• 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!

Republicans to attack healthcare law funding

Whovian said:
Your source does not validate your post that people who were opposed to it were opposed because it does not go far enough.
Click to expand...

If 40% wanted the law to do more, 20% want the government out, and most of the other 40% are presumably somewhere in the middle, that hardly sounds like an overwhelming rejection of health care reform to me.
 
Kandahar said:
I didn't feel like digging too much, so here's the first Google result I got:
AP Poll: Many think health overhaul should do more - Yahoo! News

Yeah...I don't do the stupid partisan hackery stuff. I just do policy, and occasionally political analysis. If you want someone to argue with about how much liberals suck, you'll have to look elsewhere. :2wave:
Click to expand...

But you quoted a poll by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which is funded by the uber left (follow the link). So you can claim to not do the partisan hackery stuff, but at the same time you use their propaganda as evidence. Do you have anything from a reliable source, or just partisan hackery junk?
 
Kandahar said:
If 40% wanted the law to do more, 20% want the government out, and most of the other 40% are presumably somewhere in the middle, that hardly sounds like an overwhelming rejection of health care reform to me.
Click to expand...

My apologies...
This...
The poll found that about four in 10 adults think the new law did not go far enough to change the health care system, regardless of whether they support the law, oppose it or remain neutral.
Click to expand...

...does indeed support this...

Kandahar said:
You do realize that of those people who say they don't like the bill, at least some of them are unhappy because it didn't go far ENOUGH?
Click to expand...

I apparently misread your initial post.
 
Prof. Peabody said:
But you quoted a poll by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which is funded by the uber left (follow the link). So you can claim to not do the partisan hackery stuff, but at the same time you use their propaganda as evidence.
Click to expand...

:roll:
I told you, I pulled up the first hit on Google. If you aren't satisfied with the source of poll, find it yourself. I don't feel like digging for information right now.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
:roll:
I told you, I pulled up the first hit on Google. If you aren't satisfied with the source of poll, find it yourself. I don't feel like digging for information right now.
Click to expand...

If you don't want to "dig" for information, then don't respond to my posts. I'll make anyone who does look foolish, it's my policy.
 
Last edited:
progressiveny said:
"Victorious at the polls, congressional Republicans asserted their newfound political strength on Thursday, vowing to seek a quick $100 billion in federal spending cuts and force repeated votes on repeal of President Barack Obama's prized health care overhaul."

So, the above will be the Republican's first order of business...

1- Help our struggling economy? No, attacking President Obama is much more important. So check

2- Help regenerate jobs while providing universal and affordable job training for millions of Americans? No, however President Obama must be taught a lesson. So check


- I see a theme here folks.-


3- Help small business owners stay in business while guiding them into hiring more employees again? No, yet it's our Godly mission as Republicans to punish President Obama. So check

4- Provide the millions of Americans and our guest with affordable health coverage? God no! These poor Americans must understand if you are not wealthy you do not deserve quality health coverage. And simply screw our guests yet when our Republican lawns need trimming, it's Paulo we will call. Repeal. So check

___________________________________________________________________

5- Deregulate everything President Obama helped regulate so far? Yes that is a double check. Large businesses including those in energy and finance do not need regulations; they simply need a harsh talking too....
_______________________________________________________________

So, the first order of business in the house is to clearly punish President Obama. I cannot see how anyone with common sense cannot see this also. This will be a horrible situation for a president who is trying. Now he has to combat against very rich and angry Republicans who's agenda was not meant to help this struggling nation as a whole, rather to play parisian politics and bring America back to the socially, racially, politically, and economically divided country we were and always have been it seems. At least President Obama got folks to see we can be equals one day.
Click to expand...

Thank you Tbone.

So no one contradicted the above? Because you all know the Republicans agenda is solely based on making the President look bad and ineffective. How can Americans put people in office with the sole intention to make America a worst off country?

When you publicly and privately state you will undo everything President Obama has done and will do, you are clearly hurting this country. No if's or butt's about it. But this is OK and that's the scary part.

Instead of the Republicans coming out during elections and stating to the American people, we will work with our President to make this country a better place, rather all I read and heard was attacks in not making America a better place. I saw Republicans not putting blame on his / her self and party, rather passing the buck on the White House.
 
Prof. Peabody said:
If you don't want to "dig" for information, then don't respond to my posts. I'll make anyone who does look foolish, it's my policy.
Click to expand...

It appears that the reverse is occurring. Btw, merely citing the source does not prove that the methodology is wrong.

And another person ignorant of statistics joins DP.
 
Kandahar said:
Uh-huh. And who are you again?
Click to expand...

A guy almost like you, but I back up what I say with links to legitimate sources, do you? If a poster makes an assertion and can't back up what they say, then it's merely an ubsubstanciated opinion, likely based in a preconcieved notion and is hardly a fact. If any answering my posts can't back up their assertions with facts, everyone should know that and assign credibility as such. that's all I'm saying.
 
obvious Child said:
It appears that the reverse is occurring. Btw, merely citing the source does not prove that the methodology is wrong.

And another person ignorant of statistics joins DP.
Click to expand...

Maybe I missed where you posted them, be a kind fella and point me to the statistics you posted I missed, won't you? Or better yet prove what I posted is wrong or inaccurate. That's real debate.
 
Last edited:
Prof. Peabody said:
Maybe I missed where you posted them, be a kind fella and point me to the statistics you posted I missed, won't you? Or better yet prove what I posted is wrong or inaccurate. That's real debate.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should take up reading comprehension. Your argument was that the data was wrong because it came from a source you dislike. That does not logically prove it is wrong. Proving such data is wrong requires proving the methodology is wrong. You have failed to do this entirely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom