|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On June 27 2019 11:30 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2019 11:28 Achamian wrote:
Next election cycle, they have to have a max 7 candidates per day.
They shouldn’t even call this a debate, it should be called “get to know your candidates” I think some of us were saying exactly the same thing in the 2016 Republican Primary "debates." I'm not sure what a good solution is though. Maybe have more days and keep the roster for each debate a secret or something. Make it into some type of a strange reality show.
My preferred format would be this: each candidate gets 5 minutes to talk about whatever they want, then another round of each candidate getting 3 minutes to talk about whatever they want and/or address topics brought up by other candidates.
This whole setup that promotes fighting, talking over one another in order to avoid being ignored is terrible.
edit: Regarding the technical difficulties, traveling back in time a few years is worth a chuckle:
+ Show Spoiler +(For whatever reason it doesn't jump to the time - it's 15 seconds in.
|
On June 27 2019 17:24 Starlightsun wrote:
What do you guys think of Kushner's Palestine proposal in Bahrain? Looking for investors to pour in 60 billion or something into Palestinian economy. No talk of the political situation - that will supposedly be unveiled in "part two". Palestinians seem to view it as an insulting bribe at best. I'm inclined to agree, it smells like a turd. It was very briefly laughed at earlier in the thread but there isn't much to discuss. As you said its part of a peace deal that doesn't talk about how to get peace.
But to offer something, without looking at the plan itself, pouring money into the region once you get peace is a good idea. Like a modern day Marshal Plan, create economic ties and incentives to stop them from going back to shooting eachother.
Not something you discuss prior to the d-day landings tho.
|
On June 27 2019 18:54 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2019 17:24 Starlightsun wrote:
What do you guys think of Kushner's Palestine proposal in Bahrain? Looking for investors to pour in 60 billion or something into Palestinian economy. No talk of the political situation - that will supposedly be unveiled in "part two". Palestinians seem to view it as an insulting bribe at best. I'm inclined to agree, it smells like a turd. It was very briefly laughed at earlier in the thread but there isn't much to discuss. As you said its part of a peace deal that doesn't talk about how to get peace. But to offer something, without looking at the plan itself, pouring money into the region once you get peace is a good idea. Like a modern day Marshal Plan, create economic ties and incentives to stop them from going back to shooting eachother. Not something you discuss prior to the d-day landings tho.
Fundamentally it's fine. It's just contextually it makes no sense because the entire problem is bringing peace to the area.
Saying 'if you stop fighting we'll help you out' sounds great... if the reason for the violence wasn't bone-deep and incredibly hard to confront.
|
I'm not sure that private healthcare needs to be completely eliminated in the US. In NZ we have a public health system which everyone pays for with their taxes but wealthier people can also get private health insurance if they wish which gives them the options to get some elective surgery done at private clinics which may, in some cases, be quicker than the public system.
Because the private insurance is, in a sense, competing with the free public system, their prices are forced to remain fairly reasonable as far as I know. In any case, nobody needs to have the private insurance, it's just an option if you've got some extra money.
Is the reason Bernie wants to completely get rid of private healthcare because it's far too embedded to coexist peacefully with a public system? Is it necessary to completely excise the cancer that it has become?
|
To pull from a manga: if everyone is special, then no one is special. Optics of being on public healthcare or welfare brings negative connotation. So paying more makes you appear more wealthy/affluent.
|
|
|
On June 27 2019 20:08 tomatriedes wrote:
I'm not sure that private healthcare needs to be completely eliminated in the US. In NZ we have a public health system which everyone pays for with their taxes but wealthier people can also get private health insurance if they wish which gives them the options to get some elective surgery done at private clinics which may, in some cases, be quicker than the public system.
Because the private insurance is, in a sense, competing with the free public system, their prices are forced to remain fairly reasonable as far as I know. In any case, nobody needs to have the private insurance, it's just an option if you've got some extra money.
Is the reason Bernie wants to completely get rid of private healthcare because it's far too embedded to coexist peacefully with a public system? Is it necessary to completely excise the cancer that it has become?
To borrow GH's argument about the police (which I mostly agree with); the US healthcare system is horrendously corrupt down to its foundations. Some privatisation is fine, but in this instance the US is probably going to be better served by going full free healthcare and then privatising bits as and when needed.
|
![[image loading]](https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/2019-06-27_4-36-59.jpg?itok=CKbOFsik)
Gabbard was the most searched candidate during the debate according to google trends so it will be interesting to see if she jumps a few points.
|
On June 27 2019 22:23 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Gabbard was the most searched candidate during the debate according to google trends so it will be interesting to see if she jumps a few points.
She surged because she's a looker. I almost did it too, but for the wrong reasons. I assume many males searched her name too.
|
On June 27 2019 20:08 tomatriedes wrote:
I'm not sure that private healthcare needs to be completely eliminated in the US. In NZ we have a public health system which everyone pays for with their taxes but wealthier people can also get private health insurance if they wish which gives them the options to get some elective surgery done at private clinics which may, in some cases, be quicker than the public system.
Because the private insurance is, in a sense, competing with the free public system, their prices are forced to remain fairly reasonable as far as I know. In any case, nobody needs to have the private insurance, it's just an option if you've got some extra money.
Is the reason Bernie wants to completely get rid of private healthcare because it's far too embedded to coexist peacefully with a public system? Is it necessary to completely excise the cancer that it has become?
Weren't you from Alaska?
Anyway, here in Spain it's similar to what you describe. A fair amount of people have private insurance. It doesn't replace the public health, it just allows you more options. At a cost, of course.
|
On June 27 2019 22:54 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2019 22:23 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Gabbard was the most searched candidate during the debate according to google trends so it will be interesting to see if she jumps a few points. She surged because she's a looker. I almost did it too, but for the wrong reasons. I assume many males searched her name too.
Okay, you got me. I googled her. Having a surfer chick as president sounds pretty awesome tho. I'd vote! 
|
On June 27 2019 22:55 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2019 20:08 tomatriedes wrote:
I'm not sure that private healthcare needs to be completely eliminated in the US. In NZ we have a public health system which everyone pays for with their taxes but wealthier people can also get private health insurance if they wish which gives them the options to get some elective surgery done at private clinics which may, in some cases, be quicker than the public system.
Because the private insurance is, in a sense, competing with the free public system, their prices are forced to remain fairly reasonable as far as I know. In any case, nobody needs to have the private insurance, it's just an option if you've got some extra money.
Is the reason Bernie wants to completely get rid of private healthcare because it's far too embedded to coexist peacefully with a public system? Is it necessary to completely excise the cancer that it has become? Weren't you from Alaska? Anyway, here in Spain it's similar to what you describe. A fair amount of people have private insurance. It doesn't replace the public health, it just allows you more options. At a cost, of course.
What do you get with private that you don't get with public?
|
All conservative judges decided that gerrymandering was not something they should be concerned with, weird how that happens. Remember that when conservatives tell you Trump is objectionable but at least he delivered for the Supreme Court, this is what they mean.
|
On June 27 2019 23:23 Nebuchad wrote:https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1144247851003908097All conservative judges decided that gerrymandering was not something they should be concerned with, weird how that happens. Remember that when conservatives tell you Trump is objectionable but at least he delivered for the Supreme Court, this is what they mean.
That depends entirely on who intends to bring the topic to the SC, no? Only things I've heard is Reps trying to push to the SC to keep their gerrymandering.
|
On June 27 2019 23:23 Nebuchad wrote:https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1144247851003908097All conservative judges decided that gerrymandering was not something they should be concerned with, weird how that happens. Remember that when conservatives tell you Trump is objectionable but at least he delivered for the Supreme Court, this is what they mean.
Are you fucking kidding me.... well it just means when dems win its time to stack the shit out of every district they can
|
|
|
On June 27 2019 23:28 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2019 23:23 Nebuchad wrote:https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1144247851003908097All conservative judges decided that gerrymandering was not something they should be concerned with, weird how that happens. Remember that when conservatives tell you Trump is objectionable but at least he delivered for the Supreme Court, this is what they mean. Are you fucking kidding me.... well it just means when dems win its time to stack the shit out of every district they can
And as soon as you do that, the other side will cry and the USSC will reverse.
|
I can't find an article for it yet, but Reuters reporting that the Supreme Court ruled against Trump in adding a citizenship question to the census.
|
On June 27 2019 23:26 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2019 23:23 Nebuchad wrote:https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1144247851003908097All conservative judges decided that gerrymandering was not something they should be concerned with, weird how that happens. Remember that when conservatives tell you Trump is objectionable but at least he delivered for the Supreme Court, this is what they mean. That depends entirely on who intends to bring the topic to the SC, no? Only things I've heard is Reps trying to push to the SC to keep their gerrymandering.
Is there a meaningful distinction?
|
The gerrymandering case is why Roberts allowed Auer to survive, so he could slam this door in exchange.
This is welcome news.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
