If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hill)   Stuart Smalley discuses Medicare for All bill: "It's good enough, it's smart enough, and doggone it, people like it"   ( thehill.com) divider line
    More: Spiffy, court nominee Franken, Franken Oregon senators, Sen. Al Franken, United States Senate, Trump judicial pick, Franken objects, Al Franken, health care  
•       •       •

1430 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Sep 2017 at 9:03 PM (44 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



105 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-09-12 06:49:06 PM  
Now if someone can show Donnie a poll showing Medicare polls at around 75% positive maybe something could happen.
I am even willing to name it Trump care if he gets behind the idea. ( in a good way)
 
2017-09-12 07:06:27 PM  

eurotrader: Now if someone can show Donnie a poll showing Medicare polls at around 75% positive maybe something could happen.
I am even willing to name it Trump care if he gets behind the idea. ( in a good way)


It'd be the only good thing he's ever named after himself.
 
2017-09-12 07:10:03 PM  
Franken, Gillibrand, and Booker so far. 

This won't happen but it is interesting that 3 dems likely to be frontrunners in 2020 are on board.
 
2017-09-12 07:59:23 PM  

thehobbes: Franken, Gillibrand, and Booker so far.
This won't happen but it is interesting that 3 dems likely to be frontrunners in 2020 are on board.


img.fark.netView Full Size


So close.
 
2017-09-12 08:06:46 PM  

thehobbes: Franken, Gillibrand, and Booker so far.

This won't happen but it is interesting that 3 dems likely to be frontrunners in 2020 are on board.


"I'm asking what do you offer? Are you smart? Funny? Interesting? Talented? Ambitious? Creative? OK, now what do you do to demonstrate those attributes to the world? Don't say that you're a nice guy -- that's the bare minimum. Pretty girls have guys being nice to them 36 times a day. The patient is bleeding in the street. Do you know how to operate or not?

'Well, I'm not sexist or racist or greedy or shallow or abusive! Not like those other douchebags!'

I'm sorry, I know that this is hard to hear, but if all you can do is list a bunch of faults you don't have, then back the fark away from the patient. There's a witty, handsome guy with a promising career ready to step in and operate.

Does that break your heart? OK, so now what? Are you going to mope about it, or are you going to learn how to do surgery? It's up to you, but don't complain about how girls fall for jerks; they fall for those jerks because those jerks have other things they can offer. 'But I'm a great listener!' Are you? Because you're willing to sit quietly in exchange for the chance to be in the proximity of a pretty girl (and spend every second imagining how soft her skin must be)? Well guess what, there's another guy in her life who also knows how to do that, and he can play the guitar. Saying that you're a nice guy is like a restaurant whose only selling point is that the food doesn't make you sick. You're like a new movie whose title is This Movie Is in English, and its tagline is 'The actors are clearly visible.'"
 
2017-09-12 08:09:43 PM  
Since I was just at our companies Insurance meeting I fully agree with this. We spent an hour going over our new plan and I'm still not sure how it all works. Regular insurance and then co-insurance, deductibles and co pays varying by tier, In network, out of network, blah blah blah. The lady giving the presentation seemed to be confused by some things as well. I swear they make it as difficult as possible to understand on purpose. While I appreciate having insurance for this job (first job I've had with insurance) I seriously hate the whole process. It should not take multiple people multiple attempts to figure out a basic plan on going to a doctor. The money we waste on this has to be astronomical.
 
2017-09-12 08:31:52 PM  

Tellingthem: Since I was just at our companies Insurance meeting I fully agree with this. We spent an hour going over our new plan and I'm still not sure how it all works. Regular insurance and then co-insurance, deductibles and co pays varying by tier, In network, out of network, blah blah blah. The lady giving the presentation seemed to be confused by some things as well. I swear they make it as difficult as possible to understand on purpose. While I appreciate having insurance for this job (first job I've had with insurance) I seriously hate the whole process. It should not take multiple people multiple attempts to figure out a basic plan on going to a doctor. The money we waste on this has to be astronomical.


If you work with conservatives, and you also get a 401k match.  You can rile them up with this tidbit.  It works with just insurance, but best if you also have 401k match.

Why is healthcare insurance a flat rate for everyone, with just different tiers depending on what you pick, and you family situation?  While at the same time, the 401k match is tied to a percentage of your salary?  Why is that fair?  Think about it, if the CEO is married with a family and gets the best offered insurance plan he pays the same exact amount as the middle class salary guy that also has a family.  CEO makes 6 million a year, worker makes 60k a year, they both pay a total of 6k for their insurance, that's just 0.1% of the CEO's salary, but 10% of the middle class workers salary.  But with 401k match, they offer 50% match on up to 10% of your salary.  So the Company will give the CEO $300,000 of free money every year for investing 10%, but the middle class worker tops out at just $3,000 in free money, even if he manages to put 20% towards his 401k, $3,000 is his limit.  Why not base them both on percentages?  Or both on flat  values that can't be exceeded?  It's almost as if both of these 'benefits' are designed to benefit the wealthiest among us.
 
2017-09-12 08:54:01 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size


welcome to the new democrat platform.
 
2017-09-12 09:07:01 PM  
Good.
 
2017-09-12 09:07:31 PM  
Now it's up to the youngsters to vote.

/I hope
 
2017-09-12 09:10:53 PM  
How farking hilarious would it be if Medicare-for-all passed under Trump? The entire country, from far left to far right, would have absolutely no farking idea what to think
 
2017-09-12 09:15:32 PM  

AsparagusFTW: Now it's up to the youngsters to vote.

/I hope


We're hosed.
 
2017-09-12 09:15:38 PM  
Sick burn, subby.
 
2017-09-12 09:18:30 PM  

hobbes0022: Tellingthem: Since I was just at our companies Insurance meeting I fully agree with this. We spent an hour going over our new plan and I'm still not sure how it all works. Regular insurance and then co-insurance, deductibles and co pays varying by tier, In network, out of network, blah blah blah. The lady giving the presentation seemed to be confused by some things as well. I swear they make it as difficult as possible to understand on purpose. While I appreciate having insurance for this job (first job I've had with insurance) I seriously hate the whole process. It should not take multiple people multiple attempts to figure out a basic plan on going to a doctor. The money we waste on this has to be astronomical.

If you work with conservatives, and you also get a 401k match.  You can rile them up with this tidbit.  It works with just insurance, but best if you also have 401k match.

Why is healthcare insurance a flat rate for everyone, with just different tiers depending on what you pick, and you family situation?  While at the same time, the 401k match is tied to a percentage of your salary?  Why is that fair?  Think about it, if the CEO is married with a family and gets the best offered insurance plan he pays the same exact amount as the middle class salary guy that also has a family.  CEO makes 6 million a year, worker makes 60k a year, they both pay a total of 6k for their insurance, that's just 0.1% of the CEO's salary, but 10% of the middle class workers salary.  But with 401k match, they offer 50% match on up to 10% of your salary.  So the Company will give the CEO $300,000 of free money every year for investing 10%, but the middle class worker tops out at just $3,000 in free money, even if he manages to put 20% towards his 401k, $3,000 is his limit.  Why not base them both on percentages?  Or both on flat  values that can't be exceeded?  It's almost as if both of these 'benefits' are designed to benefit the wealthiest among us.


You sound poor. You should have pulled yourself up by the bootstraps, then you'd be the CEO wondering why he should pay more just so the lazy people could get something for free.
/sarcasm
//Republican POV
/// third slashie is free
 
2017-09-12 09:19:54 PM  

AsparagusFTW: Now it's up to the youngsters to vote.

/I hope


The line is "If you build it, he will come."

Democrats have had it backwards for decades.
 
2017-09-12 09:21:23 PM  

Bith Set Me Up: thehobbes: Franken, Gillibrand, and Booker so far.

This won't happen but it is interesting that 3 dems likely to be frontrunners in 2020 are on board.

"I'm asking what do you offer? Are you smart? Funny? Interesting? Talented? Ambitious? Creative? OK, now what do you do to demonstrate those attributes to the world? Don't say that you're a nice guy -- that's the bare minimum. Pretty girls have guys being nice to them 36 times a day. The patient is bleeding in the street. Do you know how to operate or not?

'Well, I'm not sexist or racist or greedy or shallow or abusive! Not like those other douchebags!'

I'm sorry, I know that this is hard to hear, but if all you can do is list a bunch of faults you don't have, then back the fark away from the patient. There's a witty, handsome guy with a promising career ready to step in and operate.

Does that break your heart? OK, so now what? Are you going to mope about it, or are you going to learn how to do surgery? It's up to you, but don't complain about how girls fall for jerks; they fall for those jerks because those jerks have other things they can offer. 'But I'm a great listener!' Are you? Because you're willing to sit quietly in exchange for the chance to be in the proximity of a pretty girl (and spend every second imagining how soft her skin must be)? Well guess what, there's another guy in her life who also knows how to do that, and he can play the guitar. Saying that you're a nice guy is like a restaurant whose only selling point is that the food doesn't make you sick. You're like a new movie whose title is This Movie Is in English, and its tagline is 'The actors are clearly visible.'"


Yes, we all lament when Cracked was good. What's your point?
 
2017-09-12 09:23:20 PM  

thehobbes: [img.fark.net image 293x495]

welcome to the new democrat platform.


At a funeral this weekend, i was talking politics at the luncheon (because I'm socially awkward) and theorized that the democrats were going to be forced left as an outcome of 2016.

So then this happened...

So ya
 
2017-09-12 09:26:36 PM  

The Dog Ate My Homework: How farking hilarious would it be if Medicare-for-all passed under Trump? The entire country, from far left to far right, would have absolutely no farking idea what to think


We'd probably react the same way as the fact that the EPA started under Nixon.
 
2017-09-12 09:32:20 PM  
"People like it" is not the same thing as "people will support it politically." The health care debate is very similar to the gun control debate in this way. When asked, "Do you support universal health care/background checks?" without any context in a generic public opinion poll, of course the vast majority of people will answer "yes." But once details start to emerge in the actual discussion --such as the fact that "universal" means "government-run"-- support drops precipitously. The problem is that support for these policies is wide, but not very deep. Other concerns --ideology, bigotry, religion, etc.--  easily outweigh them when people make real decisions, like who to vote for in elections.
 
2017-09-12 09:33:56 PM  
Im thinking that D's are starting to realize that trying to craft legislation to curry favor with R's and R voters is a wasted effort. You're not going to get them to go along with it, so do some saber rattling and whip up a froth with your base. Might as well go big on the first go round and never relent.
 
2017-09-12 09:36:47 PM  

Jojo_TheDogFacedBoy: hobbes0022: Tellingthem: Since I was just at our companies Insurance meeting I fully agree with this. We spent an hour going over our new plan and I'm still not sure how it all works. Regular insurance and then co-insurance, deductibles and co pays varying by tier, In network, out of network, blah blah blah. The lady giving the presentation seemed to be confused by some things as well. I swear they make it as difficult as possible to understand on purpose. While I appreciate having insurance for this job (first job I've had with insurance) I seriously hate the whole process. It should not take multiple people multiple attempts to figure out a basic plan on going to a doctor. The money we waste on this has to be astronomical.

If you work with conservatives, and you also get a 401k match.  You can rile them up with this tidbit.  It works with just insurance, but best if you also have 401k match.

Why is healthcare insurance a flat rate for everyone, with just different tiers depending on what you pick, and you family situation?  While at the same time, the 401k match is tied to a percentage of your salary?  Why is that fair?  Think about it, if the CEO is married with a family and gets the best offered insurance plan he pays the same exact amount as the middle class salary guy that also has a family.  CEO makes 6 million a year, worker makes 60k a year, they both pay a total of 6k for their insurance, that's just 0.1% of the CEO's salary, but 10% of the middle class workers salary.  But with 401k match, they offer 50% match on up to 10% of your salary.  So the Company will give the CEO $300,000 of free money every year for investing 10%, but the middle class worker tops out at just $3,000 in free money, even if he manages to put 20% towards his 401k, $3,000 is his limit.  Why not base them both on percentages?  Or both on flat  values that can't be exceeded?  It's almost as if both of these 'benefits' are designed to benefit the wealthiest among us.

You sound poor. You should have pulled yourself up by the bootstraps, then you'd be the CEO wondering why he should pay more just so the lazy people could get something for free.
/sarcasm
//Republican POV
/// third slashie is free


All the conservatives I work with, the most uber conservative, farking hate the CEO and pretty much anyone at the VP level.  "What do those assholes do all day, they never made money for this god damned company".  They absolutely don't connect this to their general conservative philosophy, but if you tell them about insurance and 401k it's usually enough to make the grumble and just go away.
 
2017-09-12 09:38:56 PM  
Trump was for it before he was against it...
Donald Trump: Replace Obamacare with Universal Health Care
Youtube TPJfKdp3bDs
 
2017-09-12 09:42:14 PM  

JAGChem82: Im thinking that D's are starting to realize that trying to craft legislation to curry favor with R's and R voters is a wasted effort. You're not going to get them to go along with it, so do some saber rattling and whip up a froth with your base. Might as well go big on the first go round and never relent.


I hope Democrats start to realize that they've been losing because they haven't had high expectations, not despite it.

What was the last truly lofty goal we set for ourselves as a nation? Landing on the moon?

In 2008, Obama was saying "Yes, we can!". In 2016, Hillary was saying "Your call is important to us. Please continue to hold".
 
2017-09-12 09:45:19 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-12 09:49:28 PM  

Bith Set Me Up: AsparagusFTW: Now it's up to the youngsters to vote.

/I hope

The line is "If you build it, he will come."

Democrats have had it backwards for decades.


So the Democrats have to win and accomplish everything before people will vote for them?

Sounds like you're the one who has it backwards.
 
2017-09-12 09:50:43 PM  

hobbes0022: All the conservatives I work with, the most uber conservative, farking hate the CEO and pretty much anyone at the VP level. "What do those assholes do all day, they never made money for this god damned company". They absolutely don't connect this to their general conservative philosophy, but if you tell them about insurance and 401k it's usually enough to make the grumble and just go away.


These "populist" conservative assholes are the ones I have the least farking patience for. For the past thirty years all we've heard from them is how the government needs to get out of the way and let the free market work itself out. Blacks, hispanics and women don't perform as well as white men socio-economically because they've been lured into the trap of dependency by government handouts.

Oh, but now that YOU aren't doing so well, suddenly you think the world isn't fair and maybe there needs to be some enforced leveling between the haves and the have-nots? GDIAF assholes.
 
2017-09-12 09:51:24 PM  

The Dog Ate My Homework: How farking hilarious would it be if Medicare-for-all passed under Trump? The entire country, from far left to far right, would have absolutely no farking idea what to think


This chapter of future history books is getting more and more bizarre by the week, I tell you.
 
2017-09-12 09:51:31 PM  
Ah, the Stuart Smally joke will never get old.  Actually it already has.  About 10 years ago
 
2017-09-12 09:52:45 PM  

qorkfiend: Bith Set Me Up: AsparagusFTW: Now it's up to the youngsters to vote.

/I hope

The line is "If you build it, he will come."

Democrats have had it backwards for decades.

So the Democrats have to win and accomplish everything before people will vote for them?

Sounds like you're the one who has it backwards.


Democrats have to start setting high expectations and goals which will win people over.
 
2017-09-12 09:52:48 PM  

qorkfiend: Bith Set Me Up: AsparagusFTW: Now it's up to the youngsters to vote.

/I hope

The line is "If you build it, he will come."

Democrats have had it backwards for decades.

So the Democrats have to win and accomplish everything before people will vote for them?

Sounds like you're the one who has it backwards.


That is actually how most liberals think it works.
 
2017-09-12 09:53:52 PM  

fusillade762: [img.fark.net image 640x468]


Help me out here. Medicare/Medicaid aren't an example of governement being responsible for health care?
 
2017-09-12 09:55:21 PM  

Bith Set Me Up: qorkfiend: Bith Set Me Up: AsparagusFTW: Now it's up to the youngsters to vote.

/I hope

The line is "If you build it, he will come."

Democrats have had it backwards for decades.

So the Democrats have to win and accomplish everything before people will vote for them?

Sounds like you're the one who has it backwards.

Democrats have to start setting high expectations and goals which will win people over.


We had one candidate who vowed to get rid of the ACA and one who vowed to keep it. Only 25% of eligible voters voted for the latter. I think you're vastly overestimating how progressive and intelligent most Americans are.
 
2017-09-12 09:58:30 PM  

Norquist Vagprobe: Bith Set Me Up: qorkfiend: Bith Set Me Up: AsparagusFTW: Now it's up to the youngsters to vote.

/I hope

The line is "If you build it, he will come."

Democrats have had it backwards for decades.

So the Democrats have to win and accomplish everything before people will vote for them?

Sounds like you're the one who has it backwards.

Democrats have to start setting high expectations and goals which will win people over.

We had one candidate who vowed to get rid of the ACA and one who vowed to keep it. Only 25% of eligible voters voted for the latter. I think you're vastly overestimating how progressive and intelligent most Americans are.


 But only 24.9% voted for the person that wanted to get rid of it.

 The opposition to the ACA only works when people believe that Obamacare and the ACA are different.

When the dumb asses were given a clue, their reps were afraid to leave their offices

This is known
 
2017-09-12 09:59:36 PM  

Bith Set Me Up: qorkfiend: Bith Set Me Up: AsparagusFTW: Now it's up to the youngsters to vote.

/I hope

The line is "If you build it, he will come."

Democrats have had it backwards for decades.

So the Democrats have to win and accomplish everything before people will vote for them?

Sounds like you're the one who has it backwards.

Democrats have to start setting high expectations and goals which will win people over.


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Yeah, they've never had any problems with backlash if they only manage to accomplish some of their goals.

Your problem is that you'll abandon the candidates you elect in a heartbeat if they fall even slightly short. Democratic officeholders know this and, as a result, don't trust you, and you still wonder why they think they have to look elsewhere for votes. Get their backs for once instead of dropping them as soon as you don't feel "inspired" (see: 2010) and show them that you won't just walk away while they're trying to build what you want them to.
 
2017-09-12 09:59:40 PM  

JAGChem82: Im thinking that D's are starting to realize that trying to craft legislation to curry favor with R's and R voters is a wasted effort. You're not going to get them to go along with it, so do some saber rattling and whip up a froth with your base. Might as well go big on the first go round and never relent.


Agreed. Up until the mid 90s the democrats had a solid base. They had a majority of state legislatures, a competitive edge in the Senate and House, but they didn't have the executive. They sold their souls effectively to get the Executive branch (Third Way) and then proceeded to have historic losses ever since. 

Cozying up tot he republicans farked us. The unions got decimated in the process.
 
2017-09-12 09:59:44 PM  

Bith Set Me Up: JAGChem82: Im thinking that D's are starting to realize that trying to craft legislation to curry favor with R's and R voters is a wasted effort. You're not going to get them to go along with it, so do some saber rattling and whip up a froth with your base. Might as well go big on the first go round and never relent.

I hope Democrats start to realize that they've been losing because they haven't had high expectations, not despite it.

What was the last truly lofty goal we set for ourselves as a nation? Landing on the moon?

In 2008, Obama was saying "Yes, we can!". In 2016, Hillary was saying "Your call is important to us. Please continue to hold".


And then we had the two most productive and progressive years legislatively since the New Deal . . . and then Americans gave the Congress to the teabaggers.
 
2017-09-12 10:00:03 PM  

qorkfiend: So the Democrats have to win and accomplish everything before people will vote for them?

Sounds like you're the one who has it backwards.


No, but they do have to appear as though they're willing to fight for it. Saying things like 'eh, the Republicans won't go for it so why even try' won't win people over to your side. Instead, put up those bills and make the Republicans own the fact that they shot them down. Call them out for doing so and people will see you're willing to fight the good fight.

HRC was right when she said single payer would never pass the current congress, but it came off as a statement that it was therefore not even worth trying. 'It is hard so why even bother' isn't very compelling campaign material, I'm afraid.
 
2017-09-12 10:00:29 PM  
1. Al Franken is an extremely intelligent, good man. Watch him in interviews and he's clearly too good a person for this country. I mean it. Half of us deserve men like him, half of us can go burn in a lake of fire.

2. I'm impressed, but Medicare-for-All could really be a platform going forward. The Dems need vision, they need guts, they need something grand for the future to dispel the evil vision of the other party. This can be part.
 
2017-09-12 10:01:16 PM  

fusillade762: [img.fark.net image 640x468]


Hell, the Constitution definitively says that the government should "insure domestic tranquility" and "promote the general welfare".

I think enacting universal healthcare falls under those two tasks.
 
2017-09-12 10:02:03 PM  

Tellingthem: Since I was just at our companies Insurance meeting I fully agree with this. We spent an hour going over our new plan and I'm still not sure how it all works. Regular insurance and then co-insurance, deductibles and co pays varying by tier, In network, out of network, blah blah blah. The lady giving the presentation seemed to be confused by some things as well. I swear they make it as difficult as possible to understand on purpose. While I appreciate having insurance for this job (first job I've had with insurance) I seriously hate the whole process. It should not take multiple people multiple attempts to figure out a basic plan on going to a doctor. The money we waste on this has to be astronomical.


Oh, it'll get better when YOU have to be the go-between to get your provider and the insurance company on the same page.
 
2017-09-12 10:02:05 PM  

thehobbes: JAGChem82: Im thinking that D's are starting to realize that trying to craft legislation to curry favor with R's and R voters is a wasted effort. You're not going to get them to go along with it, so do some saber rattling and whip up a froth with your base. Might as well go big on the first go round and never relent.

Agreed. Up until the mid 90s the democrats had a solid base. They had a majority of state legislatures, a competitive edge in the Senate and House, but they didn't have the executive. They sold their souls effectively to get the Executive branch (Third Way) and then proceeded to have historic losses ever since. 

Cozying up tot he republicans farked us. The unions got decimated in the process.


Serious question: do you believe the Democratic dominance in the state legislatures and Congress was based on a solid progressive base? Or was it based on the conservative working class voters who you have now decided have no place in the party any more?
 
2017-09-12 10:04:29 PM  
don't let it stop there. write your congressman and senator and tell them you support the legislation. donate to their campaigns. give them some positive feedback.
 
2017-09-12 10:04:32 PM  

Norquist Vagprobe: Bith Set Me Up: JAGChem82: Im thinking that D's are starting to realize that trying to craft legislation to curry favor with R's and R voters is a wasted effort. You're not going to get them to go along with it, so do some saber rattling and whip up a froth with your base. Might as well go big on the first go round and never relent.

I hope Democrats start to realize that they've been losing because they haven't had high expectations, not despite it.

What was the last truly lofty goal we set for ourselves as a nation? Landing on the moon?

In 2008, Obama was saying "Yes, we can!". In 2016, Hillary was saying "Your call is important to us. Please continue to hold".

And then we had the two most productive and progressive years legislatively since the New Deal . . . and then Americans the Democratic Party leadership gave the Congress to the teabaggers.


FTFY.

The Democratic Party leadership insisted upon the ACA rather than single-payer, and then ran away from both the ACA and President Obama himself once the GOP got butthurt over its enactment.
 
2017-09-12 10:05:53 PM  
The thing is with every passing day more and more people end up learning how incredibly broke our health care system is, how if you're poor you're screwed.  More and more people of voting age are getting that first brush with modern medicine and discovering near-cartoon-like numbers coming back to them from hospitals and physicians and realizing that something is very, very wrong.
 
2017-09-12 10:06:31 PM  

TheDarkSaintOfGin: Norquist Vagprobe: Bith Set Me Up: qorkfiend: Bith Set Me Up: AsparagusFTW: Now it's up to the youngsters to vote.

/I hope

The line is "If you build it, he will come."

Democrats have had it backwards for decades.

So the Democrats have to win and accomplish everything before people will vote for them?

Sounds like you're the one who has it backwards.

Democrats have to start setting high expectations and goals which will win people over.

We had one candidate who vowed to get rid of the ACA and one who vowed to keep it. Only 25% of eligible voters voted for the latter. I think you're vastly overestimating how progressive and intelligent most Americans are.

 But only 24.9% voted for the person that wanted to get rid of it.

 The opposition to the ACA only works when people believe that Obamacare and the ACA are different.

When the dumb asses were given a clue, their reps were afraid to leave their offices

This is known


See, this raises another problem: Winning over the people who hated Obamacare but loved the ACA is fine in the abstract, but . . . do you remember WHY they hated Obamacare? I seem to remember a lot of lynching imagery and the n-word thrown around at these anti-Obamacare rallies. What will the Democrats have to give up in terms of their commitment to civil rights to get these people's votes on health care?
 
2017-09-12 10:06:43 PM  

Bith Set Me Up: Norquist Vagprobe: Bith Set Me Up: JAGChem82: Im thinking that D's are starting to realize that trying to craft legislation to curry favor with R's and R voters is a wasted effort. You're not going to get them to go along with it, so do some saber rattling and whip up a froth with your base. Might as well go big on the first go round and never relent.

I hope Democrats start to realize that they've been losing because they haven't had high expectations, not despite it.

What was the last truly lofty goal we set for ourselves as a nation? Landing on the moon?

In 2008, Obama was saying "Yes, we can!". In 2016, Hillary was saying "Your call is important to us. Please continue to hold".

And then we had the two most productive and progressive years legislatively since the New Deal . . . and then Americans the Democratic Party leadership gave the Congress to the teabaggers.

FTFY.

The Democratic Party leadership insisted upon the ACA rather than single-payer, and then ran away from both the ACA and President Obama himself once the GOP got butthurt over its enactment.


And instead of saying "Fark you" to the DNC and electing a Congress that would move towards single payer despite their objections, you rolled over and followed them right off the cliff.
 
2017-09-12 10:08:46 PM  
I want to watch the Republicans chew their feet off, trying to get out of this trap that they laid for themselves.
 
2017-09-12 10:09:54 PM  

Bith Set Me Up: Norquist Vagprobe: Bith Set Me Up: JAGChem82: Im thinking that D's are starting to realize that trying to craft legislation to curry favor with R's and R voters is a wasted effort. You're not going to get them to go along with it, so do some saber rattling and whip up a froth with your base. Might as well go big on the first go round and never relent.

I hope Democrats start to realize that they've been losing because they haven't had high expectations, not despite it.

What was the last truly lofty goal we set for ourselves as a nation? Landing on the moon?

In 2008, Obama was saying "Yes, we can!". In 2016, Hillary was saying "Your call is important to us. Please continue to hold".

And then we had the two most productive and progressive years legislatively since the New Deal . . . and then Americans the Democratic Party leadership gave the Congress to the teabaggers.

FTFY.

The Democratic Party leadership insisted upon the ACA rather than single-payer, and then ran away from both the ACA and President Obama himself once the GOP got butthurt over its enactment.


This interpretation doesn't make any farking sense. It's completely backwards. If you like single payer, then IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY FARKING SENSE TO SUPPORT THE PARTY HELL-BENT ON DESTROYING THE ACA!
 
2017-09-12 10:10:04 PM  

Norquist Vagprobe: TheDarkSaintOfGin: Norquist Vagprobe: Bith Set Me Up: qorkfiend: Bith Set Me Up: AsparagusFTW: Now it's up to the youngsters to vote.

/I hope

The line is "If you build it, he will come."

Democrats have had it backwards for decades.

So the Democrats have to win and accomplish everything before people will vote for them?

Sounds like you're the one who has it backwards.

Democrats have to start setting high expectations and goals which will win people over.

We had one candidate who vowed to get rid of the ACA and one who vowed to keep it. Only 25% of eligible voters voted for the latter. I think you're vastly overestimating how progressive and intelligent most Americans are.

 But only 24.9% voted for the person that wanted to get rid of it.

 The opposition to the ACA only works when people believe that Obamacare and the ACA are different.

When the dumb asses were given a clue, their reps were afraid to leave their offices

This is known

See, this raises another problem: Winning over the people who hated Obamacare but loved the ACA is fine in the abstract, but . . . do you remember WHY they hated Obamacare? I seem to remember a lot of lynching imagery and the n-word thrown around at these anti-Obamacare rallies. What will the Democrats have to give up in terms of their commitment to civil rights to get these people's votes on health care?


 part of it is also disrupting the right wing propaganda machine.

Though part of it also those suckers WANTING to actually learn things
 
2017-09-12 10:11:35 PM  

qorkfiend: Bith Set Me Up: Norquist Vagprobe: Bith Set Me Up: JAGChem82: Im thinking that D's are starting to realize that trying to craft legislation to curry favor with R's and R voters is a wasted effort. You're not going to get them to go along with it, so do some saber rattling and whip up a froth with your base. Might as well go big on the first go round and never relent.

I hope Democrats start to realize that they've been losing because they haven't had high expectations, not despite it.

What was the last truly lofty goal we set for ourselves as a nation? Landing on the moon?

In 2008, Obama was saying "Yes, we can!". In 2016, Hillary was saying "Your call is important to us. Please continue to hold".

And then we had the two most productive and progressive years legislatively since the New Deal . . . and then Americans the Democratic Party leadership gave the Congress to the teabaggers.

FTFY.

The Democratic Party leadership insisted upon the ACA rather than single-payer, and then ran away from both the ACA and President Obama himself once the GOP got butthurt over its enactment.

And instead of saying "Fark you" to the DNC and electing a Congress that would move towards single payer despite their objections, you rolled over and followed them right off the cliff.


That's the problem with liberals. They don't understand that the PRIMARIES, not the GENERAL, are where intra-party disputes are hashed out.
 
Displayed 50 of 105 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report