Trump presents 'partner' Pence, but no doubt who's the star

"Yet the announcement lacked much of the stagecraft typically associated with the public unveiling of a running mate, one of the most significant moments under a presidential campaign’s control."

"“All right, back to Mike Pence,” Trump said at one point after a long tangent talking about the Republican Party’s efforts to overturn rules that limit church leaders’ political involvement." - article

Donald J. Trump, gaming the rigged system of Evangelical 'what's in it for me?' ethos. A match made in heaven.

Just like Trump and 'Trump University'.

This is a good thing. No one can pretend the only thing wrong with the Republican ticket is Trump. The blind, ignorant hatefulness that is the Republican Party is on full display.

It is all coming together now, a true unity anti-corruption party. You still have a few corrupt Republicans not wanting to get on the Trump train -and they may just get thrown under the train. Still the corrupt mainstream media is mostly anti-Trump and pro-Lib.

"The Indiana governor is well-regarded by evangelical Christians, particularly after signing a law that critics said would allow businesses to deny service to gay people for religious reasons." - article

In simple terms: Pence is a nutter. Trump wants him as the Vice President. Trump is a buffoon. QED.

His far-ranging remarks devoted more time to recapping his primary victories — and he even found time to tout his new hotel in Washington — than introducing the relatively unknown Pence to America’s voters.

It was basically the standard stump speech plus a long, winding anecdote about evangelical voters and a 1954 tax code (the Johnson Amendment) that prevents tax-exempt organizations from endorsing political candidates — to tout Pence’s record in Indiana.

Interesting chemistry - reminds me of a Moonie wedding.

The Indiana governor is well-regarded by evangelical Christians, particularly after signing a law that critics said would allow businesses to deny service to gay people for religious reasons.

America will never have Shariah law!

...but the Christian version of it is no big deal.

Check out the new Trump Pence logo and the hilarious comments on the web.

Can a governor of Indiana experienced kin International issue?

Donald J. Trump, gaming the rigged system of Evangelical 'what's in it for me?' ethos. A match made in heaven.

Just like Trump and 'Trump University'.

"What's in it for me?" Wait a minute, you say that and you think Bernie is supporting Hillary (Mrs. Liar and crook) out of fondness and kindness? LOL

Hmmm....when Christianity in this time and present is responsible for killing millions of people in this time and on the same exact scale and if they want to establish Christian caliphate and kill anyone that is NOT Christian or is an Apostate, you will have a compelling argument, but as such, Sharia law is the problem.

In simple terms: Pence is a nutter. Trump wants him as the Vice President. Trump is a buffoon. QED.

But Pence created a surplus for his state, what are Hillary's accomplishments or Hillary for that matter?

I spoke too soon. The "new" Trump Pence logo is now the old logo. Too much ridicule on social media.

“This is the primary reason I wanted Mike — other than that he looks very good, other than he’s got an incredible family, and incredible wife,” Trump said." - article

So, nothing about anything, except 'he looks good' and 'his wife is hot'?

What a Buffoon. Donald J. Trump, 'Buffoon in Chief',

...but the Christian version of it is no big deal.

Again, our country our laws. Don't like it? Leave. Simple. Besides. . . . America was founded on Judeo-Christian values.

It's absolutely true. Oh yeah! & we print our own money. Printed on US currency is, "In God We Trust". Surely our forefathers were NOT referring to Allah and prophets like muhammad.

If Mike Pence is good looking, Trump needs his eyesight checked. He's no George Clooney, as our Indiana insider Lizz should be able to attest after looking at Pence's mug day after day for years.

our country our laws.

Like the law requiring separation of state and religion?

Like the law requiring separation of state and religion?

Yeah. Like that. If we are to have double-standards, it will be so, as long as it's beneficial to us and not "them." After all it is our country. If the Muslims don't like it, they can go back to wherever they came from.

I'm tired of all the pc, tolerance and special protection the faith is getting. Especially when endorsed by the potus.

Just MSM BS for the sheep.

If we are to have double-standards, it will be so, as long as it's beneficial to us and not "them."

So Americans who are Muslim are 'them' and as such the rules don't apply to them? And what about the Jews?

I'm tired of all the pc, tolerance and special protection the faith is getting.

You just preached special protection for the faith.

I'm tired of all the pc, tolerance and special protection the faith is getting. Especially when endorsed by the lotus.

Hopefully, once January rolls in and this guy is out of the White House, PC will be a thing of the past.

If you guys don't like PC, why do you keep repeating right-wing PC talking points?

Like the law requiring separation of state and religion?

Laws have become so passé since the Obama regime took power.

Laws have become so passé since the Obama regime took power.

Ha! that's a gross understatement to say the least.

I don't care what you call your particular brand of deeply held religious belief but it doesn't belong near or in government.

I hope announcing a running mate who is anti-LGBT, anti-womans rights to bodily autonomy will be the end of this non-sense campaign.

There is such a strange mood people think their opinions equal fact, they think their beliefs 'trumps' others rights.

It might seems all well and good when you agree but, who is to say that will always be the case.

When the republicans were about fiscal responsibility and so on perhaps I could have respected them to a degree but becoming the political face of religious conservatives... is no difference to asking if shira law has a place in a secular country from my point of view.

Ha! that's a gross understatement to say the least.

No.

When the republicans were about fiscal responsibility and so on perhaps I could have respected them to a degree but becoming the political face of religious conservatives... is no difference to asking if shira law has a place in a secular country from my point of view.

Yes.

Woe. . . Woe-woe! I'm just saying: America was founded on judeo-christian values. Period.

I don't care what the FBI says. They were just bought off by HRC. Plus they dropped the ball investigating Omar. Etc-

It's always radical islam harming the west. Inflicting multiple atrocities. How many killed since Ramadan? The jews, on the other hand, are not shooting up Paris, Nice, Brussels, Orlando, San Bern, Bangladesh, Medina.

Laws have become so passé since the Obama regime took power.

Could you provide some specific examples of these, and not just 'Obama is bad because I don't like him'? Or is your intent just to rabble rabble?

@bass4 Hopefully, once January rolls in and this guy is out of the White House, PC will be a thing of the past.

PC, to me at least, means recognizing that it's inappropriate to make negative comments intended to belittle and demean individuals or groups because of their gender, ethnicity, religion, age, physical and mental condition, among other things. To me it's about having the common sense to keep your hate to yourself. For example, do you think it's OK to mock an individual who's blind? Which age in the past was it OK to NOT be PC, and why would you want to return to it? I know FOX entertainment and many other rightwing MSM are telling you PC is bad, but can't you see they're manipulating you? I hope no one in your family and none of your friends has to deal with anti-PC comments.

Woe. . . Woe-woe! I'm just saying: America was founded on judeo-christian values. Period.

Ok, so to clarify, you are saying American-Muslims are lesser Americans, because they aren't judeo-Christian, correct?

It's always radical islam harming the west. Inflicting multiple atrocities. How many killed since Ramadan?

And it's America harming the middle east. Inflicting multiple atrocities. How many hospitals have been blown up by ISIS?

America was founded on judeo-christian values

Are you sure that term wasn't a tad too PC for the Founding Fathers?

"Woe. . . Woe-woe! I'm just saying: America was founded on judeo-christian values. Period."

America was founded by theists, deists and non-believers who founded the country on secular values. They would turn in their graves if they saw religious crackpots like Ted Cruz or Ben Carson running for office spouting the nonsense they do.

"PC, to me at least, means recognizing that it's inappropriate to make negative comments intended to belittle and demean individuals or groups because of their gender, ethnicity, religion, age, physical and mental condition, among other things"

I wish people would stop lumping religion into the same category as things like ethnicity or gender. It doesn't belong in that category. It's an opinion and open to any criticism.

Again, our country our laws. Don't like it? Leave. Simple. Besides. . . . America was founded on Judeo-Christian values.

Leaving is not "that easy," and that is frankly the argument people without any substance make. If you don't like it, leave. Absurd. And no, America was not founded on judeo-christian values. It was founded on the concept of religious freedom. Read the constitution, study some history.

It's absolutely true. Oh yeah! & we print our own money. Printed on US currency is, "In God We Trust". Surely our forefathers were NOT referring to Allah and prophets like muhammad.

You do realize "In God We Trust" didn't appear on currency until almost 200 years after America became I country, don't you?

Like that. If we are to have double-standards, it will be so, as long as it's beneficial to us and not "them."

There is no us and them, all equal under the law. Don't like it, leave. ;)

I'm tired of all the pc, tolerance and special protection the faith is getting. Especially when endorsed by the potus.

Yes, tolerance is terrible. Becoming less tolerant will surely make American great again.

Mrs. Liar and crook She is called his by people who believe people like Wayne Simmons. She is a clean honest person who is full of integrity.

They were just bought off by HRC How? Did HRC bring a suitcase full of cash? But really, Imaginations running wild or listening to people like Wayne Simmons (and he is busted). Hillary is not even president so she has no power over that. GWB could not stop the conviction of Libby.

Hillary is clean as a whistle. The conservatives' strategy is hate. Can Trump win with this this strategy?

Just MSM BS for the sheep Which sheep? The hating sheep?

America was founded on Judeo-Christian values. That says to kill gay people.

I wish people would stop lumping religion into the same category as things like ethnicity or gender. It doesn't belong in that category. It's an opinion and open to any criticism.

In my opinion religion is fair game, but not its practitioners UNLESS they cross legal lines. Making negative comments, expressing harsh opinions about any religion doesn't bother me. I am a-religious. But demeaning individuals because of their beliefs does. That does not mean I condone religious extremists who kill and assault those whose beliefs differ, so please don't play whatabout. I understand the evils of religious extremists; I clearly understand the dangers of Islamic extremists.

I also understand what happened in Europe in the 1930's to individuals who were seen to hold a set of beliefs different from the majority's. (There's your Godwin's.)

But demeaning individuals because of their beliefs does. I will make fun of the evangelicals because of their great political push that I don't like.

$10 trillion in new Obama debt and nothing to show for it; he even lied to the American voters that "shovel ready" jobs he promised were a pipe dream. Nothing got fixed; no infrastructure got build nor repaired and yet magically we got $10 trillion in new debt.

But the liberal media echo chamber tells its low information minions how great everything is under Dear Leader's watch: 93 million people left the work force, a race war could break out at any second, the Millde East on fire, Illegal immigrants (i.e. lawbreakers) and unvented Muslims pouring into our country by the thousands, etc., etc., etc.

And Mrs. Bill Clinton is promising a continuation of the Obama-type failed policies.

Of course liberal leeches living on the Democratic Party plantation want to maintain this status quo. But for us taxpayers who are required to maintain their lifestyle are asking do we really want more of this?

$10 trillion in new Obama debt

Ahh, the old tactic of blaming the guy who was in office when the credit card bill from the last president came due, rather than blaming the guy who actually ran up the debt on the credit card.

As a sneaky political move, it's ingenious. Morally, it's reprehensible.

Damn it, I thought it'd be Sarah Palin. Love her speeches - tee hee hee.

The Kool aid THAT good? No way, look at the convinced felon of the month Wayne Simmons. Felons like him are spreading falsehoods about Clinton and Obama and Conservatives choose to believe people like him. This guy made more lies about his record than Steven Seagal. This guy is busted which means that Obama/Clinton are good people who did no crime. No koolaid, just facts and Clinton/Obama comes out clean.

Illegal immigrants Do you know that Reagan inked over 3M greencard amnesty?

Leader's watch: 93 million people left the work force You are right. People at or near death don't work. That number could be right.

But for us taxpayers who are required to maintain their lifestyle Are you in Texas now?

the leaders making excuses for radical Islam

Please provide one statement by a current leader that makes excuses for radical Islam. Direct quote, please.

Please provide one statement by a current leader that makes excuses for radical Islam.

There aren't any. It's one of those lies that are spoken in the bubble, that the sheep then repeat without actually fact checking.

Interesting to hear the rightists here complaining about out of control political correctness. The pc crowd get on my nerves too at times.

The thin-skinned rightists have been bleating like little lambs on this site over that big, nasty Kenyan's comments about lipstick on pigs and southerners with their bibles and firearms for a while. Grow a backbone, tough guys.

"Thin-skinned, I have never met anyone that is more thin-skinned than a liberal. Liberals can talk bad about everyone, call everyone names, including Whites and Whites are not allowed to say anything about anyone because liberals might call racism on it. Talk about Trump, game on! Talk about Obama, you are a racist, talk about Hillary, you are a sexist. Sorry, it doesn't work like that because liberals have a whiny fit. Should be fair game if anyone can make fun about Trump or Whites, then Whites can do the opposite or do liberals want to cry foul and limit free speech only to themselves?"

Thanks for proving my point. Just about the most thin-skinned, whiniest, self-pitying bleat I've heard. I heard the violins from here.

You tough guy rightists are the straight talkers, not those whiny, over-sensitive libs. Grow a backbone, man.

See, there you're doing it again. Blaming the credit card bill on the guy that received it, rather than the guy that used the card.

And there I was, drifting thru life believing that at least one of America’s problems was not caused by Bush; turns out I was wrong. Every cent of debt associated with Obama is actually Bush’s fault. What a crushing burden to bear.

The blame Bush excuse is well past its sell-by-date is it not?

The blame Bush excuse is well past its sell-by-date is it not?

8 years, waaaaaaaaaay beyond its sell date. Obama will leave the country with one of the largest deficits and largest debt he racked....still racking up, once he's out of here and who's going to clean up his mess? And what a mess it will be! Oh, boy....

Every cent of debt associated with Obama is actually Bush’s fault.

Hey that's a great way to counter a truthful statement - make it an extreme, then look down on that extreme.

You chopped that straw man down impressively my good sir.

Sounds like the perfect Republican. Stuck in the past fighting the 45 year old culture wars--unable to understand the present and baffled by the changes whirling around him--and clueless about how to solve the challenges of the future.

Ahh, the old tactic of blaming the guy who was in office when the credit card bill from the last president came due, rather than blaming the guy who actually ran up the debt on the credit card.

Hey that's a great way to counter a truthful statement - make it an extreme, then look down on that extreme.

There's your strawman argument. Oh, and did you just admit that you believe Obama's policies have in fact, added to the deficit?

8 years, waaaaaaaaaay beyond its sell date. Obama will leave the country with one of the largest deficits and largest debt he racked How will Republicans pay it down? Less taxes? Are there any specifics?

The blame Bush excuse is well past its sell-by-date is it not? How much would have been saved by not starting the war in Iraq?

There's your strawman argument.

Pointing out a strawman is a strawman? I think not.

Oh, and did you just admit that you believe Obama's policies have in fact, added to the deficit?

Obama significantly reduced the deficit from what he had when he took office: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jan/20/barack-obama/barack-obama-claims-deficit-has-decreased-two-thir/

Ivanka Trump could be the first female U.S. president after one or two terms of Donald.

"Obama significantly reduced the deficit from what he had when he took office"

Yeah? What about the $9 trillion increase in the national debt?

So even if hate speech is protected by the first amendment when liberals spew it, it's acceptable, but when a conservative does it FREE speech doesn't apply and this is why liberals are so ruthlessly dangerous.

Please, Bass. Provide some concrete evidence of this "hate speech" so-called liberals supposedly spew. Should be easy, since you've implied it's prolific. Go ahead. Anything from the last month. Oh, heck. I'll give you past year. Please post a link from a reputable source and or some politically extreme virtual rag from either the left or the right.

And please let that evidence be something that demonstrates conclusively you actually possess a basic understanding of the difference between "hate speech" (speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or disability) and speech that expresses hatred for an individual just for being him/her, like, say, George W. Bush.

Please. For the love of Pete, please tell me that you, a self-avowed journalist, actually understand the distinction and realize lambasting GW Bush for being a woefully inadequate president isn't the same as labeling all Muslims terrorists, or referring to women as dogs, or mocking a reporter's disability as the punchline to a joke in front of your supporters (Yeah, Trump still did that, and yeah, you still think he's a swell guy, despite it).

Proof, please. Let's see this deluge of liberal "hate speech" you insist is rampant.

Obama significantly reduced the deficit from what he had when he took office: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jan/20/barack-obama/barack-obama-claims-deficit-has-decreased-two-thir/

Did you even read that article?

"The claim ignores a stark reality about the deficits, however. The country’s spending is not expected to continue its downward route, according to federal forecasters, for factors that include increased interest payments on the debt and the lack of substantial policy changes for the country’s biggest programs, like Social Security and Medicare."

You claim Bush's policies have taken 8 years to affect the deficit, yet Obama's have been immediate. Your logic is contradictory and blindly partisan.

Yeah? What about the $9 trillion increase in the national debt?

Maybe you heard about these two wars in the middle east that were put on the country credit card?

Did you even read that article?

Yep, but still, the point remains that Obama reduced the deficit, which was my reply to your question on whether I 'admit' that I believe Obama added to the deficit. Or to be explicit, no I don't believe he did add to the deficit.

You claim Bush's policies have taken 8 years to affect the deficit

No I didn't.

Something tells me you don't know the difference between debt and deficit. Which is why this makes no sense:

yet Obama's have been immediate.

Did you even read the article, Kabuki?

Also, some economists we consulted pointed out that the 2009 fiscal year was Obama’s first year in office, and so not necessarily a good starting point since he had little control over the spending in that year.

The stimulus was initially Bush's baby, and though Obama (wisely) followed suit, you'll notice that deficits fell steadily from that year and have consistently been below the 40-year average during his second term (and well below the average of Reagan's eight-year teem).

Furthermore, avoiding Bush's legacy in the crushing deficits of Obama's first term while simultaneously blaming Obama for historic challenges to health care and pensions in the face of an aging society is too cute by half. Congressional Democrats with Obama's support propose fixes such as raising the ceiling on social security payments, whereas Republicans favor slashing payments by, for example, raising both the minimum age for full benefits of medicare from to 67 (the current age for full benefits from SS) and both later to 70. This will hit the middle class workers with a double-whammy: Not only is their entire income subject to the payroll tax, but they have lower average lifespans.

To anyone with a brain, it's clear that the GOP wants to make both programs so unpopular among working Americans that they can eventually kill both off. Clinton will continue with Obama's efforts to raise revenues to fix both programs both by cutting costs and broadening the revenue base. You're welcome to disagree - but, as a party, you'll do so at your peril. The workers of America may not benefit from the government as much as the wealthy, but their votes are equal.

Yeah? What about the $9 trillion increase in the national debt? Again, what do Republicans or Dems do to make the debt go up (or down)? The Iraq war could have been NOT started which would have saved a lot of money and not ruined so many lives. But taking care of old boomers cannot be avoided and WILL contribute to the debt no matter who is in the WH.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/1/obama-presidency-to-end-with-20-trillion-national-/

When President Obama signs into law the new two-year budget deal Monday, his action will bring into sharper focus a part of his legacy that he doesn’t like to talk about: He is the $20 trillion man. Mr. Obama’s spending agreement with Congress will suspend the nation’s debt limit and allow the Treasury to borrow another $1.5 trillion or so by the end of his presidency in 2017. Added to the current total national debt of more than $18.15 trillion, the red ink will likely be crowding the $20 trillion mark right around the time Mr. Obama leaves the White House.

Please, Bass. Provide some concrete evidence of this "hate speech" so-called liberals supposedly spew. Should be easy, since you've implied it's prolific. Go ahead. Anything from the last month. Oh, heck. I'll give you past year. Please post a link from a reputable source and or some politically extreme virtual rag from either the left or the right.

You mean, facts or facts that liberals will approve and judge it based according to their satisfaction?

And please let that evidence be something that demonstrates conclusively you actually possess a basic understanding of the difference between "hate speech" (speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or disability) and speech that expresses hatred for an individual just for being him/her, like, say, George W. Bush.

Either you want facts or you want something that makes you guys feel good, which is it?

Please. For the love of Pete, please tell me that you, a self-avowed journalist, actually understand the distinction and realize lambasting GW Bush for being a woefully inadequate president isn't the same as labeling all Muslims terrorists, or referring to women as dogs, or mocking a reporter's disability as the punchline to a joke in front of your supporters (Yeah, Trump still did that, and yeah, you still think he's a swell guy, despite it).

Proof, please. Let's see this deluge of liberal "hate speech" you insist is rampant.

Also, for the record and as I said before, if Non-Whites can make racist remarks, then Whites can do the same, that is, unless you value free and fair speech, if you believe in a double standard, just say so, I ain't mad at you. I hate ANY hate speech from either side, I just hate it more when liberals claim they don't partake in it, it's just laughable nonesense. I met more racist intolerant liberals in my life then I care to remember.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/7411/7-disgusting-things-obama-said-while-hijacking-ben-shapiro

http://politistick.com/the-two-quotes-that-prove-obama-is-a-hate-filled-racist/

kabukideath: Oh, and did you just admit that you believe Obama's policies have in fact, added to the deficit?

Actually there are pretty good studies out there showing how Bush added to the deficit by choice and Obama added by necessity. Going to war or giving massive tax cuts are choices that didn't have to be made. On the other hand Obama couldn't just turn off unemployment after Wall Street put so many people out of work.

But I doubt any of that would interest a bubble dweller.

You mean, facts or facts that liberals will approve and judge How about facts from Wayne Simmons? And this Obama/Clinton hater is going away for 33 months. Meanwhile Clinton is free and clear. No arrest because she is a clean and ethical person. People hate her because she is so smart and I can't wait to watch her debate Trump.

Actually there are pretty good studies out there showing how Bush added to the deficit by choice and Obama added by necessity.

What is it with you guys?? Yes, Obama added to the deficit out of necessity in his first year of office, however, after that, No One told Obama to go on a spending spree, asking to raise the debt ceiling, print more money. When the Democrats controlled the House, the Senate and the presidency until 2010 they went on a spending spree which is why they lost the House in 2010.

Going to war or giving massive tax cuts are choices that didn't have to be made.

So you guys taxed the bejeezus out of the entire country which led to the formation of the Tea Party, because the people were sick and tired of how Washington and the Democrats were blindly spending OUR money!

On the other hand Obama couldn't just turn off unemployment after Wall Street put so many people out of work.

Obama put 46 million on food stamps take about failure, the unemployment rate for Blacks is 58% higher in the nation, 36 million people on unemployment benefits. This president is most definitely the food stamp president.

But I doubt any of that would interest a bubble dweller.

Ha ha! The Washington Times! Coincidental that I mentioned last night Trump and Pence's union looked like a Moonie marriage, and then one links to a newspaper founded and owned by the Moonies. Might as wll simply link to the GOP platform committee.

And what a platform it is: It goes way beyond trying to lose the 2008 and 2012 elections all over again but with more enthusiasm. It's like they took the postmortum conducted after Romney's loss and purposefully doing everything opposite with a vengeance. Let's have a look.

Constitutional amendments are in the offing to outlaw abortion and same-sex marriage despite the fact that Trump has clearly accepted the new reality and moved on (Pence and his ilk haven't). Transgender rights are specifically rejected. Legislators are urged to use religion as a guide, although it’s a safe bet that only some religions are acceptable. The Bible should be taught in public school, and judges should respect “traditional family values.” Pornography is defined as a “public menace,” parents should be free to seek “conversion therapy” for LGBT children and a theory is advanced that the offspring of “natural marriage” between a man and a woman are less likely to become substance abusers. Change a couple of proper nouns and ISIS would endorse the whole damn thing.

So Trump will be nominated on a Penceian platform mostly antithesis to his views. Awkward. Sad.

When President Obama signs into law the new two-year budget deal So the only thing that Obama has to do is NOT sign this deal then you would acknowledge him as a great president because then America's debt would be reduced. It's so simple and you have explained what Obama should not do in one sentence in order for him to have a good legacy. So if Obama changes his mind and doesn't sign it you would consider him a great president. Right?

Ha ha! The Washington Times! Coincidental that I mentioned last night Trump and Pence's union looked like a Moonie marriage, and then one links to a newspaper founded and owned by the Moonies. Might as well simply link to the GOP platform committee.

Yeah, keep dreaming. The Democrats have a lot of problem of their own makings and growing. Just off the press from CNN, 40% of Sanders voters say they won't vote for Hillary, Uh-oh..... That be a lot of people, young people as a matter of fact, add to that 62% unpopularity vote, having a reputation for being a liar and a criminal, well.... Dems need all the help they can.

The 46,674,364 people on food stamps But all Obama needs to do is NOT sign the budget deal then no food stamps, no freeloading Mexicans and he can make the US great again like Trump would, right? Obama's bad policy as you confirmed is summed up in one sentence which means he just needs to NOT sign it and the US will be on the right track. This is something I sure could NOT do if I were president. I child could do this.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2014/10/17/now-there-can-be-no-doubt-obamacare-will-increase-the-deficit/#f5a4d2153d1c

Oddly enough the bills won't be due till after the 2016 election.

Republicans invented Obamacare. Obama just stole the idea.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2014/10/17/now-there-can-be-no-doubt-obamacare-will-increase-the-deficit/#f5a4d2153d1c

Oddly enough the bills won't be due till after the 2016 election.

That's odd. Because here is a different article from Forbes, written after the one you posted, that says repealing Obamacare would increase the deficit:

The report, which was prepared at the request of Senate Budget Committee Chairman Mike Enzi (R-WY), concluded that eliminating Obamacare would definitely, unambiguously and undeniably (Get the picture?) increase the deficit.

Link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/stancollender/2015/06/22/cbo-obamacare-report-shows-deficit-and-debt-are-phony-issues/#1182dc14bbe5

Note that the report in question was requested by a Republican.

