US Politics: The 'In His Own Words' Edition

[Fez]

43 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Considering how hard it is to take away a major entitlement like medicaid (very very hard), why wasn't this even considered? 

Because the goal wasn't actually to reform health care in anyway, it was to cut taxes without blowing up the deficit. They'll try to cut taxes and blow up the deficit when they try to pass tax reform, but they didn't want to do that twice.

[Maithanet]

Just now, Fez said:

Because the goal wasn't actually to reform health care in anyway, it was to cut taxes without blowing up the deficit. They'll try to cut taxes and blow up the deficit when they try to pass tax reform, but they didn't want to do that twice.

Even that doesn't truck with me though.  The clearly wanted to be able to declare victory on Repeal/Replace.  They were just in a tough spot because all Health Care options come with unpleasant tradeoffs.  So it seems like the best solution for them would be a comparatively small bill to replace Obamacare with something so they can declare victory, and then move on to issues they really care about like tax cuts.  Because instead they wasted 6 months on health care, accomplished nothing, and look completely incompetent.  Making huge cuts to health care is really hard, and McConnell should have known that.  Even with 60/59 votes in the Senate and a huge House majority, Obamacare still took a year to pass. 

 

[Fez]

13 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Even that doesn't truck with me though.  The clearly wanted to be able to declare victory on Repeal/Replace.  They were just in a tough spot because all Health Care options come with unpleasant tradeoffs.  So it seems like the best solution for them would be a comparatively small bill to replace Obamacare with something so they can declare victory, and then move on to issues they really care about like tax cuts.  Because instead they wasted 6 months on health care, accomplished nothing, and look completely incompetent.  Making huge cuts to health care is really hard, and McConnell should have known that.  Even with 60/59 votes in the Senate and a huge House majority, Obamacare still took a year to pass. 

 

There's only one reconciliation bill per fiscal year at most though; it's a lost opportunity to go small on them (unless its impossible to go big, I suppose, as the GOP has now discovered).

[A Horse Named Stranger]

On 17.7.2017 at 3:26 PM, Tywin et al. said:

One has to wonder how much further the Trump Administration can move the goal posts. It seems to me that they're nearing the water's edge. 

So what? US territory - Russian territory, that's maybe 5 miles. So the posts can float down the Bering strait.

Now to the Trumpcare failure.

I don't think the Republicans will actually do much about the ACA. They will create some more chaos (to create uncertainty for insurers and to drive them out of the exchange), make a few financial tweaks here and there, and hope it collapses. Then they will happily turn up at Faux News and claim.

"We told you this would happen. We wanted to reform healthcare, but the Democrats blocked it. You lost your health insurance/Medicaid. Blame the Democrats for that."

I guess something like that will probably be the endgame they're aiming for.

[Dr. Pepper]

3 hours ago, dmc515 said:

The problem here is people use hypotheticals that are plausible, or at least reflect political reality.  The point of hypotheticals is to "hypothesize" about how to explain or predict the real world.  If I thought there was a greater-than-zero possibility GOP would ever get on board with single payer I'd be much more sympathetic to the argument and stop sounding like a turtle or I'm playing a game or whatever your issue is.

This just doesn't make any sense.  How is the opposition party supposed to "actually get shit done right fucking now?"  What are they supposed to do?  I guess you mean advocate certain policies - fine, that's great.  But it's politics 101 to not push a policy you know will be detrimental to regaining power if it has no chance to pass anyway. 

I'm totally fine with working with the GOP too, but only if there's a decent possibility they would be willing to compromise on the issue, and single payer is not one of them.  Moreover, it seems quite odd to concurrently say democracy has basically ended and the Dems should find ways to work with the party that has basically ended it.

We have a very different idea about what is plausible and what isn't.  You can't just say something is likely to happen....

As for doing shit right now...anything at all would be good.  All this shit where progressives say "oh, no we can't go there because we just need to win" isn't doing anything but pretending like real life is just a game of checkers with no real stakes.  

1 hour ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Um yes, they would. The whole reason McConnell is even bothering to hold this Repeal and Wait vote is to appease that 30% or so of the base that is still deadset on repeal, regardless as to whether or not they benefit from Obamacare.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/the-paradox-of-mitch-mcconnells-repeal-only-vote/534129/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark

And what about the 46% of the base who actually support single payer?  

Look, I've said it a hundred times, I'll say it a hundred more.  Conservatives stand for nothing.  They believe in nothing, they will agree with whatever their person says they should agree with.  They'll damn Obamacare while being completely reliant upon it.  They'll claim to want universal healthcare but then vote against it.  My point is that if the GOP decided to get on board with single payer, they'd have massive support.

[Fragile Bird]

So McConnell is now taking the approach that the bill to be presented can be amended, and so therefore no one should not vote for it.

And you can be certain there will be a vote next week.

[Dr. Pepper]

38 minutes ago, S John said:

They need some new blood to emerge - and soon, but they aren't done.  These things are cyclical, even with gerrymandering.  Trump's approval rating is the lowest of any president at this point in his presidency and it does not look like he is equipped to drastically improve those opinions.  With some fluctuations here and there I'd expect him to continue to shed supporters as it gets harder and harder to ignore how full of shit he is.  His base is still intact mostly, but it's only been 7 months.    

And the Republicans continue to fail at solving their most threatening long-term problem which is demographics.  I'm admittedly inclined towards optimism, but when I see the Trump crew on TV I see the desperate dying gasp of those not well equipped for the realities of 21st century.  The 2016 election was a major setback for social issues, the climate, healthcare reform, and improving economic equality, but I don't see it as the final say on all of those things.  Trump supporters tend to be old and white and the only way the R's are going to bring in more young people, more minorities, and more people of color is by actually doing an incredible job and improving the lives of voters in a tangible way.  But what has happened so far instead is that they are fucking up.  They've got a guaranteed two year window to fundamentally change this country with a flurry of regressive legislation but they obviously do not have a coherent plan and Trump is a terrible leader on legislative issues, he just wants sign things with his big pen, golf, and tweet.  

If things continue like this it is entirely possible that the political make-up of the presidency and congress looks very different in 4 years.  And even if they get it together and succeed at implementing a conservative agenda (especially on issues like healthcare) I think there's a good possibility that when the American people get a dose of what that entails the R's own agenda could bite them in the ass at the polls.  Trump was all about jobs, jobs, jobs - but many of the industries he championed are in dying industries that have been heavily automated.  Those aren't coming back in the numbers it would take to revitalize the rust belt and in 2020 it should not be difficult to demonstrate that Trump's campaign bluster for 2016 was mostly a bunch of bull shit.  Gonna be a long 4 years, though, that much is for sure.  

 

Two things here: If these things are cyclical (and I agree that typically they are) and the GOP needs to solve it's demographic issue, it's probably not out of the realm of possibility for another party realignment to occur.  A Republican party with many of it's current social positions but that supports things like universal healthcare would be incredibly powerful, and also terrifyingly dangerous.  

I definitely don't have your level of optimism.  When I see Trump getting away with all he's gotten away with and with him focusing on things like loyalty and tearing apart the media, I'm terrified.  The terror becomes more real when you realize that his voters stand for absolutely nothing and will just sway whichever direction Trump tells them to sway. This is not good.  I don't think we'll come back from this.  

[Zorral]

4 hours ago, Fez said:

What dmc515 said.

 

Anyway, I'm legit shocked...

That sounds like actual integrity from a currently-elected Republican.

Although maybe its just an excuse to avoid hearing anymore of Trump's BS; I suspect there are quite a few other Senators that wish they also had an excuse like this. 

This made me laugh.

I'vw just re-read a section of Jon Meachem's American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House, that covers his 1833 two month, summer, tour of New York and New England.  The reason was to show New England and NY how the People loved him, so the elite should not balk at his removal of federal funds from the United States bank, which he was planning to do in the fall, to ensure it didn't rise from the stake he'd already put in its heart.  The crowds loved him almost as much as Jackson loved being loved.

A New York clergyman got trapped with Jackson on a harbor crossing to Manhattan.  Jackson repeated endlessly GREAT GREAT GREAT AMERICA GREAT EVERYTHING GREAT EVERYTHING AMERICAN GREAT ME MAKE AMERICA GREAT.  The clergyman was heartily sick of it within 5 minutes, but still it went on and on and on.  The only way he could make it stop was to bring up the piety of Jackson's dead wife, Rachel.  Thus he listened to that instead of ME GREAT for the rest of the crossing.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

This is troubling considering he has to do it every 90 days:

Quote

Every 90 days, the White House must certify to Congress that Iran is upholding the agreement designed to keep nuclear weapons out of its hands for a decade or longer. Monday night marked the deadline for the latest certification. But this time, Donald Trump had a brilliant idea: Don't do it.

Instead, why not pull the United States out of the treaty, slap the mullahs with North Korean-level sanctions and try to negotiate a better deal? Then, in two years, we'd have two desperate, starving, nuclear-armed countries, each in tinderbox areas of the world.

We can all breathe a sigh of relief because Trump didn't pull out of the deal. At least not this time. But by all accounts it was a close call. National security adviser Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster and Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, talked the President down off that perch, with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson weighing in with a last-minute tete-a-tete with Trump, according to The New York Times.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/19/opinions/iran-nuclear-deal-trump-opinion-andelman/index.html

Hopefully this is one campaign promise that he continues to break. 

[ThinkerX]

To an extent, I support 'Dr. Peppers' view on the value of hypotheticals, especially as they pertain to health care.

First, it was republicans who gave us a greatly expanded Medicaid (and no way to pay for it).

Second, and this STILL is not sinking in with most posters here - republican voters are extremely ticked off about the recent health care offerings put forth by their congress-people.  Ticked off enough to where direct physical attacks on the congress-people are a least possible, regardless as to whether or not they hold Town Halls.  If through some dark legislative miracle the GOP does dismantle the current system without providing a palatable replacement, then some of those responsible may not live long enough to run for reelection - and they seem to be aware of this.  Donar dollars do not benefit a corpse.

Third, the GOP is pretty much out of options that don't involve screwing over huge numbers of people at this point.  I can envision them putting forth some version of single-payer for the sole purpose of showing they're not monsters.

 

[S John]

3 hours ago, Notone said:

So what? US territory - Russian territory, that's maybe 5 miles. So the posts can float down the Bering strait.

Now to the Trumpcare failure.

I don't think the Republicans will actually do much about the ACA. They will create some more chaos (to create uncertainty for insurers and to drive them out of the exchange), make a few financial tweaks here and there, and hope it collapses. Then they will happily turn up at Faux News and claim.

"We told you this would happen. We wanted to reform healthcare, but the Democrats blocked it. You lost your health insurance/Medicaid. Blame the Democrats for that."

I guess something like that will probably be the endgame they're aiming for.

I agree that is a likely scenario, but I don't think it'll fly.  There is no escaping the fact that R's control congress and the White House.  Obviously there are plenty of hyper-partisans out there who will jump at the chance to go along with that line but it won't work in the margins.  It will be impossible to deny the obvious - they had control and squandered it.

[all swedes are racist]

50 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

I can envision them putting forth some version of single-payer for the sole purpose of showing they're not monsters.

 

lol

[Inigima]

I am actually fairly happy with Democrats' work thus far in the minority. The Republicans' ideas have been so monstrous that there was never much danger of the Dems supporting their agenda. There's not much they can do productively while in the minority in both houses and absent from the White House. Most of the stuff I hate from the Democrats is their continued utter tone deafness for 2018 and 2020. Stop trying to be cool, guys. Stop engaging in pure symbolism. None of that matters.

As regards the other recent discussion, I sympathize with the desire for Dems to stake out a true liberal position. But electoral realities exist, and I do think there is some point n, regardless of where it is, where liberal positions a. won't be fulfilled and b. will hurt them electorally. (Forgive the oversimplification; obviously we aren't talking about a flat 2D spectrum, which would make no sense as a conceptual model.) For example, if the Democrats were to propose stringing up rich people and giving all their money to the poor, I don't think that proposal, or the Democrats making it, are going places.

If you agree with that, then any disagreement we have is merely about where n is located. It's completely reasonable to say that you don't think the Democrats are being ambitious enough.

If you don't agree with that then I'm sorry to say I think you live in a fantasyland. The Democrats need to consider electoral realities or remain on the outside, no matter how good you personally may think an idea is.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

2 minutes ago, commiedore said:

lol

THE CALL IS COMING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE!

[DMC]

3 hours ago, Dr. Pepper said:

We have a very different idea about what is plausible and what isn't.  You can't just say something is likely to happen....

Yes, we do have a very different idea on plausibility.  As for the bolded, that's pretty much what I make a living doing in regards to studying politics.  Granted, in this case I didn't provide any empirical evidence, but frankly it's not needed.

4 hours ago, Dr. Pepper said:

As for doing shit right now...anything at all would be good.  All this shit where progressives say "oh, no we can't go there because we just need to win" isn't doing anything but pretending like real life is just a game of checkers with no real stakes.

Again, please describe exactly what they should be doing.  The minority party has absolutely no ability to actually do anything in terms of legislation, so it really makes no tangible sense what you're going on about with the checkers/monopoly/(insert game here) similes.

52 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

First, it was republicans who gave us a greatly expanded Medicaid (and no way to pay for it).

All the GOP has ever done on Medicaid is try to dismantle or undermine it in one way or another.  I believe you may be talking about Bush's Medicare Part D program, which subsidized the cost of prescription drugs?  In that case, sure.

[Kalbear]

Senator McCain was diagnosed with brain cancer. No specific word yet on if this will delay his return to congress or if he will retire, though apparently the tissue was removed without issue (though they'll still be apparently doing chemo/radiation as well). 

[Fragile Bird]

4 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Senator McCain was diagnosed with brain cancer. No specific word yet on if this will delay his return to congress or if he will retire, though apparently the tissue was removed without issue (though they'll still be apparently doing chemo/radiation as well). 

Poor man. I hope they got it all. 

Well, we see why he had that strange fay at the Comey testimony, in all likelihood.

[OldGimletEye]

On 7/19/2017 at 2:37 PM, Dr. Pepper said:

And what about the 46% of the base who actually support single payer?  

Look, I've said it a hundred times, I'll say it a hundred more.  Conservatives stand for nothing.  They believe in nothing, they will agree with whatever their person says they should agree with.  They'll damn Obamacare while being completely reliant upon it.  They'll claim to want universal healthcare but then vote against it.  My point is that if the GOP decided to get on board with single payer, they'd have massive support.

If I may, just let me throw my two cents in here.

If the Republican Party were to seriously consider passing single payer, it’s something the Democratic Party would have to seriously consider working with Republicans on.  I’m very sympathetic to your argument.

And I agree the GOP would likely get the support to pass such a bill.

The downside would of course would be that it might very well cement Republican Power, in the short term, at least, and help to get Trump reelected.

The upside is that it would be a huge policy win for the Democratic Party. And the Democratic Party may not get another chance at such an opportunity for a very long time.

The reality is though, I don’t think the Republican Party would ever go for it. Sure, many “clothe coat Republicans” might have little problem with it. But, the intellectual infrastructure that makes up the Conservative movement would fight it tooth and nail along with their wealthy donors. You’d see, I’d imagine, the Heritage Foundation, The Cato Institute, The Manhattan Institute, etc. etc. go into overdrive trying to defeat such a bill. The implementation of single payer, I can only think, would be a decisive defeat for the conservative movement, at least from their point of view. It just seems to me that it would be something that conservatives have been preaching against, since the 1930s.

[Mexal]

Trump expressed anger that Sessions recused himself in interview with Times.

Quote

President Trump said on Wednesday that he never would have appointed Attorney General Jeff Sessions had he known Mr. Sessions would recuse himself from overseeing the Russia investigation that has dogged his presidency, calling the decision “very unfair to the president.”

In a remarkable public break with one of his earliest political supporters, Mr. Trump complained that Mr. Sessions’s decision ultimately led to the appointment of a special counsel that should not have happened. “Sessions should have never recused himself and if he was going to recuse himself he should have told me before he took the job and I would have picked somebody else,” Mr. Trump said.

In a wide-ranging interview with The New York Times, the president also accused James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director he fired in May, of trying to leverage a dossier of compromising material to keep his job. Mr. Trump criticized both the acting F.B.I. director who has been filling in since Mr. Comey’s dismissal and the deputy attorney general who recommended it. And he took on Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel now leading the investigation into Russian meddling in last year’s election.

Mr. Trump said Mr. Mueller was running an office rife with conflicts of interest and warned that investigators would cross a red line if they delve into Trump family finances unrelated to Russia. Mr. Trump never said he would order the Justice Department to fire Mr. Mueller, nor would he outline circumstances under which he might do so. But he left open the possibility as he expressed deep grievance over an investigation that has taken a political toll in the six months since he took office.

 

[DMC]

34 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Senator McCain was diagnosed with brain cancer. No specific word yet on if this will delay his return to congress or if he will retire, though apparently the tissue was removed without issue (though they'll still be apparently doing chemo/radiation as well). 

Hopefully he'll tough it out the old son of a bitch.  Can't help but think of the similarities between this and Kennedy dying of brain cancer at he beginning of Obamas term.  Some weird mojo there.