Well I guess "better of two evils" does have it's merits. As for healthcare reform, it's not healthCARE reform it's health insurance reform. Two different things. And Obamacare is nothing more than a Republican plan. He actually said it himself at a press conference where he wondered out loud why so many Repubs were against him..."...I don't understand, this is the same program Republicans tried to push through a few years ago...". Now people have the right to get insurance whose premiums will bankrupt them! And that's without getting a stitch of actual healthCARE. It was a pure handout to the insurance industry - capitalistic greed at it's worst - from Obama!You must be ignoring the many people, like my brother, who have insurance only because of the ACA. He was diagnosed with Stage IV liver cancer one year ago and was able to obtain affordable insurance to cover his chemotherapy. I agree the ACA is not the best we can do but under the circumstances it is an excellent start to true health care reform in this country. It was the best that could be done considering the Republicans in Congress who would have ended your brother's chance to get health insurance--and millions more. We could have had a decent, more workable and humane system if not for Republicans. Lois
It was the best that could be done considering the Republicans in Congress who would have ended your brother's chance to get health insurance--and millions more. We could have had a decent, more workable and humane system if not for Republicans. LoisWhat puzzles me is that despite Republicans trying to repeal the ACA my brother and father still vote Republican.
On a lighter note:
(In case you can’t see the image, its of a campaign T-shirt featuring Trump and Bill the Cat, with their faces smooshed up against one another and the caption “2016 Donald 'N Bill, Oh Hell, Why Not?”)
It was the best that could be done considering the Republicans in Congress who would have ended your brother's chance to get health insurance--and millions more. We could have had a decent, more workable and humane system if not for Republicans. LoisWhat puzzles me is that despite Republicans trying to repeal the ACA my brother and father still vote Republican. Yes, that's the problem. No matter what happens, Republicans, especially, will not abandon their Republican stance. Instead they think up excuses about how their own party would have done an even better job, despite evidence to the contrary. Some people just can't learn from experience. It has no effect. Lois
In fairness, Cuthbert did make an exception for Warren and Sanders, so maybe there is hope for his redemption from cynicism.I look at it like this: We had the dumbest of the dumb for POTUS (W), and possibly the smartest of the smart (BO), and what real difference did it make? The rich have still gotten richer, the poor poorer, we're still a completely militaristic country, education hating, and on an on. A few minor things have been allowed to occur, but that's about it. My cynicism comes primarily from Obama. I was excited, voted for him, was so happy when he got elected. And within months he showed his true colors as a Republican (old style, not the nutjob type). To me that says alot. We were played like fiddles. And this is also why I've posted so many times about electing a nutjob. I have a feeling that even if Trump got elected, he'd be steered by the powers that be into a certain direction that was similar to BO and W before him. I recognize your reasons for being disenchanted. I think that I have the advantage of not being "enchanted" in the first place. Not that I didn't and not that I don't still do, literally, love Obama. I just recognize his limitations. There is no such thing as a magical wizard, who just by recognizing what needs to be changed, can instantly and unilaterally make it happen. You are right about the problems that have continued despite Obama, especially re: income disparity. But I think that you too readily dismiss how much worse thing could be had a Repub been President instead. I think that you, also, too readily dismiss the positive changes that have occurred. No other President in history ever got any kind of a national healthcare policy in place. People with pre-existing conditions can get healthcare now. Millions who couldn't afford it can get healthcare now. No one has to stay in a job that they don't really like, simply out of not being able to give up the health insurance they have with that job. That's not minor. Gay people can get officially married now in all 50 states! You don't think that a Repub Pres and Congress would find a way to undermine that? With the repubs denial of the existence of man-caused climate change, do you think we would not be so much worse off environmentally speaking with a Repub Pres and Congress? (And I think Obama is going to make some headway on that issue during the remainder of his term.) Re: the military, sure Obama keeps droning away, but do you seriously think that a Repub Pres and Congress would not have insured massively greater numbers of our soldiers getting killed, mangled, disabled, and mentally and emotionally devastated, by now? And it does not seem a minor difference to me, that the last Pres took us to the brink of another Great Depression, and the current one has presided over us coming out of that economic fiasco. I could go on, but my point is IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE - IT HAS MADE A DIFFERENCE, to have a pragmatic, clear thinking person who cares about people, in general, to be POTUS. And if you are concerned about being "played like a fiddle" as you say, you might want to rethink your choice of someone like Donald Trump as POTUS.Well I guess "better of two evils" does have it's merits. As for healthcare reform, it's not healthCARE reform it's health insurance reform. Two different things. And Obamacare is nothing more than a Republican plan. He actually said it himself at a press conference where he wondered out loud why so many Repubs were against him..."...I don't understand, this is the same program Republicans tried to push through a few years ago...". Now people have the right to get insurance whose premiums will bankrupt them! And that's without getting a stitch of actual healthCARE. It was a pure handout to the insurance industry - capitalistic greed at it's worst - from Obama! I think that you give a somewhat reasonable criticism of the ACA, but again, it is something that was, just barely doable (in the real context of Repubs trying to blow it to bits every step of the way) [i]as opposed to nothing, and doing nothing would have been worse. And, hopefully, it will, ultimately, be a step toward single party payer. Again, if you believe that a POTUS can single handedly and immediately change the structure of our greed-ridden capitalistic structure, you are living in a fairy tale land where someone like Donald Trump can make all kinds of extraordinary claims about what he will do, and it will actually come true... just don't wake up from that Walt Disney dream. The real world is not so magical, so you will wind up complaining about there not being enough magic in the world. Presidential candidates of either party run into the same situation. When they are running they make impossible promises. If they are elected they soon learn that the President does not have the power to do what he promised. In fact he has very little power. Everything must be a compromise and it depends on how rabid the opposition is. If Obama could have created real health care reform he would have. But there was the reality of vicious Republican opposition, especially in Congress. Obama did the best he could, considering that opposition. It is better than nothing, which we have to live with. It was similar with the deal he made with Iran. No one of either party could have done better. It is better than nothing. Nothing would be disaster. That is the result of most things in politics. Better than nothing is the best that can be done. Although we are all disappointed that the party of our chosen president never seems to do what he promised before reality sets in, it is a very good thing that the opposition also can't do what it promises. Imagine if it could! The US would have completely self-destructed long ago. The founding fathers knew what they were doing when they limited presidential power and separated and limited the powers of each of the three branches of government. Lois
Well I guess "better of two evils" does have it's merits. As for healthcare reform, it's not healthCARE reform it's health insurance reform. Two different things. And Obamacare is nothing more than a Republican plan. He actually said it himself at a press conference where he wondered out loud why so many Repubs were against him..."...I don't understand, this is the same program Republicans tried to push through a few years ago...". Now people have the right to get insurance whose premiums will bankrupt them! And that's without getting a stitch of actual healthCARE. It was a pure handout to the insurance industry - capitalistic greed at it's worst - from Obama!You must be ignoring the many people, like my brother, who have insurance only because of the ACA. He was diagnosed with Stage IV liver cancer one year ago and was able to obtain affordable insurance to cover his chemotherapy. I agree the ACA is not the best we can do but under the circumstances it is an excellent start to true health care reform in this country.I do agree that in extreme cases, like chemo, insurance vs no insurance can be helpful, but only because of the extreme costs involved. But in most ordinary cases, the premiums themselves can bankrupt you before you get even a dime's worth of care. I speak from experience. I worked for a fortune 500 company, and paid around $700 a month for a group policy (where the group was over 65k employees) and that policy had a $6400 deductible. This is a typical company plan! Before I wisened up, I had medical bills I couldn't pay because I hadn't met the deductible and we almost went bankrupt. Once I realized my mistake, and went for the cheapest plan, I could afford the actual bills. THIS is what people can sign up for! A chance to be hoodwinked into thinking they're actually paying for something. And part and parcel of this is the fact that the medical institutions are no dummies. They jack up their prices to makeup for any differences. A simple 15 minute appointment to the doctor might cost upwards of $250!!
In fairness, Cuthbert did make an exception for Warren and Sanders, so maybe there is hope for his redemption from cynicism.I look at it like this: We had the dumbest of the dumb for POTUS (W), and possibly the smartest of the smart (BO), and what real difference did it make? The rich have still gotten richer, the poor poorer, we're still a completely militaristic country, education hating, and on an on. A few minor things have been allowed to occur, but that's about it. My cynicism comes primarily from Obama. I was excited, voted for him, was so happy when he got elected. And within months he showed his true colors as a Republican (old style, not the nutjob type). To me that says alot. We were played like fiddles. And this is also why I've posted so many times about electing a nutjob. I have a feeling that even if Trump got elected, he'd be steered by the powers that be into a certain direction that was similar to BO and W before him. I recognize your reasons for being disenchanted. I think that I have the advantage of not being "enchanted" in the first place. Not that I didn't and not that I don't still do, literally, love Obama. I just recognize his limitations. There is no such thing as a magical wizard, who just by recognizing what needs to be changed, can instantly and unilaterally make it happen. You are right about the problems that have continued despite Obama, especially re: income disparity. But I think that you too readily dismiss how much worse thing could be had a Repub been President instead. I think that you, also, too readily dismiss the positive changes that have occurred. No other President in history ever got any kind of a national healthcare policy in place. People with pre-existing conditions can get healthcare now. Millions who couldn't afford it can get healthcare now. No one has to stay in a job that they don't really like, simply out of not being able to give up the health insurance they have with that job. That's not minor. Gay people can get officially married now in all 50 states! You don't think that a Repub Pres and Congress would find a way to undermine that? With the repubs denial of the existence of man-caused climate change, do you think we would not be so much worse off environmentally speaking with a Repub Pres and Congress? (And I think Obama is going to make some headway on that issue during the remainder of his term.) Re: the military, sure Obama keeps droning away, but do you seriously think that a Repub Pres and Congress would not have insured massively greater numbers of our soldiers getting killed, mangled, disabled, and mentally and emotionally devastated, by now? And it does not seem a minor difference to me, that the last Pres took us to the brink of another Great Depression, and the current one has presided over us coming out of that economic fiasco. I could go on, but my point is IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE - IT HAS MADE A DIFFERENCE, to have a pragmatic, clear thinking person who cares about people, in general, to be POTUS. And if you are concerned about being "played like a fiddle" as you say, you might want to rethink your choice of someone like Donald Trump as POTUS.Well I guess "better of two evils" does have it's merits. As for healthcare reform, it's not healthCARE reform it's health insurance reform. Two different things. And Obamacare is nothing more than a Republican plan. He actually said it himself at a press conference where he wondered out loud why so many Repubs were against him..."...I don't understand, this is the same program Republicans tried to push through a few years ago...". Now people have the right to get insurance whose premiums will bankrupt them! And that's without getting a stitch of actual healthCARE. It was a pure handout to the insurance industry - capitalistic greed at it's worst - from Obama! I think that you give a somewhat reasonable criticism of the ACA, but again, it is something that was, just barely doable (in the real context of Repubs trying to blow it to bits every step of the way) [i]as opposed to nothing, and doing nothing would have been worse. And, hopefully, it will, ultimately, be a step toward single party payer. Again, if you believe that a POTUS can single handedly and immediately change the structure of our greed-ridden capitalistic structure, you are living in a fairy tale land where someone like Donald Trump can make all kinds of extraordinary claims about what he will do, and it will actually come true... just don't wake up from that Walt Disney dream. The real world is not so magical, so you will wind up complaining about there not being enough magic in the world.Nah, I don't believe the president has anything to do with the course of the country outside a small window of options made available to them. That's part of why I think I wouldn't mind seeing Trump elected...to see if I'm right in thinking POTUS is purely a figurehead. But I'm rational, I do have my doubts either way. If Bernie gets the Dem nomination then I will vote for him. Hillary gets it? Then maybe I'll consider Trump or just not vote.
We’d be better off if you don’t vote. Trump as president would be a disaster for everyone and would make the US a bigger laughingstock abroad than it is already. Putting in Trump to prove a point is playing with fire. A president is not just a figurehead. He has some power and influence, just not as much as many presidential candidates think. It’s enough to cause great damage to the country and the people. I wouldn’t take a chance. There is always a third party to vote for if Trump is the Republican candidate. We don’t need more trouble than we’ve already had to deal with when it comes to Republican presidents. They CAN cause great damage as Reagan and Bush II have proven.
Don’t play with fire.
LL
I noticed that today, Obama ordered even steeper cuts to greenhouse emissions by US industries. And he still has over a year and a quarter left to do more.
4 days to go until the big clown debate. Maybe we’ll know more about Trump’s chances after that.
4 days to go until the big clown debate. Maybe we'll know more about Trump's chances after that.It's going to be a 16-ring circus. Lois
4 days to go until the big clown debate. Maybe we'll know more about Trump's chances after that.It's going to be a 16-ring circus. Lois I think it's 17, now. Thursday afternoon, the 7 lower ranked clowns will have a "kid's table" debate. Then Thursday evening, the top 10 clowns will provide the entertainment.
4 days to go until the big clown debate. Maybe we'll know more about Trump's chances after that.As of right now, he has a double digit lead in the polls. http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/08/03/poll-trump-debate-format/
4 days to go until the big clown debate. Maybe we'll know more about Trump's chances after that.As of right now, he has a double digit lead in the polls. http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/08/03/poll-trump-debate-format/ People are entertained by clowns, especially children and stupid adults. LL
4 days to go until the big clown debate. Maybe we'll know more about Trump's chances after that.As of right now, he has a double digit lead in the polls. http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/08/03/poll-trump-debate-format/ Good. You're back. The outcome of this debate, defies prediction, but I am not one to let that phase me. Trump, I am guessing will, I think, most likely, not go up in the national polling after the debate (at least not immediately). And this is why I think that: It is not because I am assuming that he will make some horrible "gaff". (I am not sure that he could say or do anything Trump-like that would turn off his supporters.) I think, though, that he will lose some percentage points to others in the debate who are successful in presenting themselves. Trump's support seems to be demographically broad based. But across the population of people who are drawn to the Republican shtick, there are many who don't know a lot of the candidates from "Joe Blow". Once, they start to recognize and remember some of the other candidates, I suspect that the one or two or three candidates that may distinguish themselves, in some way to the broad base of the constituency, will leach off some of the support from Trump, (who everybody already knows) moreso than from the candidates that are doing relatively well already, but are not well known. e.g., if Scott Walker, presents himself well (from a Republican perspective) he could leach off a bit of Trump support, because he is just not, yet, particularly well known among the constituency. (Not that I want him to. I would prefer that he and some of his fellow candidates burn in their own mythical hell.)
The one thing Trump does prove, and really others before him who were considered “uncouth”, is that Americans, left right center, are sick of the usual well mannered politician who appears to say all the right things in all the right ways. The smooth operator, and Obama and Hillary are the best, but Jubba, Walker, and all the rest of the non-clowns, too. When I ask someone “Do you like hotdogs” I want the candidate to reply “shit ya, they’re delicious” or “shit no, horrible”. What I don’t want is “In terms of nutrition, texture, and viability of a food substance, one can argue that hotdogs are both…” blah blah blah. Just tell us what you think. That’s what people are responding to in Trump, not his ideas or even what’ll happen to the country.
The one thing Trump does prove, and really others before him who were considered "uncouth", is that Americans, left right center, are sick of the usual well mannered politician who appears to say all the right things in all the right ways. The smooth operator, and Obama and Hillary are the best, but Jubba, Walker, and all the rest of the non-clowns, too. When I ask someone "Do you like hotdogs" I want the candidate to reply "shit ya, they're delicious" or "shit no, horrible". What I don't want is "In terms of nutrition, texture, and viability of a food substance, one can argue that hotdogs are both...." blah blah blah. Just tell us what you think. That's what people are responding to in Trump, not his ideas or even what'll happen to the country.In other words, most people are shallow thinkers.
The one thing Trump does prove, and really others before him who were considered "uncouth", is that Americans, left right center, are sick of the usual well mannered politician who appears to say all the right things in all the right ways. The smooth operator, and Obama and Hillary are the best, but Jubba, Walker, and all the rest of the non-clowns, too. When I ask someone "Do you like hotdogs" I want the candidate to reply "shit ya, they're delicious" or "shit no, horrible". What I don't want is "In terms of nutrition, texture, and viability of a food substance, one can argue that hotdogs are both...." blah blah blah. Just tell us what you think. That's what people are responding to in Trump, not his ideas or even what'll happen to the country.In other words, most people are shallow thinkers.Exactly! And if you think otherwise, you're fooling yourself. Another part of the problem is, Liberals want to believe people aren't shallow, and we treat them as not shallow by appealing to logic, reason, etc, and get effed almost every time. Conservatives OTOH realize they are, i.e. know their audience, act on it, and clobber us. It's really Idiocracy played out for real.
The one thing Trump does prove, and really others before him who were considered "uncouth", is that Americans, left right center, are sick of the usual well mannered politician who appears to say all the right things in all the right ways. The smooth operator, and Obama and Hillary are the best, but Jubba, Walker, and all the rest of the non-clowns, too. When I ask someone "Do you like hotdogs" I want the candidate to reply "shit ya, they're delicious" or "shit no, horrible". What I don't want is "In terms of nutrition, texture, and viability of a food substance, one can argue that hotdogs are both...." blah blah blah. Just tell us what you think. That's what people are responding to in Trump, not his ideas or even what'll happen to the country.I think one powerful aspect of Trump's attractiveness to his constituency (and the same goes for Bernie Sanders) is his not seeming beholden to the money of others. Few of us want our government to remain a kind of plutocracy.
The one thing Trump does prove, and really others before him who were considered "uncouth", is that Americans, left right center, are sick of the usual well mannered politician who appears to say all the right things in all the right ways. The smooth operator, and Obama and Hillary are the best, but Jubba, Walker, and all the rest of the non-clowns, too. When I ask someone "Do you like hotdogs" I want the candidate to reply "shit ya, they're delicious" or "shit no, horrible". What I don't want is "In terms of nutrition, texture, and viability of a food substance, one can argue that hotdogs are both...." blah blah blah. Just tell us what you think. That's what people are responding to in Trump, not his ideas or even what'll happen to the country.In other words, most people are shallow thinkers.Exactly! And if you think otherwise, you're fooling yourself. Another part of the problem is, Liberals want to believe people aren't shallow, and we treat them as not shallow by appealing to logic, reason, etc, and get effed almost every time. Conservatives OTOH realize they are, i.e. know their audience, act on it, and clobber us. It's really Idiocracy played out for real. Cynicism, IMO, is another form of shallowness.