• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Anthem to leave Ohio's Obamacare insurance market in 2018

Perotista said:
On terrorism, Trump has an out. If there ever is an attack here in the good old USA, Trump can and absolutely will blame the courts for overturning his ban on terrorist. He can always say he tried, but it was the judges who put America in peril, not him. Watch and see if something happens.
Click to expand...

And folks will swallow-n-follow right along, and the empire will continue the economic colonization of the planet.
 
Puigb said:
I wasn't a Reagan fan, but this post is spot on. There's no comparison between Reagan and Trump. One thing you didn't mention is that Reagan won the presidency by a landslide. Trump barely won against arguably the worst candidate the Democrats ever fielded. Trump also won because Democrats didn't support Hillary the same way they did Obama. Trump's support among the Republican base was basically on par to Romney's support in 2012, and Bush's support in 2004. There's no evidence at all of this supposed massive tidal wave of support that went to Trump that previous GOP candidates didn't receive. Compare Trump's win in 2016 to Obama's in 2008, and it's not close. Obama received almost 70 million votes in 2008, compared to 62million+ for Trump, and that is DESPITE more people voting in 2016 compared to 2008.
Click to expand...

I liked Ronnie, but there are those who didn't. But the majority of Americans did. That is something that can't be said for Trump at this point. I noticed that Clinton ran behind Obama's vote totals, percentage wise, in almost every voter category. The stat I found most interesting was a study by CCSE which found out that 11% of those who voted for Obama in 2012 voted for Trump in 2016. Compared to 4% who voted for Romney in 2012 and voted for Clinton in 2016. CCSE didn't go into detail, it was Larry Sabato who reported their findings in his Crystal Ball Report. But I think the reason why so many Obama supporters voted for Trump were most of them were Sanders supporters. They were angry at the perceived rigging of the Democratic Primaries by the DNC and Democratic State Party leaders in Clinton's favor. Exit polls showed Clinton won the Democratic base by a 89-8 margin over Trump. But she only won Sanders supporters 65-22 over Trump with 13% voting third party. I think most of that 11% who voted for Obama in 2012 and Trump in 2016 were indeed Sanders supporters.
 
Perotista said:
I liked Ronnie, but there are those who didn't. But the majority of Americans did. That is something that can't be said for Trump at this point. I noticed that Clinton ran behind Obama's vote totals, percentage wise, in almost every voter category. The stat I found most interesting was a study by CCSE which found out that 11% of those who voted for Obama in 2012 voted for Trump in 2016. Compared to 4% who voted for Romney in 2012 and voted for Clinton in 2016. CCSE didn't go into detail, it was Larry Sabato who reported their findings in his Crystal Ball Report. But I think the reason why so many Obama supporters voted for Trump were most of them were Sanders supporters. They were angry at the perceived rigging of the Democratic Primaries by the DNC and Democratic State Party leaders in Clinton's favor. Exit polls showed Clinton won the Democratic base by a 89-8 margin over Trump. But she only won Sanders supporters 65-22 over Trump with 13% voting third party. I think most of that 11% who voted for Obama in 2012 and Trump in 2016 were indeed Sanders supporters.
Click to expand...

I actually know an Obama/Trump voter, who wasn't a Sanders supporter. His reasons were that like Obama, he saw Trump as an "outsider", who was preferable to another Bush/Clinton. I'm no Trump fan obviously, but I'll admit it is refreshing to see an end to both the Bush and Clinton political dynasties, at least for now.
 
Puigb said:
I actually know an Obama/Trump voter, who wasn't a Sanders supporter. His reasons were that like Obama, he saw Trump as an "outsider", who was preferable to another Bush/Clinton. I'm no Trump fan obviously, but I'll admit it is refreshing to see an end to both the Bush and Clinton political dynasties, at least for now.
Click to expand...

The dynasty that matters is the Goldman Sachs dynasty in the white house that no election ever touches.
 
Fenton Lum said:
The great american democracy vomits up the "choice" Wall Street and the "job creator" class allow.
Click to expand...

Is it really a democracy when the choices given are what the two major parties want you to choose from? We do have a two party system as opposed to multi parties in almost every other democracy I can think of. We're given an either or choice.
 
Anthem to leave Ohio's Obamacare insurance market in 2018
Click to expand...

not surprising. expand Medicare to cover everyone, and then Anthem can leave other markets as well.
 
Perotista said:
Is it really a democracy when the choices given are what the two major parties want you to choose from? We do have a two party system as opposed to multi parties in almost every other democracy I can think of. We're given an either or choice.
Click to expand...

We're given an either or choice from the same pile of donor class prostitutes.
 
Puigb said:
I was talking about the Republican party itself, not the voters. Most Republican voters still support Trump. The party on the other hand, clearly doesn't want him, and will only use him to get what they want. Once they get what they want...the GOP itself could care less what happens to Trump.

