What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

*** Official Pete Buttigieg Thread *** (2 Viewers)

Uhm, yeah.  I know it is.  Democrats are falling all over themselves to cater to non-US citizens, ignoring you know the actual LEGAL citizens they're supposed to represent.

You know how I know? Because I said it and because that is literally what's happening. 

 It goes from God to me to the rest of you.  Yw.  😜
The Dems think it's their greatest con. They act like the system works/will work because in the back of thier minds they really want us to pay for it. 

 
The Dems think it's their greatest con. They act like the system works/will work because in the back of thier minds they really want us to pay for it. 
Or they want they want people to have the same access to health service regardless of which vagina they came out of.  

Note: I'm not a fan of freebies for illegals, but would open up immigration to almost anyone.  

 
Or they want they want people to have the same access to health service regardless of which vagina they came out of.  

Note: I'm not a fan of freebies for illegals, but would open up immigration to almost anyone.  
:lmao: Vagina?  Oh yeah that’s exactly what this is about. Wow. 

 
His post was not fact or reality...it made the assumption illegal immigrants don't work and can't pay for things.
We've been through this.

Assuming the average income for an illegal of $36K, their participation in the "insurance policy" will be heavily subsidized. Either by the government or other the pool of other ratepayers.

Much closer to "free" for the illegals than not free.

Just the opposite of how Pete tries to spin it...and par for the course for him on that front.

 
Democrats are falling all over themselves to cater to non-US citizens, ignoring you know the actual LEGAL citizens they're supposed to represent.
What makes a legal citizen more worthy of being catered to than an undocumented person?  Like what specifically about citizenship makes the citizen worthy of care and representation, but not the immigrant?  

Reason I ask is because I find the process of naturalization to be pretty arbitrary.  It’s a bureaucratic slog with little significance, other than the English portion of the test, to determine how viably a person could live in a predominantly (but not 100%) English-speaking country.  It walks them through a sort of ritual where they pledge an oath of allegiance to this mass of land and its people, and requires them to pass a civics test written by govt officials.  They are interviewed to make sure they demonstrate the appropriate fealty to US Gov institutions and the Constitution.  It’s like brainwashing in a sense.  

To argue that there is a meaningful difference between a US citizen and an immigrant is to accept the state’s determination of whether a human being can rightfully exist on a given territory.  It’s the implicit acceptance of an arcane and unforgiving process dreamed up by the most institutionalized form of govt insiders.  

So it’s odd to see people who tend to a rightwing worldview- and if that’s not a fair assessment of your posts feel free to correct me here- talk so reliantly of a process I would think they’d be more natively critical of.  When people make hay about ‘legal citizens’ versus ‘illegal aliens,’ I always feel like they’re endorsing the state’s top-heavy, bureaucratic approach to humanity.  

 
11 million illegals "paying income taxes" (making roughly $36K / year) x 284 per month discount = $37.5 billion / year for Pete's "not free" insurance policy for illegals

Here's the math.

  • Pat is 30 years old and estimates her 2020 income will be 250% of poverty (about $31,225 per year)
  • Suppose the second-lowest cost silver plan available to Pat in the Marketplace is $500 per month
  • Under the ACA, with an income of $31,225 per year, Pat would have a cap of 8.29% of income for the second-lowest cost silver plan
  • This means that Pat would have to pay no more than $216 per month (8.29% of $31,225, divided by 12 months) to enroll in the second-lowest cost silver plan
  • The tax credit available to Pat would therefore be $284 per month ($500 premium minus $216 cap)
  • Pat can then apply this $284 per month discount toward the purchase of any bronze, silver, gold, or platinum Marketplace plan available
https://www.kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/explaining-health-care-reform-questions-about-health/

 
11 million illegals "paying income taxes" (making roughly $36K / year) x 284 per month discount = $37.5 billion / year for Pete's "not free" insurance policy for illegals

Here's the math.

  • Pat is 30 years old and estimates her 2020 income will be 250% of poverty (about $31,225 per year)
  • Suppose the second-lowest cost silver plan available to Pat in the Marketplace is $500 per month
  • Under the ACA, with an income of $31,225 per year, Pat would have a cap of 8.29% of income for the second-lowest cost silver plan
  • This means that Pat would have to pay no more than $216 per month (8.29% of $31,225, divided by 12 months) to enroll in the second-lowest cost silver plan
  • The tax credit available to Pat would therefore be $284 per month ($500 premium minus $216 cap)
  • Pat can then apply this $284 per month discount toward the purchase of any bronze, silver, gold, or platinum Marketplace plan available
https://www.kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/explaining-health-care-reform-questions-about-health/
https://imgur.com/gallery/B8lkWSV

 
We've been through this.

Assuming the average income for an illegal of $36K, their participation in the "insurance policy" will be heavily subsidized. Either by the government or other the pool of other ratepayers.

Much closer to "free" for the illegals than not free.

Just the opposite of how Pete tries to spin it...and par for the course for him on that front.
Yes...we have been through this...and the post you quoted asked how people were going to pay into the system.  That is what I disputed...and no, that does not refute what Pete has stated on the topic either.

 
Yes...we have been through this...and the post you quoted asked how people were going to pay into the system.  That is what I disputed...and no, that does not refute what Pete has stated on the topic either.
And the post before that strongly implied that, because it is "not free," that it therefore somehow a fully paid for insurance policy.

And yes, that is how Pete spins it when he claims "it is not free, it is something people will buy into."

He always conveniently neglects to mention that taxpayers will be forced to buy into it at the same time...in a bigger proportion.

 
My daughter will turn 18 on the 25th.  Our primary is on the 3rd of March.  She has little perspective on matters due to her age but she is inquisitive, well read, and extremely intelligent, I guess it skipped a generation.  She is currently contemplating Mayor Pete.  I don't know where she will land.  

Turning 18 on Fat Tuesday.
Oh yeah? 

 
And the post before that strongly implied that, because it is "not free," that it therefore somehow a fully paid for insurance policy.

And yes, that is how Pete spins it when he claims "it is not free, it is something people will buy into."

He always conveniently neglects to mention that taxpayers will be forced to buy into it at the same time...in a bigger proportion.
I don't believe that is what was being implied before that at all.

And we don't yet know the full manner of the plan either...so all of us are assuming a lot.

 
Most are required to collect sales tax in this state which requires a ITIN.  And if they are a 1099 vs. employee, you are required to file a 1099 with their ITIN for anything over $600.
And once they’ve received one once, they can provide the ITIN in the future.

 
Vagina, socio-economic status, whatever.  Nothing wrong with showing some compassion for people who weren't as lucky as you.
Feels appropriate:

“I was born HERE
and you were born THERE
just inches apart
on a map on a wall.
The lines on the map
decide if you matter at all.
I was born HERE
and you were born THERE
So I belong HERE
and you belong THERE.
And if that’s a bad place
I don’t have to care.
I was born HERE
and you were born THERE
but you tried to come
HERE to be free.
You forgot that the lines
on the map on the wall
say that to be free
you would have to be ME.”
L.R.Knost

 
Pete down to 8 percent?  What happened?
Yeah, we might as well re-route away from Iowa & NH kicking off the process, because the length of the winnowing has taken the pop away from their intended purpose. We've always trusted these two states not to get carried away by media and reflect the ability of candidates as people asking for acceptance & support rather than entities turning themselves into brands. Then America is supposed to say either "Wow, so&so not only has national but personal support" or "wOw this candidate came out of nowhere and hit these simple country folk where they live" and, zoom, that one takes off and takes on the establishment candidate and they fight to the finish cuz they eats they spinach etc etc. But a media already saturated by month after month of Marianne & the Multitudes gave Bernie and Buttie big whatevs (helped by Iowa's inability to declare a timely winner) and America swept on to the next image. Big whoop -

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pete looks better and better every day, but I fear it may be too late for him somehow. Depends how long Bloomberg can hold on to his tenuous ad campaign. 

 
rockaction said:
Pete looks better and better every day, but I fear it may be too late for him somehow. Depends how long Bloomberg can hold on to his tenuous ad campaign. 
afraid by the time anyone drops out, Bernie will have too many delegates

 
Pete looks better and better every day, but I fear it may be too late for him somehow. Depends how long Bloomberg can hold on to his tenuous ad campaign. 
He's the Eugene McCarthy, the Carter, the Clinton, the Obama, the toppler of kings & queens. Any other election season, a guy coming from the nowherest nowhere anyone ever has to win the 1st contest, who then didnt blow it in the afterglow would be the Golden Boy. Whether because of the Shadow probs in Iowa or the media's unprecedented nonsensicality or the general panty-pissing fecklessness of Trumpophobe fantasypolitickers, he's a meh. :shrug:

 
Whether because of the Shadow probs in Iowa or the media's unprecedented nonsensicality or the general panty-pissing fecklessness of Trumpophobe fantasypolitickers, he's a meh. :shrug:
I don’t think any of these are the reason, it’s about money.  In previous election cycles candidates like Klobuchar and maybe Biden and Warren would have dropped out due to lack of money.  

 
He's the Eugene McCarthy, the Carter, the Clinton, the Obama, the toppler of kings & queens. Any other election season, a guy coming from the nowherest nowhere anyone ever has to win the 1st contest, who then didnt blow it in the afterglow would be the Golden Boy. Whether because of the Shadow probs in Iowa or the media's unprecedented nonsensicality or the general panty-pissing fecklessness of Trumpophobe fantasypolitickers, he's a meh. :shrug:
He's butter pecan ice cream. It's not a bad flavor, but there are almost always seemingly more enticing ones available.

 
Here's an example of why I don't like this guy:

"In several instances reviewed by ABC News, the Buttigieg campaign identified people as supporters who later said their interactions had either been misunderstood or misconstrued."

LINK

 
Here's an example of why I don't like this guy:

"In several instances reviewed by ABC News, the Buttigieg campaign identified people as supporters who later said their interactions had either been misunderstood or misconstrued."

LINK
That confuses me. Do you similarly not like Trump when he makes claims like that? Ones that are blatantly false, not just misunderstood or misconstrued?

Example: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/07/carter-denies-supporting-trumps-border-wall-1085968

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's an example of why I don't like this guy:

"In several instances reviewed by ABC News, the Buttigieg campaign identified people as supporters who later said their interactions had either been misunderstood or misconstrued."

LINK
Yet you now support a man who lies more than anyone else?  Including about things like the imminent attack that didn't exist to justify actions killing a foreign official.

 
No.  I didn’t say anything was okay or not okay. I’m trying to understand if you don’t like when people claim others support them who don’t or if you don’t like it when Pete does it. 
I recall being really disappointed to learn Key had endorsed Mayor Pete - but it turned out untrue. The article points out that this is a repeated pattern with Pete. Many instances of claiming people endorse him, claiming businesses partner with him, and claiming black leaders endorse his "Douglass Plan" - all false. 

I just don't think it's a very effective strategy right before South Carolina. Do you?

 
I recall being really disappointed to learn Key had endorsed Mayor Pete - but it turned out untrue. The article points out that this is a repeated pattern with Pete. Many instances of claiming people endorse him, claiming businesses partner with him, and claiming black leaders endorse his "Douglass Plan" - all false. 

I just don't think it's a very effective strategy right before South Carolina. Do you?
I’m not sure that is an accurate characterization of the article, but I’m happy to answer your question. Do you have any interest in answering mine?

 
I’m not sure that is an accurate characterization of the article, but I’m happy to answer your question. Do you have any interest in answering mine?
Sorry I thought I did. No I don't like it when Trump does it. This is the Mayor Pete thread so I thought the article was relevant here.

I was actually carefully going through the article when I was writing the sentence.

"Many instances of claiming people endorse him, claiming businesses partner with him, and claiming black leaders endorse his "Douglass Plan" - all false." 

Which part is mis-characterized?

 
Sorry I thought I did. No I don't like it when Trump does it. This is the Mayor Pete thread so I thought the article was relevant here.

I was actually carefully going through the article when I was writing the sentence.

"Many instances of claiming people endorse him, claiming businesses partner with him, and claiming black leaders endorse his "Douglass Plan" - all false." 

Which part is mis-characterized?
Well, I’m not sure it got into the number of times the claims ended up being pushed back on, nor do I believe the word “false” was used. And I think the statement arguably characterizes it quite differently than if you look into the “incidents.”

For instance, “sure you can come hold a campaign photo op at my business!” Or “sure, I’ll appear at your event on a mic!” aren’t exactly crazy to say you’re partnering with those people/businesses. 
 

But in two parts: I don’t think his strategy is to mischaracterize support. I think the thing I like least about him is his assumption that people he includes by bringing them into his advisory or discussion system support him: when they often just want a voice in or insight into a forming campaign because it’s important or fun or interesting. 
 

And second, what I think he is trying to do - bring in diverse mindsets and backgrounds, whether he’s being successful or not - is a good strategy, yes. 
 

Much like many people attribute malice to things Trump does when it isn’t warranted, I think people do that to Pete.  That may or may not be the case here, but my interpretation of it is that it’s what’s happening. 

 
Honestly, Pete’s problem with people of color comes down to a horrible incident with a black police chief. 
 

As a human being I would have screamed at him to support the chief with every fiber of my being 

As a lawyer I know what my advice would have been, and that ain’t it.  So I really, really get why he fired the guy but it may well sink his entire political career. And I don’t begrudge anyone for refusing to vote for him over it, but I think it’s likely a very misunderstood incident. 

 
On the Key incident: one of the weird comparisons we can make right now. 
 

Remember the loser who ran his van into a voter registration booth covered in trump support signs? And the assumption was (I think rightly) that he was running over it because those people support trump?

Key was a speaker at a voter registration event that Buttigieg held. And it’s apparently a big knock on his campaign that they claim they believed he was a Pete supporter.

Isn’t that odd?

 
I find it odd the left has attacked Buttigieg for not being gay enough, while the right could care less.

 
Depends on who you mean on the right.  Limbaugh certainly went after him for being gay the other day. 
Limbaugh specifically said it was Americans who wouldn’t vote for him for kissing his husband on the debate stage. Limbaugh didn’t say he himself wouldn’t vote for him for that reason. 

 
That confuses me. Do you similarly not like Trump when he makes claims like that? Ones that are blatantly false, not just misunderstood or misconstrued?

Example: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/07/carter-denies-supporting-trumps-border-wall-1085968


Yet you now support a man who lies more than anyone else?  Including about things like the imminent attack that didn't exist to justify actions killing a foreign official.
LOL...At least the Trump guys waited until after Trump was elected to start using the "But Obama" line.

 
Honestly, Pete’s problem with people of color comes down to a horrible incident with a black police chief. 
 

As a human being I would have screamed at him to support the chief with every fiber of my being 

As a lawyer I know what my advice would have been, and that ain’t it.  So I really, really get why he fired the guy but it may well sink his entire political career. And I don’t begrudge anyone for refusing to vote for him over it, but I think it’s likely a very misunderstood incident. 
Can you elaborate?  Seems like you were headed somewhere interesting.

I haven't paid much attention to the incident.  All of them have skeletons and it likely wouldn't cost him my vote.

 
LOL...At least the Trump guys waited until after Trump was elected to start using the "But Obama" line.
Its a bit odd to have that big of a problem with Pete when someone wrote a long thread about switching to Trump...someone who is a habitual liar.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top