US Politics Mega-thread - Page 9728

On January 20 2018 01:12 zlefin wrote:
one thing I'll fault all sides on though, is not talking/doing enough on structural fixes to address the fact that problems like this occur.
simply not enough work is done on structure (admittedly most voters don't understand/care/vote on it, which makes it kinda hard)

On January 20 2018 01:11 brian wrote:


i enjoy that you call children’s health insurance a carrot. that speaks volumes.

On January 20 2018 01:16 Logo wrote:


If the Republicans are repeatedly ok with passing bills that only have like a 30% general approval rating (if that) then I don't think voter popularity is much of an excuse.

On January 20 2018 01:16 Logo wrote:


If the Republicans are repeatedly ok with passing bills that only have like a 30% general approval rating (if that) then I don't think voter popularity is much of an excuse.

On January 20 2018 01:00 Introvert wrote:
I see where the Democrat talking points are going. Dems refusing to fund anything in their defense of non-citizens after calling 2013 Republicans arsonists, anarchists, and legislative terrorists. But we're all going to hang our hat on the last second CHIP 6 year funding carrot.

As we consider yet another possible government shutdown, it’s important that we review the ground rules for how to approach the central issue that arises each time we face this calamity—namely, who is to blame for it.

If Republicans control both the White House and Congress, then the shutdown is their fault. That’s because Republicans were unwilling to negotiate with a Democratic minority that offered sensible, mature, and apolitical ideas for improving the spending bill.

The GOP must be reminded that in our system, holding a bare majority is not enough. The 60-vote supermajority threshold required to pass legislation in the Senate forces both sides to find common ground. The GOP should have worked harder to win votes from moderate Democratic senators to clear this procedural hurdle, which protects the vital interests of the congressional minority.

If Democrats control both the White House and Congress, then a shutdown must be the result of a small number of Republican senators filibustering the spending bill in reckless disregard for the urgency of funding the government. These senators are subverting the will of the duly elected majority, playing politics with our national security, and harming millions of hard-working civil servants and their families. The situation is a textbook illustration of how the anachronistic Senate rules allow a small cadre in the minority to wield immense power, and why we should abolish the filibuster.

If Republicans control the White House and Senate, but Democrats control the House of Representatives, then the shutdown was caused by an out-of-touch Republican president and tone-deaf Senate Republican majority that has callously rejected the national popular will, as it is expressed through the legislative priorities of the “People’s House,” just as the Founders intended.

If Democrats control the White House and Senate, but the Republicans control the House of Representatives, then fault for the shutdown must be laid at the feet of a House Republican caucus that has been hijacked by the extreme fringe of a once-sensible party. The situation presents a sad but enduring testament to the destructive power of Republican gerrymandering efforts that have artificially sustained the party’s House majority.

If Republicans control the White House and the House of Representatives, but Democrats control the Senate, then the shutdown reflects a GOP unwilling to come to terms with the need to share power with the opposition party in the world’s most deliberative body, the incomparable U.S. Senate. [...]

If Democrats control the White House but the Republicans control all of Congress, then the cause of the shutdown, obviously, is the party in control of Congress. Under the U.S. Constitution, Congress holds the federal purse-strings and is charged with appropriating money to fund the government. Failure to do so rests with the Republican-controlled Congress.

On January 20 2018 01:17 Introvert wrote:


The expected response. Devoid of anyt critical thought. No, I don't think "children's health insurance" is a "carrot." The extra SIX YEARS is a carrot. As I said before they've been haggling about how to pay for it for months.

Also the GOP could prob get to 50, but as long as Dems are a hard no the wavering Republicans can stay a "no." This is a classic dilemma. I think last night McConnell asked Schumer to allow a majority vote. If Dems thought GOP couldn't get to 50 he would have allowed and have a super strong position.



Tax law is much more popular now but popularity is bad reason to do things by itself anyways.

On January 19 2018 23:39 oBlade wrote:

Already I have useful insight into your state of mind.


There are lots of articles about the size of his hands but this doesn't suggest it's an important issue, just that people are stupid and addicted to clickbait and publishing tabloid content. If you know much about Trump it's pretty clear calling himself a genius isn't out of character for the last 40 years.


So when you read something like that your train of thought was live to 200 years old, that's patently absurd -> we are now living in a country on the level of one that publicly straps people to artillery to execute them (I don't appreciate the cheap comparison). People who aren't stuck in nitpick the opposition to death mode see live to 200 years old -> that's obviously impossible -> perhaps I should give the medical school graduate and flag officer a little credit and realize he wasn't making a literal scientific claim (which would make sense with the rest of what he said at the conference).

That you would even cite this is indicative of a perspective loss, like everything Trump touches turns to Trump. That's perfectly how a normal human being and Obama White House doctor appointee would talk.

Or he stood up straighter or didn't take his shoes off, or measured in the morning when people are taller and rounded up.

I am at first willing to grant that the president would be obese but I see something like desperation in the way girthers are obsessing about tiny things like this and I get second thoughts because what's the big deal in any case? BMI is not a super metric to begin with, it's just something made up to put people in categories. When you invent categories you invariably have to draw lines somewhere even though there are some clearly obese and clearly underweight people. If you're on the line I don't think one inch or two pounds makes a whole lot of a difference about the reality of your physical situation.

But it is true that if the president were unfit for duty due to being unable to drink water it probably wouldn't be in the WH doc's purview, so I can see you would be concerned this exam didn't adequately address that.


"His health is deteriorating"

"nobody is questioning his health"

I appreciate your interest but if you also don't know what's going on you're not compelled to answer for someone else, this is something not a day old and so I don't think unfathomable to explore.

EDIT: Forgot to link the screening test http://dementia.ie/images/uploads/site-images/MoCA-Test-English_7_1.pdf

On January 19 2018 23:42 brian wrote:
even though it was done pages ago, again, you write that all completely misunderstanding the point.

nobody is questioning his health. it’s the lying. i can see your confusion, because he’s lying about his health. but it’s the lying that’s the problem. not his health(though admittedly i’m not sure then what Excludos’s serious concern is. again, unless it’s his inability to stop himself from lying. which is indeed concerning.)

On January 20 2018 01:57 Mohdoo wrote:
So why not just pass a CHIP bill? What is stopping a bill that only involves CHIP from being put forward?