The real legacy of Trump

[Sweet Jesus]

The one AOC reckons needs compiling to identify the non believers.

You say a lot of stupid things.

 

[dumb]

i'm not a great student of US politics. but i do find it vaguely amusing/alarming that a president's progeny or relations are thrown into the mix as presidential candidates by default. is this a newish phenomenon? obviously political families like the kennedy's exist but has it always been this overt?
it's possible a loose anti-establishment legacy may come about. if there's only one person who could turn the office into even more of a circus than trump, it would be kanye west and he's already floating in the wings. with republican nomination his pro-life stance would already afford him a hefty amount of guaranteed votes despite, well, a whole truckload of potential issues.

i don't think dem supporters are immune from this type of cheerleading - michelle obama and oprah winfrey were 2 previous candidate suggestions after hilary couldn't overcome donnie.

his legacy will likely be as someone not to aspire to. crazed twittering, cronyism, avoidance of outside expertise. he's set new nadirs that future presidents will know to (be seen to) avoid.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

i'm not a great student of US politics. but i do find it vaguely amusing/alarming that a president's progeny or relations are thrown into the mix as presidential candidates by default. is this a newish phenomenon? obviously political families like the kennedy's exist but has it always been this overt?
it's possible a loose anti-establishment legacy may come about. if there's only one person who could turn the office into even more of a circus than trump, it would be kanye west and he's already floating in the wings. with republican nomination his pro-life stance would already afford him a hefty amount of guaranteed votes despite, well, a whole truckload of potential issues.

i don't think dem supporters are immune from this type of cheerleading - michelle obama and oprah winfrey were 2 previous candidate suggestions after hilary couldn't overcome donnie.

his legacy will likely be as someone not to aspire to. crazed twittering, cronyism, avoidance of outside expertise. he's set new nadirs that future presidents will know to (be seen to) avoid.

It's always been a thing

The Roosevelts, Rockerfellers, Daley's, Taft's, Harrison's, Adams

 

[parsons nose]

Democracy is no longer the only game in town. Whether that is a good or bad thing, the jury is still out. The flaws in the system appeared long before Trump came along. What we do know is that at least, in some degree there is support policies which include; building a wall, withdrawing occupying forces, trade tariffs and gutting of the foreign offices.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Trump's political trajectory reminds me of the WWE trope of "heel turned face", which is when a "bad guy" becomes a fan favourite because of his "attitude", like Stone Cold Steve Austin. His catchphrase was "suck it" and millions of people thought it was amazing. I think we can assume which way they voted, if at all. They would have loved Trump's "attitude".

Also, in the parlance of WWE, the word kayfabe refers to the way scripted or staged events are treated as genuine. In Trump's refusal to concede the election, despite no evidence for his complaints, he has taken a position that is purely performative, pure theatre. Trump's enduring legacy may be his status as the first kayfabe president.

 

[kranky al]

The green new deal doesnt benefit the current middle. It benefits the future middle who mostly dont yet vote. Medicare for all doesnt benefit the middle if they lose their private health insurance. Medicare for all benefits the low income workers and unemployed. Not the middle.

you are clearly unaware that the largest cause of bunkruptcy in america is medical bills

wanna turn a solid middle class citizen into a pauper - get a chronic illness and run out of deductible

say goodbye to your house

of course in australia with medicare that doesn't happen

 

[Seeds]

you are clearly unaware that the largest cause of bunkruptcy in america is medical bills

wanna turn a solid middle class citizen into a pauper - get a chronic illness and run out of deductible

say goodbye to your house

of course in australia with medicare that doesn't happen

I am aware. But it doesnt bankrupt the middle because most of them have private health insurance through their employers. It bankrupts the low income earners who dont.

 

[kranky al]

I am aware. But it doesnt bankrupt the middle because most of them have private health insurance through their employers. It bankrupts the low income earners who dont.

incorrect.

us private health runs out.

if you get cancer or some other longterm illness they pay for as ling as your deductible lasts then you are on your own - and medical care us hideously expensive over there.

lower class people dont own houses for the most part - they rent


im talking about solid middle class folk


<<< – In 2007, before the current economic downturn, an American family filed for bankruptcy in the aftermath of illness every 90 seconds; three-quarters of them were insured.Over 60% of all bankruptcies in the United States in 2007 were driven by medical incidents. In an article published in the August 2009 issue of The American Journal of Medicine, the results of the first-ever national random-sample survey of bankruptcy filers shows that illnesses and medical bills contribute to a large and increasing share of bankruptcies. The share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 50% between 2001 and 2007.

Following up on a 2001 study in 5 states, where medical problems contributed to at least 46.2% of all bankruptcies, researchers from Cambridge Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Harvard Law School and Ohio University surveyed a random national sample of 2,314 bankruptcy filers in 2007, abstracted their court records, and interviewed 1,032 of them. They designated bankruptcies as “medical” based on debtors’ stated reasons for filing, income loss due to illness and the magnitude of their medical debts.

Using identical definitions in 2001 and 2007, the share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 49.6%. The odds that a bankruptcy had a medical cause were 2.38 fold higher in 2007 than in 2001.

According to the study, a number of circumstances propelled many middle-class, insured Americans into bankruptcy. For 92% of the medically bankrupt, high medical bills directly contributed to their bankruptcy. Many families with continuous coverage found themselves under-insured, responsible for thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs. Out-of-pocket medical costs averaged $17,943 for all medically bankrupt families: $26,971 for uninsured patients; $17,749 for those with private insurance at the outset; $14,633 for those with Medicaid; $12,021 for those with Medicare; and $6,545 for those with VA/military coverage. For patients who initially had private coverage but lost it, the family’s out-of-pocket expenses averaged $22,568.

Because almost all insurance is linked to employment, a medical event can trigger loss of coverage. Nationally, a quarter of firms cancel coverage immediately when an employee suffers a disabling illness; another quarter does so within a year. Income loss due to illness was also common, but nearly always coupled with high medical bills.

Writing in the article, David U. Himmelstein, M.D., states, “The US health care financing system is broken, and not only for the poor and uninsured. Middle class families frequently collapse under the strain of a health care system that treats physical wounds, but often inflicts fiscal ones.”

“This study provides further evidence that the US health care system is broken,” according to James E. Dalen, M.D., M.P.H., University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson. “Medical bankruptcy is almost a unique American phenomenon, which does not occur in countries that have national health insurance. These long-time advocates of a single payer system give us another compelling reason to work toward this goal as a nation.”The article is “Medical Bankruptcy in the United States, 2007: Results of a National Study” by David U. Himmelstein, M.D., Deborah Thorne, Ph.D., Elizabeth Warren, J.D., and Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H. It appears in The American Journal of Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 8 (August 2009) published by Elsevier.>>>>


source : https://www.elsevier.com/about/pres...bankruptcies-attributable-to-medical-problems

 

[Seeds]

incorrect.

us private health runs out.

if you get cancer or some other longterm illness they pay for as ling as your deductible lasts then you are on your own - and medical care us hideously expensive over there.

lower class people dont own houses for the most part - they rent


im talking about solid middle class folk


<<< – In 2007, before the current economic downturn, an American family filed for bankruptcy in the aftermath of illness every 90 seconds; three-quarters of them were insured.Over 60% of all bankruptcies in the United States in 2007 were driven by medical incidents. In an article published in the August 2009 issue of The American Journal of Medicine, the results of the first-ever national random-sample survey of bankruptcy filers shows that illnesses and medical bills contribute to a large and increasing share of bankruptcies. The share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 50% between 2001 and 2007.

Following up on a 2001 study in 5 states, where medical problems contributed to at least 46.2% of all bankruptcies, researchers from Cambridge Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Harvard Law School and Ohio University surveyed a random national sample of 2,314 bankruptcy filers in 2007, abstracted their court records, and interviewed 1,032 of them. They designated bankruptcies as “medical” based on debtors’ stated reasons for filing, income loss due to illness and the magnitude of their medical debts.

Using identical definitions in 2001 and 2007, the share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 49.6%. The odds that a bankruptcy had a medical cause were 2.38 fold higher in 2007 than in 2001.

According to the study, a number of circumstances propelled many middle-class, insured Americans into bankruptcy. For 92% of the medically bankrupt, high medical bills directly contributed to their bankruptcy. Many families with continuous coverage found themselves under-insured, responsible for thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs. Out-of-pocket medical costs averaged $17,943 for all medically bankrupt families: $26,971 for uninsured patients; $17,749 for those with private insurance at the outset; $14,633 for those with Medicaid; $12,021 for those with Medicare; and $6,545 for those with VA/military coverage. For patients who initially had private coverage but lost it, the family’s out-of-pocket expenses averaged $22,568.

Because almost all insurance is linked to employment, a medical event can trigger loss of coverage. Nationally, a quarter of firms cancel coverage immediately when an employee suffers a disabling illness; another quarter does so within a year. Income loss due to illness was also common, but nearly always coupled with high medical bills.

Writing in the article, David U. Himmelstein, M.D., states, “The US health care financing system is broken, and not only for the poor and uninsured. Middle class families frequently collapse under the strain of a health care system that treats physical wounds, but often inflicts fiscal ones.”

“This study provides further evidence that the US health care system is broken,” according to James E. Dalen, M.D., M.P.H., University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson. “Medical bankruptcy is almost a unique American phenomenon, which does not occur in countries that have national health insurance. These long-time advocates of a single payer system give us another compelling reason to work toward this goal as a nation.”The article is “Medical Bankruptcy in the United States, 2007: Results of a National Study” by David U. Himmelstein, M.D., Deborah Thorne, Ph.D., Elizabeth Warren, J.D., and Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H. It appears in The American Journal of Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 8 (August 2009) published by Elsevier.>>>>


source : https://www.elsevier.com/about/pres...bankruptcies-attributable-to-medical-problems

I stand corrected then. Americans are indeed idiots. What is even the point of employer provided private health insurance if you can get sacked once you are sick and lose your insurance? And why do the labour unions defend it so much?

