Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted June 27, 2017 Author Share Posted June 27, 2017 He was warned. He was given an explanation. Nevertheless, he persisted... http://www.rawstory.com/2017/06/watch-emotional-donald-trump-supporter-explains-that-his-family-wont-be-insured-if-obamacare-goes-away/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=im&utm_tracker=1737131x84899 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 3 hours ago, Kalbear said: Citation needed. 2010. A big part of the 2010 wave was because of the ACA, and it's quite possible that something similar could happen in 2018 because of the AHCA. 3 hours ago, Kalbear said: Now, I'd agree with you that people would punish Republicans if they, say, lost their job or the economy plummeted or something like that - but for healthcare? Yeah, premiums went up - you think that means a person who voted for Trump is going to say 'no, I'd rather vote for a Democrat'? Come on, man. I think they won't like the healthcare thing, but they'll just rationalize it away because it isn't their biggest concern. Healthcare is a very personal issue, and it's easy to see how people would punish the Republican Party if they took it away. Now that doesn't necessarily mean that a Trump voter will go out and vote for a Democrat, but they might just not vote at all. And there will be a lot of Independents that could be motivated to vote for a Democrat solely to send a message to the Republican Party. It's easy to envision a lot of Republicans losing close races if you factor those two things in while assuming that enthusiasm will be high on the Democratic side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 McConnell seems to think its an easy thing for everybody to get the sort of medical help and therapy he got at the non-profit, private (back then) Warm Springs where his polio was treated, as well as FDR's who made the place, along with the March of Dimes. It's not a private facility any longer though, and hasn't been since 1974. And thanks to the government interest and support polio has been just about eliminated from the US. But with McConnell's efforts that is likely to change, and very soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 27 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: 2010. A big part of the 2010 wave was because of the ACA, and it's quite possible that something similar could happen in 2018 because of the AHCA. That's totally true, though as @Altherion is fond of pointing out their main area of anger was not the ACA - it was the economy. 27 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Healthcare is a very personal issue, and it's easy to see how people would punish the Republican Party if they took it away. Now that doesn't necessarily mean that a Trump voter will go out and vote for a Democrat, but they might just not vote at all. And there will be a lot of Independents that could be motivated to vote for a Democrat solely to send a message to the Republican Party. It's easy to envision a lot of Republicans losing close races if you factor those two things in while assuming that enthusiasm will be high on the Democratic side. It's not that easy for me to see. That same thinking made it 'easy' to see how Trump loses, for instance. There are just too many people who are never, ever going to vote for a Democrat no matter what, and too many districts where it doesn't matter what the turnout is on the Democratic side because of gerrymandering, voter rights being taken away and any number of disenfranchisements. My fear is that basically so long as a person can have something to excuse Trump et al, they will use it over voting rationally. It doesn't even need to be true! Right now Republicans are saying that their nearly trillion dollar cut to medicaid doesn't touch medicaid. And people are buying it! They'll be told once their premiums go up and they can't afford insurance that the reason isn't because of the BRCA or AHCA, it's because of Obama poisoning the well,and the only way to get anything done is to vote those obstructionist Democrats out so they can change things for the better once and for all. Come on, you can see that, can't you? Can't you see that as the message most Republican voters would buy, especially if their alternative is to vote in a Democrat wanting single payer? Now, if the economy tanks I think you're right - they'll be far more inclined to vote the bums out. Conversely, if we go to war with Syria and Iran like it looks like, they'll be far more inclined to keep them in. But boy, do I not share the optimism that them voting this cruel bill into place will make people finally realize that they were bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 The Bill Lives GOP senators delay the health care vote, but Trumpcare is still very much in play. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/06/what_the_delayed_vote_means_for_trumpcare.html A Bipartisan Health-Care Bill Could Save Republicans. Why Does It Scare Them? http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/06/why-dont-republicans-try-a-bipartisan-health-care-bill.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted June 27, 2017 Author Share Posted June 27, 2017 7 minutes ago, Martell Spy said: The Bill Lives GOP senators delay the health care vote, but Trumpcare is still very much in play. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/06/what_the_delayed_vote_means_for_trumpcare.html Need some time to dole out that $188 billion in exchange for votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 Quote Need some time to dole out that $188 billion in exchange for votes. It's really hard to stop zombie Ryancare from killing a million babies when it wants to. You need like a +5 holy sword wielded by a level 20 paladin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigima Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 They don't try bipartisan healthcare reforms because better healthcare was never, ever the point of this charade. As always, the point is Republican priorities like tax cuts. Any healthcare benefits are incidental, as you can see from the bill, which doesn't have any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 This is pretty pointless information, kinda sorta, but sometimes we need that type of thing. Eric Trump got himself a Hitler-youth/Richard Spencer/alt-right haircut. http://www.distractify.com/politics/2017/06/27/Z22iaVR/eric-trump-got-a-new-hair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted June 28, 2017 Author Share Posted June 28, 2017 7 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said: This is pretty pointless information, kinda sorta, but sometimes we need that type of thing. Eric Trump got himself a Hitler-youth/Richard Spencer/alt-right haircut. http://www.distractify.com/politics/2017/06/27/Z22iaVR/eric-trump-got-a-new-hair As much as I hate to admit it, that haircut makes him look at least 12% more punchable. And that's a conservative estimate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
all swedes are racist Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 On 6/25/2017 at 6:49 PM, dmc515 said: I'll likewise admit I'm hardly an expert on California politics or this specific bill, but I think this article explains the reasoning fairly well: When a bill is that costly - particularly in any state with a balanced budget amendment (not to mention one that has had serious recent budget problems like California) - AND even the co-sponsors that introduced it admit they don't know how to pay for it, it's not ready for a floor vote. Should they have kicked it back to committee? Sure. And you're right to be pessimistic about "plans to park the bill ... in Assembly Rules Committee 'until further notice.'" Hopefully the nurses lobby can maintain pressure to bring it back to life if not next year then next session. It should be noted this already appears to be a political football in next year's gubernatorial race between top Democratic challengers Newsom and Villaraigosa. From the link above: late response-- sorry thanks for that article. just read another (http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/democrats-help-corporate-donors-block-california-health-care-measure-progressives) which addresses some of that, and more. namely, (again, being a moron, i may be missing out on technical nuances) that there is "detail economic analysis" stating over all saving should outweigh costs in terms of funds allocated, (see infra) as well as the fact the proposed bill contains failsafe language that prevent its enaction without adequate funding. basically, i understand this particular iteration of this particular bill was not ready to be passed, but motherfuck if every goddamn democrat in this country shouldn't be fighting tooth and nail to forward sp-uhc, and shit like this is extremely disheartening On 6/26/2017 at 1:05 AM, lokisnow said: It was a shite bill. a %15 state payroll tax to pay for health insurance is unacceptable, and I am pretty fucking progressive and support the theory but they'll have to do better than that. "Providing full universal coverage would increase overall system costs by about 10 percent, but ... single payer system could produce savings of about 18 percent,” concluded a May 2017 study led by University of Massachusetts-Amherst economist Robert Pollin. “The proposed single-payer system could provide decent health care for all California residents while still reducing net overall costs by about 8 percent relative to the existing system." https://jacobinmag.com/2017/06/trumpcare-obamacare-repeal-ahca-single-payer "Of course, this needs funding — and it needs to prevent people from feeling shirked by paying into benefits they don’t receive. Thus, a public option must be created with an aggressive piece of legislation: remove the requirement for corporations to provide insurance for their employees and instead levy a corporate tax to pay for the public option. Because per-person cost is lower under single-payer than private insurance, overall cost to corporations under this approach is less than what they currently pay to cover their employees, without the shell games involved in finding ways to deny employee coverage. And more importantly, employees will be freed from employer coverage (which, since it covers a smaller risk pool, more often than not comes with stringent deductibles and challenging premiums)." i get that a payroll tax increase is shitty, and I have no idea how the nitty gritty numbers shake out, (and of course that should be addressed, maybe by more assembly persons and not just the two sponsors?) but coundlt the above lessen the blow somewhat? like, what is californias current payroll tax look like, and what do the respective employee/employer contributions to insurance look like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A True Kaniggit Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 3 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: As much as I hate to admit it, that haircut makes him look at least 12% more punchable. And that's a conservative estimate. Ha. Intended? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
all swedes are racist Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 On 6/26/2017 at 2:22 PM, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: Second Minimum Wage Increase in a year Seems to have backfired a bit for Seattle... https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/seattles-minimum-wage-hike-may-have-gone-too-far/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark /Low wage workers receiving less hours and unemployment is up about that https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/06/27/seattles-higher-minimum-wage-is-actually-working-just-fine/?utm_term=.b4399e44ee41 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted June 28, 2017 Author Share Posted June 28, 2017 11 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said: Ha. Intended? Of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 4 hours ago, Dr. Pepper said: This is pretty pointless information, kinda sorta, but sometimes we need that type of thing. Eric Trump got himself a Hitler-youth/Richard Spencer/alt-right haircut. http://www.distractify.com/politics/2017/06/27/Z22iaVR/eric-trump-got-a-new-hair 4 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: As much as I hate to admit it, that haircut makes him look at least 12% more punchable. And that's a conservative estimate. Total honesty here, I'm really burned that neo-nazi's ruined that haircut. It looked great on Jimmy Darmody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 10 minutes ago, Pony Queen Jace said: Total honesty here, I'm really burned that neo-nazi's ruined that haircut. It looked great on Jimmy Darmody. Don't blame the Neo-Nazis. The actual Nazis were the ones who made that haircut "popular". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 1 minute ago, theguyfromtheVale said: Don't blame the Neo-Nazis. The actual Nazis were the ones who made that haircut "popular". But I thought that was a pretty normal haircut for soldiers in WWI??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 Yeah. It just wasn't a political statement in WWI... but by 1933, it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 For shame, Many...that title, for shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
all swedes are racist Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 12 minutes ago, Pony Queen Jace said: But I thought that was a pretty normal haircut for soldiers in WWI??? what? jimmy darmondy was like 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.