Upstate New York is very similar to appalachia in a lot of ways. They believe that they subsidize New York City through their taxes, when the opposite is true. There is very real tension between NYC and the rural parts of the state.
But for some fucking reason they have an equal say in how the NYC subway is fucking run
There is no small part of me that's sitting back and enjoying the show this is causing. About as large a part that's panicking about the sky falling.
But more than anything else, I'm curious as to how this will all turn out. I've yet to find anyone other than Fox News as being for this bill. Hell, the AARP is calling for the head of anyone who votes for it. The goddamned AARP is calling for the heads of anyone who votes for it. Yes, I wrote that twice because it's an absolutely crazy thing to have to contemplate, let alone accept as actually having happened (tweet from a MSNBC show producer). Now, I don't know how effective the AARP would be in getting people to change their voting habits, but it's not a powerless group. Far from it. It has worked closely with the GOP in the past to keep stupid things from happening if not gouging the opportunities of the young out of their hands but I digress.
The AARP was, nominally, an ally for the GOP to rely on to see this abomination of a law get public support. But the AARP isn't having any of it.
So I guess the people running the show in the GOP really, truly believe they're untouchable. I'm simply gobsmacked by how little they seem to care about anything other than getting the bill through. And it'll be like with the allowing foreign states to be sued. "Someone should have stopped us!"
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
Upstate New York is very similar to appalachia in a lot of ways. They believe that they subsidize New York City through their taxes, when the opposite is true. There is very real tension between NYC and the rural parts of the state.
But for some fucking reason they have an equal say in how the NYC subway is fucking run
And how the NYC schools are run (which is the current fight.)
NYC and New York State would be better separated. NYC is big enough to run as a city-state on its own. New York State would also benefit, as its agricultural/mining concerns are not even remotely related to NYC's concerns.
Grayson is a very silly goose and his speech helped solidify opposition at the time.
It is exactly the opposite of what should be done with Democrats in the opposition, because it will harden the GOP base. If Grayson is your example for how to oppose the AHCA, you have already conceded defeat.
I remember this thinking at the time, and the tsk tsking because Grayson blundered and solidified the Republicans. But the entire Republican posture during the ACA negotiations was a sham. Every minute spent debating the bill with Republicans was 2 minutes wasted on bad faith actors who were there only for sabotage.
Grayson is one of the few who plainly articulated the Republican political program. Grayson didn't make the Republicans do one thing they weren't already planning to do.
To be fair, this ended up getting the ACA into law. It may not be perfect but it was that or nothing - there was no path to a better healthcare bill getting past congress, things like single payer and UHC were never on the table to passing congress. That bill has literally saved millions of lives, I don't see why this is a bad thing.
What are you even talking about, do you have some "it's not perfect, but" speech copied to drop into everything? Learn to read.
Upstate New York is very similar to appalachia in a lot of ways. They believe that they subsidize New York City through their taxes, when the opposite is true. There is very real tension between NYC and the rural parts of the state.
But for some fucking reason they have an equal say in how the NYC subway is fucking run
And how the NYC schools are run (which is the current fight.)
NYC and New York State would be better separated. NYC is big enough to run as a city-state on its own. New York State would also benefit, as its agricultural/mining concerns are not even remotely related to NYC's concerns.
That would be one way to properly balance the U.S. government without amending the constitution. Allow cities of a certain size petition to become states, giving them an appropriate share of electoral votes and congressional representatives. Admittedly, they'd also get two senators which would heavily tilt the senate towards Democrats.
Brief update: My partner was, to my surprise, excited about expressing her, ahem, "feelings" about Trumpcare publicly. I've reached out to all of my friends in both politics and media so updates will be forthcoming. She is a bit worried about getting her name dragged through the mud, but we both agree that the personal cost is outweighed by the public benefit.
Small correction: My partner is on Medicare because of her disability, not Medicaid, but otherwise the facts are correct as previously posted.
According to people at work, Obamacare such a devastatingly bad policy ANY bill would be better omygosh those evil Dems are trying to block it again they will doom us all.
If GOP bill demanded blood sacrifice prior to enrollment, these people would still cheer it to replace Obamacare.
Upstate New York is very similar to appalachia in a lot of ways. They believe that they subsidize New York City through their taxes, when the opposite is true. There is very real tension between NYC and the rural parts of the state.
But for some fucking reason they have an equal say in how the NYC subway is fucking run
And how the NYC schools are run (which is the current fight.)
NYC and New York State would be better separated. NYC is big enough to run as a city-state on its own. New York State would also benefit, as its agricultural/mining concerns are not even remotely related to NYC's concerns.
That would be one way to properly balance the U.S. government without amending the constitution. Allow cities of a certain size petition to become states, giving them an appropriate share of electoral votes and congressional representatives. Admittedly, they'd also get two senators which would heavily tilt the senate towards Democrats.
I think it would depend on what kind of senators a state already had. New York already has two Dem senators, right? So for them it would be an increase of two Repub senators since the back country can now get whatever their hick hearts desire.
Upstate New York is very similar to appalachia in a lot of ways. They believe that they subsidize New York City through their taxes, when the opposite is true. There is very real tension between NYC and the rural parts of the state.
But for some fucking reason they have an equal say in how the NYC subway is fucking run
And how the NYC schools are run (which is the current fight.)
NYC and New York State would be better separated. NYC is big enough to run as a city-state on its own. New York State would also benefit, as its agricultural/mining concerns are not even remotely related to NYC's concerns.
That would be one way to properly balance the U.S. government without amending the constitution. Allow cities of a certain size petition to become states, giving them an appropriate share of electoral votes and congressional representatives. Admittedly, they'd also get two senators which would heavily tilt the senate towards Democrats.
I think it would depend on what kind of senators a state already had. New York already has two Dem senators, right? So for them it would be an increase of two Repub senators since the back country can now get whatever their hick hearts desire.
Upstate New York is very similar to appalachia in a lot of ways. They believe that they subsidize New York City through their taxes, when the opposite is true. There is very real tension between NYC and the rural parts of the state.
Yes and no, the cost of doing business anywhere in New York has gone up. State business taxes and property taxes have drive out multiple major job suppliers in upstate New York, the income and property taxes make upstate new york an undesirable place to live, and the smaller areas like Mexico or Syracuse get less money per student in education benefits back from their property taxes than the larger cities.
It's less like subsidizing the city and more like the taxes are based on the city.
Upstate New York is very similar to appalachia in a lot of ways. They believe that they subsidize New York City through their taxes, when the opposite is true. There is very real tension between NYC and the rural parts of the state.
But for some fucking reason they have an equal say in how the NYC subway is fucking run
And how the NYC schools are run (which is the current fight.)
NYC and New York State would be better separated. NYC is big enough to run as a city-state on its own. New York State would also benefit, as its agricultural/mining concerns are not even remotely related to NYC's concerns.
That would be one way to properly balance the U.S. government without amending the constitution. Allow cities of a certain size petition to become states, giving them an appropriate share of electoral votes and congressional representatives. Admittedly, they'd also get two senators which would heavily tilt the senate towards Democrats.
I think it would depend on what kind of senators a state already had. New York already has two Dem senators, right? So for them it would be an increase of two Repub senators since the back country can now get whatever their hick hearts desire.
Turning the big cities into city states would probably vastly increase the number of Republican senators because the sticks *always* vote Republican.
It'd still be beneficial on a local level, though.
While almost three-fourths of Americans have a favorable view of Medicaid, only about four in 10 — 38 percent — are aware that the House-passed American Health Care Act would make major funding reductions and structural changes to the program. About a fourth of respondents said the bill made “minor reductions” to Medicaid, and 13 percent didn’t realize there were any proposed cuts. (The poll was conducted before the Senate released its legislation on June 22.)
This is a huge basic knowledge gap Democrats should have avoided. Way too much time was wasted on other things instead yelling to everyone about an imminent danger.
..wait so most people hate it AND most people aren't aware of how badly it fucks Medicaid? Wow.
most people don't bother to read bills. seems like a combination of not having enough time, a sore lack of proper civics education, and simply not caring enough. most Americans seem this way, explaining a LOT of Trump support. it's disheartening.
While almost three-fourths of Americans have a favorable view of Medicaid, only about four in 10 — 38 percent — are aware that the House-passed American Health Care Act would make major funding reductions and structural changes to the program. About a fourth of respondents said the bill made “minor reductions” to Medicaid, and 13 percent didn’t realize there were any proposed cuts. (The poll was conducted before the Senate released its legislation on June 22.)
This is a huge basic knowledge gap Democrats should have avoided. Way too much time was wasted on other things instead yelling to everyone about an imminent danger.
To be fair, that's based on how much people know about the specific depth of cuts that the bill makes to Medicare, and the actual text of the bill wasn't released publicly until yesterday. And the poll was conducted before that had been released. So, unless they're psychics, the best information that can be taken from that is:
1) The majority of people knew that there was going to be some cut to medicare (38% said major cuts, 25% said minor cuts)
2) The Republicans were malfeasant in their attempts to miscommunicate what was in the bill.
There's a whole lot of terrible in this bill, but I think the thing that terrifies me most is how blatantly they're going after a big entitlement. People LOVE those programs; they aren't called the 'third rail' of American politics for nothing. If you touch them, you probably gonna die.
But here we are, and the GOP isn't just touching the third rail, they're pissing on it, just straight up taking that money and giving it away to the hyper rich.
If they do that and DON'T get utterly, completely, resoundingly, repeatedly fucked sideways and every ballot box for the next 10 years (and they won't!) the New Deal won't even exist in a decade...but all the spending will, funneling your tax dollars to subsidize the wealthy!
While almost three-fourths of Americans have a favorable view of Medicaid, only about four in 10 — 38 percent — are aware that the House-passed American Health Care Act would make major funding reductions and structural changes to the program. About a fourth of respondents said the bill made “minor reductions” to Medicaid, and 13 percent didn’t realize there were any proposed cuts. (The poll was conducted before the Senate released its legislation on June 22.)
This is a huge basic knowledge gap Democrats should have avoided. Way too much time was wasted on other things instead yelling to everyone about an imminent danger.
How is this the fault of Democrats? The poll was conducted before the text of the bill was released. The expectation was that the GOP was going to gut the ACA, not sidestep it and go straight for Medicaid.
+3
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
The bill was only released yesterday. No poll is going to take into account what is actually in the bill.
Jennifer Haberkorn is a politico healthcare reporter.
Heller is one of the most vulnerable senate republicans and Sandoval is one of the republican governors who voiced opposition to the AHCA. A joint press conference could be a positive sign that he'll oppose the bill, or it could be an unfortunate train wreck where they're trying to sell it to the public. I'm leaning more toward the former based off the governors' letter though.
Cuts to Medicaid were already in the house bill. I probably shouldn't focus on it particularly because it's not like there was anything else about the bill they were yelling about.
While almost three-fourths of Americans have a favorable view of Medicaid, only about four in 10 — 38 percent — are aware that the House-passed American Health Care Act would make major funding reductions and structural changes to the program. About a fourth of respondents said the bill made “minor reductions” to Medicaid, and 13 percent didn’t realize there were any proposed cuts. (The poll was conducted before the Senate released its legislation on June 22.)
This is a huge basic knowledge gap Democrats should have avoided. Way too much time was wasted on other things instead yelling to everyone about an imminent danger.
How is this the fault of Democrats? The poll was conducted before the text of the bill was released. The expectation was that the GOP was going to gut the ACA, not sidestep it and go straight for Medicaid.
Democrats are responsible for their actions, any inaction they may have taken, any action that you would have done differently, the actions of Republicans, and the actions of the news media.
+22
Options
HedgethornAssociate Professor of Historical Hobby HorsesIn the Lions' DenRegistered Userregular
Cuts to Medicaid were already in the house bill. I probably shouldn't focus on it particularly because it's not like there was anything else about the bill they were yelling about.
The Senate's cuts to Medicaid are deeper in the long run than the House's.
While almost three-fourths of Americans have a favorable view of Medicaid, only about four in 10 — 38 percent — are aware that the House-passed American Health Care Act would make major funding reductions and structural changes to the program. About a fourth of respondents said the bill made “minor reductions” to Medicaid, and 13 percent didn’t realize there were any proposed cuts. (The poll was conducted before the Senate released its legislation on June 22.)
This is a huge basic knowledge gap Democrats should have avoided. Way too much time was wasted on other things instead yelling to everyone about an imminent danger.
How is this the fault of Democrats? The poll was conducted before the text of the bill was released. The expectation was that the GOP was going to gut the ACA, not sidestep it and go straight for Medicaid.
Democrats are responsible for their actions, any inaction they may have taken, any action that you would have done differently, the actions of Republicans, and the actions of the news media.
I know you're being flippant, but I do actually expect Democrats to be able to talk both about what's good about their shit, and what's bad about Republican shit.
There's a whole lot of terrible in this bill, but I think the thing that terrifies me most is how blatantly they're going after a big entitlement. People LOVE those programs; they aren't called the 'third rail' of American politics for nothing. If you touch them, you probably gonna die.
But here we are, and the GOP isn't just touching the third rail, they're pissing on it, just straight up taking that money and giving it away to the hyper rich.
If they do that and DON'T get utterly, completely, resoundingly, repeatedly fucked sideways and every ballot box for the next 10 years (and they won't!) the New Deal won't even exist in a decade...but all the spending will, funneling your tax dollars to subsidize the wealthy!
People are terrible at predicting the future and planning for it. Even when we try, we are likely to make several mistakes and missteps because that's just how our brains work. Let's not even get into the statistical aspects of it because that'll make everyone's eyes roll backwards.
Instead understand that until it hits some right in their home, they won't care. And even then, some will think they deserve it. This isn't pessimism or cynicism talking, this is being honest about how humans work. Look at how the New Deal came about and how much that was fought against by the wealthy elite and some of the general populace. Despite how much it benefited the rich, they still lashed out at it. They still attempted to take it down because reasons, none of which were actually germain to providing a solution to the economic depression the world was suffering through.
And some have been fighting that fight ever since. Out of some misguided sense of "responsibility" or ideological purity or religious belief. I think it's finally sunk into me that it doesn't really matter the reason. They fight it because they have to have something to fight against because that's all they know what to do. It's not even personal to people like Ryan or McConnel. It's what they think they need to do and even if they stopped to consider that any deeper, it's the answer they'd come away with. These people aren't politicians. Not in the sense that they've been put there to govern. They've been put there to "correct" things. They've been put there to exercise their zeal.
Which is how we've got to where we are. They've sold their souls to set up this situation with Trump. He's perfect for this. He doesn't know or want to understand what's he saying. All he wants is to be adored, so he'll say whatever gets him that in the moment. He's a walking, talking Id. This distracts a lot of the press so they're busy trying to get their minds wrapped around that mess instead of looking at the laws being passed too deeply. Or would be if we didn't have the internet and a 24-hour news cycle. With both of those, the rocks are being looked under and we get things like the protest yesterday and the St. Louis newspaper headlines.
I got no idea how this is going to work out. At this point, I'm pretty exhausted.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
@Elki Some of that is framing, like cuts to medicaid will only affect the people that abuse it and not people like us that really need it.
It's a 2 camp dilemma: a large enough percent of the base actually uses the program so support for cuts has to employ waste/fraud rhetoric. These individuals may fall into the "favorable" category yet still support cuts to funding. Second part of the base doesn't use medicaid and sees the program as a leech of their hard earn tax dollars by lazy moochers that should buy their own insurance just like they did. That's your 13 to 30% "unfavorable"
..wait so most people hate it AND most people aren't aware of how badly it fucks Medicaid? Wow.
most people don't bother to read bills. seems like a combination of not having enough time, a sore lack of proper civics education, and simply not caring enough. most Americans seem this way, explaining a LOT of Trump support. it's disheartening.
I mean, I kinda think that in a way this is kind of what a representative democracy is and why it exists. Keeping up with all the stuff that proper governance requires knowing and reading is basically a full time job, so we elect public servants whose full-time job is to keep up with all this shit and take informed decisions for us, because the average voter has enough on their plate getting to next month's paycheck.
The problem comes when the representatives in question do... well, what the Repubs are doing and have been doing for a while now. Lying to their electors, hiding things, taking decisions that hurt the people that they're supposed to be making decisions for in favor of a few rich buddies, trying to out-ignorant each other and refusing to read or care about anything that is supposed to be their job... And of course the huge anti-intellectualism campaign of the last decades, trying to convince people that not only doesn't your representative need to be informed, the more ignorant he is the more honest and "real" he is.
I was listening to MSNBC today and the prevailing narrative across all shows seems to "What's the point of this?"
Saying that all this does is just take the ACA, shrink it, giving less to everybody just for the sake of a tax cut for the super wealthy.
That the Republicans started with a tax cut and everything is just a work around for it.
That's what's insane to me, like they literally are just screwing people for a tax cut. I can't even see how they sell this as good to people other than a nebulous "we are repealing Obamacare." And its not even a general tax cut, its specifically a mega rich tax cut.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
This is the kind of shit you see in illiberal democracies when the President's party knows they face no repercussions for anything they do: pass pointlessly stupid laws because they can. That's what this is. It's partially because they realize they have to do something after years of bleating about it, and partially just a power move to humiliate their foes. The substance of the bill is largely meaningless to most of the party, except for a few hard-right ideologues who will at least stick to their principles.
I was listening to MSNBC today and the prevailing narrative across all shows seems to "What's the point of this?"
Saying that all this does is just take the ACA, shrink it, giving less to everybody just for the sake of a tax cut for the super wealthy.
That the Republicans started with a tax cut and everything is just a work around for it.
That's what's insane to me, like they literally are just screwing people for a tax cut. I can't even see how they sell this as good to people other than a nebulous "we are repealing Obamacare." And its not even a general tax cut, its specifically a mega rich tax cut.
On Fox News, they sell it by attacking the ACA and having the occasional fantasy about AHCA.
On The Five, a roundtable talk show, the pundits did devote a substantial amount of time — 10 minutes — to what they described as the “SENATE HEALTH CARE SHOWDOWN.” But the framing was entirely political. Instead of talking about what the bill would do, they talked about the bill’s chances of making it through Congress.
The crew then began to fantasize about what it would mean for the president if this bill were to pass.
“Health care passes, tax reform gets teed up, the economy starts jamming again,” Watters mused. “This could be a turning point.”
“Yes, in theory, you could actually get there” said Dana Perino, a former press secretary for President George W. Bush. “But the next two weeks, they are not going to be smooth.”
Juan Williams, the token liberal, was the only person who brought up substantive details about the new Republican bill. “This is going to drive the premiums and costs for working people who come to the hospital,” he said. “What about the elderly, Jesse? The people we all have sympathy for?”
“They are all going to die, according to the liberals,” Gutfeld mocked.
“You forgot the children dying of cancer,” deadpanned Kimberly Guilfoyle, who was at one point rumored to be a possible replacement for Sean Spicer as the president’s press secretary.
I was listening to MSNBC today and the prevailing narrative across all shows seems to "What's the point of this?"
Saying that all this does is just take the ACA, shrink it, giving less to everybody just for the sake of a tax cut for the super wealthy.
That the Republicans started with a tax cut and everything is just a work around for it.
That's what's insane to me, like they literally are just screwing people for a tax cut. I can't even see how they sell this as good to people other than a nebulous "we are repealing Obamacare." And its not even a general tax cut, its specifically a mega rich tax cut.
Yeah, at least throw us a bone and cut our taxes a little, too! But no. This is just for the 1%. Someone's gotta pay the taxes, and the people who pay taxes via Turbotax are a lot easier to tax than guys with expensive accountants.
“You forgot the children dying of cancer,” deadpanned Kimberly Guilfoyle, who was at one point rumored to be a possible replacement for Sean Spicer as the president’s press secretary.
At this point, it's OK to wish that terrible things will happen to that person, right?
While almost three-fourths of Americans have a favorable view of Medicaid, only about four in 10 — 38 percent — are aware that the House-passed American Health Care Act would make major funding reductions and structural changes to the program. About a fourth of respondents said the bill made “minor reductions” to Medicaid, and 13 percent didn’t realize there were any proposed cuts. (The poll was conducted before the Senate released its legislation on June 22.)
This is a huge basic knowledge gap Democrats should have avoided. Way too much time was wasted on other things instead yelling to everyone about an imminent danger.
How is this the fault of Democrats? The poll was conducted before the text of the bill was released. The expectation was that the GOP was going to gut the ACA, not sidestep it and go straight for Medicaid.
Democrats are responsible for their actions, any inaction they may have taken, any action that you would have done differently, the actions of Republicans, and the actions of the news media.
I know you're being flippant, but I do actually expect Democrats to be able to talk both about what's good about their shit, and what's bad about Republican shit.
They did, people either didn't care or weren't happy because it wasn't everything they've always wanted.
0
Options
HedgethornAssociate Professor of Historical Hobby HorsesIn the Lions' DenRegistered Userregular
Heller (R-NV), in a joint press conference with Nevada's Republican Governor, announces his opposition to the Senate bill. Governor Sandoval made an impassioned defense of the Medicaid expansion. (Tweets from a Nevada journalist livestreaming the press conference.)
Posts
But for some fucking reason they have an equal say in how the NYC subway is fucking run
But more than anything else, I'm curious as to how this will all turn out. I've yet to find anyone other than Fox News as being for this bill. Hell, the AARP is calling for the head of anyone who votes for it. The goddamned AARP is calling for the heads of anyone who votes for it. Yes, I wrote that twice because it's an absolutely crazy thing to have to contemplate, let alone accept as actually having happened (tweet from a MSNBC show producer). Now, I don't know how effective the AARP would be in getting people to change their voting habits, but it's not a powerless group. Far from it. It has worked closely with the GOP in the past to keep stupid things from happening if not gouging the opportunities of the young out of their hands but I digress.
The AARP was, nominally, an ally for the GOP to rely on to see this abomination of a law get public support. But the AARP isn't having any of it.
So I guess the people running the show in the GOP really, truly believe they're untouchable. I'm simply gobsmacked by how little they seem to care about anything other than getting the bill through. And it'll be like with the allowing foreign states to be sued. "Someone should have stopped us!"
And how the NYC schools are run (which is the current fight.)
NYC and New York State would be better separated. NYC is big enough to run as a city-state on its own. New York State would also benefit, as its agricultural/mining concerns are not even remotely related to NYC's concerns.
What are you even talking about, do you have some "it's not perfect, but" speech copied to drop into everything? Learn to read.
That would be one way to properly balance the U.S. government without amending the constitution. Allow cities of a certain size petition to become states, giving them an appropriate share of electoral votes and congressional representatives. Admittedly, they'd also get two senators which would heavily tilt the senate towards Democrats.
Small correction: My partner is on Medicare because of her disability, not Medicaid, but otherwise the facts are correct as previously posted.
If GOP bill demanded blood sacrifice prior to enrollment, these people would still cheer it to replace Obamacare.
I think it would depend on what kind of senators a state already had. New York already has two Dem senators, right? So for them it would be an increase of two Repub senators since the back country can now get whatever their hick hearts desire.
Yo not on topic.
Neither is lead in water by the by.
Yes and no, the cost of doing business anywhere in New York has gone up. State business taxes and property taxes have drive out multiple major job suppliers in upstate New York, the income and property taxes make upstate new york an undesirable place to live, and the smaller areas like Mexico or Syracuse get less money per student in education benefits back from their property taxes than the larger cities.
It's less like subsidizing the city and more like the taxes are based on the city.
Turning the big cities into city states would probably vastly increase the number of Republican senators because the sticks *always* vote Republican.
It'd still be beneficial on a local level, though.
http://khn.org/news/poll-most-americans-unaware-gop-plans-would-make-deep-funding-cuts-to-medicaid/
This is a huge basic knowledge gap Democrats should have avoided. Way too much time was wasted on other things instead yelling to everyone about an imminent danger.
Like I had no idea half of all births are covered by Medicaid.
Who has babies? Young people. Who tends to skip out on health insurance, trusting to the health of youth? Young people.
Note how nicely this interacts with the Republican hostility to birth control and insistence that accidental babies be brought to term.
It's just not viewed as a negative since obviously only lazy liberals and illegals are in medicaid.
most people don't bother to read bills. seems like a combination of not having enough time, a sore lack of proper civics education, and simply not caring enough. most Americans seem this way, explaining a LOT of Trump support. it's disheartening.
steam | Dokkan: 868846562
Daniel Dale is a political reporter for the Toronto Star.
Good to see the media start to be open about what's happening.
To be fair, that's based on how much people know about the specific depth of cuts that the bill makes to Medicare, and the actual text of the bill wasn't released publicly until yesterday. And the poll was conducted before that had been released. So, unless they're psychics, the best information that can be taken from that is:
1) The majority of people knew that there was going to be some cut to medicare (38% said major cuts, 25% said minor cuts)
2) The Republicans were malfeasant in their attempts to miscommunicate what was in the bill.
But here we are, and the GOP isn't just touching the third rail, they're pissing on it, just straight up taking that money and giving it away to the hyper rich.
If they do that and DON'T get utterly, completely, resoundingly, repeatedly fucked sideways and every ballot box for the next 10 years (and they won't!) the New Deal won't even exist in a decade...but all the spending will, funneling your tax dollars to subsidize the wealthy!
How is this the fault of Democrats? The poll was conducted before the text of the bill was released. The expectation was that the GOP was going to gut the ACA, not sidestep it and go straight for Medicaid.
Jennifer Haberkorn is a politico healthcare reporter.
Heller is one of the most vulnerable senate republicans and Sandoval is one of the republican governors who voiced opposition to the AHCA. A joint press conference could be a positive sign that he'll oppose the bill, or it could be an unfortunate train wreck where they're trying to sell it to the public. I'm leaning more toward the former based off the governors' letter though.
Democrats are responsible for their actions, any inaction they may have taken, any action that you would have done differently, the actions of Republicans, and the actions of the news media.
The Senate's cuts to Medicaid are deeper in the long run than the House's.
I know you're being flippant, but I do actually expect Democrats to be able to talk both about what's good about their shit, and what's bad about Republican shit.
People are terrible at predicting the future and planning for it. Even when we try, we are likely to make several mistakes and missteps because that's just how our brains work. Let's not even get into the statistical aspects of it because that'll make everyone's eyes roll backwards.
Instead understand that until it hits some right in their home, they won't care. And even then, some will think they deserve it. This isn't pessimism or cynicism talking, this is being honest about how humans work. Look at how the New Deal came about and how much that was fought against by the wealthy elite and some of the general populace. Despite how much it benefited the rich, they still lashed out at it. They still attempted to take it down because reasons, none of which were actually germain to providing a solution to the economic depression the world was suffering through.
And some have been fighting that fight ever since. Out of some misguided sense of "responsibility" or ideological purity or religious belief. I think it's finally sunk into me that it doesn't really matter the reason. They fight it because they have to have something to fight against because that's all they know what to do. It's not even personal to people like Ryan or McConnel. It's what they think they need to do and even if they stopped to consider that any deeper, it's the answer they'd come away with. These people aren't politicians. Not in the sense that they've been put there to govern. They've been put there to "correct" things. They've been put there to exercise their zeal.
Which is how we've got to where we are. They've sold their souls to set up this situation with Trump. He's perfect for this. He doesn't know or want to understand what's he saying. All he wants is to be adored, so he'll say whatever gets him that in the moment. He's a walking, talking Id. This distracts a lot of the press so they're busy trying to get their minds wrapped around that mess instead of looking at the laws being passed too deeply. Or would be if we didn't have the internet and a 24-hour news cycle. With both of those, the rocks are being looked under and we get things like the protest yesterday and the St. Louis newspaper headlines.
I got no idea how this is going to work out. At this point, I'm pretty exhausted.
It's a 2 camp dilemma: a large enough percent of the base actually uses the program so support for cuts has to employ waste/fraud rhetoric. These individuals may fall into the "favorable" category yet still support cuts to funding. Second part of the base doesn't use medicaid and sees the program as a leech of their hard earn tax dollars by lazy moochers that should buy their own insurance just like they did. That's your 13 to 30% "unfavorable"
I mean, I kinda think that in a way this is kind of what a representative democracy is and why it exists. Keeping up with all the stuff that proper governance requires knowing and reading is basically a full time job, so we elect public servants whose full-time job is to keep up with all this shit and take informed decisions for us, because the average voter has enough on their plate getting to next month's paycheck.
The problem comes when the representatives in question do... well, what the Repubs are doing and have been doing for a while now. Lying to their electors, hiding things, taking decisions that hurt the people that they're supposed to be making decisions for in favor of a few rich buddies, trying to out-ignorant each other and refusing to read or care about anything that is supposed to be their job... And of course the huge anti-intellectualism campaign of the last decades, trying to convince people that not only doesn't your representative need to be informed, the more ignorant he is the more honest and "real" he is.
Saying that all this does is just take the ACA, shrink it, giving less to everybody just for the sake of a tax cut for the super wealthy.
That the Republicans started with a tax cut and everything is just a work around for it.
That's what's insane to me, like they literally are just screwing people for a tax cut. I can't even see how they sell this as good to people other than a nebulous "we are repealing Obamacare." And its not even a general tax cut, its specifically a mega rich tax cut.
pleasepaypreacher.net
https://www.vox.com/2017/6/23/15862130/fox-news-trump-voters-dark-senate-health-care-bill-obamacare-repeal
Yeah, at least throw us a bone and cut our taxes a little, too! But no. This is just for the 1%. Someone's gotta pay the taxes, and the people who pay taxes via Turbotax are a lot easier to tax than guys with expensive accountants.
At this point, it's OK to wish that terrible things will happen to that person, right?
They did, people either didn't care or weren't happy because it wasn't everything they've always wanted.