***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[trasoul82]

Trasoul in here grasping for straws as usual.

I've articulated my point. If you have a suitable response, feel free to opine.

You're better than that pathetic one-liner, Shackles.

 

[seandon23]

tokes99 The people put in office should have a better understanding of the system than the average American. But it is clear to me there is only one party with an actual solution to the problems in the healthcare system. I think the best option would be too support the dems because they seem to have a better grasp on what is most important when it comes to healthcare than the GOP. So far the plan they've been proposing is going to simply benefit the rich so far. Instead what they should be doing is improving upon Obamacare and push for the public option. We should look toward regulating more than pushing for this idea of having a free market.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Trasoul in here grasping for straws as usual.

I've articulated my point. If you have a suitable response, feel free to opine.

You're better than that pathetic one-liner, Shackles.

Your have not articulated your point, you have spoken in circles and said a whole bunch of nothing.

Ben Carson deserves all the blow back he is betting because Ben Carson has proven to be ignorant about the socio-economic forces affecting his people, and the research and suggestions of other people in his community on how to improve things. Other black people are the right to voice their concern and displeasure at Ben Carson because he is a proud agent of white supremacy.

All you got is a sound bit from Obama that kinda sounds the same. But lets ignore all context, or the messengers that have two very different track records discussing social issues.

I would say you're better than this, but let us be honest, you're not

 

[trasoul82]

Wow...

All you got is a sound bit from Obama that kinda sounds the same.

...

Alright, I've said what I have to say. You guys take care. Until next time...

 

[RustyShackleford]

Wow...

All you got is a sound bit from Obama that kinda sounds the same.

...

Alright, I've said what I have to say. You guys take care. Until next time...

I make a comment about you not looking at context, then you quote me his way to strip the context. I guess when the missions is defending cornballing, anything goes.

But ahhhh running away so soon.

Of course you wouldn't say around, just like the other Trump stans you don't/can't defend his buffoonery.

 

[seandon23]

The problem with what you're taking away from the article trasoul82 is that what Obama and Carson are saying are two different things. The context behind what they are saying are completely different so comparing the two is showing a lack of comprehension and grasping to make a weak argument

 

[Nike Jordan]

Shouldn't the house negro be happy that his mans is in the White House now?

 

[whywesteppin]

Sounds like trump has a new best friend in Elijah Cummings. After meeting with him Wednesday, trump surprised him with 2 lengthy phone calls on Friday:

“The president -- I was surprised on Friday evening when he called me Friday evening. He called me Friday morning … So we have had now three discussions with regard to this issue,” said Cummings.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/demo...icare-negotiate-drug-prices/story?id=46066596

Cummings trying to say, "Please stop calling me."

 

[IATT]

 

[trasoul82]

The problem with what you're taking away from the article trasoul82 is that what Obama and Carson are saying are two different things. The context behind what they are saying are completely different so comparing the two is showing a lack of comprehension and grasping to make a weak argument

Don't just say there's a difference. Explain the difference.

 

[seandon23]

Don't just say there's a difference. Explain the difference.

I did go back and read my first post to what you posted

Edit: and the point I make in the post you quoted still stands true for whatever it is you are trying to point out as well

 

[RustyShackleford]

The problem with what you're taking away from the article trasoul82 is that what Obama and Carson are saying are two different things. The context behind what they are saying are completely different so comparing the two is showing a lack of comprehension and grasping to make a weak argument

Don't just say there's a difference. Explain the difference.

I thought you were done for the day

 

[whywesteppin]

You got one? When?

Apparently they're worth $600 or so per bottle now.

 

[trasoul82]

The problem with what you're taking away from the article trasoul82 is that what Obama and Carson are saying are two different things. The context behind what they are saying are completely different so comparing the two is showing a lack of comprehension and grasping to make a weak argument

Don't just say there's a difference. Explain the difference.

I thought you were done for the day

And I thought I was "running away so soon."

 

[tokes99]

In the same way the average person relies on a doctor for medical care or a lawyer for legal advice, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that the average person doesn't know what the best political policies are either.

this assumes politicians are well versed or more knowledgeable than the average person in policy, with is probably a good assumption but maybe not necessarily always true...politics isn't exactly like law or medical knowledge...

tokes99, I appreciate the fact that you can acknowledged that there is indeed some bias. That's all I'm trying to get to.

And not to knock anyone from Hawaii or Indonesia, but I think someone who grew up in urban Detroit would understand "the struggle" a little better. There's no need to question Dr. Carson's blackness.

i think most would admit bias, and up to a point your examples, though not totally accurate in my opinion, illustrated that; that neither took the comparison(s) seriously is something of a missed opportunity to really parse WHY those examples were different...unfortunately that is where discourse is, just at the surface level on most things, because most don't really have the time or want to spend their time with nuanced arguments...i don't know that you can assume understanding just because of where someone is from, but i'll digress from that point to agree that questioning carson's blackness is unnecessary...

tokes99 The people put in office should have a better understanding of the system than the average American. But it is clear to me there is only one party with an actual solution to the problems in the healthcare system. I think the best option would be too support the dems because they seem to have a better grasp on what is most important when it comes to healthcare than the GOP. So far the plan they've been proposing is going to simply benefit the rich so far. Instead what they should be doing is improving upon Obamacare and push for the public option. We should look toward regulating more than pushing for this idea of having a free market.

what people (be them politicians or not) 'should' and do 'actually' know about the system is very much up for debate...and it isn't clear to everyone which party has better solutions for the healthcare system, frankly it seems both parties are not where the majority of the people are in regards to the healthcare system, and the overall direction of the country generally; and that is the main reason most people are put off with politics today...

 

[IATT]

 

[kdawg]

this assumes politicians are well versed or more knowledgeable than the average person in policy, with is probably a good assumption but maybe not necessarily always true...politics isn't exactly like law or medical knowledge...

That's why we get to choose them after they've told us what they know/stand for. Normally that works out sort of okay...

 

[RustyShackleford]

The problem with what you're taking away from the article trasoul82 is that what Obama and Carson are saying are two different things. The context behind what they are saying are completely different so comparing the two is showing a lack of comprehension and grasping to make a weak argument

Don't just say there's a difference. Explain the difference.

I thought you were done for the day

And I thought I was "running away so soon."

Wasn't taking objection to you going away, just point out your usual drive by antics

 

[seandon23]

i think most would admit bias, and up to a point your examples, though not totally accurate in my opinion, illustrated that; that neither took the comparison(s) seriously is something of a missed opportunity to really parse WHY those examples were different...unfortunately that is where discourse is, just at the surface level on most things, because most don't really have the time or want to spend their time with nuanced arguments...i don't know that you can assume understanding just because of where someone is from, but i'll digress from that point to agree that questioning carson's blackness is unnecessary...
what people (be them politicians or not) 'should' and do 'actually' know about the system is very much up for debate...and it isn't clear to everyone which party has better solutions for the healthcare system, frankly it seems both parties are not where the majority of the people are in regards to the healthcare system, and the overall direction of the country generally; and that is the main reason most people are put off with politics today...

the discourse isn't being discussed on surface level stop it. dude brought a terrible example of something completely grasping at straws to prove a flawed assumption. period. and the discussion of blackness shouldn't be needed but it is somewhat baffling for a black man to undermine slavery the way Carson does which is troubling in itself. the problem truly lies in the fact that when trying to compare Obama and Carson is that people are mis-contextualizing what Carson said to what Obama said so it is wrong to do so because it isn't true nor is there any merit to what Carson is saying.

actually we have talked in this thread a lot about how the Democrats have a better understanding on healthcare in this thread. go read it and again look at how many people are talking about Obamacare. for years the GOP and right wing media has distorted what Obamacare is, without having anything worth of substance to bring to improve it or come up with a new plan. saying that neither party has better solutions is showing your lack of knowledge in the discussion and is a false equivalency to the highest degree there is. and this once again goes back to my point about people not knowing what is in their best interest because they do not understand the healthcare system and what they need out of it. while on one hand average people shouldn't have to worry about this, these people in polls are voted in to SERVE the people and a majority of people do not want to lose their coverage under Obamacare. but to say that neither party has what the majority of people want is again not true and shows how you are out of touch with what is going on in the news 

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Don't just say there's a difference. Explain the difference.

I'll never understand why people get so salty about this.


If a black person wants to be a cornball, that is certainly their right but I don't understand why white people think we have to accept them with open arms as a member in good standing of the #culture.




Even if I accept that Carson and Obama meant the exact same thing, that don't matter.

Obama has said PLENTY of corny things, but he gets a pass becuase he's a member in good standing, Ben Carson is not so he's going to get **** on.



Your history and reputation effect how people view your words...shocking.

 

[whywesteppin]

this assumes politicians are well versed or more knowledgeable than the average person in policy, with is probably a good assumption but maybe not necessarily always true...politics isn't exactly like law or medical knowledge...

That's why we get to choose them after they've told us what they know/stand for. Normally that works out sort of okay...

Part of the problem is that trust in objective analysts has eroded.

We should be free to choose, but we should also have a chance to see the truth laid out for us. The reason people are against the ACA isn't because of ideology or economics. It's because they have been presented a partisan account that plays to their emotions.

The same goes for manufacturing jobs. People are being fed a narrative they feel good about, so they will vote for the candidate that promises to return them all to a dangerous coal mine while also stripping them of the health coverage they will so desperately need for their black lung, their opioid addiction, and the complicated pregnancies their wives will endure.

I know there's no good way to implement this, but it would be great to have an oversight committee of fact-checkers that has the power to remove names from the ballot if they are caught lying or to impeach those already in office. Or, in another version, this committee would assign scores to each senator and representative based on how truthful they have been in the past, and that score is used to weight their votes. Obviously it's a pipe dream but one can still dream.

 

[RustyShackleford]

It is clear to anyone that takes the time to research the subject which party has a better solution for Healthcare. And it is not even close.

Every other major country that has solved this problem has solved (there are multiple was to solve it) it on the left side of the political spectrum.

And knowing policy might not be like medicine, but the ignorance of voters regarding public policy have a cost.

People are utility maximizers, that doesn't mean they are efficiency maximizers, or equality maximizers, hell it doesn't guarantee they are even rational actors. Politicians have to hopefully do the research and explain why certain plans are better than the others to citizens

You would hope that politicians would rely on scientist of all kinds (especially social) in forming policy. And once again, one party relies way more heavily on expert advice than the other.

--------
Btw

I like to tell people this. If voting was made as easy as possible for citizens, one party would have a huge advantage. If more people voted, one part would have a huge advantage. If people voted along their economic interest, one party would have a huge advantage. If representation was truly proportional, one party would have a huge advantage.

Guess which party that is?

 

[RustyShackleford]

Don't just say there's a difference. Explain the difference.

I'll never understand why people get so salty about this.


If a black person wants to be a cornball, that is certainly their right but I don't understand why white people think we have to accept them with open arms as a member in good standing of the #culture.




Even if I accept that Carson and Obama meant the exact same thing, that don't matter.

Obama has said PLENTY of corny things, but he gets a pass becuase he's a member in good standing, Ben Carson is not so he's going to get **** on.



Your history and reputation effect how people view your words...shocking.

You're giving dude so many options of what he can quote outta context to drag you down into a rabbit hole.

He fundamentally doesn't understand why the black community respects Barrack Obama wayyyyyyyy more than Ben Carson.

