|
DC Murderverse posted:so did he take it home last night to sleep with it?  
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 09:47 |
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:She was just being polite. Santorum worked heavily on GCHJ (even before AHCA passed the House) and sees it as his little baby. He's been stumping hard for it behind the scenes. So that's what he's been up to since getting fired from Heritage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I think it's more important to make people realize that if they elect shitlords to their state government, guess what might happen, and use it as a cudgel to retake governorships and state legislatures. Oklahoma has been a little surprising in this regard. Of course it doesn't help that the special elections were all because of things like embezzlement and child prostitution - which tainted a third special election that led to a Democrat (a school teacher in a state that can't keep the schools open) winning a long held traditional state Republican seat, which was vacated because the guy left for the private sector rather than a controversy. That last Democrat in Oklahoma *LOST* the election in 2016 by 20 damned points. And all of this in a state that the Democratic Party more or less 100% ignores and gives virtually no funding to whatsoever. ---- In order for your idea to work (and I want it to work) the Democratic Party has to actually become a 50 state party again. Perez said he was supportive of that idea, but unsurprisingly he's not delivering on it as the Alabama Senate race is showing with negligible funding for the Democrat. I mean this should be a goddamned golden age of fundraising for the DNCC/DSCC - Trump's win and the constant nightmares the GOP put forth have people screaming "shut up and take my money" - but the Democratic Party STILL can't get loving message.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 04:24
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Bernie owned Graham and Cassidy hard on this at the debate. They were all "why these Democrats make it sound like your governor is just scheming to hike premiums on people with preexisting conditions, a governor would never do that, why here in South Carolina we take care of each other" and Bernie pointed out their states were happy to give sick people the finger before ACA. Yeah, if anyone has not watched the debate yet, go do it. It had Graham and Cassidy literally tell a survivor of opium addiction (her husband OD'd two years ago) that they were going to cut funding for the program (can't remember what its called) that got her sober. It also had great moments of Bernie completely pushing Cassidy's poo poo in. The whole thing just showed us (again) how republicans are completely devoid of empathy and new ideas; especially with Cassidy, that man has a permeant sneer on his face which reeks of, "I'm evil and full of poo poo."
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 06:10
|
|
|
viral spiral posted:Yeah, if anyone has not watched the debate yet, go do it. It had Graham and Cassidy literally tell a survivor of opium addiction (her husband OD'd two years ago) that they were going to cut funding for the program (can't remember what its called) that got her sober. It also had great moments of Bernie completely pushing Cassidy's poo poo in. don't forget cassidy and graham each getting horrible lies in about Charlie Gard and Planned Parenthood selling dead baby parts respectively, and both lies going unchallenged. The Charlie Gard thing is kinda hard to challenge in 30 second sound bites, but I was screaming at my TV when Bernie Sanders listened to Lindsey Graham talk about Planned Parenthood selling body parts and not saying a single loving thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 06:12
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:don't forget cassidy and graham each getting horrible lies in about Charlie Gard and Planned Parenthood selling dead baby parts respectively, and both lies going unchallenged. It's not that Sanders didn't care about those lies, but rather that he wanted to stay on message for the health care debate. They were baiting Sanders to wade into their swamp of made up bullshit where no facts or rules exist...and then beat him with experience. If experience has proven anything it's that exhaustively fact checking and proving poo poo is made up gets us absolutely nowhere. If it did then Trump wouldn't be President.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 06:58
|
|
|
viral spiral posted:Yeah, if anyone has not watched the debate yet, go do it. It had Graham and Cassidy literally tell a survivor of opium addiction (her husband OD'd two years ago) that they were going to cut funding for the program (can't remember what its called) that got her sober. It also had great moments of Bernie completely pushing Cassidy's poo poo in. That was loving incredible. "Oh I'm glad Medicaid saved your life but don't you care about the deficit, next time we need to let you die" and Bernie calling them out on supporting hundreds of billions in tax cuts for the top 0.2% quote:The whole thing just showed us (again) how republicans are completely devoid of empathy and new ideas; especially with Cassidy, that man has a permeant sneer on his face which reeks of, "I'm evil and full of poo poo." Yeah like I get Lindsey Graham's appeal because he has this aw shucks folksy charm so if you don't know anything you could think "well gosh ding he's just trying to help", but how the hell did Cassidy get elected. He looks like a cross between a beady-eyed weasel and a bloodthirsty vampire and sounds like a carpetbagging used car salesman trying to sell you on the rustproofing because "it has rustproof in the name so you know it works." I spent half the debate worrying he was going to lunge into the audience at that girl with leukemia and try to greedily suck money from her veins. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 07:42 on Sep 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 07:38
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/913003340451188737 what
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 12:35
|
|
|
That literally makes no sense at all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 13:08
|
|
|
Who even knows at this point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
Contradicting reality in a confident tone of voice has gotten him this far, so maybe he can conjure more votes into existence that way. Or maybe he means in 2018.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 14:40
|
|
|
One vote in the hospital? Huh?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/27/obamacare-repeal-graham-cassidy-243178quote:Graham told his Republican colleagues in the closed-door meeting Tuesday that Murkowski “likes the idea of sending the money to Alaska and getting the hell out of the way. But the process and the constant changes just made getting her vote impossible at this point,” according to a Republican senator in the room. I do not believe that Murkowski was ungettable, and people will need to remain vigilant about this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/27/obamacare-repeal-graham-cassidy-243178 Slashing medicaid to pay for tax cuts for the rich?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Could mean anything, but it appears that Murkowski is leaning hard on "bipartisan solutions" to health reform. If Murray can present her with an acceptable level of "state flexibility" without completely abdicating regulatory guardrails, we might be able to keep her from following Heller completely into the Death Cult. I'm still dubious about actual success, but a strong Democratic push with her wishes in mind could help keep her on hand as a possible asset. http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/352727-murkowski-obamacare-bill-needs-to-be-bipartisan
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/27/obamacare-repeal-graham-cassidy-243178 Lindsey Graham has been lying his rear end off more or less the entire time he's been working on this bill. As far off as two weeks ago he claimed to be "one or two votes shy" of 50, and then it turns out that he was still throwing bribes to Cruz, Lee, Murkowski, Collins, Portman, and Capito to try to get their support in the bill's final hours. Which isn't to say that Murkowski is absolutely ungettable, but so far not one single Obamacare repeal effort has managed to thread the needle between the Cruz/Lee/Paul and Collins/Murkowski wings of the party. In fact, other than skinny repeal, which almost passed based on a (lying) promise from McConnell that the bill was in no way final and represents a genuine aberration in both process and politics, no actual repeal effort has gotten more than 45 Yes votes. There may not exist a universe where murkowski and Cruz are both gettable at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
Old Kentucky Shark posted:Lindsey Graham has been lying his rear end off more or less the entire time he's been working on this bill. As far off as two weeks ago he claimed to be "one or two votes shy" of 50, and then it turns out that he was still throwing bribes to Cruz, Lee, Murkowski, Collins, Portman, and Capito to try to get their support in the bill's final hours. If Murkowski's statement after the bill's failure hadn't been so wishy-washy I would not be giving his statements any creedence, but they fit her unwillingness to say she was a no and to clearly come out against it. Her statement was very easy to read as a "i was not confident that i could calculate the bribes correctly and ensure there were enough given the garbage process and short amount of time, so next time make sure i'm bought off clearly and in advance"
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Her statement was very easy to read as a "i was not confident that i could calculate the bribes correctly and ensure there were enough given the garbage process and short amount of time, so next time make sure i'm bought off clearly and in advance"
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
I think it's less that she wants bribes -- I actually sincerely doubt whether the type of direct porkbarrel bribes that used to buy Senators even works anymore in the modern hyperpartisan political climate -- and more that she wants centrist political cover, which is why she has been pushing the "bipartisan" angle. But there does not exist a world where you can pass bipartisan healthcare reform using the current congressional makeup. There's a big difference between being in favor of a hypothetical bill, and a specific bill. If you read her actual statements, what she seems to be agreeing to is vague future support for healthcare reform involving "flexibility" and "more state control", and there's not a Republican alive who wouldn't voice the same vague general support. But the actual reality is that as long as there are 52 Republican senators, and three of those senators are Lee, Cruz, and Rand Paul, then there will always be a corollary of "and the bill has to be written on the flayed skin of minorities and the poor", and Murkowski hasn't been willing to get behind that train at all, and I'm not sure why she would start in 2018.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 22:28
|
|
|
The gently caress is Trump spewing now that he can do an executive order allowing insurance across state lines? That's an area that Congress controls not the executive branch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
The tax bill will already be a clusterfuck before even tossing healthcare in there. I am more worried what it will be like after the next election.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:The gently caress is Trump spewing now that he can do an executive order allowing insurance across state lines? That's an area that Congress controls not the executive branch. Donald Trump misunderstanding what the executive branch can do? This is unprecedented 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:The gently caress is Trump spewing now that he can do an executive order allowing insurance across state lines? That's an area that Congress controls not the executive branch. Donald Trump is not a smart man, you see
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:The gently caress is Trump spewing now that he can do an executive order allowing insurance across state lines? That's an area that Congress controls not the executive branch. Trump always supports the last person to talk to him about any subject, and the last person to talk to him about healthcare is Rand Paul, who has been pushing a really loving dumb libertarian "healthcare association" plan which would allow individuals to voluntarily form healthcare associations in large groups and across state lines. I have no idea what the specifics are of any planned executive actions, but the President's ability to legally do anything about interstate commerce is really loving limited. It's already legal to purchase or sell insurance across state lines in several states, but because of the way healthcare networks and state regulations work, nobody in their right mind ever does this. Old Kentucky Shark fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Sep 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/theintercept/status/913147003202359297 This whole thing being about taxes somehow doesn't detract from an open, explicit confession from sitting senators that they have no idea what they're doing and expected everyone else to do the work for them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2017 23:15
|
|
|
OK, so let's pretend Trump correctly said guy is recuperating at home. Are you telling me ACA repeal didn't happen because a GOP Senator has been sick and couldn't vote? This is true? Holy poo poo. Can't believe this was never brought up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
Mokelumne Trekka posted:OK, so let's pretend Trump correctly said guy is recuperating at home. Are you telling me ACA repeal didn't happen because a GOP Senator has been sick and couldn't vote? This is true?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Mokelumne Trekka posted:OK, so let's pretend Trump correctly said guy is recuperating at home. Are you telling me ACA repeal didn't happen because a GOP Senator has been sick and couldn't vote? This is true? Holy poo poo. Can't believe this was never brought up. The amount of pretending required would rupture a hole in reality and liberate us all from this farcical life.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 00:32
|
|
|
quote:“Well, I’ve been doing it for about a month. I thought everybody else knew what the hell they were talking about, but apparently not,” Graham clarified, adding he had assumed “these really smart people will figure it out.” I believe this is the most generous explanation of this entire procedure starting from day 1. "We don't know what we're doing, lets hope someone else does." The least generous would be, " We know what we're doing we just don't have enough votes to gently caress over people not in our donor class."
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
Hand Row posted:The tax bill will already be a clusterfuck before even tossing healthcare in there. I am more worried what it will be like after the next election. i am a dumbass so i kinda assumed that the tax bill would be the easier one to pass. i guess not? Office Pig posted:https://twitter.com/theintercept/status/913147003202359297 part of me is incredibly enraged but the other part finds it kinda funny.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i am a dumbass so i kinda assumed that the tax bill would be the easier one to pass. i guess not? Republicans didn't really give a gently caress about the minutiae of healthcare, so the majority were more than willing to go along with any drat thing they could call Obamcare repeal and it was only the party's outer wings that fought about it. Republican lawmakers individually give quite a huge gently caress about taxes, so it's more likely that SOMETHING they all find acceptable passes, but it's also more likely for any individual tax idea to get bogged down in the details.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
Mokelumne Trekka posted:OK, so let's pretend Trump correctly said guy is recuperating at home. Are you telling me ACA repeal didn't happen because a GOP Senator has been sick and couldn't vote? This is true? Holy poo poo. Can't believe this was never brought up. Here's a shortcut for life. If Trump says something it is not true.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
fwiw i have been very restrained about not taking victory laps about how i was right about paul 
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:fwiw i have been very restrained about not taking victory laps about how i was right about paul You really shouldn't be.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i am a dumbass so i kinda assumed that the tax bill would be the easier one to pass. i guess not? Last time it was done Reagan had way more favorable conditions and it was tough as hell. They are going to need way more than just removing some deductions to make this deficit neutral or reduction. They will probably end up passing a really minor bill and pretend it was yuge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
Scipiotik posted:Here's a shortcut for life. If Trump says something it is not true. It's a wonder I didn't vote for Trump because I had to read an article explaining to me why an extra Yes vote would not change the math, i.e. make 4 No's required not 3.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 01:43
|
|
|
Hand Row posted:They will probably end up passing a really minor bill and pretend it was yuge. They can just slash taxes for the rich and say gently caress the debt and as long as they sunset the cuts after 10 years it's perfectly fine for reconciliation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
A GIANT PARSNIP posted:They can just slash taxes for the rich and say gently caress the debt and as long as they sunset the cuts after 10 years it's perfectly fine for reconciliation. Exactly! I never understood the logic that Obamacare reform was required to fund the tax "reform" (cuts). It's not like the GOP is the party of long-term thinking these days. Why not just eliminate the top tax bracket for 10 years to make the donors happy and let the future reps figure out what to do when the cuts sunset.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
I thought not wanting the tax cuts TO sunset was why they wanted the repeal done first. Like the donors got mad that W's cuts sunset during Obama and werent renewed, they want it so that to get rid of them Congress would have to actively pass a bill which they would fight as it would be "raising taxes".
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 05:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 09:47 |
|
|
KildarX posted:I believe this is the most generous explanation of this entire procedure starting from day 1. I always get a little skeeved out when people describe others as smart. There's no such thing as a smart person. Every motherfucker on earth fucks up constantly and barely knows what they're doing and even then gain that barest knowledge right as or slightly before they do it. The best you can hope for is someone already knows what to do purely because they've already done it and it hasn't deviated too much from when they did it last time, or have failed enough before to eliminate all their stupid ideas. In every other instance people are only separated by their ability to appear competent, and unfortunately the people best able to appear competent are the people who don't realise they aren't. So when someone is described as "smart" I think "gently caress, they actually think they know what they're doing and so do the people around them". And that's a recipe for disaster. Everyone is a loving idiot who needs to have their ideas and work questioned and double checked. Everyone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 06:05
|
|
