|
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. |
@Plansix and NewSunshine
You guys are both missing my point. My point is that the Republicans are merely playing the system. The current electoral system doesn't reward the opposition party dedicating money to policy research. It rewards winning elections. The best political strategy for the Republicans is to oppose Obamacare (as its a two-party system).
If the current Republicans didn't execute the optimal political strategy, they would have simply lost their primaries to someone who would have (or simply lose Congress to the Democrats).
The Democrats are playing the same game, but the only difference is that their ideology makes it a more favorable game to play in the healthcare arena. They're not really much different in their MO.
If you want to maintain consistency as a Lefty, support Leftist policies and criticize the system when it produces idiotic outcomes like this. Criticize Fox News, Breitbart, FPTP, lobbyists, whatever it may be. But criticizing the Republicans in Congress themselves is basically senseless. It's like complaining that Apple doesn't lower it's huge iPhone margins out of generosity so more people can afford them. It's just not how the world works.
EDIT: Guys, I'm fully aware that the Democratic platform contains support for public healthcare options and expanding Medicare to those older than 55. And that Progressives want single-payer. Hopefully my point above clarifies things--specifically the part about their ideology making healthcare a favorable arena for Democrats. My point about "no policies since November" wasn't meant to be exclusively limited to healthcare. I will predict right now that the Democrats will spend the vast majority of the next four years being obstructionist, rather than trying to come up with policies--because that's historically what opposition parties do. Not just in the US, and not just in the post-2000s era.
EDIT 2: The original posting of this was an unreadable trainwreck. I apologize.
|
My day has been improved by at least 100%.
|
On July 27 2017 10:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
I am always impressed by the ability to conform all measurement systems into a readily available football field.
|
Individual Republicans came out with their own plans too. It's not about random members being able to say "I have a plan," or even the party having a goal.
It is quite right to say that, on the whole, opposition parties don't need to submit or debate real bills. And so they don't.
|
On July 27 2017 10:43 mozoku wrote:
@Plansix and NewSunshine
You guys are both missing my point. My point is that the Republicans are merely playing the system. The current electoral system doesn't reward the opposition party dedicating money to policy research. It rewards winning elections. The best for the Republicans political strategy is to oppose Obamacare (as its a two-party system).
If the current Republicans didn't execute the optimal political strategy, they would have simply lost their primaries to someone who would have (or lose Congress)
The Democrats are playing the same game, but the only difference is that their ideology makes it a more favorable game to play in the healthcare arena. They're not really much different in their MO.
If you want to maintain consistency as a Lefty, support Leftist policies and criticize the system when it produces idiotic outcomes like this. Criticize Fox News, Breitbart, FTFP, lobbyists, whatever it may be. But criticizing the Republicans in Congress themselves is basically senseless. It's like complaining when that Apple should lower it's iPhone large margins out of generosity. It's just not how the world works.
EDIT: Guys, I'm fully aware that the Democratic platform contains support public options and expanding Medicare. And that Progressives want single-payer. Hopefully my point above clarifies things. My point about "no policies since November" wasn't meant to be exclusively limited to healthcare. I will predict right now that the Democrats will the vast majority of the time being obstructionist, rather than trying to come up with policies.
When the GOP sets the state, writes the script, picks the topics of debate and language of the bills, that is the only role there is.
You don't seem to fully understand how fucked congress is.
Behold the Hastert Rule: Under the doctrine, the Speaker will not allow a floor vote on a bill unless a majority of the majority party supports the bill.
This rule prevents the minority party from bring any bill forward unless they get a majority of Republicans to vote for it. Newt Gingrich's creation in his efforts to weaponize the house of representatives as a tool of the ruling party. When the Republicans took the house after 40 years of democrat control, the first thing they did was make sure they didn't have to vote on any bills the democrats wanted. The democrats kept it in place in 2008 because they are fucking stupid, but that doesn't excuse the GOP for creating it.
All budget bills must start in the house. Any bill involving money. This mean that the minority party, aka: the Democrats, can do nothing.
There are endless other rules and subtle changes. The way the health care bill was drafted, avoiding floor debate and skipping the committee process. But the key thing to understand is that, under the current rules, the minority party is a bitch. They can't do shit if the Majority doesn't want it to happen. They can't even bring a bill they know will fail to a vote. It won't even reach the floor. The majority party controls the ideas that are debated in the House. The minority party doesn't get ideas after the mid 1990s. This is how congress functions and why the opposition party simply opposes.
|
On July 27 2017 11:00 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 10:43 mozoku wrote:
@Plansix and NewSunshine
You guys are both missing my point. My point is that the Republicans are merely playing the system. The current electoral system doesn't reward the opposition party dedicating money to policy research. It rewards winning elections. The best for the Republicans political strategy is to oppose Obamacare (as its a two-party system).
If the current Republicans didn't execute the optimal political strategy, they would have simply lost their primaries to someone who would have (or lose Congress)
The Democrats are playing the same game, but the only difference is that their ideology makes it a more favorable game to play in the healthcare arena. They're not really much different in their MO.
If you want to maintain consistency as a Lefty, support Leftist policies and criticize the system when it produces idiotic outcomes like this. Criticize Fox News, Breitbart, FTFP, lobbyists, whatever it may be. But criticizing the Republicans in Congress themselves is basically senseless. It's like complaining when that Apple should lower it's iPhone large margins out of generosity. It's just not how the world works.
EDIT: Guys, I'm fully aware that the Democratic platform contains support public options and expanding Medicare. And that Progressives want single-payer. Hopefully my point above clarifies things. My point about "no policies since November" wasn't meant to be exclusively limited to healthcare. I will predict right now that the Democrats will the vast majority of the time being obstructionist, rather than trying to come up with policies. When the GOP sets the state, writes the script, picks the topics of debate and language of the bills, that is the only role there is. You don't seem to fully understand how fucked congress is. Behold the Hastert Rule: Under the doctrine, the Speaker will not allow a floor vote on a bill unless a majority of the majority party supports the bill.This rule prevents the minority party from bring any bill forward unless they get a majority of Republicans to vote for it. Newt Gingrich's creation in his efforts to weaponize the house of representatives as a tool of the ruling party. When the Republicans took the house after 40 years of democrat control, the first thing they did was make sure they didn't have to vote on any bills the democrats wanted. The democrats kept it in place in 2008 because they are fucking stupid, but that doesn't excuse the GOP for creating it. All budget bills must start in the house. Any bill involving money. This mean that the minority party, aka: the Democrats, can do nothing. There are endless other rules and subtle changes. The way the health care bill was drafted, avoiding floor debate and skipping the committee process. But the key thing to understand is that, under the current rules, the minority party is a bitch. They can't do shit if the Majority doesn't want it to happen. They can't even bring a bill they know will fail to a vote. It won't even reach the floor. The majority party controls the ideas that are debated in the House. The minority party doesn't get ideas after the mid 1990s. This is how congress functions and why the opposition party simply opposes.
I totally agree that Congress as an institution in its current state is fucked. We aren't far apart there at all.
But if it's okay for Dems to be obstructionist now, then it's totally hypocritical to criticize the GOP from 2012-2016 for being obstructionist. As they couldn't pass literally anything that won't Obama won't sign. And Obama opposed their entire agenda (ideologically, which is fair). They were basically in the same situation.
|
It is quite right to say that, on the whole, opposition parties don't need to submit or debate real bills. And so they don't.
You missed the "can't" in there. Plansix explained it.
Apart from that, you're obviously right. Not to mention that it feels extremely weird that right wingers now start blaming the Democrats for not coming up with a replacement for.. you know, ahm, their baby?
They don't even need to make proposals regardless of possibility or not - they just need to point at the fact that many key features of the ACA got butchered by the republicans.
edit:
But if it's okay for Dems to be obstructionist now, then it's totally hypocritical to criticize the GOP from 2012-2016 for being obstructionist.
By design, a minority can't be obstructionist. What can be an obstruction is policies so bad that your own people won't vote for it.
|
On July 27 2017 11:06 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 11:00 Plansix wrote:On July 27 2017 10:43 mozoku wrote:
@Plansix and NewSunshine
You guys are both missing my point. My point is that the Republicans are merely playing the system. The current electoral system doesn't reward the opposition party dedicating money to policy research. It rewards winning elections. The best for the Republicans political strategy is to oppose Obamacare (as its a two-party system).
If the current Republicans didn't execute the optimal political strategy, they would have simply lost their primaries to someone who would have (or lose Congress)
The Democrats are playing the same game, but the only difference is that their ideology makes it a more favorable game to play in the healthcare arena. They're not really much different in their MO.
If you want to maintain consistency as a Lefty, support Leftist policies and criticize the system when it produces idiotic outcomes like this. Criticize Fox News, Breitbart, FTFP, lobbyists, whatever it may be. But criticizing the Republicans in Congress themselves is basically senseless. It's like complaining when that Apple should lower it's iPhone large margins out of generosity. It's just not how the world works.
EDIT: Guys, I'm fully aware that the Democratic platform contains support public options and expanding Medicare. And that Progressives want single-payer. Hopefully my point above clarifies things. My point about "no policies since November" wasn't meant to be exclusively limited to healthcare. I will predict right now that the Democrats will the vast majority of the time being obstructionist, rather than trying to come up with policies. When the GOP sets the state, writes the script, picks the topics of debate and language of the bills, that is the only role there is. You don't seem to fully understand how fucked congress is. Behold the Hastert Rule: Under the doctrine, the Speaker will not allow a floor vote on a bill unless a majority of the majority party supports the bill.This rule prevents the minority party from bring any bill forward unless they get a majority of Republicans to vote for it. Newt Gingrich's creation in his efforts to weaponize the house of representatives as a tool of the ruling party. When the Republicans took the house after 40 years of democrat control, the first thing they did was make sure they didn't have to vote on any bills the democrats wanted. The democrats kept it in place in 2008 because they are fucking stupid, but that doesn't excuse the GOP for creating it. All budget bills must start in the house. Any bill involving money. This mean that the minority party, aka: the Democrats, can do nothing. There are endless other rules and subtle changes. The way the health care bill was drafted, avoiding floor debate and skipping the committee process. But the key thing to understand is that, under the current rules, the minority party is a bitch. They can't do shit if the Majority doesn't want it to happen. They can't even bring a bill they know will fail to a vote. It won't even reach the floor. The majority party controls the ideas that are debated in the House. The minority party doesn't get ideas after the mid 1990s. This is how congress functions and why the opposition party simply opposes. I totally agree that Congress as an institution in its current state is fucked. We aren't far apart there at all. But if it's okay for Dems to be obstructionist now, then it's totally hypocritical to criticize the GOP from 2012-2016 for being obstructionist, as they can't pass literally anything that won't Obama won't sign. And Obama opposed their entire agenda (ideologically, which is fair).
The Republicans were not the minority party. They were in charge of the House. They could have governed with Obama. They decided not to. Their argument was that government doesn't work. And then they proceeded to do nothing and government failed to work. It is sort of amazing a plan so fucking stupid worked so effectively that I have to type this today.
"I'm not interested in passing something with mostly Democrat votes" - Boehner December 2012
|
United States42784 Posts
It's a silly objection either way. Obamacare is the Democrats idea. It's not that they don't have an idea, is that the idea they have is one they've already passed. Refusing to let the thing that they already built be destroyed is the furthest thing from not having a plan to build anything.
Democrats: We want to build X.
Republicans: We disagree with X.
Democrats: We just built X.
Republicans: We want to tear X down.
Democrats: We'd rather you didn't tear X down.
mozuku: "I don't hear much about what the Democrats want to build, all they do is oppose the Republicans"
If they'd failed to pass Obamacare and were trying to pass it you'd be applauding their vision and big ideas. But by wanting to defend the thing they already built they apparently become intellectually hollow in your eyes.
|
Some folks also don't seem to understand the deep divisions in the GOP due to them doubling down on conservatives. Both for money and voting power. They have empowered a political group that wants to destroy every aspect of the Federal government, including the modern healthcare system that relies on medicare and medicaid. That is how they took back the House in 2010 and beyond. But that group cannot govern and cannot co-exist with the democrats or moderate Republican. They are already threatening to primary any Republican who works with Democrats on the ACA.
I've said it so many times now, but how you win an election fucking matters because it sets the tone for how you govern.
|
On July 27 2017 11:10 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 11:06 mozoku wrote:On July 27 2017 11:00 Plansix wrote:On July 27 2017 10:43 mozoku wrote:
@Plansix and NewSunshine
You guys are both missing my point. My point is that the Republicans are merely playing the system. The current electoral system doesn't reward the opposition party dedicating money to policy research. It rewards winning elections. The best for the Republicans political strategy is to oppose Obamacare (as its a two-party system).
If the current Republicans didn't execute the optimal political strategy, they would have simply lost their primaries to someone who would have (or lose Congress)
The Democrats are playing the same game, but the only difference is that their ideology makes it a more favorable game to play in the healthcare arena. They're not really much different in their MO.
If you want to maintain consistency as a Lefty, support Leftist policies and criticize the system when it produces idiotic outcomes like this. Criticize Fox News, Breitbart, FTFP, lobbyists, whatever it may be. But criticizing the Republicans in Congress themselves is basically senseless. It's like complaining when that Apple should lower it's iPhone large margins out of generosity. It's just not how the world works.
EDIT: Guys, I'm fully aware that the Democratic platform contains support public options and expanding Medicare. And that Progressives want single-payer. Hopefully my point above clarifies things. My point about "no policies since November" wasn't meant to be exclusively limited to healthcare. I will predict right now that the Democrats will the vast majority of the time being obstructionist, rather than trying to come up with policies. When the GOP sets the state, writes the script, picks the topics of debate and language of the bills, that is the only role there is. You don't seem to fully understand how fucked congress is. Behold the Hastert Rule: Under the doctrine, the Speaker will not allow a floor vote on a bill unless a majority of the majority party supports the bill.This rule prevents the minority party from bring any bill forward unless they get a majority of Republicans to vote for it. Newt Gingrich's creation in his efforts to weaponize the house of representatives as a tool of the ruling party. When the Republicans took the house after 40 years of democrat control, the first thing they did was make sure they didn't have to vote on any bills the democrats wanted. The democrats kept it in place in 2008 because they are fucking stupid, but that doesn't excuse the GOP for creating it. All budget bills must start in the house. Any bill involving money. This mean that the minority party, aka: the Democrats, can do nothing. There are endless other rules and subtle changes. The way the health care bill was drafted, avoiding floor debate and skipping the committee process. But the key thing to understand is that, under the current rules, the minority party is a bitch. They can't do shit if the Majority doesn't want it to happen. They can't even bring a bill they know will fail to a vote. It won't even reach the floor. The majority party controls the ideas that are debated in the House. The minority party doesn't get ideas after the mid 1990s. This is how congress functions and why the opposition party simply opposes. I totally agree that Congress as an institution in its current state is fucked. We aren't far apart there at all. But if it's okay for Dems to be obstructionist now, then it's totally hypocritical to criticize the GOP from 2012-2016 for being obstructionist, as they can't pass literally anything that won't Obama won't sign. And Obama opposed their entire agenda (ideologically, which is fair). The Republicans were not the minority party. They were in charge of the House. They could have governed with Obama. They decided not to. Their argument was that government doesn't work. And then they proceeded to do nothing and government failed to work. It is sort of amazing a plan so fucking stupid worked so effectively that I have to type this today. "I'm not interested in passing something with mostly Democrat votes" - Boehner December 2012
Besides the obvious fact that the Democrats wouldn't vote for items on the Republican agenda (entitlement reform, tax reform, etc.), you're getting away from the point I was actually making and this is turning into petty partisan warfare. I should have just discontinued this line of argument instead of responding, in retrospect.
Let's play hypothetical here. Suppose we have a reverse situation of 2014-2016. Democrats control both chambers of Congress, and, say, Ted Cruz is POTUS (i.e. a president that opposes all of a hypothetical Democratic Congress's legislative agenda like Obama did). Do you think that the Democrats will be playing for compromise? Or do you think they'd be trying to energize their base in hopes to win the 2020 general election?
On July 27 2017 11:16 KwarK wrote:
It's a silly objection either way. Obamacare is the Democrats idea. It's not that they don't have an idea, is that the idea they have is one they've already passed. Refusing to let the thing that they already built be destroyed is the furthest thing from not having a plan to build anything.
Democrats: We want to build X.
Republicans: We disagree with X.
Democrats: We just built X.
Republicans: We want to tear X down.
Democrats: We'd rather you didn't tear X down.
mozuku: "I don't hear much about what the Democrats want to build, all they do is oppose the Republicans"
If they'd failed to pass Obamacare and were trying to pass it you'd be applauding their vision and big ideas. But by wanting to defend the thing they already built they apparently become intellectually hollow in your eyes.
This is not my argument at all. This is like the strawman of the century.
|
|
|
On July 27 2017 04:30 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 04:29 Danglars wrote:On July 27 2017 03:12 Reaps wrote:
What a absolutely terrifying tweet. Just fan service for his evangelical base. The absolute worse response is getting your panties up in a bunch over it. He isn't Jerry Falwell. The embodied sentiment is a fairly mainstream conservative position. I don't see any panties bunching.
It's absolutely terrifying!
It's whatever Christian stuff.
The content is different. And maybe I didn't adequately describe that difference.
|
Besides the obvious fact that the Democrats wouldn't vote for items on the Republican agenda (entitlement reform, tax reform, etc.)
That could have to do with the fact that these were objectively incredibly shitty reforms.
This is not my argument at all. This is like the strawman of the century.
Last time I checked, the general consensus on the Left is that Obamacare needs work. I don't recall hearing them putting any specific proposals forth though. Weird, huh? I wonder why an opposition party would not dedicate a significant share of its resources to policy research when they're sitting on the legislative sidelines and there's an election next year.
Might not be your argument, but it clear as hell is what you said.
|
mozoku, if that's not your argument (which is hwat it looked like ot me, regardless of what oyu intended to argue, it looked like that from what you wrote and the parts I read), how about we just ditch/disregard everthing else you said for the past several pages, and you start your argument over, fresh and clean and clear?
|
United States42784 Posts
You were criticizing the Democrats for only opposing the Republicans and for not putting forward their own ideas about how to go proceed. The thing is, the Democrats already enacted their own big idea and the thing the Republicans are doing that the Democrats oppose directly relates to that big idea.
It's nonsense.
If you're somehow unaware of what the Democrats big healthcare policy idea is then I'd be happy to enlighten you. It's called the Affordable Care Act.
|
On July 27 2017 07:25 Plansix wrote:
This discussion is at least 10 time better than the garbage pile from yesterday.
I enjoyed reading how Western civ alternatively is and isn't flowing from/traceable to much earlier Greek and Roman thought that formed the core of the Enlightenment. I expected a little more agreement, but I was too optimistic.
On July 27 2017 09:02 mozoku wrote:
There's no two year delay on the skinny repeal? I assumed there was still, and they were going to make into a real bill before it went into action.
Are they really going to put forward a "plan" that has no cohesive framework? That sounds like electoral suicide. There's now way that'll pass.
That said, I'm still trying to figure out why the media assessments of these focus on the change in the number of uninsured patients. Obamacare is literally mandatory insurance; of course the new plan is going to have the number of uninsured rise. The point is to make give patients them the choice of whether they want to purchase health insurance and to make the system more efficient.
I'm not at all claiming that the GOP bill does that or that's necessarily the correct way to go (my relatively uninformed opinion is that the ACA seems preferable), but comparing the bills by number of uninsured is still a totally slanted way for the media to cover the healthcare bills.
On July 27 2017 10:17 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 09:44 Gorsameth wrote:On July 27 2017 09:02 mozoku wrote:
There's no two year delay on the skinny repeal? I assumed there was still, and they were going to make into a real bill before it went into action.
Are they really going to put forward a "plan" that has no cohesive framework? That sounds like electoral suicide. There's now way that'll pass.
That said, I'm still trying to figure out why the media assessments of these focus on the change in the number of uninsured patients. Obamacare is literally mandatory insurance; of course the new plan is going to have the number of uninsured rise. The point is to make give patients them the choice of whether they want to purchase health insurance and to make the system more efficient.
I'm not at all claiming that the GOP bill does that or that's necessarily the correct way to go (my relatively uninformed opinion is that the ACA seems preferable), but comparing the bills by number of uninsured is still a totally slanted way for the media to cover the healthcare bills. Are they going to put forward a plan with no framework? Have you been paying attention to what they have been doing for the last 7 years? They do not have a plan. Its a shocker I know but we have known they do not have a plan for years now. Healthcare in the US has come close to a total collapse several times during recent years where a Supreme Court decision in the other direction would have left the country with nothing. And the focus on number of uninsured makes a lot of sense. People need healthcare, with or without insurance because we as a society no longer accept that people should be left to die in the gutter because they can't afford emergency care. So the ER saves them for free. Which is totaly not free but many times more expensive then timely medical care and everyone ends up picking up the tab because the hospitals raise their prices to cover ER costs. Plus health insurance works by having the largest possible risk pool. So that healthy young people end up paying more then they use so that sick old people can get the aid they need. And then when those youngsters inevitably get old the next generation is there ect. If you only have sick people on health insurance the premiums skyrocket. Thats why every plan that scraps the mandate shows a MASSIVE premium increase. often up to higher then peoples actual income. Every other western nation, all of which have better and cheaper healthcare for the average Joe then the US, have mandatory health insurance for a reason. How many policy plans have the Democrats come up with since November? I can tell you. Zero. Because that's what opposition parties do. They oppose. It makes no political sense to outline policies while you're an opposition party. Attacking the other party is sufficient to win elections. Putting out your own policies is only a vulnerability. This isn't unique to Republicans, no matter how much your partisan slant wants you to believe it is. The bill almost certainly won't pass because the GOP realizes it's an electoral disaster. The only real idiocy here (this healthcare charade in Congress is merely politics) is Trump defunding the ACA so he can gain try to motivate Congress to give him a signing ceremony where he can take credit for doing something (at the expense of people's health). Otherwise we'd be exactly where we were year ago--with a bad and deteriorating healthcare system, but one that's not abjectly broken. Large risk pools don't provide anything except redistribution of healthcare costs. Whether that's desirable is purely a function of your views on the merits of redistribution. Quit trying to pawn it off as objectively better policy--that's just you projecting your ideology on to others. While I'm personally willing contribute to redistribution (to my own disadvantage), I don't have an expectation that everyone else must hold the same view. Even if I am sick, I am not entitled to someone else's money to pay for my medical costs.
On July 27 2017 10:27 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 10:22 KwarK wrote:
It's possible that the Democrats aren't trying as hard to come up with ideas for how to repeal and replace Obamacare deliberately. Last time I checked, the general consensus on the Left is that Obamacare needs work. I don't recall hearing them putting any specific proposals forth though. Weird, huh? I wonder why an opposition party would not dedicate a significant share of its resources to policy research when they're sitting on the legislative sidelines and there's an election next year. Nah, only Republicans focus on politics. Democrats are out there for the warm feelies obviously, so we can rest assured they're hard at work coming up with ways to save the world. /s Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 10:23 Plansix wrote:
The democrats have plans. This process is specifically designed to exclude them and the public. You don't get to blame them this time around. Obamas gone. The democrats are not in power. The GOP straight up pitched you something they couldn't deliver. You only have yourself to blame for believing they had a plan beyond cutting 32 million people's healthcare. Don't lump me with the morons that are still blaming Obama and Hillary for the GOP's legislative problems, please. Nor did I support the GOP's "Repeal Obamacare" rallying cry from 2009-2015. That's a valid shot at the median Republican though.
I think you know exactly why the media has focused on enrollment numbers in legislation that changes the mandate.
|
Basically this senator doesn't support single payer but thinks it will hurt Democratic senators no matter which way they vote on the amendment. Sort of clever, but could also backfire on him hilariously.
|
Why is Reince Preibus mentioned in this tweet...
|
On July 27 2017 11:27 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 11:10 Plansix wrote:On July 27 2017 11:06 mozoku wrote:On July 27 2017 11:00 Plansix wrote:On July 27 2017 10:43 mozoku wrote:
@Plansix and NewSunshine
You guys are both missing my point. My point is that the Republicans are merely playing the system. The current electoral system doesn't reward the opposition party dedicating money to policy research. It rewards winning elections. The best for the Republicans political strategy is to oppose Obamacare (as its a two-party system).
If the current Republicans didn't execute the optimal political strategy, they would have simply lost their primaries to someone who would have (or lose Congress)
The Democrats are playing the same game, but the only difference is that their ideology makes it a more favorable game to play in the healthcare arena. They're not really much different in their MO.
If you want to maintain consistency as a Lefty, support Leftist policies and criticize the system when it produces idiotic outcomes like this. Criticize Fox News, Breitbart, FTFP, lobbyists, whatever it may be. But criticizing the Republicans in Congress themselves is basically senseless. It's like complaining when that Apple should lower it's iPhone large margins out of generosity. It's just not how the world works.
EDIT: Guys, I'm fully aware that the Democratic platform contains support public options and expanding Medicare. And that Progressives want single-payer. Hopefully my point above clarifies things. My point about "no policies since November" wasn't meant to be exclusively limited to healthcare. I will predict right now that the Democrats will the vast majority of the time being obstructionist, rather than trying to come up with policies. When the GOP sets the state, writes the script, picks the topics of debate and language of the bills, that is the only role there is. You don't seem to fully understand how fucked congress is. Behold the Hastert Rule: Under the doctrine, the Speaker will not allow a floor vote on a bill unless a majority of the majority party supports the bill.This rule prevents the minority party from bring any bill forward unless they get a majority of Republicans to vote for it. Newt Gingrich's creation in his efforts to weaponize the house of representatives as a tool of the ruling party. When the Republicans took the house after 40 years of democrat control, the first thing they did was make sure they didn't have to vote on any bills the democrats wanted. The democrats kept it in place in 2008 because they are fucking stupid, but that doesn't excuse the GOP for creating it. All budget bills must start in the house. Any bill involving money. This mean that the minority party, aka: the Democrats, can do nothing. There are endless other rules and subtle changes. The way the health care bill was drafted, avoiding floor debate and skipping the committee process. But the key thing to understand is that, under the current rules, the minority party is a bitch. They can't do shit if the Majority doesn't want it to happen. They can't even bring a bill they know will fail to a vote. It won't even reach the floor. The majority party controls the ideas that are debated in the House. The minority party doesn't get ideas after the mid 1990s. This is how congress functions and why the opposition party simply opposes. I totally agree that Congress as an institution in its current state is fucked. We aren't far apart there at all. But if it's okay for Dems to be obstructionist now, then it's totally hypocritical to criticize the GOP from 2012-2016 for being obstructionist, as they can't pass literally anything that won't Obama won't sign. And Obama opposed their entire agenda (ideologically, which is fair). The Republicans were not the minority party. They were in charge of the House. They could have governed with Obama. They decided not to. Their argument was that government doesn't work. And then they proceeded to do nothing and government failed to work. It is sort of amazing a plan so fucking stupid worked so effectively that I have to type this today. "I'm not interested in passing something with mostly Democrat votes" - Boehner December 2012 Besides the obvious fact that the Democrats wouldn't vote for items on the Republican agenda (entitlement reform, tax reform, etc.), you're getting away from the point I was actually making and this is turning into petty partisan warfare. I should have just discontinued this line of argument instead of responding, in retrospect. Let's play hypothetical here. Suppose we have a reverse situation of 2014-2016. Democrats control both chambers of Congress, and, say, Ted Cruz is POTUS (i.e. a president that opposes all of a hypothetical Democratic Congress's legislative agenda like Obama did). Do you think that the Democrats will be playing for compromise? Or do you think they'd be trying to energize their base in hopes to win the 2020 general election?
Cruz is an epic piece of shit, the senate fucking hates him. If it was Graham or McCain, they would work with him. They worked with Bush for god sakes.
I don't know how old you are, my political experience began in the 2000 election. Since then, the democrats have been the party of compromise, governance. They have meet in the middle. Passed the Bush tax cuts. Voted for the Iraq war. Confirmed Bush nominations to the courts. All in the spirit of getting shit done. And none of it mattered. The Republicans watched the country burn, went to war, deregulated the banks and cut taxes. The 2007 crash happens.
Then the dems CRUSH the Republicans in 2008. And then come in guns blazing. They manage TARP, save the banking and auto industry. Pull us out of recession, extend unemployment, save people who are getting foreclosed on. And they create the ACA. Hold so many public hearings, deal with claims of death panels and finally pass the thing. And then lose in 2010. And after that, the Republicans make their plan to do nothing for 6 years. Literally nothing. Obama worked out a bill called the Budget Control Act of 2011, where automatic budget cuts would take place in 2013 if congress couldn't work out a deal. No one thought it would happen and the cuts happened. Congress was confused.
But even during all of that, the Democrats tried to work with the Republicans, like someone in an abusive relationship. And they got slapped for it. They got dragged so far right after 16 years of bullshit some of them look like Reagan republicans. And finally in 2016 the Republican controlled senate held back a nominee to the Supreme Court so Obama couldn't appoint someone to the bench and Trump still won.
And now the left is fucking done. Why would anyone want to work with these faithless fucks? It is win by any means necessary, so fuck them. There is no reason to work with Republicans right now. Maybe after 2018, but unlikely But this group is just a bunch of assholes who got into congress by promising to do shit they didn't know how to do. But mostly lets see them justify doing nothing now that their whipping boy isn't in the White House.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
