US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6239
Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
Antyee
Hungary1011 Posts
| ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On November 16 2016 04:45 LegalLord wrote: Protests always attract the kind of folk who don't really care about the issues but just like to protest. I just commented on this last page, but clearly it's gone unnoticed. On November 16 2016 04:05 Logo wrote: Why are people making a big deal out of the fact that "1/2 of the arrested Trump protestors in Washington didn't vote" 1. It's deceptive, arrested protestors aren't necessarily a representative sample of the protestors as a whole. [Your post acknowledges this as well] 2. It's not shocking that people in a deep blue state are not particularly motivated to vote for the candidate that is going to win their state. 3. There's at least some overlap with people pointing this out and also pointing out that Trump would have campaigned differently if the US election was a popular vote. | ||
Dan HH
Romania9024 Posts
| ||
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
On November 16 2016 05:07 Dan HH wrote: Maybe without this programmed disgust towards protests and unions, Americans wouldn't have had to go straight for the nuclear option and elect Trump to be heard half of america rarely protests. The only way for them to get their voice heard is through this vote against the establishment. It doesn't even matter if trump doesn't follow through and bring back all of their jobs, they were heard, and are at least a part of the conversation now. I have seen enough interviews with rural white trump supporters who accept that he may not deliver, but as long as he tries it is good enough for them. Rural workers have been abandoned and forgotten completely, so much so that social issues regarding LGBTQ communities, who make up a marginal segment of the population dominate the discourse, while half the country's population is not worth listening to because of white privilege? It was a mistake by the democrats for sure, Biden and Bernie would have tapped into this voter base but Clinton failed horribly. | ||
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On November 16 2016 05:13 biology]major wrote: half of america rarely protests. The only way for them to get their voice heard is through this vote against the establishment. It doesn't even matter if trump doesn't follow through and bring back all of their jobs, they were heard, and are at least a part of the conversation now. I have seen enough interviews with rural white trump supporters who accept that he may not deliver, but as long as he tries it is good enough for them. Rural workers have been abandoned and forgotten completely, so much so that social issues regarding LGBTQ communities, who make up a marginal segment of the population dominate the discourse, while half the country's population is not worth listening to because of white privilege? It was a mistake by the democrats for sure, Biden and Bernie would have tapped into this voter base but Clinton failed horribly. So because LGBT folk got the right the marry, now we gotta go back to trickle down and engage in trade war to lift up the rural whites. Sounds like those people have a clue. | ||
farvacola
United States18819 Posts
![]() Paul D. Ryan unanimously won the nomination of his House Republican colleagues Tuesday to continue as speaker and serve as the chief legislative partner to President-elect Donald Trump. “Welcome to the dawn of a new unified Republican government,” he told reporters ahead of Tuesday’s vote. Ryan must now win a floor vote in January of all 435 House members. If about two dozen Republicans were to withhold their support, his election would be thrown in doubt. Several Republicans made clear this week that although Trump’s victory may have eased the internal party tensions that threatened Ryan’s speakership before the election, it has not eliminated them entirely. “I haven’t heard from him what he wants to change — what’s going to be different the next two years than the last two years?” said Rep. Raúl R. Labrador (R-Idaho), a co-founder of the hard-line House Freedom Caucus. “So far, I’m not hearing anything about changing the way we do business here in Washington, so I’m not ready to support him yet.” Labrador is in a clear minority among House Republicans — Ryan (R-Wis.) enjoys broad support among the GOP rank-and-file — but his qualms reflect ongoing discomfort over how Ryan’s brand of Republican politics will meld with Trump’s. He was among a handful of members who said Tuesday they would still consider opposing Ryan then. Beyond Ryan, other senior members of House leadership were all reelected on Tuesday. Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), Majority Whip Steve Scalise (La.), Conference Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.) and Policy Committee Chairman Luke Messer (Ind.) will remain in their jobs. Rep. Steve Stivers (Ohio) is now at the helm of the National Republican Congressional Committee, beating Rep. Roger Williams (Tex.) for the job. Two junior leadership positions are set to be filled with new faces Tuesday after Conference Vice Chairman Lynn Jenkins (Kan.) and Conference Secretary Virginia Foxx (N.C.) declined to seek reelection to those posts. Reps. Douglas A. Collins (Ga.) won the race for vice chairman over Rep. Bill Flores (Tex.), while Rep. Jason T. Smith (Mo.) is the only declared candidate for the secretary’s post. That means, barring the surprise entry of another candidate, seven of the top eight House Republican leaders will be white men. Rep. Mia Love (R-Utah), who will be one of 21 Republican women in the House, said that was reason for concern. “Just recently we realized, oh my gosh, we didn’t have enough women that were running,” she said. “We have great women as part of this conference. There are amazing women, and we should have more women in leadership.” The tension is manifest in Trump’s plans for his White House. On Sunday, he chose Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, a longtime Ryan friend and ally from Wisconsin, as his chief of staff while also tapping a campaign official who has sought to undermine Ryan, Stephen K. Bannon, to a coequal position as chief strategist. On significant matters such as trade policy, immigration reform and entitlement cuts, Ryan and Trump have crossed ways. And Trump’s enthusiastic backers in Congress bristled when Ryan distanced himself from his party’s presidential nominee — withholding his endorsement for several weeks after Trump clinched the nomination, for instance. Ryan instead hit the campaign trail and the TV airwaves holding a copy of the “Better Way” policy agenda he developed — one that mostly ignored the areas where Trump’s agenda clashed with tenets of conservative doctrine. In media interviews since the election, he has pointed to the agenda as a blueprint for major legislation that can be enacted with a Republican White House and Congress working in tandem. Trump and Ryan met last week on Capitol Hill and appeared before cameras together for the first time since the campaign began. Both men have said in the past week that action to repeal the Affordable Care Act, secure the southern U.S. border and cut taxes are among their shared priorities. “We are on the same page,” Ryan said Tuesday, citing recent conversations with Vice President-elect Mike Pence. “We will be working hand in glove.” Republicans unanimously pick Ryan to continue as speaker, but differences remain | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22741 Posts
On November 16 2016 05:45 farvacola wrote: Never thought I'd be cheering for Paul Ryan, but here I am with Donald Trump as my President-Elect ![]() Republicans unanimously pick Ryan to continue as speaker, but differences remain It is an unprecedented level of control the Republicans now have. I suspect the vast majority of what Republicans claimed to be about wont happen over this period. But if Trump continues down the "Gay marriage is settled law" road, Democrats could be in big trouble, particularly if they keep trying to appeal to Republicans as their response to losing. | ||
farvacola
United States18819 Posts
![]() | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
The Affordable Care Act's requirement that people have health insurance or pay a fine is one of the least popular provisions of the law, and one that Republicans have pledged to eliminate when they repeal and replace Obamacare. But take a look at some of the replacement proposals that are floating around and it becomes clear that the "individual mandate," as it's called, could still exist, but in another guise. First, though, the health law's mandate doesn't actually require people to have insurance. Instead, it imposes a tax penalty on most people if they don't have coverage. In 2016, the penalty is the greater of $695 per person or 2.5 percent of household income. Unpopular as the tax penalty is, it's ultimately what makes possible the very popular provision of the law that prohibits insurers from turning people down for coverage because they have preexisting medical conditions that might make them expensive to insure. The mandate is designed to make sure healthy people buy coverage so that insurers aren't left only with customers who are sick. President-elect Donald Trump has signaled that he would like to find a way to keep the ban on preexisting conditions. But requiring insurers to accept all comers means they need a way to coax people into buying and keeping insurance before they develop expensive conditions like diabetes or cancer. In other words, they need a mandate. Health policy wonks point out that the individual mandate was originally a Republican idea, advocated by academics and conservative thinkers as a way to avoid a government-run single-payer system. "The purpose of it was to round up the stragglers who wouldn't be brought in by subsidies," said Mark Pauly, a University of Pennsylvania economist, in a 2011 interview. He co-authored a Health Affairs study in 1991 that aimed to persuade then-President George H.W. Bush to adopt a universal health care requirement. The drafters of Obamacare incorporated the individual mandate concept because they hoped to get Republicans on board, said Sara Rosenbaum, a professor of health law and policy at George Washington University in Washington, D.C. Republicans generally accept that some sort of incentive is necessary to help stabilize the insurance market in whatever system they propose as an alternative to the health law. In a policy paper released last summer, House Speaker Paul Ryan proposed creating a one-time open enrollment period during which people could sign up for coverage regardless of their health. As long they stay enrolled in coverage in the individual or group market, they wouldn't be charged higher rates if they get sick. If they don't sign up during that open enrollment period, though, those protections don't apply, and people could face higher premiums and health care costs if they were to buy insurance. "It's a soft mandate," said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum, a conservative think tank. "You must get in now to get this treatment." But health policy analysts say that a one-time open enrollment period, whether it's one month or three months in length, isn't enough. Source | ||
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
- Armstrong Williams, spokesman for Ben Carson, 11/15/16 | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22741 Posts
On November 16 2016 06:05 Doodsmack wrote: "Dr. Carson feels he has no government experience; he's never run a federal agency. The last thing he would want to do was take a position that could cripple the presidency." - Armstrong Williams, spokesman for Ben Carson, 11/15/16 His spokesman knows he was running for president not long ago right? So they think you need experience to be surgeon general but not President? Or was that an accidental admission that his campaign was just to bilk people out of money? | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On November 16 2016 05:07 Dan HH wrote: Maybe without this programmed disgust towards protests and unions, Americans wouldn't have had to go straight for the nuclear option and elect Trump to be heard they didn't have to do that to be heard either. and firing around nukes tends to cause a lot of fallout. and despite bio's claims in the post after yours, they were in fact always heard. They do in fact have some representation, and their interests are and were looked after to a fair extent. I've yet to see any proof that that's not the case; rather than it being simply a lie they were told to get their votes to go one way or another. But no matter how much people look after your interests, some things just aren't possible. and you have to recognize the difference between being heard and acted for, and the situation getting actively better in a generalized sense. sometimes that's simply not possible. | ||
pmh
1351 Posts
All those bonds the fed bought, 1-2 trillion total worth? Quiet a loss already and not looking to good for the future. | ||
CorsairHero
Canada9489 Posts
On November 16 2016 06:31 pmh wrote: https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/donald-trump-blew-bond-market-171124909.html All those bonds the fed bought, 1-2 trillion total worth? Quiet a loss already and not looking to good for the future. I'd prefer higher yield bonds tbh. That money went into equity so you'd be fine if you had a balanced portfolio. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On November 16 2016 06:31 zlefin wrote: they didn't have to do that to be heard either. and firing around nukes tends to cause a lot of fallout. and despite bio's claims in the post after yours, they were in fact always heard. They do in fact have some representation, and their interests are and were looked after to a fair extent. I've yet to see any proof that that's not the case; rather than it being simply a lie they were told to get their votes to go one way or another. But no matter how much people look after your interests, some things just aren't possible. and you have to recognize the difference between being heard and acted for, and the situation getting actively better in a generalized sense. sometimes that's simply not possible. Biologymajor actually hit the nail on the head. I don't know in what world you think "they were always heard", but rural/working class white America has been completely ignored for the past generation. The only time that the Left ever talked about helping them was in general terms, e.g. "reducing healthcare/education/childcare costs for everyone", while at the same time constantly talking about issues that specific demographics (poor black communities, LGBTQ folk, etc.) face. The Right only ever went on about "religious freedom" and being incredibly pro-business. It's no wonder that this voting block finally had enough, and deservedly so. No one has even come close to attempting to address the crippling economic problems that rural white America faces. That's why, when one candidate finally did, they flocked to him, even if all of his ideas are bogus and won't work at all and the voters are clueless on these actual economic issues. The Left got everything they deserved in the election and, as pretty much everyone has said, this should galvanize them to move on from the entrenched Old Guard of the Democratic party to a newer generation. While xDaunt, Danglars, and Biologymajor tend to undermine themselves with sensationalist and disingenuous rhetoric, they've definitely been correct about the over-reaction the Left has had to the racism/xenophobia/homophobia of the right by focusing so much on minority communities to win office. | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22741 Posts
On November 16 2016 07:16 Stratos_speAr wrote: Biologymajor actually hit the nail on the head. I don't know in what world you think "they were always heard", but rural/working class white America has been completely ignored for the past generation. The only time that the Left ever talked about helping them was in general terms, e.g. "reducing healthcare/education/childcare costs for everyone", while at the same time constantly talking about issues that specific demographics (poor black communities, LGBTQ folk, etc.) face. The Right only ever went on about "religious freedom" and being incredibly pro-business. It's no wonder that this voting block finally had enough, and deservedly so. No one has even come close to attempting to address the crippling economic problems that rural white America faces. That's why, when one candidate finally did, they flocked to him, even if all of his ideas are bogus and won't work at all and the voters are clueless on these actual economic issues. The Left got everything they deserved in the election and, as pretty much everyone has said, this should galvanize them to move on from the entrenched Old Guard of the Democratic party to a newer generation. While xDaunt, Danglars, and Biologymajor tend to undermine themselves with sensationalist and disingenuous rhetoric, they've definitely been correct about the over-reaction the Left has had to the racism/xenophobia/homophobia of the right by focusing so much on minority communities to win office. You know, those minorities (outside of white women, and a little bit of gay white men) feel like Democrats haven't been focusing on us either. That's what's so troubling about this new focus on white rural voters. All Democrats really gave us was lip service, apparently just enough to piss off white people, but far short of really changing the situation. If Democrats focus even less on minority issues, what makes people think we're just going to sit politely and keep voting for them? EDIT: BTW the media is just absolutely terrible, they covered every Trump protest from 90 angles, but practically nothing on the #NODAPL protests around the country. | ||
Blisse
Canada3710 Posts
| ||
| ||