Gun control is neither here nor there but abortion is a nonstarter for me, unless you are full-throatedly in favor of promoting safe sex and other forms of reproductive rights that would reduce the need for abortions.
-
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 2017 |OT2| Well, maybe McMaster isn't a traitor.
- Thread starter ItWasMeantToBe19
- Start date
- Status
Gun control is neither here nor there but abortion is a nonstarter for me, unless you are full-throatedly in favor of promoting safe sex and other forms of reproductive rights that would reduce the need for abortions.
BlastProcessing
Member
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
I....what
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
Two trillion and cut Mexico from the continent
If we support primaries against Manchin are we allowed to think women's rights matter?
Frankly, Manchin strikes me as much closer to Bernie than Hillary!
"50-state strategy" means we should be running candidates in every race and giving them some small amount of money.
It doesn't necessarily mean we should run white supremacists or people who want to restrict choice. We should run candidates that support Democratic values regardless of the district.
I'm not sure where people got the idea that "50-state strategy" means "compromise on fundamental values all the time." Literally the Democrats keep failing to even run candidates. We should avoid doing that.
They got it from the large democratic majority that was formed exactly that way. Yeah, blue dogs sucked on some issues but not most and if there is anything the last few months should have shown people its that a majority is more important that individual votes
Pro-life democrats are nothing like pro-life republicans anyway. Plenty of people dislike abortion -- but that doesn't mean going out of your way to deny women that right
The one in 2008 that lasted literally two years? On the back of a horribly incompetent and unpopular president who took us to a totally unnecessary war that went on for a decade?
Do you think other factors might have been at play?
Have you seen the last few months?
If anything, the evidence of the last few months is that creating a majority by inviting people who disagree with your party's core values is a recipe for total dysfunction and meltdown.
The Democrats aren't magically going to turn into a majority-male party overnight either, which is what it would take to send a pro-choice stance down the crapper. (alongside massive demographic changes to make farming suddenly the new bitcoin and draw millions of workers out to the fields)
It's not so much that they disagree, it's more that the Freedom Caucus guys are dogmatic and unwilling to compromise. If they were willing to give a little we'd all be in real trouble.
Frank the Great
Banned
Random question. Would a national single payer healthcare system be a huge boon to small businesses? I always hear about how businesses are crippled by healthcare costs so why wouldn't single payer be super attractive to that normally conservative constituency?
I think if Dems ever decide to start pushing for this or Medicare for all again, this could be a selling point.
I think if Dems ever decide to start pushing for this or Medicare for all again, this could be a selling point.
No, I mean the one in 2006 that lasted until all of the conservative blue dogs were eliminated from Congress
The warring Republican factions don't disagree on core values at all. Trump and his supporters did, but they've already assimilated. But I was referring to the ability to control committees and determine what gets a vote at all
In 2010.
The Republican Party has that control right now.
What exactly has it gained them? I'll give you Gorsuch. Anything else?
Decoupling health insurance from employment is what results in that boon to small businesses. It's why the ACA was sold as being good for start-ups, it made it easier and cheaper to get health insurance outside of employment which lets people take the jump to start their own business with more confidence. Decoupling it completely would not only be good for business in general, but would force wages up as well. Unfortunately mega-corps and random joe on the street would be against it, albeit for different reasons.
UHC is what would be the boon, decoupling insurance from employment.
The actual method isn't relevant.
Yes, and they have yet to be replaced by anyone more progressive. Nor is there really any sign that they will be. I'm not talking about why they got kicked out, but why they ever managed to get elected.
An entire slate of terrible cabinet heads, a rejection of numerous legitimate investigations into the Trump administration (not even talking about conspiracies -- just simple things like his refusal to divest). The FCC, the FEC, NLRB etc. The elimination of a number of regulations through the CRA, countless future judicial seats. Some of these things, like gutting the FCC, didn't even require the presidency -- they simply refused to vote on Obama's nominees. What have they failed to accomplish? Replacing the ACA with a shittier bill that was hated by Republicans. That's about it. They did a great job of stopping Obama in his tracks since 2014, and a great job of rubber stamping whatever Trump wants now
smokeandmirrors
Banned
UHC would be incredible for workers so yes it would be a boon. Not being tied to a job and being able to take chances in jobs you wouldn't otherwise? Why not take that start up job! Why not start a business for an idea you had!
It would be great for business too
Ending the ties between employment and healthcare has actually been a republican goal -- but obviously they don't want to replace it with UHC
The debate for UHC would be entirely different if everyone was paying for their own healthcare directly rather than indirectly
Sirpopopop
Member
Your idea holds merit, but small business will never see it that way.
It might be advantageous to small business, but they would never ever see it that way. Small business owners only care about what's in front of them and what's visible - which is taxes and regulations. So, they will see the increase in taxes, but won't bother looking at any ancillary benefits.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Which is what Bart Stupak kind of was when he won a super-red part of Michigan twice.
The idea that no democratic candidate can have differing views on abortion and gun control sounds an awful lot like the "purity test" Bernie and his followers have been pushing. If you ever want to start getting some sort of control of state governments, building up some candidates that vary in these areas has to be given consideration.
Doesn't mean they will change Roe v. Wade. Doesn't mean they'll vote against PP. Just means that they aren't in favor of it and will look for ways to avoid it.
it would. it'd put you on more even footing to hire people as small companies will never be able to afford the more complete healthcare plans that bigger companies do, reduces your own healthcare costs personally, and lets you not have to play games with your company being dropped out of a network. considering that employer based healthcare started as a loophole to get around paycheck caps..
Fenderputty
Banned
Out of all the issues Dems should drop to pick up red state voters and independents, it's probably gun control. Especially in the form of bans.
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
That is really cool.
Yup.
I can speak from experience that this is the biggest deal breaker I see personally in rural Missouri.
Sirpopopop
Member
As someone who owned his own small business for 5 years, I think anyone thinking UHC would help with that demographic are drastically overestimating the ability of small business owners to look beyond issues other than taxes or regulations.
Many of them are perfectly fine with not competing in terms of salary with the big boys in terms of hiring employees. They tend to believe that their family atmosphere is their big appeal to folks.
The only area where health care would see a benefit would be the small business owners already on your side - the startup founders, or that candle maker down in Asheville, NC.
You do UHC for one reason and one reason only: Because you actually want to fucking help people not die because of inadequate health care. You do it knowing that people will complain. You do it knowing you will probably lose votes.
Many of them are perfectly fine with not competing in terms of salary with the big boys in terms of hiring employees. They tend to believe that their family atmosphere is their big appeal to folks.
The only area where health care would see a benefit would be the small business owners already on your side - the startup founders, or that candle maker down in Asheville, NC.
You do UHC for one reason and one reason only: Because you actually want to fucking help people not die because of inadequate health care. You do it knowing that people will complain. You do it knowing you will probably lose votes.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I've lived in the Midwest my entire life and think it's probably equal. Both are disqualifying for candidates. Either way, starting with gun control would be a great idea.
They're both close for sure. Thinking about it honestly depresses me because they probably shouldn't be political issues at all.
timetokill
Banned
Yep. Gun bans simply aren't going to work any time soon. Dems need to change their image from "coming to take yer guns" to "protecting families" and "disarming criminals."
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
And they can promote it by showing the polls that show most Americans want the same thing, like restrictive background checks.
But the unassailable reality is that they are political issues, and major issues at that.
Fenderputty
Banned
From my perspective (I own and am probably some what bias) it's an important issue but not as important as preserving rights of females to do what they want with their own bodies.
See above. It's less about what would be more effectual and more about which policy is more important to liberals
Fenderputty
Banned
This too.
Aaron Strife
Banned
http://m.dailykos.com/stories/1655000
lol fucking really
Georgia GOP is trying to prevent anyone newly registered to vote from voting in the 6th district runoff.
lol fucking really
Georgia GOP is trying to prevent anyone newly registered to vote from voting in the 6th district runoff.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
*Whispers* The biggest thing the Dems could do to pick up voters is to demonize Muslims *End Whispers*
But we aren't going to fucking do that because it's wrong.
So when you talk about moderating on an issue, you have to evaluate how much the issue does matter to the core of liberalism.
But we aren't going to fucking do that because it's wrong.
So when you talk about moderating on an issue, you have to evaluate how much the issue does matter to the core of liberalism.
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
Yup arguing a runoff is "a continuation" of the previous election.
From OT, on Merkel's visit to the WH:
GOD HELP US ALL
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trump-puts-eu-ahead-of-britain-in-trade-queue-l7t8zwn7k
GOD HELP US ALL
Yup. Dementia.
whyamihere
Banned
I'm starting to think Trump isn't very good at making deals!
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
Patience of a saint, I would've left after #3
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
What gave it away? lol.
By that logic, people who didn't vote last time around shouldn't be allowed to either. Anyway there's no way any court holds that up. It's nonsense.
For starters, it's a brand new set of candidates. Actually I'm not even bothering continuing this train of logic because logic is not the method they used to come up with this nonsense.
A lot of rural people don't care all that much about abortion one way or another if they're not churchgoing, though yeah, love of guns is almost universal out that way.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked