2020 POTUS Campaign thread - EvolutionM - Mitsubishi Lancer and Lancer Evolution Community

Notices
The Back Room Off topic discussions for thick skinned, can take a joke members. Evom rules apply.

2020 POTUS Campaign thread

Old Jun 27, 2015, 08:25 AM
  #1  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
CaliMR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Left of you
Posts: 928
Thanked 24 Times in 14 Posts
2020 POTUS Campaign thread

Thread for anyone who:

Originally Posted by ambystom01 View Post
want[s] some robut in your butthole.

I'm all for ****ing politics all over APW, but the RPT is where I draw the line.
CaliMR is offline  
Old Jun 27, 2015, 10:37 AM
  #2  
Evolved Member
 
mikesevo8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Ulster County, NY
Posts: 741
Thanked 42 Times in 29 Posts
RPT ??? Robot ***** Time ??
mikesevo8 is online now  
Old Jun 27, 2015, 03:32 PM
  #3  
Newbie
 
NFSEvolutionGSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Orlando
Posts: 37
Thanked 26 Times in 17 Posts
Can we all agree that Obamacare sucks? The idea was great in theory, but the practice of this turd is infuriating.
NFSEvolutionGSR is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to NFSEvolutionGSR For This Useful Post:
David Buschur (Jun 20, 2017)
Old Jun 27, 2015, 05:39 PM
  #4  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
 
4G63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: الرصاص والمدافع والخنازير يا بلدي!
Posts: 1,145
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by NFSEvolutionGSR View Post
Can we all agree that Obamacare sucks? The idea was great in theory, but the practice of this turd is infuriating.
The Dems/Obama get Gruber to write a **** law, don't read it, vote and pass it with legal shenanigans, then exempt themselves from it! ****ing awesome!! Remember, it was touted as
but as we all now know, the Roberts court decided it was a tax. Then having made that determination, the Roberts court almost had to allow the subsidies, even though the language was quite clear it shouldn't have been interpreted that way. At least the employer mandate will kick in this year after being unilaterally delayed by the White House.

I can't stand the current Republican leadership in Congress but they at least tried to rid the country of this terrible law. The Democrats own Obamacare lock, stock, and barrel. People should vote accordingly and hopefully they remember as they spend their $2-5k on deductibles, not including their monthly rate.

Never fear though comrade because if Obamacare goes to **** (which it will, if you survive an IPAB assessment) Congress will just go full single-payer, at which point, if its anything like the VA, will kill most citizens before they can get their required treatments or surgery

Good times are upon us, comrade!

Last edited by 4G63; Jun 27, 2015 at 08:17 PM.
4G63 is offline  
Old Jun 27, 2015, 06:44 PM
  #5  
Newbie
 
NFSEvolutionGSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Orlando
Posts: 37
Thanked 26 Times in 17 Posts
The reality is that many Americans have lost access to doctors that they were happy with and are now paying more to do it. I understand that there are now many more insured folks than there were, but this only really matters if they actually use this new found access to care to engage in preventative medical care. Then everyone wins, which is how the law was sold to many. In practice, very few have "won" and many more have "lost".

NFSEvolutionGSR is offline  
Old Jun 29, 2015, 10:52 AM
  #6  
El Jefe
iTrader: (1)
 
WestSideBilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Asleep at the wheel
Posts: 3,615
Thanked 59 Times in 55 Posts
Originally Posted by NFSEvolutionGSR View Post
The reality is that many Americans have lost access to doctors that they were happy with and are now paying more to do it.
Can you provide data to back this up? This has been a constant talking point for anti-Obamacare types, but I've not seen anything that would be considered "proof".
WestSideBilly is offline  
Old Jun 29, 2015, 11:44 AM
  #7  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
 
4G63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: الرصاص والمدافع والخنازير يا بلدي!
Posts: 1,145
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

Last edited by 4G63; Jun 29, 2015 at 01:08 PM.
4G63 is offline  
Old Jun 29, 2015, 04:28 PM
  #8  
El Jefe
iTrader: (1)
 
WestSideBilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Asleep at the wheel
Posts: 3,615
Thanked 59 Times in 55 Posts
I guess I should have been more explicit: I want numbers, not anecdotes. Were 1% forced to switch? 5%?


If we're counting anecdotes, this **** ain't new. Insurance companies drop doctors/hospitals all the time, always have, but before Obamacare the boogeyman was the insurance company, now it's the black guy.
WestSideBilly is offline  
Old Jun 29, 2015, 04:32 PM
  #9  
Newbie
 
NFSEvolutionGSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Orlando
Posts: 37
Thanked 26 Times in 17 Posts
Originally Posted by WestSideBilly View Post
Can you provide data to back this up? This has been a constant talking point for anti-Obamacare types, but I've not seen anything that would be considered "proof".
Both parents are doctors. Would you like for me to investigate the mechanism for you?

Last edited by NFSEvolutionGSR; Jun 29, 2015 at 04:43 PM.
NFSEvolutionGSR is offline  
Old Jun 29, 2015, 05:45 PM
  #10  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
 
4G63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: الرصاص والمدافع والخنازير يا بلدي!
Posts: 1,145
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by WestSideBilly View Post
I guess I should have been more explicit: I want numbers, not anecdotes. Were 1% forced to switch? 5%?
I don't think you'll get them. You'd need to have a way to add everyone up from each state that have lost their doctors and you're not going to get those numbers from either the states or the Feds. It would most likely come from a group that opposes the law therefore it would be dismissed by those whom are proponents of the law (aka, the media, DNC, the Feds)

Originally Posted by WestSideBilly View Post
If we're counting anecdotes, this **** ain't new. Insurance companies drop doctors/hospitals all the time, always have, but before Obamacare the boogeyman was the insurance company, now it's the black guy.
Really?
4G63 is offline  
Old Jun 29, 2015, 06:13 PM
  #11  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
 
4G63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: الرصاص والمدافع والخنازير يا بلدي!
Posts: 1,145
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
There's also this:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Warding off the specter of election-year health insurance cancellations, the Obama administration Wednesday announced a two-year extension for individual policies that don't meet requirements of the new health care law.

The decision helps defuse a political problem for Democrats in tough re-election battles this fall, especially for senators who in 2010 stood with President Barack Obama and voted to pass his health overhaul.

The extension was part of a major package of regulations that sets ground rules for 2015, the second year of government-subsidized health insurance markets under Obama's law — and the first year that larger employers will face a requirement to provide coverage.

Hundreds of pages of provisions affecting insurers, employers and consumers were issued by the Treasury Department and the Department of Health and Human Services. It will likely take days for lawyers and consultants to fully assess the implications.

The cancellation last fall of at least 4.7 million individual policies was one of the most damaging issues in the transition to a new insurance system under Obama's law
. The wave of cancellations hit around the time that the new HealthCare.gov website was overwhelmed with technical problems that kept many consumers from signing up for coverage. It contradicted Obama's promise that you can keep your insurance plan if you like it.

The latest extension would be valid for policies issued up to Oct. 1, 2016. It builds on an earlier reprieve issued by the White House.
Why not follow the law the Dems passed in Congress and Obama signed? Can a President unilaterally change a specific law by altering its implementation dates and language? Can a POTUS ignore a law?
4G63 is offline  
Old Jun 30, 2015, 09:50 AM
  #12  
El Jefe
iTrader: (1)
 
WestSideBilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Asleep at the wheel
Posts: 3,615
Thanked 59 Times in 55 Posts
Originally Posted by 4G63 View Post
Really?
Ya rly

Anecdotal, but I've twice had doctors removed from my insurance coverage, pre-Obamacare. Both times, the blame is placed rightfully on the insurance company for making a decision that negatively impacts me, but presumably positively impacts them (aside: this is the fundamental flaw of Obamacare, in that it still relies on a network of for-profits). This was NEVER talked about as a "big deal".

Now, the same thing happens and people blame Obama. Not the law, not the senators who passed it, not the lawyers/insurance company reps that wrote it... they blame Obama. And get press coverage.

Yes, I realize the scale of it is different, but the point is that the blame *should* be on the insurance companies.

Originally Posted by 4G63 View Post
There's also this:



Why not follow the law the Dems passed in Congress and Obama signed? Can a President unilaterally change a specific law by altering its implementation dates and language? Can a POTUS ignore a law?
4.7M is a lot higher than I would have expected.

Rough numbers... 199M adults 18-64; 64% self- or employer-insured, so 128M policies... about 3.6% of policies were affected.

That's bad, but not end of the world bad.


As to the other question, I don't really know. The POTUS' responsibility is to implement the laws written by Congress, but I don't know the exact limitations.

If Congress passed a law requiring the President to reduce gravity, would he be responsible for not implementing that?
WestSideBilly is offline  
Old Jun 30, 2015, 01:34 PM
  #13  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
 
4G63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: الرصاص والمدافع والخنازير يا بلدي!
Posts: 1,145
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by WestSideBilly View Post
Now, the same thing happens and people blame Obama. Not the law, not the senators who passed it, not the lawyers/insurance company reps that wrote it... they blame Obama. And get press coverage.


He's the President. He signed it and, for better or worse, owns it. The Dems get their blame too but the President is in charge.

Originally Posted by WestSideBilly View Post
Yes, I realize the scale of it is different, but the point is that the blame *should* be on Gruber.
Fixed. He's the man who crafted it.

Originally Posted by WestSideBilly View Post
4.7M is a lot higher than I would have expected.

Rough numbers... 199M adults 18-64; 64% self- or employer-insured, so 128M policies... about 3.6% of policies were affected.

That's bad, but not end of the world bad.
You're a single man with no spouse or children (that you know of?). You don't have any responsibility or worry about health coverage for anyone but yourself. Hate to say it but your position is a selfish one. Those people are more than 'numbers on a spreadsheet' which is why the President unilaterally changed the law prior to the elections

Originally Posted by WestSideBilly View Post
As to the other question, I don't really know. The POTUS' responsibility is to implement the laws written by Congress, but I don't know the exact limitations.

If Congress passed a law requiring the President to reduce gravity, would he be responsible for not implementing that?
No, not if he vetoed it. If that law still passes after a veto, we've got far bigger problems than what a POTUS is allowed to do or not.
4G63 is offline  
Old Jun 30, 2015, 01:58 PM
  #14  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
ambystom01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Canuckistan
Posts: 14,972
Thanks: 0
Thanked 50 Times in 43 Posts
Jesus, not this bull**** again. It comes complete with the always hypocritical "he's the POTUS, so he's to blame" stance from the same person who once said Bush deserved respect for simply being the POTUS. Awesome, good to see that flips the moment it's a black democrat.

There's no denying that more people have insurance coverage due to Obamacare than before Obamacare.

http://www.businessinsider.com/cbo-o...insured-2014-4

Now, having said that, as an outsider, I still think you have a ****ing retarded medical system. Does it provide great service? Absolutely, if you're lucky enough to be able to afford it. Unfortunately, a large proportion of the population can't. Morally, I find it repugnant that a developed western nation that prides itself on being compassionate, and yes, embraces Christian values, has a system that leaves millions to die from preventable diseases or disorders because individually they can't afford to receive treatment.

The moral argument aside, the US system is also extremely wasteful, which of course makes it very ironic from my perspective that the biggest resistance to change appears to come from the party that totes itself as the "fiscally responsible" group. Per capita, health care spending in the US is leaps and bounds above everyone else, without the corresponding increase in any of the markers of health, like lifespan, infant mortality, etc. There is undoubtedly a huge divide in the US; the rich or well insured likely do have impressive health figures, while the poor have abysmal values thus the average of mediocre.

To me, it makes logical sense to move towards a less wasteful, less bull**** system that removes the profit incentive for health care, at least for the average American. Cut the ****ty bureaucracy, and go to a single-payer system ala the NHS for the masses. By all means, keep private facilities available for those that can afford it. I see no problem with that. This would allow for a massive reduction in costs when you factor in the ability to negotiate drug fees on a national scale.

Last edited by ambystom01; Jun 30, 2015 at 02:02 PM.
ambystom01 is online now  
Old Jun 30, 2015, 02:03 PM
  #15  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
ambystom01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Canuckistan
Posts: 14,972
Thanks: 0
Thanked 50 Times in 43 Posts
Originally Posted by 4G63 View Post
You're a single man with no spouse or children (that you know of?). You don't have any responsibility or worry about health coverage for anyone but yourself. Hate to say it but your position is a selfish one. Those people are more than 'numbers on a spreadsheet' which is why the President unilaterally changed the law prior to the elections
This emotional argument goes both ways. What about the millions of people that had no insurance coverage before Obamacare? Were they just numbers on a speadsheet, because that's how they were treated.
ambystom01 is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 2020 POTUS Campaign thread


Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.