2020 US Election (Part One)

[peter grimes]

Moderator Action: Enough with the insults.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[metatron]

Catch on J. Nobody cares what you will say, because we've all seen that there is no such thing as a lie that you won't say.

If nobody cares, why is it so important to call Jay names?
What is the utility if supposedly nobody cares in the first place?

Also: You're doing it for a while now? What result do you think your strategy has yielded?

 

[onejayhawk]

If nobody cares, why is it so important to call Jay names?
What is the utility if supposedly nobody cares in the first place?

Also: You're doing it for a while now? What result do you think your strategy has yielded?

Name calling is a standard political tactic by the left half of the Ameican political spectrum, suitably amplified by the media outlets. It substitutes for facts and logic when they have none. Hence, the droves of people attacking MAGA and all things Trump rather than deal with his record.

J

 

[Broken_Erika]

WARNING! DANGER! ALERT!


Moderator Action: What did peter grimes just say? This is trolling. --LM

 

[Berzerker]

name calling...right on cue

 

[Broken_Erika]

Name calling is a standard political tactic by the left half of the Ameican political spectrum, suitably amplified by the media outlets. It substitutes for facts and logic when they have none. Hence, the droves of people attacking MAGA and all things Trump rather than deal with his record.

J

Where are you getting your news and information? Seriously. I want to know.
I want to check them.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/search/#gsc.tab=0

 

[cardgame]

When some people live in a post-fact and post-logic world, others feel like they must resort to other means to get through to them.

 

[onejayhawk]

Where are you getting your news and information? Seriously. I want to know.
I want to check them.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/search/#gsc.tab=0

Fine, then research it. You will gain a better grasp. It's ten years old and I don't care enough to bother. The key point is that everyone signed up for Medicaid was counted as newly covered, regardless of prior eligibility. In 2013 they changed the counting rules to make it look like fewer people were uncovered. The cite for that is a few posts back.

When some people live in a post-fact and post-logic world, others feel like they must resort to other means to get through to them.

Tell me something I don't know. We have people still claiming ACA covered 30 Million new people.

J

 

[Timsup2nothin]

How dare the left resort to name calling? Even if he is an opponent, a United States Senator deserves better than to be called "Little Marco."

Oh.

Wait.

 

[Estebonrober]

Pleaded guilty of charges? You mean the one pathetic little charge they were not forced to drop due to total lack of evidence. The one charge that they could arbitrarily accuse any foreigner of anyway. It's amazing how easy it is in the US to arrest and pressure someone into pleading guilty.

Do you thing that the New Republic is some propaganda agency for the russians? If not, then take the time to read this story on the case. It was yet another bureaucratic witch hunt.

And of course had not one mainstream media source bothered to public a story about it, you'd dismiss any reporting that questioned the official charges as "russian propaganda" or "conspiracy theory". Credulous foolishness and incapability for critical thinking...

The mainstream media over here is real shaky right now, and anything that would make Trump look more innocent is not going to be popular with the editors at CBSNews or where ever all these "liberal" plots happen. Good journalism is hard to find and its not typically the corporate crap on TV.

I do want to pull something out of that admittedly good and enlightening story. . .

Among the FBI’s key pieces of evidence is a four-year-old email exchange with Erickson in which Butina fantasizes about a possible “diplomacy” project aimed at building constructive relations between Russia and the United States and suggests that such a project would require a budget of $125,000, for her to attend conferences and the Republican National Convention. What Helson didn’t mention in the affidavit, however, is that because there was never any funding from Torshin, the Russian government, or anyone else, there was no influence operation. It was talk, nothing more

I get that its not spycraft that she was executing but it looks damn weird when your nation is going around trying to fight the US in every other sphere. So the fact that she put a huge light on herself seems crazy to me, that said with what I've read I probably would not convict her. Hopefully the truth bears out.

Russian propaganda is bloody rampant and has gotten pretty damn good the last 10 years. Putin conspiracies are bloody legend by the way and I generally don;t believe in conspiracies at all. I am literally concerned he has something on Trump and that's only the way Trump has behaved (secret meetings, being so deferential (not a very Trump trait normally), trying to back off sanctions and Ukraine)). So this story doesn't change any of that at all, nor any of the facts about the dozen other indictments and guilty pleas.

Finally the NRA should have bloody known better, or maybe we should be using them to arm the Russian populace and rise up against the mafioso masters.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Fine, then research it. You will gain a better grasp. It's ten years old and I don't care enough to bother. The key point is that everyone signed up for Medicaid was counted as newly covered, regardless of prior eligibility. In 2013 they changed the counting rules to make it look like fewer people were uncovered. The cite for that is a few posts back.

J

That's not what i meant. I was wondering what news sites you get your news from.

 

[Berzerker]

we'll have a better idea if she's sentenced to jail and Putin wants a prisoner swap

 

[Estebonrober]

Tell me something I don't know. We have people still claiming ACA covered 30 Million new people.

J

You are a liar, linking first results on searching whether the ACA covered 30 million new people.

https://www.kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/6/29/15892642/28-million-uninsured-obamacare

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottg...le-has-obamacare-really-insured/#37528199788a

https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/healthcare/320969-debunking-the-20-million-obamacare-myth

This is the essence of the "lie" by liberals I take it:

The roughly 2.5 million people added in 2016 brings the total number of Americans who have gained access to health insurance to 16.5 million, well below the alleged “20 million” slogan Democrats have made into their rallying cry. But even this figure paints a wildly inaccurate picture of the alleged benefits of the ACA.


So idk where you got the 30 million number I'm not seeing that anywhere (you are a liar). I see 20 million. Now 3/5 pieces support that number and the two that don't indicate that it was more like 16-17 million and that was a huge political lie (bullcrap, that's a round up in politics if I've ever seen it, I don't hear complaints about pentagon budgeting from goldman sachs and hill oped people). So you are a lying strawman packing debater who every time he gets crushed around here casually shifts the topic. The ACA was designed to fail (I've seen you state this before and I agree actually for a lot of reasons), the difference between the two parties now is one is trying to govern in good faith to fix it or make something better, the other one just wants to loot your treasury again for the friends the next time the market cycles down, loot the parks, the continental shelf, and any other public commons it can get its twisted hands on. Wake up. Your strawmen are literally ruining your children's and their children's country.

 

[Berzerker]

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/o...ould-take-insurance-30-million-people-n693051

"Repealing President Barack Obama's health care law without a clear replacement risks making nearly 30 million people uninsured, according to a study released Wednesday."

https://www.cbpp.org/blog/who-are-the-30-million-who-would-lose-coverage-under-aca-repeal

"New Urban Institute state fact sheets describe the nearly 30 million adults and children who would lose coverage in each state by 2019 if the new Republican majority repeals the Affordable Care Act"

Maybe thats where the 30m comes from

 

[metalhead]

But that is very clearly not the same thing as saying 30 million people got newly insured.

We've had this argument before. The basic point here is that J believes that people newly covered under the Medicaid expansion don't count as being newly covered under the ACA, even though expanding access to Medicaid was an integral part of the ACA.

So make of that what you will.

 

[onejayhawk]

But that is very clearly not the same thing as saying 30 million people got newly insured.

We've had this argument before. The basic point here is that J believes that people newly covered under the Medicaid expansion don't count as being newly covered under the ACA, even though expanding access to Medicaid was an integral part of the ACA.

So make of that what you will.

As you say, this is a ten-year old argument.

Expanding Medicaid is one thing. Merely signing people up is a different thing, which was used to inflate the numbers claimed for ACA. It's political spin in its native habitat.

J

 

[metalhead]

No, that's a lie.

 

[Estebonrober]

As you say, this is a ten-year old argument.

Expanding Medicaid is one thing. Merely signing people up is a different thing, which was used to inflate the numbers claimed for ACA. It's political spin in its native habitat.

J

The mandate required them to be signed up and that is distinctly different from before the ACA. That means the ACA gets credit.

 

[Estebonrober]

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/o...ould-take-insurance-30-million-people-n693051

"Repealing President Barack Obama's health care law without a clear replacement risks making nearly 30 million people uninsured, according to a study released Wednesday."

https://www.cbpp.org/blog/who-are-the-30-million-who-would-lose-coverage-under-aca-repeal

"New Urban Institute state fact sheets describe the nearly 30 million adults and children who would lose coverage in each state by 2019 if the new Republican majority repeals the Affordable Care Act"

Maybe thats where the 30m comes from

Hey at least they linked something instead of just shifting the conversation and acting like my post didn't happen.

 

[Takhisis]

At the rate solar cell prices are falling now, we won't need government intervention to make the switch. I think the changeover will be dramatically fast and have major knock-on effects for the rest of the economy that we can't fully envision. The sun gives us a full kilowatt of free energy per square meter, and that's just what makes it through the atmosphere on average.

There's this concept for measuring the advancement of a civilization, the Kardashev scale. There are three ranks and they are all tied to the amount of energy a civilization can harvest. Type I can fully utilize what's available on a planet, II a star, III a galaxy. The biggest jump is from 0 to 1, which is where we're currently at.

It's a technological marvel when people build a megawatt power station that belches pollution and things like that have improved our lives but at great cost to the planet. Yet the sun gives us megawatts worth of energy, every second for half the day for free in an area the size of a decent parade field. We're on the cusp of tapping into that energy and it will transform our society in a way more fundamental than the creation of the internet. Everything we do is based on access to energy, not least the internet itself. More power = more of everything and if we can do it with minimal impact to the environment, we can maintain our quality of life and begin to repair the damage we've done.

Essentially unlimited energy will allow us to seriously think about fixing the CO2 levels in the air, for example. It takes a lot of energy to scrub the air in a hurry but it's fundamentally something we can do now - if we had cheap energy to power the systems to do it. It's just industrial chemistry, which we're pretty damn good at.

Yes, it's mostly a matter of engineering (i.e taking theory to practice) rather than ‘hard’ science (actually developing the theory).

But first you'll have to deal with legal/economical alchemy and other arcane arts that make it cheaper to manufacture parts in, say, China, ship them across a few oceans consuming ultimately finite amounts of petroleum-based fuels for assembly, then to another for packaging, then to the final destination for sale and soon disposal (e.g. manufacturing teddy bears) for a profit that leaves enough to grease the palms of a few legislators here and there who make it legal while holding back the electric car and making Steve Guttenberg a star.

Someone on another forum derided the green deal as impossible because airplanes can't run on nuclear/solar/wind power. Because, okay, aviation is the obvious target of a green energy campaign.

Airplanes can't run on sol… WTF. There is such a thing as electric engines. And even an idiot like me can get round some of the more basic fixes.

Hey at least they linked something instead of just shifting the conversation and acting like my post didn't happen.

Acting as if their posts hadn't happened is what I tend to do when the people I'd call hate-filled shills by name if it wasn't considered an offence by the moderators start spouting nonsense. It saves time.