|
icantfindaname posted:Extremely difficult to implement, or extremely difficult to pass, because Dem lawmakers will refuse to do it? If you're a democratic rep and an insurance company in your district is going to lay off a whole bunch of people (because the company is no longer able to leech off the american public) thats still an issue you, as a politician, have to deal with. You're going to get thousand-to-one calls against the expansion of government overreach and socialism encroaching on are country and my tax dollars going to pay for lazy bums blah blah, and you need ways to deal with that or you're going to lose your seat. If (inshallah) a dem majority slams through medicare for all without really consistent and good messaging, a really solid implementation plan that can't be seized on as evidence of failure (eg healthcare.org), and ways to insulate voters from the economic fallout of nationalizing a huge industry - the next election could be a bloodbath, regardless of how much healthier everyone is. The potential difficulties of implementation make it difficult to sell to lawmakers, because nobody wants to be the deciding vote for a bad bill. See: the Tuesday group. But this is all just speculation . I think its a lot easier to talk up big bills when you're in absolutely no danger of passing them - I also think its easy to egg each other on to be the one supporting the biggest, most hardcore bill, which can come back to bite hard when you get into power (cf - "repeal obamacare day one") I say this as someone who personally benefits from a civilized health care system and absolutely wishes americans had one too. e: yeah what ew said. incrementalism, IMO, is the way to go on this. Boil the frog in healthcare.
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 23:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 05:39 |
|
|
Gotta admit, both Tricare and USAA are pretty awesome. Tricare is basically the only reason I'm still in the reserves. Though I imagine Tricare is only awesome because the people on it tend to be less than 45 years old and not chronically ill. Tricare retirement plans tend to be more expensive and the VA picks up the worst of the vets. Boon fucked around with this message at 23:16 on Mar 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 23:14
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:My fingers are crossed that the Supreme Court rules in favor of that partisan gerrymandering case coming up, that would be yuuuuuuuge. Have you been following that at all? Well, issue is that has no effect on the Senate which is naturally gerrymandered. What's so bad about 2018 is that there's a ton of Democratic seats up for election and virtually no Republican seats outside states where it's not necessarily even worth running a democratic candidate. I'm not joking when I say Ted Cruz is the third most vulnerable Republican senator in that election - there's Heller in Nevada (the only likely vulnerable seat), then Flake in Arizona (not likely to be vulnerable, but this would be the next one to fall most likely), and then Cruz. It's a nightmare of a map but it's not gerrymandered, it just happens to be that 2012 and 2006 were really good for Dems. But yes, I don't want to get my hopes up too much but Kennedy has always hated partisan gerrymandering but simply had no good rule he could lay out for lower courts to avoid a barrage of "i knows it when i sees it" cases. What's really interesting about that case is that it offers precisely that sort of rule that could let Kennedy finally join an opinion banning it. evilweasel fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Mar 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:If Bernie or another Democrat that campaigns heavily around Medicare for everyone, they get elected, what could they do about getting the votes necessary to get that bill passed? If Bernie was president now, and lets say the bill gets passed in a Democratic majority House but the Senate is composed the way it is today, there's no way that bill would be passed. Here's why the talking-points piss me off so much: There is a difference between long-term goals and today's sausage-making. You can advocate for UHC, lambaste opposition, make agitation for UHC mainstream Democratic political culture, etc. all while fighting to lower Medicare age, increase funding, create 55+ optional buy-ins, let Medicare negotiate drug prices, etc. tl;dr: Ratchet out progress however you can while applying constant pressure to the long-term goal. Accretionist fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Mar 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Well, issue is that has no effect on the Senate which is naturally gerrymandered. What's so bad about 2018 is that there's a ton of Democratic seats up for election and virtually no Republican seats outside states where it's not necessarily even worth running a democratic candidate. I'm not joking when I say Ted Cruz is the third most vulnerable Republican senator in that election - there's Heller in Nevada (the only likely vulnerable seat), then Flake in Arizona (not likely to be vulnerable, but this would be the next one to fall most likely), and then Cruz. It's a nightmare of a map but it's not gerrymandered, it just happens to be that 2012 and 2006 were really good for Dems. There's a pretty easy rule for this, the minimum cumulative border length rule. The state's map needs to be the lowest possible length of each district's borders added together while also including an equal number of people in each district. Any map that includes a 10 foot by 15 mile length so they can include every available Republican across a huge length throws that map hugely off and gets it disqualified. Pure simple mathematical efficiency without a capacity to politicize it. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 23:46 on Mar 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
Boon posted:Gotta admit, both Tricare and USAA are pretty awesome. Tricare is basically the only reason I'm still in the reserves. Neighbor is retired with Tricare, the benefit/price ratio is insanely good. Plus he gets the overseas family add-on for $500.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:There's a pretty easy rule for this, the minimum cumulative border length rule. The state's map needs to be the lowest possible length of each district's borders added together while also including an equal number of people in each district. Any map that includes a 10 foot by 15 mile length so they can include every available Republican across a huge length throws that map hugely off and gets it disqualified. Pure simple mathematical efficiency without a capacity to politicize it. That's a legislative solution, not a judicial solution. Courts can't just up and declare districts must be drawn according to a specific mathematical formula. They have the power to say that doing certain things in drawing districts is unconstitutional - discriminating by race or (as the partisan gerrymandering cases have argued) discriminating to suppress political speech. What Kennedy needed was a rule that can be easily applied that says "these districts have been unconstitutionally gerrymandered", and what the Wisconsin case offers is a formula for measuring how gerrymandered is too gerrymandered. The minimum cumulative border length rule you propose and other mathematical things that take the human element out suffer from obvious flaws - most importantly, the distribution of partisan voters is not random, cities are very heavily democratic - so many formulas can create a natural gerrymander, or you can pick between different neutral formulas specifically to pick the one with the maximum natural gerrymander. It does not follow that because the human element is removed, then the map is a fair map (either in the sense that it produces the maximum number of competitive elections, or leads to representation that matches the political leanings of the state). A much better rule is to eliminate FPTP single-winner districts and move to multi-member districts with some form of PR voting system, like STV or the like. That would require removing the ban on multi-member districts in federal law though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 00:01
|
|
|
lmao https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/03/former-obama-aide-who-helped-kill-single-payer-in.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 00:22
|
|
|
tekz posted:lmao Yeah I hope that guy dies too. Hopefully it's a long, torturous death so that his buddy realizes he was wrong and slits his wrists.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 12:30
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Yeah I hope that guy dies too. Hopefully it's a long, torturous death so that his buddy realizes he was wrong and slits his wrists. I, uh, sincerely hope that this is not an earnest response (to a lovely low effort drive by post, no less).
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 12:34
|
|
|
Quorum posted:I, uh, sincerely hope that this is not an earnest response (to a lovely low effort drive by post, no less). Oh you better believe I am in favor of gloating over death and suffering to the fullest possible extent. After all, Emma Goldman was well-known for visiting victims of gas attacks in the hospital to sneer at them for refusing to be conscientious objectors, Abbie Hoffman wrote over a million words about how Vietnam veterans deserved all the health effects linked to Agent Orange exposure, it's more or less a consistently leftist position to exult in bloodshed. Frankly, if you don't believe people should die in agony for being born in an imperialist country, you're the lowest kind of reactionary.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 12:40
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Oh you better believe I am in favor of gloating over death and suffering to the fullest possible extent. After all, Emma Goldman was well-known for visiting victims of gas attacks in the hospital to sneer at them for refusing to be conscientious objectors, Abbie Hoffman wrote over a million words about how Vietnam veterans deserved all the health effects linked to Agent Orange exposure, it's more or less a consistently leftist position to exult in bloodshed. Frankly, if you don't believe people should die in agony for being born in an imperialist country, you're the lowest kind of reactionary. Nah that just makes you the lowest kind of scum. Nobody gets to decide what country they are born into. Leftists should be about reducing suffering not reveling in it. Strangely your logic kinda fits into the GOP's healthcare plan of taking millions off insurance and dying, but hey they were born in imperalist America so they should die in agony. Good grief man. I'm all for using the guillotine judiciously but what you posted is nuts. Confounding Factor fucked around with this message at 12:58 on Mar 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 12:56
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Yeah I hope that guy dies too. Hopefully it's a long, torturous death so that his buddy realizes he was wrong and slits his wrists.  Jesus christ dudeConfounding Factor posted:Nah that just makes you the lowest kind of scum. Nobody gets to decide what country they are born into. Leftists should be about reducing suffering not reveling in it. Effectronica is mentally ill.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 14:08
|
|
|
tekz posted:
Wow, looks like someone was only exulting in death and suffering ironically.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Wow, looks like someone was only exulting in death and suffering ironically. Twain said it better quote:“I come from the Throne — bearing a message from Almighty God!” The words smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived it he gave no attention. “He has heard the prayer of His servant your shepherd, and will grant it if such be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained to you its import — that is to say, its full import. For it is like unto many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than he who utters it is aware of — except he pause and think. “God’s servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two — one uttered, and the other not. Both have reached the ear of Him who heareth all supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder this — keep it in mind. If you would beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon your neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain on your crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly praying for a curse on some neighbor’s crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Oh you better believe I am in favor of gloating over death and suffering to the fullest possible extent. After all, Emma Goldman was well-known for visiting victims of gas attacks in the hospital to sneer at them for refusing to be conscientious objectors, Abbie Hoffman wrote over a million words about how Vietnam veterans deserved all the health effects linked to Agent Orange exposure, it's more or less a consistently leftist position to exult in bloodshed. Frankly, if you don't believe people should die in agony for being born in an imperialist country, you're the lowest kind of reactionary. "you'd like Kafka, one of my predecessors"
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
lolquote:WASHINGTON — House Republican leaders and the White House, under extreme pressure from conservative activists, have restarted negotiations on legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act, with House leaders declaring that Democrats were celebrating the law’s survival prematurely. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/28/us/politics/health-care-obamacare-freedom-caucus.html?_r=0 they're determined to drag this closer to the election
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
quote:It is not clear what political dynamics might have changed since Friday "Nancy Pelosi laughed at us.  "
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:lol The GOP constantly trying to repeal the ACA and failing as a majority is probably the best path towards UHC this stupid country has
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
skull mask mcgee posted:The GOP constantly trying to repeal the ACA and failing as a majority is probably the best path towards UHC this stupid country has It's good b/c if they give the HFC what they want the moderates will torpedo it, and vice versa. How they can reconcile this, I have no idea
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:lol The only way that doesn't blow up in their face is if they can sabotage the existing system so that it is actually "failing" like Trump says.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Nothus posted:The only way that doesn't blow up in their face is if they can sabotage the existing system so that it is actually "failing" like Trump says. It would still blow up in their face because things will have gotten dramatically worse on their watch, and whatever the GOP pulls out of their rear end wouldn't fix it at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:lol And if they don't keep the hope of repealing Obamacare alive they can't very well fundraise off of it, can they?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:And if they don't keep the hope of repealing Obamacare alive they can't very well fundraise off of it, can they? I can hear it now when they still blame democrats despite having all of the power.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:And if they don't keep the hope of repealing Obamacare alive they can't very well fundraise off of it, can they? They can switch to banning abortion. Then sweat as RBG dies and they have enough justices to do so but would have to raise taxes to pay for all the new orphanages and foster homes required.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:They can switch to banning abortion. Then sweat as RBG dies and they have enough justices to do so but would have to raise taxes to pay for all the new orphanages and foster homes required. Tough poo poo once their born they got bootstraps
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Sloober posted:It's good b/c if they give the HFC what they want the moderates will torpedo it, and vice versa. How they can reconcile this, I have no idea My feeling is they're not. They know they're not. But the HFC and their crazy donors are raging at the idea of giving up, so they're like fine, we're not giving up. But they won't actually do anything about it. The issue is that just keeps expectations high and will mean the base is freshly outraged in 2018 when it still hasn't happened.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:They can switch to banning abortion. Then sweat as RBG dies and they have enough justices to do so but would have to raise taxes to pay for all the new orphanages and foster homes required. I've thought for years that the GOP would never actually repeal Roe because then they couldn't fundraise off it anymore I'm thrilled, just thrilled that I get to see now if that is true or not
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:I've thought for years that the GOP would never actually repeal Roe because then they couldn't fundraise off it anymore I'm thrilled, just thrilled that I get to see now if that is true or not GOP has had a bogeyman to raise or make people fear about for the entirety of this last decade, they're not giving up their cash cows. What are they going to run off of if abortion is banned and the PPACA is gone? Literally i have no idea what they could use? At some point when we hit 0% taxes they won't be able to use that either. Where would they go? Maybe go full religious war with anyone non-denominational or w/e
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:I've thought for years that the GOP would never actually repeal Roe because then they couldn't fundraise off it anymore I'm thrilled, just thrilled that I get to see now if that is true or not I'm guessing you are not a straight woman aged 18-45.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
Sloober posted:GOP has had a bogeyman to raise or make people fear about for the entirety of this last decade, they're not giving up their cash cows. What are they going to run off of if abortion is banned and the PPACA is gone? WW3 in the Middle East. Protecting your guns against the evil Democrats. They'll think of something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
yertle is trying desperately to make paul ryan stopquote:Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) shot down the idea that Republicans would be able to revive their Obamacare repeal effort, after a House replacement bill was pulled from the floor Friday. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/mcconnell-throws-cold-water-on-reviving-obamacare-repeal-effort evilweasel fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Mar 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:I'm guessing you are not a straight woman aged 18-45. No and I am not actually thrilled, either  There are plenty of partisan issues for the GOP to rally under and fundraise off of but abortion always felt like the big one to me. Although if Roe was overturned, it would probably just flip to "you must elect us so we can preserve the anti-Roe decision, Democrats want to go back to murdering babies!" and not much would change.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
Sloober posted:GOP has had a bogeyman to raise or make people fear about for the entirety of this last decade, they're not giving up their cash cows. What are they going to run off of if abortion is banned and the PPACA is gone? Transgender rights are the latest front in the culture war, far as I know.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:Transgender rights are the latest front in the culture war, far as I know. Oh so only a matter of time before they say you'll be force-transgendered by the LIEberals.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Yeah, conservatives will never run out of things to scream and be afraid about. That's a benefit of being completely insane.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Yeah, conservatives will never run out of things to scream and be afraid about. That's a benefit of being completely insane. Being reactionary means being terrified of change by default so really it can be anything different than "whitebread straight Protestant America"
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
And even then, they'll be terrified by those satanic Catholics, not like us good god fearing protestants.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
Sloober posted:GOP has had a bogeyman to raise or make people fear about for the entirety of this last decade, they're not giving up their cash cows. What are they going to run off of if abortion is banned and the PPACA is gone? Guns
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 05:39 |
|
|
Accretionist posted:Here's why the talking-points piss me off so much: There is a difference between long-term goals and today's sausage-making. This is an important point. There is value to pushing for policy even if it is unlikely that it will be passable during your administration. It basically increases the policy's perception as being "mainstream" and helps make it more palatable in the future (it's harder to call something "extreme/radical" if it was openly supported by the President). And, as you mentioned, there's nothing stopping you from still accepting beneficial compromises in the meanwhile (if anything, starting from a more radical position gives you more leeway to choose something relatively left-wing and still claim you made a big compromise).
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 22:45
|
|
