• 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 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
ShironRedshift said:
Hmm, our racist President getting all-aboard the racist talking point that HBCU's are only for blacks and engage in "reverse" racism and discrimination against white students? I'm shocked!
Click to expand...
Yeah but rabble rabble Clinton crime bill rabble rabble

Bonen no Max'd said:
Oh no I thought Labrador's town hall was tomorrow, not today, so I missed the chance to go shout and call him a murderer.
Click to expand...
You should have hit him on the head with a newspaper for being a bad boy.
 
C

cartoon_soldier

Member
This GA-6 poll has Handel Leading

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/plenty-undecided-in-tightly-contested-6th-district-runoff/519809623

he new poll of 611 likely voters shows Handel with 49.1 percent of the vote and Ossoff with 46.5 percent.

But with 4.4 percent undecided and a margin of error of 4 percent, the race is still very close.

Landmark Communications President Mark Rountree says this shows Handel may be consolidating Republicans around her campaign.
Click to expand...

I continue to believe that Ossoff will lose.
 
P

Pixieking

Banned
cartoon_soldier said:
This GA-6 poll has Handel Leading

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/plenty-undecided-in-tightly-contested-6th-district-runoff/519809623

I continue to believe that Ossoff will lose.
Click to expand...

538 rated them B during the 2016 election campaign, with a 0.5 mean reverted bias. But the polling data is out-of-date - polled on 3rd/4th, meaning mayyyyybe some were polled on the day of the AHCA passing. But even if they were, with the media attention on the AHCA's effects now and in the coming weeks/days, their poll is highly irrelevant.
 
D

Diablos

Member
Starting to wonder if the Senate can even get 50 votes for the AHCA.

I can see Cotton, Paul, and Collins/Cassidy all voting against it for different reasons. Maybe Heller too?

They say they want to write a new bill but the Freedom Caucus isn't going to have any of that.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Pixieking said:
538 rated them B during the 2016 election campaign, with a 0.5 mean reverted bias. But the polling data is out-of-date - polled on 3rd/4th, meaning mayyyyybe some were polled on the day of the AHCA passing. But even if they were, with the media attention on the AHCA's effects now and in the coming weeks/days, their poll is highly irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Can we not do this?

Just take the poll as is. It can be wrong but it's not "highly irrelevant"
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
I wouldn't dismiss the Landmark poll, but keep in mind there have been three polls of GA-6 thus far, and two gave Ossoff the lead.

It's a tossup that doesn't look to be leaning one way or the other. Just keep your expectations in check and you'll be fine. (royal "you")
 
B

balladofwindfishes

Member
Diablos said:
Starting to wonder if the Senate can even get 50 votes for the AHCA.

I can see Cotton, Paul, and Collins/Cassidy all voting against it for different reasons. Maybe Heller too?

They say they want to write a new bill but the Freedom Caucus isn't going to have any of that.
Click to expand...
Is this... optimism?
 
P

Pixieking

Banned
NYCmetsfan said:
Can we not do this?

Just take the poll as is. It can be wrong but it's not "highly irrelevant"
Click to expand...

Yeah, okay, maybe a bit over the top ("anti-Cartoon Soldier'ing?" :p ). I just don't see it being something to worry about, considering how close to the AHCA passing it is. If

Mark Rountree says this shows Handel may be consolidating Republicans around her campaign.
Click to expand...

then it can be argued that the AHCA ought to consolidate a lot of the Dem base behind Ossoff.
 
E

Ecotic

Member
I'm in the Atlanta media market and the ads are really interesting. All of Ossoff's ads have him speaking directly to the camera and genuinely connecting. Ossoff is getting hammered with the usually effective "doesn't share our values" ads, but they also comes across as jealous of a front-runner who has a message and knows what he stands for.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
re:AHCA, we already know gutting the Medicaid expansion, ban on pre-existing conditions and probably the under 26 provision are nonstarters. Too many GOP senators have too much to lose from the first (Heller, Portman, Murkowski, Moore-Capito, Cassidy, like a bunch more) and all three are wildly popular elements of ACA. In particular, the pre-existing conditions coming back seems to be item #1 that gets brought up when talking about why AHCA is so terrible just from what I've seen on social media and such, so there's no way in hell they end up getting rid of it.

I think the only bill that could get through the Senate is something like the Cassidy-Collins plan which doesn't so much repeal ACA as much as it just block grants everything. Which would be terrible for a multitude of reasons, but at least preserves ACA in some form. On the other hand, I don't know if that can make it through the Freedom Caucus, and the hard right conservatives (Cruz, Paul, Lee) would certainly oppose it in the Senate. So... who knows.

Ecotic said:
I'm in the Atlanta media market and the ads are really interesting. All of Ossoff's ads have him speaking directly to the camera and genuinely connecting. Ossoff is getting hammered with the usually effective "doesn't share our values" ads, but they also comes across as jealous of a front-runner who has a message and knows what he stands for.
Click to expand...
From an outsider's perspective, Ossoff reminds me a bit of Kander. I always thought his greatest strength as a candidate was being able to run as his own brand, separate from the rest of the Democratic Party. We obviously can't get that everywhere, but I'm glad we got Ossoff here.
 
W

wutwutwut

Member
The whole pre-existing conditions debate shows why insurance is a silly way to provide basic healthcare, doesn't it? Of course it doesn't make sense to insure people with pre-existing conditions when viewed through an actuarial angle — the main justification is humanitarian. Of course then the only way to make insurance work is a mandate to dilute risk plus subsidies through taxes on the wealthy. Of course EMTALA has provided really shitty universal coverage since 1986. Of course ER-only healthcare is more expensive than preventative care. Of course other countries have cheaper healthcare because they don't do ER-only universal coverage. Of course waiting lines are a tradeoff. With scarcity you're either going to have high prices or waiting lines.

I wish CNN etc instead of their stupid 10 person panels seriously and honestly talked about the tradeoffs here. Without the mandate and subsidies there just can't be pre-ex coverage.

This is a golden opportunity to inform the public instead of drowning in soundbites. The public not being informed about their real options is honestly a much bigger failure of the media than the emails or whatever.
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I think the ACA's issue is that the penalty for not having insurance is not steep enough. Frankly.
 
W

wutwutwut

Member
Y2Kev said:
I think the ACA's issue is that the penalty for not having insurance is not steep enough. Frankly.
Click to expand...
Can most people cogently explain why the penalty even exists, though? Or do they just see "mandate" and think their freedoms are being taken away?
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
So I'm starting to see conservatives and right leaning people starting to warm to single payer. It's coming in the next 10 years imo. Bernie and trump really made it politically feasible imo
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
kirblar said:
If Vermont couldn't do it, I can't see NY doing it.
Click to expand...
I think the difference is that NY, being a bigger economy would be more equipped to support such a plan. Plus the state is rich as hell.

I think it's also far more important for a bigger state like NY or Cali to be the one to launch something like this for it to start a nationwide movement. I think of how gay marriage in NY sort of kick-started the momentum for that movement. You get something done there, people will pay attention to it.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
I think it needs to pass in a major state first.

Get it done, Cuomo
Click to expand...
We need to get rid of the IDC first and win a few more senate seats. 2018 is gonna be interesting in NY.

Single payer can pass the assembly and has 20+ votes in the senate.

My guess is if dems win the senate in 2018 cuomo pushes single payer as a boost for his 2020 campaign
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
B-Dubs said:
The issue isn't really politics, Cuomo can more or less force anything he wants through the legislature, but cost.
Click to expand...
The thing is you have to sell cuomo on how it benefits him. He'll change on a dime. See 15$, gay marriage, free college.

Cuomo is actually good for progressives because if pressure can be brought, he changes. he's not an ideologue
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
NYCmetsfan said:
The thing is you have to sell cuomo on how it benefits him. He'll change on a dime. See 15$, gay marriage, free college.

Cuomo is actually good for progressives because if pressure can be brought, he changes. he's not an ideologue
Click to expand...

I'd think the benefit would be obvious, it'd make his 2020 campaign a lot easier.
 
D

dramatis

Member
Perfect timing.

Say It Ain't So: 129 People Have Already Filed To Run For President In 2020
Trump's election may have been a threshold moment in presidential politics, opening the door for anyone to run or at least think about it, who might not have before. Becoming president is no longer about the ascendancy of current officerholders or lifelong public servants. That experience is no longer a prerequisite. Now, wealth, power and celebrity not only have a door open for access, but for the possibility of themselves being in charge. It's atypical for Washington and more like what's seen in Hollywood or major financial centers, like New York or London.

It's, in part, the evolution of decades of disengagement from the American public, more interested in celebrity than the policy-wonk world of Washington. Presidential elections have become treated like reality shows, giving presidential candidates outsize attention compared to the actual power they have, while lower-level, closer-to-home elections and civic engagement get far less attention from voters and the media. The consequences of that are not yet known, but already what's emerged is activists dominating.

For 2020, people are already taking steps to be part of the conversation. And the list below reflects the new reality. It's a who's who of politics, business and, yes, even one outright Hollywood actor with no political experience.
Click to expand...
There's a section on Mark Zuckerberg that will piss pigeon off lol
 
D

Diablos

Member
Tamanon said:
Do we really need both of our choices in 2020 to be New Yorkers that are easily persuaded to change their beliefs?
Click to expand...
Do we really have room to complain?

If it's a guy like him he has my vote.
If it's a Bernie kind of person he or she will have my vote.

Aaron: he doesn't have Hillary's baggage and 30 years of political warfare engaged upon him
 
M

metalslimer

Member
Only candidate I would seriously consider not voting for is Tulsi gabbard

I'm fine with like 8-10 real contenders running. We should never have a de facto 2 person primary again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

your favorite racing games by year (2002-2022)
2
72
4K
marcincz replied
[GfK data] In the UK, Xbox Series S and X has now overtaken sales of the original Xbox. PS5 is now closing in on 3DS/2DS sales.
Sales-Age 2
51
5K
Thirty7ven replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5
230
40K
elbourreau replied
Evolution of Open World Games 1980-2021
2 3
141
12K
IbizaPocholo replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
58K
DGrayson replied
Top Bottom