2 2
turtlespeed

DNC Hopefuls

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

We see "Sometimes a Great Notion", they see "Never Give an Inch."

THIS is why ACA shouldn't have been shoved down our throats. Further debates should have been had, and been allowed to convinced people, not unlike it convinced me, that Medicare expansion is what was needed.

B U T . . . NOOOOOO - we had to have a fucking political statement.

How much did that political statement cost us?  

1) It was the start of some seriously fucked up politics.

2) It led to Trump.

Next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

THIS is why ACA shouldn't have been shoved down our throats. Further debates should have been had, and been allowed to convinced people, not unlike it convinced me, that Medicare expansion is what was needed.

B U T . . . NOOOOOO - we had to have a fucking political statement.

How much did that political statement cost us?  

1) It was the start of some seriously fucked up politics.

2) It led to Trump.

Next.

You are being foolish. The ACA was a clusterfuck owing to republican opposition to anything Obama. After it was passed they did everything possible to make it a failure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

You are being foolish. The ACA was a clusterfuck owing to republican opposition to anything Obama. After it was passed they did everything possible to make it a failure.

It was designed to fail.

It was, and always will be, the Ah-Ha moment of the Obama admin.

The issues were chuckled about.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, turtlespeed said:

It was designed to fail.

It was, and always will be, the Ah-Ha moment of the Obama admin.

The issues were chuckled about.

 

You just like to post. You don't need to think because someone will respond and then you can post again. If not for the internet I'd guess you'd be out tagging instead.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

You just like to post. You don't need to think because someone will respond and then you can post again. If not for the internet I'd guess you'd be out tagging instead.

I guess you weren't one of those that lost their plan, their doctor, and their money, huh?

I tell you what - you send me the percentage of income I lost and pay for anything over what I used to pay for a monumentally better plan than I have now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I guess you weren't one of those that lost their plan, their doctor, and their money, huh?

I tell you what - you send me the percentage of income I lost and pay for anything over what I used to pay for a monumentally better plan than I have now.  

Not my problem. Send your bill to the republican assholes that caused the ACA to crater for so many people. Wake up, man. Do you really believe that if Obama didn't have to deal with the Republicans anyones health care plan would have tanked?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Rick said:

so the infrastructure is already there, It just needs to be funded and expanded.  

I think a good way to expand it without instantly destroying private insurance would be to start with new births.  All born citizens get on it automatically, the remainder can join it according to traditional qualifications.  It won't be fair to those of us older than zero years old but it's good middle ground for starting and takes care of the most vulnerable. Eventually we'd all be on it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Send your bill to the republican assholes that caused the ACA to crater for so many people.

Sorry, there were 39 Democrat "Defectors" also. Many of whom represent some of the highest number of "poor folk" (poverty-level), so you may want to consider the "whys" of their defection.  One of the issues I have with liberals is they think they speak for all the "poor folk," but they don't take much time to listen to them. Most poor folk also have a fear of an intrusive government. That opposition to a government role in healthcare and mandatory health insurance makes it unlikely that the US will ever be able to insure that all of its citizens have ongoing access to healthcare in the near future. Until the Democrat party overcomes the perception that the government can look into your medical records; you're never going to sell it.

Just offering some strategic planning thoughts. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/democrats-who-voted-against-obamacare-keep-your-plan-2013-11   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Most poor folk also have a fear of an intrusive government. That opposition to a government role in healthcare and mandatory health insurance makes it unlikely that the US will ever be able to insure that all of its citizens have ongoing access to healthcare in the near future. Until the Democrat party overcomes the perception that the government can look into your medical records; you're never going to sell it.

The idea that democrats have to sell that a society should look after itself is insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

The idea that democrats have to sell that a society should look after itself is insane.

It really is.  But when the opposing party has convinced their own block of low income voters that everything that would could give them a leg up out of a cycle of poverty is socialism then it must be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DJL said:

when the opposing party has convinced their own block of low income voters

Nobody is addressing the 39 Democrat "defectors'" positions on why they did not vote for the ACA. You just keep talking about the "opposing party."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
1 hour ago, DJL said:

It really is.  But when the opposing party has convinced their own block of low income voters that everything that would could give them a leg up out of a cycle of poverty is socialism then it must be done.

On NPR last night I heard a reporter interviewing a woman (I think she was a waitress in South Carolina) who was explaining that she had no insurance from employer and since she was buying a house, she could not afford to pay for insurance. The interviewer informed her she would probably qualify for subsidized insurance with ACA. The response:

"NO! That's from Obama!!!"

So apparently, the risk of being bankrupted by medical bills takes a back seat to standing up for her hatred of anything from Obama.

Edited by ryoder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Nobody is addressing the 39 Democrat "defectors'" positions on why they did not vote for the ACA. You just keep talking about the "opposing party."

What is there to address? 31 of them represented districts won by McCain in the presidential election. In my very humble opinion they based their vote with solely re-election in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ryoder said:

she had no insurance from employer and since she was buying a house, she could not afford to pay for insurance. The interviewer informed her she would probably qualify for subsidized insurance with ACA.

The deductions for purchasing a home are far greater than medical costs that are the biggest non-deduction tax deduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

In my very humble opinion they based their vote with solely re-election in mind.

You think that might be because they represent the people in their district and if they go against them - they're out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

THIS is why ACA shouldn't have been shoved down our throats. Further debates should have been had, and been allowed to convinced people, not unlike it convinced me, that Medicare expansion is what was needed.

B U T . . . NOOOOOO - we had to have a fucking political statement.

But without ACA being implemented, who would it have convinced? Before ACA the Rs were staunchly against universal care without any sign of change. They’d never have voted to implement any sort of society wide healthcare plan.
 

Now, even though they’ve been against ACA from day one, their message is not to get rid of it and go back to the way things were, but to get rid of it and replace it with a better federal plan, because you just can’t sell no guaranteed healthcare to the public anymore.

 

That alone is a huge achievement in a short space of time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Nobody is addressing the 39 Democrat "defectors'" positions on why they did not vote for the ACA. You just keep talking about the "opposing party."

Yeah, I haven't really delved into the meat of this discussion, just throwing in my one-liner about people voting against their own interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
10 minutes ago, jakee said:

Before ACA the Rs were staunchly against universal care without any sign of change. They’d never have voted to implement any sort of society wide healthcare plan.

Fair point. "Conflict is good. It can be the first step to resolution." ~One of my college professors 

Edited by BIGUN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Not my problem. Send your bill to the republican assholes that caused the ACA to crater for so many people. Wake up, man. Do you really believe that if Obama didn't have to deal with the Republicans anyones health care plan would have tanked?

Absolutely.

You cant make an abrupt change to socialistic medicine from Capitalist without destroying some.

All it would have taken was time.

Time that the Democrats refused to take, and use. 

They had a point to make - fuck everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, billvon said:

Their point was getting healthcare for everyone - and that means fuck everyone?

You have odd values.

 

36 minutes ago, jakee said:

But without ACA being implemented, who would it have convinced? Before ACA the Rs were staunchly against universal care without any sign of change. They’d never have voted to implement any sort of society wide healthcare plan.
 

Now, even though they’ve been against ACA from day one, their message is not to get rid of it and go back to the way things were, but to get rid of it and replace it with a better federal plan, because you just can’t sell no guaranteed healthcare to the public anymore.

 

That alone is a huge achievement in a short space of time.

Ahhh - so there you actually do agree with me, but not in the way you will admit.

They didn't want to be patient and wait until they had more support.  They wanted to prove point.  They wanted to make a statement.  They needed to prove their prowess. 

Everything and everyone else was secondary.

It was always about power.

It was never actually about the people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/25/2020 at 1:51 AM, Coreece said:
19 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

 

Ahhh - so there you actually do agree with me, but not in the way you will admit.

They didn't want to be patient and wait until they had more support.  They wanted to prove point.  They wanted to make a statement.  They needed to prove their prowess. 

Everything and everyone else was secondary.

It was always about power.

It was never actually about the people.

Grinds me when people say access to healthcare.  Everyone already has access to healthcare.  What they don't have access to is insurance to pay for it.  ACA was supposed to address that but it missed by a mile.  Insurance plans with huge deductibles are not viable for poor folks but it's a great soundbite that we've given "access" to people who didn't have it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

They didn't want to be patient and wait until they had more support.  They wanted to prove point.  They wanted to make a statement.  They needed to prove their prowess. 

Nope.  They wanted to get it done - and they had a narrow window to be able to get it done in.  So they did it and got everyone healthcare.  If they had waited until they had less support it would not have happened, and people would not have had healthcare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2