Trump thread part 2 (Or anything else we want to talk about that's ridiculous in politics today)

[Cannavore]

Nope sorry, it's not bullshit, just do the research there were a number of elements to the Affordable Care Act such as what was called then the "Public Option" that republicans either watered down or outright stripped from the bill as it went thru the legislative process in Congress before finally making it to Obama's desk for a signature. Which he went ahead and signed because even as crippled as the Republicans in the House and Senate tried to make it at the time, was an improvement over what there was at the time and way better then what the republican's were offering (which was nothing).

lol im not saying that didn't happen.

what i'm saying is the final version Obama signed is what the democratic donors wanted the entire time. what we saw was performative politics.

weird how since the ACA became law, not a single "real" democrat has even uttered the words single payer. the party will never support it and that tells me all i need to know. that it was never actually planned to begin with. and why would they? their top donors are literally the private health insurance industry that single payer would cripple.

 

[HempKat]

lol im not saying that didn't happen.

what i'm saying is the final version Obama signed is what the democratic donors wanted the entire time. what we saw was performative politics.

weird how since the ACA became law, not a single "real" democrat has even uttered the words single payer. the party will never support it and that tells me all i need to know. that it was never actually planned to begin with. and why would they? their top donors are literally the private health insurance industry that single payer would cripple.

Well when I make a post talking about how republican Senators removed the Single payer aka "Public Option" from the Affordable Care Act and your response to that post starts out saying "Pure Bullshit" followed by your asscertion that no Democrats ever wanted that as part of the Affordable Care Act, it sure seems like you're saying that it never happened. Perhaps next time you should make what you are saying more clear? I mean beyond your implications of the ability to read the minds of politicians to know what you claim were their true intentions from the start.

How do you even square your statements in your head? On one hand you say they never intended to have a public option because it would piss off thier donors but then you claim that you weren't saying that they didn't include a public or single payer option. I mean which is it did they never intend to have that from the start or did they actually include it hoping that the Republicans would strip it out? Seems like a pretty risky move to include something that would piss off their top donors by crippling their industry and hope that it doesn't get left in. I mean if you as just an average citizen can "know" what their real intent was then surely their republican colleages could know that too and sabotage the money they depend on from their donors by leaving something in, certain to piss their donors off. That would seem to be a much better way to mess the democrats plans up then to allow a bill to ultimately pass and became so well liked that even republican voters protested against ending the bill later on. But hey if you can read politicians minds to know their true intent then we got to take your word ofr it...right?

 

[moose eater]

Well when I make a post talking about how republican Senators removed the Single payer aka "Public Option" from the Affordable Care Act and your response to that post starts out saying "Pure Bullshit" followed by your asscertion that no Democrats ever wanted that as part of the Affordable Care Act, it sure seems like you're saying that it never happened. Perhaps next time you should make what you are saying more clear? Imean beyond your implications of the ability to read the minds of politicians to know what you claim were their true intentions from the start.

How do you even square you statements in your head? On one hand you say they never intended to have a public option because it would piss off thier donors but then you claim that you weren't saying that they didn't include a public or single payer option. I mean which is it did they never intend to have that from the start or did they actually include it hoping that the Republicans would strip it out? Seems like a pretty risky move to include something that would piss off ther top donors by crippling their industry and hope that it doesn't get left in. I mean if you as just an average citizen can "knoe" what their real intent was then surely their republican colleages could know that too and sabotage the money they depend on from their donors by leaving something in certain to piss their donors off. That would seem to be a much better way to mess the dmecrats plans up then to allow a bill to ultimately pass and became so well liked that even republican voters protested against ending the bill later on. But hey if you can read politicians minds to know their true intent then we got to take your word ofr it...right?

Both parties engage in politics of posturing for the voters, often including language in bills that they full well know will never pass but which allow them to turn to their constituents at election time and say, "Those evil X, Y or Z'ers made that basket of presents to the People impossible."

That disingenuous posturing has taken place for decades, using the voting public as pawns or stooges, silly enough to believe the dance in the first place. And it achieves nothing productive other than for one party to try and smear another party for the purpose of gaining undeserved support from voters who don't pay close attention at all and respond more to sound bites than they do reality.

America typically has the best government Oligarchy money can buy (left beholding to those funders rather than their constituency), and some of the most ignorant voters, who essentially get what they deserve as a matter of laziness and/or partisan blinders.

And there's little can be done legally for those who make campaign promises, etc. that they know from the outset are hollow. Apparently, they're not held to the same standards the rest of us are where civil law involves the concept of binding verbal contracts. But they ought to be.

America gets C-grade posturing, delivered more often than not in such ways that if they were lines being played out in a movie, the audience would walk out of the theater and demand refunds.

But attach some red, white and blue cloth to it, some political party emblems, a few anthems that once meant something, and many people will vote to be bullshitted and stolen from over and over again.

Masochism perfected. Involving millions of dollars in campaign contributions and climbing each year.

They might consider getting some decent actors so the shtick could at least be delivered in some sort of believable tone and manner.

And like actors everywhere, the scumbags don't even write or construct their own words or thoughts., They have teams that study public opinion polls, look for rallying points, and ask the speech writers to include the BS into speeches in ways that might grab the ignorant and gullible by their check books.

It's how most candidates, especially on the National level, function today.

 

[zachrockbadenof]

Hell, that looks even mor

Japan PM Abe says North Korea's missile launch absolutely unacceptable

North Korea's test launch of a ballistic missile was absolutely unacceptable, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said at a joint news conference on Saturday with U.S. President Donald Trump in Florida.

www.reuters.com

u said a "NUKE'... again lets see the proof...

 

[dramamine]

Well when I make a post talking about how republican Senators removed the Single payer aka "Public Option" from the Affordable Care Act and your response to that post starts out saying "Pure Bullshit" followed by your asscertion that no Democrats ever wanted that as part of the Affordable Care Act, it sure seems like you're saying that it never happened. Perhaps next time you should make what you are saying more clear? Imean beyond your implications of the ability to read the minds of politicians to know what you claim were their true intentions from the start.

How do you even square you statements in your head? On one hand you say they never intended to have a public option because it would piss off thier donors but then you claim that you weren't saying that they didn't include a public or single payer option. I mean which is it did they never intend to have that from the start or did they actually include it hoping that the Republicans would strip it out? Seems like a pretty risky move to include something that would piss off ther top donors by crippling their industry and hope that it doesn't get left in. I mean if you as just an average citizen can "knoe" what their real intent was then surely their republican colleages could know that too and sabotage the money they depend on from their donors by leaving something in certain to piss their donors off. That would seem to be a much better way to mess the dmecrats plans up then to allow a bill to ultimately pass and became so well liked that even republican voters protested against ending the bill later on. But hey if you can read politicians minds to know their true intent then we got to take your word ofr it...right?

They left it in knowing full well the Republicans would strip it out. Both parties have medical mafia donors. Pretty simple. Has anyone lifted a finger to make any changes since then? No, they haven't. They won't even bring it up. No mind reading necessary.

 

[GOT_BUD?]

They keep going more and more mask off every day.

 

[igrowone]

They keep going more and more mask off every day.

Bernie Sanders broke up the fight!? now I know I've crossed over to the other side, i.e I must be dead to be seeing this weirdness

 

[GOT_BUD?]

Bernie Sanders broke up the fight!? now I know I've crossed over to the other side, i.e I must be dead to be seeing this weirdness

Yup. Big tough GOP Rep got stopped dead in his tracks by an 80 year old man.

 

[Brother Nature]

They keep going more and more mask off every day.

It may not seem related but it is...

 

[buzzmobile]

They keep going more and more mask off every day.

...under the Dome.

 

[GOT_BUD?]

...under the Dome.

I was thinking more roller derby with the underlying soundtrack of Yackety Sax.

 

[GOT_BUD?]

Jack Smith is literally "going medieval on his ass".

Jack Smith cites medieval murder as he seeks Trump gag order

Trump is targeting Smith's family in campaign speeches, prosecutors have complained

www.newsweek.com

 

[buzzmobile]

I was thinking more roller derby with the underlying soundtrack of Yackety Sax.

Sean O'Brien looked like a solid match for Sen. Mullin.

 

[GOT_BUD?]

Sean O'Brien looked like a solid match for Sen. Mullin.

Apparently Mullins practices MMA. I don't know how good he is, but that really doesn't matter. Because you never fight A teamster. As in one.

You could bet your sweet ass and half a titty there would have been 3 or 4 fists in Mullins face before anyone knew what was going on.

 

[buzzmobile]

Apparently Mullins practices MMA. I don't know how good he is, but that really doesn't matter.

I checked for you.

Who Is Senator Markwayne Mullin? How Much Has He Trained in MMA?

Here is a look back at the mixed martial arts career of Senator Markwayne Mullin after he almost came to blows at a recent senate hearing.

www.essentiallysports.com

 

[HempKat]

Both parties engage in politics of posturing for the voters, often including language in bills that they full well know will never pass but which allow them to turn to their constituents at election time and say, "Those evil X, Y or Z'ers made that basket of presents to the People impossible."

That disingenuous posturing has taken place for decades, using the voting public as pawns or stooges, silly enough to believe the dance in the first place. And it achieves nothing productive other than for one party to try and smear another party for the purpose of gaining undeserved support from voters who don't pay close attention at all and respond more to sound bites than they do reality.

America typically has the best government Oligarchy money can buy (left beholding to those funders rather than their constituency), and some of the most ignorant voters, who essentially get what they deserve as a matter of laziness and/or partisan blinders.

And there's little can be done legally for those who make campaign promises, etc. that they know from the outset are hollow. Apparently, they're not held to the same standards the rest of us are where civil law involves the concept of binding verbal contracts. But they ought to be.

America gets C-grade posturing, delivered more often than not in such ways that if they were lines being played out in a movie, the audience would walk out of the theater and demand refunds.

But attach some red, white and blue cloth to it, some political party emblems, a few anthems that once meant something, and many people will vote to be bullshitted and stolen from over and over again.

Masochism perfected. Involving millions of dollars in campaign contributions and climbing each year.

They might consider getting some decent actors so the shtick could at least be delivered in some sort of believable tone and manner.

And like actors everywhere, the scumbags don't even write or construct their own words or thoughts., They have teams that study public opinion polls, look for rallying points, and ask the speech writers to include the BS into speeches in ways that might grab the ignorant and gullible by their check books.

It's how most candidates, especially on the National level, function today.

Yes, yes, virtually everyone knows, at least those participating in this thread, that they games you describe do in fact take place on both sides and has been for many many years, You talk like you're the only one aware of this. The problem with it, as it applies to the ACA, is why did the republicans just attempt to cripple the bill (and mostly fail in the process) when they could have just stopped the whole thing rather then just key parts of it? I mean the republicans didn't want any of it and they spent pretty much all of their political capital for several years afterwards trying to undo it and failed. Surely the doners from the Insurance industry didn't like the removal of no pre-existing conditions or the change they people could keep their children covered well into their 20's. It didn't mess them up as much as a public option but it still had to eat into the profits of the insurance providers? So why not just stop all of it or strip out those elements too? The Democrats still could have said "Well we tried..." and the republicans could have prevented something they didn't want. Instead by letting what they did, get thru, they lost support of millions of republican voters that also likee the changes they didn't block. Which made it infinitely more of a problem to get rid of it afterwards.

Like I said, if the goal was to hurt the democrats they could have been more effective if they had allowed the public option to stay and thereby cost the democrats some of their largest political donations. Unless of course there was far more to it and it wasn't just the simple slight of hand you're trying to make it out to be.

 

[HempKat]

u said a "NUKE'... again lets see the proof...

I knew you were going to try that arguement, no you were the one that said "Nuke" I said long range missle. Of course it's easy to understand why you thought I said Nuke, because everyone knows that the whole point of N. Korea testing their long range missle capabilities is to show that they have a delivery system capable of delivering a "nuke". The reality though is that N.Korea never lobbed a "nuke" anywhere, during any Presidency.Even they aren't stupid enough to try something like that because the end result would be far worse for them then anyone they might try to lob a nuke at. The thing is, they have nukes and they've been working hard on perfecting their long range delivery systems which is why lobbing ballistic missles anywhere whether it be at Japan, The US or whoever is considered such a provokative move.

 

[HempKat]

Yup. Big tough GOP Rep got stopped dead in his tracks by an 80 year old man.

A former MMA fighter no less.

 

[mean mr.mustard]

u said a "NUKE'... again lets see the proof...

I don't know but think he's talking about an ICBM.

We're proudly the only country that nukes people.

 

[GOT_BUD?]

I knew you were going to try that arguement, no you were the one that said "Nuke" I said long range missle. Of course it's easy to understand why you thought I said Nuke, because everyone knows that the whole point of N. Korea testing their long range missle capabilities is to show that they have a delivery system capable of delivering a "nuke". The reality though is that N.Korea never lobbed a "nuke" anywhere, during any Presidency.Even they aren't stupid enough to try something like that because the end result would be far worse for them then anyone they might try to lob a nuke at. The thing is, they have nukes and they've been working hard on perfecting their long range delivery systems which is why lobbing ballistic missles anywhere whether it be at Japan, The US or whoever is considered such a provokative move.

Pigeon on a chess board dude.