 

[trasoul82]

trasoul82 the article you posted is wildly inaccurate. The quotes they use from Obama are not at all similar to what Carson is saying. Carson is undermining the plight of slavery for Africans and trying to compare slavery to immigrants when they are nothing similar the backlash to Carson is for his comparison to the two because it is a WRONG to compare the two. Obama never does any such thing in any of the quotes used. What Obama speaks about is about is that we are all immigrants which is true but that regardless of where we come from that we must all come together and work together. His message in all of the quotes are about unifying the American people not to compare the plight of slavery to that of other immigrants because the experiences of both are completely different. There is no "liberal bias" or media slant in response to Carson's statements because what Carson is saying is a lie

I beg your pardon...

"There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less. But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great-grandsons, great-granddaughters, might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land."

"So life in America was not always easy. It wasn’t always easy for new immigrants. Certainly it wasn’t easy for those of African heritage who had not come here voluntarily, and yet in their own way were immigrants themselves. There was discrimination and hardship and poverty. But, like you, they no doubt found inspiration in all those who had come before them. And they were able to muster faith that, here in America, they might build a better life and give their children something more."

Both men sugar-coated the slavery experiment while likening said experience to immigration. Neither statement justifies the faux outage that was put on display for Dr Carson. But it appears that any opportunity to belittle a black conservative can't be passed up.

 

[tokes99]

this assumes politicians are well versed or more knowledgeable than the average person in policy, with is probably a good assumption but maybe not necessarily always true...politics isn't exactly like law or medical knowledge...

That's why we get to choose them after they've told us what they know/stand for. Normally that works out sort of okay...

i can't call it...

i think most would admit bias, and up to a point your examples, though not totally accurate in my opinion, illustrated that; that neither took the comparison(s) seriously is something of a missed opportunity to really parse WHY those examples were different...unfortunately that is where discourse is, just at the surface level on most things, because most don't really have the time or want to spend their time with nuanced arguments...i don't know that you can assume understanding just because of where someone is from, but i'll digress from that point to agree that questioning carson's blackness is unnecessary...

what people (be them politicians or not) 'should' and do 'actually' know about the system is very much up for debate...and it isn't clear to everyone which party has better solutions for the healthcare system, frankly it seems both parties are not where the majority of the people are in regards to the healthcare system, and the overall direction of the country generally; and that is the main reason most people are put off with politics today...

the discourse isn't being discussed on surface level stop it. dude brought a terrible example of something completely grasping at straws to prove a flawed assumption. period. and the discussion of blackness shouldn't be needed but it is somewhat baffling for a black man to undermine slavery the way Carson does which is troubling in itself. the problem truly lies in the fact that when trying to compare Obama and Carson is that people are mis-contextualizing what Carson said to what Obama said so it is wrong to do so because it isn't true nor is there any merit to what Carson is saying.

actually we have talked in this thread a lot about how the Democrats have a better understanding on healthcare in this thread. go read it and again look at how many people are talking about Obamacare. for years the GOP and right wing media has distorted what Obamacare is, without having anything worth of substance to bring to improve it or come up with a new plan. saying that neither party has better solutions is showing your lack of knowledge in the discussion and is a false equivalency to the highest degree there is. and this once again goes back to my point about people not knowing what is in their best interest because they do not understand the healthcare system and what they need out of it. while on one hand average people shouldn't have to worry about this, these people in polls are voted in to SERVE the people and a majority of people do not want to lose their coverage under Obamacare. but to say that neither party has what the majority of people want is again not true and shows how you are out of touch with what is going on in the news 

i wasn't referring to the discourse in this thread, rather much of the way we consume media at large...i'm not going to front like i know all the problems of healthcare in all their complexity, how each party has decided to solve them, or whose plan is better, but it is fairly obvious that both the gop & dems are not where the majority of people are with a whole range of issues, including healthcare...and that is the main issue with politics today, the dems plan may indeed be 'better' but is their plan what people actually want?