4 ms·

> Nope. Nope to that! See I can make unfounded assertions too! It's fun. > Leaving aside the the current psychotic break the GQP is experiencing this year,

> Nope. Nope to that! See I can make unfounded assertions too! It's fun. > Leaving aside the the current psychotic break the GQP is experiencing this year, universal health care is not something they've ever wanted. There's a difference between "I would never, ever vote for this under any circumstances because NO WAY" and "I'll get voted out if I allow an increase in spending on something that my voting base doesn't want". In the same way that Democrats couldn't go to their voting bases and say "see we got universal healthcare! " if they had to give up the necessary funding in other places in order to make it budget-neutral, Republicans could only hope to get re-elected if they could go to their voting bases and say "look yeah we compromised, but it was on a thing that was budget-neutral! We didn't get a tax break for you, but we did eliminate all these other $horrible programs!" I'm not saying that's good or right or what we want. But both sides are playing to their audiences and very much tuned in to what they want. That's what you have to do to get re-elected. That's why neither side is interested in compromising to make a deal. They'll get crucified for "not standing up for what WE believe in" and "compromising with that other side full of awful, evil people" I don't really like that the US hasn't done much legislatively in the last 20 years. But, I, personally, myself don't get to decide how all this works. And neither does anyone else.

ansible 5y ago
You seem to be under the impression that the large blocks of voters actually understand and care about the issues. Large corporations and their considerable advertising and lobbying efforts are what's really important. Much of this effort is to frame issues to the public in the way they choose. The "stances" the voting base take are largely shaped by influence campaigns of powerful interest groups. Both major parties (the minor ones too) are affected by this. Though one of the groups has gotten even stupider recently, and they actively vote against their own best interests. Edit: grammar.
- msandford 5y ago
  > You seem to be under the impression that the large blocks of voters actually understand and care about the issues. Large corporations and their considerable advertising and lobbying efforts are what's really important. Much of this effort is to frame issues to the public in the way they choose. The idea that it's the voters that vote is actually true! That's how the system works. Corporations can influence that of course, probably to an enormous degree. But the corporations themselves don't vote. That's the system we've got. The primary mechanism in our system is people. And people aren't logical, rational, economically-maximizing, or any of it. People are far more narrative-driven than they are rationally-driven. THAT's what I would say that Republicans would get on board with a universal healthcare bill in which they could claim that they "destroyed" the Democrats by "obliterating" a bunch of "socialist pork". But that's absolutely going to ensure that the Democrats that "caved" in order to get something important done won't be able to get re-elected. And they care more about getting re-elected than they do about doing the right thing! Same on the other side of the isle! This isn't a partisan issue. Everyone wants to get re-elected way, way, way more badly than they want to do the right thing. I don't like it. I don't think it's right. But it's extremely easy to see that neither party is compromising in any meaningful way these days. Both take hardline stances and don't budge. That's not a bug, it's a feature of American Democracy. It was designed such that if there wasn't wide agreement (or elected officials who would compromise) that things would grind to a halt. That was done so that nobody could run roughshod over the other. Until we start getting richer such that the increases in spending are coming out of even bigger growth or we somehow manage to convince everyone that paying more and getting less is totally-A-OK this is going to be how it continues to go. Neither side wants to compromise, so their counterparties don't want to either. Deadlock is the name of the game. > and they actively vote against their own best interests I can understand how you'd think that. It makes a lot of sense. But it belies a terrible ignorance on your part. Animals don't make decisions on purpose to make their own lives worse in ways in which they KNOW they will end up worse. You can try and project your ethics onto other people all you want and use their relative-to-you irrationality to belittle them. But it doesn't work! Putting people down doesn't change minds. In fact putting people down might be the very thing that got Trump elected (re: deplorables). I'm not saying Trump is good and Hilary is bad BTW. I'm just using that as an example of how unfortunate it can be to generalize one's personal ethics to the entire country and draw conclusions as a result.
  - edmundsauto 5y ago
    It's just my (underinformed) opinion, but I don't think there is a trade that Democrats could make to get full UHC passed. More than being anti-socialism, Republicans have defined themselves as being the opposite of Democrats. Democrats could give up everything they hold dear, and I still don't think Mitch would make that deal.
    - msandford 5y ago
      I don't think that's an unreasonable thing to think at all. Were one to try and apply some kind of quasi symmetrical thinking what might one conclude? In what ways have the Dems defined themselves to be the opposite of republicans?

ansible 5y ago

You seem to be under the impression that the large blocks of voters actually understand and care about the issues. Large corporations and their considerable advertising and lobbying efforts are what's really important. Much of this effort is to frame issues to the public in the way they choose. The "stances" the voting base take are largely shaped by influence campaigns of powerful interest groups. Both major parties (the minor ones too) are affected by this. Though one of the groups has gotten even stupider recently, and they actively vote against their own best interests. Edit: grammar.

msandford 5y ago
> You seem to be under the impression that the large blocks of voters actually understand and care about the issues. Large corporations and their considerable advertising and lobbying efforts are what's really important. Much of this effort is to frame issues to the public in the way they choose. The idea that it's the voters that vote is actually true! That's how the system works. Corporations can influence that of course, probably to an enormous degree. But the corporations themselves don't vote. That's the system we've got. The primary mechanism in our system is people. And people aren't logical, rational, economically-maximizing, or any of it. People are far more narrative-driven than they are rationally-driven. THAT's what I would say that Republicans would get on board with a universal healthcare bill in which they could claim that they "destroyed" the Democrats by "obliterating" a bunch of "socialist pork". But that's absolutely going to ensure that the Democrats that "caved" in order to get something important done won't be able to get re-elected. And they care more about getting re-elected than they do about doing the right thing! Same on the other side of the isle! This isn't a partisan issue. Everyone wants to get re-elected way, way, way more badly than they want to do the right thing. I don't like it. I don't think it's right. But it's extremely easy to see that neither party is compromising in any meaningful way these days. Both take hardline stances and don't budge. That's not a bug, it's a feature of American Democracy. It was designed such that if there wasn't wide agreement (or elected officials who would compromise) that things would grind to a halt. That was done so that nobody could run roughshod over the other. Until we start getting richer such that the increases in spending are coming out of even bigger growth or we somehow manage to convince everyone that paying more and getting less is totally-A-OK this is going to be how it continues to go. Neither side wants to compromise, so their counterparties don't want to either. Deadlock is the name of the game. > and they actively vote against their own best interests I can understand how you'd think that. It makes a lot of sense. But it belies a terrible ignorance on your part. Animals don't make decisions on purpose to make their own lives worse in ways in which they KNOW they will end up worse. You can try and project your ethics onto other people all you want and use their relative-to-you irrationality to belittle them. But it doesn't work! Putting people down doesn't change minds. In fact putting people down might be the very thing that got Trump elected (re: deplorables). I'm not saying Trump is good and Hilary is bad BTW. I'm just using that as an example of how unfortunate it can be to generalize one's personal ethics to the entire country and draw conclusions as a result.
- edmundsauto 5y ago
  It's just my (underinformed) opinion, but I don't think there is a trade that Democrats could make to get full UHC passed. More than being anti-socialism, Republicans have defined themselves as being the opposite of Democrats. Democrats could give up everything they hold dear, and I still don't think Mitch would make that deal.
  - msandford 5y ago
    I don't think that's an unreasonable thing to think at all. Were one to try and apply some kind of quasi symmetrical thinking what might one conclude? In what ways have the Dems defined themselves to be the opposite of republicans?