And here is another article cites a CBO report and says:

Under the old-fashioned method, it will lower the deficit by $118 billion in 2025. But using the sleek new dynamic scoring system insisted on by Republicans, the truth becomes evident and Democratic evasions are exposed for all the world to see. Obamacare will, um, still reduce the deficit. But only by $98 billion.

Link: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/06/no-matter-how-you-slice-it-obamacare-reduces-federal-deficit

And here is another article on the matter, just for good measure: http://thehill.com/policy/finance/245530-cbo-obamacare-repeal-would-add-353b-to-deficit

It's so amazing that people (Extreme Conservatives) living in Japan really slam socialized medicine, yet happily use it when they get sick in Japan. Like the same type of Crazy Conservatives who live and die by their guns no matter what, then they unwillingly come to Japan unarmed. They hate the socialized unarmed countries, but then they move to one. I might understand if you guys are accessing JT from the USA but you choose to live in a country that go against your old white man's conservative values. Isn't that really funny? I'm trying to figure you guys out. What are you doing here?

It's so amazing that people (Extreme Conservatives) living in Japan really slam socialized medicine, yet happily use it when they get sick in Japan.

Obamacare is not socialized medicine. If it were universal public coverage, I for one would not complain. But it is neither straightforward nor affordable.

We need a public system that actually includes all people, such as extending Medicare to all Americans. Obamacare's individual mandate to buy health insurance does not reach everyone because many uninsured individuals will not "buy-in" to an expensive and overly complex insurance system.

it is neither straightforward nor affordable Obama tried to push through a public option and who pushed it back? Obama knows it should be single payer where every citizen is automatically enrolled. The public option would have Obamacare transition America's healthcare system into a single payer system for tried and tested treatments for catastrophic cases, especially (bells and whistles like private hospital rooms or other non standard treatments/items can be purchased on the free market- this exists in Japan) but his Republican opponents didn't want it. Obamacare will someday become socialized medicine but the Republicans slowed this down by being against the public option.

"Pence also personally led the fight to defund Planned Parenthood while serving in the House and fought to pass Indiana's 2016 anti-abortion law, with some of the most outrageous restrictions in the country that threatened women’s privacy and limited their choice. And just like Trump, he's been a longtime opponent of comprehensive immigration reform."

source: 'Donald Trump Reveals New Trump-Pence Logo, Twitter Has a Field Day With Suggestive Design'

For a television game show host, Trump can't put together a ticket to The White House.

Picking an enemy of women's rights and pair it with Trump's own outrageous bigotry?

The GOP-tea can cry all they want. Short of pulling the endorsement these two are going to lay one egg after another.

"The logo features a letter T for Trump penetrating the center of a P for Pence in blue, along with five red horizontal bars meant to symbolize the American flag. Trump’s slogan, “Make America Great Again!” runs under the pair’s names." - source above

Even a game show host should be able to make a logo other than TP, known in the States as an abbreviation for, 'toilet paper'.

That's odd. Because here is a different article from Forbes, written after the one you posted, that says repealing Obamacare would increase the deficit:

I don't think conservatives really think of fighting against Obamacare as being a fight to return to the old status quo. That's probably because they don't feel the need to craft policy.

"The complaint argues that the Trump campaign has “knowingly and illegally” solicited donations from the foreign nationals. It includes several references to media reports of politicians receiving fundraising emails, including a number of members of parliament in Iceland and Australia as well as the 54 members of the Scottish National party and UK House of Commons."

source: 'Trump Campaign May Have Broken Law By Seeking Foreign Political Donations'

What has Pence gotten himself into?!

Boy, join the Campaign and find out your boss "has “knowingly and illegally” solicited donations from the foreign nationals."

That Pence! (what a screw up.) Maybe Trump can blame him?

Not really, no.

It's an attempt to divert attention from a blunder by crapping out irrelevancy. Better maths would be accepting that your figure of +46 is actually +16.

Ahh, so you know more than the HEAD US Secretary of Treasury: Jacob Lew? Dude, sorry to break it to you, those are not my personal calculations. Believe it or not, there are actually people that get paid to keep track of these things. LOL Too funny, liberals are really hilarious and the ones that live outside of the US are even funnier.

Even a game show host should be able to make a logo other than TP, known in the States as an abbreviation for, 'toilet paper'.

Yeah, whatever... So Kc, how do you feel about Trump and Hillary being a virtual tie in the general poles?

I don't think conservatives really think of fighting against Obamacare as being a fight to return to the old status quo. That's probably because they don't feel the need to craft policy.

No, they will, but that's not on the list as first priority. Jobs and National security are at the top, the rest will come later, probably tackling the out of control PC would follow.

so you know more than the HEAD US Secretary of Treasury: Jacob Lew? Dude, sorry to break it to you, those are not my personal calculations.

There were 30 million people on food stamps at the start of Obama's presidency. You said that he added 46 million. That would mean there are 76 million people on food stamps. Yet there are only 46 million people on food stamps.

Please explain the discrepancy of 31 million people between the numbers you are claiming, and the real number.

Jobs Do you enjoy universal health coverage in Japan as a Japanese citizen after giving up your American one? yet you don't like Obamacare? And what's this about jobs? What will Trump do to create jobs that Clinton can't? What are the specifics?

Sure, very easy to explain, the same as with the unemployment. many people have resorted in moving in with family members friends and relatives and have taken themselves off the list or have not registered, when that happens as with the unemployment numbers like the fact that so many baby boomers are retiring and many people took themselves out of the job market because they can't find anything of course in the same case the numbers will go down. It's not that hard to see. If you do breakdown the numbers and subtract the people that have taken themselves out of the workforce or for the people that applied on the food stamp program you will have a lower count of course, but the numbers show something quite different. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/07/gallup-ignores-all-time-high-food-stamp-usage-as-reason-for-7-year-low-percentage-americans-struggling-to-afford-food/ Look, it doesn't matter what any of the liberals claim or want it to be and again, for the record, these are not my numbers, these are just the factual numbers of the economists. Also, it is a laughable and at the same time ignorant joke to dismiss anything that Obama does wrong. This is what gets me about liberals. They will post, smear, rant, scrutinize, analyze, pinpoint, tear apart, criticize and ONLY, ONLY accept the truth if THEY feel it to be the truth regardless if it's not, so long as they wish it to be. If a 4 star general or the head of the CIA, FBI, NSA say, we have a fundamental problem with radical Islam (mind you combined of probably over 90 years experience between these men) and the Obama or any other liberal says, NO, we don't, well then, the president knows more and the rest of the country with more experience doesn't. I personally find that kind of denial sad, but at the same time a little bit hilarious, but I also believe in allowing people to believe what they want, including hallucinations and occasional trips to the Unicornverse.

many people have resorted in moving in with family members As a Japanese person you would know they do this in Japan all the time. Nothing new. Besides is moving in/staying with parents illegal? There is nothing Trump can do about it. Kids are staying home but rents remain high.

You did. The number in your link gives 46 million as the total number of people on food stamps, not the increase in the total since Obama took office. In other words, it doesn't support you at all.

LOL! wipeout, hate to break this to you and I know you might be surprised by this, but I didn't write it, so I will go by the economist and Jacob Lew, any and all personal opinions from people domestic or International is completely irrelevant.

The figures are becoming unprecedented What will Trump do to lower this?

creating higher paid jobs How?

Obama is a food stamp president What will Trump do about it?

A lot of it is the Republicans' doing because they didn't want to go with the public option. That is a part of it. As a Japanese person you would know that the national health system works well in Japan and it will work well in the USA.

Let's make it simple, there are more people in the US on food stamps than the entire population of California and that is A LOT of people.

Either way, NO matter how liberals want to do classroom fractions, there are more people on food stamps than ever before and that's bad, really bad.

Apparently you consider 30 million people receiving food stamps in January 2009 irrelevant merely because it's not "now". The thing is, if you insist on removing 30 million from the total in 2009, you are obliged to keep them out of the total now, which would give you a total of 16 million. Alternatively, if that simple like for like deduction doesn't work for you, you could explain in simple terms why you think the total was 0 then (because by general agreement it certainly wasn't), and what mathematical formula should be used to go from 0 to 46 million in 8 years.

You say 16 million, I will go by and trust the economists record of 46 million.

Obama is cutting good stamp budgets. It shows that Obama is a good president and he would win a "third" term.

Yes, they do, even if liberals don't think so.

No, they don't. I challenge you to provide one credible source that says, ". . . virtually any economist says that Obama has added 46 million people to the food stamps roll during his term in office."

C'mon Bass, let's see the actual proof.

Sure, I already did.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/joseph-rossell/2014/11/03/food-stamps-crisis-ignored-nearly-98-network-stories

http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/SNAPsummary.pdf

Check this link and you will see it's been going up since '69 under ANY president. Just like Medicaid. And it will continue to go up under Trump because he says he will increase the size of the government with more taxes. Sorry, Trump won't save the USA from Liberal-ville.

Wait! Check that chart again at the link above. As of 2014-15 the numbers are slowing down. It shows that Obama is doing a good job at making people less poor. Yes, Obama is a good president and the data shows.

Sure, I already did.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/joseph-rossell/2014/11/03/food-stamps-crisis-ignored-nearly-98-network-stories

Oh dear, bass. the link you gave mentions clearly, and I quote, “increase of 18 million people [enrolled in SNAP], to 46 million Americans now receiving food stamps,”: also, and again I copy-paste, Enrollment had increased from 32.2 million individuals in January 2009, to at least 46 million individuals during the last 35 straight months.

It does not say Obama added 46 million people to those receiving food stamps.

Do you not read what you link to, or do you just assume that anything that describes itself as 'Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias' is going to be fair and balanced and say what you want it to say?

Bass, nowhere in that article that you just posted a link to supports your assertion that economists blame Obama for adding 46 million food stamp recipients during his term in office. That's the point--he did not--and nowhere in the article does it say that he added 46 million to the list. The article does blame him for an increase in the number of people added to the list--but that number was not 46 million.

It also said this: "When it came to food stamps, the networks deflected concerns away from “the Obama administration’s failed economic policies,” according to Tad DeHaven of libertarian think tank, Cato Institute. DeHaven did not blame Obama solely for the problem. He was frank about the role of Republicans in expanding the food stamp program in 2002, but also explained the program was supercharged by a 2008 bill in the “Pelosi Congress” and again by Obama’s stimulus bill and has been exacerbated by the “sluggish economy.”

So, once again, you need to prove that Obama added 46 million to the rolls during his term in office. Nice try, but try again.

Also, was my math problem too challenging for you?

The numbers of food stamp recipients would be lower if public healthcare were expanded the way it should be. Actually Trump could do that because he said he would raise taxes then of course public healthcare would go up- and that could slow down the foodstamp race.

The numbers of food stamp recipients would be lower if public healthcare were expanded the way it should be. Actually Trump could do that because he said he would raise taxes then of course public healthcare would go up- and that could slow down the foodstamp race.

I don't think so, now if Trump is president and he can provide higher wage jobs, get more people to work and less dependent on government subsidies, that 46 million would come down, by limiting government assistance, NOT by increasing it. And judging from the polls pertaining to job creations, she's lagging behind Trump.

Some pathology prevents certain personality types from admitting error, no matter how glaring. Years ago, Trump and two of his offspring (forget from which mother) all failed to multiply 17 and six. To be fair, the question was sprung on them on live TV, and who among us might not have flubbed it? The difference, though, is even with his error pointed out, Trump hung on to the end maintaining that he was correct. You can watch it here. http://kwotable.com/2016/06/22/watch-donald-trump-fails-math-question-still-insists-he-got-it-right/ That personality trait has never left him. Mah - nice trait in a megalomaniac; disastrous for a president.

At any rate, those who complain about SNAP should be so ashamed of themselves as to question their right to be American. In the breadbasket of the world, the very idea that people can go hungry should be anathema. The US government spends less on SNAP than it does on payments to farmers as price supports, etc., and also about as much it does on security spending in a single week.

Truth and priorities. Some have serious problems wirh both.

now if Trump is president and he can provide higher wage jobs, get more people to work and less dependent on government subsidies, that 46 million would come down, by limiting government assistance, NOT by increasing it. And judging from the polls pertaining to job creations, she's lagging behind Trump.

And like a true journalist you base all your ifs on polls. (Which ones, by the way?) Trump is gonna do it all by talking tough and talking BS? Please use your Wapo bona fides to spell out to us in specifics how the Donald is gonna accomplish this huge miracle.

Tony Schwartz was the ghost writer behind "Art of the Deal" (Trump has claimed he wrote it himself, but the publisher noted,"He didn't write as much as a postcard). Schwartz later came to regret the small role he'd had in creating the Trump we know today and decided to donate his 50% cut of the royalties to charity (unlike Trump, who only promised to do so - another lie)

Schwartz was recently interviewed by the New Yorker regarding his experiences writing the book, his perceptions of Trump, and his take on the present situation. It's a bit of a long read but well worth it: an insiders view into one of the greatest megalomaniacs of the modern age. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all

What I said was not that I actually believe the current total of recipients is 16 million, because I don't, but that applying your (frankly insane) logic of ignoring 30 million, the total today would be 16 million rather than 46.

You can believe that f you wish as I said, I don't. I prefer to take the words of the economists and seeing how most Californians live, I would say added to what's going on in middle America, 46 millions doesn't seem so far fetched.

And like a true journalist you base all your ifs on polls. (Which ones, by the way?)

The most reliable polls.

Trump is gonna do it all by talking tough and talking BS?

Funny, Hillary talks BS every single day as well as Obama, why are you not rolling your eyes at that, plastic?

Please use your Wapo bona fides to spell out to us in specifics how the Donald is gonna accomplish this huge miracle.

I'll let you know in a few hours from now, as soon as I know once he starts filling us in. By the way, I thought it was hilarious the other day after the horrific and tragic terrorist attack in Nice that on O'Reilly Trump was on right away talking and saying we are at war with radical Islam-straight and hit the ground running and who called in after that? HIllary!!! What a shocker and she said, kinda the same thing. Now she hasn't been on his show in about 8 years and as soon as Trump talks tough, she bites the bullet, not to be outdone and called in to "the Factor" which actually is good for her I must admit, she probably reached a lot more people in that 5 minute chat she had with Bill, just find it a bit hilarious though, always incognito and now has to bite the bullet because she can't look weak and she can't look like Trump would be stronger than her when it comes to being hawkish and once she locks in that nomination, that little fling she now has with Obama will start to sour very fast as well, heck, we might see the possible morphing of a warmonger.

Seeing how this thread is supposed to be about Mr. Trump and Mike Pence, let's get back on the topic with this latest bit of information regarding Mr. Trump and his running mate:

"In his first interview with his new running mate, Donald Trump said it was alright (sic) for Mike Pence to make a “mistake” in supporting the Iraq War, but not okay for Hillary Clinton to have done the same.

“I don’t care,” Trump said on 60 Minutes when journalist Lesley Stahl asked him about Pence’s support of the war.

“But you’ve used that vote of Hillary’s that was the same as Governor Pence, as the example of her bad judgment,” Stahl pressed.

“Many people have, and frankly, I’m one of the few that was right on Iraq… He’s entitled to make a mistake every once in a while,” Trump said.

“But she’s not?” Stahl asked, referencing Clinton. “No,” Trump responded. “She’s not.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-says-hillary-clinton-230001736.html

I'll let you know in a few hours from now, as soon as I know once he starts filling us in.

As I thought. You have no idea what his policies are, but you like the way he talks.

Loose canon for president!

I would have like to have seen Newt Gingrich chosen. Six wives between them.

King Herod and Pontius Pilate leading the GOP into the arena.