er binnen komt. Daarnaast vind ik dat je de rente aan de markt moet overlaten, en niet aan een aan de overheid gelieerd instituut (Federal Reserve) die aan de knoppen gaat draaien 'om de economie te helpen'.

Ik heb me enorm gestoord aan de verkiezing van Trump. Hij is met miljarden aan steun "gratis" door de media in het zadel geholpen.

Maar.

Trump doet zich veel dommer voor dan dat hij werkelijk is. Hij beheerst bepaalde aspecten van het politieke spel tot in de finesse. Ik moet heel eerlijk bekennen dat ik eigenlijk best wel onder de indruk ben van wat er tot nu toe gepresteerd is.

En dat brengt me bij Kavanaugh.

Tot de benoeming van Kavanaugh had ik niks met Trump, maar de manier waarop de Democraten Kavanaugh door het slijk hebben gehaald, en zich daarmee zelf te kakken hebben gezet, laat zien dat alleen een straatvechter van het kaliber Trump op dit moment genoeg tegengas kan geven aan de engnekken bij de Democratische partij. Nog even een stapje terug. Welke idioot bij de Democraten heeft überhaupt besloten dat er genoeg bewijs was om Kavanaugh in zo'n kwaad daglicht te zetten? Als serieuze partij laat je je toch niet in met dat soort wishful thinking?

Dems of GOP? Het zou mij niet verbazen als de Republikeinen de Senaat winnen, en op een nipt verlies in het HvA uitkomen. En ik hoop op winst.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:42 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Juist, highschoolers staan in kolenmijnen en mensen met een bachelor/master zorgen voor kennis. Redelijk bekrompen.

Ik denk dat je onderschat hoe groot die studieschulden zijn en overschat wat de vooruitzichten op beter werk zijn. Vooral in studie gebieden als Kunst en Gender Studies.

De VS heeft overigens veel meer vakmensen nodig vanwege hun falende infrastructuur. Dat zijn inderdaad highschoolers die niet direct bijdragen aan de kennis economie. Maar je hebt die mensen wel nodig. Want zonder degelijke fundering van vakmensen, geen fatsoenlijke infrastructuur, waardoor je kennis economie ook veel minder stabiel is.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:04 schreef Refragmental het volgende:
Ik snap dat je een punt probeert te maken dat vooral domme mensen republikein stemmen.
Echter... zijn die mensen wel zo dom?

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:37 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Dan hebben ze "gezond verstand" of zo.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:42 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Juist, highschoolers staan in kolenmijnen en mensen met een bachelor/master zorgen voor kennis. Redelijk bekrompen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:45 schreef Kansenjongere het volgende:

[..]

En dan vervolgens zelf met bekrompen gelul komen dat de high school dropouts vakmensen zijn en de hogeropgeleiden werkloos...

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:44 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Mwah.
De persoon die na z'n highschool diploma stopt om verder te gaan als specialist in de bouw vind ik verstandiger dan de persoon die 100+k schuld heeft opgebouwd voor een gender studies master en vervolgens nergens aan de bak komt en dus burgers moet gaan flippen.

Jij niet dan?

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:44 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Nee, ik zeg gewoon dat je onder de groep blanke mensen die niet hoger dan de high school hebben afgerond een steeds grotere sympathie voor de Republikeinen vindt, in tegenstelling tot de groepen die jij eerder opnoemde.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:47 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Sure.

Maar degene die denkt dat bovengenoemd scenario de norm is, is in mijn ogen dan weer een domme debiel.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:42 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Juist, highschoolers staan in kolenmijnen en mensen met een bachelor/master zorgen voor kennis. Redelijk bekrompen.

Ik denk dat je onderschat hoe groot die studieschulden zijn en overschat wat de vooruitzichten op beter werk zijn. Vooral in studie gebieden als Kunst en Gender Studies.

