• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2013 |OT3| 1,000 Years of Darkness and Nuclear Fallout

Status
Not open for further replies.
So Ted Cruz's father really likes to say things, helps explain a lot. Really worth a read, its the Christian right redux.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/10/ted-cruz-rafael-father-video-christian-tea-party

"People here are trying to figure out Ted Cruz," a Democratic senator recently told me. "And a lot of them are saying, 'He went to Princeton, Harvard Law—he doesn't really believe what he says.' But I think he does. All you have to do is look at his father. So much of our life is mirroring. And Ted Cruz is mirroring his father."

Edit: I hope this boosts Ted's chances in the primaries.
 

Diablos

Member
NBC/WSJ poll: Obama approval sinks to new low

By Mark Murray, Senior Political Editor, NBC News

President Barack Obama’s approval rating has declined to an all-time low as public frustration with Washington and pessimism about the nation’s direction continue to grow, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.
Just 42 percent approve of the president’s job performance, which is down five points from earlier this month. By comparison, 51 percent disapprove of his job in office -- tied for his all-time high.
What does this mean for Ohio?!





I KID.

Still, healthcare.gov + NSA drama isn't doing him any favors
 
Not knowing all the details about this, but does cost of cancer care decrease for your mom with the ACA?

I'm trying to find out. I've been fucking with the website, and had issue after issue after issue. I'm going to give it a shot again this weekend.
 

Wilsongt

Member
While the government focuses on the rollout of a program that is meant to help people, a current program that is helping people is going to begin experiencing cuts starting tomorrow.

Food stamp cuts kick in as Congress debates more


WASHINGTON (AP) — More than 47 million Americans who receive food stamps will see their benefits go down starting Friday, just as Congress has begun negotiations on further cuts to the program.

Beginning in November, a temporary benefit from the 2009 economic stimulus that boosts food stamp dollars will no longer be available. According to the Agriculture Department, that means a family of four receiving food stamps will start receiving $36 less a month.

The benefits, which go to 1 in 7 Americans, fluctuate based on factors that include food prices, inflation and income. The rolls have swelled as the economy has struggled in recent years, with the stimulus providing higher benefits and many people signing up for the first time.

As a result, the program has more than doubled in cost since 2008, now costing almost $80 billion a year. That large increase in spending has turned the program, now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, into a target for House Republicans looking to reduce spending.

Negotiations on a wide-ranging farm bill, including cuts to the SNAP program, began Wednesday. Five-year farm bills passed by both the House and the Senate would cut food stamps, reductions that would come on top of the cut that will go into effect Friday. But the two chambers are far apart on the amounts.

Legislation passed by the GOP-controlled House would cut food stamps by an additional $4 billion annually and tighten eligibility requirements. The House bill would also end government waivers that have allowed able-bodied adults without dependents to receive food stamps indefinitely and allow states to put broad new work requirements in place.

The Senate farm bill would cut a tenth of the House amount, with Democrats and President Barack Obama opposing major cuts.

Farm-state lawmakers have been pushing the farm bill for more than two years, and Wednesday's conference negotiations represented the opening round in final talks. If the bill is not passed by the end of the year and current farm law is not extended, certain dairy supports would expire that could raise the price of milk. Farmers would start to feel more effects next spring.

"It took us years to get here but we are here," House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., said. "Let's not take years to get it done."

The biggest obstacle to a final bill is how far apart the two parties are on food stamps. Lucas said at the conference meeting that he was hoping to find common ground on the issue, but House GOP leaders such as Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., have insisted on higher cuts, saying the program should be targeted to the neediest people.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., sent out a statement as the meeting opened that said food stamp recipients "deserve swift action from Congress to pass a bill that provides the much-needed nutritional support for our children, our seniors, our veterans and our communities."

As Congress debates the cuts to the program, charities say they are preparing for the farm bill reductions as well as the scheduled cuts taking place Friday.

"Charities cannot fill the gap for the cuts being proposed to SNAP," said Maura Daly of Feeding America, a network of the nation's food banks. "We are very concerned about the impact on the charitable system."

Daly says food banks may have to as much as double their current levels of distribution if the House cuts were enacted. The Congressional Budget Office says as many as 3.8 million people could lose their benefits in 2014 if the House bill became law.

America, ladies and gentlemen. Where the poor continue to be shat upon.
 
NY Times: Senate Republicans Block Two Obama Nominees

Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked the confirmation of two of President Obama’s nominees, one to a powerful appeals court and another to a housing lending oversight post, setting up a confrontation with Democrats that could escalate into a larger fight over limiting the filibuster and restricting how far the minority party can go to thwart a president’s agenda.

The Senate voted 55 to 38 to move forward with the the nomination of Patricia Ann Millett to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, four votes short of the 60 required to break the Republican filibuster. The vote to advance the nomination of Representative Mel Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, to become the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency was 56 to 42, four votes short. Forty one Republicans opposed Mr. Watt, two supported him.​

https://www.google.com/search?q=senate+republicans+block+2+obama+nominees
 

Wilsongt

Member
NY Times: Senate Republicans Block Two Obama Nominees

Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked the confirmation of two of President Obama’s nominees, one to a powerful appeals court and another to a housing lending oversight post, setting up a confrontation with Democrats that could escalate into a larger fight over limiting the filibuster and restricting how far the minority party can go to thwart a president’s agenda.

The Senate voted 55 to 38 to move forward with the the nomination of Patricia Ann Millett to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, four votes short of the 60 required to break the Republican filibuster. The vote to advance the nomination of Representative Mel Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, to become the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency was 56 to 42, four votes short. Forty one Republicans opposed Mr. Watt, two supported him.​

https://www.google.com/search?q=senate+republicans+block+2+obama+nominees

Sounds like Thursday for the GOP.
 
Can we just do this filibuster thing already? I'm tired of the game where they block everything and we threaten reform and then they block everything and we threaten reform back and forth forever while important positions remain unfilled.
 
Ending the ability of filibustering judges could set up some really ugly things in the future. But then again, Reagan and W Bush put some pretty extreme judges on the court with the existing senate rules.
 

Atlagev

Member
I think tonight's SP episode was about shitting all over OC

Edit: People in the SP thread tell me it actually was about how changing HC can't go smoothly. Episode was still a bit lost on me.

I was a little unsure of the angle they were going for as well, but the '80s songs IntelliLink would randomly play made it worth it.
 
I think tonight's SP episode was about shitting all over OC

Edit: People in the SP thread tell me it actually was about how changing HC can't go smoothly. Episode was still a bit lost on me.

Except that at the end of the show the best way to deal with it was to get rid of it entirely? Or something like that? Long story short it was both heavy handed and nonsensical. The Miley Cyrus thing especially was just annoying.

I haven't watched South Park in a while. I think I'm just too old for it now.
 

Diablos

Member
NCavoDK.gif
 
You want to know how you can lose faith in the average American? Take a college course that involves discussions of crime and economics. Holy fuck!
 

Diablos

Member
WASHINGTON -- Senate Democrats facing reelection next year aren't just fretting about a balky website and President Barack Obama's misleading campaign statements on health care. Now they've begun worrying about another deadline a year away.

According to an Affordable Care Act timetable established by administration officials, early next October insurance companies will announce their new menu of health care plans for the ACA marketplaces -- plans that may be more varied and numerous than those offered this year, but that almost certainly will come with higher prices.

The likely price hikes will hit the individual and small-business insurance markets only weeks before Election Day on Nov. 4, 2014.

"What genius came up with that timetable?" asked one key Democrat, who declined to be quoted by name because he is involved in private White House talks.

Democratic senators and their political advisers have been lobbying the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services to push back the next "open season" date until after the election, to no avail.


The concern about the 2014 timetable highlights a fundamental political reality of Obamacare: The success or failure of the program depends largely on the kindness of strangers -- the insurance companies -- and whatever happens in the marketplace, for good or ill, will be ascribed to President Obama and the Democrats, since Republicans refused to vote for the law or cooperate in efforts to make it work.

The president's job approval rating is already down to 42 percent in the new NBC poll, the lowest of his presidency in that survey.

"People are going to compare the world as it existed before Obamacare to the world that exists after it,"
said Democratic consultant Mark Mellman. "Some of the resulting judgments they make aren't going to be fair. Rates in many places and for many people will rise and would have risen with or without the new program, but voters will tend to look to Obamacare one way or the other."

"Luckily," Mellman added, "we have the Republicans out there to make us look good by comparison."

But that is not enough to entirely allay the Democrats' fears. Eleven Senate Democrats, most of them running for reelection in 2014, have asked the administration to postpone the deadline for obtaining individual insurance past the current date of March 31, given the problems with the Obamacare website.

They haven't received an official response but have been told that the deadline can't be pushed back. To do so, the senators have been told, would actually increase the likelihood of major price hikes next October. The theory is that extending the deadline would lead to even more sick people signing up, while young, healthy people would remain skeptical and wary of the program.

It's not clear that the 11 senators really expect a deadline change or whether they are asking for it simply to show voters back home that they're concerned. Administration officials also contend that extending the deadline would require legislation -- and that putting such a bill on the Senate and House floors would invite other amendments and give Republicans a chance to dismantle the program.

Democrats weren't been pleased with the spate of stories about how the president, at best, oversimplified his campaign-season assurances about the program. But there was little they could do, and they largely kept mum on that fraught topic.

They were left to explain -- correctly -- that the coverage that individuals are losing now was, for the most part, barely coverage at all. And they are reminding all who will listen that the vast majority of Americans are covered by their employer plans.

"We have to remember that we are in the white heat of this controversy now," said Mellman. "The temperature will be a lot lower a year from now."

Maybe -- depending on how many people lose coverage, how many sign up for new policies and what the prices are as Election Day nears.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...-democrats_n_4179505.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
Maybe, indeed.

Ugh. Every time I read anything like this it just makes me all the more enraged over how badly healthcare.gov is fucking up the trajectory of this already hard-to-sell law.

I'd love to hear what Obama says behind closed doors about it.
 
edit: Nevermind, old shit.

---

Democracy Corps also has approval for Obamacare going up:

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2013/10...rvey-shows-growing-support-for-nbsp-Obamacare

Just 38 percent now clearly oppose the Affordable Care Act. While likely voters divide evenly on the plan, 8 percent oppose the law because it does not go far enough. As a result, just 38 percent oppose the law because it is big government.
By significant margins, voters want lawmakers to implement and fix the law, rather than repeal it. By a 20-point margin, 58 percent to 38 percent, voters say lawmakers should implement and fix the law rather than repeal it. Additionally, intensity favors implementation—38 percent strongly favor implementing the law while 28 percent strongly favor repeal.
Strong opposition to the law has dropped a net 10 points since 2010 —now at 34 percent. This is a totally different context than 2010, when Democrats paid the price for the ACA and Republicans took control of the House [...]
By a 17-point margin (49 to 32), voters say they trust Democrats more than Republicans on implementing the Affordable Care Act. The more Republicans make the period ahead about implementation, the more voters trust Democrats to do a better job in government.
 
Isn't there a law in the ACA that caps their profits and refunds it to customers if its above a certain threshold? Possibility here?

this is true. whether a company is on the exchanges or not, they're bound by that rule. i think it's 85% of all premiums must go to patient care, but don't quote me on it.
 

Trouble

Banned
probably not for midterms

B.O. needs to get the band back together and get the ground game he had during the elections going for congressional candidates in the midterm. Maybe his last two years could be like his first two years where he was only mostly obstructed.
 
Exactly. The shutdown distracted from and masked the website issues, so now that that's over and everyone's watching the thing fail, I expect approval to drop.

Yup. And without a shutdown to cover, the media has moved to the next narrative.

A wave election would be required to win the House, and I just don't see a wave occurring during a shitty economy and divisive, apparently faulty health care law going into effect. This is what happens in second terms. It's been a horrible year for the administration, pretty much since January 1st.
 
Yup. And without a shutdown to cover, the media has moved to the next narrative.

A wave election would be required to win the House, and I just don't see a wave occurring during a shitty economy and divisive, apparently faulty health care law going into effect. This is what happens in second terms. It's been a horrible year for the administration, pretty much since January 1st.

To be fair, most of it is because of Republican obstruction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom