• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why

Status
Not open for further replies.

studyguy

Member
McConnell knows taking ownership of healthcare would cost him the Senate and that's his chief concern.

Right, no one doubts that. McConnel's no idiot unfortunately. All the same, their fear of party coming to ruin is a boon to literally everyone else on the ACA right now. I'll take a stagnant GOP senate over them actually owning some heaping garbage bill that fucks millions even if it does cost them seats.


Also
Fenderputty said:
We'll see how things roll out, CA has a lot of work to do, I've already seen disingenuous attacks on the tax for it, not taking into account the way existing taxes are dealt with. It's gonna be a hell of a fight.
 

sangreal

Member
McConnell knows taking ownership of healthcare would cost him the Senate and that's his chief concern.

You would think so, but then the smart thing to do would have been to let GOP Senators continue bashing the AHCA2 before it passed the House. According to supports, he is supposedly privately hellbent on passing something
 
Also
We'll see how things roll out, CA has a lot of work to do, I've already seen disingenuous attacks on the tax for it, not taking into account the way existing taxes are dealt with. It's gonna be a hell of a fight.


That's why I posted the study. Most stuff I've seen suggested much larger tax increases.


I like the sound of this. Deep, thought out policy is music to my ears.

Same. I'm eager to see more actual analysis.
 

benjipwns

Banned
You guys and your "what agenda?" "what can be done?"

Comprehensive immigration reform and amnesty obviously:
Lawmakers baffled that immigration getting short shrift in Washington
But there's another pressing issue that's getting less attention but that lawmakers from both parties are warning needs it: a comprehensive immigration overhaul. That is especially ironic because many lawmakers believed immigration would be among Trump's first issues of concern given that one of his campaign's central promises was building a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

“I’m hoping that we can do immigration reform later in the year or in the coming years. We’ve got to,” Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) told a chamber of commerce meeting in Glendale, Ariz. that I covered earlier this week.

Meanwhile in California, Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) told the Code 2017 conference that Congress is failing to assist “dreamers,” the children of undocumented immigrants, and higher-skilled workers trying to get visas to work in the United States or to stay and continue working.

That’s partly because “There are a lot of people who are the legislators who will make the decision at the federal level about immigration who do not have any experience with this population,” she said.

“We need to actually create more opportunities for policymakers and opinion leaders to meet” with people affected by immigration policy, Harris added.
 

Effect

Member
From what I gather, the media, and people on the left alike, feel Hillary having lost the election should fall off the face of the earth, and if she does not and speaks candidly about her experience, if she doesn't say all my fault and I suck as a human/candidate then EXCUSES!!!11!!

The media clearly does not want to be reminded of their part in electing trump. Hanging on his every word with no push back until the very end when it was to late. That I think is very clear and Hillary not willing to just disappear is a constant reminder. At the same time they have no problem at all covering every little thing she does. Even if she didn't say anything they'd still be camped outside her home looking to see what she's doing. She's never not going to be in the spotlight so she might has well use it effectively.

To many still refuse to accept acknowledge the racism and sexism that was at play. Doesn't mean she and her campaign didn't make mistakes or do a bad job in some areas. Those aren't the only reasons she lost though and to many on the left and the media find it very hard to admit to that. There were a number of reasons. When you have a guy that says he's going to hurt you or your family with this actions and you still vote for him and would again (we've talked about these people in threads on this forum and in these PoliGaf threads) that's not on Hillary. You don't take responsibility for that BS.

Nothing Hillary said or did would have won over people (men and women ) who felt a woman's place wasn't in the White House as President. There were people on both sides that felt that way and still do. No amount of economic message, etc breaks through that wall. Nothing breaks through the wall people built that believed Hillary was corrupt. Even when you show evidence that she isn't and show there is no evidence she is nothing gets through. There are people on this own board like that. Just how nothing will break through to hardcore racist. The type of people that would let their child die if the only doctor that could help them within a 500 miles radius had black or brown skin or was asian. These are truths many in the media and left refuse to accept. That is in part why they want her to go away so the don't have to face these and be reminded of them.
 

Crocodile

Member
My understanding of the CA single-payer plan currently making its way through the legislature is that its way more generous that most single- payer plans around the world. Maybe it will have a better chance becoming law/not requiring tax hikes high enough to make the populace balk if they make its a little less generous?

Recommended Reading

Trump and the threat of tribalism to the planet

Twitter thread on how Tribalism and GOP position on climate change is linked

Analysis: How many Obama > Trump voters were there?
 
My understanding of the CA single-payer plan currently making its way through the legislature is that its way more generous that most single- payer plans around the world. Maybe it will have a better chance becoming law/not requiring tax hikes high enough to make the populace balk if they make its a little less generous?

Recommended Reading

Trump and the threat of tribalism to the planet

Twitter thread on how Tribalism and GOP position on climate change is linked

Analysis: How many Obama > Trump voters were there?
yeah iirc it covers both dental and prescription drugs, which make it more generous than Canada or Sweden. I'm not sure if the goal in mind was to start from a high place of negotiating power so they can give up dental or drugs or if they really just think they can make an incredibly robust system.

Comparatively, here in Oregon the goal is to just get it on the ballot so there's not really any negotiating process here. I think the current plan is to cover drugs and dental insurance so there really wouldn't be any supplemental insurance needs if it passed the initiative. It would be a godsend to the ballot efforts though if California just passed it and showed that it worked.
 
Spicer looks fucking BEAT.
You'd be too. He tied himself to a shitty ship and is stuck going down with it, despite every logical part of him screaming to jump. Like, the one upside of being Trump's Press Secretary had to looking forward to the Pope, where Spicer was snubbed. He's been forced to defend every Stupid decision made by the Trump Admin, even though he's probably aware of how bad it is.

I feel bad for him, but he chose this job. Unless Trump is blackmailing him, Spicer is willingly staying on.
 

Crocodile

Member
This thread on gender politics/toxic masculinity/Democratic messaging issues/Pittsburgh vs. Paris reminded me of some posts Plinko has made in the past on the role of sexism in this election (which extend beyond Clinton)


I mean if they want to generate more bad headlines for themselves and probably lose anyway go for it?

yeah iirc it covers both dental and prescription drugs, which make it more generous than Canada or Sweden. I'm not sure if the goal in mind was to start from a high place of negotiating power so they can give up dental or drugs or if they really just think they can make an incredibly robust system.

Comparatively, here in Oregon the goal is to just get it on the ballot so there's not really any negotiating process here. I think the current plan is to cover drugs and dental insurance so there really wouldn't be any supplemental insurance needs if it passed the initiative. It would be a godsend to the ballot efforts though if California just passed it and showed that it worked.

I see. I'm curious to see how things work out then.
 

Surfinn

Member
You'd be too. He tied himself to a shitty ship and is stuck going down with it, despite every logical part of him screaming to jump. Like, the one upside of being Trump's Press Secretary had to looking forward to the Pope, where Spicer was snubbed. He's been forced to defend every Stupid decision made by the Trump Admin, even though he's probably aware of how bad it is.

I feel bad for him, but he chose this job. Unless Trump is blackmailing him, Spicer is willingly staying on.

I'd be? I'd be done after day one. Though I wouldn't have ever accepted the job of lying daily for a corrupt admin.

The fact that this man is even still standing seems to defy basic psychology
 

Barzul

Member
So it's looking like Healthcare won't happen this year. GOPers like Johnson and Burr are saying so anyways. Johnson even suggests funding the CSRs is the best short term measure, sharp departure from the WH rhetoric.
 
I just saw this and while I agree w/ the problem, he is not advocating a helpful solution, especially in a majority-female party.

I disagree, and I don't think that treating masculinity as though it is inherently bad is doing liberals any favors. Honestly the number of times I see the word "masculinity" in liberal circles it's almost always preceded by the word "toxic."
 
So it's looking like Healthcare won't happen this year. GOPers like Johnson and Burr are saying so anyways. Johnson even suggests funding the CSRs is the best short term measure, sharp departure from the WH rhetoric.

It sure as FUCK won't happen in 2018. There's no way during an election year.
 

kirblar

Member
I disagree, and I don't think that treating masculinity as though it is inherently bad is doing liberals any favors. Honestly the number of times I see the word "masculinity" in liberal circles it's almost always preceded by the word "toxic."
Masculinity isn't inherently bad!

The issue is that the people attracted to this have a very fucking narrow view of masculinity that causes a lot of damage in its wake.

See the complaint about "YAASSS QUEEN" - it's fucking homophobia, plain and simple.
 
Would a short-term bill funding the CSRs be an entirely new bill or just the Senate's version of the AHCA? Either way, I can't see the freedom caucus supporting it.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
I disagree, and I don't think that treating masculinity as though it is inherently bad is doing liberals any favors. Honestly the number of times I see the word "masculinity" in liberal circles it's almost always preceded by the word "toxic."

What other reason to use it in a headline would there be? Honest question. Like do you expect "Martin O'Mally's Modern Masculinity Makes Him a 2020 Contender?"

Edit:
allllllllliteration
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom