logo Sign In

Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 239

This topic has been locked by a moderator.

Author
Time

I still believe that if Trump manages to get his health care bill passed, it will ultimately secure his re-election. Sure, there will be screaming about people losing their health insurance, and sick people unable to get health care. But that will always be the minority of people. Most people are healthy, and so most people will see their premiums go down, because they won’t be having to subsidize the sick anymore. You only need a majority of voters to win an election.

I have many friends who were able to get health care for the first time in their lives when the ACA passed. But every time I mention that to my Trump-supporting friends, they simply don’t care - they just say “but my premiums went up, why should I have to pay for someone else’s health care?”. That sentiment got Trump elected, it was what his voters asked him to fix, and that is what he is doing. I don’t see anything that would make that sentiment change. And for each screaming anti-Trump comment at the bottoms of ACHA stories, there are responses calling them snowflakes and people saying I don’t want to pay for your problems.

This is a fundamental philosophical issue. Should a country take care of its sick? I think that the current stance of a majority of Americans is no, every man for himself.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

I don’t see anything that would make that sentiment change.

For the healthy who lack empathy, an unexpected health crisis can do wonders, especially if it wipes them out financially. Incidentally:

http://www.consumerreports.org/personal-bankruptcy/how-the-aca-drove-down-personal-bankruptcy/

Recent ACA polls put support for its continued existence in the majority, so I don’t necessarily buy into your argument that the majority are selfish; Trump supporters may be, but they’re not the majority.

Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time

Sure, an unexpected health crisis can change that person’s mind, but does it change anyone else’s mind? Back in the late 1990s, a friend of mine’s wife got cancer – his insurance immediately dropped them. They were able to get into one of those “high risk pools” that the republicans keep touting (they’re not new, they’ve been around), which at least allowed her to get care. However, their premiums were $1600 per month, with tens of thousands in copays and deductibles. By the time she finally succumbed about 10 years later, he was left with over $500,000 in debt. At his income level, I don’t think he will ever be able to pay this off.

When I mention this to my Trump supporting friends, of course they say how sad that is, how tragic. But again, they don’t want to have to pay extra because of someone else’s problems, that would be redistribution of wealth.

As for polls that say people want ACA to continue, I’m skeptical. I’d have to see how the poll was worded – if it’s a choice of simply repealing it, sure I might agree. But if there is a replacement that removes the mandate (which ACHA seems to be), I think most people who voted for Trump would be in favor of it. The ACA was wildly unpopular just a year ago.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

I still believe that if Trump manages to get his health care bill passed, it will ultimately secure his re-election.

I am not so sure of that.

  1. 4 years is a long time away.

  2. There are many other factors to consider other than just the health care bill(other domestic issues, immigration, foreign policy, etc)

  3. We have no idea yet who will be running against him in the General election.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:
it’s that I literally can’t because I never understand anything you say.

You are not the only one.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Just this once.

Jetrell Fo said:

If you were willing to engage in normal discussion about it

I think he believes (and I agree with that belief), that engaging in a normal rational discussion with you is impossible.

Jetrell Fo said:

Why is it so hard for you to be normal in conversation? Why does everything you have to say have to be made to sound like you’re the smarter person?

One could ask you the same question.

Jetrell Fo said:

No need to be a dick or condescending.

Yes we get enough of that from you already.

btw, you want reasonable well rounded conversions? Stop defending Trump no matter what and deny being a Trump supporter. That would be a start.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Jetrell Fo said:

CatBus said:

Jetrell Fo said:

CatBus said:

Seems typical legit.

You couldn’t find your own shtick?

😉

If you don’t like unoriginal schtick, don’t post unoriginal conspiracy theories.

There’s a Jeffrey Epstein conspiracy theory?

Several, actually. The one you posted, which was that this was tied back to the Clintons is the one I was talking about. There’s also one that ties it back to Trump. New York’s millionaire social scene is smaller than you’d think, and you can invent all kinds of crazy connections, as it appears Mike is rather used to doing.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

I agree with Puggo to the degree that booting a few million people off health insurance won’t hurt Trump’s re-election chances. However, it could play badly in certain legislative districts, and even flip some state governments (Florida, for example).

What’s interesting to me is that many of the arguments about the ACA (“why should I pay for someone else’s healthcare?”) are actually arguments against the concept of insurance in general and not specific to the ACA or even health insurance. It goes back to John Birch or even further back, when people railed against insurance companies, not only because they’re rich (which they are), but because insurance is an inherently collectivist concept. And worse, it’s an example of a collectivist concept that appears to be the only reasonable solution to a common market problem. And that is a real problem for Birchers/Tea Partiers, etc.

