War Room Lounge V24: Mental Illness

[Jack V Savage]

I’ve lived a bit longer than you my friend. Watching cycle after cycle, politician after politician, not much really changes among regular people.

Take Doug Jones as an example. The Democrat that Alabamians voted for over the insane alternative. He stated that he was a conservative Democrat. He would take the will of the people of Alabama to Washington.

Yet, so far all he has done is tow the Democratic line and he goes right along with what Shumer and Pelosi tell his ass to do.

This isn't true (Jones has made a couple of votes that Democratic leadership opposed), and wouldn't support your point if it were, as taking controversial stands for the good of the country is something that no one would do if you were right.

I’m actually sad for you bud. You put faith and trust in people who couldn’t care less about you. They do however, really care about your vote and they will tell you exactly what you want to hear to get it.

Not really. There's middle ground between the cynicism you were expressing and blind trust, but it requires paying close attention.

When is the last time you heard a politician say they wanted what’s best for every citizen? That they would only support laws and bills that benefitted every citizen? You don’t.

You actually hear it all the time, and very often bills are passed that do just that. When we're talking about resource allocation, of course it is logically impossible to leave everyone better off, but there are things that make the vast majority better off and at minimal harm to everyone else (see the ACA for example--small tax increase on income over $250K, cap on insurer profits, so some groups that can afford a little hit are a little worse off but for the benefit of almost everyone).

Not everyone is Trump.

 

[Trotsky]

I’ve lived a bit longer than you my friend. Watching cycle after cycle, politician after politician, not much really changes among regular people.

Take Doug Jones as an example. The Democrat that Alabamians voted for over the insane alternative. He stated that he was a conservative Democrat. He would take the will of the people of Alabama to Washington.

Yet, so far all he has done is tow the Democratic line and he goes right along with what Shumer and Pelosi tell his ass to do.

I’m actually sad for you bud. You put faith and trust in people who couldn’t care less about you. They do however, really care about your vote and they will tell you exactly what you want to hear to get it.

When is the last time you heard a politician say they wanted what’s best for every citizen? That they would only support laws and bills that benefitted every citizen? You don’t. You see them pander to specific groups because those groups are the ones who support them.

It is certainly their plan to keep us fighting amongst ourselves because as long as we aren’t united, they keep control.

Anyone ever noticed how this sort of willfully ignorant, nihilistic, "both sides are the same" head-in-the-sand nonsense is only promulgated by conservatives who can't actually defend the policies of their representatives and need a way to justify not actively supporting a party whose policies can be defended empirically, philosophically, morally, and historically?

 

[Captain Davis]

This isn't true (Jones has made a couple of votes that Democratic leadership opposed), and wouldn't support your point if it were, as taking controversial stands for the good of the country is something that no one would do if you were right.



Not really. There's middle ground between the cynicism you were expressing and blind trust, but it requires paying close attention.



You actually hear it all the time, and very often bills are passed that do just that. When we're talking about resource allocation, of course it is logically impossible to leave everyone better off, but there are things that make the vast majority better off and at minimal harm to everyone else (see the ACA for example--small tax increase on income over $250K, cap on insurer profits, so some groups that can afford a little hit are a little worse off but for the benefit of almost everyone).

Not everyone is Trump.

Trump is no worse than any other politician. He just says shit out loud more than he should.

Dude, Hillary is a complete dumpster fire and you would support her blindly.

The ACA is bullshit and just a way for Obama to give Fred healthcare to people at the expense of responsible tax payers.

That was his introduction to government controlled healthcare.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Anyone ever noticed how this sort of willfully ignorant, nihilistic, "both sides are the same" head-in-the-sand nonsense is only promulgated by conservatives who can't actually defend the policies of their representatives and need a way to justify not actively supporting a party whose policies can be defended empirically, philosophically, morally, and historically?

That's one element of the GOP's pitch. Not, "we're going to do good things," but "no one will pass good policy and everyone is corrupt, so vote your identity."

 

[Jack V Savage]

Trump is no worse than any other politician. He just says shit out loud more than he should.

Except for the fact that he lies way more than anyone else, is totally clueless about policy, is corrupt, and is basically using the power of the office to loot the country on behalf of himself and secondarily his economic class.

Dude, Hillary is a complete dumpster fire and you would support her blindly.

Both of this claims are false.

The ACA is bullshit and just a way for Obama to give Fred healthcare to people at the expense of responsible tax payers.

The ACA was a way to A) fix the broken individual market, B) ensure that people with pre-existing conditions who didn't have coverage could get it, C) reduce overall healthcare cost growth, D) do all that without increasing taxes on the middle class, and E) drastically reducing long-term debt. It succeeded on all counts.

 

[Captain Davis]

Anyone ever noticed how this sort of willfully ignorant, nihilistic, "both sides are the same" head-in-the-sand nonsense is only promulgated by conservatives who can't actually defend the policies of their representatives and need a way to justify not actively supporting a party whose policies can be defended empirically, philosophically, morally, and historically?

I support personal responsibility over government intervention. Both of our political parties give the government too much power and authority. Our founding fathers never intended for a central government to have this kind of power.

Lol at politicians caring about morals. Morals only count if the other side is doing it.

Keep your head in the sand buying all of their bullshit.

 

[Captain Davis]

Except for the fact that he lies way more than anyone else, is totally clueless about policy, is corrupt, and is basically using the power of the office to loot the country on behalf of himself and secondarily his economic class.



Both of this claims are false.



The ACA was a way to A) fix the broken individual market, B) ensure that people with pre-existing conditions who didn't have coverage could get it, C) reduce overall healthcare cost growth, D) do all that without increasing taxes on the middle class, and E) drastically reducing long-term debt. It succeeded on all counts.

Cute. You must have pulled that straight from the website.

Jack, you are a living billboard for Democrats.

 

[Captain Davis]

That's one element of the GOP's pitch. Not, "we're going to do good things," but "no one will pass good policy and everyone is corrupt, so vote your identity."

Democrats creating government dependency is not “good things.”

 

[Jack V Savage]

I support personal responsibility over government intervention.

Those things aren't in competition, and anyway, it's not possible for the gov't not to intervene in anything unless you have full communism. The question is only about the nature of the intervention.

Both of our political parties give the government too much power and authority. Our founding fathers never intended for a central government to have this kind of power.

Lol at politicians caring about morals. Morals only count if the other side is doing it.

Keep your head in the sand buying all of their bullshit.

Again, this is sad. Politicians are people. Some bad apples, and some heroes, and everything in between. You can run for office yourself. In your position, you might even be able to win local office.

 

[Trotsky]

I support personal responsibility over government intervention. Both of our political parties give the government too much power and authority. Our founding fathers never intended for a central government to have this kind of power.

Lol at politicians caring about morals. Morals only count if the other side is doing it.

Keep your head in the sand buying all of their bullshit.

No one other than you is making comments about the individual morality or civic ethos of either party's politicians.

We're talking about their respective policies. Even if all Democrats are amoral, self-enriching, hollow vessels, and all Republicans are righteous civil servants, we can objectively review the efficacy and legitimacy of their policies, their history of good faith adherence to norms and administrative policy, and consistency on issues of import. And if we do the Democrats come out as the better pick - regardless of whether they care about us.

Your "buying politician bullshit" line that you keep repeating is the lamest excuse for not thinking that I regularly see here.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Cute. You must have pulled that straight from the website.

Jack, you are a living billboard for Democrats.

No, I "pulled it" from years of following the issue and looking into the results, etc. I guarantee that if you look into it, you'll at least admit that all of those goals were accomplished and that the reforms were designed with them in mind.

Democrats creating government dependency is not “good things.”

Er, OK. But good policy (such as the ACA) is doing good things.

 

[Captain Davis]

Except for the fact that he lies way more than anyone else, is totally clueless about policy, is corrupt, and is basically using the power of the office to loot the country on behalf of himself.

You mean like when Obama told us we could keep the doctor of our choice?

And lmao at Trump looting. The dude is rich. He doesn’t need the money.

He may not be up on “policy” but all that means is knowing the rules to how to play the game.

 

[TheComebackKid]

It sounds like Trotsky still has faith in the Democratic party. How sad.

 

[Jack V Savage]

You mean like when Obama told us we could keep the doctor of our choice?

This doesn't make any sense. I said that Trump is unusual for a politician, and I listed reasons.

And lmao at Trump looting. The dude is rich. He doesn’t need the money.

Trump was born rich, and his whole life, he's been ripping people off (running scams, not paying people who work for him, stealing from the public, etc.). The only really significant action he's taken in office is to borrow money to give more to people like him.

He may not be up on “policy” but all that means is knowing the rules to how to play the game.

No, policy refers to things like laws and regulations. He's clueless on it.

 

[Captain Davis]

No one other than you is making comments about the individual morality or civic ethos of either party's politicians.

We're talking about their respective policies. Even if all Democrats are amoral, self-enriching, hollow vessels, and all Republicans are righteous civil servants, we can objectively review the efficacy and legitimacy of their policies, their history of good faith adherence to norms and administrative policy, and consistency on issues of import. And if we do the Democrats come out as the better pick - regardless of whether they care about us.

Your "buying politician bullshit" line that you keep repeating is the lamest excuse for not thinking that I regularly see here.

You are thinking so much that you can’t see what’s right in front of you.

Your opinion on administrative policies by Democrats are only better from your perspective. If either sides policies were for the better of the country, both sides would agree. They would be in it for us. But that’s not the case. Either side will resist, resist, resist because it’s not about what’s best for everyone, it’s about what’s best for their constituents.

 

[Captain Davis]

This doesn't make any sense. I said that Trump is unusual for a politician, and I listed reasons.



Trump was born rich, and his whole life, he's been ripping people off (running scams, not paying people who work for him, stealing from the public, etc.). The only really significant action he's taken in office is to borrow money to give more to people like him.



No, policy refers to things like laws and regulations. He's clueless on it.

No. You said he lies. I gave you an example of Obama lying. They all lie.

 

[Jack V Savage]

You are thinking so much that you can’t see what’s right in front of you.

Your opinion on administrative policies by Democrats are only better from your perspective. If either sides policies were for the better of the country, both sides would agree.

Both sides mostly do agree that Democratic policy is better if you poll people on issues. But the GOP is able to effectively play identity politics to counteract that.

 

[Jack V Savage]

No. You said he lies. I gave you an example of Obama lying. They all lie.

I said that he lies way more than anyone else, etc. And that's simply, objectively true. He also lies way more outrageously. What Obama meant to say was that the ACA wouldn't hurt your ability to keep your doctor. He said it right a lot of times and wrong sometimes (inadvertently suggesting that it would stop turnover altogether). Compare that to Trump just blatantly lying with no connection to reality.

 

[Captain Davis]

Both sides mostly do agree that Democratic policy is better if you poll people on issues. But the GOP is able to effectively play identity politics to counteract that.

No one will take your thoughts on this seriously as long as you continue to say that the GOP pushes identity politics more than Democrats. It’s simply ridiculous Jack.

 

[Jack V Savage]

No one will take your thoughts on this seriously as long as you continue to say that the GOP pushes identity politics more than Democrats. It’s simply ridiculous Jack.

I understand that people who have been conditioned to think the opposite will resist hearing it, but what I'm saying is true. Again, look up polling by issues. Even at the height of the unpopularity of the ACA (it's now pretty popular), if you polled the provisions of it without naming it, it was very popular. Both parties are very well aware of that, and it drives their differing strategy (Democrats pounding policy and the GOP pounding identity).