(11-05-2025 01:29 PM)hburg Wrote: In Virginia, one thing was very clear.
1. Dems did not vote for a black female.
2. Dems did not vote for an openly gay man
3. NAACP refused to endorse a black woman and instead endorsed a white woman.
4. Obama endorsed a white woman and a someone who wants to murder opposition.
5. Obama refused to endorse a black woman.
Am I missing anything?
1. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sex and not a gender.
2. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sexual persuasion.
3. NAACP endorsed a candidate, and not a race.
4. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor a sex.
5. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor sex.
I guess you are upset that Dems, NAACP, and Obama operated in a political manner, and not one based on race, sex, or sexual leaning?
I guess how dare that happen, a series of people operated on race neutral manner, operated in a sex neutral manner, and operated in a sexual persuasion neutral manner. The horror. The sheer outrage.
that may be your best interpretation of the medicine man from the 19th century...
yo, trip As, what's the donk count at now ... 5, 6, 7, ...
He just tripped the 5 wire above.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2025 02:00 PM by TripleA.)
So they are barely pulling 5% margin, if that. Look up what successful businesses look for in terms of margin in order to be able to have financial stability. I'll clue you in, 10-15% minimum. This is healthcare, and it is absolutely needed by everyone, but you still have to be able to sustain, reinvest, and upgrade at all times or you risk the best patient outcomes.
It's NOT "healthcare". It is health insurance. Health care is a service that requires payment.
yep ... as we're going to have that comin' to hey-zeus meeting with me mum and pops tomorrow ... it's time to stop the stubborn and the unnecessary phone calls ... we're on it!
disclaimer: I've used the same term in conjunction at times ... it's what annoys many when I state, "some believe healthcare is a right of function." ... it's not ... sometimes, some have to suffer...
boomers and the #wealthsiphon ... simple numbers game ... oh, wellzy...
(11-05-2025 11:44 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote: "It's the Republicans' fault Medical Insurance is bad because they haven't come up with something to replace Obamacare!!!" You can't make this up. I know, how bout you have to get a job to get Medical Insurance if you aren't 100% disabled or 65 or older? Sounds pretty simple to me. Obamacare did what it was supposed to do. Destroy the private medical insurance business so the Feds were in control of your health. What could go wrong? Hey Stink, I see Johnny Dupree is back in business up around your way. People are so stupid.
A couple things here.
1. My personal belief is that Obamacare was intended to bankrupt the healthcare providers, not the insurance companies. The insurance companies are producing HUGE profits while the healthcare providers have been struggling to just get out of the red post covid. The ACA cut reimbursement rates for Medicare and Medicaid patients thus killing our hospitals, especially when their demographics currently has 60-70% of their patients being covered by one of those 2 entities. Last time I saw a breakdown it cost over $115 for every $100 reimbursed for those patients. Those rebursement cuts allowed the Obamacare plans to essentially match those reimbursement rates, exacerbating the situation.
2. A lot of companies don't offer insurance, or if they do they are terribly expensive and don't cover jack ****. Someone having a job does not guarantee them of affordible, quality insurance.
Glad someone else besides me said the second part. I've got a very good job, in the healthcare industry, that offers as far as this country goes good plans and they cover over 1/2 of the cost of the plan. Even with all of that for me to keep the plan I had last year for my now family of 3 even with the companies help will cost me over 1,300 a month, an increase of over 200 a month from this past year. AKA over 15k a year just to have the insurance not to use it at all. If I used it to the OOP max (which we did last year with my wife being pregnant) you are talking about spending over 23k for the insurance and the OOP max (and the only "illness" we had was us having a child), and quite frankly what I have is probably on the top end of what you get with jobs.
(11-05-2025 12:34 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote: Over 100 posts and extra long posts when it's a simple things:
1. Blue states voted blue
2. The only reasons Republicans had hopes in some of these elections was because Trump was on the ballot in 2024 that shifted those states slightly rightward and these Dem candidates had troubling history. Trump wasn’t on the ballot and dem voters didn’t care about troubling history
3. Women once again carried dems to victory bases on the numbers
The end
Number 2 should be very concerning moving forward if true. It means the GOP cannot figure out how to effectively organize after Trump’s gone.
I don't think that's the issue. The key is to find another leader who attracts votes.
Is JD the guy? I think maybe. We'll see. Everybody seems to think the no-brainer ticket is JD/Marco.
I think it should be JD and a strong woman like Noem or Wiles, perhaps.
keep pounding ballot reform in the states that matter, take mail-it-inns to SCOTUS, and fk all the rest of the bs...
JDV and whomever will be just fine ... the blue is always going blue ... there's still a few states that haven't tossed in the towel to this point...
it's the only way ... if not, it wouldn't matter if you reincarnated JFK and Marilyn as the resurrected 'right' ...
NY, NJ,Cali and Nova voted blue.
Shocker
They got him now.
mon shere, I agreed with your posit yesterday ... I'm just gittin' muh spank on ...
(11-05-2025 12:34 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote: Over 100 posts and extra long posts when it's a simple things:
1. Blue states voted blue
2. The only reasons Republicans had hopes in some of these elections was because Trump was on the ballot in 2024 that shifted those states slightly rightward and these Dem candidates had troubling history. Trump wasn’t on the ballot and dem voters didn’t care about troubling history
3. Women once again carried dems to victory bases on the numbers
The end
Number 2 should be very concerning moving forward if true. It means the GOP cannot figure out how to effectively organize after Trump’s gone.
I don't think that's the issue. The key is to find another leader who attracts votes.
Is JD the guy? I think maybe. We'll see. Everybody seems to think the no-brainer ticket is JD/Marco.
I think it should be JD and a strong woman like Noem or Wiles, perhaps.
keep pounding ballot reform in the states that matter, take mail-it-inns to SCOTUS, and fk all the rest of the bs...
JDV and whomever will be just fine ... the blue is always going blue ... there's still a few states that haven't tossed in the towel to this point...
it's the only way ... if not, it wouldn't matter if you reincarnated JFK and Marilyn as the resurrected 'right' ...
Well, that part goes without saying. If somebody doesn't keep a close eye on the crooks, you're right, it matters not whom the Pubs run. That's always a given.
I mean, how many times have you typed mail-it-inns in the last few years?
(11-05-2025 01:29 PM)hburg Wrote: In Virginia, one thing was very clear.
1. Dems did not vote for a black female.
2. Dems did not vote for an openly gay man
3. NAACP refused to endorse a black woman and instead endorsed a white woman.
4. Obama endorsed a white woman and a someone who wants to murder opposition.
5. Obama refused to endorse a black woman.
Am I missing anything?
1. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sex and not a gender.
2. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sexual persuasion.
3. NAACP endorsed a candidate, and not a race.
4. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor a sex.
5. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor sex.
I guess you are upset that Dems, NAACP, and Obama operated in a political manner, and not one based on race, sex, or sexual leaning?
I guess how dare that happen, a series of people operated on race neutral manner, operated in a sex neutral manner, and operated in a sexual persuasion neutral manner. The horror. The sheer outrage.
that may be your best interpretation of the medicine man from the 19th century...
yo, trip As, what's the donk count at now ... 5, 6, 7, ...
He just tripped the 5 wire above.
Dem logic says they are racist, homophobic, murderous, misogynistic creeps. They just proved their own identity politics are for opposition and not for them. In other words dems proved themselves to be what they claim others are.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2025 02:18 PM by hburg.)
60% democrats fault and 40% republicans that healthcare is bad... Mostly Democrats for shoveling ACA down our throats, the rest Republicans because they have not offered any type of alternative... But that is because every single politician in Washington is owned by Big Insurance and Big Pharma... down to the very last man. They will sit back and watch Big Insurance make record profits (around 200 billion last year) and then continue to jack up premiums... because they can. They know we will continue to pay price gouging, ridiculous prices... People are literally paying 15k a year in health insurance to go to the doctor 2-4 times a year. I would simply not have insurance before that. I will put that 15k in a high yield savings account and if I need emergency fund, there it is... If not, I let it wrap to next year and keep accruing interest.
(11-05-2025 01:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: 1. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sex and not a gender.
2. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sexual persuasion.
3. NAACP endorsed a candidate, and not a race.
4. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor a sex.
5. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor sex.
I guess you are upset that Dems, NAACP, and Obama operated in a political manner, and not one based on race, sex, or sexual leaning?
I guess how dare that happen, a series of people operated on race neutral manner, operated in a sex neutral manner, and operated in a sexual persuasion neutral manner. The horror. The sheer outrage.
that may be your best interpretation of the medicine man from the 19th century...
yo, trip As, what's the donk count at now ... 5, 6, 7, ...
He just tripped the 5 wire above.
Dem logic says they are racist, homophobic, murderous, misogynistic creeps. They just proved their own identity politics are for opposition and not for them. In other words dems proved themselves to be what they claim others are.
(11-05-2025 01:57 PM)stinkfist Wrote: that may be your best interpretation of the medicine man from the 19th century...
yo, trip As, what's the donk count at now ... 5, 6, 7, ...
He just tripped the 5 wire above.
Dem logic says they are racist, homophobic, murderous, misogynistic creeps. They just proved their own identity politics are for opposition and not for them. In other words dems proved themselves to be what they claim others are.
MAGAs and identity politics. Can't separate them.
ewer point is what vs. the abomination of globohomo donktard-ism...
I'll take "choice" vs. the chow line every fk'n time...
(11-05-2025 01:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: 1. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sex and not a gender.
2. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sexual persuasion.
3. NAACP endorsed a candidate, and not a race.
4. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor a sex.
5. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor sex.
I guess you are upset that Dems, NAACP, and Obama operated in a political manner, and not one based on race, sex, or sexual leaning?
I guess how dare that happen, a series of people operated on race neutral manner, operated in a sex neutral manner, and operated in a sexual persuasion neutral manner. The horror. The sheer outrage.
that may be your best interpretation of the medicine man from the 19th century...
yo, trip As, what's the donk count at now ... 5, 6, 7, ...
He just tripped the 5 wire above.
Dem logic says they are racist, homophobic, murderous, misogynistic creeps. They just proved their own identity politics are for opposition and not for them. In other words dems proved themselves to be what they claim others are.
(11-05-2025 09:51 AM)EigenEagle Wrote: The biggest myth of politics is that the political center is right-of-center economically and left-of-center culturally. It's the exact opposite of that. The only people who believe that are those that only socialize with people on the cocktail circuit.
Steve Bannon is basically right. We can either get rid of all the social Darwinist weirdos that want to get rid of Social Security and Medicare or we can lose the culture wars. If we let all of these globalist billionaires wreck the social safety net the left will inevitably take power and win on issues like men in women's sports, open borders, DEI, etc.
It's amazing to me that some Republicans thought this election would go well for them when you're basically holding substantial premium increases over the American people. MTG is also right, BTW. If you don't want universal health care Republicans will have to fix the health care system.
I wish they would fix the system. Somehow the repubs are unable to even put together a plan to replace the current one.
b/c there isn't one w/o taking monies away from some 'groups'...
it's puttin' back the genie in the bottle scenario...
in politics, that's a death wish...
"It's the Republicans' fault Medical Insurance is bad because they haven't come up with something to replace Obamacare!!!" You can't make this up. I know, how bout you have to get a job to get Medical Insurance if you aren't 100% disabled or 65 or older? Sounds pretty simple to me. Obamacare did what it was supposed to do. Destroy the private medical insurance business so the Feds were in control of your health. What could go wrong? Hey Stink, I see Johnny Dupree is back in business up around your way. People are so stupid.
Your take makes sense. However, if you had control of both chambers and ultimately failed to find a better replacement to Obamacare…then what good are you as a party? That’s also a reasonable take.
And there you have it. Republicans talk **** but they love insurance companies pouring money into their campaigns and pockets. Insurance companies know what to do, they donate the same amount to both sides so no matter who wins, Insurance Companies win... and all the "republicans did not cast one vote for ACA" they knew they did not have to cast a vote for it. They damned sure were not going to stop it... they want Insurance making record profits so they can continue to get their kickbacks..
All this nonsense of "premiums are going up because Republicans wont extend the subsidies" is absolute nonsense... Premiums are going up because insurance companies have to keep raising profit every quarter so they can maintain stock prices... Stock is their product and increased profit is their only concern.
The solution is simple... if our healthcare is going to be based around insurance... then we need a government backed, non-profit insurance that has caps on salaries so they cannot dump all of their "profit" into salaries to hide the fact they are making too much profit.
(11-05-2025 02:33 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote: So we had elections as scheduled?
I was promised by so many over the past year that we’d never have them again.
lol ... don't remember that 'guy' ... notice no one is questioning the results (the ubiquitous mail-it-inn scenario doesn't count) ... only the residual impact they will most coih-ten-lee achieve becomes the fonzie portion downstream ... only then will they wander in the wonderment of 'why'...
(11-05-2025 01:29 PM)hburg Wrote: In Virginia, one thing was very clear.
1. Dems did not vote for a black female.
2. Dems did not vote for an openly gay man
3. NAACP refused to endorse a black woman and instead endorsed a white woman.
4. Obama endorsed a white woman and a someone who wants to murder opposition.
5. Obama refused to endorse a black woman.
Am I missing anything?
1. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sex and not a gender.
2. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sexual persuasion.
3. NAACP endorsed a candidate, and not a race.
4. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor a sex.
5. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor sex.
I guess you are upset that Dems, NAACP, and Obama operated in a political manner, and not one based on race, sex, or sexual leaning?
I guess how dare that happen, a series of people operated on race neutral manner, operated in a sex neutral manner, and operated in a sexual persuasion neutral manner. The horror. The sheer outrage.
that may be your best interpretation of the medicine man from the 19th century...
No better, nor any worse, than the sophomoric comments it was in response to. I guess the former is pure truth for the rabble here, and the latter pure 'medicine man'.
Cool cool.
And in all honesty, it seems that the NAACP, Dems, and Obama all operated as to their preferred candidate. Simply *because*: 1) Dems didnt vote for a black female; 2) Dems did not vote for an openly gay man; 3) NAACP refused to endorse a black woman and instead endorsed a white woman; 4) Obama endorsed a white woman; *and* 5) Obama refused to endorse a black woman.
But somehow that list hits on the prolific and deep victimhood streak present in today's MAGA.
Somehow hburgs list is presented as some negative. Now that: 1) Dems didnt vote for a black female; 2) Dems did not vote for an openly gay man; 3) NAACP refused to endorse a black woman and instead endorsed a white woman; 4) Obama endorsed a white woman; *and* 5) Obama refused to endorse a black woman -- it is somehow bad.
Neat stuff.
I think only in cartoon world that: 1) Dems must vote for a black female; 2) Dems must vote for an openly gay man; 3) NAACP must endorse a black woman and not endorse a white woman; 4) Obama must not endorse a white woman; *and* 5) Obama must endorse a black woman, as the original post seemingly goes to lengths to complain about.
And I think it only in cartoon world that the mirror image happen of: 1) Reps must not vote for a black female; 2) Reps must not vote for an openly gay man; 3) Turning Point must not endorse a black woman and must endorse a white woman; 4) Trump must endorse a white woman; *and* 5) Trump must not endorse a black woman.
(11-05-2025 10:27 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: I wish they would fix the system. Somehow the repubs are unable to even put together a plan to replace the current one.
b/c there isn't one w/o taking monies away from some 'groups'...
it's puttin' back the genie in the bottle scenario...
in politics, that's a death wish...
"It's the Republicans' fault Medical Insurance is bad because they haven't come up with something to replace Obamacare!!!" You can't make this up. I know, how bout you have to get a job to get Medical Insurance if you aren't 100% disabled or 65 or older? Sounds pretty simple to me. Obamacare did what it was supposed to do. Destroy the private medical insurance business so the Feds were in control of your health. What could go wrong? Hey Stink, I see Johnny Dupree is back in business up around your way. People are so stupid.
Your take makes sense. However, if you had control of both chambers and ultimately failed to find a better replacement to Obamacare…then what good are you as a party? That’s also a reasonable take.
And there you have it. Republicans talk **** but they love insurance companies pouring money into their campaigns and pockets. Insurance companies know what to do, they donate the same amount to both sides so no matter who wins, Insurance Companies win... and all the "republicans did not cast one vote for ACA" they knew they did not have to cast a vote for it. They damned sure were not going to stop it... they want Insurance making record profits so they can continue to get their kickbacks..
All this nonsense of "premiums are going up because Republicans wont extend the subsidies" is absolute nonsense... Premiums are going up because insurance companies have to keep raising profit every quarter so they can maintain stock prices... Stock is their product and increased profit is their only concern.
The solution is simple... if our healthcare is going to be based around insurance... then we need a government backed, non-profit insurance that has caps on salaries so they cannot dump all of their "profit" into salaries to hide the fact they are making too much profit.
you haven't read thru the thread to state "republicans talk shite" ... it's a gimme putt addressing w/o a filibuster proof majority coupled with a lame duck is political suicide...
you may want to review the last handful of pages...
I'll give you this ... in no way should health insurance companies or any pharma be publicly traded if one believes 'fair for all' ... that'll piss off a many that will argue, "but muh muh muh research will fail" ... to those fagoos, I retort, "they have no reason to cure."
this is muh problem with Bismark ... it just propagates the same function of the problem...
gov't CAN FIX THIS ... it's the greed that is unwilling to succumb...
(11-05-2025 01:29 PM)hburg Wrote: In Virginia, one thing was very clear.
1. Dems did not vote for a black female.
2. Dems did not vote for an openly gay man
3. NAACP refused to endorse a black woman and instead endorsed a white woman.
4. Obama endorsed a white woman and a someone who wants to murder opposition.
5. Obama refused to endorse a black woman.
Am I missing anything?
1. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sex and not a gender.
2. Dems voted for a candidate, not a sexual persuasion.
3. NAACP endorsed a candidate, and not a race.
4. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor a sex.
5. Obama endorsed a candidate, and not a race, nor sex.
I guess you are upset that Dems, NAACP, and Obama operated in a political manner, and not one based on race, sex, or sexual leaning?
I guess how dare that happen, a series of people operated on race neutral manner, operated in a sex neutral manner, and operated in a sexual persuasion neutral manner. The horror. The sheer outrage.
that may be your best interpretation of the medicine man from the 19th century...
No better, nor any worse, than the sophomoric comments it was in response to. I guess the former is pure truth for the rabble here, and the latter pure 'medicine man'.
Cool cool.
And in all honesty, it seems that the NAACP, Dems, and Obama all operated as to their preferred candidate. Simply *because*: 1) Dems didnt vote for a black female; 2) Dems did not vote for an openly gay man; 3) NAACP refused to endorse a black woman and instead endorsed a white woman; 4) Obama endorsed a white woman; *and* 5) Obama refused to endorse a black woman.
But somehow that list hits on the prolific and deep victimhood streak present in today's MAGA.
Somehow hburgs list is presented as some negative. Now that: 1) Dems didnt vote for a black female; 2) Dems did not vote for an openly gay man; 3) NAACP refused to endorse a black woman and instead endorsed a white woman; 4) Obama endorsed a white woman; *and* 5) Obama refused to endorse a black woman -- it is somehow bad.
Neat stuff.
I think only in cartoon world that: 1) Dems must vote for a black female; 2) Dems must vote for an openly gay man; 3) NAACP must endorse a black woman and not endorse a white woman; 4) Obama must not endorse a white woman; *and* 5) Obama must endorse a black woman, as the original post seemingly goes to lengths to complain about.
And I think it only in cartoon world that the mirror image happen of: 1) Reps must not vote for a black female; 2) Reps must not vote for an openly gay man; 3) Turning Point must not endorse a black woman and must endorse a white woman; 4) Trump must endorse a white woman; *and* 5) Trump must not endorse a black woman.
Both sides of it are thin and stupid.
These are the same people that argued people only voted for Harris because she is black. They need to pick a lane.
(11-05-2025 02:33 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote: So we had elections as scheduled?
I was promised by so many over the past year that we’d never have them again.
Yeah, no you weren't.
There are plenty of people who actually believed that. Probably doesn’t help the stupid, ignorant, people of the world when people like Gavin Newsome feed into the nonsensical hysteria about never having elections again.
Now anyone with a half functioning brain knew the hysteria was nonsense. Unfortunately there are a good amount of people lacking even that.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2025 03:05 PM by BcatMatt13.)
(11-05-2025 02:54 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote: These are the same people that argued people only voted for Harris because she is black. They need to pick a lane.
![[Image: 00100450268_gszr9ys.jpg]](https://static.pbslearningmedia.org/media/assets/00100450268_gszr9ys.jpg)
