This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Like getting them killed in the middle east? Like making insurance so unaffordable their parents can't take them to the doctor? Like putting them in jail for smoking pot? Like gift wrapping their parents jobs to Mexico and the Far East?
By supporting illegal immigration the way it stands (instead of a reasonable system where we stop the inflow from the Mexican border and institute a legal system there) they are implicity condoning mass child rape. The coyotes who bring unaccompanied children over (encouraged by the administration, no less) regularly rape the young girls that come through. It has been widely reported, substantiated, and the Democrats don't care. At all. All they see is future voters and damn the damage done to make that happen.
I wouldn't say they haven't done ANYTHING. They did help make sure funds from other areas couldn't be used to fund this ####storm. They were also happy to help override the Cadillac Tax and the device tax etc. Neither of those were really "battles" between dems and repubs as if the dems were fighting against them.
Yup, exactly like that. Great post.
First, health insurance shill Lieberman killed the public option. Every other Democrat supported it and not a single Republican. Nothing Obama could do about that.You left the generalization of Democrats wanting to do this and there is ZERO evidence they give a #### about affordability of healthcare. The democratic senators didn't care enough to pass the public option when they had a chance and Obama didn't care enough to make it more of an issue with those senators.
Maybe Hillary is more serious about it? Who knows. All we know is that in order to make it more affordable in any sort of meaningful way to the average tax payer, costs have to be addressed and that requires government intervention and the government siding with the electorate. I'm not holding my breath.
Its simply a question of winning the house. The number of people voting against abortion, against obamacare, against gay marriage, and against tougher gun laws is simply way too high. It doesnt effect the white house race because people are voting for the person. But when they vote for the house they vote the issues.
Gerrymandering plays a big role in that. Democrats running for the House in 2012 got more votes than Republicans.
The vote in the Senate was 60-39 for a bill that DIDN'T include a public option. Yeah, Obama got "something" passed...woohoo....didn't get passed what he needed to though and as a result a lot of people are in a lot of discomfort right now.First, health insurance shill Lieberman killed the public option. Every other Democrat supported it and not a single Republican. Nothing Obama could do about that.You left the generalization of Democrats wanting to do this and there is ZERO evidence they give a #### about affordability of healthcare. The democratic senators didn't care enough to pass the public option when they had a chance and Obama didn't care enough to make it more of an issue with those senators.
Maybe Hillary is more serious about it? Who knows. All we know is that in order to make it more affordable in any sort of meaningful way to the average tax payer, costs have to be addressed and that requires government intervention and the government siding with the electorate. I'm not holding my breath.
In the end Obama got something passed, even though it was doomed to failure. The good news for Americans is even though ACA will fail, there's no going back on its provisions and pressure is mounting on a public option. It will take a lot to overcome the hooks health insurance and pharma companies have in Congress but it can be done.
What sort of role would a Trump Administration play in answering those questions to your satisfaction? Keep in mind Trump is for nuclear proliferation and has wondered aloud on many occasions why the US doesn't use nukes on their enemies, hasn't said anything specific about health insurance other than being anti-ACA but proposed a maternity leave plan than allowed the wealthy to deduct the cost of their nannies but excluded single mothers from a lot of benefits and excluded same-sex couples entirely, is a teetotaler who wants to continue the war on drugs and kicked off his campaign railing against people bringing drugs into the country, and outsources his businesses overseas whenever possible, including importing steel from China instead of the stuff made domestically?
Don't hold your breath. House will be Republican until at least 2030. The gerrymandering job the Republicans pulled in 2010 was genius and total.
It was that or nothing for the foreseeable future. When the public option does get passed it will be because Obama did the pragmatic thing to get the ball rolling, despite all the flack he knew he was going to get from both sides.
That write off hads a history. I'm guessing it was a response to the 1986 tax reform which went after "tax shelters" but hit real estate hard - discouraging investment in projects that ere truly in the public interest such as low and middle income housing etc.
He's as bad as Hillary if not worse on most issues. The only advantage I see to a Trump presidency is that everyone on both sides of the aisle will hate him so much that he can't get anything done. The establishment won't turn a blind eye to his misdeeds or destroy evidence for him or allow him to contract with Don Jr to promote his plans.
This is a convenient excuse I hear way too often. I simply don't buy it especially when we're talking about a single vote (supposedly.....can't say I believe that completely, but we'll never know for sure so there's no point in speculating). The worst thing about this whole thing is they could have accomplished what has been accomplished to date with a simple shift of discussion to medicaid expansion and introduction of a law forbidding discrimination because of pre-existing conditions.
The checks and balances argument. Let's vote a guy in, and hope that everyone keeps him in check. That's responsible.
Have Tim and Squis taken over some of our normally reasonable "conservative' poster accounts? Seems like some stretches those two cats would be attempting
So when somebody writes something irrational, you immediately speculate that I took over their account?
My favorite thing about this argument is that it always seems to come from the people who are most disdainful of "the establishment" and our current government in general.
Well, he has to be thinking about protecting his businesses once she is president at this point.
Not immediately...the characteristics between them are pretty similar just flipped from liberal spin to conservative spin
Well #### you too Commish!
To be fair....keeping Trump in check also keeps the establishment in tact, so I don't think there's any question even the most pessimistic people (like myself) are confident the establishment will do the needful to keep status quo. Really has nothing to do with Trump the individual. Oh, and FWIW, I don't subscribe to this approach. He doesn't need to be anywhere near the office. Just explaining a possible reason for the position.
Well, his MAGA nonsense certainly seems to resonate with his followers, and there is absolutely no doubt that he is playing to the lowest mental common denominator.
Yup. And this is the best reason to vote for Clinton IMO even if you're not in a swing state. If she wins, every vote that adds to the margin of victory discourages a slightly smarter and harder working egomaniac from running the Trump playbook in the future.
I've often said that it isn't Trump's policies that truly concern me but that he'll be a puppet of a Republican Congress. If they want something passed, it's going to pass, no questions asked. He'll call it "deal-making".
Pence would be the man behind the throne, pushing his religious social conservative agenda, while Trump just preens and struts for the cameras.
Come on TF...not you too!!!!!TobiasFunke said:
Even if there's a 1% chance that Trump could become Hitler-like, how dumb do you have to be to take that chance?Come on TF...not you too!!!!!
Are we really comfortable saying the circumstances, knowledge levels and various other factors of 2016 are close enough to 1930s Germany to draw this sort of direct comparison?
There are some similarities. He's a populist demagogue taking advantage of fear and anger by appealing to the bigotry of the uneducated in this country. Granted, that's about as far as the similarities go, and Trump is certainly completely uninterested in transforming the country in any meaningful way. He just loves the ego stroke.Come on TF...not you too!!!!!
Are we really comfortable saying the circumstances, knowledge levels and various other factors of 2016 are close enough to 1930s Germany to draw this sort of direct comparison?
No, of course not. I mostly just like to link to that NY Times book review because it's so awesome. And the point was that similar dismissals of Hitler (the stuff he says is so stupid there's no way he's smart enough to get stuff done, he'll eventually moderate if he takes office, the establishment powers that be will rein him in, etc.) all turned out to be wrong. Just because the situations are not directly comparable doesn't mean you should dismiss the lessons of history.Come on TF...not you too!!!!!
Are we really comfortable saying the circumstances, knowledge levels and various other factors of 2016 are close enough to 1930s Germany to draw this sort of direct comparison?
Make no mistake...I don't dismiss it. But there's far less similar about the situations than there is different. The times, government structure, flow of information etc are all vastly different and I struggle to come up with a remotely possible scenario that would come close to making the Hitler comparison. That's all.
If there was anything close to a 1% chance, I'd be incredibly concerned to the point where I'd probably vote for Clinton....let that sink in as you read through my comments on her character and judgment.Even if there's a 1% chance that Trump could become Hitler-like, how dumb do you have to be to take that chance?Come on TF...not you too!!!!!
Are we really comfortable saying the circumstances, knowledge levels and various other factors of 2016 are close enough to 1930s Germany to draw this sort of direct comparison?
Yep. I don't think more recent polls support the idea that Americans are still in a majority against gay marriage and abortion. People are frustrated with Obamacare, but were frustrated with health care costs before Obamacae too, and irritated at Washington gridlock on addressing the issue.Don Quixote said:
For the most part I agree. However, most of what you say here was also offered up as reasons that Trump would never win the GOP nomination. The structure of the nomination process would allow the party to rein in his candidacy, voters would reject him once they turned their attention to all of the readily available information indicating how insane and hateful and unqualified he is, the party would unite once some early candidates dropped out to prevent him from seizing control of the nomination, etc. And every new hateful message he delivered or abhorrent policy he advocated was going to be his death knell. "There's no way Americans will tolerate a candidate who advocates religious discrimination! This is 2016!"
While I rail on our gov't a good bit even I see the difference between the structure of the GOP nomination process and how our federal government is structured. They aren't comparable IMO...not a fan of that analogy. The demographic of who votes in a primary vs the general election alone forces me to reject the analogy. That along with the reality that the GOP doesn't have to abide by the popular vote makes it tough to consider. I do agree that no one should vote for Trump....no one. But that's not going to happen. We have some really really stupid people in this country. You don't have to worry, I will NOT be voting for him.
Yeah, it could never happen again, that would entail a significant percentage of the population having anachronistic, racist, xenophobic, hateful beliefs.
More like a "Dr. Evil"??Coeur de Lion said:
