|
Spiritus Nox posted:A huge part of the reason things are as hosed as they are is people insisting that you can only care about one thing at a time the media focus on russia is problematic in that there's a limited amount of front page space and a limited amount of tv news time but really the problem is mcconnell has smothered any stories the media could do on health care by blocking any information about the actual bill from leaking in solid enough form, so the only story that can be done is process stories that the media and the public just don't find that interesting
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 06:31 |
|
|
evilweasel posted:yes, because you will believe what you want to believe no matter what evilweasel, tell me more about how people who think that the GOP will succeed in repealing the ACA are brokebrained idiots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:evilweasel, tell me more about how people who think that the GOP will succeed in repealing the ACA are brokebrained idiots. tell me more about completely different subject than the one being discussed, man with soup for brains
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
Guys just quietly roll over on the healthcare poor people genocide bill, it's way more important to focus on more nebulous Russia poo poo that absolutely has more of an effect on everyday Americans than their soon to be gone healthcare.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:tell me more about completely different subject than the one being discussed, man with soup for brains Pardon me for thinking that your serial record of making dead wrong predictions is germane when you're making predictions, I guess?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Pardon me for thinking that your serial record of making dead wrong predictions is germane when you're making predictions, I guess? yeah ok idiot if you can actually support any of the dumb things you say by all means try but if all you have is brokebrains poo poo why the hell are you posting
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Nothus posted:Guys just quietly roll over on the healthcare poor people genocide bill, it's way more important to focus on more nebulous Russia poo poo that absolutely has more of an effect on everyday Americans than their soon to be gone healthcare. It isn't rolling over. There's nothing they can do about it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:It isn't rolling over. There's nothing they can do about it. Make a stink so that Republican voters who depend on it notice it is happening?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:Make a stink so that Republican voters who depend on it notice it is happening? They are. There's still nothing they can do in the senate to stop or delay it in any way whatsoever. Like that's how we change things for 2018 but there ain't a drat thing that can be done any earlier than that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/rossbaird/status/874454133700427777
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Nothus posted:Guys just quietly roll over on the healthcare poor people genocide bill, it's way more important to focus on more nebulous Russia poo poo that absolutely has more of an effect on everyday Americans than their soon to be gone healthcare. So, I put to you, what specific things do the Democrats have in their bag of tricks to stop the GOP healthcare bill?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:What, specifically, should Democrats do that they're not already doing? I'm seeing and hearing all of my elected officials speaking out, and a whole bunch of others, but that's obviously not enough to stop McConnell. this, apparently: https://twitter.com/alexwagner/status/874729182235959302 oh wait, trump just did that himself
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Please god let everything pass smoothly and then have Trump veto the bill.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
christ you guys gave me a heart attack when i saw 70 new posts but it was just a retarded slap fight.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:this, apparently: Could still be a Dem gambit! A President so easily manipulated isn't JUST a tool for the forces of evil.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Please god let everything pass smoothly and then have Trump veto the bill. The moment Trump vetoes a massive tax cut masquerading as a healthcare bill for being "too mean" is the moment you'll see some congressional Rs stroke their chins about this whole Russia thing. Pence will do as he's told. no, I don't actually believe this will happen
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
It's Politico, so take it with a grain of salt, but I just ran across this: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/13/senate-democrats-save-obamacare-239493 Edited to fix link. Azathoth fucked around with this message at 00:35 on Jun 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:It's Politico, so take it with a grain of salt, but I just ran across this: http://www.politico.com/stop/2017/06/13/senate-democrats-save-obamacare-239493 Uh, removed already?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Uh, removed already? Was this the article?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:christ you guys gave me a heart attack when i saw 70 new posts but it was just a retarded slap fight. When is it not?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
Tiax Rules All posted:When is it not? Sometimes its a slapfight over something that happened.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:it's not even this, this is not what's being discussed, what is being discussed is a tiny tactical issue Those things are much much much much less important than healthcare so maybe making headlines by delaying a pointless hearing with a guy who won't answer questions and a vote on sanctions that Republicans want anyway would be worth it to have the media talk about Republicans' secret kill the poor bill.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 00:22
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/FoxReports/status/874740147836911616
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
Yeah, that's the one, thanks for finding it. I'll edit my post.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
It'd be much more effective to have any Dem doing a TV or Radio hit pivot halfway through the point they were brought on to discuss. "Thank you, Don. I agree that the situation in Qatar is very unusual, and the President needs to tread carefully with the number of strategic.... pardon me. Speaking of unusual situations, can you believe that Republicans are hiding the bill that their own analysis projects will markedly increase premiums, cause uninsured rates to spike, reduce the coverage for those on employer plans, and kill loads of their constituents?" It seems like the ask is that Democrats engage in (technically) unprecedented obstruction in order to draw media attention to the horrific bill. Which is a fine strategy, except where it relies on the corporate and right wing media prioritizing the object awfulness of the bill rather than the Democratic obstruction. If y'all want to trust Lucy to hold the football this time, that's fine... but I've seen no indication that the Media has stopped fetishizing BothSides narratives.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:What, specifically, should Democrats do that they're not already doing? I'm seeing and hearing all of my elected officials speaking out, and a whole bunch of others, but that's obviously not enough to stop McConnell. Make a spectacle of it. That followup Politico story is what I'm talking about. I know it's a lost cause, but the theater of this matters for 2018- you want to be portrayed as going down fighting rather than just meekly surrendering because people are going to loving hate this bill. You want to make sure every GOP shitbag owns their vote for this horror show.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 00:46
|
|
|
Nothus posted:Make a spectacle of it. That followup Politico story is what I'm talking about. I know it's a lost cause, but the theater of this matters for 2018- you want to be portrayed as going down fighting rather than just meekly surrendering because people are going to loving hate this bill. You want to make sure every GOP shitbag owns their vote for this horror show. I'd say they're doing exactly that, if my email, RSS reader, radio, and TV are any indication, and I am in a light red swing district (MN-1) which has no incumbent in 2018 because our Democrat rep is running for governor, so we're gonna be a battleground once 2018 campaigning heats up. I see them making as much noise as possible, but I think anyone who thinks that they're surrendering on this needs to take a deep, bullshit-cleansing breath and come to grips with just how little power Democrats have right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:The senate democrats could all just stay home and not show up and the same bills are going to pass regardless. It'd be more honest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
It would be a bad move, not only because it would give Republicans a seemingly-legit gripe about Democrats not participating when they totes want to bring them into the process, but also because it would prevent them from doing all the minor procedural fuckery they have been doing to slow poo poo down like requiring full votes on stuff that used to be done by unanimous consent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
The good news is Trump has been trying to torpedo the bill today so who knows what the gently caress will happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 01:57
|
|
|
Can someone explain to me why the original ACA senate vote didn't follow the 51 senators reconciliation rules at the outset in order to sidestep bad Democrats back in 2009/2010? We would have gotten a more robust law that would have been a hell of a lot harder politically to dismantle. I realize reconciliation was used when Scott Brown won, but I've never understood the blame Lieberman gets when the GOP is using reconciliation votes right out of the gate. What was it about the original ACA that required 60 votes?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
MooselanderII posted:Can someone explain to me why the original ACA senate vote didn't follow the 51 senators reconciliation rules at the outset in order to sidestep bad Democrats back in 2009/2010? We would have gotten a more robust law that would have been a hell of a lot harder politically to dismantle. I realize reconciliation was used when Scott Brown won, but I've never understood the blame Lieberman gets when the GOP is using reconciliation votes right out of the gate. What was it about the original ACA that required 60 votes? They wanted it to seem bi-partisan and was during the magical time where Obama and the Dems thought they could reach across the aisle to prevent any trouble down the line.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:It'd be much more effective to have any Dem doing a TV or Radio hit pivot halfway through the point they were brought on to discuss. I would love to see Dems universally start doing this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
MooselanderII posted:Can someone explain to me why the original ACA senate vote didn't follow the 51 senators reconciliation rules at the outset in order to sidestep bad Democrats back in 2009/2010? We would have gotten a more robust law that would have been a hell of a lot harder politically to dismantle. I realize reconciliation was used when Scott Brown won, but I've never understood the blame Lieberman gets when the GOP is using reconciliation votes right out of the gate. What was it about the original ACA that required 60 votes? They did use reconciliation for part of it though. Go to the house section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act#Healthcare_debate.2C_2008.E2.80.9310 quote:House hobbesmaster fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Jun 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
MooselanderII posted:Can someone explain to me why the original ACA senate vote didn't follow the 51 senators reconciliation rules at the outset in order to sidestep bad Democrats back in 2009/2010? We would have gotten a more robust law that would have been a hell of a lot harder politically to dismantle. I realize reconciliation was used when Scott Brown won, but I've never understood the blame Lieberman gets when the GOP is using reconciliation votes right out of the gate. What was it about the original ACA that required 60 votes? The regulations on the insurance market and on private employers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 03:03
|
|
|
Zil posted:They wanted it to seem bi-partisan and was during the magical time where Obama and the Dems thought they could reach across the aisle to prevent any trouble down the line. I mean it became apparent by the vote that GOP support was a long dead pipe dream, while core components were being held up by a handful of Democrats and had to be scrapped. Did no one seriously think of doing that until Scott Brown won?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
MooselanderII posted:Can someone explain to me why the original ACA senate vote didn't follow the 51 senators reconciliation rules at the outset in order to sidestep bad Democrats back in 2009/2010? We would have gotten a more robust law that would have been a hell of a lot harder politically to dismantle. I realize reconciliation was used when Scott Brown won, but I've never understood the blame Lieberman gets when the GOP is using reconciliation votes right out of the gate. What was it about the original ACA that required 60 votes? Ted Kennedy was still alive when they started. And nobody expected Massachusets to elect a Republican senator.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:They did use reconciliation for part of it though. Gotcha. So how on earth is reconciliation appropriate for the AHCA? Is it just because it solely tinkers with funding mechanisms?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 03:08
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Ted Kennedy was still alive when they started. And nobody expected Massachusets to elect a Republican senator. From the above wiki article, 60 votes were required to create substantive laws governing the insurance industry in the first place, so I guess all of those votes really were necessary to get the ball rolling. I do wonder if a public option and expanded medicare coverage could have fallen within the scope of appropriate reconciliation, as the AHCA shows that reconciliation can potentially be used in somewhat broad and creative ways.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 06:31 |
|
|
Zil posted:They wanted it to seem bi-partisan and was during the magical time where Obama and the Dems thought they could reach across the aisle to prevent any trouble down the line.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 03:30
|
|
