US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3386

On March 18 2016 08:14 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:

So what does USSR stand for
"The goal of socialism is communism" - V.Lenin

Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Thursday there’s no chance he’ll emerge as the GOP presidential nominee if no candidate captures enough delegates before this summer’s convention.

For the first time, however, Ryan acknowledged the increasing likelihood that the GOP nominee will be decided in Cleveland at what’s known as a contested or open convention.

Donald Trump is the clear front-runner, but whether he can clinch the nomination by winning 1,237 delegates before the party's July convention remains to be seen.

“Nothing has changed other than the perception that this is more likely to be an open convention than we thought before,” Ryan, the ceremonial chairman of the convention, told reporters. “We’re getting our minds around the idea that this could very well become a reality and that those of us who are involved in the convention need to respect that.”

The Speaker’s comments Thursday suggest party leaders are beginning to prepare for a floor fight at the convention at Quicken Loans Arena in downtown Cleveland.

When The Hill asked him in January about a possible contested convention, Ryan dismissed the idea.

On March 18 2016 10:34 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:


Well if we elect a Democratic president, the new nominee will be far more liberal than Merrick.

On March 18 2016 10:27 farvacola wrote:
lol, if Sanders were elected Obama would rescind Garland's nomination on his own accord anyhow.

On March 18 2016 10:42 ticklishmusic wrote:




To me, it's kind of the principle of the matter. I mean... yes, it would be funny in the sense the Republicans would be screwed and we'd get a super liberal guy. However, this to me is just a continuation of what I see as "Bernie knows best".

On March 18 2016 09:00 Atreides wrote:


So this is basically the first good post I've seen on health insurance in this thread.

The reason for the huge price hike is because of the ability to segregate and discriminate against a population by states line. There is a reason that is in most platforms on reforming the ACA.

It is also true that the ACA mostly just moved problems around. I agree with that assessment. The funny thing is the issue everyone talks about. The nominal "poor people dieing in the streets" demagoguery, is something that the ACA didn't even change. People who qualify for Medicare now, did before also.

About the only purpose I can see of it is to attempt to create a 100% insured population. Which regardless of whether you thing this is the federal governments job or not, there are arguments both for and against it, the ACA kind of fails to do.

The world I live in has a lot of self-employed people who would need to buy their own insurance. I am not unique in the slightest. Many of my friends/family are in same spot. I know of almost no cases where people previously were uninsured and they are insured now. A few, but I don't think the ACA really gets credit for it. Either they are uninsured and get royally pissed about the penalty, uninsured but don't get penalized, or joined a religious medi-share group to exempt themselves from penalty. That's why I say the ACA is broken.

There is an explosion in popularity of these religious medi share programs and I am not really convinced it's a good thing.

On March 18 2016 10:42 ticklishmusic wrote:




To me, it's kind of the principle of the matter. I mean... yes, it would be funny in the sense the Republicans would be screwed and we'd get a super liberal guy. However, this to me is just a continuation of what I see as "Bernie knows best".

On March 18 2016 11:11 CannonsNCarriers wrote:


Bingo. Bernie never worked with the Democratic party and isn't about to start. There is no good reason besides his ambition for him to be the leader of the Democratic party. Even if he is better than the Republicans, you need a certain amount of partisan fealty and leadership to corral a big coalition like the Democratic party. Bernie hasn't shown it. All Bernie. All the time.

"Bernie Sanders says he ran as Democrat for the media attention"
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-sanders-says-he-ran-as-democrat-for-the-media-attention/

On March 18 2016 11:32 Doraemon wrote:
can someone explain how this whole merrick thing will negatively affect the republicans? is it just the whole public image of them that's going to lose them votes, being portrayed as obstructionists

On March 18 2016 11:30 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
So Sanders had his honeymoon in the USSR.
Pretty weird.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/420228/bernie-sanderss-soviet-honeymoon-john-fund

On March 18 2016 11:32 Doraemon wrote:
can someone explain how this whole merrick thing will negatively affect the republicans? is it just the whole public image of them that's going to lose them votes, being portrayed as obstructionists

PALM BEACH, Fla. ― House Speaker Paul Ryan met Thursday night at a pricey French restaurant here with some of the Party’s biggest donors to assess a political landscape dominated by one vexing question: what to do about Donald Trump.

The dinner was a highlight of a secretive two-day conclave, convened under heavy security by a donor group headed by New York hedge fund manager Paul Singer, that is being viewed as a pivotal moment for the big-money effort to block Trump from the Republican presidential nomination.

Sources familiar with the gathering said it was not intended to rally a last-ditch anti-Trump cabal, and that, in fact, there was a diverse array of opinion represented among the donors in attendance. Some seemed open to supporting Trump if he wins the nomination, while others are backing his remaining rivals Ted Cruz and John Kasich.

But many of the two dozen or so donors in attendance ― including Singer and Chicago Cubs co-owner Todd Ricketts ― have given millions to super PACs devoted to attacking Trump or supporting his now-vanquished rivals, including Marco Rubio, Scott Walker and Jeb Bush. Now, however, it’s becoming increasingly likely that efforts to derail Trump by defeating him in primaries and caucuses are futile.

Thus, talk was expected in GOP finance circles to turn to whether there might be other viable avenues for stopping the anti-establishment billionaire real estate showman, such as a convention fight, or whether his nomination is a fait accompli, and donors should instead focus their spending on protecting Republicans in other races.

The gathering, organized under the auspices of a coalition formed by Singer called the American Opportunity Alliance, took place largely in the second-floor ballroom of a tony resort hotel secured by guards wearing gold trident lapel pins.

While the session was planned weeks ago, as Trump was starting his surprising string of primary victories, the presidential race is only part of the focus. According to sources at the gathering and an agenda obtained by POLITICO, activities include a briefing on the presidential race, but also panels on economic policy, national security and the battle over President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nomination of Judge Merrick Garland. A Thursday lunch session was entitled “13 Hours: The Inside Account of What Really Happened in Benghazi,” according to the agenda.

On March 18 2016 11:32 Doraemon wrote:
can someone explain how this whole merrick thing will negatively affect the republicans? is it just the whole public image of them that's going to lose them votes, being portrayed as obstructionists