-
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 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
StopMakingSense
Member
Yeah, it was a little dispiriting to see how little traction the new repeal was getting, but this really put it back int forefront in a big way.
Fenderputty
Banned
One of the reasons I have slightly more confidence in McCain. "Party over country" exists as for a reason though. 400M is a lot in the party coffers.
My money is still on Mueller to charge a couple of people with treason alongside various conspiracy and lesser charges we all anticipate. This would force Trump's hand on whether to pardon something of that magnitude.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Cool, cool.
No, it's really not, Chuck. That's not how things work.
Mark Andrew
Member
Nobody has been convicted of treason in almost a century. Mostly because we dont declare wars anymore.
Atomic Playboy
Member
Cool, cool.
This is like writing a bill that lowers taxes and declares war on the entirety of Europe and saying, "well, obviously there are things in the bill we may not want, but we did campaign on lower taxes, so now I guess we'll just have to blow up Paris." Congressional logic.
timetokill
Banned
There's a lot of "unpresidented" things happening right now though
If Trump and his cronies want to send the country back in time, hell, why not give 'em some treason charges while we're at it?
BoogieWoogie
Banned
McCain still seems to be a firm no as of 5 minutes ago:
If McCain sticks to his guns, then Rand will also vote no. No way is Rand going to be the deciding vote, but he'll go no if McCain's vote provides him cover.
I think what he means is, it's not legally treason because we are not at war with Russia.
I think what he means is, it's not legally treason because we are not at war with Russia.
I want the regular order with a side order of fries and a medium Diet Coke, please
benicillin
Banned
Damnit I was about to make a lunch joke and you beat me to it.
Deuce Deuce
Member
I'm ready to rock a McCain Starter Jersey if he holds firm on this.
timetokill
Banned
While that may be technically true, I'd like to see Trump argue that publicly lol
Looked into it more and the "open war" limitation is too significant. Thanks! I wonder how cyber-war works in terms of declaration/ongoing.
Though coordination and passing of info to Russia for those facebook ads to subvert the democratic process seems to skirt towards spying.
To me it sounds like he doesn't care about the content, he cares about the process.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
That was a large degree of his argument for voting against it last time, but not the whole reason.
I don't know if it was a convenient excuse to vote against it, or if that's his main reason.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Hot take I don't get the "Democrats shouldn't have celebrated AHCA defeat/should have kept up the pressure" rhetoric.
Constituent calls, rallies, protests, all of that is important and we should do it. That's not why BCRA failed. That was entirely on the whims of John McCain and his obsession with procedure.
All the vulnerable Senators (Heller, Capito, Portman, Gardner) went along with it. Because they thought they had 50. That's all that mattered. They will absolutely vote Yes on a floor vote tomorrow because they're spineless pieces of pig shit. A bunch of Democrats calling them didn't factor into their calculus at all on this issue.
I also think people are underestimating Rand Paul here. It could just be virtue signaling, could just be for leverage, but iirc he was never this adamantly against BCRA. In the run-up to the vote he was clearly jockeying for a clean repeal vote.
Point is, if Graham-Cassidy fails, it'll be from a handful of personalities in Congress. It's pretty clear the GOP doesn't answer to public rallying, and if they do manage to get it passed they're going to be destroyed in the midterms. They don't care.
Constituent calls, rallies, protests, all of that is important and we should do it. That's not why BCRA failed. That was entirely on the whims of John McCain and his obsession with procedure.
All the vulnerable Senators (Heller, Capito, Portman, Gardner) went along with it. Because they thought they had 50. That's all that mattered. They will absolutely vote Yes on a floor vote tomorrow because they're spineless pieces of pig shit. A bunch of Democrats calling them didn't factor into their calculus at all on this issue.
I also think people are underestimating Rand Paul here. It could just be virtue signaling, could just be for leverage, but iirc he was never this adamantly against BCRA. In the run-up to the vote he was clearly jockeying for a clean repeal vote.
Point is, if Graham-Cassidy fails, it'll be from a handful of personalities in Congress. It's pretty clear the GOP doesn't answer to public rallying, and if they do manage to get it passed they're going to be destroyed in the midterms. They don't care.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
This, ladies and gentlemen, is Exhibit A for why trying to jump immediately to single-payer was a horrible idea:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-re...is-weaponize-bernie-sanders-single-payer-plan
Here is the republican talking points sheet for the healthcare plan:
Absolutely zero things about their own healthcare disaster, and all focus pointed at the tax burden single-payer would give to the middle-class. And, to be fair, the attack about tax increases on Americans is accurate. So basically their entire method to selling their horrible bill over this next week is, "Your alternative is a huge tax increase."
I just feel that Bernie, though he means well, does more damage than good to the democratic platform.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-re...is-weaponize-bernie-sanders-single-payer-plan
Here is the republican talking points sheet for the healthcare plan:
Absolutely zero things about their own healthcare disaster, and all focus pointed at the tax burden single-payer would give to the middle-class. And, to be fair, the attack about tax increases on Americans is accurate. So basically their entire method to selling their horrible bill over this next week is, "Your alternative is a huge tax increase."
I just feel that Bernie, though he means well, does more damage than good to the democratic platform.
benicillin
Banned
That's a Republican talking point plan that would exist for like, literally any Democratic healthcare plan. Who cares what they have to say?
If we want to take that argument to its logical extreme, Trump declaring Putin as the new President of the United States wouldn't be Treason because we aren't at war with Russia.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Because the tax burden for a Medicare option on the marketplace would be far, far less than this one. And it would adversely affect nearly all employed Americans far, far less than single-payer would at this time. They wouldn't be able to use the $32 billion dollar figure, and they wouldn't be able to use the idea that it would actually hurt Americans anywhere near as badly as they are now.
benicillin
Banned
They would just make things up. I will never understand the argument to propose policy around what we're worried Republicans will say because no matter what you do they're always going to lie and exaggerate and tell everyone it's the most destructive plan ever.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Man do you think anyone is taking this shit seriously? Bernie's plan can't pass. Graham's plan might. Y'all should have learned from Obama's presidency that it's basically impossible to rally people against whatever the minority party is proposing, because who cares? The GOP tried to repeal ACA 50 times before they got the presidency, and hardly anyone gave a shit because they knew there was no consequence for it. That's Bernie's plan.This, ladies and gentlemen, is Exhibit A for why trying to jump immediately to single-payer was a horrible idea:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-re...is-weaponize-bernie-sanders-single-payer-plan
Here is the republican talking points sheet for the healthcare plan:
Absolutely zero things about their own healthcare disaster, and all focus pointed at the tax burden single-payer would give to the middle-class. And, to be fair, the attack about tax increases on Americans is accurate. So basically their entire method to selling their horrible bill over this next week is, "Your alternative is a huge tax increase."
I just feel that Bernie, though he means well, does more damage than good to the democratic platform.
Some encouraging news out of New Hampshire, where Manchester (the biggest city in the state) just had its mayoral primary. Democrat Joyce Craig finished ahead of incumbent R mayor Ted Gatsas 53-46 - in 2015, Gatsas won the primary over Craig 43-37, and beat her in the general election by 85 votes. While the GE result could be very different, it's a good sign for Dem enthusiasm and support.
Sanders "bill" isn't even really a bill nor is it close to a floor vote nor are they trying to seriously push it without hearings, a CBO score, etc. Who would that argument work on that was already gungho for ACA repeal?
Granted I dunno why Sanders didn't just wait two weeks but I find it hard to think this line of attack by the GOP would be helpful?
Granted I dunno why Sanders didn't just wait two weeks but I find it hard to think this line of attack by the GOP would be helpful?
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
This and grandstanding Sanders shows the left played itself.
In all fairness, none of the other democrats have put out any bills on fixes for the ACA. So in a way it's a valid comparison between where we are now, and the only two tabled proposals, Bernie's and Graham one.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
That's one of the key points here: I think there is actually increasing desire among all groups for a public option plan. They see how hard it is to actually deal with the healthcare issue and they nearly all feel the pain of the increasing health care premiums and costs.
This set of talking points seems to be in response to that. I think that an instant jump to a single-payer plan that would cause a massive payroll tax increase is the wrong way to go about this because it is easy pickings for attacks. A public option on the marketplace doesn't do that.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Hell, they say in that very quote that Obamacare "failed spectacularly and devastated" the healthcare system.
Doesn't matter what's proposed, they'll lie.
I have nothing against Sanders' proposal, even if I think it can't work. Start there and end with public option.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
This isn't "proposing policy around what Republicans will say." This is common sense. Americans are nuts about taxes. And, to be fair, for most lower- and middle-income Americans who live paycheck to paycheck, they probably should be. This is all about proposing policies that would appeal to those people, not republicans.
