What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[garbon]

I think the plan is to avoid paying for unnecessary surgeries.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/26/politics/trump-military-transgender/index.html

A 2016 Rand Corp. study commissioned by the Defense Department concluded that letting transgender people serve openly would have a "minimal impact" on readiness and health care costs, largely because there are so few in the military's 1.3 million-member force.

The study put the number of transgender people in the military between 1,320 and 6,630. Gender-change surgery is rare in the general population, and the RAND study estimated the possibility of 30 to 140 new hormone treatments a year in the military, with 25 to 130 gender transition-related surgeries among active service members. The cost could range from $2.4 million and $8.4 million, an amount that would represent an "exceedingly small proportion" of total health care expenditures, the study found.

[derspiess]

Merkel is also running a government, not Season 16 of The Apprentice - The White House Edition.

Ooh, there's a Poll Cat for that.

[Ed Anger]

 

[derspiess]

I think the plan is to avoid paying for unnecessary surgeries.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/26/politics/trump-military-transgender/index.html

A 2016 Rand Corp. study commissioned by the Defense Department concluded that letting transgender people serve openly would have a "minimal impact" on readiness and health care costs, largely because there are so few in the military's 1.3 million-member force.

The study put the number of transgender people in the military between 1,320 and 6,630. Gender-change surgery is rare in the general population, and the RAND study estimated the possibility of 30 to 140 new hormone treatments a year in the military, with 25 to 130 gender transition-related surgeries among active service members. The cost could range from $2.4 million and $8.4 million, an amount that would represent an "exceedingly small proportion" of total health care expenditures, the study found.

Yeah, I was totally shocked when a study commissioned by the Obama administration gave them exactly the results they were looking for.

[derspiess]

Yeah, I'm starting to run out of those

[garbon]

I think the plan is to avoid paying for unnecessary surgeries.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/26/politics/trump-military-transgender/index.html

A 2016 Rand Corp. study commissioned by the Defense Department concluded that letting transgender people serve openly would have a "minimal impact" on readiness and health care costs, largely because there are so few in the military's 1.3 million-member force.

The study put the number of transgender people in the military between 1,320 and 6,630. Gender-change surgery is rare in the general population, and the RAND study estimated the possibility of 30 to 140 new hormone treatments a year in the military, with 25 to 130 gender transition-related surgeries among active service members. The cost could range from $2.4 million and $8.4 million, an amount that would represent an "exceedingly small proportion" of total health care expenditures, the study found.

Yeah, I was totally shocked when a study commissioned by the Obama administration gave them exactly the results they were looking for.

You mean the result that makes logical sense given than transgender individuals probably don't exist in the military at higher levels than in the general population?

But whatever, probably a good idea to spend time sticking it to a few thousand people who want to serve in the military.

[Ed Anger]

Yeah, I'm starting to run out of those

Thank god.

[Jacob]

Hey I thought Trump was actually liberal on social issues and was super pro-LGBT. Huh.

I guess the plan is to encourage more Chelsea Mannings to fall apart and steal secrets?

Nah, it's culture wars red meat for the base. Trans individuals as an easy target. If the Democrats come out strong in favour of Trans rights, so much the better - it'll shore up the sizeable "reasonable bigot" vote against "special interest groups".

[Barrister]

Is there any possibility that this bizarre anti-Sessions  extended rant of Trump's might be the beginning of the end for him?  I mean it even has Breitbart writing articles that are critical of Trump on the topic.

[Grey Fox]

If Breitbart is against Trump on something, you should be with Trump.

[Barrister]

If Breitbart is against Trump on something, you should be with Trump.

I gotta disagree with this.

You can dislike Sessions politics all you want, but he is at least trying to promote the policies that he (and Trump) actually ran on.  And Trump firing Sessions over him recusing himself is madness - there's no chance the Senate will confirm any new AG unless that person agrees they will NOT fire Mueller.

Which of course means Trump will fire Sessions tomorrow.

[Grey Fox]

While keeping Mueller & recusing himself are good, sensible things but Sessions is a white supremacist turning back the clock on many improvement the American justice had made. ie: Marijuana enforcement & civil forfeiture.

[Barrister]

While keeping Mueller & recusing himself are good, sensible things but Sessions is a white supremacist turning back the clock on many improvement the American justice had made. ie: Marijuana enforcement & civil forfeiture.

But those are at least actual policy positions that Trump ran on.

[derspiess]

While keeping Mueller & recusing himself are good, sensible things but Sessions is a white supremacist turning back the clock on many improvement the American justice had made. ie: Marijuana enforcement & civil forfeiture.

He's not a white supremacist but he is wrong on both those issues.

[The Minsky Moment]

Yeah, I was totally shocked when a study commissioned by the Obama administration gave them exactly the results they were looking for.

Riiight . . . the Rand Corporation is so well known for its radical leftist positions on identity politics.