- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: There is no doubt town hall agitators are paid stooges
Posted on 2/23/17 at 8:45 am to NC_Tigah
Posted on 2/23/17 at 8:45 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Unfortunately, in many instances they are not constituents,
I am legitimately asking: Is being a constituent of the senator or representative a requirement in order to attend? Would someone who is not a constituent be turned away at the door if it were found out they were from another state?
quote:
they attend with disruption as their primary goal
In your opinion, if someone disagrees with the repeal of the ACA, what should their primary goal be when attending?
Posted on 2/23/17 at 8:49 am to AZTarheeel
quote:
Why is anyone holding a town hall in February 2017?
It's pretty typical for them to host town halls when there is a Congressional recess. They're not just election year or campaign events. They just never get much national coverage unless there's a contentious subject. I went to one 4 or 5 years ago and there were maybe 20 people there. It was boring.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 8:50 am to 9th life
quote:
Is being a constituent of the senator or representative a requirement in order to attend?
It should be. Town halls are a way for people that the representatives represent to voice their comments or concerns, so that the representative can better understand the desires of those they represent. But unless they are "carding" people, there is no way for anyone to know 100% that those people are the ones at the town hall. It is not unreasonable to think that people are coming from outside those districts or states to cause havoc for those town halls.
quote:
In your opinion, if someone disagrees with the repeal of the ACA, what should their primary goal be when attending?
Their primary goal is to voice their concerns...to the specific representatives who actually represent their district (for reps) or state (for senators).
This post was edited on 2/23/17 at 8:52 am
Posted on 2/23/17 at 9:02 am to Bamatab
quote:
It is not unreasonable to think that people are coming from outside those districts or states to cause havoc for those town halls.
Other districts, sure. I doubt many, if any, are coming from out of state. There is a large swath of people in this country, on both sides, that probably can't even tell you who their House Rep is, especially around urban areas where district lines can get a bit messy.
Rep Marsha Blackburn had a town hall the other night where she restricted attendance to citizens in her district. It turned out about the same as all the others have. People that have seen the benefits of ACA are HIGHLY motivated to let lawmakers know, just as those opposed to it were in 2009 and 2010. In many districts, they are probably a minority opinion on the issue, but their voices are at least being heard.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 9:04 am to Bamatab
quote:
It should be.
so it isn't. why would that be? there is security, there has to be some type of frisking or searching of personal belongings before being able to enter, so why not simply ask for ID or a voter registration card?
quote:
Their primary goal is to voice their concerns
Are they not doing that?
I have to say, kudos to all those senators and reps that showed up.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 9:22 am to SlowFlowPro
think about what these loser protesters were doing during Hurricane Katrina, while Kennedy was setting up a medical clinic for flood victims. I know of at least one of these agitators that high tailed it to Alabama and DID NOTHING to help flood victims, then came back home and wanted everybody else to fix his shite, get his power back on, etc.
my point is, these protesters usually don't do shite for their community, they're useless; they're goatee-sporting baristas,right? Then they have the nerve to want to hold Cassidy's feet to the fire!!! the nerve, the hypocrisy.
my point is, these protesters usually don't do shite for their community, they're useless; they're goatee-sporting baristas,right? Then they have the nerve to want to hold Cassidy's feet to the fire!!! the nerve, the hypocrisy.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 9:25 am to TakingStock
IMHO, it will be important to expose your facts to the general public so they will know the Truth.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 10:23 am to 9th life
quote:Most often it isn't. It should be. Interestingly, Dems did begin checking ID to confirm constituency at townhalls during the ACA fiasco.
Is being a constituent of the senator or representative a requirement in order to attend?
quote:First off, the politician MUST MAKE IT CLEAR that continuing the ACA is not an option. Not because of opposition, but because of the program itself.
if someone disagrees with the repeal of the ACA, what should their primary goal be when attending?
When a loved one is on his or her deathbed, we can disagree with the inevitable, we can deny the inevitable, but the inevitable will still occur. Obamacare is on its deathbed. It is in its deathspiral. Its death is inevitable. We have to forward another plan.
After that is made crystal clear for someone who disagrees with the repeal of the ACA, that someone should enquire as to what comes next and provide input as to what is needed.
This post was edited on 2/23/17 at 10:24 am
Posted on 2/23/17 at 10:54 am to TakingStock
quote:
There is no doubt town hall agitators are paid stooges
Link?
Posted on 2/23/17 at 10:59 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
the politician MUST MAKE IT CLEAR that continuing the ACA is not an option
But it is an option. One that polls increasingly well.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 11:03 am to BamaAtl
quote:Ask losers who get subsidized insurance or morons like you, sure it polls well.
But it is an option. One that polls increasingly well.
Ask the people whose rates have shot up and deductibles are so high the coverage isn't usable, not so much.
The latter are the people paying for the former. You might want to listen to the people footing the bill.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 11:04 am to BamaAtl
quote:
But it is an option. One that polls increasingly well.
Sustainability is the answer you're looking for. ACA is not sustainable in its present form. Most of those in ACA getting subsidized do not understand this, at all.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 11:05 am to llfshoals
quote:
sure it polls well.
Broadly well.
quote:
Ask the people whose rates have shot up and deductibles are so high the coverage isn't usable, not so much.
Approx. 3% of the population are in the individual exchanges without a subsidy, so would fit your definition. Let's make the law better for them, instead of ripping insurance away from 10% of the population.
quote:
You might want to listen to the people footing the bill.
I do, and they like it.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 11:08 am to TakingStock
So they're all paid? You'd figure by now there would have been a leak or more evidence considering we got people like James O'Keefe paying for undercover videos.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 11:09 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
First off, the politician MUST MAKE IT CLEAR that continuing the ACA is not an option. Not because of opposition, but because of the program itself.
These guys aren't doing that though. Why would that be?
If true, seems to me that would be the first thing said out of the gate to their constituents. It also seems like it would be a standard answer to every person who stands up at those town hall meetings and relays a personal story of how the ACA is keeping them alive or has kept them alive.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 11:14 am to BamaAtl
quote:A small fraction get said subsidy.
quote:
Ask the people whose rates have shot up and deductibles are so high the coverage isn't usable, not so much.
Approx. 3% of the population are in the individual exchanges without a subsidy, so would fit your definition. Let's make the law better for them, instead of ripping insurance away from 10% of the population.
quote:
You might want to listen to the people footing the bill.
I do, and they like it.
The rest of us pay more for ours so they can have it. If you can't afford it, you shouldn't have it.
You aren't listening to those people at all. We frigging hate it, that's a big reason why Donald Trump is now president.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 1:06 pm to llfshoals
quote:
A small fraction get said subsidy.
And a smaller fraction are on the individual exchanges without a subsidy. Which is paid for by taxes on the rich (oh nooooo)
Posted on 2/23/17 at 1:14 pm to BamaAtl
quote:I would ask if you're really that stupid, but we have ample evidence over the years indeed you are.
And a smaller fraction are on the individual exchanges without a subsidy. Which is paid for by taxes on the rich (oh nooooo)
But I suppose you think everyone who pays their own bills is rich.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News