Democratic (Party) Direction

tbc, i do think they'll want credit, but also want it to be an "inherent failure of socialized medicine."

I think a lot of the relatively healthy folks who were supposed to be buying insurance under the mandate ended up just taking the tax hit. Chalk it up to the “young people understanding income tax” fallacy.

The proof of the individual mandate will be in how many insurers pull out of which markets next year, and how much rates go up. Regardless: Medicare for all is a winning issue, it drives poll turnout, and November is gonna fucking suck for the GOP.

How many trials do you think POTUS will have to testify in in October btw? One or two?

ha zero? i think youre right about november, from july at least. and as far as gop goes and their terrible arguments, well...they want what they want.

I read something vaguely relevant to all of this *gestures at whole thread* recently but I think it was in the New Yorker and so it would be extremely obvious of me to link it here probably

― devops mom (silby), Thursday, July 5, 2018 1:12 AM (sixteen hours ago)

u should link it

*gestures at https://www.newyorker.com/magazine*

was this one. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/07/02/the-rise-of-mcpolitics

I'm not sure I believe that "many long for moderation" as a line tossed off near the conclusion suggests but otherwise yknow, a thing to read

Oh that’s Yascha Mounk isn’t it. Dude’s a Third Way Type who freaks out about ‘populism’ in a way that deliberately collapses any distinctions in it.

Also the “moderation” that he longs for doesn’t make sense with his invocation of Schlesinger’s quote. Schlesinger was talking about Truman-era Fair Deal/social democracy, _not_ the neoliberal hell shit is now.

that piece mourns the destruction of the political order that preserved jim crow for a century, and its replacement with the order that resulted, immediately and inevitably, from the destruction of jim crow. this sort of lib will never free anyone. all they will do is take credit for those already freed.

presumably to avoid further wounding the ‘white working class’, the new holy cow of chastened metropolitans is some limited thinking bullshit overreach regarding the damage reactionaries wish to do without considering leftist necessities for overcoming them imo. labeling them sacred cows is rhetoric.

sorry that's from mishra's opinion

what would Jemmy Madison say about the Red Hen

whenever you see someone today wringing their hands over the fact that people haven't been this serious about politics since 1860, you should imagine them in 1860 wringing their hands over how terrible it is people have spurned stephen douglas by refusing to allow the 1850 compromise to work

lol

it depends which founders were dirtbags and which were fuckin centrist libs, and were any reactionaries? i'll have to rewatch hamilton to find out. i mean, none were alt-right tories, and all were like 30 or younger at convention time, right?

^^^the dangers of attempting to remodel the past on your present?^^^

c'mon there will never be any reason to watch Hamilton

a reason is that it's fun to watch

thread now heading into even more fraught waters

NB I do not have the wherewithal to argue about whether Hamilton is good or not, anyway thanks all for verifying that this thing I read is eyebrow-raising to say the least. I did find the discussion of the "unsorted" political parties kind of intriguing but as mentioned the fact that that system was the one that maintained Jim Crow is a pretty major strike against it

i haven't seen hamilton and i try not to have opinions on it anyway lol

2bclear i don't mean madison's an idiot and that every party should always be the bolsheviks. just that sometimes a country simply can't put its business off any longer.

w/ earplugs and supertitles maybe

xxxp

c'mon there will never be any reason to watch Hamilton
a reason is that it's fun to watch
thread now heading into even more fraught waters

you are killing my punch line

dlh, your point is well taken tho

Hamilton was a quasi-Tory who went batshit insane after 1796 but wrote often and well about exec power limits (and was anti-slavery).

Hamilton was also Washington's de facto prime minister, and Washington's good sense is still underrated.

from what i have heard it does a bad job of entirely ignoring the historical black voices of the time in favor of founder's chic & more glorifying white male culture. it is not to tell the story of historical black people but to use modern casting to sexify crusty old US nationalism. Thomas Jefferson's slave, with whom he had multiple children, is in the show, but she has a non speaking role and does a sexy dance. when he died he had promised her and her children freedom, but they were quickly sold anyways. now they are historically exploited once more by the act of a woke culture. there were black spies for the Revolution but there are none in this show. it is just more product of the oppressive culture. it is a vampire, like the media, feeding on the ally industrial complex.

yes these wonderful dudes that were anti slavery and even wrote All Men Are Created Equal what great people they were (in their writings)

saying and doing are different things. what you do is all that matters.

Thomas Jefferson's slave, with whom he had multiple children, is in the show

…not that I recall.

Unless you mean Sally Hemmings has joined the touring cast from beyond the grave

I don't think that's exactly true. And I had to consult Wiki:

Of the hundreds of slaves he owned, Jefferson formally freed only two slaves while he was living: Hemings' older brothers Robert, who had to buy his freedom, and James Hemings (who was required to train his brother Peter for three years to get his freedom). He freed five slaves in his will - all males from the extended Hemings family, including Madison and Eston Hemings, his two "natural" children. Harriet was the only female slave he allowed to go free.[43] In addition to manumission for the Hemings men in his will, he petitioned the legislature to allow them to stay in the state. No documentation has been found for Sally Hemings' emancipation.[37][38]

my jaw kind of dropped when i heard them singing "How lucky we are to be alive right now?" like are u kidding me? no wonder Mike Pence went to this.

the challopsy-at-the-time oped that accused it of "blackwashing" history seemed about right to me

I mean I don’t think anybody is being hoodwinked here. Maybe 14 year olds.

"from what i have heard" i think is the key phrase up there

thread now heading into even more fraught waters

you are killing my punch line

you had, as you now think, vainly flattered yourself, that without very much hamilton talk, it could be done

I will admit that while its politics suck it has a few really good tunes (none of which feature rapping)

On your first statement, you're just wrong. Polarization only prevents meaningful policy change when you're deadlocked. Right now politics is extremely polarized and Republicans are achieving "meaningful policy change" at an alarming rate. They achieve change through power, not through compromise.

― Fedora Dostoyevsky (man alive)

ok, "meaningful" was imprecise and, yeah, probably wrong. substitute "positive" for "meaningful". lot harder to fix things than it is to break them.

-

the near-silence about this at the time of the repeal (and now) was so odd. when the ACA was passed, a commonly-referenced analogy was that the individual mandate was one critical component of a three-legged stool (the others being preventing insurers from denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, and providing subsidies for people who can't afford insurance). now that the mandate is gone, you'd think that the impending collapse of ACA would be top news, but it's not. cue the usual people trying to convince me that there's been wall-to-wall news coverage on this and everyone in the united states is very aware of the issue, but i haven't seen it. you'd think that at least there would be interviews with rightwing dipshits about how much better their life is now that they're not forced to purchase communist socialized healthcare or whatever.

― Karl Malone

not really odd at all. the democratic belief that nobody would get insurance if there weren't penalties for not getting insurance was ill-advised "austerity" rhetoric which didn't play out in practice. it turns out the main consideration for whether people get insurance is whether they can afford it, not whether they're penalized for not having it. nobody dropped their insurance once the "mandate" was repealed. all that happened was a bunch of people who couldn't afford insurance under obamacare anyway stopped having the prospect of a "poor tax" hanging over their head. there's no way for either party to really talk about this without looking utterly foolish, so neither party is.

So my understanding is that Hamilton is a broadway musical, correct?

xpost i think it's a little too early to say all that. for one thing, the individual mandate is still in place through 2018. it's possible that what you're describing will take place, but CBO estimated last year that 4 million people will drop their healthcare as a result of the repeal of the mandate in 2019, rising up to 13 million by 2027. if that's true, the conventional wisdom once suggested that the risk pool of the insurers would shift toward the more expensive, sicker people and premiums would increase as a result. if any of that's still likely, now would be a good time for everyone to make a fuss about it!

So my understanding is that Hamilton is a broadway musical, correct?

― Nerdstrom Poindexter

about one of the members of "hamilton, joe frank, and reynolds", correct

No wonder it’s so divisive. That sounds unbearable.

XP conservatives understand very well the value of slicing off even a sliver of something. Even 5-10% fewer healthy people buying insurance drives up costs for everyone and contributes to a further cycle of people dropping their plans.

Much like with Janus, you may only see a trickle of public workers leaving the unions in the beginning but this will gradually weaken the union and they’ll continue other attacks as well and over time the unions will diminish. T
Democrats have either failed to apprehend this strategy or just haven’t been able to stop it.

understandably, it's tough to muster the enthusiasm to defend the law since it was a compromise with immoral actors in the first place

why are you insulting the Hamilton cast like Adam Bruneau has

Okay when we get done with Hamilton let's work on Pocahontas and Braveheart. Lots of correcting to do, I'm sure this is a great use of our time

Federalist (Party) Direction

I'm sure this is a great use of our time

Not sure if the ad is as good as the tweet implies but it's definitely a good line of attack

DAMN. This is a devastating ad. This Trump contribution scandal should, and could, engulf Cuomo's reelection bid. pic.twitter.com/u6QThYIoBO

— Kumar Rao (@KumarRaoNYC) July 6, 2018

that is good

what is Nixon polling at right now, 20%...?

What was Ocasio polling at, 30%?