When it comes down to it, we DO agree that a candidate's character says a lot about whether or not we want to vote for them. I can't imagine ever voting for someone who I perceive as untrustworthy, and if you feel that way about Obama then that's valid in my books.
That is fine, but what is to be said about McCain's character (and trustworthiness) that he has flipflopped on (almost) all of the issues that prevented him from getting the Republican base and the nomination in 2000?
There is no spin behind actual clips of things he said, sorry.
He is pandering to the Republican base, and offering much of the same things Bush was in 2000.
I liked McCain...when he was his own man.
So if you want to argue, as McCain's camp wants to, that this election is not about issues, but about character and personality, lets see how changing your core political beliefs just to get elected reflects on your character?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
Well, if you want to get right down to it it's probably true.
A person's character doesn't have an impact on their actions, as they are fully capable of doing any action. What their character does is create an identity that lead other people to weigh in their heads the odds of a certain action.
When you give a homeless man clearly reeking of alcohol $10, you'll probably assume [and rightly so] that he's going to the nearest liquor store and buying a couple fifths of vodka. However, this doesn't mean he's going to, and it's possible he will go buy some real food.
When it comes down to it, we DO agree that a candidate's character says a lot about whether or not we want to vote for them. I can't imagine ever voting for someone who I perceive as untrustworthy, and if you feel that way about Obama then that's valid in my books.
Yes, and in the end I feel the same way about McCain/Palin as SSJAlakazam feels about Obama - I don't trust them. Of course their actions speak as loudly as their character, furthering my distrust of them. Of course the conservatives will say the same thing about Obama. November 2nd will tell us all what we really want to know.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks
Commander
Ezuri, Renegade Leader (Aggro/Combo - Favorite) Skullbriar, the Walking Grave (Sac and Grave hijinks) Azusa, Lost but Seeking (Landfall hijinks) Kaalia of the Vast (Heavily modded)
That is fine, but what is to be said about McCain's character (and trustworthiness) that he has flipflopped on (almost) all of the issues that prevented him from getting the Republican base and the nomination in 2000?
There is no spin behind actual clips of things he said, sorry.
He is pandering to the Republican base, and offering much of the same things Bush was in 2000.
I liked McCain...when he was his own man.
So if you want to argue, as McCain's camp wants to, that this election is not about issues, but about character and personality, lets see how changing your core political beliefs just to get elected reflects on your character?
1.) I wasn't lobbying for McCain at all. SSJ was talking specifically about how he finds Obama untrustworthy and that is why he won't vote for him. I merely agreed that that's a fair line of reasoning.
2.) I actually disagree with SSJ's assertions of Obama being untrustworthy. I think he can be trusted.
I'm just saying that if you find a candidate for anything, ever, possessing a major negative character trait from your point of view then that's a valid reason to not want to vote for that candidate. I just rehashed SSJ's opinion for closure to my response to him.
Context.
Onto what you're saying, I don't think flipflopping bears much significance on whether or not someone can be trusted. If anything it would lead one to believe that the candidate is more prone to not being capable of staying firm to their first opinion.
I've stated my opinion about it over and over again. People will vote what they need to to show the major party they are on their side. That's just politics.
Finally, I wouldn't be surprised if flipflopping is more common in politics than we think.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Waiting patiently for MTGO Leagues to become a priority again. It's been 4 years :sick:.
Drop by my Helpdesk if you have any questions/concerns on the Limited forum.
Excited for M13 Limited? What do you think the format will look like? Head over to the limited forum and let us know what you think.
Finally, I wouldn't be surprised if flipflopping is more common in politics than we think.
Except that accusations of flip flopping about the war in Iraq (Kerry changed his stance arguably because it was politically beneficial, but the American people initially supported the war as well...) combined with attacking Kerry's war record, got Bush to keep his presidency (or seemed to be the main downfalls of the Kerry campaign anyway) in 2004.
Attacking McCain's war record is never going to happen, but the flip flopping is pretty thick there. There is certainly a case to go for that point, and it surely will come up in the debates.
On a side note, I personally completely agree with McCain's original abortion stance, (Just because it is suddenly illegal doesn't solve 'the problem', people will still do it, just more dangerously) and it can also be pushed onto other issues, like abstinence-only education, just replace illegal with 'not allowed'.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
Except that accusations of flip flopping about the war in Iraq (Kerry changed his stance arguably because it was politically beneficial, but the American people initially supported the war as well...) combined with attacking Kerry's war record, got Bush to keep his presidency (or seemed to be the main downfalls of the Kerry campaign anyway) in 2004.
I always thought the problem with Kerry was that you nominated a man who was about as interesting as a pitcher of warm spit. Whatever else I can say about Obama, he's definitely interesting.
While it is disappointing to see McCain acting like any and every other campaigning Republican, I too don't see that as making him untrustworthy. If you want to consider the things that he that he's LEAST likely to follow through on, it's the campaign rhetoric.
I don't condone such dishonest campaigning; I just think it's important to see the big picture.
While it is disappointing to see McCain acting like any and every other campaigning Republican, I too don't see that as making him untrustworthy. If you want to consider the things that he that he's LEAST likely to follow through on, it's the campaign rhetoric.
I don't condone such dishonest campaigning; I just think it's important to see the big picture.
So wait, you're saying he won't follow through on the campaign rhetoric (ya know, all the promises to do stuff every politician makes), but that we need to see the big picture - what is the big picture by your estimation?
I will offer as an example my basic "wants" and how they influence my decisions. I want -
1: Good healthcare for all Americans. The people need it, badly.
2: Better Education. It's a mess right now, and I speak as someone involved in education and hoping to have a full career in it.
3: Restored economy. Argue about recession or no recession, it doesn't matter, the economy right now is in dire shape for a lot of Americans, on many different fronts. This also includes the job market and keeping jobs on American soil.
4: Good Foreign relations. Needless to say our reputation has been dragged through the mud (or sand) for quite a while now, and it needs repair badly.
5: Success in Fighting terrorism. The way it has been done up to now has been a huge mess, and now we have to extricate ourselves from a quagmire without leaving everything behind us in ruin, and then we still have an enemy to defeat. Except we've been fighting that enemy on the wrong field most of this time.
I don't feel that McCain would help in any of these situations. Not even in fighting terror, which is supposed to be his strong point - I think he'll end up getting us into more trouble than anything else.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks
Commander
Ezuri, Renegade Leader (Aggro/Combo - Favorite) Skullbriar, the Walking Grave (Sac and Grave hijinks) Azusa, Lost but Seeking (Landfall hijinks) Kaalia of the Vast (Heavily modded)
So wait, you're saying he won't follow through on the campaign rhetoric (ya know, all the promises to do stuff every politician makes), but that we need to see the big picture - what is the big picture by your estimation?
I will offer as an example my basic "wants" and how they influence my decisions. I want -
1: Good healthcare for all Americans. The people need it, badly.
2: Better Education. It's a mess right now, and I speak as someone involved in education and hoping to have a full career in it.
3: Restored economy. Argue about recession or no recession, it doesn't matter, the economy right now is in dire shape for a lot of Americans, on many different fronts. This also includes the job market and keeping jobs on American soil.
4: Good Foreign relations. Needless to say our reputation has been dragged through the mud (or sand) for quite a while now, and it needs repair badly.
5: Success in Fighting terrorism. The way it has been done up to now has been a huge mess, and now we have to extricate ourselves from a quagmire without leaving everything behind us in ruin, and then we still have an enemy to defeat. Except we've been fighting that enemy on the wrong field most of this time.
I don't feel that McCain would help in any of these situations. Not even in fighting terror, which is supposed to be his strong point - I think he'll end up getting us into more trouble than anything else.
1: McCain will give everyone a 2,500 dollar tax refund to be used to buy healthcare. Married couples will get 5,000 dollar refunds. This will make healthcare companies have to lower their prices to compete with each other, without reducing America's healthcare system to Canada's, which is dysfunctional - people in Canada cross the border to go to hospitals, the service is so bad.
2: McCain has called Education the most important issue of the 21st Century. He's for teacher accountability, just like Obama.
3: McCain will lower taxes on businesses, creating more competition and allowing more growth, getting us out of this recession. It is true that he won't lower taxes for most Americans, however.
