Hacker News Reader

Comment by jcfrei | Hacker News Reader

Just cancel it, make a new Act with a different name and equal purpose, claim victory. Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration.

View on HN

Easier: Make some trivial amendment to it (does not need to be ratified), and then just start calling it something else.

"It was a disaster, but We Fixed It because I'm your favorite."

Isn't that how they "fixed ACA" last time around? Failed to have the votes to repeal it, so they "saved" it

Hero John McCain saved it

They got rid of the much hated, terrible, corrupt, illegal Obamacare and replaced it with the much loved and wonderful Affordable Care Act.

Can't tell if trolling

This is where we are at. So many people are unaware that ACA is Obamacare. Obamacare evil.

Yeah, I've seen a few videos where people are asked if they want to purge Obamacare, then asked if they support the Affordable Care Act, the reactions are priceless.

Who me or the politicians who go to town halls and tell their constituents this is what they did (one of the 5 things they did this week perhaps).

“Only I can fix it. Tortilla chips (those are gang chips) taking up too much room on the table. Don’t know why you’d stick up for gang chips. Potato chips belong. ”

>Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration.

For example?

Also please show that the major current on-going efforts, like ongoing negotiations, measures in the border etc, were worked upon as intensive as it is now, in the previous administration.

> For example?

USMCA

Not sure if you are the same person. But anyway, I cannot read your mind. Please explain your justifications for the claim or please share an article that does it.

You know how to use Google, right?

That would put a wrench in whatever weird contrarian play that keeps getting OP banned.

I don’t know why I even engaged. Haven’t had my coffee yet.

USMCA was NAFTA, which Trump was against before and then supported it after the rename. Only the name changed, the treaty did not.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43398744

Why don’t YOU show those things? That would at least be the start of a good faith discussion and not a whataboutism bias tirade.

Show what things?

Trump replaced NAFTA with USMCA during his first term. He claimed it was the best deal ever.

This term, he's claiming the deal is terrible and starting a trade war (which is likely not winnable and probably ends up settling for something approximating NAFTA again).

Which is it? Best deal ever, or crap? He's lying about one.

So I searched for "NAFTA USMCA difference" and there are a lot of articles that describe the differences.

I agree that Trump sometimes exaggerate stuff, but that does not mean that there is nothing is there.

I think It is very dishonest to claim that all the current administration is doing is just continuing what the previous ones did, but with changed names.

Trump signed USMCA. Now he claims some idiot did USMCA.

Both facts check out.

The point of the argument you were replying to was that Trump signed the USMCA in his first term, but it's now saying it's a terrible deal for the US and reason enough to start a trade war with Canada over.

A deal he himself signed.

Trump doesn't just exaggerate. Trump outright lies. Minute by minute.

Even if that is true, that only make him look better. He made a mistake and is now correcting it. Not sure why it is a bad thing.

If we want to play the "whos more dishonest" game, we should probably look at what he said about his own trade agreement years later.

As part of it, Trump signed the "deal" that had Canada supplying power to 3 states. The same thing he later railed against and wanted to know who could have possibly done it. It was him.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com