The GOP voters? Yeah, most of them will defend Trump to the very end. Not so much because they like Trump, but because they hate Liberals/Democrats so much, they'll defend Trump because he's their "guy", and they certainly don't want to admit that the EVIL liberals were right about Trump.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure if the voters themselves aren't beginning to leave Trump. In the last YouGov polls only 79% of Republicans approved of Trump and that was split pretty much down the middle between strongly support and somewhat support. You're right, they will choose Trump every time when Trump is pitted against the evil liberal democrats. But I wonder if the choice was say, between Trump and Pence, which side would they come down on? Especially those who only somewhat support?
 
Perotista said:
I'm not so sure if the voters themselves aren't beginning to leave Trump. In the last YouGov polls only 79% of Republicans approved of Trump and that was split pretty much down the middle between strongly support and somewhat support. You're right, they will choose Trump every time when Trump is pitted against the evil liberal democrats. But I wonder if the choice was say, between Trump and Pence, which side would they come down on? Especially those who only somewhat support?
Click to expand...

you may be right, especially considering how many of them seem to have abandoned both Bush presidents. Most GOP voters still love Reagan, but I rarely hear any of them give praise to either Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. In fact, many GOP voters seem to be upset with them since it came out that neither former Bush president voted for Trump in the general election.

As for who the GOP voters would chose between Trump and Pence, I have no idea. The establishment GOP itself though would definitely choose Pence.
 
Puigb said:
I actually know an Obama/Trump voter, who wasn't a Sanders supporter. His reasons were that like Obama, he saw Trump as an "outsider", who was preferable to another Bush/Clinton. I'm no Trump fan obviously, but I'll admit it is refreshing to see an end to both the Bush and Clinton political dynasties, at least for now.
Click to expand...

I wonder how much effect the dynasty approach had on the election? I've seen nothing on that in any of the exit polls. It really hurt Jeb Bush in the Republican primaries, but didn't bother the Democrats at all. Perhaps it should have.
 
Perotista said:
I wonder how much effect the dynasty approach had on the election? I've seen nothing on that in any of the exit polls. It really hurt Jeb Bush in the Republican primaries, but didn't bother the Democrats at all. Perhaps it should have.
Click to expand...

It SHOULD have bothered the Democrats, and it obviously did bother some of it's voters. The Democrat party itself screwed up so badly by ensuring that Hillary Clinton would win the nomination, that the result is a Donald Trump presidency.
 
Fenton Lum said:
We're given an either or choice from the same pile of donor class prostitutes.
Click to expand...

I guess you could say that. There is no doubt that both major parties owe their hearts and souls to corporations, Wall Street Firms, lobbyist, special interests and mega, huge money donors who give them their millions, tens of millions of dollars. All of those folks are good business people. They aren't donating or investing in the two major parties because of civic responsibility. They do so to get a great return on their investment. As Donald Trump said in 2015 I think when asked why he donated to both major parties, he said, "I give, they give back."
 
Puigb said:
you may be right, especially considering how many of them seem to have abandoned both Bush presidents. Most GOP voters still love Reagan, but I rarely hear any of them give praise to either Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. In fact, many GOP voters seem to be upset with them since it came out that neither former Bush president voted for Trump in the general election.

As for who the GOP voters would chose between Trump and Pence, I have no idea. The establishment GOP itself though would definitely choose Pence.
Click to expand...

I sure the GOP establishment would. Both Trump and Pence have almost identical very favorable and somewhat favorable ratings among Republicans. Questions 138 and 139.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/lssamz3o6b/econTabReport.pdf
 
Puigb said:
It SHOULD have bothered the Democrats, and it obviously did bother some of it's voters. The Democrat party itself screwed up so badly by ensuring that Hillary Clinton would win the nomination, that the result is a Donald Trump presidency.
Click to expand...

I can't argue with that. The problem is Hillary was chosen back before the 2012 election to be their 2016 nominee. Heck by the time the year turned to 2013, she already had 15 super delegates pledged to her. When 2015 rolled around, long before Sanders announced his candidacy, Clinton had surpassed the 300 mark in pledged super delegates. I think most Democrats saw that and knew there would be no defeating her. In the end Sanders ended up with just 48 out of 712 super delegates.

What was interesting with Clinton is back in February of 2016 there was a poll which showed 56% of all Americans wanted the Democrats to nominate someone else other than Hillary Clinton. Of course the Democrats didn't listen and we know the result of that party not listening to America as a whole. A Donald Trump presidency. Now the Democrats had the right to nominate whomever they wanted, that I am not contesting. Just the wisdom of nominating the only Democratic candidate, alive or dead that could possibly lose to Trump.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Medicaid expansion is a horrid idea, absolutely terrible.
The program is a necessary thing for people with disabilities and adding more people to a program, that already underpays market rates, will reduce availability to those who need it most.
Click to expand...

One of the reasons that Medicaid pays less than market rate (unlike SNAP) is that it requires the states to pick up part of the tab. There is no reason that a state could not "contribute" more to fix that underpayment problem. The idea that expanded Medicaid participants should not have to pay any premium or deductible is insane.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
One of the reasons that Medicaid pays less than market rate (unlike SNAP) is that it requires the states to pick up part of the tab. There is no reason that a state could not "contribute" more to fix that underpayment problem. The idea that expanded Medicaid participants should not have to pay any premium or deductible is insane.
Click to expand...

They do pick up part of the premium in some states, it's just usually nominal ($1-$5).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom