Support NeoGAF

[Atomic Playboy]

"The United States cannot afford another four years of the Obama White House, which is what Hillary Clinton represents," Ryan and Trump said in a joint statement issued after their private meeting. "That is why it’s critical that Republicans unite around our shared principles, advance a conservative agenda, and do all we can to win this fall."

I don't understand this line of reasoning. The economy is great, unemployment is low, the stock market is doing fantastic. About the only complaint people have is that the gains are being realized almost exclusively by the wealthy at the expense of the middle class, but people who are upset at that aren't voting Republican, since that's the very basis of Republican policies. Who out there is legitimately thinking "the economy is shit for me right now; trickle down economics will be an improvement for me personally"? I understand Ryan and Trump have to paint the current situation as terrible to get votes, but maybe stay away from the argument where people can look around and say, "actually, I'm doing pretty good."

 

[NeoXChaos]

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1634139739/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Most of my colleagues are dishonest career politicians who revel in the power and special-interest money that's lavished upon them."
"My main job is to keep my job, to get reelected. It takes precedence over everything."
"Voters are incredibly ignorant and know little about our form of government and how it works."
"It's far easier than you think to manipulate a nation of naive, self-absorbed sheep who crave instant gratification."
"Fundraising is so time consuming I seldom read any bills I vote on. Like many of my colleagues, I don't know how the legislation will be implemented, or what it'll cost."
"We spend money we don't have and blithely mortgage the future with a wink and a nod. Screw the next generation. It's about getting credit now, lookin' good for the upcoming election."

Worth Buying?

 

[Maledict]

I don't understand this line of reasoning. The economy is great, unemployment is low, the stock market is doing fantastic. About the only complaint people have is that the gains are being realized almost exclusively by the wealthy at the expense of the middle class, but people who are upset at that aren't voting Republican, since that's the very basis of Republican policies. Who out there is legitimately thinking "the economy is shit for me right now; trickle down economics will be an improvement for me personally"? I understand Ryan and Trump have to paint the current situation as terrible to get votes, but maybe stay away from the argument where people can look around and say, "actually, I'm doing pretty good."

Someone posted about this earlier, but basically - reality no longer matters for republican voters.

They have been fed a steady diet of terror and depression for the last 8 years, and actual fact doesn't come anywhere near it. They are convinced the USA is a laughing stock because of Obama, that the economy is fucked worse than ever, that debt is overwhelming their children and that religious freedom is being trampled on.

Part of this is absolutely on the media's head - in the need for balance, regular media never takes them to task for absolutely false statements. but partly it's also fox - when your only news source is pumping that filth into your front room 24 / 7 a day, confirming all your worse fears, its natural you believe it.

(As Terry Pratchett put it, most people don't want news - they want "olds". They want to hear the same stories that confirm their beliefs, they don't want to be challenged or forced to confront things).

 

[NYCmetsfan]

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1634139739/?tag=neogaf0e-20



Worth Buying?

If it has any bombshells they'll be reported. Don't but these stupid books. Get it from the library if you want to read it.

I doubt its a good read like a leibovich book or something (If you havent read this town, read it, its especially good after pundits stupid inability to see the racism in the GOP for what it is with trumps election)

 

[pigeon]

The Affordable Care Act rewards insurers for pooling risk by paying them a subsidy. Congress never approved this spending and in fact has explicitly removed it from the budget. Thus the administration has illegally been spending money. This will be appealed but the court is correct because the administration has not been appropriated these funds.

This will raise premiums and the PPACA is looking more and more like the PPA.

Just for clarity, are you saying the money was removed in the budget resolution, or in the HHS appropriations bill? Because only one of those is actually meaningful.

 

[Macho Madness]

The Clinton campaign's response to Ryan/Trump:

Interesting that they go that route instead of "The GOP is the party of crazy ass Trump!"

But I guess that'll come in time.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1634139739/?tag=neogaf0e-20



Worth Buying?

Interesting, I wonder who the author was?

by Congressman X (Author)

oh.

 

[AnotherNils]

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0Y32BB

STOP DOING THIS TO ME

In a just world they win the case, lose the election and Hillary adds the public option. So sick of this shit.

 

[Macho Madness]

Trump's trade policies would be terrible for those he says he's trying to help: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/report-trump-tariffs-would-be-catastrophic-for-poor-223117

 

[VRMN]

STOP DOING THIS TO ME

In a just world they win the case, lose the election and Hillary adds the public option. So sick of this shit.

In a normal world Congress just patches up the law and gets rid of weird drafting anomalies while improving how the law works. But...yeah, not with this GOP.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Just for clarity, are you saying the money was removed in the budget resolution, or in the HHS appropriations bill? Because only one of those is actually meaningful.

It wasn't "removed" it was never there. The gov is arguing the ACA amended a previous Code that provided the appropriation.

In fact the budget resolutions explicitly required a program assuming the cost sharing

The October 2013 legislation did, however, require HHS to
certify that a program was in place to verify that applicants were eligible for “premium tax
credits . . . and reductions in cost-sharing” before “making such credits and reductions
available,” Pub. L. 113-46, Div. B, § 1001(a), 127 Stat. 566.

and that congress was assuming the money was going to be spent

During the same deliberations, several members of Congress described Sections
1401 and 1402 as costing “500 billion dollars,” an estimate that almost certainly combined the
costs of Section 1401’s premium tax credits and Section 1402’s cost-sharing reimbursements.

its just missing the magic words in the ACA proper


Basically someone forgot to list section 1402 in this part of the bill so congress clearly didn't mean to appropriate to it (which is frankly absurd since the rest of the bill clearly assumes its being appropriated and everybody assumed it was since there are statements in which they count that money as appropriated)

Disbursements may be made from the appropriation made by this
section only for—
(1) refunds to the limit of liability of an individual tax account;
and
(2) refunds due from credit provisions of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) enacted before January 1,
1978, or enacted by the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, or from
section 25A, 35, 36, 36A, 36B, 168(k)(4)(F), 53(e), 54B(h), or
6431 of such Code, or due under section 3081(b)(2) of the
Housing Assistance Tax Act of 2008.

 

[Grief.exe]

Someone posted about this earlier, but basically - reality no longer matters for republican voters.

They have been fed a steady diet of terror and depression for the last 8 years, and actual fact doesn't come anywhere near it. They are convinced the USA is a laughing stock because of Obama, that the economy is fucked worse than ever, that debt is overwhelming their children and that religious freedom is being trampled on.

Part of this is absolutely on the media's head - in the need for balance, regular media never takes them to task for absolutely false statements. but partly it's also fox - when your only news source is pumping that filth into your front room 24 / 7 a day, confirming all your worse fears, its natural you believe it.

(As Terry Pratchett put it, most people don't want news - they want "olds". They want to hear the same stories that confirm their beliefs, they don't want to be challenged or forced to confront things).

T
There are also billions of dollars on the back end going into conservative think tanks and studies designed to twist and distort statistics.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

So Hillary is consistently calling Trump a "loose cannon" now. That press release is the second time this week she's used that specific phrasing.

Looks like she's got her Trump style nickname for Trump himself. "The Loose Cannon"

 

[B-Dubs]

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1634139739/?tag=neogaf0e-20



Worth Buying?

It's from a self-publishing publisher, if it was legit then an actual publisher would have picked it up. For all we know it could have been written by some 13-year-old in his mother's basement. Actually, that's more likely than an actual Congressman having written this. Had an actual Congressman wanted to write something like this I know of at least 2 publishing houses who would have jumped on it.

 

[Lord_Byron28]

The Clinton campaign's response to Ryan/Trump:

Interesting that they go that route instead of "The GOP is the party of crazy ass Trump!"

But I guess that'll come in time.

Should've instead tethered them together. Saying look at the republican party supporting everything Donald Trump says.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Should've instead tethered them together. Saying look at the republican party supporting everything Donald Trump says.

Ryan will come out in support sooner or later. She can tie them then

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Why?

His Labor background helps with both working class whites and Bernie's progressive wing. He's Hispanic, and speaks fluent Spanish. He has more experience than a lot of the contenders (not Kaine, but I'd take him second). I think he'd be a good fresh face for the ticket.

The Clinton campaign's response to Ryan/Trump:

Interesting that they go that route instead of "The GOP is the party of crazy ass Trump!"

But I guess that'll come in time.

I like the strategy. Trump's biggest weakness isn't that he's part of the crazy ass GOP. Everyone knows that and has for years. His biggest weakness is his utter contempt for backing down or building bridges. If he won't even attempt to meet Republicans half way, then you drive that wedge in to keep the cowards from meeting him the whole way. They'll all do it eventually if you don't push, so you constantly remind the public who hasn't jumped on the crazy train. The implication is that you WILL notify the public when they do.

In this instance, Ryan can't get away with a quick endorsement because it's clear that the Clinton campaign will immediately paper the country with that knowledge. If someone already boarded the Trump train, let them, but drive the ones that haven't even further away.

 

[GrapeApes]

Should've instead tethered them together. Saying look at the republican party supporting everything Donald Trump says.

I'd imagine that will come later when the party kisses the ring.

 

[B-Dubs]

I'd imagine that will come later when the party kisses the ring.

Yup. For now play up the strife and peel off the moderate republicans who can't stand Trump's racism. Then when Ryan kisses the ring, and he will kiss the ring, you wrap everyone who is left in Trump's racism and demonize the lot of them, making it harder for those who jumped ship earlier to go back when they get cold feet.

 

[Macho Madness]

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrDavidDuke/status/730800126994698240

 

[Spoiled Milk]

This is the same argument of the other case. It was never explicitly stated thus not word for word approved. This is also a decision by a former Reagan appointee to the NLRB and a Bush appointee

I mean this is pretty silly intentionally misconstruing one line in king v burwell because the court ended up siding with the government in its interpretation that. How can you not infer it ment to dispurse money when it authorized the program but left it out in authorization in another part? Congress's intent is clear and she's being obtuse.



anyways if this will be appealed to the SCOTUS it will be decided easily in favor. I doubt this even gets past an en banc ruling or circuit court.

That line she uses says yeah if its clear we enforce but when its not you side with the government if congresses intent can be inferred, she just says intent be inferred because reasons and that appropriations are different.

Appropriations are different. Funding is the exclusive realm of the legislature. The supreme court challenge we saw was hand-wavy and about implementation. Yes, it is obvious that even though the states are supposed to set up exchanges, the intent is to have exchanges, so the federal government is more than welcome to set those up itself. But almost every part of the affordable care act was explicitly funded. This one had no such mechanism.

If this does pass the courts then it will have to be because the cost sharing payments will be reinterpreted to fall under another appropriation. It is likely that the exchange subsidy could cover that. I don't know.

Just for clarity, are you saying the money was removed in the budget resolution, or in the HHS appropriations bill? Because only one of those is actually meaningful.

I don't know. The Washington Times states that the funding was "zeroed out" by Republicans. I don't actually know what that means.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

https://mobile.twitter.com/DrDavidDuke/status/730800126994698240

lol

 

[Ophelion]

Haha, what the shit am I even looking at there, Macho?

If Trump actually wins this general, we clearly all deserve whatever comes next. This guy is so obviously and hilariously vulnerable.

 

[Macho Madness]

Haha, what the shit am I even looking at there, Macho?

If Trump actually wins this general, we clearly all deserve whatever comes next. This guy is so obviously and hilariously vulnerable.

It's David Duke.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

David Duke is the only person who looks like he's made actual Horcruxes.

He just doesn't look like a real person.

 

[B-Dubs]

I don't know. The Washington Times states that the funding was "zeroed out" by Republicans. I don't actually know what that means.

I'd look for another source on that. Check the Washington Post or New York Times, if it happened then they'll probably have something on it.

David Duke is the only person who looks like he's made actual Horcruxes.

He just doesn't look like a real person.

It's like all the hair on his head, from his beard to his actual hair, is completely fake.

 

[Clefargle]

Here is a great video where Sam Seder from the majority report and Jimmy Dore of TYT go at it over "Bernie or bust".

Watch all 4 parts:
https://youtu.be/kshwtCuNewU

Spoiler

Jimmy looks stupid and unprepared when Sam calmly calls him out on his incorrect historical references and straight up revisionist nonsense. Then Sam kicks his teeth in by simply playing out his argument and seeing that it does nothing to further the progressive agenda. As a Sam Seder fan that can't stand Jimmy on TYT this debate was cathartic

 

[pigeon]

I don't know. The Washington Times states that the funding was "zeroed out" by Republicans. I don't actually know what that means.

That does not strike me as a super reliable source, and I would observe that the case at question does not suggest that the funding was cut by the GOP. As metsfan notes, the case actually just hinges on the question of whether the payments required by 1402 are actually appropriated by the PPACA when it amends the US Code for 1401's appropriations.

Ultimately this goes back to, like, one of the fundamental dumbnesses of American government. It's not in dispute that HHS is required by law to make these risk pool payments. The argument is over whether they are allowed to make the payments they're required to make. Hopefully the fundamental absurdity of that argument should make clear why this position is problematic -- there's just no logical sense behind Congress mandating an action it refuses to appropriate the funds for. But that's what's being argued here.

 

[Macho Madness]

Yikes.

https://twitter.com/CNBCnow/status/730820050698051585

CNBC Now
@CNBCnow
BREAKING: U.S. immigration agency plans new deportation raids in May & June focused on women & children -Reuters, citing sources & documents

 

[pigeon]

Yikes.

https://twitter.com/CNBCnow/status/730820050698051585

Goddamn it. This is bad policy and bad politics. Why can't Obama get a fucking handle on ICE? Or DHS or whatever the fuck they're called now.

 

[Macho Madness]

Here's the article on it: Exclusive: U.S. plans new wave of immigrant deportation raids

U.S. immigration officials are planning a month-long series of raids in May and June to deport hundreds of Central American mothers and children found to have entered the country illegally, according to sources and an internal document seen by Reuters.

The operation would likely be the largest deportation sweep targeting immigrant families by the administration of President Barack Obama this year after a similar drive over two days in January that focused on Georgia, Texas, and North Carolina.

Those raids, which resulted in the detention of 121 people, mostly women and children, sparked an outcry from immigration advocates and criticism from some Democrats, including the party's presidential election frontrunner Hillary Clinton.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has now told field offices nationwide to launch a 30-day "surge" of arrests focused on mothers and children who have already been told to leave the United States, the document seen by Reuters said. The operation would also cover minors who have entered the country without a guardian and since turned 18 years of age, the document said. Two sources confirmed the details of the plan.

 

[harSon]

Disgusting

 

[Coriolanus]

Goddamn it. This is bad policy and bad politics. Why can't Obama get a fucking handle on ICE? Or DHS or whatever the fuck they're called now.

Why can't the president responsible for record deportation numbers get a handle on the agencies that allowed him to have record deportation numbers?

One is indeed forced to wonder.

 

[pigeon]

Why can't the president responsible for record deportation numbers get a handle on the agencies that allowed him to have record deportation numbers?

One is indeed forced to wonder.

I mean, fair enough, but in that case I'm frustrated with Obama's bizarrely schizophrenic policies. The guy who put DAPA into place should not also be running up the score on deportations. Why be an extremist in both directions? How does that help anything?

 

[NYCmetsfan]

That does not strike me as a super reliable source, and I would observe that the case at question does not suggest that the funding was cut by the GOP. As metsfan notes, the case actually just hinges on the question of whether the payments required by 1402 are actually appropriated by the PPACA when it amends the US Code for 1401's appropriations.

Ultimately this goes back to, like, one of the fundamental dumbnesses of American government. It's not in dispute that HHS is required by law to make these risk pool payments. The argument is over whether they are allowed to make the payments they're required to make. Hopefully the fundamental absurdity of that argument should make clear why this position is problematic -- there's just no logical sense behind Congress mandating an action it refuses to appropriate the funds for. But that's what's being argued here.

This is whys its clearly a typo and a result of poor law writing. The intent is clear, congress meant to appropriate money they forgot to write a few numbers and letters. Its absurd to then say they didn't appropriate it.

 

[Orbis Tabula]

Has anyone made a Lady and The Tramp joke yet? Because that seems like super low hanging fruit. First Lady and The Trump.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I mean, fair enough, but in that case I'm frustrated with Obama's bizarrely schizophrenic policies. The guy who put DAPA into place should not also be running up the score on deportations. Why be an extremist in both directions? How does that help anything?

I'd be curious who is getting deported. I mean DAPA and DACA are for long time residents, not new arrivals. I mean Obama has never made the argument for open borders. So I mean if you've come in the last year or two why would't he deport them?

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has now told field offices nationwide to launch a 30-day "surge" of arrests focused on mothers and children who have already been told to leave the United States, the document seen by Reuters said. The operation would also cover minors who have entered the country without a guardian and since turned 18 years of age, the document said. Two sources confirmed the details of the plan.

It sounds like these people have been through the process and found that they didn't have a right to be here and haven't left. So why wouldn't you deport them? Being a mother or 18 years of age isn't a get out of jail free card.


(I'm playing devils advocate, I'd argue most of these people are refugees)

 

[Goodstyle]

One of the great GAF mysteries to me is the question of why no one made an X-Files themed Democratic Debate thread when they had the chance. Bernie as Mulder and Hillary as Scully would have been perfect.

 

[Iolo]

Has anyone made a Lady and The Tramp joke yet? Because that seems like super low hanging fruit. First Lady and The Trump.

"He's a tramp, but they love him.
Breaks a new heart every day.
He's a tramp, they adore him.
And I only hope he'll stay that way..."

qed

One of the great GAF mysteries to me is the question of why no one made an X-Files themed Democratic Debate thread when they had the chance. Bernie as Mulder and Hillary as Scully would have been perfect.

Scully and Mulder had chemistry.

 

[Coriolanus]

I mean, fair enough, but in that case I'm frustrated with Obama's bizarrely schizophrenic policies. The guy who put DAPA into place should not also be running up the score on deportations. Why be an extremist in both directions? How does that help anything?

ahm.... legacy?

democrats do seem fond of pointing out clinton's budget surplus like it meant something, after all.

Hm. This weird duality can also be attributed to the way he handled federal expenditure. Dude tries hard to decrease the deficit because.... why, exactly?

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

One of the great GAF mysteries to me is the question of why no one made an X-Files themed Democratic Debate thread when they had the chance. Bernie as Mulder and Hillary as Scully would have been perfect.

But Hillary's the real UFO buff...

 

[Macho Madness]

Boehner

Deirdre Walsh ✔ ‎@deirdrewalshcnn
Boehner backs Trump, says "Anybody who doesn't think Donald Trump can win, just watch"

Phil Mattingly ✔ ‎@Phil_Mattingly
Boehner: "I did my best to bring our party together, but I don't know what the knuckleheads want. Still to this day I don't know."

Rebecca Ballhaus ✔ ‎@rebeccaballhaus
Boehner: “Shutting down the government to get rid of Obamacare might have been about the dumbest thing I ever saw.”

And:

Rebecca Ballhaus ✔ ‎@rebeccaballhaus
Three of four on #SALT2016 politics panel predict Clinton will be president. Karl Rove, the fourth, says: “Damned if I know.”

 

[BlackClouds]

I don't see a GOP realignment happening for a while. They said after 2012 they needed to and they didn't. There's no one senior in the party with the balls to stand up to the bigots who make up a large part of their base.

I agree. Republicans still dominate state and local election, and own congress for the moment, and had the supreme court until recently. Takes a long time for folks to accept reality if indeed they are done nationally.

 

[whyamihere]

Here's the article on it: Exclusive: U.S. plans new wave of immigrant deportation raids

Gross.

 

[Macho Madness]

PPP will be polling Arizona this weekend.

 

[Aaron Strife]

PPP will be polling Arizona this weekend.

Can't wait.

Biggest hope is that McCain loses his primary to the chem trails candidate. Just gift-wrap that seat for the Demmycrats.

Feel like they'll show Trump leading by 7 or so. I don't buy the polls showing him down just yet.

 

[Wilsongt]

Boehner



And:

And just like that they fall in line to support a racist, xenophobic, small-handed prick.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

ahm.... legacy?

democrats do seem fond of pointing out clinton's budget surplus like it meant something, after all.

Hm. This weird duality can also be attributed to the way he handled federal expenditure. Dude tries hard to decrease the deficit because.... why, exactly?

It helps him get elected and get other liberal policies?

Voters want a lower deficit, you can blame this on whatever but its the state of things and I think trying to convince people that it doesn't matter is a fools errand and a recipe for electoral disaster with few if any upsides. And if its done through taxes on the rich I don't have a problem with it (and its likey also good policy)

 

[VendettaRed07]

Boehner really screwed over Ryan by stepping down and forcing him to become Speaker. Boehner wouldn't have gave two shits and endorsed Trump and just dealt with it. Ryan is now in a literally impossible position trying to work with the Nominee that his party voters picked and while at the same time trying to keep his hands clean of the dirt that comes with Trump to preserve his political future.

 

[blackw0lf]

Unfortunately I don't think Obama has full control over ICE