Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 107: Better (Try Harder) Care Reconciliation Act

(+) Yeah! (+)

C'mon, next bill get it down to 21 million! You can do it!
---

https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/879784211380555776

Hope those Senators are seeing these numbers!
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/879784211380555776

Hope those Senators are seeing these numbers!

I've been saying it for awhile, all this means is Republicans have to push through fast on a health care bill so people have a long time to forget about it and for dems to get sidetracked away from it.

Leafeon13N posted...

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/879784211380555776

Hope those Senators are seeing these numbers!

I've been saying it for awhile, all this means is Republicans have to push through fast on a health care bill so people have a long time to forget about it and for dems to get sidetracked away from it.

Except the health care bill goes into effect almost immediately after the 2020 elections. If you think for a second that it won't get brought back up for that, you're nuts.
---

I still can't believe Jakyl thinks fascism is a far-left ideology.

What the everloving fuck
---

SupremeZero posted...

Leafeon13N posted...

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/879784211380555776

Hope those Senators are seeing these numbers!

I've been saying it for awhile, all this means is Republicans have to push through fast on a health care bill so people have a long time to forget about it and for dems to get sidetracked away from it.

Except the health care bill goes into effect almost immediately after the 2020 elections. If you think for a second that it won't get brought back up for that, you're nuts.

It will, but it wont be as immediate on peoples minds. People will be able to buy into the idea that the cbo is bs and Republicans will have had longer to do whatever they can to fuck obamacare.

And as I've said many times, the Dems are awful at staying on message and driving the narrative over long time.

DeepsPraw posted...

I still can't believe Jakyl thinks fascism is a far-left ideology.

What the everloving fuck

it's not that weird if you simplify things to "left = big government."
---

DeepsPraw posted...

I still can't believe Jakyl thinks fascism is a far-left ideology.

What the everloving fuck

wait what
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

DeepsPraw posted...

I still can't believe Jakyl thinks fascism is a far-left ideology.

What the everloving fuck

wait what

Last topic he said the Nazis were the logical extreme of leftist philosophy
---

DeepsPraw posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

DeepsPraw posted...

I still can't believe Jakyl thinks fascism is a far-left ideology.

What the everloving fuck

wait what

Last topic he said the Nazis were the logical extreme of leftist philosophy

Not to rehash an old topic but I missed this so I'm gonna comment once:

Left-wing ideologies believe no one should have an unfair advantage / everyone should be equal.

Right-wing ideologies believe that there are and SHOULD be multiple stratum of social class.

<_< With fascism, is everyone equal or are there people in control of other people?
---

Where fascism fits on the political compass is definitely open to debate. As is anarchy. As are a lot of things.

Really we should just stop pretending late 18th-century France's political spectrum is at all applicable to politics in a different country over 200 years later.
---

Kenri posted...

Really we should just stop pretending late 18th-century France's political spectrum is at all applicable to politics in a different country over 200 years later.

But everything is so much easier this way.
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

DeepsPraw posted...

I still can't believe Jakyl thinks fascism is a far-left ideology.

What the everloving fuck

it's not that weird if you simplify things to "left = big government."

This is what I was referring to when I said it.
---

Also I didn't say fascism. I said authoritarianism. All fascists are authoritarians. Not all authoritarians are fascist.
---

I like that logic because it implies that Marxism is a radical rightist ideology
---

Again, the two axis alignment chart exists for a reason
---

DeepsPraw posted...

Again, the two axis alignment chart exists for a reason

Because we're tools?
---

TheRock1525 posted...

DeepsPraw posted...

Again, the two axis alignment chart exists for a reason

Because we're tools?

No, the technology just isn't there yet.

It's like console generations, but much slower. The 3D breakthrough is coming though.
---

Republicans will be fine if they pass the bill. Who among voters can say that they aren't doing exactly what they promised?
---

red sox 777 posted...

Who among voters can say that they aren't doing exactly what they promised?

the ones who saw the president promise that you had to cover everyone and that prices would go down.
---

red sox 777 posted...

Republicans will be fine if they pass the bill. Who among voters can say that they aren't doing exactly what they promised?

Just like Dems were fine when they passed a kinda unpopular health care bill.

Oh wait it's 1/6th of the US economy and voters give lots of shits about it.
---

Democrats promised a lot of things in 2008, healthcare was only one of a lot of issues, not one that had been pounded home for 7 years. Also, the Democrats promised to fix the healthcare system. The Republicans have never promised this, only to repeal Obamacare. (Hint: no one believes specific promises by Trump).
---

red sox 777 posted...

(Hint: no one believes specific promises by Trump).

ann coulter did.
---

red sox 777 posted...

(Hint: no one believes specific promises by Trump).

yeah tell that to everyone who still expects a fucken wall
---

red sox 777 posted...

healthcare was only one of a lot of issues, not one that had been pounded home for 7 years.

yeah it was more like 50

red sox 777 posted...

(Hint: no one believes specific promises by Trump).

Well, I mean, I don't. But I rather doubt that's true for many of his voters. What makes you so sure of this though? And why was he voted for in the primaries if no one believed him? Seems like a rather bold claim to speak for millions of voters about a candidate for the highest political office.
---

i mean, i kinda agree with red sox. trump took both sides on 99% of the issues during the campaign - what "specific promises" can his voters even latch onto in the first place?

"build the wall" was one of his few clear consistent promises, and not many people seem to even give a shit that he's not doing that so far.
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

what "specific promises" can his voters even latch onto in the first place?

whichever ones they like
---

Hillary is in jail right?
---

"I lost my health insurance and am going bankrupt from medical costs, but the Republicans were just keeping their promise to repeal Obamacare so I guess I'll vote for them again" - literally no one
---

I feel my read on the electorate is pretty good and I got 48/50 on the election.

But, why don't people believe specific Trump promises? Because they are absurd on their face. Trump gives off the feeling that he favors the school of negotiation where you start off by asking for the moon.
---

xp1337 posted...

whichever ones they like

they could, but i don't think people like trump for the promises he made.

just look at trump lovers on this board, and how they blindly adore the guy without actually referring to specific things he has done (instead they come up with crazy hypotheticals like "if trump would cure cancer liberals would STILL hate him!"). it's pretty cultish, and cultish behavior isn't very reasonable or logical.
---

If Trump gives us a conservative supreme court and single payer healthcare, I would be ready to declare his presidency a great success even if he doesn't succeed in bringing the jobs back.
---

It's not about Trump.

It's about Republicans in general.

They're gonna struggle to justify this bill to their non-base voters. It's showing in red districts turning slightly more purple and purple districts up in the House.

Senate is gonna stay Republican no matter what in 2018. House is most definitely up for grabs if they pass shitty healthcare.
---

red sox 777 posted...

I feel my read on the electorate is pretty good and I got 48/50 on the election.

one election doesn't strike me as the largest sample size

red sox 777 posted...

But, why don't people believe specific Trump promises? Because they are absurd on their face. Trump gives off the feeling that he favors the school of negotiation where you start off by asking for the moon.

Okay, but this leads to two follow-ups:

1. How does this lead to, "Oh, so they're totally okay with the AHCA/BCRA then" rather than something else like, "Okay, well universal coverage with costs going down isn't him telling the truth, but that's the direction he's aiming for and hopefully he can work with/moderate a Republican Congress to get them closer to there." I mean, the Republican plan is basically the opposite of what he said during the campaign. That isn't, "Oh he's starting from a negotiating position well above what he expects to get" it's, "He took the opposite side at the negotiating table."

2. Are we really calling "everyone is covered" and "lower costs" specific promises? Those are ridiculously general and vague. It was a running theme of his campaign that he would never provide details for how he intended to implement his plans and on the rare case the media got him to, it was still light on details but what was there was entirely unrealistic. I mean, what exactly constitutes "general" or "broad" if that's specific?
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

they could, but i don't think people like trump for the promises he made.

What I was driving at there was they could pick and choose what promises they believed and basically play "Create Your Own Candidate" and come up with an idealized version. It requires you to ignore the reality that he's everywhere on so many different issues and has said contradictory things, but if you're blinded by dislike of Clinton or Democrats or the left or just view it as a sporting event, then why not?

I also think there's a bit of a spectrum of supporters here and wouldn't necessarily count the handful you see on Board 8 as representative of the whole. (Though also not entirely insignificant either)
---

xp1337 posted...

red sox 777 posted...

I feel my read on the electorate is pretty good and I got 48/50 on the election.

one election doesn't strike me as the largest sample size

red sox 777 posted...

But, why don't people believe specific Trump promises? Because they are absurd on their face. Trump gives off the feeling that he favors the school of negotiation where you start off by asking for the moon.

Okay, but this leads to two follow-ups:

1. How does this lead to, "Oh, so they're totally okay with the AHCA/BCRA then" rather than something else like, "Okay, well universal coverage with costs going down isn't him telling the truth, but that's the direction he's aiming for and hopefully he can work with/moderate a Republican Congress to get them closer to there." I mean, the Republican plan is basically the opposite of what he said during the campaign. That isn't, "Oh he's starting from a negotiating position well above what he expects to get" it's, "He took the opposite side at the negotiating table."

2. Are we really calling "everyone is covered" and "lower costs" specific promises? Those are ridiculously general and vague. It was a running theme of his campaign that he would never provide details for how he intended to implement his plans and on the rare case the media got him to, it was still light on details but what was there was entirely unrealistic. I mean, what exactly constitutes "general" or "broad" if that's specific?

Universal coverage can still be the endgame. The big obstacle (according to the GOP) is Obamacare. So if you just get Obamacare repealed, you're like 60% of the way to affordable healthcare for all.

General or broad would be something like "Make America Great Again" or "Yes We Can."
---

Usually when you want to get to universal coverage you don't start by taking away 22 million peoples' insurance
---

Clearly, they have to start by culling the weak.
---

In single payer countries almost no one has health insurance, so yeah, getting rid of insurance can be a step forward. The long road can also involve taking steps back at times. Republicans are very willing to play the long game.
---

red sox 777 posted...

In single payer countries almost no one has health insurance, so yeah, getting rid of insurance can be a step forward. The long road can also involve taking steps back at times. Republicans are very willing to play the long game.

If you actually believe the Republicans want to get rid of insurance in favor of a single payer type solution, you're a horrifically ignorant person. No two ways about it.
---

red sox 777 posted...

If Trump gives us a conservative supreme court and single payer healthcare, I would be ready to declare his presidency a great success even if he doesn't succeed in bringing the jobs back.

Why are you so excited for a conservative supreme court?
---

red sox 777 posted...

Universal coverage can still be the endgame. The big obstacle (according to the GOP) is Obamacare. So if you just get Obamacare repealed, you're like 60% of the way to affordable healthcare for all.

You don't... actually believe this is the case with Republican legislators do you?

Let's ignore the CBO scoring that has you go 22 million people in the wrong direction on coverage. We probably shouldn't, but for now I'll put it to the side.

Are you seriously suggesting that Republican voters are voting for Republican legislators with the intent that we achieve universal coverage/single payer? What exactly would make you think that way?

like you accuse people in this topic of erroneously thinking the voters are stupid but this is cognitive dissonance on a level that's almost stunning to me

Unless you're playing the super technical argument that "Well, it could be the goal! It may be entirely counter to it now but who knows what the future holds? Technically the probability is non-zero!" which would be entirely intellectually disingenuous here.
---

Everyone wants universal coverage. There's only been 2 ways proposed to get there: single payer and insurance. The Democrats are all in on insurance. The Republicans oppose the Democrats. Next step.......

I mean, this may not actually happen but YES, Republican voters absolutely believe the GOP wants to increase access to healthcare and make it cheaper.
---

red sox 777 posted...

Everyone wants universal coverage

Uh what
---

red sox 777 posted...

Everyone wants universal coverage.

Do they?

I would think there's a lot of people out there who think they're invincible and see any form of paying into it, whether it be via insurance or more indirectly through single-payer, as something they are opposed to. Sure, they'll want it when they need it, but until then a lot of people will see it as paying for other people's problems.

tl;dr: Libertarian-type perspectives
---

Also let's say you are a voter who wants single payer. Who do you vote for? Bernie. But he loses. Who do you vote for then? Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump? Your chances of getting single payer within the next 10 years are surely higher with a Trump win.
---

red sox 777 posted...

I mean, this may not actually happen but YES, Republican voters absolutely believe the GOP wants to increase access to healthcare and make it cheaper.

I don't think Republican voters believe that at all. Most Republican voters say things like "Healthcare is NOT a right" and "If you can't afford healthcare, GET A JOB!" (But your employer should absolutely not have to provide health insurance)
---

Ashethan posted...

red sox 777 posted...

I mean, this may not actually happen but YES, Republican voters absolutely believe the GOP wants to increase access to healthcare and make it cheaper.

I don't think Republican voters believe that at all. Most Republican voters say things like "Healthcare is NOT a right" and "If you can't afford healthcare, GET A JOB!" (But your employer should absolutely not have to provide health insurance)

That's what they said before Obamacare. Now it's stuff like, "I had to sell my house and work 3 jobs to be able to afford my Obamacare premiums."
---

red sox 777 posted...

Also let's say you are a voter who wants single payer. Who do you vote for? Bernie. But he loses. Who do you vote for then? Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump? Your chances of getting single payer within the next 10 years are surely higher with a Trump win.

The only way that makes sense is if you believe Trump and the Republicans screw up healthcare so bad that the Democrats come in and fix it with single-payer later. Because that sentiment is something I'd only expect to come from the far left, not the middle or the right which was the subject of the discussion.

Otherwise, the Democrats are the party that has, in admittedly limited pockets, supported single-payer.
---

Don't know if this is an amazing lack of self-awareness or an incredible amount of self-awareness to troll us but this was literally said by a Fox News Host:

I think the video sting is a big black eye for CNN, no matter how hard they try to spin it, but the core of the video is what everybody already knew, that CNN is biased against Trump, wants him to leave office, and they are pushing a B.S. Russia story for ratings and cash.

Now, if a Fox News producer was caught in a video sting saying that the company wants Obama impeached, and they are pushing a bogus story about the president's birth certificate just for ratings, and the CEO is on board with it, that would be national news. It would be national news, but this was buried just like everything else. I think the actual real scandal is these three guys resigning, which I think they did honorably for pushing a fake news story.

---