US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8110
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. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
On July 18 2017 11:59 Introvert wrote: Every Republican who voted for this in 2015 should be shamed if they balk now. The Republican policy platform has long devolved into sticking it to the libs. Look at all the praise by Trumpkins for Gorka cause he sticks it to the libs on TV. There is no real Republican policy ... even on taxes. It is crazy. They could pass a 10% capital gains tax cut right now with 50 votes but they don't. Only thing the REpublican party can still do is Judges, and that is because of the power of faith. | ||
mozoku
United States708 Posts
On July 18 2017 12:55 Wulfey_LA wrote: + Show Spoiler + On July 18 2017 11:59 Introvert wrote: Every Republican who voted for this in 2015 should be shamed if they balk now. https://twitter.com/BenjySarlin/status/887142552377450500 The Republican policy platform has long devolved into sticking it to the libs. Look at all the praise by Trumpkins for Gorka cause he sticks it to the libs on TV. There is no real Republican policy ... even on taxes. It is crazy. They could pass a 10% capital gains tax cut right now with 50 votes but they don't. Only thing the REpublican party can still do is Judges, and that is because of the power of faith. The Left's energy is literally behind a movement called "The Resistance" and you're only concerned about Republicans being obstructionist? Sticking it to the other party is the standard opposition party strategy. Counterproductive as it is to actually getting things done, welcome to American politics. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
| ||
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
Meanwhile... | ||
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 18 2017 10:37 micronesia wrote: I'm not a fan of reality TV but that is really insulting. As sad a subject as healthcare in the USA is, it gives me some amount of pleasure to see the republicans completely unable to repeal Obamacare as they loudly declared they would (for the past 7 years), despite controlling the house, the senate, and the Whitehouse. Unless I'm missing something, this administration is still working on its first legislative victory. This will help expose them to more people that like their Congressman but hate Congress. We heard they needed more than just the House, and more than just the House and Senate, and now with the House, Senate, and the Presidency, no action. Such cowardice not having and debating four replacement bills or "big ideas" from the last seven years ready to go, or simply repealing now and working on the replace later. On July 18 2017 11:24 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Dems won't join in. They're too invested. If Trump had any bullying power on vulnerable Democratic Senators, he lost it with his response to Comey firing, the clown show of an appointments process, and his generally twitter behavior. You pass a bad one and own it. You pass a good one and get flak from the usual types. There is no silver bullet here; Obamacare was far too far-reaching and destructive for it, and nobody is brave enough to tackle any of the real problems facing the complex system before the ACA took it and made it worse. | ||
ZerOCoolSC2
8982 Posts
| ||
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
On July 18 2017 12:59 mozoku wrote: The Left's energy is literally behind a movement called "The Resistance" and you're only concerned about Republicans being obstructionist? Sticking it to the other party is the standard opposition party strategy. Counterproductive as it is to actually getting things done, welcome to American politics. First, the Republicans aren't obstructing anything for several reasons. (1) They are the majority ... how can they obstruct? That makes no sense. (2) They write bills that poll at 18%. BCRA seriously hit 18%. That is only a little above Herpes. It isn't obstruction if the public understands that your bills are terrible and they let you know it. Second, I know what Dems stand for. HRC ran on having a public option and ACA expansion. We will limit our foreign wars to hunting jihadists. Taxes will largely be the same but with some more on capital income. Defense spending is likely to plateau (a net cut). Liberal judges. Aggressive civil rights and voting rights enforcement. Criminal justice reform. Expanded labor rights if we can ever manage to pass the bill. And more public spending on universities, research, and general public welfare. Yeah the 'Resistance' kids don't put whole sentences on their billboards, but if you actually asked on these likely college kids I would bet they could come up with a list very similar to mine. | ||
ZerOCoolSC2
8982 Posts
On July 18 2017 13:31 Wulfey_LA wrote: First, the Republicans aren't obstructing anything for several reasons. (1) They are the majority ... how can they obstruct? That makes no sense. (2) They write bills that poll at 18%. BCRA seriously hit 18%. That is only a little above Herpes. It isn't obstruction if the public understands that your bills are terrible and they let you know it. Second, I know what Dems stand for. HRC ran on having a public option and ACA expansion. We will limit our foreign wars to hunting jihadists. Taxes will largely be the same but with some more on capital income. Defense spending is likely to plateau (a net cut). Liberal judges. Aggressive civil rights and voting rights enforcement. Criminal justice reform. Expanded labor rights if we can ever manage to pass the bill. And more public spending on universities, research, and general public welfare. Yeah the 'Resistance' kids don't put whole sentences on their billboards, but if you actually asked on these likely college kids I would bet they could come up with a list very similar to mine. HRC ran with what was popular and had nothing of substance to offer. She was a shill and nothing more. I'd take her over trump simply for having the competency to run the White House and do the job she was appointed. I doubt a lot of good would have come, but we wouldn't be a laughing stock at the very least. | ||
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On July 18 2017 13:31 Wulfey_LA wrote: First, the Republicans aren't obstructing anything for several reasons. (1) They are the majority ... how can they obstruct? That makes no sense. (2) They write bills that poll at 18%. BCRA seriously hit 18%. That is only a little above Herpes. It isn't obstruction if the public understands that your bills are terrible and they let you know it. Second, I know what Dems stand for. HRC ran on having a public option and ACA expansion. We will limit our foreign wars to hunting jihadists. Taxes will largely be the same but with some more on capital income. Defense spending is likely to plateau (a net cut). Liberal judges. Aggressive civil rights and voting rights enforcement. Criminal justice reform. Expanded labor rights if we can ever manage to pass the bill. And more public spending on universities, research, and general public welfare. Yeah the 'Resistance' kids don't put whole sentences on their billboards, but if you actually asked on these likely college kids I would bet they could come up with a list very similar to mine. Clinton did not run on a public option. That is a bold faced lie, she was actually against it while Sanders said Medicare for all is a human right. Edit: he'll she even campaigned against tuition free college only to change her mind because it polled well. | ||
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
On July 18 2017 13:35 TheFish7 wrote: I don't see how the ACA made things worse? Premium growth slowed, people got better access to coverage. Sure it took away the individual right to stick one's head in the sand and not buy insurance (which hurts the system overall). Maybe if they can't muster the votes within their own party they should move on to something that might actually "get done". No one gets a free pass to say ACA is bad anymore. Any time anyone shit talks ACA I can now post this CBO analysis showing that its repeal would double insurance premiums and toss 32 million off the market. If ACA is making premiums skyrocket, why would repealing it double premiums? Unless you can prove the CBO wrong, any anti-ACA argument has as concessions: 100% premium increase + 32 million tossed. CBO report: Obamacare repeal would lead to 32 million more uninsured by 2026 And it would double insurance premiums in the individual market, a new report says. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/1/17/14296108/congressional-budget-office-obamacare-repeal https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/reports/52371-coverageandpremiums.pdf | ||
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
On July 18 2017 13:42 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Clinton did not run on a public option. That is a bold faces lie, she was actually against it while Sanders said Medicare for all is a human right. These are the first hits on google. I will check for more. Where are you getting this whole "no public option" thing? All these hits across multiple months of 2016 all say HRC was for the public option. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-public-option_us_5781064fe4b01edea78e1cf1 https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/upshot/the-health-care-public-option-is-back-can-it-help-obamacare.html http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/hillary-clinton-keeps-the-fight-public-option-alive EDIT response to above EDIT: Oh no! Politicians adjusting their policy positions to reflect the interests of their voters! Que Horror! Some of us don't mind representative style politicians over ideologues. Guys like Paul Ryan terrify me because he believes his own bullshit. HRC had the presence of mind to doubt her positions and was willing to adapt to her coalition. | ||
mozoku
United States708 Posts