 

[kranky al]

I stand corrected then. Americans are indeed idiots. What is even the point of employer provided private health insurance if you can get sacked once you are sick and lose your insurance? And why do the labour unions defend it so much?

its almost like america is set up to benefit a small cabal of very wealthy people who have bribed the politicians to keep the rules all tilted firmly in favour of them.

they keep a diminishing middle class onside with incredibly cheap labour at such a low rate that its in effect almost slavery - so this middle class can have cleaners and gardeners and feel like they are upper class.

 

[sherb]

I saw this on FB.

Number 1 would be any Republican president, so that doesn't fall on Trump.

But the other three do, of course with enablement from the Republican establishment and support of his base.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

 

[Seeds]

I saw this on FB.

Number 1 would be any Republican president, so that doesn't fall on Trump.

But the other three do, of course with enablement from the Republican establishment and support of his base.

View attachment 1014623

C and d

 

[Seeds]

Well said. This needs its own thread. would love to hear trump supporters response to this if thry were actually willing to listen to it.

 

[Deleted User 130321]

Sorry no signs of dementia, drug abuse or slurring words

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Sorry no signs of dementia, drug abuse or slurring words

no sign of 270 electoral college votes either

 

[Ben The Donkey]

The primary issue with any form of government is relative heterogeneity.
Western democracy is more susceptible than most, it lacks focus in the face of perceived political necessity.

 

[ep2018]

Trump may have inspired millions of voters who normally wouldn't vote in elections, to vote. A horrid, old, right leaning, child sniffing loser just won the election in the biggest popular vote landslide since colour TV. Hard right-leaning Georgia VOTED BLUE. If I were a republican I'd be shitting myself. Their days are numbered. Trump may have been the vaccine America needed.

 

[Deleted User 130321]

no sign of 270 electoral college votes either

1x free Democrat round of applause

 

[Sweet Jesus]

The dynamic between Trump and the Republican Party will be fascinating after he leaves office in January.

One-term presidents and defeated candidates generally don't continue to hold sway over the party. In fact, parties move on pretty quickly from losers. Look at George HW Bush, for example. He left office after one term, and with a significantly higher approval rating than Trump ever enjoyed. But he went quietly and certainly didn't continue to intervene personally in electoral politics. Of course, his son ran eight years later but Bush Snr basically kept to himself. Trump won't do that.

When Nixon was persuaded to resign, it was other Republicans who convinced him to go. He agreed, for the good of the party. But Trump doesn't care about the party. He has no sense of obligation or responsibility to the Republican cause beyond his own immediate interests.

Whether he runs in 2024 or not, it seems certain that he will continue to dangle the possibility and at least pose as a kingmaker in the event he doesn't actually run. The party won't be allowed to move on as easily as it might hope. And it might find that its voters prefer Trump, even after defeat, to the party itself.

 

[Gethelred]

Elon Musk said the left is losing the middle, but I think as far as policy is concerned, it's the middle losing the left by distancing themselves from good things like Medicare For All, the Green New Deal, a federal jobs guarantee, and ending the wars. Nevertheless, Biden has a good chance of beating Trump because Trump is alienating everyone except for hardcore conservatives and RWNJs. They'll distance themselves from Kanye as well if he puts his hand up to run in 2024 because his platform is essentially black Trump + even more religiosity.

Elon Musk is hardly the person who I'd be asking for political commentary.

 

[Coolangatta]

Elon Musk is hardly the person who I'd be asking for political commentary.

I agree. That's why I went on to say I think it's the middle losing the left, not the other way around. I think a lot of people are tired of milk toast 'centrism' but the results of the US election show they'll go back to it if you get a ****ed in the head campaigner like Trump steering the wheel.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I agree. That's why I went on to say I think it's the middle losing the left, not the other way around. I think a lot of people are tired of milk toast 'centrism' but the results of the US election show they'll go back to it if you get a f’ed in the head campaigner like Trump steering the wheel.

What about the middle losing the right? Or the right losing the middle? Or whatever. Is there even such a thing as a moderate conservative any more?

That aside, look at the popular vote in presidential elections since 1990 and tell me which side is losing support. Republican candidates have won just once from eight elections.

It's quite something to look at that record and conclude that it's the Democrats struggling to persuade people en masse.

 

[Not Important]

turned american against american.

increased the divide between rich and poor.

turned america into a laughing on the world stage.

been responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths due to his mishandling of covid.

turned deceit and lying into an art form.

arguably the most corrupt president in their history.

 

[Coolangatta]

What about the middle losing the right? Or the right losing the middle? Or whatever. Is there even such a thing as a moderate conservative any more?

That aside, look at the popular vote in presidential elections since 1990 and tell me which side is losing support. Republican candidates have won just once from eight elections.

It's quite something to look at that record and conclude that it's the Democrats struggling to persuade people en masse.

Good point.

It's a pity, in my opinion, that the Coalition has been so dominant in Australian federal politics. I understand that both our major parties would be considered left-wing in America, but the Coalition is very much a neoconservative party. It seems like that is a winning ticket in politics, even in countries you would argue are "progressive" and "socialist."