- 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: So with the impending salivating over a DNC takeover of the house: What would be different
Posted on 5/23/17 at 3:13 pm to cokebottleag
Posted on 5/23/17 at 3:13 pm to cokebottleag
they've got two chances to take bake the house. slim and none........and slim just left the building!
0
Posted on 5/23/17 at 3:15 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
Are you really going to fight on that hill? Probably the most blatant piece of rent-seeking legislation in Trump's presidency.
I cannot bring myself to care, and your shallow attempt and mustering some kind of indignation is incredibly easy to brush past. The NSA, FBI, and everyone else is gobbling up your data because its big business, and you draw the line at ISPs? Was the climb up your mountain of principle hard? Did you have to stop for a water break?
quote:
You asked what would be different. Those are clear examples I could think of off the top of my head. If you want to know what the Democratic agenda is in specifics, how things would differ, go seek it out! You are on the damn internet lol. Almost all of human civilization's collective knowledge is at your finger tips, use it!
And I explained exactly how there was no meaningful difference to any of them. A DNC house would be passing bills and attempting to ignore Trump just like the GOPe. Actually, you'd probably hear less calls for impeachment than now: Democrats in the House and senate have repeatedly said "There is no evidence for impeachment". The only ones calling for it are in the media, and they would stop immediately as soon as the DNC had the ability to call for impeachment proceedings. Wouldn't want to embarrass them.
quote:
The AHCA would be a non-starter. It's awfulness, and its awful driving coalition would not be able poison the debate and force the Senate to work toward their shitty demands. It could also mean the bill would not need to pass through reconciliation. So much more comprehensive reform would be on the table.
The DNC is not going to reform the ACA. They like the ACA. They passed the ACA. They didn't have to compromise at all. It's what the DNC wanted. You have this fantasyland where the GOP did something nefarious to sabotage it, but it wasn't built to do anything but what it is doing: Pass the massive cost of insuring the marginally healthy unemployed onto the middle classes. That's who is paying: not the rich (each person can only have one plan, count em, one, and plans don't scale up with income; Warren Buffet has a Berkshire Hathaway health plan), the middle class. You just don't care.
I do have to applaud you, at least you took me up on the offer to attempt to explain the differences. No one else has made a serious attempt.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 3:23 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
I cannot bring myself to care, and your shallow attempt and mustering some kind of indignation is incredibly easy to brush past. The NSA, FBI, and everyone else is gobbling up your data because its big business, and you draw the line at ISPs? Was the climb up your mountain of principle hard? Did you have to stop for a water break?
Nice deflection. You keep on carrying that water for shitty legislation though. Doesn't make you look like a partisan stooge or anything.
You wanted to know what would be different, I gave you a perfect clear cut legislative example.
Don't start threads asking questions you don't actually want answers for. That you are going to reject factual answers given to you.
quote:
And I explained exactly how there was no meaningful difference to any of them. A DNC house would be passing bills and attempting to ignore Trump just like the GOPe. Actually, you'd probably hear less calls for impeachment than now: Democrats in the House and senate have repeatedly said "There is no evidence for impeachment". The only ones calling for it are in the media, and they would stop immediately as soon as the DNC had the ability to call for impeachment proceedings. Wouldn't want to embarrass them.
See above.
quote:
The DNC is not going to reform the ACA. They like the ACA. They passed the ACA. They didn't have to compromise at all. It's what the DNC wanted. You have this fantasyland where the GOP did something nefarious to sabotage it, but it wasn't built to do anything but what it is doing: Pass the massive cost of insuring the marginally healthy unemployed onto the middle classes. That's who is paying: not the rich (each person can only have one plan, count em, one, and plans don't scale up with income; Warren Buffet has a Berkshire Hathaway health plan), the middle class. You just don't care.
Even though your narrative is objectively incorrect. Many on the left were never satisfied with the ACA that passed, for a slew of reasons. But even taking your premise at face value proves my point. The House Dems would not be allowing the AHCA to pass or let any other bill that harms the current ACA more then they see it improving it. A clear difference from right now.
You just undercut your own thesis. Congrats!
This post was edited on 5/23/17 at 3:26 pm
Posted on 5/23/17 at 3:29 pm to cokebottleag
I hope the Dems actually work to promote net neutrality and do whatever they can to fight Ajit Pai
Posted on 5/23/17 at 3:37 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
Nice deflection. You keep on carrying that water for shitty legislation though. Doesn't make you look like a partisan stooge or anything.
You wanted to know what would be different, I gave you a perfect clear cut legislative example.
Don't start threads asking questions you don't actually want answers for. That you are going to reject factual answers given to you.
You have yet to provide any meaningful examples of differences. Your whole argument sums up to "The deck chairs would be Eggshell, not Bone".
I don't support the legislation. I just don't care. I wouldn't care if the DNC repealed it. I don't care if they don't. I don't care that they passed it in the first place. I don't work for AT&T, I don't work for Facebook, so I don't have a dog in the fight. My information is out there. Be upset about it, rage and howl into the night about the injustice. No one cares about this particular piece.
quote:
Even though your narrative is objectively incorrect. Many on the left were never satisfied with the ACA that passed, for a slew of reasons. But even taking your premise at face value proves my point. The House Dems would not be allowing the AHCA to pass or let any other bill that harms the current ACA more then they see it improving it. A clear difference from right now.
You just undercut your own thesis. Congrats!
AHCA doesn't pass because GOPe Senate.
AHCA doesn't pass because DNC house.
Your conclusion: "TOTAL DIFFERENT OUTCOME! In one, the AHCA doesn't pass! In the other, it doesn't pass! You stupid right winger! You don't see the difference? HAAHHAHA"
Also "Many on the Left" are not the DNC higher ups in congress. "Many on the Left" wanted Bernie, but you don't get a say. The DNC controlling the house is not 'bonhoeffer45 controlling the house'. You aren't even on the same team, the DNC just tangentially is the local sports team of the town you happen to be living in.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 4:04 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
You have yet to provide any meaningful examples of differences. Your whole argument sums up to "The deck chairs would be Eggshell, not Bone".
You have refused to accept the factual examples provided. There is a difference.
quote:
AHCA doesn't pass because GOPe Senate.
AHCA doesn't pass because DNC house.
Complex thought is not your strong point is it?
There is only so many ways something can be explained. I broke down to a near kindergarten level and that seems to have been too much for you to handle. Probably not much more I can do to help you but last try:
In the alternative scenario you have House Dems unwilling to accept any perceived harm to the ACA structure. Eliminating the probability of harmful legislation passing to 0. But there are some common ground reforms the House Dems and Senate see eye to eye on. That can be spinned as positive sum, like the aforementioned link I provided. So you have the probability, albeit low, of passing some minor improvements that democratic voters could be more satisfied with.
In the current scenario you have a probability much greater then 0 of legislation passing that does harm to the ACA from a Democrats perspective. The Senate Republicans and House Republicans both love tax cuts for the rich and are willing to cut coverage subsidies in the ACA to pay for them.
Both scenarios have the probability of stalemate, no one ever said otherwise. But both scenarios shift the probabilities and the type of outcomes possible and probable.
This post was edited on 5/23/17 at 4:05 pm
Posted on 5/23/17 at 4:13 pm to cokebottleag
So many independent prosecutors and investigators it will make your head spin.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News