De VS heeft overigens veel meer vakmensen nodig vanwege hun falende infrastructuur. Dat zijn inderdaad highschoolers die niet direct bijdragen aan de kennis economie. Maar je hebt die mensen wel nodig. Want zonder degelijke fundering van vakmensen, geen fatsoenlijke infrastructuur, waardoor je kennis economie ook veel minder stabiel is.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:45 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Ik heb dus nooit geroepen dat belastingen op zich niet geheven moeten worden.
Ik vind dat er wel een gezonde wantrouwen tegen de staat moet zijn en dat er wel eens aan lastenverlichtingen gedaan mag worden.
In mijn ogen is er helemaal niets mis met een politicus die de intentie heeft om belastingen te verlagen en als burger kan ik niet begrijpen waarom je daar per definitie tegen moet zijn.
Belastingverlaging hoeft niet meteen te betekenen dat de infrastructuur compleet instort ofzo. Het is juist een prikkel voor politici om verstandiger met het geld om te gaan wat door ons burgers word opgebracht.

quote:

Ik persoonlijk denk dat het een verschil is in cultuur tussen Europeanen en Amerikanen, hier is de staat heilig verklaard en daar heeft men een gezonde wantrouwen tegenover de staat.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:47 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Jammer, je had ook gewoon eerlijk kunnen zijn en toe kunnen geven dat je insinueerde dat voornamelijk domme mensen R stemmen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:47 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Jammer, je had ook gewoon eerlijk kunnen zijn en toe kunnen geven dat je insinueerde dat voornamelijk domme mensen R stemmen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:50 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Ongeveer 40% van de mensen met een post-doc stemt waarschijnlijk Republikeins, waarom zou ik dan in hemelsnaam insinueren dat ze voornamelijk domme mensen trekken?

Ze doen het tegenwoordig goed bij de blanke arbeidersklasse. Dat jij die dom vindt moet je zelf weten, maar dat zijn niet mijn woorden.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:52 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Wat ik zeg. Jammer.
Je insinueert... maar neemt vervolgens geen verantwoordelijkheid voor die insinuatie, om daarna ook nog eens te ontkennen.

Volgende keer graag duidelijker zijn in je uitspraken.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:52 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Wat ik zeg. Jammer.
Je insinueert... maar neemt vervolgens geen verantwoordelijkheid voor die insinuatie, om daarna ook nog eens te ontkennen.

Volgende keer graag duidelijker zijn in je uitspraken.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:56 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Lekker makkelijk jongen, zelf een heel betoog optuigen van wat ik gezegd zou hebben, en als ik dan uitleg geef over wat ik bedoel roepen dat ik op slinkse wijze iets anders bedoelde.

En dat terwijl ik iedereen, ook jou, heb horen roepen dat het juist de arbeidersklasse in Michigan en dergelijke was die Trump naar de overwinning heeft gestemd, dat hij de normale man wist te bereiken die klaar was met de elitaire identiteitspolitiek van de Democraten. Nou, dat zie je in die grafiek, de arbeidersklasse neigt steeds meer naar de Republikeinen door de jaren heen. De elitaire balletjes met hun omhooggevallen kutstudies neigen meer naar de Democraten. Ik snap niet hoe je dit opeens zo confronterend vindt.

quote:

Er is wel een groep die duidelijk meer richting de Republikeinen trekt de afgelopen jaren, dat wel.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:01 schreef Refragmental het volgende:
Hierin zit een bepaalde toon.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:10 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
Voor de discussie hier compleet verzandt, want Euribob is er helaas niet meer.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:13 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Dat is de nieuwe policy geloof ik. Meer Stormfrontpage in Pol.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:08 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]
Jij bent degene die ze dom noemt. Ik noem ze nergens zo. Het is wel gewoon een feit dat het blanke mensen zijn met maximaal een high school diploma.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:36 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

En vanuit de belastingontduikers de GOP.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:18 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Waar noem ik ze dom?
Ik ging er (terecht) van uit dat dat je insinuatie was. Nergens heb ik ze zelf dom genoemd.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:27 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

. Hou op hoor.

quote:

Je begint een betoog over dat ik ze dom noem (wat niet zo is).

quote:

Vervolgens zeg je dat er niks doms is aan het alleen behalen van een high school diploma.

quote:

Daarmee stel je dat mensen met alleen een high school diploma niet dom zijn.

quote:

De groep is echter mensen met ten hoogste een high school diploma, waarmee je dientengevolge insinueert ( ) dat mensen zónder high school diploma wel dom zijn.

quote:

Dat gezegd hebbende is de redenatie die je vervolgens hanteert om aan te tonen dat die mensen eigenlijk heel slim zijn natuurlijk te simpel voor woorden,

quote:

maar dat laat ik maar even voor wat het is verder.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:35 schreef Refragmental het volgende:
Hier heb ik 0,0 uitspraken over gedaan. En ook nergens geinsunieerd. Hoe je hier dus op komt, geen idee. Tenzij je specifieke uitspraken kunt quoten en kunt uitleggen waarom jij daar een insinuatie in leest.

quote:

Nergens is dat mijn redenatie. Geen dingen lezen die er niet zijn.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:21 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Ik wacht nog op een bron.
Vind het vooral interessante geschiedenis.
Vooral wanneer je kijkt naar de mythe dat de partijen zouden zijn geswitcht.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:36 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic-Republican_Party

En daar kun je nog wat meer linkjes vinden. Succes.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:40 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Ik denk dat jij net zoals de meesten eigenlijk geen idee hebt wat libertarisme nu precies inhoud, zo zijn private partijen niet per definitie marktpartijen met winstoogmerk en zijn veel zaken die de overheid nu regelt zoals zorg en onderwijs ook prima privaat te regelen zonder dat dit zal leiden tot monopolies.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:47 schreef Lord-Ronddraai het volgende:

[..]

Eh, ik heb gewoon Hayek en Friedman gelezen. En je hebt gelijk dat private partijen niet per definitie een winstoogmerk hoeven hebben. Het punt is dat zonder controle van buitenaf, bijvoorbeeld door een overheid zijn of goede journalistiek dit toch meestal het geval gaat zijn. Dat de zorg prima zonder overheid zou kunnen werken zonder dat er monopolies komen is eerlijk gezegd lachwekkend, kijk maar eens naar de prijzen van medicijnen die marginaal verbeterd zijn de afgelopen jaren ze gaan nog steeds rap omhoog. In Amerika waar de zorg veel meer geprivatiseerd is dan hier zie je ook dat de kosten gigantisch veel hoger zijn dan hier. Dit staat in geen verhouding tot hoeveel beter de zorg daar is. Ja in Amerika is de zorg over het algemeen iets beter, maar ook 30% van de gofundme pagina's is vervolgens voor mensen die dit niet kunnen betalen.
https://www.forbes.com/si(...)k-health-care-costs/
Een interessante video hierover is bijvoorbeeld
https://www.vpro.nl/progr(...)eperdure-pillen.html

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:57 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Op het moment dat je in een goedlopende economie de belasting verlaagt loop je een enorm risico bij een recessie. Dan heb je geen mogelijkheid meer om de economie aan te trappen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:58 schreef Lyrebird het volgende:

[..]

Hoe werkt dat, een economie aantrappen?

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 16:18 schreef archito het volgende:

[..]

Investeringen doen vanuit de overheid zodat er meer geld en werk in de markt komt. Dat kan niet als je nu de overheidsschuld al enorm laat oplopen en een tekort hebt. Door juist een overschot te hebben in economisch goede tijden kan de overheid meer investeren in slechte tijden zodat de conjunctuur afgezwakt wordt.

Vergelijk deze 2 grafieken maar eens:

https://countryeconomy.com/deficit/netherlands

https://countryeconomy.com/deficit/usa

Daarin zie je dat de VS in afgelopen 2 jaar in tegenstelling tot Nederland een tekort op de begroting houdt. Dit betekent dus dat een crisis in de VS harder zal aankomen in Nederland omdat Nederland hier op dit moment voor 'spaart' om in slechtere tijden de crisis te kunnen verzachten.
Een euro in een crisis investeren heeft veel meer effect dan een euro in een oververhitte economie.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 16:28 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Er zijn natuurlijk nog wel meer zaken die een rol spelen. De ECB hanteert een rentepercentage van 0,4% op het moment geloof ik. De Fed zit daarentegen alweer op 2,25%.
Ook dat is het gevolg van het verschil in overheidsbeleid. Na de crisis is er onder Obama in de VS gekozen voor anti-cyclisch beleid met hele forse tekorten tot gevolg. Dat zorgt natuurlijk wel voor een grotere (absolute) staatsschuld, maar tegelijkertijd hersteld de economie ook wel veel sneller dan wanneer je zoals in Europa vol inzet op spaarzaamheid.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 13:51 schreef Lyrebird het volgende:

[..]


Maar.

Trump doet zich veel dommer voor dan dat hij werkelijk is. Hij beheerst bepaalde aspecten van het politieke spel tot in de finesse. I

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:21 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Ik wacht nog op een bron.
Vind het vooral interessante geschiedenis.
Vooral wanneer je kijkt naar de mythe dat de partijen zouden zijn geswitcht.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 23-10-2018 om 16:30:00 A new report estimates that Bush and Trump era tax cuts for the wealthy have cost $2 trillion, the same amount that Republicans have proposed cutting from Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Obamacare. https://t.co/QSuVEpsFqp reageer retweet

quote:

Democrats on the congressional Joint Economic Committee issued the study, based on calculations by the non-profit Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, late last week. It shows that the estimated $2 trillion cost of the Bush and Trump-era tax cuts through 2025 is the same amount which Republicans have proposed cutting from Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Obamacare.

"It is a dollar-for-dollar transfer of benefits to those who need help the least paid for by those who need help the most," said Phil Schiliro, a Democrat who’s served in several government positions including as President Obama’s legislative director.

While the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy is a nonpartisan think tank, it is aligned with Citizens for Tax Justice, which advocates for “tax fairness” and has been critical of tax cuts dating to the Reagan administration.

The report, called "Families & Seniors Foot the Bill for GOP Tax Cuts," includes state-by-state and district-by-district level data, and concludes that the average beneficiary from social safety net programs would stand to lose $1,500 a year under proposed cuts. And it comes as President Donald Trump is teasing another potential tax cut ahead of the midterm elections.

The House Budget Committee vote in June proposing $2 trillion in entitlement cuts got little attention, but the new report comes as Democrats are trying to short-circuit a surge in GOP enthusiasm around the midterms that could hinder their attempt to win back control of the House and, especially, the Senate.

Bron

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 14:47 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Jammer, je had ook gewoon eerlijk kunnen zijn en toe kunnen geven dat je insinueerde dat voornamelijk domme mensen R stemmen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 16:34 schreef archito het volgende:

[..]

Het probleem is alleen de overgang van anti-cyclisch beleid van Obama naar pro-cyclisch beleid door Trump, daardoor lopen tekorten dubbel hard op. Na het enorm snelle herstel hadden ze groei wat kunnen afremmen ten bate van het overheidstekort, maar dat is natuurlijk geen populair beleid.
Dat zie je in Nederland ook wel een beetje terug, de regering wil graag 'geven'. Gelukkig houden we hier een klein overschot zodat er een aardig evenwicht is tussen de overheidsfinanciën verbeteren en het stimuleren van de economie.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:18 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Waar noem ik ze dom?
Ik ging er (terecht) van uit dat dat je insinuatie was. Nergens heb ik ze zelf dom genoemd.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 19:06 schreef Geytenbeekje het volgende:
Ik las in de Volkskrant dat in Wisconsin de Democraten op winnen staan...

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 19:11 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Baldwin? Die staat er wel goed voor ja.
Wat het huis betreft lijkt het 3-3 te zijn in zetels die eigenlijk sowieso wel beslist lijken en dan nog 2 waar de Republikeinen de beste papieren hebben.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 19:13 schreef Geytenbeekje het volgende:

[..]

Nee, Randy Bryce lijkt het daar goed te doen..

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 19:22 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Waar baseren ze dat op? Er zijn vrij weinig peilingen. FiveThirtyEight heeft er maar twee en de meest recente is meer dan een maand oud.
Daar komen ze mede door vergelijkbare districten en fundamentals tot een kans van pakweg 20% voor Bryce.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 19:32 schreef Geytenbeekje het volgende:

[..]

https://www.volkskrant.nl(...)-heroveren~bd0ecfc0/

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 15:53 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

En waarom is dat lachwekkend? Zoek maar eens uit waarom de prijzen van medicijnen zo hoog zijn en dan kom je er al vrij snel achter dat het met marktwerking niks te maken heeft.

quote:

Er zijn wereldwijd genoeg voorbeelden te vinden van zorg wat succesvoller door de markt geregeld kan worden dan door de overheid, zoals tandartszorg in Mexico en Taiwan. Maar ja waar jij waarschijnlijk naar kijkt zijn de mislukte privatiseringen hier (en in de VS) waar een paar partijen een monopolie krijgen van de overheid.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 19:43 schreef Nintex het volgende:
Republikeinen staan voor in iedere staat behalve Nevada
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/republicans-outpacing-democrats-early-voting-key-states-nbc-news-finds-n922881

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 20:01 schreef Lord-Ronddraai het volgende:

[..]

Omdat medicijnen een markt zijn waar vrijheid van keuze nooit mogelijk gaat zijn. Als je een bepaald medicijn nodig hebt kun je niet kiezen het niet te nemen. Dus op die manier wordt je eenzelfde keuze geboden als elke dief die zegt je geld of je leven doet. Op die manier worden voor sommige medicijnen tonnen per jaar gevraagd, mensen geven alles om niet dood te gaan.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 13:51 schreef Lyrebird het volgende:

[..]

Trump doet zich veel dommer voor dan dat hij werkelijk is. Hij beheerst bepaalde aspecten van het politieke spel tot in de finesse. Ik moet heel eerlijk bekennen dat ik eigenlijk best wel onder de indruk ben van wat er tot nu toe gepresteerd is.

quote:

En dat brengt me bij Kavanaugh.

Tot de benoeming van Kavanaugh had ik niks met Trump, maar de manier waarop de Democraten Kavanaugh door het slijk hebben gehaald, en zich daarmee zelf te kakken hebben gezet, laat zien dat alleen een straatvechter van het kaliber Trump op dit moment genoeg tegengas kan geven aan de engnekken bij de Democratische partij. Nog even een stapje terug. Welke idioot bij de Democraten heeft überhaupt besloten dat er genoeg bewijs was om Kavanaugh in zo'n kwaad daglicht te zetten? Als serieuze partij laat je je toch niet in met dat soort wishful thinking?

quote:

Dems of GOP? Het zou mij niet verbazen als de Republikeinen de Senaat winnen, en op een nipt verlies in het HvA uitkomen. En ik hoop op winst.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 20:28 schreef Monolith het volgende:
Ik heb Lyrebird hier eigenlijk ook nog nooit gehoord over de schandelijke wijze waarop Clinton destijds "door het slijk gehaald werd", waarin ene Brett K. ook een rol speelde.

quote:

Op dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 20:28 schreef Oostwoud het volgende:

[..]

Ah.. ja, de vast right-wing conspiracy, later omgedoopt tot een basket of deplorables, is het niet?