Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[Edge-]

And how long did that last?

https://www.kff.org/uninsured/issue-...ed-population/

The number of uninsured has grown under Trump, predictably, but still show roughly 20 million more with insurance than before the ACA. That's as of 2018. So it's still lasting.

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

And if you're low income, you can get federal subsidies to help offset any increases. And for people who can afford insurance without the need for subsidies, they now no longer need to worry about being denied a plan because they were pregnant once or had acne as a teen.

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

You're right! And for the states that expanded Medicaid those people would have access to that. This is more to disprove the nonsense notion that the ACA was nothing but a windfall for insurance companies. As I posted, there are tools to address this and provide benefits to the consumer based on how profitable the companies are. It's hardly perfect, but it's a step in the right direction.

Not one democrat believed that. Most hoped differently. But they were surprised it passed in such a profiteering form.

Did you interview them all?

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?

If the GOP had come up with a better plan over the decade they spent trying to repeal the ACA, I'd be all for it. I don't give a shit if it's a Republican "win", it's a win for Americans and I don't give a damn who is behind it.

It's just a shame they twiddled their thumbs for the past decade and have nothing to show for this.

And on the Romneycare thing... - https://www.wbur.org/news/2012/02/15...care-wbur-poll

62% approval in 2012.

Here are the numbers for party registration in the state in 2012 - https://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/eleenr/enridx.htm

1.4M Democrats, 460K Republicans. That means it enjoyed support from quite a few Democrats at the very least, as the Republicans could only get the total to around 25% approval.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm showing you our court system favors corporations and it would be expensive and difficult for any individual to sue a large corporation. They don't have to be mutually exclusive.

You realize this isn't just for large corporations...right? This is for franchise stores where the corporation has no liability and the franchisee does. This is for non-chain small businesses that may engage in dangerous behavior. That our courts favor corporations the way our laws are written is a problem, but again it's a separate problem to the one we're discussing.

If it's no longer an issue when the Democrats take the Senate, then it would be on Democrats.

Yes, which I've said before on a raft of issues including passing HR1 again.

Historical president, not excusing anyone. You just being oblivious too it.

What does this even mean?

We've been incrementally moving to universal healthcare since FDR, and I can only think if he lived this wouldn't even be an issue currently?

Sorry I don't by the incremental line. It's defeatism.

Again, I agree! I wish we didn't have to take this approach, but the entirety of US history to-date has been that the only path forward is incrementalism. I'll take the less satisfying, slower, practical approach to progress. You try the all-or-nothing approach and let me know how that goes.

[Milchshake]

Brocialists in 2016: Obamacare is inadequate!
Brocialists in 2020: Sir, the Mnuchin plan is adequate!


Is this a brain on 10% Marx and 90% Joe Rogan?

[Edge-]

Brocialists in 2016: Obamacare is inadequate!
Brocialists in 2020: Sir, the Mnuchin plan is adequate!

When Democrats propose something: IT MUST BE PERFECT AND EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT!
When Republicans propose something: JUST TAKE THE FUCKING DEAL, DEMOCRATS!

[downnola]

When Democrats propose something: IT MUST BE PERFECT AND EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT!
When Republicans propose something: JUST TAKE THE FUCKING DEAL, DEMOCRATS!

Are you trying to tell me the brocialists are arguing in bad faith? Say it isn't so.

[Edge-]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/inves...gn=wp_politics

As the presidential campaign entered its final stages, a fresh-faced Republican activist named Charlie Kirk stepped into the spotlight at a closed-door gathering of leading conservatives and shared his delight about an impact of the coronavirus pandemic: the disruption of America’s universities. So many campuses had closed, he said, that up to a half-million left-leaning students probably would not vote.

“So, please keep the campuses closed,” Kirk, 26, said in August as the audience cheered, according to video of the event obtained by The Washington Post. “Like, it’s a great thing.”

Much more inside, but just another reminder that Republicans hate Democracy.

[Edge-]

Must be nice to boil things down to such simplistic nonsense in order to feel you made a valid point. Skip past all context because that doesn't matter on a internet forum. Reminding me more and more of Twitter on here.

Coming from you, this is some top quality comedy.

Because this is your literal MO, ignoring context. You want Democrats to take the slightly less expensive GOP bill, alright let's dive into context. What's in their bill? What's in the Democrats bill that's not in their bill? What is the money going towards beyond the second one-time stimulus check? Do you understand any of the context behind why Pelosi is rejecting their proposal?

[Edge-]

I provided plenty of context

I'll try to find it then, because I haven't seen it thus far.

I do know the ramifications if no deal is made, and they will make a dire situation worse if nothing is done. The longer Americans go without relief the more expensive and the longer it will take to recover.

Then you should be way more mad at Republicans than at Pelosi. Yet you don't appear to be. Weird.

I've already started being more concerned with local election anyways, and after November I'll be worrying about 2022 and getting more Blue Dogs like Biden out of office.

Good! Local elections matter a lot, even the random positions you literally never hear about outside of election times like the comptroller. That's been the Republican path to power over the past few decades, and if progressives get their act together I'd be thrilled to see a progressive wave bubble up from the local levels and gain some real state/national power. That's who I mostly vote for in the primaries, the more progressive candidates, but when it comes to the general I'll take the best/least bad options.

[Hinastorm]

Problem is republicans would balk right after they passed the ones they wanted and never pass a single small clean bill democrats wanted.
no compromise.

so why would democrats do that.


in the long run democrats holding out will help more people in bigger ways.
Her bills also include retro payments for unemployment up to the full 600 dollars, which would help fix a lot of problems all this delay caused. Republicans want 300-400 going forward helping no one get out of the hole they got in waiting.

"in the long run democrats holding out will help more people in bigger ways."

Are you a time traveler? Of course that is the goal, but we don't know how it's going to shake out yet. What we DO know is that alot of struggling people are waiting.

Like, i'm one of those unemployed people. I stand to get a BIG chunk of money from a +600 retroactive bill. I'm hoping her strategy works, but i'll keep questioning it until something solid happens.

I also recently saw a poll where most people blame Pelosi more than Trump about the stimulus being stalled. I didn't verify the source, so take it with a grain of salt, but feel free to look it up if you're so inclined. To be fair, that poll didn't include Mitch on it, who is of course the true villain of the piece.

[Rasulis]

Why are you guys discussing Nancy Pelosi and the fate of the stimulus bill here? What do they have to do with the election? It is probably more appropriate to discuss them under the Trump Focused Discussion thread.

[shimerra]

I provided plenty of context, and I won't pretend to know a line by line comparison seeing how we don't have a bill for the second one. I do know the ramifications if no deal is made, and they will make a dire situation worse if nothing is done. The longer Americans go without relief the more expensive and the longer it will take to recover. I guess that all Biden President will boil down too, because I won't be surprised hs he doesn't run for a second term. I've already started being more concerned with local election anyways, and after November I'll be worrying about 2022 and getting more Blue Dogs like Biden out of office.

The only thing you've provided is another demonstration of your profound lack of knowledge or self awareness. You seem to have little idea of exactly what you want except in the vaguest of terms, no idea how to get there both in terms of your absolutist follow me or you're a traitor attitude or navigating the actual political reality before you to achieve said goal, and at this point it's yet more confirmation you don't even understand what's actually happening now.


Edge gave you a cliff notes of some pretty terrible parts of the Republican that should absolutely enrage any progressive like you claim to be. You response essentially just showed a further lack of understanding of what exactly they entail and the consequences of passing them into law even for a short while. Your response was to hand waive Republican's and blame democrats for trying to get remove them, and ask for a larger package, and then raging about democrats not being left enough. It's just stupid.

[Felya]

Pelosi when shown a deal that gives her wealthy and corporates friends billions of dollars: DEAL !
Pelosi when shown a deal that tries to give something to the poor: NEVER!

Yes, please argue that GOP plan is about the poor...

Nice you tube video you got there:

In a July 2020 video, Dore erroneously said Joe Biden "hosted a black face affair with a bunch of rich white people" before Dore showed an altered clip which darkened the face of black singer Jerome Powell. One day after the video was uploaded it received over 100,000 views, and has since been removed from YouTube.

In May 2017, Dore discussed conspiracy theories over the murder of Seth Rich and questioned statements by law enforcement and Rich's family. Dore cited a retracted Fox News story to substantiate his claims, and continued to insist that there were “a lot of red flags” and there “is probably something more to this story” including after the Fox News retraction.

[Edge-]

Why are you guys discussing Nancy Pelosi and the fate of the stimulus bill here? What do they have to do with the election? It is probably more appropriate to discuss them under the Trump Focused Discussion thread.

Because it's quite relevant to the actual election itself. It impacts hundreds of Senators and members of Congress, as well as Trump's campaign as well. Everyone has a stake in this.

[Endus]

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.

FWIW, there's a lot to be argued for the idea that there's a subdivide in Gen-X, too. I'm technically Gen-X, born in '77, but I was raised with a PC in the home from a fairly young age (I think I was 8 when we got the Apple IIe?), and was delving into the Internet fairly early on (early '90s), before I got into high school (though not by much).

So my weird little mini-generation, the X-ennials as some describe it, remember both a time when an Atari was the height of video gaming and there was no "internet", even portable phones were massive barely-portable briefcases. And also the time when the Internet was everywhere and people were preferring e-mail to phone calls. All within the same childhood, before reaching the age of 18.

We've got way more in common with Millenials than older Gen-X types as a result, though we have enough memory of the "before-times" that we're not quite Millenials in outlook either. It's a weird point in time to have grown up.

[beanman12345]

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.

There is no point in arguing with that guy on anything, unless you okay with your brain cells dying rapidly.

[Rasulis]

Early voting data from several battleground states.

Wisconsin: early votes is equal to 25.4% of total votes in 2016. By party affiliation registration, approx. 40% Dems and 38% GOPs.

Michigan: 24.5% of 2016. 40% Dems and 40% GOPs.

Ohio: 8% of 2016. 43% Dems and 45% GOPs.

Close races so far. With the exception of Ohio, 538 poll numbers are off in Wisconsin and Michigan. Here is where it get wild.

Florida: 20% of 2016. 50% Dems and 29.4% GOPs.

North Carolina: 10.6% of 2016. 50.9% Dems and 17.9% GOPs. No Party Affiliation turnout so far almost double GOP turnout.

Pennsylvania: 8.4% of 2016. 75.9% Dems and 15.9% GOPs.

More turnout!

[Felya]

Early voting data from several battleground states.

...

Close races so far. With the exception of Ohio, 538 poll numbers are off in Wisconsin and Michigan. Here is where it get wild.

Don’t mean to be a dick, but they are not measuring the same thing. It’s not a 1 to 1 correlation between party affiliation and voting, as well as unaffiliated covering just about every scenario from 538 or anyone else for that mater... because it’s so wide.

[beanman12345]

Early voting data from several battleground states.

Wisconsin: early votes is equal to 25.4% of total votes in 2016. By party affiliation registration, approx. 40% Dems and 38% GOPs.

Michigan: 24.5% of 2016. 40% Dems and 40% GOPs.

Ohio: 8% of 2016. 43% Dems and 45% GOPs.

Close races so far. With the exception of Ohio, 538 poll numbers are off in Wisconsin and Michigan. Here is where it get wild.

Florida: 20% of 2016. 50% Dems and 29.4% GOPs.

North Carolina: 10.6% of 2016. 50.9% Dems and 17.9% GOPs. No Party Affiliation turnout so far almost double GOP turnout.

Pennsylvania: 8.4% of 2016. 75.9% Dems and 15.9% GOPs.

More turnout!

Yeah yesterday was talking how fast and easy it is to vote in Chicago, so many polling places, dozens of early voting places, to my surprise, was told the the early polling place near me, 2-3 block long line.

[Felya]

Yeah yesterday was talking how fast and easy it is to vote in Chicago, so many polling places, dozens of early voting places, to my surprise, was told the the early polling place near me, 2-3 block long line.

In Seattle, we are 4 days from getting out ballots... will our electors choose a candidate that we didn’t for again? Toon in to the wacky world of Pacific Northwest... come for the beautiful wild life, stay because you got murdered by our seemingly infinite amount of serial killers... oh and Antifa...

[postman1782]

Pelosi when shown a deal that gives her wealthy and corporates friends billions of dollars: DEAL !
Pelosi when shown a deal that tries to give something to the poor: NEVER!

Typical fucking Democratic Party all over again:
1. Pretend you want to help the poor "oh so badly".
2. Make sure that the lower and middle classes are actually going to get nothing.

This video summarizes it best:



Now, I'm not 100% certain that that is what is going on. Maybe she -does- want to get a little bit more for those in need (instead of just trying to make the demands so absurdly high that she knows Republicans would never accept it). But after spending an entire election campaign arguing that "you can't get exactly what you want, we need to cooperate with Republicans on Healthcare and Environmentalism and Worker Rights", now suddenly explaining you don't want to compromise, gives an easy reason to become suspicious and distrusting.

Once again we've to go by their track record, not by their promises and in Lucille "Pelosi" Blooth's case that objectively is:
- Giving everything to the wealthy and nothing to those in actual need.

Jimmy Dore? Seriously? Might as well link Breitbart while you are at it.

[Felya]

Jimmy Dore? Seriously? Might as well link Breitbart while you are at it.

He has linked Tim Pool before:



In no way am I endorsing Vaush... but, I am endorsing him getting hits on his video, instead of Tim Pool.

Edit: Millions of hits on YouTube... this isn’t as fringe as it seems or should be...