Trumpcare Back From Dead Again: Cassidy-Graham Cruelest Version Yet, Has 49 Votes

[Wvvtayy]

Unlikely in the Senate, especially with the makeup in 2018. There's not nearly enough repub risky seats up to make a 61 majority.

and asking people to wait until 2020 is an utterly idiotic idea

I wasn't talking about the Senate, I was talking about the house.

[Crissi]

We will have to disagree on this, because it sounds like you're saying "there is deplorable behavior on many sides, on many sides" when comparing the GOP writing and passing this bill in direct opposition to the will of the American people, and a nameless nobody on MMO-C who says he hopes it happens, but has zero control of it. I will choose to aim my ire on the situation on the people who created it, not the people who cheer it on.

The deplorable levels are different, but its still deplorable to play games like that. You dont have a leg to stand on, on caring for people, when you're willing to risk that for political points.

[Wvvtayy]

We will have to disagree on this, because it sounds like you're saying "there is deplorable behavior on many sides, on many sides" when comparing the GOP writing and passing this bill in direct opposition to the will of the American people, and a nameless nobody on MMO-C who says he hopes it happens, but has zero control of it. I will choose to aim my ire on the situation on the people who created it, not the people who cheer it on.

<3 this guy gets it. Sometimes you gotta fight fire with fire.

[Crissi]

I wasn't talking about the Senate, I was talking about the house.

until the gerrymandering is fixed in 2020 (or by SC decision), also unlikely. But any law must pass both parts of Congress, so the Senate is just as necessary. If the senate doesnt have a clear super majority, it needs to have some Repub support.

Unless they want to try what Repubs are trying now and do reconciliation with 51 votes, but Im not in favor of that kind of approach, and would still require a gain of 3 Senators.

and, ya know, Trump could veto it (and neither part of COngresss will have 2/3 to overturn a veto in 2018). Which means waiting for 2020. Which is idiotic.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

I am a firm democrat. But I kinda want it to pass. Mostly because Obamacare was setup to die by how the republicans cut out important parts of it to pass. Once this passes it will be the Republicans that own the collapse of healthcare and pay the price. Because let's face it my Americans.. healthcare in this nation isn't getting fixed until it's dead in the dirt. Until then it will just be a political tool used to sway the dim witted around.

[Wvvtayy]

until the gerrymandering is fixed in 2020 (or by SC decision), also unlikely. But any law must pass both parts of Congress, so the Senate is just as necessary. If the senate doesnt have a clear super majority, it needs to have some Repub support.

Unless they want to try what Repubs are trying now and do reconciliation with 51 votes, but Im not in favor of that kind of approach, and would still require a gain of 3 Senators.

and, ya know, Trump could veto it (and neither part of COngresss will have 2/3 to overturn a veto in 2018). Which means waiting for 2020. Which is idiotic.

Why not? If the Republicans want to use reconciliation to subvert needing Democrat support, why the fuck shouldn't Democrats do the same dirty trick? Fight fire with fire.

And even with gerrymandering, taking back the house in 2018 is still more than doable. There are currently 25 incumbent Republicans in districts where Hillary Clinton won in 2016. Combine that with increasing dissatisfaction with Republicans and taking back the house is far easier than one might think.

[Crissi]

Why not? If the Republicans want to use reconciliation to subvert needing Democrat support, why the fuck shouldn't Democrats do the same dirty trick? Fight fire with fire.

And even with gerrymandering, taking back the house in 2018 is still more than doable. There are currently 25 incumbent Republicans in districts where Hillary Clinton won in 2016. Combine that with increasing dissatisfaction with Republicans and taking back the house is far easier than one might think.

Because its retarded. If you want to pass something with only 1 party support, you better get the majority of America on board in the form of a super majority. If you cant do that, you clearly don't have a mandate for such sweeping changes.