4: McCain is the foriegn policy expert in this Campaign. He knew how to deal with the Russia-Georgia crises when Obama stumbled (McCain said famously, "We are all Georgians"). This is the area of McCains expertise I am least worried about. You're probably consindered about "Cowboy Diplomacy" however. I wouldn't worry...even Bush has laid off of that recently. And also, a critique of so called "Soft Power" - Europe is the master of it, and look at their response to the Georgia Crisis. Wholly inneffective.
5: McCain's plan to fight terrrorism in Afghanistan is about the same as Obama's, except that McCain has much more experience on the issue and knows much more about the military.
1: McCain will give everyone a 2,500 dollar tax refund to be used to buy healthcare. Married couples will get 5,000 dollar refunds. This will make healthcare companies have to lower their prices to compete with each other, without reducing America's healthcare system to Canada's, which is dysfunctional - people in Canada cross the border to go to hospitals, the service is so bad.
Pretty much everything you say in this point is wrong.
First of all, why would people having more money make health insurance prices lower? That makes no sense. If everyone has more money to spend on health insurance, the rates will go up to reflect that.
As far as Canada's health care system, try living here for a while. The vast majority of Canadians are fairly pleased with our health care system and wouldn't change it to an American style system for anything in the world. And, you see, we spend much less per capita on health care, and yet every one of us is covered! Who's dysfunctional now?
Pretty much everything you say in this point is wrong.
First of all, why would people having more money make health insurance prices lower? That makes no sense. If everyone has more money to spend on health insurance, the rates will go up to reflect that.
As far as Canada's health care system, try living here for a while. The vast majority of Canadians are fairly pleased with our health care system and wouldn't change it to an American style system for anything in the world. And, you see, we spend much less per capita on health care, and yet every one of us is covered! Who's dysfunctional now?
If more people are able to afford Health Insurance, companies will compete to have prices that can accommodate those people.
Canada's hospitals are overflowing, as are the hospitals in the EU. I'm not saying Universal Healthcare can't be done right, but it requires an incredible amount of money to pull off. Yes, Canadians spend less on healthcare than those in the US, and they're all covered. But their coverage sucks.
If they can lower their prices without compromising their profits, why haven't they already?
They will compromise their profits if they do it now. But if suddenly everyone can afford Healthcare at say, 4,000 dollars, they may lower their prices to accommodate a much larger market. It's basic supply and demand.
As far as Canada's health care system, try living here for a while. The vast majority of Canadians are fairly pleased with our health care system and wouldn't change it to an American style system for anything in the world. And, you see, we spend much less per capita on health care, and yet every one of us is covered! Who's dysfunctional now?
At my parent's office, we have had 9 cases of people coming from canada and dying due to too little to late done in their ****** system. There is no way that piece of crap could ever be implemented on a larger scale in the US =/
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-THIS IS JUST A LIST- Stax, Sapphire Tri, Set Abominae, {mikeyG}, nan, glurman, JollyTheOctopuss, Sakura, Mad Mat, Johnation, Cell, Goatchunx, VerzenChaos, DarkPhoenix, EvilDuck, echelon_house
I talked with a couple that was down from canada on vacation one day.
they liked the fact that they were covered but hated the fact it took so long to see a doctor. to see their family doctor it took almost a month or more.
She needed to see a specialist and it was going to take a year just to get the consultation.
They needed to go to a doctor down here. they found a local one she couldn't believe she got in that day and it only cost her 80 bucks for the visit.
Right now health insurance companies can charge what they want since most people can't pick where they get their insurance.
by giving people 2500-5000 (which i think is a bit much however) people can then choose whoever they want as their insurance provider. kinda like car insurance. you can shop around to who ever you want to.
now that people can afford it on their own companies will have to start competing with each other on price's. otherwise people will go somewhere else.
the other thing that needs to happen is the deregulation of the insurance coverage. people should be able to pick and choose what coverage they want and how much they should also be able to go where ever they want to get their insurance.
if you live in GA and see that insurance in ND is cheaper you should be able to get an insurance policy at that price.
again it breads competition something that is not in the system right now.
obama's plan of a NHS is folly and the taxes associated with that plus his other tax increases are just going to kill the working family and businesses.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
I'm a big advocate for the concept of 'You get what you pay for'.
I'm perfectly fine with paying for healthcare.