Except you can't actually do this if you aren't in a position of political power, and the democrats aren't even close at this point. If nearly everything goes well, maybe in 2018. Definitely in 2020. Not now, though.
No, but it wouldn't also mean anything at all because that's not how presidents are picked.
What does one have to do with the other?
That's not true, that's exactly what Patty Murray had been doing on the HELP committee.
Obamacare isn't the "OMG disaster" they'd have you believe and it didn't fail the American people. Elected officials who can't fucking govern are the ones who failed Obamacare.
I mean I think blaming the people actually trying to pass this abomination makes more sense than those trying to oppose it. We wouldn't be having this conversation if the GOP had a soul anyway and they clearly were going to try something this month.
As an aside, part of getting the CR to pass was the attachment of Harvey funds. There would be no appetite to drag that out till the end of the month. FEMA would have run out of money beforehand.
Both Brian Schawtz (Hawaii) and Chris Murphy (Connecticut) have smaller bills of their own to work upon and improve the ACA. But like, none of those bills can pass as long as the GOP control congress.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
And if you think that Graham-Cassidy will pass and everything erupts into flames and people will be running to Sanders' single payer plan, you're severely underestimating the power of status quo bias in healthcare politics.
nature boy
Member
Interesting considering they're trying to sweeten the deal for Alaska
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
It's part of an ongoing discussion and shaping of public opinion. Of course that can't pass anything, but this moves the window of discussion.
I know, my point it they are already lying about the most benign change we've had in healthcare law. Doesn't matter what Sanders's actual plan is.
StopMakingSense
Member
Eh. This would have happened regardless. Don't listen to Kristol.
I'm not sure this lines up with the past decade of healthcare politics?
When you touch people's healthcare at all they get pissed and punish you.
If G-C passes the population aren't just going to accept it. American population are very loss averse. Barring COMPLETE Dem incompetence or Russian interference or Gerrymandering/Tribalism is way worse than I thought, the GOP will be punished
The Dems won't be punished for trying to pass Single-Payer (assuming they come up with something workable) but rather they will be punished as soon as they pass it. Given that passing healthcare legislation would no longer required 50 votes, hearings, CBO score, etc. it would be easier than ever to pass Single-Payer is the Dem decided they really didn't give a shit.
I know, wasn't yelling at you. Just attempting to diffuse the bullshit from that RNC statement. So tired of the reality distortion.
So it's the same situation as last time, only reversed. The truth is I don't think they really want it to die (outside of the Freedom Caucus nuts), they just used it as a dog whistle. You could probably summarize their rhetoric on the ACA as "fuck brown people, they don't deserve healthcare" or some shit like that. This is what happens when you use something specific as a dog whistle, you get stuck trying to do something you don't want to do. It's why you should never run on something you aren't 100% willing/able to put into practice.
Except we'll have the entire lobbying arm of the insurance industry to deal with and that's a lot of money to fight against. Using the ACA with some form of public option would have at least allowed us to weaken them significantly before this fight.
Its like a game.
The further along it goes new people just start saying oh I wont back this and then they do. Its like they want to gently let people down by talking out of both sides of their ass but they all have the same goal in mind which is to kill the ACA
RustyNails
Member
Murkowski is probably going to hang on to her Senate seat with her fighting to keep ACA in place for Alaska. Heller is pretty much bye-ller. Dude put all his stock on the rabid teaparty voter. Is Collins up for re-election next year?
Poodlestrike
Banned
Uhhhh no. This is a terrible take.
There was always going to be some duration CR attached to Harvey. If Pelosi & Schumer hadn't gotten the 3 month deal it would've been an 18 month deal and we'd be sitting exactly where we are but they'd have more time on the clock. This still would've happened, we'd have maybe gotten a longer reprieve before they took it up again (but probably not because they want this thing as far away from the midterms as possible).
Didn't they already try that with her the last time by throwing Alaska specific perks? It didn't work then either. At least she's able to take a more holistic view of this from a country-wide perspective.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
I think you're severely overestimating the current Republican coalition's ability to competently run the government. If they can, then let them prove it. Otherwise, you agreed to an extension based on a promise from DONALD TRUMP that he will work with you on DACA and your Republican colleagues immediately shifted to a new HC effort, like in March.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked