who, really, is equipped to match wits with the Wizard of the Senate, but as I understand it, McConnell's scheme is:

1) get a yes vote on motion to proceed

2) endure no votes on both BRCA & ARRA, declare victory: "We voted to repeal!" Even though both their "repeal &/or replace" bills failed miserably. Tell president the first, let him/his staff figure out the 2nd, someday (probably after they've been tossed out of the White House)

3) go home for August, drink juleps

pacino wrote:unveiling parts of the democratic agenda:

On Monday Democrats unveiled three planks to their agenda:
—Lowering prescription drug prices. Suggestions include a new agency that could investigate drug manufacturer price hikes and allow Medicare to negotiate directly for the best drug prices.
—Cracking down on corporate monopolies. Democrats would enact new standards to limit large mergers, and create a new consumer competition advocate.
—Creating millions more jobs. The agenda includes proposals for expanding apprenticeships and providing a tax credit to employers to train and hire new workers.

President Obama started to work on this towards the end (they denied some mergers), but if we start to change the standard of what is a monopoly from 'does it affect prices' to 'does it affect wages/bargaining power' this could be big.

I am not sure that this is a winning path. It is going to be had to make the academic case of competition by breaking up the very employers that these folks work for. As a refresher, here are the 4 types of monopolies:

1. A single seller: only on seller exists for a good or service.
2. No substitutes: no close substitutes for the good or service the monopolist sells.
3. No entry: monopolist is protected by obstacles to competition that prevent others from entering the market.
4. Almost complete control of Market price: by controlling the available supply, the monopolist can control the market price.

These can be Geographic, Natural, Governmental, or Technological.

If you look at the history of The Reading Company you see what is today referred to as a vertical integration (from pulling stuff out of the ground to production, to transport). It very likely was the first conglomerate in the world, and it was worth at a value of $170M in 1871 ($3,284,457,542.88 today). The first company that jumps to mind in a modern context is... Amazon. So the pitch to everyday American becomes Amazon is bad. Where will this end up? at hole (or agreement with Trump and his beef with Beezos).

thephan wrote:

slugsrbad wrote:I refuse to feel bad for our racist AG. Trump is a coward trying to force him out because he can't use his catch phrase.

I love that they're teasing the idea of Ted Cruz, where the Senate is rolling out the red carpet to get rid of him. There was a great report last night on the local news that Ted was mentioned as a possible replacement, and that there are no known senators who will stand in the way of that happening because he so unpopular.

But Cruz would say no to the job, and I have no idea why anyone would voluntarily join this administration at this point, let alone give up a Senate seat to do so.

He's trashing basically the only senator who endorsed him enthusiastically.

thephan wrote:

pacino wrote:unveiling parts of the democratic agenda:

On Monday Democrats unveiled three planks to their agenda:
—Lowering prescription drug prices. Suggestions include a new agency that could investigate drug manufacturer price hikes and allow Medicare to negotiate directly for the best drug prices.
—Cracking down on corporate monopolies. Democrats would enact new standards to limit large mergers, and create a new consumer competition advocate.
—Creating millions more jobs. The agenda includes proposals for expanding apprenticeships and providing a tax credit to employers to train and hire new workers.

President Obama started to work on this towards the end (they denied some mergers), but if we start to change the standard of what is a monopoly from 'does it affect prices' to 'does it affect wages/bargaining power' this could be big.

I am not sure that this is a winning path. It is going to be had to make the academic case of competition by breaking up the very employers that these folks work for. As a refresher, here are the 4 types of monopolies:

1. A single seller: only on seller exists for a good or service.
2. No substitutes: no close substitutes for the good or service the monopolist sells.
3. No entry: monopolist is protected by obstacles to competition that prevent others from entering the market.
4. Almost complete control of Market price: by controlling the available supply, the monopolist can control the market price.

These can be Geographic, Natural, Governmental, or Technological.

If you look at the history of The Reading Company you see what is today referred to as a vertical integration (from pulling stuff out of the ground to production, to transport). It very likely was the first conglomerate in the world, and it was worth at a value of $170M in 1871 ($3,284,457,542.88 today). The first company that jumps to mind in a modern context is... Amazon. So the pitch to everyday American becomes Amazon is bad. Where will this end up? at hole (or agreement with Trump and his beef with Beezos).

amazon has been sending shockwaves and scaring small/medium businesses and industries for years. i don't think it would be as tough as you think to sell the public on it, but i actually don't think you go on the offensive against Amazon per se. they are a byproduct of our lax regulation and how we view what is and isn't considered monopolistic so you reform the system.

also, i dont care what trump this. he has no ideas. i'd cut him out of the conversation completely. i don't care about his fake feud with WaPo and Bezos.

pretty wild he is attacking sessions. the recusal was a long time ago. sessions is has been a good soldier in pushing trumps agenda. what more does the orange man want from sessions?

CalvinBall wrote:pretty wild he is attacking sessions. the recusal was a long time ago. sessions is has been a good soldier in pushing trumps agenda. what more does the orange man want from sessions?

complete and total fealty and for sessions to attack trump's perceived political enemies.

the state of our political world:

How Kid Rock Can Win Michigan's 2018 Senate Seat Jordan Gehrke, The Federalist

He is trying to make Sessions seem like an enemy to protect himself. Sessions is going along with it because he knows he'll get pardoned and he gets to do all the other AG stuff in the meantime. The feud looks fake to me.

We live in an amazing time.

CalvinBall wrote:pretty wild he is attacking sessions. the recusal was a long time ago. sessions is has been a good soldier in pushing trumps agenda. what more does the orange man want from sessions?

I think he wants Sessions to fire Mueller, he won't so he will get rid of Sessions to find someone who will.

Sessions can't fire Mueller since he recused himself. It's up to Rosenstein who hired Mueller. But if Trump can get Sessions to quit then he can appoint a new AG who can do the firing.

It's a stupid plan, fraught with horrible political consequences for Trump but there you have it.

JFLNYC wrote:Sessions can't fire Mueller since he recused himself. It's up to Rosenstein who hired Mueller. But if Trump can get Sessions to quit then he can appoint a new AG who can do the firing.

It's a stupid plan, fraught with horrible political consequences for Trump but there you have it.

lmao political consequences for trump

CalvinBall wrote:pretty wild he is attacking sessions. the recusal was a long time ago. sessions is has been a good soldier in pushing trumps agenda. what more does the orange man want from sessions?

this is directly from trump's playbook even for people he likes. public shaming, get them to fall in line. that's all it is.

plz feel free to quote and lol when he fires sessions.

87 minutes until the Senate votes to take away healthcare from millions

JUburton wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:Sessions can't fire Mueller since he recused himself. It's up to Rosenstein who hired Mueller. But if Trump can get Sessions to quit then he can appoint a new AG who can do the firing.

It's a stupid plan, fraught with horrible political consequences for Trump but there you have it.

lmao political consequences for trump

If Trump gets Mueller fired there are more than likely enough Republicans and Democrats who would reinstate the Special Prosecutor law, rehire Mueller as the Special Prosecutor and Trump would be worse off than when he started. Trump obviously believes it or he'd have already ordered Rosenstein to fire Mueller. I'm sure he's also concerned that Rosenstein would resign rather than fire Mueller, which could set in motion a downward spiral like the Saturday Night Massacre.

So he's playing the long game by humiliating Sessions and disparaging Mueller and his team in the hope that he can get enough public support to get them both gone.

That's my thinking, too. I think the feud is fake and sessions is taking one for the "family." He still gets to impose draconian and racist rule as AG, which is all he really ever wanted.

heard the Senate is going to put up the house passed health care bill and open it up for amendments - then they'll vote

who knows what kind of turd they'll end up with

JFLNYC wrote:

JUburton wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:Sessions can't fire Mueller since he recused himself. It's up to Rosenstein who hired Mueller. But if Trump can get Sessions to quit then he can appoint a new AG who can do the firing.

It's a stupid plan, fraught with horrible political consequences for Trump but there you have it.

lmao political consequences for trump

If Trump gets Mueller fired there are more than likely enough Republicans and Democrats who would reinstate the Special Prosecutor law, rehire Mueller as the Special Prosecutor and Trump would be worse off than when he started. Trump obviously believes it or he'd have already ordered Rosenstein to fire Mueller. I'm sure he's also concerned that Rosenstein would resign rather than fire Mueller, which could set in motion a downward spiral like the Saturday Night Massacre.

So he's playing the long game by humiliating Sessions and disparaging Mueller and his team in the hope that he can get enough public support to get them both gone.

remember all the leaks when Comey was fired, can't imagine what would leak if he fired Mueller

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:heard the Senate is going to put up the house passed health care bill and open it up for amendments - then they'll vote

who knows what kind of turd they'll end up with

if Rand Paul actually holds to what he stated, that'd mean he'd be a NO. If Heller held to his previous statements he would be the same and it'd be dead.


who knows though

the Cruz amendment would be dreadful in many way. here's one:

Sen. Ted Cruz's (R-Texas) "Consumer Freedom Amendment" would allow insurers to sell plans that don't comply with ObamaCare regulations, as long as they also sell plans that do meet those requirements.

High-risk, sicker individuals would likely buy the plans that comply with ObamaCare regulations while younger, healthier people would likely choose to purchase plans that don't, according to a study by Avalere Health, a healthcare consulting firm.

Premiums for these ObamaCare compliant plans could be 39 percent higher compared to current law by 2022 while premiums for noncompliant plans could drop by 77 percent.

Avalere also concluded that the amendment could lead to 4.1 million uninsured in the individual market because of "significant premium increases," as well as other factors.

Avalere is a center-left healthcare research place