US Politics - Page 47 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-21-2017, 06:15 PM   #921
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 12:41 PM
We have dozens of congressmen that seem to support the practice.


Congressional Black Caucus turns down Trump invitation - ABC News
__________________

deep is offline  
Old 06-21-2017, 06:40 PM   #922
The Fly
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 296
Local Time: 01:41 PM
Great idea...lose every time, but with your middle finger extended, as your nation goes to shit.

But...but...you kept your cred, brah...


Naw...I'd rather win to my side of center and push left from a position of power.
__________________

Wide Awake n AZ is offline  
Old 06-21-2017, 06:58 PM   #923
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,204
Local Time: 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Popmartijn View Post
That quote is a load of bullshit. It does paint a clear picture though of the political climate in the US though and the delusion of the 'Bernie or bust' crowd. They rather want to have a huge defeat instead of a small step of progress. In a climate like this, getting any real progress will be difficult. Especially since the other side appears to be much better in extremism and deluding their supporters into supporting these extreme non-compromising ideas.

Even on important issues there can be 'bipartisanship' and compromise. But there must be a climate where parties are willing to talk to each other and come together. This is one of the main things missing in the US right now. And it looks like the left is just as bad as the right.
Framing it with some bad examples is not helping the discussion.
The Republicans have pushed anyone who'd consider themselves moderate out of the party, and the Bernie or bust crowd wants to do the same.

That'll leave the majority without a home, and a never ending struggle between two unwavering factions.

I think history has taught us that two uncompromising parties are good for a nation's future. Or maybe the opposite, I dunno. I was a sports management major.
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 06-21-2017, 07:31 PM   #924
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 12:41 PM
Eric Holder Considering Presidential Bid for 2020 Election, Sources Say - Atlanta Black Star

He is a pretty smart guy.
deep is offline  
Old 06-21-2017, 11:28 PM   #925
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 12:41 PM
Muller should include this in his investigation, I am sure there is a connection to Trumps Cuba policy

Marco Rubio opens Twitter 'investigation' into failed Ivanka Trump hug - CNNPolitics.com
deep is offline  
Old 06-22-2017, 04:05 PM   #926
The Fly
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 296
Local Time: 01:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
I think history has taught us that two uncompromising parties are good for a nation's future. Or maybe the opposite, I dunno. I was a sports management major.
I think, like so many things, perception determines if this is right.

If you are of the belief, totally defensible, that gridlock creates the best government because only the coal that is squeezed into a diamond gets through, then two uncompromising parties is good for a nation's future (as long as the filibuster remains active, because 50+1 would be a mess).

But if you believe government can provide solutions, and should, and while government inefficiency is a trope, it is not always accurate, then you want two parties willing to work together and compromise.

I was a political science major (pre-law) for 3 years until my dad died and I realized I was not going to be able to afford law school. So I became a Radio and TV (Media Arts) major. And it took 5.5 years for me to get out because I had committed so far down the poli-sci path. But I didn't finish.

My emphasis was sports broadcasting. So, if you can manage some athletes, use your power and get me in at the network, and I will provide praise for your clients around contract time. Unless you are in team management, and then I can do the opposite. I am really a whore...I just want back into sports broadcasting. But I messed around and developed a stupid career in something more important (read: boring) in the meantime....
Wide Awake n AZ is offline  
Old 06-22-2017, 05:00 PM   #927
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,973
Local Time: 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wide Awake n AZ View Post
But I didn't finish.
since you're new here, let me tell you about lance's mom...
DaveC is online now  
Old 06-22-2017, 05:23 PM   #928
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 04:41 PM
The majority of people support single-payer health care. Most countries already have it. It's not a radical notion. I don't understand why I'm "Bernie Or Bust" for thinking compromise on that issue doesn't work, but I've noticed an increasing trend in Democratic circles to utterly refuse to hear criticism from the left, so I'm not surprised.

I hope I don't get like that when I get older.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 06-22-2017, 05:26 PM   #929
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,973
Local Time: 03:41 PM
only the olds think things like "common ground" and "dialogue" are important.
DaveC is online now  
Old 06-22-2017, 05:39 PM   #930
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 04:41 PM
I want to have a dialogue with the rest of the left! They're the ones who seem uninterested, in my experience.

There is no dialogue to be had with the right. Look at the healthcare bill. There are no souls on that side left to be saved.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 06-22-2017, 06:02 PM   #931
The Fly
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 296
Local Time: 01:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
The majority of people support single-payer health care. Most countries already have it. It's not a radical notion. I don't understand why I'm "Bernie Or Bust" for thinking compromise on that issue doesn't work, but I've noticed an increasing trend in Democratic circles to utterly refuse to hear criticism from the left, so I'm not surprised.

I hope I don't get like that when I get older.
You just identified an issue where I don't think there is compromise, and Obama ignored the mandate of his election and a Dem house and senate despite some crazy gerrymandering. Single Payer HAD to happen. The whole point of the mandate the people gave the Dems was to take this out of the hands of a market that was clearly price fixing and creating insane profit level on the backs of sick Americans.

But not every issue is single payer healthcare.

If you hold the executive office, you are the President for all Americans, not just your base. That's an idea that is lost on recent Presidents except for Obama, who seemed to get the idea but didn't always understand there is a difference between being a beloved leader for all Americans and leading. Sometimes, leadership means making decisions that aren't favored by all, or even the majority of people. An effective President considers the impact of policies on the entire citizenry, not just helping the rich, or busting out the rich, but that doesn't mean they should avoid difficult decisions that are not supported by the people if you believe them to be beneficial. You lead, you make those decisions, and if you vetted them, and you are proven right, when it comes time to run for election, the effect will be remembered, not the polling numbers at the time of the signing.

Barack Obama should have refused to sign a healthcare bill until it was single payer. But that does not mean he should only consider signing laws that come from the same place on the continuum as support for single payer. You demand and sign single payer because you know it is what is best, it will work, and any compromise is akin to keeping things like they are now, which is untenable.

But there are other issues that are best collectively decided, for purposes of support and staying power. Issues that don't have such a clear, notable, visible success.

Besides, we are talking about what it takes to win, not what should happen. What I think should happen is pretty far left, but it ain't my SimNation, and to get the power to enact even part of my agenda, I have to pass the test of an election.
Wide Awake n AZ is offline  
Old 06-22-2017, 06:17 PM   #932
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,973
Local Time: 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
I want to have a dialogue with the rest of the left! They're the ones who seem uninterested, in my experience.

There is no dialogue to be had with the right. Look at the healthcare bill. There are no souls on that side left to be saved.
yea you clearly are genuinely open to having a dialogue and it's the rest of us who are uninterested in having that conversation.

because just yesterday you were definitely not posting articles calling all moderates "amoral monsters" who "deserve to be told to fuck off" and saying "centrism is a stance for nothing" or anything like that
DaveC is online now  
Old 06-22-2017, 06:20 PM   #933
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 04:41 PM
Almost all of my anger and criticism is directed at the people in power with these positions, not the people debating them.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 06-22-2017, 06:43 PM   #934
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
The majority of people support single-payer health care.

What are you basing this on?
BVS is offline  
Old 06-22-2017, 07:16 PM   #935
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,204
Local Time: 03:41 PM
Would you just look at this fucking deal maker

Quote:

Trump at Carrier last December.Photo: Daniel Acker/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Less than a month after his election and aching to show America what he could do, then–President-elect Trump struck a deal with a Carrier plant in Indiana that would see1,100 jobs remain in the U.S.The company, Trump said at a rally after the deal was announced, had seen the light and would not send the jobs building heater and air conditioners to Mexico.

He spoke too soon. “The jobs are still leaving,”Robert James, president of United Steelworkers Local 1999, told CNBC. “Nothing has stopped.”

By the end of the year, Carrier will have laid off 600 workers from the plant and moved the work to Mexico. That will leave the Indianapolis plant with 730 manufacturing workers — significantly fewer than the 1,100 jobs Trump said were staying in the U.S. The plant will also continue to employ several hundred technical workers who were never slated to lose their jobs. In exchange for keeping the factory open, Carrier is getting $7 million in tax incentives.
So much winning, it makes me weep.
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 06-22-2017, 07:33 PM   #936
The Fly
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 296
Local Time: 01:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
What are you basing this on?
Not sure there is a poll, but it was a major plank of the Dem platform in Obama's election. And the people who supported a national healthcare plan certainly did not have in mind a mess of a "marketplace" where, outside of some very important and substantive changes to limits and pre-existing condition exclusions, the same factors that allowed healthcare to careen out of control were still in place. It didn't, and doesn't, make sense for the federal government to get involved in healthcare reform and not offer it as a national healthcare program.

The "compromise" in this case was not really a compromise, but a lack of completion. The restriction of maxes and pre-existing condition limits were important controls to enact on the marketplace if you left it as a marketplace, but that seemed more like an unfinished program than the change that was such a strong plank of the Dem platform, going back to Bill Clinton. The argument is certainly there that Bill killed his own healthcare efforts by placing the First Lady at the head of the initiative, even though she was more than a typical First Lady when it came to her place in policy development in that White House.

But healthcare reform has been (still is, unfortunately) a major plank of the Democratic party Executive Office platform, and voters go in knowing that. It is intuitive that a majority of people voted for the Dem candidate in 1992, 1996, 2008 and 2012 (and 2000 and 2016), and that the voter who cares about healthcare reform would not be in support of a marketplace concept that doesn't really change much (separating the marketplace vs single payer issue out from the other reforms).

Not going to be a lot of people who voted Dem who were against healthcare reform, and of those for healthcare reform, it really wasn't "reform" to keep a marketplace concept, so you can infer a majority of people at those points in time wanted single payer.
Of course, polling is susceptible to phrasing manipulation...you can describe single payer as a gov't health care plan in which the government provides HC services, etc, etc, or you can describe it as "a government healthcare plan that restricts choice, leaving you only with tax-payer funded options..." and get a much different vote.

The failure of single payer was a huge cop-out, but the PR reality of the plan was it was destined to be the subject of a sharp pendulum swing back against it upon legislation of mandatory participation, subject to tax penalty. Of course, if you get single payer, you don't have participation issues. But by compromising on the fundamental structure of government healthcare, and allowing for a "marketplace" concept, the requirement of "mandatory" insurance had to be introduced. It was such a political failure to not see the political capital of the 2008 election for what it was, and that the "marketplace" (I love that word, apparently) of ideas was going to be favorable to a single payer concept, especially over a marketplace with the dreaded "government overreach" of assessing penalties for opting out.

Sorry...I got wordy. But this is something I am passionate about, and why I think it is a poor example (not just because of my passion) of "compromise". It wasn't compromise...it was incomplete. To bring full circle to the band, it was the Unforgettable Fire. You got the music right, but rushed the words, and didn't execute properly, and now you have to change important times of day (early evening, April 4).

Ehh...I am done
Wide Awake n AZ is offline  
Old 06-22-2017, 08:06 PM   #937
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Would you just look at this fucking deal maker



So much winning, it makes me weep.

Facts don't matter. He stated it on Twitter, so it fucking happened in their minds.
BVS is offline  
Old 06-22-2017, 08:17 PM   #938
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wide Awake n AZ View Post
Not sure there is a poll, but it was a major plank of the Dem platform in Obama's election. And the people who supported a national healthcare plan certainly did not have in mind a mess of a "marketplace" where, outside of some very important and substantive changes to limits and pre-existing condition exclusions, the same factors that allowed healthcare to careen out of control were still in place. It didn't, and doesn't, make sense for the federal government to get involved in healthcare reform and not offer it as a national healthcare program.

The "compromise" in this case was not really a compromise, but a lack of completion. The restriction of maxes and pre-existing condition limits were important controls to enact on the marketplace if you left it as a marketplace, but that seemed more like an unfinished program than the change that was such a strong plank of the Dem platform, going back to Bill Clinton. The argument is certainly there that Bill killed his own healthcare efforts by placing the First Lady at the head of the initiative, even though she was more than a typical First Lady when it came to her place in policy development in that White House.

But healthcare reform has been (still is, unfortunately) a major plank of the Democratic party Executive Office platform, and voters go in knowing that. It is intuitive that a majority of people voted for the Dem candidate in 1992, 1996, 2008 and 2012 (and 2000 and 2016), and that the voter who cares about healthcare reform would not be in support of a marketplace concept that doesn't really change much (separating the marketplace vs single payer issue out from the other reforms).

Not going to be a lot of people who voted Dem who were against healthcare reform, and of those for healthcare reform, it really wasn't "reform" to keep a marketplace concept, so you can infer a majority of people at those points in time wanted single payer.
Of course, polling is susceptible to phrasing manipulation...you can describe single payer as a gov't health care plan in which the government provides HC services, etc, etc, or you can describe it as "a government healthcare plan that restricts choice, leaving you only with tax-payer funded options..." and get a much different vote.

The failure of single payer was a huge cop-out, but the PR reality of the plan was it was destined to be the subject of a sharp pendulum swing back against it upon legislation of mandatory participation, subject to tax penalty. Of course, if you get single payer, you don't have participation issues. But by compromising on the fundamental structure of government healthcare, and allowing for a "marketplace" concept, the requirement of "mandatory" insurance had to be introduced. It was such a political failure to not see the political capital of the 2008 election for what it was, and that the "marketplace" (I love that word, apparently) of ideas was going to be favorable to a single payer concept, especially over a marketplace with the dreaded "government overreach" of assessing penalties for opting out.

Sorry...I got wordy. But this is something I am passionate about, and why I think it is a poor example (not just because of my passion) of "compromise". It wasn't compromise...it was incomplete. To bring full circle to the band, it was the Unforgettable Fire. You got the music right, but rushed the words, and didn't execute properly, and now you have to change important times of day (early evening, April 4).

Ehh...I am done


I think you and Phil are projecting. And believe me, I'm on your side, I just think saying the majority support it is wishful thinking.

There are many Obama voters that were and are weary of accelerating to single payer, and there are even more on the left that can't even begin to explain how it will work.

So I'm curious as to what one is really basing this notion on?
BVS is offline  
Old 06-22-2017, 08:29 PM   #939
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,973
Local Time: 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
Almost all of my anger and criticism is directed at the people in power with these positions, not the people debating them.
well that doesn't really matter. when you repeatedly call a group of people shit like that, you really have no right to be offended that they don't care to listen to anything else you have to say.
DaveC is online now  
Old 06-22-2017, 08:50 PM   #940
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,204
Local Time: 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
well that doesn't really matter. when you repeatedly call a group of people shit like that, you really have no right to be offended that they don't care to listen to anything else you have to say.
__________________

Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×