On July 18 2017 13:31 Wulfey_LA wrote: First, the Republicans aren't obstructing anything for several reasons. (1) They are the majority ... how can they obstruct? That makes no sense. (2) They write bills that poll at 18%. BCRA seriously hit 18%. That is only a little above Herpes. It isn't obstruction if the public understands that your bills are terrible and they let you know it. Second, I know what Dems stand for. HRC ran on having a public option and ACA expansion. We will limit our foreign wars to hunting jihadists. Taxes will largely be the same but with some more on capital income. Defense spending is likely to plateau (a net cut). Liberal judges. Aggressive civil rights and voting rights enforcement. Criminal justice reform. Expanded labor rights if we can ever manage to pass the bill. And more public spending on universities, research, and general public welfare. Yeah the 'Resistance' kids don't put whole sentences on their billboards, but if you actually asked on these likely college kids I would bet they could come up with a list very similar to mine. The Republicans aren't the opposition party anymore. Hence, my statement doesn't apply. Indivisible (progressive activist group) was upset at Democratic congressman for "rubber stamping" Trump's political appointees, and was threatening to primary over it. I'm sure they're real open to compromise on actual legislative issues though. The Republican party has three factions: the Ted Cruz ideological conservatives, the Trump/Bannon populists, and the Wall Street Establishment Republicans. Each has a pretty well-defined idea of what they want, but none of them have enough votes in Congress to accomplish anything. That's a far cry from standing for nothing but "sticking it to the libs." | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Immigration officials are raising the ceiling of visas available under a program that brings in low-skilled, seasonal workers from abroad, they announced Monday, but employers will need to show their businesses would be harmed if their positions aren't filled. The H-2B temporary visa work program helps companies in industries such as landscaping, hospitality and seafood processing who have difficulty finding workers. The program excludes agricultural operations. There's a limit on the number of visas allowed under the H-2B program, with only 66,000 permitted this year. That number is split into two parts for the workers who begin employment in the first half of the fiscal year and those who begin in the second half. Officials are allowing another 15,000 workers to come into the country — welcome news for some businesses that rely on low-skilled, foreign workers, but not for unions that represent American employees in the affected industries. The lifting of the ceiling follows efforts by the administration to restrict entry by foreign workers, who candidate Donald Trump accused of taking jobs from American employees. Gillian Christensen, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services spokeswoman, said Congress in May allowed Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly in the federal omnibus budget bill to increase H-2B visas one time. "The impact that we want it to have is to save American businesses that face potential irreparable harm so that they can keep their businesses going and keep their American employees employed," said Christensen. Now, businesses that need to hire more low-skilled, foreign workers can fill out a form to show that, without the workers, they will suffer financial losses. The H-2B visas differ from the H-1B visas heavily used by the technology industry to bring in highly skilled employees, such as those with engineering degrees. Unionized hospitality workers oppose the lifting of the H-2B visa cap. Father Clete Kiley, director of immigration policy for the labor group UNITE HERE, whose members include hotel and resort workers. "The H-2B visa workers are brought in and can quickly displace permanent workers in those spots, particularly union members that have those union jobs," Kiley said. If more H-2B workers have to be brought in, Kiley said he hopes they will at least be paid fairly. "You know we're not an anti-immigrant organization," he said. "We're overwhelmingly an immigrant union. But if you're going to use those visas, we want to see labor protections...". The Trump Organization that runs the president's businesses is among the operations that use the visas to bring in workers, the Associated Press reported. Source | ||
Buckyman
1364 Posts
On July 18 2017 13:43 Wulfey_LA wrote: No one gets a free pass to say ACA is bad anymore. Any time anyone shit talks ACA I can now post this CBO analysis showing that its repeal would double insurance premiums and toss 32 million off the market. If ACA is making premiums skyrocket, why would repealing it double premiums? Unless you can prove the CBO wrong, any anti-ACA argument has as concessions: 100% premium increase + 32 million tossed. They didn't analyze a full repeal, they analyzed this scenario: eliminating, in two steps, the law’s mandate penalties and subsidies but leaving the ACA’s insurance market reforms in place In other words, repealing the parts of it that increase the nominal insurance rate and, in some cases, affordability, but leaving the parts that make both care and insurance more expensive. | ||
ZerOCoolSC2
8982 Posts
On July 18 2017 14:44 Buckyman wrote: They didn't analyze a full repeal, they analyzed this scenario: In other words, repealing the parts of it that increase the nominal insurance rate and, in some cases, affordability, but leaving the parts that make both care and insurance more expensive. What are you arguing? | ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
That actually makes me quite upset. If Trump were for all-American work to the point of being a hardliner against immigration of all forms, at least end the H1-B program and certainly don't expand H-2B. The fuck. | ||
| ||