A few questions for the GB's progressives, liberals & independents

[CandiCame]

“And this would be where I would put my Dinkleberg meme... IF I HAD ONE!!!”

Just... marry me.

Caught me right the fuck off guard I almost spit out my pop.

 

[Kirkrapine]

LOL based upon what?

(D)'s epic failure at HC reform?
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/MellowHairyClumber-size_restricted.gif

You are talking about something that, for all its flaws, we are certainly far better off with than without.

 

[Kirkrapine]

When I say progressives, I'm talking about the voters. The people on twitter and facebook and everywhere else, posting hysterically about how everyone is racist and sexist and white people are all evil and if you're not a democrat you're a piece of shit and....think of a couple million versions of Maxine Waters wannabe's all posting their spew and abusing anyone with a different opinion.,..(kind of like here, but with real people and not fake names)

That's who is driving the voters to the right. That's who the democrats need to get a damn handle on, their yahoo faction. The only way to do that is stop catering to them and giving them that narrative.

Wait, what makes you think what you describe is driving voters to the right? It sounds like it's driving voters to the left.

 

[Kirkrapine]

The DNC is dead from the head up. If they run any POTUS candidate over 50 years old they’re gone.

Pols younger than 50 who are placed to be serious presidential candidates are rare.

 

[Kirkrapine]

They are still far and away better than the Democrats. You want to tear the country apart, elect those motherfuckers.

In the past three years, nobody has done more than the Pubs to tear the country apart.

 

[Kirkrapine]

Dems have nothing to offer except chaos, economic ignorance, resistance, and subversion.

The Progressives (ie the Communists) . . .

 

[Kirkrapine]

It's a shame that many on the Left won't (perhaps can't?) answer a few simple questions.

I answered them clearly in post #7.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Will the Dems regain control of the House or the Senate in 2018?

House, probably yes.
Senate, no, unless Cruz loses

If not 2018, will Dems regain control of the House or the Senate in 2020?

Too far out to tell. Trump will likely start a war between now and then

Who will the Dems run for POTUS is 2020?

I have no idea.

Happy now, miles?

 

[Jennifer]

What happened to the political board?

 

[Kirkrapine]

What happened to the political board?

We all got bored with it; not enough action.

 

[Kirkrapine]

Too far out to tell. Trump will likely start a war between now and then

Against whom?

 

[BotanyBoy]

You are talking about something that, for all its flaws, we are certainly far better off with than without.

Uhhh "far better" is a bit of a stretch for garbage legislation that failed in every single one it's intended goals except one.

Expanded coverage!!! Total fucking scam and butt fuck of a failure in every other aspect...it's even based on a republican scam that (D)'s bashed for being a scam right up until the day they realized Obama put his name on it. Then for years they defended it as the greatest achievement of the messiah himself!!! Until Trump won then suddenly it was all his fault LOL

Gawd-for-bid you expect any better of the Democrats than a butchered version of the oppositions failed trash.

Well...if you did you wouldn't be a loyal Democrat anymore now would you?

 

[Que]

Uhhh "far better" is a bit of a stretch for garbage legislation that failed in every single one it's intended goals except one.

Expanded coverage!!! Total fucking scam and butt fuck of a failure in every other aspect...it's even based on a republican scam that (D)'s bashed for being a scam right up until the day they realized Obama put his name on it. Then for years they defended it as the greatest achievement of the messiah himself!!! Until Trump won then suddenly it was all his fault LOL

Gawd-for-bid you expect any better of the Democrats than a butchered version of the oppositions failed trash.

Well...if you did you wouldn't be a loyal Democrat anymore now would you?

It's kind of what Democrats and now Republicans specialize in; boondoggles.

When you add up all of the societal costs of the ACA from being a drag on the economy to additional insurance cost for those actually paying for insurance, and a mountain of record-keeping and compliance costs and then divided by the number of people who received coverage through what is essentially nothing more than a short-term three-year hand out to expand state-level Medicaid it would have been so much cheaper to just simply write a check for every person that this helped.

I'd have to look up how many billions Phoenix new light rail system has cost so far and of course it's continuing to expand but if you added up the cost of all of the minimal number of riders, it would be cheaper just to put all of those people into taxi cabs or even better yet boobers and have the city reimburse those companies for taking those people where they need to go. And that doesn't count all of the lost time from all of the drivers who now have two faced more congested traffic because they've lost a couple of lanes of blacktop and have to go generally at least a half a mile to find a location where they can cross the tracks. Then there are the environmental costs of all those additional miles traveled to go up and then back to get to your destination when previously you could simply make a left turn into the establishment that you were traveling too..

I mean I get that the whole point of unintended consequences is that often times the unintended consequences do not reveal themselves until you put into action the thing that you decided to try. But just because something is unintended doesn't mean it's always unforeseeable.

 

[Jennifer]

We all got bored with it; not enough action.

So now we all have to suffer through this drudgery?

Thanks. And yes, I know, I have a choice on which thread I click.

 

[Kirkrapine]

Uhhh "far better" is a bit of a stretch for garbage legislation that failed in every single one it's intended goals except one.

Expanded coverage!!!

Well, that was the main point of it.

Gawd-for-bid you expect any better of the Democrats than a butchered version of the oppositions failed trash.

I would expect them to have a better idea, but not to propose it. Art of the possible, you know. Even with Dem majority this Heritage-hatched plan proved almost impossible to enact, because the Pubs were determined to deny Obama any successes from day one. What do you think would have happened if Obama had begun by proposing Canadian-style single-payer?

 

[Kirkrapine]

So now we all have to suffer through this drudgery?

Why not? You must have suffered worse.

 

[Wok]

Will the Dems regain control of the House or the Senate in 2018?

If not 2018, will Dems regain control of the House or the Senate in 2020?

Who will the Dems run for POTUS is 2020?

I have a $3 bet Dems get slight majority in the House. GOP keeps Senate. The list of current presidential contenders is depressing.

 

[Jennifer]

Why not? You must have suffered worse.

Which alt are you? I’m out of the loop.

 

[Kirkrapine]

Which alt are you? I’m out of the loop.

No one who posts here now.

 

[Kirkrapine]

I have a $3 bet Dems get slight majority in the House. GOP keeps Senate. The list of current presidential contenders is depressing.

Before the midterms, the list of current presidential contenders is always irrelevant.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Well, that was the main point of it.

I thought comprehensive HC reform was the point.....


That's what Obama and the (D)'s ran their mouths about for years and years.

They ran on it hard as ever! HOPE!!! CHANGE!!!

Right....buuushit.

I would expect them to have a better idea, but not to propose it. Art of the possible, you know.

So you don't actually want them to do what they've been promising to do for almost 60 years???

Then what the fuck are you electing them for??

The art of bullshitting so you can feel ok about letting them slide on selling their constituents out.

What do you think would have happened if Obama had begun by proposing Canadian-style single-payer?

IDK enough about Canadian HC.

If he proposed a public HC system that would cost 1/2 what we spend and cover EVERYONE, (which is totally doable) he would have gone down a fucking hero of the people.

But he sold out along with all the other (D)'s proving they aren't any better than the (R)'s, at least they are honest about their being shit heads....so now we have Trump!!

Good job "progressives".

 

[Kirkrapine]

IDK enough about Canadian HC.

All you need to know is that health care costs half as much per capita in Canada as here (which is entirely because the private health insurance companies are cut out of the loop), and that the people are satisfied with its quality, at least to the extent that there is no significant movement to scrap single-payer -- in fact, that would be electoral suicide in Canuckistan.

If he proposed a public HC system that would cost 1/2 what we spend and cover EVERYONE, (which is totally doable) he would have gone down a fucking hero of the people.

No, not if he proposed it, only if he got it enacted -- and could he have, in the face of such powerful special interests as the insurance companies, and such entrenched ideological opposition as the Pubs'? He just barely got through the proposal he did make, and the Pubs, who invented that, have been dishonestly pissing and moaning about it ever since.

 

[BotanyBoy]

All you need to know is that health care costs half as much per capita in Canada as here (which is entirely because the private health insurance companies are cut out of the loop), and that the people are satisfied with its quality, at least to the extent that there is no significant movement to scrap single-payer -- in fact, that would be electoral suicide in Canuckistan.

No, that's not all I need to know.

How the taxes are levied and benefits are distributed are more important than all that shit.

No, not if he proposed it, only if he got it enacted -- and could he have, in the face of such powerful special interests as the insurance companies, and such entrenched ideological opposition as the Pubs'?

If he proposed it? He doesn't get to do the legislation, he only gets to sign off on or veto shit.

It was up to the (D)'s in congress to do right, if they had we would have a public HC system now and EVERYONE would be covered for LESS.

But (D)'s sold out and he signed off on it paving the way for Trump.

And the Pubs were irrelevant, they didn't get a say in the issue. (D)'s could have done single payer, been heroes, Hillary would be POTUS and they couldn't have done a damn thing about it.

He just barely got through the proposal he did make, and the Pubs, who invented that, have been dishonestly pissing and moaning about it ever since.

That's all on the (D)'s.

How have the (R)'s been dishonestly pissing and moaning about it?

It fucking sucks.

 

[Kirkrapine]

No, that's not all I need to know.

How the taxes are levied and benefits are distributed are more important than all that shit.

AIUI, the taxes are part of the general income tax and the benefits distributed to all.

If he proposed it? He doesn't get to do the legislation, he only gets to sign off on or veto shit.

Presidents do get to propose legislation, which Congress does not have to enact, but to which it does have to listen.

How have the (R)'s been dishonestly pissing and moaning about it?

Pissing and moaning by making countless futile attempts to repeal it -- which they actually could do now, but they seem to have lost interest.

Dishonestly in that sense, and in the sense that it was a Pub idea in the first place and they know it -- they just couldn't bear to allow Obama any successes, regardless of the source of his ideas; that is very deeply dishonest.

 

[BotanyBoy]

AIUI, the taxes are part of the general income tax

Progressive instead of fair I assume?

and the benefits distributed to all.

Equally or equitably?

Presidents do get to propose legislation, which Congress does not have to enact, but to which it does have to listen.

Well all the more blame for his magnificence Obama then.

He REALLY should have vetoed that shit and told congress it had better get it's shit together and remember it's job.

If he had at least done that I wouldn't have sworn off being a Democrat.

Pissing and moaning by making countless futile attempts to repeal it -- which they actually could do now, but they seem to have lost interest.

Oh yea...they are just as full of shit.

If they had repealed and replaced with a legit HC system (whatever one wants and was expecting them to do) they would cement their role as leaders of the USA for decades.

But they didn't....probably the same reason the (D)'s didn't even try to do it right in the first place and why neither party is worth a shit.

Dishonestly in that sense, and in the sense that it was a Pub idea in the first place and they know it -- they just couldn't bear to allow Obama any successes, regardless of the source of his ideas; that is very deeply dishonest.

How is it dishonest?