|
mcmagic posted:That is a catchy line but I think she let him stand up there and look too much like a "normal" republican for most of the debate. Wasn't your big gimmick earlier being mad that she wouldn't say all republicans are like Trump?
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
Hollismason posted:Regulations for what that doesn't make sense to me. regulations being the standards of insurance coverage: what you can charge, what must be covered, maximum deductibles, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:That is a catchy line but I think she let him stand up there and look too much like a "normal" republican for most of the debate. This probably wasn't what she was going for, but if Donald Trump can be painted as a "normal" Republican, that would be disastrous to the GOP long-term.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:That is a catchy line but I think she let him stand up there and look too much like a "normal" republican for most of the debate. Trump looked like anything but a normal Republican. "I will lock my opponent up." "Russia and Syria are the best." "Bill Clinton is a rapist." "Bragging about sexual assault is totally normal."
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Why is it bad if Insurance comopanies are restricted to one state? I still don't understand that whole process wouldn't it be better to have national insurance? It would be better to have a single national set of regulations for insurance. Right now it is a complete cluster gently caress and insurers maintain separate computer systems for each state they do business in. Selling across state lines is bullshit though since all insurers would base out of the state with the most "gently caress consumers" laws. A single national standard with strong consumer protection is good. Letting insurers run to the least regulated state is bad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It's not better or worse inherently. The problem is that if you allow purchase across state lines, then whatever the federal minimum rules and coverage are effectively become the minimum for everyone. Because at least one state is going to allow lovely policies or try to create favorable pricing schemes to attract insurers. Then every insurer moves to that state, like Credit Card companies and banks did with Delaware. That was my take on it just have strong federal minimums and let insurance companies compete at the national level.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
How do Mormons reconcile their support with Trump with their moral beliefs? Are their any articles or editorials about this? His words and behavior are just so opposite from the way devout Mormons try to live their lives, it's insane that Utah is still dark red this election.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:The next debate is going to be Trump and the moderator tag-teaming Hillary and doing whatever they can to bury her before her 90 minutes are up. It's Trump's friendliest environment yet and I'm sure Conway et al will be doping him to the gills and coaching him as much as they're able to keep him from loving it up. Here's hoping that Trump's next 10 days backfire that he refuses to do the third one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Regulations for what that doesn't make sense to me. *sucks air through teeth* Health insurance is regulated. There are things they can and cannot do. There are things states can individually mandate that they do or not do. (e.g., California could say that they have to cover cervical cancer screening or something. while Montana may not.) By "opening it across state lines" you will instead have every healthcare plan based in whatever state allows insurance companies to have the least amount of regulations that cause them to cover more treatments at higher rates -- where as now every health insurance plan is based in each state and is subject to each state's laws.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Diva Cupcake posted:We are all Ken Bone. Which one of you jokers is Ken Bone 'Fess up
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:That was my take on it just have strong federal minimums and let insurance companies compete at the national level. That's not what he's proposing AND there'd deffo be an interstate commerce clause challenge to it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:That was my take on it just have strong federal minimums and let insurance companies compete at the national level. https://youtu.be/1zNdw4DaUM8
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
Teriyaki Hairpiece posted:How do Mormons reconcile their support with Trump with their moral beliefs? Are their any articles or editorials about this? His words and behavior are just so opposite from the way devout Mormons try to live their lives, it's insane that Utah is still dark red this election. You say this as though their top leaders haven't been the first/only people to withdraw their endorsements of Trump.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
Teriyaki Hairpiece posted:How do Mormons reconcile their support with Trump with their moral beliefs? Are their any articles or editorials about this? His words and behavior are just so opposite from the way devout Mormons try to live their lives, it's insane that Utah is still dark red this election.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
Teriyaki Hairpiece posted:How do Mormons reconcile their support with Trump with their moral beliefs? Are their any articles or editorials about this? His words and behavior are just so opposite from the way devout Mormons try to live their lives, it's insane that Utah is still dark red this election. Mormons don't really support Trump. In fact there is a non-zero chance he loses Utah to McMullin, Johnson, or even Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:*sucks air through teeth*
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Which one of you jokers is Ken Bone I am
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:Donald Trump wants to take health care out of the hands of the states and put it under federal control. lol no he doesn't
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:That's not what he's proposing AND there'd deffo be an interstate commerce clause challenge to it. Not really. Interstate commerce is basically unlimited at this point, to the point where intrastate commerce is in fact interstate commerce. Which is actually a good thing because (Southern) state governments have proven themselves literally incapable of self-governance so the more power the federal government has the better. lozzle fucked around with this message at 14:57 on Oct 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
So, Ivanka "liked" this tweet: https://twitter.com/HuffPostPol/status/785103294620467204
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:55
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:lol no he doesn't
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:55
|
|
|
McMuffin isn't winning poo poo but Johnson could steal some cheeky EVs if Utah devolves into a four-way mess. Utah was the reddest state last election for obvious reasons and it's going to at least be close this time. Hollismason posted:That was my take on it just have strong federal minimums and let insurance companies compete at the national level. Let's take the House back and let's do it!
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Which one of you jokers is Ken Bone We are all Ken Bone. #GetBoned2020
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Oh, no, I misread that. It would be like a Texas textbooks situation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Regulations for what that doesn't make sense to me. Imagine you break down the state line stuff, and right now all 50 states require that insurance companies cover pre-existing conditions. Montana decides they'd like more insurance companies in the state, so they undo that provision. Any insurer operating out of Montana can now write insurance policies that don't cover pre-existing conditions. Because consumers are allowed to buy insurance across state lines, someone in Texas who buys insurance from a Montana-based insurer now has lost their pre-existing coverage. Not only that, but from what we've seen from previous race to the bottom scenarios, what you would likely have happen is that the health insurance companies would all migrate to Montana. In this way, you've got 49 states that still require pre-existing condition coverage, but it doesn't matter because all nationwide health insurance plans are based in the one state where they don't have to offer that, and thus no one will have pre-existing condition coverage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Why not have national standards?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
lozzle posted:Not really. Interstate commerce is basically unlimited at this point, to the point where intrastate commerce is in fact interstate commerce. Oh, I am not saying it's a challenge that should work but if Trump won and put another republican on the bench -- it would. Granted there wouldn't be the sort of federal min. you're talking about under that scenario anyway. Basically Trump's healthcare proposal is just the same poo poo Republicans have been selling for a long time. They don't want a federal healthcare structure, they want to give health insurance companies even more freedom to do dumb poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Actually that would be a fun game - name a celebrity who'd make a better POTUS candidate than the one the GOP nominated. Charles Barkley. He's actually a Republican, his views aren't 100% horrific, and we'd get a bounty of Shut Up and Jam Gaiden jokes out of the campaign.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:So, Ivanka "liked" this tweet: Hoo boy
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
greatn posted:Why not have national standards? We currently do with ACA!
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The short version is: and is there any indication that he feels the same way about Russian intervention in Syria or Ukraine?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
Lamb Chowder posted:and is there any indication that he feels the same way about Russian intervention in Syria or Ukraine? Hahahahahaha no. Russia can do no wrong in the eyes of Julian Assange.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:01
|
|
|
Technogeek posted:Charles Barkley. He's actually a Republican, his views aren't 100% horrific, and we'd get a bounty of Shut Up and Jam Gaiden jokes out of the campaign. He's not. He joked a long long time ago that he would have to be a Republican because he's rich, but in recent years has confirmed he is not a fan of Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:01
|
|
|
Lamb Chowder posted:and is there any indication that he feels the same way about Russian intervention in Syria or Ukraine?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:01
|
|
|
greatn posted:Why not have national standards? Congress: "That sounds suspiciously like not repealing Obamacare."
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:01
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:The next debate is going to be Trump and the moderator tag-teaming Hillary and doing whatever they can to bury her before her 90 minutes are up. It's Trump's friendliest environment yet and I'm sure Conway et al will be doping him to the gills and coaching him as much as they're able to keep him from loving it up. I think Wallace is going to be good. He's not Sean Hannity and he wants to look like a "real"journalist. He will definitely talk about the emails but he'll be hard on Trump too. computer parts posted:Wasn't your big gimmick earlier being mad that she wouldn't say all republicans are like Trump? Yeah but she didn't try to tie their policies to him and visa versa all that much mcmagic fucked around with this message at 15:06 on Oct 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
Antti posted:Congress: "That sounds suspiciously like full-blown communism."
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Yeah but she didn't try to tie him policies to him and visa versa all that much She did, repeatedly. In fact, she responded to almost every question about policy by stating what his actually is and then contrasted it to hers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I think Wallace is going to be good. He's not Sean Hannity and he wants to look like a "real"journalist. He will definitely talk about the emails but he'll be hard on Trump too. Counterpoint: Chris Wallace works for Fox News and is not named Shepard Smith. lozzle fucked around with this message at 15:10 on Oct 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
greatn posted:He's not. He joked a long long time ago that he would have to be a Republican because he's rich, but in recent years has confirmed he is not a fan of Republicans. He's also one of the most honest people we have today.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:05
|
|
