Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[Felya]

I clearly blamed both of them. 1.8 Trillion and 2.2 Trillion that is the amount of difference between the two bills last I checked.

It also isn't up to Mnuchin to accept the deal, it's up to Mitch to bring it forward, but if Pelosi passing a bill that Mnuchin wants or even a tweaked version of it then it would all be on the GOP. Since then Trump and Mnuchin could pressure Mitch and GOP to fall in line. Which is the only way anything above 1 Trillion would pass with the current GOP senate. Many of them don't want to pass a dime in stimulus now that their corporate donors are funding with 5 trillion dollars passed earlier this year. Doesn't matter which bill would be passed we will need more funding Come February. It's not like the House Bill doesn't have any issues, because it's far from perfect.

Can you list anything else democrats should compromise with Trump and GOP? Medicare for all? Is this the exception to the rule?

- - - Updated - - -

Since I was never "no compromise", I was against the kind of compromise they often do. Like continually expanding the Military Funding. We are also talking about the next 4 months of almost no possibility of a bill being passed if Trump loses. It's about the context of helping Americans suffering, and not about what political party comes out on top.

Does this include Medicare for all and the environment? Police reform?

[PhaelixWW]

1.8 Trillion and 2.2 Trillion that is the amount of difference between the two bills last I checked.

It's funny (and sad) that you (like Wolf Blitzer) think that the 1.8 Trillion and 2.2 Trillion would pay for the same things.

[Edge-]

It also isn't up to Mnuchin to accept the deal, it's up to Mitch to bring it forward, but if Pelosi passing a bill that Mnuchin wants or even a tweaked version of it then it would all be on the GOP.

Except that McConnell has largely remained uninvolved and said he'll let the WH negotiate the bill. At least until yesterday.

Which is the only way anything above 1 Trillion would pass with the current GOP senate.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...-idINKBN26Y2JQ

Try roughly half that amount. That's what the Senate is proposing.

It's not like the House Bill doesn't have any issues, because it's far from perfect.

Never said it was. But that's what the months between May and September were for, for the GOP to work in the Senate and with the White House on their own bill and use those months negotiating with Democrats to meet in the middle somewhere.

Again, Republicans did none of that because they don't care about weaponizing the suffering of Americans and bein a direct cause of said suffering. I'm not gonna pretend Pelosi and Democrats are angels, which you'll accuse me of otherwise, but the point remains that they tried and put forth the effort.

But here we are, and caving to a wholly inadequate bill that will make necessary further aid even more impossible is not the right solution. It's a painful choice, but it's not the right solution for the problem the country is facing right now.

- - - Updated - - -

It's funny (and sad) that you (like Wolf Blitzer) think that the 1.8 Trillion and 2.2 Trillion would pay for the same things.

Pesky details are oh so inconvenient.

[Smitzelplix]

Graham says it was sarcasm. Yet there wasn't an ounce if it in his tone of voice. If you're going to be sarcastic about something like that, be goddamn Broadway production obvious about it.

So first it was his comment about PoC being able to go anywhere in his state as long as they were conservative and now this, there's no way it was sarcasm.

[D Luniz]

Seems Trump finally has some sort of policy for his possible second term!

What is a "free market"?

Didn't he claim he would do that back in his first year?

[Shadowferal]

Aslong as McConnell feels his seat in the Senate is safe he won't push for a deal. To be fair he has to realize that he's gambling that the GOP won't lose the majority.

[Elegiac]

I'm more concerned if people will get funding going into the Winter Months with past due rent coming up in January.

So much so that you'll sell out the safety and lives of every minimum wage employee to get it?

Don't pretend you have the moral high ground, because you don't. The difference here is some of us recognise that we can't get everything we want and don't engage in ridiculous emotional reactionary politics.

[Edge-]

Well seeing how Democratic leadership doesn't want Medicare For All, and instead want to push a regressive individual mandate system. I don't see them pushing for to compromise on Medicare4all.

Except that they're still moving closer, Biden supports the public option which is yet another step towards M4A. You're just mad that this country usually moves forward incrementally rather than in massive leaps like you want.

Biden also has said he wants to increase Police funding so I'm sure the GOP would agree with that as well.

funding for...? What does he want to provide additional funding for? Riot gear? Tanks? Grenade launchers?

No, he's been clear that they need additional funding for more training and staff to better respond to calls so that your average cop with a few months of training isn't expected to expertly handle everything from a mental health episode from someone suffering from schizophrenia to responding to active shooter calls to sitting around bored waiting for speeders.

They should compromise on a lot unfortunately none of it is what is often popular with the American people, but oddly enough the richest American seem to get their issued worked on. We are one great oligarchy as is proven time and again.

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746

Yep! Which is why I'm hoping the Democrats keep the House and take the Senate/WH and re-pass HR1 next year to get it signed into law. If they don't we can absolutely hold their feet to the fire and vote out incumbents who didn't move on it and vote in younger, more progressive candidates or third parties.

But HR1, For the People, was a big step towards addressing the corrupting influence of money in politics, and moving towards a more just political system where voices are more equal in weight than they are right now.

[eschatological]

Many of us are old, curmudgeonly souls. But we're still millennials all the same.

I'm 39 and still technically a Millennial. Though I think anyone who had a childhood before the internet was common in homes should be considered something else.

[DingDongKing]

So you are telling yourself to fuck off?

Every god damn day, my G.

[Edge-]

Yes, me wanting to get aid for those people without Job or making minimum wage is me wanting to "Sell out theri Safety and Lives". FFS?

Again, this is where knowing what's in the bills would be helpful. Beyond the stimulus check, what other funding is being allocated to help support frontline workers and ensure they have access to PPE and legal protections to sue their employer if their employers dangerous behavior gets them infected, in the Republican bill?

I also recognize that no bill will probably be passed if Trump loses to Biden, and by then we will have to wait till after he and the new congress is sworn in. Do you recognize that?

And whose fault would that be, again?

- - - Updated - - -

The individual mandate is not a step in the right direction. It's a step in the wrong direction. You want a Public option that's fine, but you shouldn't be fining people because they can't afford Health Insurance premiums.

The individual mandate is key to getting enough people on this. Without it, the system struggles.

But if you've paid attention, he's actually called for lowering the ceiling on the annual spending cap on insurance plans from 10% of income to 8.5% of income, which would make millions more eligible for subsidies and assistance.

[Elegiac]

Yes, me wanting to get aid for those people without Job or making minimum wage is me wanting to "Sell out theri Safety and Lives". FFS?

Thank you for admitting you don't know what the Republican aid package contains.

[Shadowferal]

The individual mandate is not a step in the right direction. It's a step in the wrong direction. It's a GOP think tank idea to force citizen to buy insurance. You want a Public option that's fine, but you shouldn't be fining people because they can't afford Health Insurance premiums.

Well, we agree on something.
Those cheering the ACA are endorsing a GOP plan...that was crafted by the health insurance lobby. And anyone believing it was to help people aren't seeing clearly.
Everyones premiums increased even as most insurers abandoned the exchanges. Record profits made.

[Edge-]

Well, we agree on something.
Those cheering the ACA are endorsing a GOP plan...that was crafted by the health insurance lobby. And anyone believing it was to help people aren't seeing clearly.
Everyones premiums increased even as most insurers abandoned the exchanges. Record profits made.

Except the what, 20+ million people that got coverage for the first time because of the ACA? And the fact that people arne't dropped/denied for pre-existing conditions anymore? And the end on lifetime caps on insurance? And keeping kids on their parents insurance until they're 26?

Premiums went up on a lot of the garbage plans (like I used to have) because what the plans needed to cover expanded.

And those record profits they're making right now? - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/05/h...e-profits.html

Some of the largest companies, including Anthem, Humana and UnitedHealth Group, are reporting second-quarter earnings that are double what they were a year ago. And while insurance profits are capped under the Affordable Care Act, with the requirement that consumers should benefit from such excesses in the form of rebates, no one should expect an immediate windfall.

But the amounts that insurers are retaining have caught the attention of the Trump administration. The Health and Human Services Department advised companies to consider speeding up rebates, and on Tuesday suggested that they reduce premiums to help consumers through the economic downturn caused by the pandemic.

Because there are already tools to address these record profits built into the ACA.

The whole point is the ACA was the first step. It was never going to be remotely close to perfect, but it was a big first step that can be built on and improved over time as we work towards a M4A reality.

[PhaelixWW]

It's sad that you seem to think i said that, let alone even implied it. Because I did no such thing. I stated the numerical value in difference of the bills.

It's funny (and sad) that you're claiming you didn't say or imply that the difference between the bills was slight.

- - - Updated - - -

In other election news, Quinnipac just polled Georgia as Biden +7, which may or may not be an outlier, but... oof.

[Milchshake]

There's no point in arguing the ACA with bad faith posters.

• They're repeating their exact bullshit from the Hillary2020 Megathread
• Learned nothing and are desperate for attention
• They're basically Gamergaters that discovered Bernie in 2016
• M4A is the "Ethics in Game Journalism" 2020. Not a policy to understand, but some thing to bludgeon SJWs with.

[Edge-]

How many corporations would be successfully sued in this country given almost nothing is done other then fines for Banks wantonly commenting fraud?

You're connecting two unrelated issues. There's no comparison.

Maybe you get a class action law suit and people end up with an extra 100 bucks after years in court.

No, these wouldn't be class-action lawsuits. They'd be liability lawsuits.

I don't want to see a liability shield, but if the Democrats get into power they can call them in before congress and grill them and use that to pass pro-active solutions.

So AFTER the elections...which you say will be too late...and if Democrats take the Senate back after it will no longer be an issue.

It's a lame duck session. It has nothing to do with either side, and seems to be a result of shifting executive power. IMO

It's a lame duck session but there's no reason Trump couldn't sign a bill during it. This is you excusing Trump and Republicans.

The individual mandate was stopped, and it was one of the most unpopular parts of the ACA, yet the ACA still exist. It is more ass backward of incremental bullshit to force people to spend money on co-pays, deductibles, and premiums instead or fear of having fine on their tax returns.

Yes, because the only way to get to M4A is via incremental increases. Again, protection for pre-existing conditions wasn't a "thing" until the ACA. It's now considered standard for all health plans. That's progress, even if it's not at the pace you, or I, want it.

You seem to think I'm a proponent of incremental progress in principle. I'm not. I'd rather we be able to make the move more quickly. But I'm practical, and this is the practical way to get to M4A rather than stalemating in an all-or-nothing approach like you continue to advocate for.

[Smitzelplix]

Yes, me wanting to get aid for those people without Job or making minimum wage is me wanting to "Sell out theri Safety and Lives". FFS?

I dont' give a shit about a morale high ground, but I do recognize that so far people have gotten a one time stimulus, and that much of rent so far has been on put on hold, but will still come due. I also recognize that no bill will probably be passed if Trump loses to Biden, and by then we will have to wait till after he and the new congress is sworn in. Do you recognize that?

Are you aware that the Republicans have been putting in liability protections for businesses in their stimulus proposals? The liability protections would make businesses immune to lawsuits if their workers get sick from Covid, it's these liability protections that the Republicans want in their bill that is partly to blame for negotiations going nowhere, it's not just the two sides disagreeing on price that is stopping the second stimulus.

[PhaelixWW]

Well I didn't, I cant' help what you read into what I wrote. That is on you, and perhaps you should try and address an obvious bias you have.

Womp, womp. Nobody asked what the monetary difference was. Your statement was apropos of nothing; without said implication, it would have meant absolutely nothing.

But sure, hey, if anyone here read anything at all different in that sentence, please say so now. I'm legit curious to see if someone besides you saw other meaning in those words.

[Shadowferal]

Except the what, 20+ million people that got coverage for the first time because of the ACA?

And how long did that last?

And the fact that people arne't dropped/denied for pre-existing conditions anymore?

"We won't demy coverage but you'll have tp pay this much. If you can afford it...great"

And those record profits they're making right now? - [url]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/05/health/covid-insurance-profits.html[/url

Can't pay for something when you lost your job.

The whole point is the ACA was the first step. It was never going to be remotely close to perfect, but it was a big first step that can be built on and improved over time as we work towards a M4A reality.

Not one democrat believed that. Most hoped differently. But they were surprised it passed in such a profiteering form.
Do you have the self-awareness to realize that had the GOP been the only ones selling this you'd be on my side of the fence right now? Were you in Massachusetts listening to then governor Romney championing this...you would have endorsed it? Or would you have seen the flaws because it's a GOP plan?