Admittedly the one thing that she has going in her favor is the fact that people who vote for Democrats tend to be "low information" voters. Therefore, there is a good chance that they will never know what she thinks of her constituents.
A recent study has discovered that Kamala Harris has the most liberal record in the Senate. She is to the left of both Warren AND Sanders. With an extremely low likelihood of Creepy, sleepy Uncle Joe [Stalin] finishing out even his first term; that makes a vote for that ticket utterly unconscionable. Unless you're a Commie.
I'm not sure why this is newsworthy. Neuroscience shows that adulthood doesn't occur until about 24 -- and kids do lots of stupid things.
As far as Kamala identifying as being black, I think it's ironic that her first name is Indian (it means "she of the "lotus"). She has to downplay her Indian-ness even though south Asians are the most successful ethnic group in the US. Kamala's Indian mom and Jamaican dad met at UC Berkeley (probably the best public university in the US). Her mom was a medical researcher and the dad became an economics prof at Stanford. She has an interesting family background and it belies the Trumpian, repulsive, nonsense that immigrants are rapists and murderers.
Yes, she's liberal but I think she's willing to bend in pragmatic ways. For example, I wouldn't worry about the US having socialized medicine in the same way as those shithole countries like the UK and Canada. The Democrats in Congress don't want single-payer healthcare and the president doesn't get to craft legislation. Biden's interested in incremental changes to the ACA and I think that's going to work out just fine.
She is right. I stand as an example of under-24 stupidity. I married my first wife before I was 24. Did a lot of dumb things, but that one made for the worst 18 months of my life.
@Winex wrote: "Admittedly the one thing that she has going in her favor is the fact that people who vote for Democrats tend to be "low information" voters. "
____________________________
Story about high-education couties support Democrats:
"Over time, the partisan gap between college-educated voters and less-educated ones widened. In 2016 it exploded. The Pew Research Centre, a think-tank, found that overall, college graduates favoured Hillary Clinton by 21 percentage points, while those without a degree backed Donald Trump by a seven-point margin. Among whites, the difference is greater: those without a college degree backed Mr Trump over Mrs Clinton by a margin of more than two to one."
I'm excited. She adds another easily exploited flaw to already feeble-minded and physically frail ticket.
Demented old man Biden painted himself into a corner by promising that his running mate would be a woman, then he allowed the special interest groups to hijack his decison and force him into a black woman. He couldn't even do that right. Her father is of african heritage, but she herself cannot identify as african-american; which met the letter of their demand but not the spirit. They have already begun attacking her and each other because of it!
Get ready for another close race, with all the polls favoring Biden. It will most likely again be won by the Electoral College, following the consitution, and saving the Republic from the ignorant low-info democrat voters in the urban metros. God bless our Founding Fathers for their wisdom and foresight.
Most of the "protesters" are 20-somethings - many of them have little clue about what they are "protesting" about beyond just repeating non-factual slogans - a certain # of them are druggies and street-kids that like mayhem and see an opportunity to get back at the system - some of them are doing it b/c "it's the new cool thing to do" - some of them are on the payroll as paid-agitators - a certain % are actually true-believers in Marxism/Communism.
@RandomMember
For someone who subscribes to the "all-inclusive" liberal ideology, you sure seem to look down your nose at anyone without a college degree.
^^ Random
"Low information voter" simply means someone who is not well-informed about political matters. It has NOTHING to do with having a college degree. Rush Limbaugh coined the phrase, and he himself didn't go to college.
It's amazing somehow gammanut has me on ignore yet he accuses me of everything that happens to him, what a paranoid jackass he is.
And as far as low information voters are concerned you fella's have a lot to learn, many of us true conservative's, not you fools that think Trump is god, are going to lose this election then we will take back our Republican Party and use true fiscal conservative principles, not this crazy shit where we spend our children's future and steal the Social Security and Medicare, from our seniors that have paid for this.
Well, it is derogatory, and should be. A low-info voter is someone who cares little about a candidate's policies and votes based on irrelevant things like physical appearance (Obama's a handsome guy) or because they think the candidate is cool (Gov. Cuomo rides a motorcycle). That's pretty stupid, so yeah, it's derogatory.
^ That's the funny part IDGAF, I am socially liberal, but fiscally my conservative credentials are as strong as anyone, problem is you guy's aren't legitimate with your criticism, I LOLed when I heard the President start the birther nonsense with Kamala. legit conservatives have left the party in droves and Trumpism is to blame, I don't want to run around calling folks racists because it's counter productive, but dammit man most of this shit has highly bigoted overtones and many like myself, dislike this new phony republican tone.
The simple fact is that without the low information voter, the democrat party would never recovered from their atrocious record of slavery, secession, subjugation, segregation, and repression (more or less in chronological order). The low info voter is not linked to the voter's education, but rather their intelligence.
It's everything misterorange said, plus a willingness to be led around by the nose when being told what they want to hear, and unwillingness to even allow a contradictory argument to be made. It is the ultimate in willful ignorance. That is the type of regressive troglodyte that keeps voting for the democrat party year, after year, after year. They can call themselves liberal, progressive, socialist; which are the type of identity politics which the democrat party excels at, but the fact is that they are too stupid and too lazy to perform an honest assessment of the candidates, issues, and predictable outcomes. So, they vote without being fully informed of the situation. Low-info voter.
lol soo this is notable quote? Anybody who is a legitimate PL already knows this as a fact. If this is a point to pick on her as an unfit candidate they really need to try harder.
@TwentyFive - LOL - you liberals need to think up a different lie. I've lost track of how many of your kind have used the "Fiscally conservative, but socially liberal" lie.
If there was any truth behind that lie, you would be voting for Jo Jorgensen instead of Joe Biden.
I’m voting to remove Trump, Jo Jorgensen doesn’t have a snowballs chance in hell
And like I said you folks don’t represent the Republican Party even a little bit, my Republican Party had gentlemen and statesmen involved not these crude vulgarians your president can’t be compared in the same sentence to either Bush, John McCain, Reagan, people that respected other points of view,
First of all, unless you are telling me that you are not an American, Trump is your president too. Similarly, Obama was my president. I didn't like him, but he was president, and that's the way things go some times.
Second, unfortunately search really sucks here, but I think it was in the Arizona Update thread that I mentioned that going back to the 2016 primaries, my first choice was Scott Walker. (Me choosing a candidate early in a primary is like a kiss of death to a candidate)
After Scott Walker dropped out (after the first debate), I switched to Ted Cruz. I continued to support Cruz until the end. (At least he had more staying power than Walker)
I did vote for Trump in 2016. While I acknowledged and even admired the viewpoint of "Never Trump" people like George Will, just the thought of Hillary in office was enough to make me vote for Trump.
The thought of Biden in office is even more terrifying. Even before his mental decline, he was never the sharpest tool in the toolshed.
So tell me "Mr Fiscal Conservative", what is your opinion of Obamacare?
Well said, gammanu95. One symptom of being low-info is they don't know (possibly don't even care) when they're being lied to. Like when twentyfive says, "I LOLed when I heard the President start the birther nonsense with Kamala." Not sure if he heard that from someone else and is repeating it like a parrot, or he thinks he'll convince a few others to believe it, but here's the clip of the REPORTER bringing it up and Trump's response. He clearly didn't "start the birther nonsense."
^ you really don’t get how Trump operates, he incites rumors that are started by others on his behalf, he never takes responsibility all he does is says others are saying, yet You accuse me of parroting get your collective heads out of Trumps ass
@25
Could be true. If it is, it only means that Trump's learned to play the Democrats' game at least as well as they do. The left has been using trickery and misdirection since LBJ bragged, "I'll have those n*****s voting Democratic for 200 years," while at the same time championing the Civil Rights Act. He said, "We’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference."
@winex Just because you asked what's my opinion of Obama care, simple answer. I've never been a fan of it and have been against it since the beginning, but right now in the middle of a pandemic is not the time to be debating this subject, but if you remember Mr. Trump promised us over 3 years ago to replace it with something better, just like every promise Trump has made it hasn't happened.
In my opinion. "freedom" and "following the Constitution" are both far better than an unconstitutional program that accelerates this countries descent into bankruptcy. (I agree with the dissenting opinion that John Roberts wrote on Obamacare and disagree with the majority opinion he wrote on the same case)
And the subject of scrapping Obamacare was brought before the House and Senate - sadly, a single vote made the difference. Even sadder, that vote came from John McCain.
Which really brings us to the true problem with Trump that keeps me from being a strong supporter. He isn't very presidential, and has a hard time getting buy-in for the things he advocates.
And that is truly sad, because de-regulation has made a difference for the economy. The tax cuts were badly needed. And mostly importantly, he has done an excellent job (for the most part) in choosing judges to fill vacancies in federal courts.
I understand why people feel Trump isn't "presidential" but it's all relative. One could hardly say that Bill Clinton, Obama, or Hillary (as a candidate) were any more "presidential" than Trump. Or Biden with his "C'mon man" and totally insane stories about hairy legs and a bully named Corn Pop. If AOC, Tlaib or Pressley have aspirations to one day occupy the top office, they certainly don't appear presidential to me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVBqXvMo…
@MisterOrange - I am 56. The first time I was able to vote in a presidential election, I voted to re-elect President Reagan. I have vivid memories of his entire time in office.
The thing that stood out the most was when he was demonstrating why he earned the nickname "The Great Communicator". Reagan wasn't blessed with control of the House and Senate. But it didn't matter. He had the ability to apply pressure on members of the House and Senate by speaking directly to the people.
Though I like the policies that President Trump has been able to enact, I also recognize that he could have accomplished so much more.
You mentioned Obama - well, aside from his first 2 years in office when he had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate and strong control of the House, he wasn't able to accomplish a single thing without the use of "his phone and his pen".
What I dislike about Obamacare is the same thing I disklike about the majority of government programs. This is another area where the Federal government has stepped in despite the fact that they have no authority to do so.
The Constitution of the United States is a very unique constitution. Unlike the rest of the world, our Constitution gives very specific, and very limited powers to the Federal government. Any power that is not specifically enumerated, is supposed to be off limits.
We really need to start respecting the 9th and 10th amendments.
So what is my ideal healthcare system? It can be summed up in 5 words. "Leave me the fuck alone."
@Winex- What kind of work do you do? Suppose you got cancer or heart disease and you could no longer work. Under the pre-ACA system you could find that health insurance was prohibitively expensive or you couldn't buy insurance at all? Is that the kind of society you want to live in? You go bankrupt if you're unlucky enough to get sick?
Ahh now I get it we need to pass a purity test from some anonymous internet guy who claims to be an expert on the constitution what a crock of shit go kiss Trumps ass you know you want to
SMH
The UK has true socialized medicine where MDs work for the government. Canada has single-payer where the government pays private doctors. Sweden has a system similar to the ACA.
I opposed the ACA tooth and nail when it came out. Obama was not an effective legislator. With 60 senators and a commanding majority in the senate, it should have breezed through. It was a poorly crafted law, as evidenced by Trump's ability to rip the guts out of it.
But I would work to fix rather than get rid of it now. People have a way of adapting to the systems in place and hasty change introduces problems.
Medicare for All is insanity. The Sanders and Warren plans amounted to massive pay cuts for already overworked HCPs. You'd see a mass exodus from an already strained field. Single payer sounds great until you look at the costs, hence why it tanked on the ballot in three bluish to deep blue states.
And don't talk about Canada, Europe, etc. Temperamentally, we aren't them. Same reason we like our guns, it's bred into our national mythology.
Agree with most of what you said, @Tetra. I thought you were in biotech?
Incremental changes to the ACA is the best choice. Upper-middle-class people who did not qualify for subsidies are getting screwed, and that needs to change. Yes, pushing HCPs (especially MDs) into the middle-class is not a good solution.
"It was a poorly crafted law, as evidenced by Trump's ability to rip the guts out of it."
-----
Repeal failed in the Senate. The individual mandate was killed and hidden in the tax legislation. A bunch of GOP governors launched an idiotic lawsuit to kill the ACA outright and it will be back in front of the Supreme Court after the election. There were many bugs in the ACA at first -- but if GOP wants to sabotage the law, I don't see how that's evidence of a poorly crafted law?
@Random, I am in biotech, which is a subset of healthcare. Familiar with managed care as the payer is a huge part of what I do, and negotiating the system for myself and others.
It was a poorly crafted law because it had so many moving parts. Is that the best Obama could get? Congressional opposition isn't a new thing. Lyndon Johnson was a master of working Congress. So were Reagan and Clinton. Obama was not, despite the most commanding majorities in my lifetime. That's playing the game on Easy Mode.
The law needed the individual mandate to be simultaneously a tax and not a tax to survive that lawsuit. It relied on the Medicaid expansion with GOP governors are still resisting tooth and nail. I'm no historian but I don't think the original Medicare or Medicaid ever suffered from that.
Nonetheless it's what we have. Trump will roll out his healthcare plan three days after Armageddon, so he's a non-factor. I'm a pragmatist and anti-revolutionary at heart.
To say that Obamacare made health insurance more affordable and available to more Americans is a lie of staggering proportions. Anyone who repeats is a damned liar.
Commercial insurance on the exchange is too expensive for most middle class households. If you bought individual or family insurance on your own pre-ACA, you have most likely dropped it due to premium increases (I have, as has my PCP - another solo practitioner).
Likewise, most providers no longer accept the least expensive HMOs, including many BCBS and UHC plans. So now you are paying hundreds of dollars per family member per month for insurance, but cannot find a physician who will accept it.
Medicare for all will be partially funded by payment cuts, meaning that many providers will limit or refuse medicare, as they do medicaid. Others will quit clinical practice altogether, and pursue academic, research, or adminiatrative appointments. There is already a national shortage of specialists, and months long waits for PCPs.
The fact is Obamacare was the first step on the road tor ruining healthcare in America. It has only made it less accessible, less affordable, and less attractive as a career.
Pre-ACA the vast majority of uninsured people were voluntarily that way. If you had almost any kind of full-time job you could easily and cheaply obtain excellent health insurance. In college I had a cheap student plan. After that (for many years) I had an employer sponsored plan which was 100% paid by the company and with zero deductible, zero co-pay, no 80/20 split, nothing. Eventually started having to pay a chunk myself and deductibles and co-pays were creeping up. Sure, I didn't like it, but I was able to make it work, even on my modest salary and even after I got divorced and had to cover my two kids.
When ACA went into effect it drove up the cost of my employer sponsored (non-ACA) plan so high that I had insurance I couldn't afford to use anymore. It's more like "catastrophic coverage," which is fine when you're in your 20's or 30's and in perfect health. Now at 53 this shit isn't working for me. Huge premium cost, huge deductible, co-pays, "co-insurance" cost, crazy high out-of-pocket maximum.
Here's the ACA in a nutshell: It's irrelevant to the wealthy because they can afford the costs or can even self-insure. Congress has exempted themselves from it, and they still have their Cadillac plans for free. The poor have Medicaid or ACA plans for as little as $1.00 per month and with artificially low deductibles and cost sharing forced on the insurance companies. As with everything the Democrats celebrate as some wonderful patriotic accomplishment, it's the middle-class getting fucked.
Trump “ has a hard time getting buy-in for the things he advocates.”
That’s because 99% of politicians and bureaucrats are corrupt as fuck. Republicans and Democrats. Trump is an existential threat to their corrupt livelihood.
Not gonna move anywhere......Just put my income sources in sheltered accounts, then apply for all those freebies that the celebs and athletes will foot the bill for with their higher taxes !!!!!
Not the slam dunk Joe expected. Not all Blacks think alike::
“In the latest Rasmussen Reports survey, one of the first since Biden chose Harris, a third of likely voters who were black said they are “less likely” to vote for the Democratic ticket, a third said they were “more likely” to back it, and about a third said it will either have no impact on their choice or weren’t sure.“
My own political beliefs aside, I just don't see how Biden can possibly win this. I live in a very deep blue section of NJ. During every past election season I can remember, the Democrat candidate was OVERWHELMINGLY supported by lawn signs, flags, bumper stickers, tee shirts, bill boards, etc. A die-hard Republican would feel sick just looking at it.
This year, less than three months out, I have yet to see one piece of Biden promotional stuff. Not even a single bumper sticker or lawn sign. Zero. If that lack of enthusiasm is happening in swing states, old Sleepy Joe is already finished.
"Trump draws support from 53% of those with a high school diploma or less, including 38% who say they strongly support him for reelection. In contrast, 68% of voters with a postgraduate degree say they support Biden for president, including 38% who say they strongly support him."
I hope the demographic FACTS about Trump supporters piss you off, @Orange. Everyone should vote -- that's why Trump's interference with the USPS should be considered an emergency
@Random
How about the demographic FACT that Kamala Harris is even less of an African American than Liz Warren is American Indian, and can trace her direct lineage to the largest slave owner in Jamaica?
The USPS charges advertisers, bulk mailers, and Amazon a fraction of the cost of delivering their items. They do that rather than charge a fair price and downsize their business. That’s why the USPS needs billions in taxpayer subsidy every year.
"... I just don't see how Biden can possibly win this ..."
Trump is not only running against Biden and the Dems, he's also running against 90% of the media and a good chunk of the establishment (social media corps, giant corps like Amazon, etc) - and unfortunately, Trump is also running against Trump - I agree w/ a good # of his policy-positions but he can often not get out of his own way with the way he states/goes-about things.
The biggest Trump opponent seems to be Trump, i.e. the hatred many have for him - the few polls I've seen w.r.t. Biden, the #1 reason listed in the polls as to why people are voting for Biden is not b/c of anything special about Biden himself, but the #1 reason is that he's not Trump - if a potted-plant was running against Trump it'd likely get close to 50% of the vote.
@Tetradon - I don't work in the medical field, but I do have casual observations on the subject.
I think that a lot of ills in our medical system are related to the overabundance of lawyers in this country. Their impact on medicine/healthcare is driving up the costs.
Frivolous lawsuits create the need for doctors to get incredibly expensive malpractice insurance policies.
I don't know how accurate the numbers in this article are ( https://www.leveragerx.com/blog/medical-… ), but ob/gyns having to pay $214,999 a year in New York is shocking. Those costs get passed on to the consumers.
In addition to the high cost of malpractice insurance, fear of lawsuits has led to excessive use of unnecessary procedures - further driving up the cost of medical care.
Putting medicine and healthcare in the hands of bureaucrats - most of whom come from the legal field - is not the way to control costs. They do look out for their own kind.
Beyond tort reform, introducing more competition in the insurance market is a good idea. Under Obamacare, a lot of areas in the country only have a single provider available. That is not a good way to control costs.
Allow insurance companies to sell insurance across state borders easily. People in rural areas will benefit by being included in larger risk pools. Insurance companies will benefit by being able to spread the same administrative overhead (largely) across a larger pool of customers, plus they will have more diversity in their risk pools.
Like most things in life, healthcare is NOT improved by adding more government.
@winex, I don't disagree with any of those ideas, and yes, multi-six-figure malpractice insurance premiums for NYC OB/GYNs is a thing. People overestimate the role of the actual birth process in a child's development. While I know a lady whose OB/GYN literally broke her son's back during the delivery (don't ask me how), a lot of mothers falsely attribute genetic conditions to the hour of birth.
The problem is, "defensive medicine" isn't a line item one can just strike. No one knows what procedure or drug will prevent a lawsuit, so they cover all of them. Agree that tort reform is a good thing, but where it's been tried, it's had a limited impact.
Allowing insurers to sell across state lines would be a good thing. I've heard liberal economists say it's a race to the bottom, i.e. least regulated states, but that's a positive. That said, it'll take a long time to build provider networks across states. Years, rather than months.
One could take the extreme of "larger risk pool" and say nothing would be larger than everyone. While literally true, single payer gets voted down once people see the costs.
Of course lawyers and bureaucrats make the drug discovery process and medical equipment development and certification process more expensive too. And those expenses are passed on to consumers.
Hopefully some of the lessons learned from a Operation Warpspeed can be applied outside of the pandemic. But there is only one party that is in favor of deregulation.
Price transparency is yet another issue. People need to be informed of the costs and incentivized through lower insurance costs to be smart consumers.
I suspect there are parallels between what’s happening in higher education and medicine/insurance. Both systems have massive bureaucracies that didn’t exist 20 years ago.
In higher education, something like one third of tuition goes toward administrators and their staff who add nothing to the education experience. Another third pays professors who do very little teaching but are vaguely doing research that benefits no one. Then, there’s the massive physical infrastructure which helps sell the university experience to high school seniors but has little to do with education.
Bureaucracy in higher education has existed for longer than I have been alive. The cost of. a college education has been rising at above the rate of inflation since at least the 80’s - maybe longer - I just became aware in the 80’s because that’s when I started paying the cost personally.
The only thing that has permitted the cost of college to exceed inflation for 40 years is the plethora of government loans that allow paying the price of an education to be deferred.
Forty years ago, it was common for students to work their way through college. A combination of a summer job and part time work the rest of the year was often enough to cover living expenses and tuition. Back then, tuition was around $1,000 per semester even for private colleges. Adjusting for inflation, that’s still a fraction of today. After decades of government getting involved in college finance, that is no longer possible.
Similarly, many people used to pay out-of-pocket for medical care. A visit to a doctor’s office was very affordable and, if you needed surgery or a few days in the hospital, it was relatively affordable. People treated it like they would an unexpected car repair. It was a financial burden but it didn’t bankrupt you. When it happened, you found a way to pay for it.
Now, it’s unthinkable to go without insurance. People commonly assume that uninsured people are completely shut off from medical care. This is actually a recent concept.
100 comments
Latest
The fact that so many 18-24 year olds vote Democrat no matter who the candidate is goes to prove her point.
Is that even possible?
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-gov…
As far as Kamala identifying as being black, I think it's ironic that her first name is Indian (it means "she of the "lotus"). She has to downplay her Indian-ness even though south Asians are the most successful ethnic group in the US. Kamala's Indian mom and Jamaican dad met at UC Berkeley (probably the best public university in the US). Her mom was a medical researcher and the dad became an economics prof at Stanford. She has an interesting family background and it belies the Trumpian, repulsive, nonsense that immigrants are rapists and murderers.
Yes, she's liberal but I think she's willing to bend in pragmatic ways. For example, I wouldn't worry about the US having socialized medicine in the same way as those shithole countries like the UK and Canada. The Democrats in Congress don't want single-payer healthcare and the president doesn't get to craft legislation. Biden's interested in incremental changes to the ACA and I think that's going to work out just fine.
____________________________
Story about high-education couties support Democrats:
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail…
"Over time, the partisan gap between college-educated voters and less-educated ones widened. In 2016 it exploded. The Pew Research Centre, a think-tank, found that overall, college graduates favoured Hillary Clinton by 21 percentage points, while those without a degree backed Donald Trump by a seven-point margin. Among whites, the difference is greater: those without a college degree backed Mr Trump over Mrs Clinton by a margin of more than two to one."
Demented old man Biden painted himself into a corner by promising that his running mate would be a woman, then he allowed the special interest groups to hijack his decison and force him into a black woman. He couldn't even do that right. Her father is of african heritage, but she herself cannot identify as african-american; which met the letter of their demand but not the spirit. They have already begun attacking her and each other because of it!
Get ready for another close race, with all the polls favoring Biden. It will most likely again be won by the Electoral College, following the consitution, and saving the Republic from the ignorant low-info democrat voters in the urban metros. God bless our Founding Fathers for their wisdom and foresight.
I'm simply presenting facts. College-educated voters have left the Republican party in droves. You either accept reality or you don't.
Also a constitutional knowledge test.
If there were, Regan (and likely many others) would have never made it to a second term.
For someone who subscribes to the "all-inclusive" liberal ideology, you sure seem to look down your nose at anyone without a college degree.
RandomMember also believes ophthalmologists are the end-all-be-all of class, money, and refinement. 😂
"Low information voter" simply means someone who is not well-informed about political matters. It has NOTHING to do with having a college degree. Rush Limbaugh coined the phrase, and he himself didn't go to college.
And I know your type, so let me revise what I said. Rush didn't actually "coin" the phrase, he popularized it.
And as far as low information voters are concerned you fella's have a lot to learn, many of us true conservative's, not you fools that think Trump is god, are going to lose this election then we will take back our Republican Party and use true fiscal conservative principles, not this crazy shit where we spend our children's future and steal the Social Security and Medicare, from our seniors that have paid for this.
It's everything misterorange said, plus a willingness to be led around by the nose when being told what they want to hear, and unwillingness to even allow a contradictory argument to be made. It is the ultimate in willful ignorance. That is the type of regressive troglodyte that keeps voting for the democrat party year, after year, after year. They can call themselves liberal, progressive, socialist; which are the type of identity politics which the democrat party excels at, but the fact is that they are too stupid and too lazy to perform an honest assessment of the candidates, issues, and predictable outcomes. So, they vote without being fully informed of the situation. Low-info voter.
If there was any truth behind that lie, you would be voting for Jo Jorgensen instead of Joe Biden.
But like all liberals, you live to lie.
And like I said you folks don’t represent the Republican Party even a little bit, my Republican Party had gentlemen and statesmen involved not these crude vulgarians your president can’t be compared in the same sentence to either Bush, John McCain, Reagan, people that respected other points of view,
Second, unfortunately search really sucks here, but I think it was in the Arizona Update thread that I mentioned that going back to the 2016 primaries, my first choice was Scott Walker. (Me choosing a candidate early in a primary is like a kiss of death to a candidate)
After Scott Walker dropped out (after the first debate), I switched to Ted Cruz. I continued to support Cruz until the end. (At least he had more staying power than Walker)
I did vote for Trump in 2016. While I acknowledged and even admired the viewpoint of "Never Trump" people like George Will, just the thought of Hillary in office was enough to make me vote for Trump.
The thought of Biden in office is even more terrifying. Even before his mental decline, he was never the sharpest tool in the toolshed.
So tell me "Mr Fiscal Conservative", what is your opinion of Obamacare?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7oeIYMy…
Could be true. If it is, it only means that Trump's learned to play the Democrats' game at least as well as they do. The left has been using trickery and misdirection since LBJ bragged, "I'll have those n*****s voting Democratic for 200 years," while at the same time championing the Civil Rights Act. He said, "We’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference."
In my opinion. "freedom" and "following the Constitution" are both far better than an unconstitutional program that accelerates this countries descent into bankruptcy. (I agree with the dissenting opinion that John Roberts wrote on Obamacare and disagree with the majority opinion he wrote on the same case)
And the subject of scrapping Obamacare was brought before the House and Senate - sadly, a single vote made the difference. Even sadder, that vote came from John McCain.
Which really brings us to the true problem with Trump that keeps me from being a strong supporter. He isn't very presidential, and has a hard time getting buy-in for the things he advocates.
And that is truly sad, because de-regulation has made a difference for the economy. The tax cuts were badly needed. And mostly importantly, he has done an excellent job (for the most part) in choosing judges to fill vacancies in federal courts.
Yeah, I know, it's never the right time for you because you support it.
Personally, I love it when Trump does stuff like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrO53qzM…
The thing that stood out the most was when he was demonstrating why he earned the nickname "The Great Communicator". Reagan wasn't blessed with control of the House and Senate. But it didn't matter. He had the ability to apply pressure on members of the House and Senate by speaking directly to the people.
Though I like the policies that President Trump has been able to enact, I also recognize that he could have accomplished so much more.
You mentioned Obama - well, aside from his first 2 years in office when he had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate and strong control of the House, he wasn't able to accomplish a single thing without the use of "his phone and his pen".
The Constitution of the United States is a very unique constitution. Unlike the rest of the world, our Constitution gives very specific, and very limited powers to the Federal government. Any power that is not specifically enumerated, is supposed to be off limits.
We really need to start respecting the 9th and 10th amendments.
So what is my ideal healthcare system? It can be summed up in 5 words. "Leave me the fuck alone."
Margret Thatcher put it best - the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money to spend.
SMH
Pre-ACA, people would get sick and go bankrupt.
I opposed the ACA tooth and nail when it came out. Obama was not an effective legislator. With 60 senators and a commanding majority in the senate, it should have breezed through. It was a poorly crafted law, as evidenced by Trump's ability to rip the guts out of it.
But I would work to fix rather than get rid of it now. People have a way of adapting to the systems in place and hasty change introduces problems.
Medicare for All is insanity. The Sanders and Warren plans amounted to massive pay cuts for already overworked HCPs. You'd see a mass exodus from an already strained field. Single payer sounds great until you look at the costs, hence why it tanked on the ballot in three bluish to deep blue states.
And don't talk about Canada, Europe, etc. Temperamentally, we aren't them. Same reason we like our guns, it's bred into our national mythology.
Incremental changes to the ACA is the best choice. Upper-middle-class people who did not qualify for subsidies are getting screwed, and that needs to change. Yes, pushing HCPs (especially MDs) into the middle-class is not a good solution.
"It was a poorly crafted law, as evidenced by Trump's ability to rip the guts out of it."
-----
Repeal failed in the Senate. The individual mandate was killed and hidden in the tax legislation. A bunch of GOP governors launched an idiotic lawsuit to kill the ACA outright and it will be back in front of the Supreme Court after the election. There were many bugs in the ACA at first -- but if GOP wants to sabotage the law, I don't see how that's evidence of a poorly crafted law?
It was a poorly crafted law because it had so many moving parts. Is that the best Obama could get? Congressional opposition isn't a new thing. Lyndon Johnson was a master of working Congress. So were Reagan and Clinton. Obama was not, despite the most commanding majorities in my lifetime. That's playing the game on Easy Mode.
The law needed the individual mandate to be simultaneously a tax and not a tax to survive that lawsuit. It relied on the Medicaid expansion with GOP governors are still resisting tooth and nail. I'm no historian but I don't think the original Medicare or Medicaid ever suffered from that.
Nonetheless it's what we have. Trump will roll out his healthcare plan three days after Armageddon, so he's a non-factor. I'm a pragmatist and anti-revolutionary at heart.
Commercial insurance on the exchange is too expensive for most middle class households. If you bought individual or family insurance on your own pre-ACA, you have most likely dropped it due to premium increases (I have, as has my PCP - another solo practitioner).
Likewise, most providers no longer accept the least expensive HMOs, including many BCBS and UHC plans. So now you are paying hundreds of dollars per family member per month for insurance, but cannot find a physician who will accept it.
Medicare for all will be partially funded by payment cuts, meaning that many providers will limit or refuse medicare, as they do medicaid. Others will quit clinical practice altogether, and pursue academic, research, or adminiatrative appointments. There is already a national shortage of specialists, and months long waits for PCPs.
The fact is Obamacare was the first step on the road tor ruining healthcare in America. It has only made it less accessible, less affordable, and less attractive as a career.
When ACA went into effect it drove up the cost of my employer sponsored (non-ACA) plan so high that I had insurance I couldn't afford to use anymore. It's more like "catastrophic coverage," which is fine when you're in your 20's or 30's and in perfect health. Now at 53 this shit isn't working for me. Huge premium cost, huge deductible, co-pays, "co-insurance" cost, crazy high out-of-pocket maximum.
Here's the ACA in a nutshell: It's irrelevant to the wealthy because they can afford the costs or can even self-insure. Congress has exempted themselves from it, and they still have their Cadillac plans for free. The poor have Medicaid or ACA plans for as little as $1.00 per month and with artificially low deductibles and cost sharing forced on the insurance companies. As with everything the Democrats celebrate as some wonderful patriotic accomplishment, it's the middle-class getting fucked.
Just ask Willie Brown about her pragmatic bending.
That’s because 99% of politicians and bureaucrats are corrupt as fuck. Republicans and Democrats. Trump is an existential threat to their corrupt livelihood.
“In the latest Rasmussen Reports survey, one of the first since Biden chose Harris, a third of likely voters who were black said they are “less likely” to vote for the Democratic ticket, a third said they were “more likely” to back it, and about a third said it will either have no impact on their choice or weren’t sure.“
This year, less than three months out, I have yet to see one piece of Biden promotional stuff. Not even a single bumper sticker or lawn sign. Zero. If that lack of enthusiasm is happening in swing states, old Sleepy Joe is already finished.
https://www.westernjournal.com/obama-rep…
"Trump draws support from 53% of those with a high school diploma or less, including 38% who say they strongly support him for reelection. In contrast, 68% of voters with a postgraduate degree say they support Biden for president, including 38% who say they strongly support him."
The pertinent emergency is do your yoga pants make you look fat vs your skirt and pantyhose, dipshit!
How about the demographic FACT that Kamala Harris is even less of an African American than Liz Warren is American Indian, and can trace her direct lineage to the largest slave owner in Jamaica?
Trump is not only running against Biden and the Dems, he's also running against 90% of the media and a good chunk of the establishment (social media corps, giant corps like Amazon, etc) - and unfortunately, Trump is also running against Trump - I agree w/ a good # of his policy-positions but he can often not get out of his own way with the way he states/goes-about things.
The biggest Trump opponent seems to be Trump, i.e. the hatred many have for him - the few polls I've seen w.r.t. Biden, the #1 reason listed in the polls as to why people are voting for Biden is not b/c of anything special about Biden himself, but the #1 reason is that he's not Trump - if a potted-plant was running against Trump it'd likely get close to 50% of the vote.
"Pro Trump Florida boat parade":
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=flo…
@RandomMember - if you aren't ignoring me, I think that it's time for you to go. I hear your mother calling you - it's time for breast feeding.
I think that a lot of ills in our medical system are related to the overabundance of lawyers in this country. Their impact on medicine/healthcare is driving up the costs.
Frivolous lawsuits create the need for doctors to get incredibly expensive malpractice insurance policies.
I don't know how accurate the numbers in this article are ( https://www.leveragerx.com/blog/medical-… ), but ob/gyns having to pay $214,999 a year in New York is shocking. Those costs get passed on to the consumers.
In addition to the high cost of malpractice insurance, fear of lawsuits has led to excessive use of unnecessary procedures - further driving up the cost of medical care.
Putting medicine and healthcare in the hands of bureaucrats - most of whom come from the legal field - is not the way to control costs. They do look out for their own kind.
Beyond tort reform, introducing more competition in the insurance market is a good idea. Under Obamacare, a lot of areas in the country only have a single provider available. That is not a good way to control costs.
Allow insurance companies to sell insurance across state borders easily. People in rural areas will benefit by being included in larger risk pools. Insurance companies will benefit by being able to spread the same administrative overhead (largely) across a larger pool of customers, plus they will have more diversity in their risk pools.
Like most things in life, healthcare is NOT improved by adding more government.
The problem is, "defensive medicine" isn't a line item one can just strike. No one knows what procedure or drug will prevent a lawsuit, so they cover all of them. Agree that tort reform is a good thing, but where it's been tried, it's had a limited impact.
Allowing insurers to sell across state lines would be a good thing. I've heard liberal economists say it's a race to the bottom, i.e. least regulated states, but that's a positive. That said, it'll take a long time to build provider networks across states. Years, rather than months.
One could take the extreme of "larger risk pool" and say nothing would be larger than everyone. While literally true, single payer gets voted down once people see the costs.
Of course lawyers and bureaucrats make the drug discovery process and medical equipment development and certification process more expensive too. And those expenses are passed on to consumers.
Hopefully some of the lessons learned from a Operation Warpspeed can be applied outside of the pandemic. But there is only one party that is in favor of deregulation.
Price transparency is yet another issue. People need to be informed of the costs and incentivized through lower insurance costs to be smart consumers.
In higher education, something like one third of tuition goes toward administrators and their staff who add nothing to the education experience. Another third pays professors who do very little teaching but are vaguely doing research that benefits no one. Then, there’s the massive physical infrastructure which helps sell the university experience to high school seniors but has little to do with education.
The only thing that has permitted the cost of college to exceed inflation for 40 years is the plethora of government loans that allow paying the price of an education to be deferred.
Now, it’s unthinkable to go without insurance. People commonly assume that uninsured people are completely shut off from medical care. This is actually a recent concept.
"Iowa Professor’s Syllabus: You’ll Be Dismissed If You Oppose Pro-Choice Or Black Lives Matter Positions"
https://www.dailywire.com/news/iowa-prof…