Hillary will just try to appoint the Fifth Activist who will nullify the Constitution. No big deal?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Trump: Convince me without personal attacks
- Thread starter StefanM
- Start date
- Status
Hillary will just try to appoint the Fifth Activist who will nullify the Constitution. No big deal?
The exchanges are a disaster, but not all of the ACA is failing. Expanded Medicaid (which in my state consists of premiums remitted to health insurers for private plans) is helpful to states, who now see reductions in uncompensated care. My local university hospital has been able to create jobs because of expansion in my state. Rural hospitals have been able to stay open. Otherwise, we'd have medical deserts of 100+ miles that would result in deaths, period, no matter how good your insurance is. Even the state budget has been helped, allowing much-needed highway repairs to begin.
The ACA needs major repairs, to be sure, or a suitable replacement that addresses the damage without reversing some of the positives. We have bad wiring, but that's not a reason to burn down the house. We just need a REAL (not typical "free-market" rhetoric) plan that actually addresses the issues at hand. Medical costs were spiraling out of control pre-ACA, and the state-line plan just won't work. It will just put thousands of people out of work across the country as insurance companies all relocate to the "favorable" state/states. If you don't offer a real fix, you're going to get something like Medicare for all next time.
And, for the love of everything decent, don't bring back that pre-existing condition exclusion. My relative, a conservative Republican who works for an insurance company (25+ years of experience in the industry), says that the pre-existing condition exclusion was a "nightmare to administer" and that companies actually wanted to get rid of it. They just had to have a law to kill it because of adverse selection.
Input? Perhaps. But I mean more than just having input--I mean actually taking the advice of experts and implementing it. A person can have input but no real influence on the decision.
If you don't help the poor, you're just going to see riots. The country is already burning in some places. Cut off support? Just wait and see what happens. It won't be pretty. We really don't need a French-style revolution in our streets.
Plus, there's a biblical precedent for doing so on a national level, along with individual charity.
Last edited:
1 isn't a reason.
2 is a good idea.
3 is a good idea.
4 is only a good idea if it's done efficiently. We have tons of waste.
5 is good, depending on the details.
6 is very good.
7 is questionable. Free trade is typically a conservative kind of thing.
8 is ok.
9 is irrelevant. As I once heard, the VP's job "is to be alive in case the President isn't."
10 is offensive.
Under the huge topic of Republicans Are Worthless (aside form displacing Democrats) is the Flat Tax, which will increase taxes on the middle-class. If you're at all serious about a Flat Tax, how come you vote for people who don't incrementally flatten the tax? Let's get rid of the home mortgage deduction, but which Republicans are talking about that? Let's get rid of deductions for state and federal taxes. Getting rid of tax breaks for the rich is off the Republican table. Rather, Republicans want to create more tax breaks for the rich.
Obamacare is the most viable idea right now. It just needs some accompanying reforms. But, Republicans are worthless and want to scrap it (without any viable alternative) rather than improve it.
When you cut the marginal rates of the rich (a flat tax), who do you think will pick up the slack? Why should I vote for a Republican Party that can't show it cares about the working man?
And again? There is no way on earth you can ever be convinced to vote for Donald Trump, and do you know why, Stefan? His ideology is less-defined and does not come anywhere close to yours.
Any point anybody makes. positive or negative, you're going to shoot down and rationalize it. And you'll think this post is a "personal attack" but it's really not - you should forget about Trump and go with Hillary or Gary Johnson. TIA!
Any point anybody makes. positive or negative, you're going to shoot down and rationalize it. And you'll think this post is a "personal attack" but it's really not - you should forget about Trump and go with Hillary or Gary Johnson. TIA!
This is the first time in history there could be five judges on the Supreme Court who don't care the least bit about the Constitution. Furthermore, because of past Liberals on the Supreme Court, we've already arrived to place where Christianity is routinely by the government and government support of Sodomites is deemed a Constitutional right.
Then we need an even better replacement. That solves the problem.
You don't get it. That's fine with him. This is a person that just yesterday was slamming Donald Trump for his "attacks on the 1st Amendment" for . . . guess who . . . the press. Yep, the same lying corrupt press that is complicit with Hillary to gut the 2nd Amendment.
Says you.
But if that is true, it needs to come from Congress, not illegally by executive order, and without all the lying to get it passed and the entire bill needs to be read and explained in public before passage. In addition to that, it needs to apply to all Americans and members of Congress . No exceptions for political cronies. (labor unions) Lastly, everyone must be covered. No exceptions. No opting out or delaying enrollment until they're sick.
Last edited:
Yeah, repeal it without replacing. The entire healthcare industry would go into a spin overnight.
Simply taking away insurance is not an option. A better plan has to be offered, or the next Democratic President will be brought to you by "Medicare for All."
Yes, all the amendments are important but it's telling when you complain about some off-the-cuff comment Trump made about the WaPo idiots, yet you never say a thing about Hillary going after the Second except that "I don't agree with that, either" and "that's not a positive argument for me to vote for Donald Trump". Of course, it isn't, that concept does not exist.
Why can't you acknowledge it? You don't like Trump's position on trade and conservatives don't like Trump's position on trade but it doesn't follow that you're a conservative. You aren't.
Ask CTB to convince you to vote for Hillary, you don't ever mind a little socialism in your government, as you say. I think if you forced yourself to vote for Donald Trump it would be totally wrong.
Why can't you acknowledge it? You don't like Trump's position on trade and conservatives don't like Trump's position on trade but it doesn't follow that you're a conservative. You aren't.
Ask CTB to convince you to vote for Hillary, you don't ever mind a little socialism in your government, as you say. I think if you forced yourself to vote for Donald Trump it would be totally wrong.
Read the edited post.
They won't be if Hillary is elected. The first amendment is already under attack, specifically freedom of religion, with freedom of speech running a close second. Another liberal SCOTUS justice will turn this country on it's ear, with the entire bill of rights either altered or done away with in a generation.
I'm a moderate. I don't like a lot of what Hillary stands for, but I wasn't talking about voting for Hillary. My issue is Trump or 3rd party (out of protest).
I hold some more liberal positions and some more conservative ones.
Trade? I don't believe in protectionism because I don't think its economically productive, and it limits the ability to spread freedom to other nations. I tend to take a conservative position here.
It's telling when a candidate makes too many off -the-cuff comments period because it indicates an inability or unwillingness to keep oneself more restrained. Restraint is absolutely essential for the Presidency. Maybe Trump can change, but as of now, it's an area he needs to improve.
But would I be a conservative by very conservative terms? No. That being said, I'd probably look like the second coming of Mussolini to the far left. I am quite concerned that the far left has so much influence because the moderate Dems are MIA. I'm also quite concerned about the anger in the far right.
I can agree with the general desire for transparency. I don't care about reading the bill publicly. Bills are so wonky as to be unintelligible. But I do think it should be an open process.
- Status