US Politics: RIP EHK FYVM GOP

[Jace, Extat]

4 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Jace -- you can trust me in these matters.  Like a politician I never ever lie and my fingers (and toes and tongue)  are bathed in virtue frequently throughout the day (and night).

Every revolution needs a figure of fear in the ranks. I think I can bear this burden if you can act as the moral center around which I warp our newly proclaimed democracy into an oppressive Jacetatorship.

[Zorral]

Here we have this! the court document that names both Epstein and Trump as plaintiffs in a case accusing rape and many other sexual abuse crimes.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2921127-Complaint.html

1 minute ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Every revolution needs a figure of fear in the ranks. I think I can bear this burden if you can act as the moral center around which I warp our newly proclaimed democracy into an oppressive Jacetatorship.

That will work.  Until mine own cabal helps me to remove the final obstacle to all my plans, and Jacetatorship, Dear, Darling, Beloved, Best Compañera Evah, will be history.  Trust me.

[Jace, Extat]

4 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Here we have this! the court document that names both Epstein and Trump as plaintiffs in a case accusing rape and many other sexual abuse crimes.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2921127-Complaint.html

That will work.  Until mine own cabal helps me to remove the final obstacle to all my plans, and Jacetatorship, Dear, Darling, Beloved, Best Compañera Evah, will be history.  Trust me.

I can't wait for our proxy war in the Halls of Proletarian Commemoration. I think the Obelisk of Kalbear will be an important battle site.

[all swedes are racist]

4 hours ago, Triskele said:

"loss aversion"

 

3 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

Yeah, I think you get today's gold star.

I loathe employer sponsored insurance and would like to get rid of it. That said, I don't think it would be politically wise to get rid of it all at once. You're right that most people are pretty risk adverse. They may know the current system sucks, but fear they may end up with something worse.

thanks, makes sense and easy enough to explain. appreciate it fellas

[DMC]

27 minutes ago, a good and nice guy said:

thanks, makes sense and easy enough to explain. appreciate it fellas

Dude OGE's quote is essentially what me and larry were saying from the get-go:

17 hours ago, DMC said:

Aye.  I think the public option is the next step, which basically is the least offensive version of "Medicare for All."  The ACA grossly expanded Medicaid, so that would be the logical next step that's politically palatable.  And just like the ACA, I bet after a decade it will be very popular.  Then you can start to phase out private insurance.  But it needs to be a process.  It's understandable that people get worried if you tell them you're gonna take away their health insurance, so it needs to be done delicately.

Although, sure, Trisk is right that risk aversion, or "loss aversion," is an articulate way to describe it.

[dornishpen]

12 hours ago, a good and nice guy said:

mind if i ask what you like about your current insurance and what you disliked about medicare? obviously this is all anecdotal but you are the first person i’ve ever heard this from

Medicare is very expensive if someone doesn't have a supplement or isn't dual eligible, 20% adds up quickly if there are any surgeries or hospital stays; the drug plans are pretty terrible; it doesn't cover birth control like IUDs, implants etc and there are millions of non-elderly disabled adults on it so that can be a problem. These are all problems that can be fixed and it's still better than probably most private insurance.

I don't think Medicaid is a good way to bring in a public option, Medicaid is quite restrictive and most doctors don't accept it so it can be difficult to find care, obviously it's better than no insurance, but a lot of private insurance probably is better. Of course Medicaid could be fixed, but it will be harder. Also Medicaid is state administered and I think it would be better for the public option to be federal.

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, dornishpen said:

Also Medicaid is state administered and I think it would be better for the public option to be federal.

Yeah that's a good point, agreed.

[DanteGabriel]

Lol, Biden finally apologized for bragging about his "civility" with segregationist Senators. It is, of course, the hedgiest "if you were offended" sort of apology.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/biden-apologizes-comments-segregationists

In the Kabuki theater of political optics, does this even move any needle anywhere?

[Jace, Extat]

13 minutes ago, Triskele said:

I wasn't even looking for this but stumbled upon this piece about the Democratic party's history with the immigration issue that I think a lot of people will find thought-provoking.

I was not aware of the border patrols dumping water left for migrants thing that's linked from the Guardian in there.  That's some cold-blooded stuff.  

Trisk, where were you the other week when I was screaming about Pelosi imminently signing onto this thing? I coulda used your backing, I felt like I was on an island on that one.

[Jace, Extat]

Just now, Triskele said:

What was your stance?  

That if Pelosi signed the Senate bill I'd vomit from rage because it was nothing short of capitulation for the sake of capitulation. Not a red cent of that money was ever gonna go to 'improving conditions'.

[all swedes are racist]

36 minutes ago, DMC said:

Dude OGE's quote is essentially what me and larry were saying from the get-go:

Although, sure, Trisk is right that risk aversion, or "loss aversion," is an articulate way to describe it.

yeah, the term “loss aversion” is what made it click for me, framed as a kind of less than rational psychological phenomenon, whereas i only read the prior framing as insisting folks genuinely enjoy current private coverage and reinforcing the “they want to take away your insurance!!” maybe a subtle distinction, but an critical one to me. now i may not agree on the extent as to which that is a compelling argument in favor of preserving the insurance companies in any form, but at least i kinda get it

[Jace, Extat]

Just now, Triskele said:

It surprises me that this stance would have put you on an island.  

Hmm, doing a quick review of the old thread I may have been conflating two different issues but I didn't really see anyone else speaking against the move which shocked me at the time.

Meanwhile, there's a big flaw in some of these liberal beliefs. Hispanic voters are not going to save the Democratic party from annihilation. They don't even vote as consistently Democratic as Asians (religion and entrenchment bias are my theories). So tacking hardcore on appealing to Hispanics helps drive away other demographics. And yeah, the demographics I'm referring to are lightly-to-moderately racist. The kind of white people who voted for Obama but roll their window up if a black man is walking by. Black people who have been convinced illegal immigrants drain the economy. You can get those peoples' support just by not throwing every ounce of political cache into chasing a demographic that is already solidly in the Democratic orbit. 

I mean really, from a cold calculus perspective, what is achieved by Democrats taking these nobly stupid public stances on immigrants and then caving to McConnel? Like, people understand that there will never be an immigration bill that passes without Mitch's approval right? That all Democrats do when they speak on immigration at all is open themselves another flank from which to be attacked?

"They attack anyway, whaaa whaaa whaaa." 

Yeah I've heard the whining. That the opponent doesn't play fair is not an excuse for stupid and ineffective strategies.

[Larry of the Lawn]

6 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

Lol, Biden finally apologized for bragging about his "civility" with segregationist Senators. It is, of course, the hedgiest "if you were offended" sort of apology.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/biden-apologizes-comments-segregationists

In the Kabuki theater of political optics, does this even move any needle anywhere?

Consensus is needle moves up our collective b-holes.

[The Anti-Targ]

6 hours ago, Triskele said:

You're only thinking these thoughts because you have Trump armor and can't yourself be impacted by anything Trump does.  

ETA:  On a more serious note a counter-argument to all of this the California argument:  that the rest of the country is typically headed where they are but like 15 years behind, and now the GOP is like a permanent minority there.  

 

You might be able to say that about the coasts, but is that big middly bit only 15 years behind California? If there's a thin(ish) stripe of blue on both coasts of the country but a big sea of red in between that's going to be a problem  for the country's cohesion isn't it? Though if it leads to a more or less permanent house majority for the Dems and a permanent senate majority for the Republicans I wonder if having that kind of long and stable split might not lead to a more regular meeting in the center and actual policy issues.

[Altherion]

The New York Times has an interview of Speaker Pelosi wherein, among other things, she addresses the opposition to her vote on the border funding:

Quote

The article described the outrage of the Squad, as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts are known.

Pelosi feels that the four made themselves irrelevant to the process by voting against “our bill,” as she put it, which she felt was the strongest one she could get. “All these people have their public whatever and their Twitter world,” she said. “But they didn’t have any following. They’re four people and that’s how many votes they got.”

...

“If the left doesn’t think I’m left enough, so be it,” she said, breezily. “As I say to these people, come to my basement. I have these signs about single-payer from 30 years ago. I understand what they’re saying. But we have a responsibility to get something done, which is different from advocacy. We have to have a solution, not just a Twitter fight.”

 

[Centrist Simon Steele]

1 minute ago, Triskele said:

Has anyone listed to this Chapo Trap House podcast?  I'd only just heard of it recently and just listened to it.  It's kind of like Pod Save America but way more irreverent and with way more swearing.  They call themselves part of the "dirtbag left."  

The Bret Stephens column was discussed with some special venom.

Their reading series bring me joy.

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 hour ago, Altherion said:

The New York Times has an interview of Speaker Pelosi wherein, among other things, she addresses the opposition to her vote on the border funding:

 

As she supports giving more money to Trump, hoping he'll improve conditions at detention camps.  Just like they were going to stop separating families.  Or follow a SC ruling in the census question.  Wtf is Pelosi thinking?  This is the kind of shit that reminds me that 99% of Dem politicians are, as solo would say, lumpenized anti-social nihilists.

[Fragile Bird]

11 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

As she supports giving more money to Trump, hoping he'll improve conditions at detention camps.  Just like they were going to stop separating families.  Or follow a SC ruling in the census question.  Wtf is Pelosi thinking?  This is the kind of shit that reminds me that 99% of Dem politicians are, as solo would say, lumpenized anti-social nihilists.

Pelosi is thinking it's not acceptable that Democrats be responsible for the failure to improve conditions for the detainees.

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 minute ago, Fragile Bird said:

Pelosi is thinking it's not acceptable that Democrats be responsible for the failure to improve conditions for the detainees.

While maintaining a detention camp.  Why isn't she screaming about these camps existence?

[Larry of the Lawn]

And why is she publicly alienating people like AOC who speak out against them and try to shine some light on the issue?