Lack of any insurance whatsoever–health, life, auto, etc–would actually be seen as a real success by this group, a triumph of “freedom” over collectivism. Never underestimate the power of ideology–some people will march right over a cliff if they think freedom’s on the other side, and they’ll keep believing it all the way down.

I’m not sure it will actually help Trump though. I think he’s currently assured to get about 45% of the vote in 2020, and I’m not sure this changes that. The only question is who the other 55% vote for, and where they live.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

generalfrevious said:

TV’s Frink said:

24 million people were probably going to lose insurance under the previous failed bill, per the CBO. It’s unknown how many people would potentially lose insurance under this plan, and the Senate is sure to make fairly severe amendments to it as well. And of course, losing insurance does not equal death for a large number of people. For some, yes, and that will be blood on the Republican’s hands (and all because they can’t stop themselves from creating more giveaways to the rich while fucking over the poor)…but your exaggerations do not help your points at all.

Do you know who we are up against? We have a president that only does not respect the law or any morals whatsoever, but openly flaunts and brags about it.

Are you suggesting we’re up against this child actor?

😉

More like this one. 😉

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

I think reelection is highly unlikely for Trump unless enough people’s lives are significantly improved. He was the most unpopular candidate ever and needed a perfect storm of favorable things to happen in order to win once.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Warbler said:

Just this once.

Jetrell Fo said:

If you were willing to engage in normal discussion about it

I think he believes (and I agree with that belief), that engaging in a normal rational discussion with you is impossible.

Jetrell Fo said:

Why is it so hard for you to be normal in conversation? Why does everything you have to say have to be made to sound like you’re the smarter person?

One could ask you the same question.

Jetrell Fo said:

No need to be a dick or condescending.

Yes we get enough of that from you already.

btw, you want reasonable well rounded conversions? Stop defending Trump no matter what and deny being a Trump supporter. That would a start.

So you prove at least part of my point in your post. Because I don’t believe as you guys do I am unable to be understood and you cannot have a rational conversation with me. On top of that, you quoting my convo with Duracell is a moot point. Him and I already worked it out and we both understood where we were coming from and why. If I can have that kind of conversation with him, you guys can have it with me, it is your unwillingness to meet in the middle on anything that prevents that from happening.

You’re right, that is a start.

😃

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

I think reelection is highly unlikely for Trump unless enough people’s lives are significantly improved. He was the most unpopular candidate ever and needed a perfect storm of favorable things to happen in order to win once.

There was nothing perfect about this election cycle. The Democrats only opportunity to take Trump out was cheated by his own people and none of them cared that it happened. Trump is not my friend, nor was he my choice for President (I wanted Bernie, not Hillary), but there is method to the madness that he uses whether you guys give him credit for it or not. My life does not evolve around your opinions … it evolves around mine.

Trump has a better chance at getting re-elected than you seem to give him credit for. If the Democrats can give up the “status quo” mentality and get back to regular Americans they would have a far better chance of unseating him.

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

Jetrell Fo said:

generalfrevious said:

TV’s Frink said:

24 million people were probably going to lose insurance under the previous failed bill, per the CBO. It’s unknown how many people would potentially lose insurance under this plan, and the Senate is sure to make fairly severe amendments to it as well. And of course, losing insurance does not equal death for a large number of people. For some, yes, and that will be blood on the Republican’s hands (and all because they can’t stop themselves from creating more giveaways to the rich while fucking over the poor)…but your exaggerations do not help your points at all.

Do you know who we are up against? We have a president that only does not respect the law or any morals whatsoever, but openly flaunts and brags about it.

Are you suggesting we’re up against this child actor?

😉

More like this one. 😉

Sam Neil was great in that movie. I loved all 3 of them. Does that me an anti-christ lover now?

😉

Author
Time
 (Edited)

CatBus said:

I agree with Puggo to the degree that booting a few million people off health insurance won’t hurt Trump’s re-election chances. However, it could play badly in certain legislative districts, and even flip some state governments (Florida, for example).

What’s interesting to me is that many of the arguments about the ACA (“why should I pay for someone else’s healthcare?”) are actually arguments against the concept of insurance in general and not specific to the ACA or even health insurance. It goes back to John Birch or even further back, when people railed against insurance companies, not only because they’re rich (which they are), but because insurance is an inherently collectivist concept. And worse, it’s an example of a collectivist concept that appears to be the only reasonable solution to a common market problem. And that is a real problem for Birchers/Tea Partiers, etc.

Lack of any insurance whatsoever–health, life, auto, etc–would actually be seen as a real success by this group, a triumph of “freedom” over collectivism. Never underestimate the power of ideology–some people will march right over a cliff if they think freedom’s on the other side, and they’ll keep believing it all the way down.

I’m not sure it will actually help Trump though. I think he’s currently assured to get about 45% of the vote in 2020, and I’m not sure this changes that. The only question is who the other 55% vote for, and where they live.

PPffffffttttttttt…

The Demican-Republocrat establishment uniparty pols are, like all “progressive” incremental totalitarian sh%#*, a gang of human misery vampires. They gain sustenance from severe unhappiness of their subjects. They want a socialist one-size-fits-all tyranny complete with rationing and death panels for anyone they deem unworthy. They are really just distracting and killing time until their ‘Big Glitch’ and the institution of communism in the aftermath.

Establish individual accounts within the Medicare system supposedly holding $10,000 each, INDEX FOR INFLATION, qualified providers bill the individuals, individuals can pay out of the account, individuals are paid $100-$200 dollars a month for not draining the account, monthly allotment is used to recharge the account to 10Gs whenever it’s drained, convert the rest of Medicare to 80/20 catastrophic. Pay for all this with the monies for Medicare, Medicaid, all other gov’t insurance, taxing the money for all private insurance, ending subsidies and a surtax to cover any deficit. Give all gov’t healthcare facilities 6-9 months to convert to private non-profit orgs that must be self-sustaining thereafter.

It’s universal, for most all people over the long term it’s 100 percent, personal responsibility of patients and doctors preserved and expanded, free market dynamic forces preserved and expanded…

There’s nothing more to see here. Move along.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Jetrell Fo said:

Warbler said:

Just this once.

Jetrell Fo said:

If you were willing to engage in normal discussion about it

I think he believes (and I agree with that belief), that engaging in a normal rational discussion with you is impossible.

Jetrell Fo said:

Why is it so hard for you to be normal in conversation? Why does everything you have to say have to be made to sound like you’re the smarter person?

One could ask you the same question.

Jetrell Fo said:

No need to be a dick or condescending.

Yes we get enough of that from you already.

btw, you want reasonable well rounded conversions? Stop defending Trump no matter what and deny being a Trump supporter. That would a start.

So you prove at least part of my point in your post.

No, you only think it does.

Because I don’t believe as you guys do I am unable to be understood and you cannot have a rational conversation with me.

not exactly. It goes beyond not believing as we do.

On top of that, you quoting my convo with Duracell is a moot point. Him and I already worked it out and we both understood where we were coming from and why. If I can have that kind of conversation with him, you guys can have it with me, it is your unwillingness to meet in the middle on anything that prevents that from happening.

May I remind you that you weren’t able to have “that kind of conversation” with Durecell, without warning him with:

No need to be a dick or condescending.

when he wasn’t being a dick or being condescending. Doesn’t seem like you had that great a conversation with him.

Author
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

Trump has a better chance at getting re-elected than you seem to give him credit for.

For once I agree with Fo, in conclusion if not in how I got there. It should come as no surprise to anyone that when polled on issues rather than candidates, “Democratic issues” win by enormous margins. Part of the problem is clearly messaging.

When Democrats run on their policies, they win. What was missing this last cycle? Well, the top media topics were: Benghazi, Emailghazi, Sneezeghazi, pussy grabbing, and penis size. Whether true/important or not, these were character issues and not policy stories. Was Clinton’s character fatally flawed? Maybe, but the Trump team is also very, very good at waving shiny things in front of the media–even if it doesn’t reflect well on them–to prevent people from talking about policy issues. Does it matter that nobody knew where Trump stood on any issues? Not as long as they kept people from knowing where Clinton stood.

And as Lee Atwater said, when Republicans run on race, they win. America hasn’t seen a campaign as racially charged as Trump’s since George Wallace, and it’s unlikely he’s going to change the strategy that put him in the White House.

Democrats seem hell-bent on pursuing policies that appeal to the most people. Trump seems hell-bent on ignoring what appeals to the most people and simply appealing to the right people (the disproportionately influential white/rural working class). Where does that leave us? With a Democratic Party that’s successfully outpolled their opposition in 6 of the last 7 Presidential elections, and is simultaneously wondering how they can change to become relevant in national politics again.

The wild card is that the Trump team loves to play the victim card, and it worked well when he wasn’t an incumbent. When you control all three branches of federal government and the vast majority of state governments, it’s tough to convince people the mean system is rigged against you. Not that he’s not trying, what with Obama’s microwave spying on him and all. I just can’t see them changing tack on this one either, and it could lead to people seeing him as a paranoid nut, which might work against him. Or not.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

Warbler said:

Jetrell Fo said:

Warbler said:

Just this once.

Jetrell Fo said:

If you were willing to engage in normal discussion about it

I think he believes (and I agree with that belief), that engaging in a normal rational discussion with you is impossible.

Jetrell Fo said:

Why is it so hard for you to be normal in conversation? Why does everything you have to say have to be made to sound like you’re the smarter person?

One could ask you the same question.

Jetrell Fo said:

No need to be a dick or condescending.

Yes we get enough of that from you already.

btw, you want reasonable well rounded conversions? Stop defending Trump no matter what and deny being a Trump supporter. That would a start.

So you prove at least part of my point in your post.

No, you only think it does.

Because I don’t believe as you guys do I am unable to be understood and you cannot have a rational conversation with me.

not exactly. It goes beyond not believing as we do.

On top of that, you quoting my convo with Duracell is a moot point. Him and I already worked it out and we both understood where we were coming from and why. If I can have that kind of conversation with him, you guys can have it with me, it is your unwillingness to meet in the middle on anything that prevents that from happening.

May I remind you that you weren’t able to have “that kind of conversation” with Durecell, without warning him with:

No need to be a dick or condescending.

when he wasn’t being a dick or being condescending. Doesn’t seem like you had that great a conversation with him.

You keep providing every reason you can think of for you two not to converse with me. If you don’t want to have a conversation, that’s fine, but own it and don’t blame just me for not being able to. How hard is that really? Putting only your conditions on whether or not you have a conversation with me isn’t reasonable. It says that you don’t want to meet in the middle. It says that you want what you want or it won’t happen because it can’t unless I follow only your terms.

I’d rather you and Frink keep ignoring me than to subject my personal integrity just to have a small chance of talking with you normally. There is nothing that important that you two do here that would sway me to make such a one sided and futile compromise.

Peace

Author
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

I’d rather you and Frink keep ignoring me

For me, it would really help if you would return the favor, as I’ve said many times, but for some reason you still insist on responding to every post I make. And I’m not talking about posts like the one I’m making now, I’m talking about the random ones where I post a current events article. You always have to comment on it. Is it so hard to not respond? I don’t want to have a conversation with you, so why keep trying to comment on everything I say?

Author
Time

CatBus said:

Jetrell Fo said:

Trump has a better chance at getting re-elected than you seem to give him credit for.

For once I agree with Fo, in conclusion if not in how I got there. It should come as no surprise to anyone that when polled on issues rather than candidates, “Democratic issues” win by enormous margins. Part of the problem is clearly messaging.

When Democrats run on their policies, they win. What was missing this last cycle? Well, the top media topics were: Benghazi, Emailghazi, Sneezeghazi, pussy grabbing, and penis size. Whether true/important or not, these were character issues and not policy stories. Was Clinton’s character fatally flawed? Maybe, but the Trump team is also very, very good at waving shiny things in front of the media–even if it doesn’t reflect well on them–to prevent people from talking about policy issues. Does it matter that nobody knew where Trump stood on any issues? Not as long as they kept people from knowing where Clinton stood.

And as Lee Atwater said, when Republicans run on race, they win. America hasn’t seen a campaign as racially charged as Trump’s since George Wallace, and it’s unlikely he’s going to change the strategy that put him in the White House.

Democrats seem hell-bent on pursuing policies that appeal to the most people. Trump seems hell-bent on ignoring what appeals to the most people and simply appealing to the right people (the disproportionately influential white/rural working class). Where does that leave us? With a Democratic Party that’s successfully outpolled their opposition in 6 of the last 7 Presidential elections, and is simultaneously wondering how they can change to become relevant in national politics again.

The wild card is that the Trump team loves to play the victim card, and it worked well when he wasn’t an incumbent. When you control all three branches of federal government and the vast majority of state governments, it’s tough to convince people the mean system is rigged against you. Not that he’s not trying, what with Obama’s microwave spying on him and all. I just can’t see them changing tack on this one either, and it could lead to people seeing him as a paranoid nut, which might work against him. Or not.

