It depends on how much of the base are GOP true believers versus the deplorables and the larger mass of deplorable-adjacent, those who put on a veneer of respectability but still only care about hurting brown people and triggering the libs.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
US PoliEra 2019 |OT8| WHITE HOUSE ADMITS TO QUID PRO QUO WITH UKRAINE
- Thread starter TheHunter
- Start date
- Status
It depends on how much of the base are GOP true believers versus the deplorables and the larger mass of deplorable-adjacent, those who put on a veneer of respectability but still only care about hurting brown people and triggering the libs.
It's a big part of the opposition and narrative foisted on people to vote against their self-interest. A plan which would give them better coverage for less money. States that refuse Medicare expansion.
Were you paying attention in '09/'10 when the vote was going through the Senate? Because the death of the public option had fuck all to do with marginalized people. https://publicintegrity.org/health/elimination-of-public-option-threw-consumers-to-the-insurance-wolves/
Fuck Joe Lieberman forever.
You're right that this was the choice, but I don't think it even does the context justice. Those were the only choices because Ted Kennedy died and Scott Brown was elected after the Senate passed the ACA with a super majority. The only options were literally this bill or nothing. We couldn't even put up a fight for the superior house bill. We couldn't even tweak any of the broken provisions outside of what could be done in reconciliation
Everyone knew it kind of sucked, but hoped (somewhat correctly) that once people were insured the only way to go was up
As a Warren supporter, I don't care if she runs on single payer...because, well to be frank, it's not going to happen. The reason I trust her on healthcare is because she has shown she's intelligent, nimble and willing to synthesize new information. I don't think she would refuse to compromise to pass an expanded ACA, public option, or Medicare for all who want it. (All of which I think are good ideas that are far more realistic.) If, through some magical thing, she manages to get single payer through Congress...then she's an even better politician than I thought she was.
I also don't have to agree with every single thing a candidate is running on.The default position shouldn't be that your candidate is always 100% right on everything, and then work backwards from there.
I also don't have to agree with every single thing a candidate is running on.The default position shouldn't be that your candidate is always 100% right on everything, and then work backwards from there.
You, and Sanders, can repeat this over and over and try to convince yourselves that loss aversion is not a thing I guess.
I simultaneously think the US healthcare system is an absolute mess and travesty.
But part of the greatest opposition to changing it will be from people who don't want to lose what they have.
Nothing to me indicates that Sanders of anyone in this field, or the people he surrounds himself with, are remotely equipped for such a change management exercise.
It's not a messaging bill. I think that's where the breakdown comes in and a real ideological difference exists. One is lip-service if this is what you believe.
It should be such an easy ruling to make. "President is not a king." the end.
Lol, so I mean. This is exactly where the disconnect lies.
Bernie Sanders, and his devout following, read that bill and think... This is a plausible thing that will happen in four years. It is the only thing that should happen. Nothing else will do.
And everyone else looks at it and sees a messaging bill put forward in a Senate minority, completely implausible, that was always going to get tabled or die in committee. But provides a good signal of directional alignment, and so can be co-sponsored without any real chance of enactment.
Last edited:
It's republican opposition. No one is disputing that. But, again, there are legitimate reasons to be opposed to a forced single payer system out side "let's stick it to the poors." I am not in favor of a mandated transition to single payer. It has zero to do with wanting to make life harder for poor folks. In fact, some of my opposition is rooted in the drastic changes that would occur for folks on Medicaid should Bernie's bill be implemented as written. Like I said, my issue is that it's a bad idea to just argue everyone opposed to this one thing is doing so because of bullshit republican talking points.
A silver lining to this is that not even Trump thinks he's getting re-elected. A silver lining littered with the bodies of our dead allies and broken foreign relations.
I get the feeling that dumbass is getting ready to flee the country.
I get the feeling that dumbass is getting ready to flee the country.
That's actually the thing that I wonder and worry most about. For all his recklessness, Trump still has plenty to lose right now. Now what happens if he loses in 2020 and people aren't willing to forgive and forget? That lame duck period could get ugly fast. (I suppose there's technically a chance that a large enough loss would convince the Senate to cut their losses impeach, just to stop him from breaking anything else before leaving, hell maybe even the 25th would be invoked)
Is the 2016 election the only memorable win he has gotten? Traitor seems to have failed in every prospect.
Also, like, I think pretty much everyone in here who has a preference for Warren dunked on her implausible trade policy.
Sorry but this is really asinine. We don't have hundreds of millions of people here demanding single-payer healthcare. If you want single-payer to happen, then many many many people who were skeptical of or outright opposed to it will need to come into the fold. How do you think Bernie wins and passes single-payer healthcare, solely off the backs of the minority of Americans who already support it? If Warren is expanding the base for single-payer support, that's exactly what any single-payer advocate should be in favor of!
Last edited:
Nope, that disgusting tax cut for the billionaires and 2 Supreme Court seats will leave ripples of damages that the GOP and their base will be complicit to blaming the Dems for.
Don't see any reason to credit him with two Supreme Court seats. The first was all Mitch for one.
Here in Canada my good friend is having the surgery next week, everything is paid for through medicare, they showed her the bills how much it would cost and it's unreal how expensive it is. I can't imagine anyone having to find ways to raise the money to have such an important surgery for themselves. All she had to do was pay for a flight to Montreal where it is happening.
Still catching up but I'm not sure I saw a clear TLDR:
support for M4A collapses when you tell people they'd lose their current coverage.
Warren's caginess here is wise.
support for M4A collapses when you tell people they'd lose their current coverage.
Warren's caginess here is wise.
People largely want Medicare 4 America, and that's really the only viable option... as nice as M4All is, there's no way it passes, I just can't fathom it happening
You mean individual bankers and insurance employees, many of whom are rank and file making median wage?
My mom works in medical billing. If she donates to a candidate she does so as an individual, but it gets reported as part of the "healthcare industry" for people who don't understand how this works.
I'm part of the LEGAL INDUSTRY. ONOESSSSSSSSsssssssssssssssss
Why is this even a thing with our election laws? Who gives a fuck where the average private ass citizen works.
That reminds me of someone, it was like this guy who looked like Larry David and he was running against the fight song woman
I'm good with a lot of that. I don't think it's all 100% attainable, because we're still going to have to trade with China unless we want to pay a fortune for everything in the store. But, ya, tying some things to climate change isn't the worst idea in the world.
I mean I don't think you should be supporting turkey with tourist dollars but sure.
User banned (1 week): inappropriate commentary over a series of posts
Is it just my imagination or does trish regan on fox news talk like she has brain damage. Perhaps she is a victim of physical spousal abuse that caused such great brain damage. Investigate her husband?
[mod edit: post reverted to its original content]
[mod edit: post reverted to its original content]
Last edited by a moderator:
It's fucking maddenning. Corporations cannot donate to any campaigns or committees. They can only donate to Super PACs which, by definition, candidates have no control over (including any ability to reject their support)
My donations would go down in the banking/finance industry and I don't even own a top hat. I work in software
I'm not entirely clear what you are expressing by repeating yourself with this.
Your post is tasteless, crass, and dumb, and he wonders why you made it. Do you comprehend?
Prolly the spousal abuse bit.. I've been banned for banned for poor commentary.
I am expert.
- Status