The real talking point here is that when Trump repeals the individual mandate Obamacare ceases to be Obamacare - you can spin it like the media any way you want but effectively once that provision is repealed Obamacare wont exist anymore. Think of it this way - If you take the technology out of a self driving car it becomes just like any other car on the road. There are plenty of insurance policies written in the US every year that include covering pre existing illness and such policies existed long before Obamacare.

So many holes in your analysis. I don't have time to rebuke all of these but let me point out one example - my comment "that will never happen" refers to true objectivity in journalism but you chose to apply it to American divide. Kinda the exact same thing that so often happened with the news media in this election.

ah I believe the issue in the thread was how this applies to Trump somehow reversing/compromising his position on Obamacare and certainly not what you just stated.

Nobody is pretending anything - Some of your talking point analysis of my conclusions are worded far too general to invalidate my specific observations. One thing for sure though is that Trump is definitely not going back on his vow to repeal Obamacare. The individual mandate provision is the only stipulation that doesn't exist anywhere else in other insurance policies. If you have evidence where Trump said these other provisions now being talked about in the news were horrible I might then entertain your conclusions. Obamacare IS and ALWAYS has been 100% about the individual mandate and I'm pretty sure Trump hasn't moved even
.00000000000000000000000000001 per cent on that.

In the 2016 presidential election, most major news agencies completely lost all objectivity. The look on the journalist's faces as Trump racked up the electoral votes was priceless. Martha Raddatz, like most of the others, with her Clinton loving tears, should be ashamed to call themselves journalist. Maintaining objectivity should always be the compelling backbone of journalism.

And now after the election, most major news agencies have been focused on trying to explain how they got it so wrong. News Flash - people that liked Trump voted for Trump / people that didn't like Trump voted for Clinton / people that liked Clinton voted for Clinton / people that didn't like Clinton voted for Trump. Some people voted for other candidates. Yes it was really that simple. Yet most major news medias are still hung up on the same kind of analysis that they have already proved that they really didn't have a clue about.

And it also seems that the other news media focus these days is in trying to catch Trump in a lie or a contradiction. Take Trumps tweets about the protestors. Can someone definitely say Trumps tweets were about the same group of protestors? And what about how Obamacare is being covered. Trump hasn't reversed or contradicted or compromised his position on Obamacare. A person has always been able to buy insurance policies other than Obamacare that included pre existing conditions and also always buy policies that keep their children covered after a certain age. I don't recall anyone reporting that Trump said that these provisions which can be a part of any insurance policy were horrible ideas. The heart and soul of Obamacare was the individual mandate requiring everyone to purchase insurance. I'm pretty sure that one will get repealed. Obamacare will quickly die without the individual mandate provision cause the remaining insurers will flee. So how do these secondary provisions of Obamacare now become the major news story that Trump is somehow contradicting or reversing his position on Obamacare? Answer - once again there is no objectivity.

True objective journalism could really go a long way in rectifying the divide among Americans. That will never happen but at least most people can now see just how dishonest the news media was in the 2016 election.

I think you hit the nail squarely on the head posting that quote - that is exactly what Hillary Clinton and all her supporters did as well as the news media who got it SO SO SO WRONG !

Really now...Trump is the nominee because of the values of his supporters...
the problem is liberals and the news media want to impose and identify his supporters as if all are zombie like clones....this is the same mistake Cruz, Bush, and a few more made and they still have NO CLUE just like the people who like to assume.

Just keep assuming all you want - this only shows that you don't have a clue as to how or why Trump is the Republican nominee or why on election day Trump will be President. Clue - it has nothing to do with those nine assumptions!

Seems to me that you too have totally missed the whole point - as did the President, the Congress, and the media - That point being that analysis and comments about Trumps remarks overwhelmingly overshadowed any other discussions about the real issues.

Semantics aren't necessary here - Trumps comment about the election and voter fraud has been the overwhelming focus since the debate ended - sure one can dig comments on the rest of the real issues discussed in the debate out but why should one have to when Trumps remarks should have gotten subordinate attention in the 1st place

This thread is about the fact that NO ONE (our President, our Congress, or Our Press) cares anything about the real issues facing this country - if they did they surely wouldn't be just talking the day after a presidential debate about what Donald Trump said about the election or voter fraud except in a passing reference. This surely shouldn't be the focus considering the overwhelming complicated issues this country is facing today.

Our present administration (both the president and all of Congress- most republicans and all the democrats it seems)as well as all the major news agencies are more interested in Trump saying that he'd like to withhold judgement about the election and look into voter fraud than any of them are about the issues this nation faces - issues like what the candidates said on health insurance, the economy, foreign affairs, immigration, abortion etc.

This is so sad - so very sad. It is no wonder that this country has so many issues to solve when the President and Congress and all the news agencies after a debate mainly only focus on one candidate saying that he'd like to withhold judgement about the election and look into voter fraud. On a scale of everything else happening that needs attention is this really what the main focus should or needs to be?

sounds like one of my bean eating episodes...in the men's bathroom at the mal not realizing their was a man in the handicapped stall that couldn't talk only groan...I had to go BAD...and the smell was beyond AWFUL...the poor guy started groaning and banging his cane on the metal...I quickly finished...washed up...headed out the door only to run into his son who said..."I swear Dad if you don't quit eating them beans they are going to kill you..." Although I have laughed about it many times I still feel bad for letting the old guy take the blame!

if the shoe was on the other foot...Russia would definitely advise Crimea to do just that...

SIMFEROPOL, Crimea (AP) — Within days of Crimea being swallowed up by Russia, the lights began flickering out.

Officials in the peninsula accused Ukraine of halving electricity supplies in order to bully Crimea, which voted earlier this month in a referendum to secede and join Russia.

"Cutting supplies is an attempt by Kiev to blackmail Russia through Crimea," Crimean Prime Minister Sergei Aksyonov wrote on his Twitter account.

Aksyonov's combative reaction reflects a sobering reality for Crimea: the strategic peninsula's overwhelming reliance on electricity and water supplies from mainland Ukraine. The Kiev government, which has been unable to prevent the Russian annexation, still wields a weapon it can use to bargain with its aggressive neighbor.

Crimea currently gets about 80 percent of its electricity and a similar share of its water needs from Ukraine.

But Ukraine also needs to be careful not to hit Crimeans too hard over electricity and water. It cannot afford to be seen hurting ordinary people as it argues that the region remains part of its territory.

Analysts say that Ukraine will likely be able to charge higher prices for power and water supplies to Crimea, but won't get any leverage on political and security issues.

Ukrainian authorities have described power cutoffs to Crimea this week as simply the result of technical maintenance and insist they would do nothing to harm residents. Russian officials have rushed to the rescue with hundreds of diesel generators and started drafting plans to connect the region's electrical grid to mainland Russia, which is separated from Crimea by the Kerch Strait. They said a possible water shortage could be offset by more efficient use of existing resources.

Those reassurances have provided little comfort to Filipp Savchenko, the 29-year-old owner of a refrigeration and logistics business in Simferopol, the Crimean capital. Savchenko said Tuesday that the power had been out for two nights at his warehouse, where he stores about $9,000 of produce daily for his clients.

"With the help of the generators we have, we were able to survive," Savchenko said. "But if they turn (the electricity) off in the future or for longer, we won't be able to cope. We'll lose our produce and business owners will have legal issues with us."

Regardless of the intention behind the recent blackouts, they have underscored Crimea's dependency on mainland Ukraine. They also highlight its lack of a real contingency plan if Kiev does decide to pull the plug. Russia's long-term projects could eventually snap Crimea's reliance on Ukraine for good, but that could take years.

Russia's Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said this week that a quick solution for the power problem could be to use a transmission cable to hook up the peninsula to Russia's power grid across the Kerch Strait, which is 4.5 kilometers (2.8 miles) wide at its narrowest point.

Russia has dispatched diesel generators, including some big units used as a back-up during the recent Sochi Winter Games. Russian Emergency Situations Minister Vladimir Puchkov said Tuesday that his agency had already delivered 1,400 diesel generators to Crimea.

For the longer term, the Crimean regional government has pushed the idea of building two power plants on the peninsula. Ambitious infrastructure projects in Russia are typically blighted by major overspend and corruption.

Irrigation has long been a headache for Crimea, and could become so again, should Ukraine choose to apply pressure by closing off the Soviet-built canals fed by the Dnipro River, a major waterway that streams through the heart of the country. The canal system that feeds Crimea was built only after the peninsula was transferred in 1954 by Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev to his native Ukraine.

Deputy Crimean premier Rustam Temirgaliyev has grimly acknowledged that the peninsula has not to date found any alternative to water supplies from the Dnipro.

But Dmitry Kirillov, the head of water resources department at Russia's Natural Resources Ministry, said that Crimea's potential water problem isn't that threatening. He argued that the agricultural sector accounts for the bulk of the region's water consumption, and a possible water shortage can be overcome simply by stopping the cultivation of some crops, such as rice, and focusing on traditional winemaking.

Adversity for the peninsula may prove an opportunity for Ukraine, which is already signaling its intent to withdraw some of the state subsidies for essential resources that have kept prices relatively low.

Sergei Sobolev, head of the parliamentary faction of the Fatherland party, whose leading members now dominate the government, has argued that special tariffs should be established for power and water supplies to Crimea.

The need to raise funds for Ukraine's cash-strapped treasury will prove particularly acute against the backdrop of reported Russian plans to increase the price of natural gas to $405 per thousand cubic meters. Late last year, Russia agreed to help prop up the teetering government of now-ousted President Viktor Yanukovych by selling Ukraine gas at $268.50 per thousand cubic meters, but it has recently announced a decision to scrap the discount.

"We have no intention of subsidizing citizens of the Russian Federation: the occupiers that have now deployed their armed contingents on temporarily occupied territory," Sobolev was cited as telling parliament this week by the UNIAN news agency.

Sobolev said that prices for gas and electricity in Crimea are priced four times below market cost and that water is provided at one-seventh of its real value.

Vladimir Omelchenko, an energy analyst at the respected Kiev-based Razumkov Center think tank, said Ukrainian companies will now charge prices that would bring a profit. He said it would be unrealistic to expect that Ukraine could win security guarantees from Moscow or persuade it to return the Ukrainian military equipment seized in Crimea.

Alexander Konovalov, the head of the Institute of Strategic Assessment and Analysis, an independent think-tank, said that Ukraine could potentially profit on its current monopoly on providing power and water supplier to Crimea. But he added that Moscow's refusal to engage in a dialogue with Ukraine's new government was hampering any meaningful dialogue.

"To start bargaining, you have to sit down for talks," Konovalov said. "And Russia has said the (Ukrainian) government is illegitimate."

Either way, many of the Crimeans who have supported the Russian annexation remain confident Russia will come to the rescue if matters get any more serious.

"We've lived through this before, I'll just go and buy some candles," said Olga Dusheyeva, an 81-year-old former math teacher. "I'm not scared, I know that Russia will always help us."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=294835780


like I stated...it seems the Russians are much better chess players...that doesn't surprise me with whose in the White House...Kerry is laughable...Hillary is a tougher man than him...there were so many options to stop Russian expansion...the only thing I agree with Obama on is that Russia should NOT get to take territory by force...one thing for sure...it will be a cold winter in Ukraine for awhile...

cut off electricity and water to Crimea...that why UN troops should already be stationed close to the Ukraine and Crimea border...and then the chess match could begin...

at school a principal is the prosecutor, jury, and judge...suspension are served before one has the chance to take it to the school board and get it overturned...and that is one of the biggest abuse of power today in the US...

that bout sums that up

Ron Paul, as usual has always had...ZERO CHANCE at the nomination

Romney overestimated the populations growing distrust of Obama as of election time...anmd the media did him in as well with the truthful 47% comment...

too bad he didn't take Charles Barkley over there with him...Charles would have picked the "grand marshall" up on a fast break and dunked him through the goal...

yup... geez, Obama had told enough actual lies...no need to fabricate one...love to see Obama questioned by Judge Judy lol...

I want some of those Mountain Dew flavored chips sold in Japan...but I need more $$$ from the govment to pay for the shipping lol...

original post super post for a Monday Morning !!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/foodbeast/er-mountain-dew-cheetos-h_b_4555084.html