Trump also helps the media help themselves look bad. He goads them constantly and instead of falling back on their laurels and reporting factually and without bias, they drop their moral ethics and parade gossip style writing as factual news. Also, as far as I know, there isn’t a single reporter assigned to the press briefings that is a registered Republican.

It’s a weird space to watch live for sure.

Author
Time

CatBus said:

Jetrell Fo said:

Trump has a better chance at getting re-elected than you seem to give him credit for.

For once I agree with Fo, in conclusion if not in how I got there. It should come as no surprise to anyone that when polled on issues rather than candidates, “Democratic issues” win by enormous margins. Part of the problem is clearly messaging.

Yes, but Trump was not a normal Republican candidate…not even Ted Cruz “normal.” He was insanely lucky to win. That doesn’t mean he didn’t run an effective campaign, but he barely won (and only via the Electoral College by a very slim margin) because people hate Clinton, because she’s a poor campaigner, because the polling was off, because of the Comey letter, because of Wikileaks, and on and on.

That all had to go his way for him to win.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Jetrell Fo said:

I’d rather you and Frink keep ignoring me

For me, it would really help if you would return the favor, as I’ve said many times, but for some reason you still insist on responding to every post I make. And I’m not talking about posts like the one I’m making now, I’m talking about the random ones where I post a current events article. You always have to comment on it. Is it so hard to not respond? I don’t want to have a conversation with you, so why keep trying to comment on everything I say?

There is only one person on the top of the food chain here and his name is not TV’sFrink or warbler. Your words and opinions are no smarter or dumber than mine or anybody elses.

Commenting on a story you or any one else posts is fair game for comment. Why should yours be treated so special? Me commenting on them is not having a dialog with you. You take quietly worded pot shots at me or my person in other threads and that’s okay right?

You and warbler have made poor arguments for your positions. It’s bad enough you got me temp banned on a double standard. I will not let it happen again, guaranteed. Either own it, and say you won’t have a regular conversation with me because you don’t understand how to, or stop complaining and just be a normal person like everyone else here.

Author
Time

said:

CatBus said:

Jetrell Fo said:

Trump has a better chance at getting re-elected than you seem to give him credit for.

For once I agree with Fo, in conclusion if not in how I got there. It should come as no surprise to anyone that when polled on issues rather than candidates, “Democratic issues” win by enormous margins. Part of the problem is clearly messaging.

Yes, but Trump was not a normal Republican candidate…not even Ted Cruz “normal.” He was insanely lucky to win. That doesn’t mean he didn’t run an effective campaign, but he barely won (and only via the Electoral College by a very slim margin) because people hate Clinton, because she’s a poor campaigner, because the polling was off, because of the Comey letter, because of Wikileaks, and on and on.

That all had to go his way for him to win.

Luck had absolutely nothing to do with it. Nothing. He played the same dirty pool they did but he was better at it. People in America just did not want another lying Clinton in office even if their only other choice was a lying Trump. They wanted change and Trump offered it in spades. Simple as that.

Author
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Jetrell Fo said:

I’d rather you and Frink keep ignoring me

For me, it would really help if you would return the favor, as I’ve said many times, but for some reason you still insist on responding to every post I make. And I’m not talking about posts like the one I’m making now, I’m talking about the random ones where I post a current events article. You always have to comment on it. Is it so hard to not respond? I don’t want to have a conversation with you, so why keep trying to comment on everything I say?

There is only one person on the top of the food chain here and his name is not TV’sFrink or warbler. Your words and opinions are no smarter or dumber than mine or anybody elses.

Commenting on a story you or any one else posts is fair game for comment. Why should yours be treated so special? Me commenting on them is not having a dialog with you. You take quietly worded pot shots at me or my person in other threads and that’s okay right?

You and warbler have made poor arguments for your positions. It’s bad enough you got me temp banned on a double standard. I will not let it happen again, guaranteed. Either own it, and say you won’t have a regular conversation with me because you don’t understand how to, or stop complaining and just be a normal person like everyone else here.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

I’m clearly insane.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Jetrell Fo said:

Also, as far as I know, there isn’t a single reporter assigned to the press briefings that is a registered Republican.

I don’t know of any who are registered Democrats (and would it even matter if the news organization they represent is as conservative as most are?). But you know that white-supremacist-lite conspiracy theorist with the pedophile fixation you were quoting earlier? Yeah, that guy. He’s got a press pass now. Think he’s not a Republican? Although I do throw up a little when I try to call him a reporter.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)