I dont support what the Repubs are doing, and as such I will not support Dems do it either. Because I'm not a hypocrite.

and this still means waiting for 2020, because Trump veto (or Pence veto). Im not willing to have Americans wait 2ish years

[Wvvtayy]

Because its retarded. If you want to pass something with only 1 party support, you better get the majority of America on board in the form of a super majority. If you cant do that, you clearly don't have a mandate for such sweeping changes.

I dont support what the Repubs are doing, and as such I will not support Dems do it either. Because I'm not a hypocrite.

We have different mindsets. I think of it as giving Republicans a taste of their own medicine. To not use the same dirty tricks on them that they used on us is not only a strategically bad idea, it shows people that were a bunch of doormats.

[Crissi]

We have different mindsets. I think of it as giving Republicans a taste of their own medicine. To not use the same dirty tricks on them that they used on us is not only a strategically bad idea, it shows people that were a bunch of doormats.

I see it as perpetuating the cycle, which just makes partisanship worse. I rather not encourage that, and you certainly don't get to pretend to be the more moral party in the process if you're willing to engage in the same idiocy.

If you cant be arsed to get a super majority, you dont deserve to pass anything with only 1 party support.

[Wvvtayy]

I see it as perpetuating the cycle, which just makes partisanship worse. I rather not encourage that, and you certainly don't get to pretend to be the more moral party in the process if you're willing to engage in the same idiocy.

If you cant be arsed to get a super majority, you dont deserve to pass anything with only 1 party support.

so it's better to let them walk all over us and show the American people that we LET them do it giving them a free pass? :/ it's not like us taking the high road will make them do the same thing in the future.

[Crissi]

so it's better to let them walk all over us and show the American people that we LET them do it giving them a free pass? :/ it's not like us taking the high road will make them do the same thing in the future.

Better than essentially screwing America over every cycle cause political points. Win the people over and have them punish the Repubs for their shenaniganz, dont engage in them yourself which leads to a more divided America.

If you cant win the people over honestly, the problem is you.

[Wvvtayy]

Better than essentially screwing America over every cycle cause political points. Win the people over and have them punish the Repubs for their shenaniganz, dont engage in them yourself which leads to a more divided America.

Look, if us taking the high road would truly stop all of this madness and reign in the Republicans guaranteeing they would stop their bullshit in the future, id agree with you. But I know that even if we did that, it would do nothing to change how the Republicans actually work now. Eventually once the pendulum swings back to the Republicans they'll pull the same bullshit again that they're pulling now. It doesn't matter if we played nice with them, Pandoras box has been opened and there's just no going back to Bush Era Republicans who'd actually work with Democrats sometimes.

[Adam Jensen]

https://twitter.com/peterdaou/status/910256403574640641


Liberals are already blaming a conservative bill on Sanders.
lololol

"It's Bernie's fault the GOP wants to fuck us!"

Totally. Because Cassidy and Graham's only possible response to Bernie Sanders is craft yet another shitty ACA repeal!

OR we could just, you know, blame the conservative bill on the conservatives that crafted said conservative bill.

[Fugus]

You're both sort of correct. Classical liberals went for Clinton. Social liberals went for Sanders.

#knowyourliberals

Thank you for the distinction between the two.

- - - Updated - - -

I hope it passes.
I was watching Morning Joe this morning and Joe Scarborough (who is a former Republican congressman) described their latest attempt perfectly, "my friends in the Republican party must really want Nancy Pelosi to be speaker of the house again in 2018" .

Let the Republicans fuck us badly enough to all but guarantee Democrats take back the house next year and the Senate in 2020, then let them clean up their mess and have control of the government again, seems like the best course of action at this point.

I don't see that happening in the House without Gerrymandering being outlawed by then.

I live in North Carolina and with the districts as they are the republicans have nothing to fear until violence erupts to change things.

With a 50/50 split on popular vote, our seats are split 3 to 10 in the republicans favor.
With a 55/45 split on the popular vote in the Democrats favor, our seats are still split 4 to 9 in the republicans favor.

For the Democrats to gain control in North Carolina, they require like 80%+ of the popular vote.

We are a state that is firmly blue by will of the people, slightly blue to purple by popular vote, but firmly red by representation. And short of parties being banned from drawing districts and gerrymander, they have nothing to legislatively fear from the population here outside of Senate and Governors whom they try to disenfranchise voters to change that as well.

[Wvvtayy]

Thank you for the distinction between the two.

- - - Updated - - -



I don't see that happening in the House without Gerrymandering being outlawed by then.

I live in North Carolina and with the districts as they are the republicans have nothing to fear until violence erupts to change things.

With a 50/50 split on popular vote, our seats are split 3 to 10 in the republicans favor.
With a 55/45 split on the popular vote in the Democrats favor, our seats are still split 4 to 9 in the republicans favor.

For the Democrats to gain control in North Carolina, they require like 80%+ of the popular vote.

We are a state that is firmly blue by will of the people, slightly blue to purple by popular vote, but firmly red by representation. And short of parties being banned from drawing districts and gerrymander, they have nothing to legislatively fear from the population here outside of Senate and Governors whom they try to disenfranchise voters to change that as well.

NC is an extreme example. Most states aren't that badly gerrymandered.

[downnola]

Like I keep saying, you're using the defintion used by American centrists/conservatives. Sanders is not a liberal.
I don't want to turn this into a semantincs argument again, so lets just say it was an misunderstanding, okay? You now know who I ment, the right wing capitalists.

What percentage of your 14 thousand posts consists of arguing over the semantics of socialism, and how American Democrats aren't left-wing? Christ man, you're a broken record.

[Stormspark]

A part of me hopes it does pass. Because at this point it will take something catastrophic to turn the country around, and 100 million people losing healthcare and being told to go die in the street when they get sick could be the catalyst. Otherwise, I think this country is doomed to become the next Nazi Germany.

[Fugus]

NC is an extreme example. Most states aren't that badly gerrymandered.

One of the biggest problem going forward is that just how far they managed to do it to us and many other states during the last districting using computer software shows them what they can do with computers now and you can expect them to be doing it either way next time the districts are drawn, from virtually both sides.

And so long as gerrymandering is legal, given the technology of the day and our current system, the will of the people won't be worth shit anymore as every side will be doing this now because if they don't, the other side may very well the moment they get control.

So long as gerrymandering is legal or the parties get to be the ones drawing the districts, this will be a huge issue that touches on a lot of other issues.

[Mafic]

More Americans are realizing that healthcare is a big problem and a problem that society must have a stake in collectively. A lot of Americans are also starting to realize that the idea of healthcare being personal and insular like Republicans are portraying isn't true with how American society has changed the last 30 years.

No more unions in most states, no more pensions for most of the private industry, credit replacing real wage increases all points to healthcare no longer being a "personal choice".

Before ACA most people were bound to a job that offered healthcare through work. How is that a personal choice? Furthermore, this runs counter to the spirit of competitive capitalism in that talented individuals are stuck and can not pursue better jobs.

EU in comparison has most of their member states offering reasonable healthcare which leads to worker mobility and career progression.

US worker pool stagnates because they can't move to more lucrative jobs if the healthcare is not being offered.

I have said this many times but universal healthcare will come from necessity when the US healthcare system crashes. The signs are already there but most people want to pretend that throwing more money to private health insurers can slow down the raging river from overflowing. Too late as that should have been done 30 years ago.

[Glnger]

hrmmm, taking healthcare from 32 million people... whats that saying about a government should fear its people? Doesn't seem so. If only all the 2nd amendment nuts in these Republican states realized the politicians they keep voting for are probably the greatest threat to them and their family's health in their day to day lives than any of the boogeyman the media they watch showcase every day (Muslims, BLM, college students, African Americans, Mexicans, football players kneeling during the pledge, ect.). Wealth inequality and poverty are more than likely the most desperate problems facing most Americans and it's not "socialism" to redistribute wealth downwards, as opposed to more tax cuts for the wealthy and fantasy trickle down economics that have not worked.

IMO tax corporations to the point they can no longer afford armies of lobbyists to argue policies that perpetuate wealth inequality and are harmful to Americans