I don't care how free your healthcare is. If it's not good and/or not the best, then it probably isn't for me. I'd rather put quality ahead of cost. Anyone from Canada simply boasting how their system is better cause it's free.....well.....you sound as though a doctor with rusty razor blades is cool and all if you don't have to pay for it.
Quality needs to be considered before deciding what's 'dysfunctional'. The truest dysfunction is letting people believe they're in good shape cause they get free healthcare, while giving you the bare minimum for treatment and run a risk of undertreatment.
I'm willing to believe that comparatively more money gets pumped into the American healthcare system than Canada's. This happens because instead of the government footing the whole bill they can cut back on some spending on health care and let us pay the difference and maybe a little extra. This has more money going into the system which lets us have better doctors, more/better supplied hospitals, and other extras.
I'm a big advocate for the concept of 'You get what you pay for'.
I'm perfectly fine with paying for healthcare.
I don't care how free your healthcare is. If it's not good and/or not the best, then it probably isn't for me. I'd rather put quality ahead of cost. Anyone from Canada simply boasting how their system is better cause it's free.....well.....you sound as though a doctor with rusty razor blades is cool and all if you don't have to pay for it.
Quality needs to be considered before deciding what's 'dysfunctional'. The truest dysfunction is letting people believe they're in good shape cause they get free healthcare, while giving you the bare minimum for treatment and run a risk of undertreatment.
I'm willing to believe that comparatively more money gets pumped into the American healthcare system than Canada's. This happens because instead of the government footing the whole bill they can cut back on some spending on health care and let us pay the difference and maybe a little extra. This has more money going into the system which lets us have better doctors, more/better supplied hospitals, and other extras.
I wholeheartedly agree with Dark Knight 307, except for the part about Clinton being "mediocre." Clinton was definitely above average, and imo one of America's best presidents.
That is one man's opinion.
Speaking of Flip-Flopping. I heard a rumor about the sneaky Dems yesterday. I heard that they are debating kicking Biden off the ticket and instead having Clinton run. I don't know how much truth is there...but I personally think that this would end up biting the Dems in the ass. On top of that wouldn't that be against what Hillary wants anyway...to run in 2012? What are your thoughts?
Speaking of Flip-Flopping. I heard a rumor about the sneaky Dems yesterday. I heard that they are debating kicking Biden off the ticket and instead having Clinton run. I don't know how much truth is there...but I personally think that this would end up biting the Dems in the ass. On top of that wouldn't that be against what Hillary wants anyway...to run in 2012? What are your thoughts?
Unless there is something very nasty hidden in Bidden's past, this is just a wild rumour. The last time a VP candidate was kicked off the ticket it hurt the party a lot in the election. It would have to be a desperation move at best.
It is just like the speculation there was for a while that Cliton would try to steal the nomination during the convention. Just not ground in reality.
Unless there is something very nasty hidden in Bidden's past, this is just a wild rumour. The last time a VP candidate was kicked off the ticket it hurt the party a lot in the election. It would have to be a desperation move at best.
When was the last time?
But yes, there's no way in hell Hillary is going to get on the nomination. I guess people just have a hard time accepting a world where Hillary has zero chance of being on the Democratic presidential ticket.
The polls are currently deadlocked right now, so awesome time. GOOOOO McCain!
In 1972 McGovern replaced his running mate Eagleton after it was found out that the guy had received electro shock therapy. It made McGovern look indecisive (what we now would call a flip-flopper) and cost him support.
In one poll, yeah. If you take a look at polling across the board it is more even. Irregardless, we are at the height of the McCain bounce (I talked about this earlier in the thread), we *should expect* this to start to level off in the coming days to show Obama with a couple point lead.
From there we get to the debates, where the bounces will be much more meaningful for the end game.
Which just goes to show. Repeatedly rubbing your nose in your own mess for 8 years straight works on dogs and cats, but not on the average American voter.
Which just goes to show. Repeatedly rubbing your nose in your own mess for 8 years straight works on dogs and cats, but not on the average American voter.
Cool, I suppose equating mccain to bush makes a TOTALLY valid point - that is, you either are retarded, or you are being hand-fed democrat talking points (total lies, btw?).
In one poll, yeah. If you take a look at polling across the board it is more even. Irregardless, we are at the height of the McCain bounce (I talked about this earlier in the thread), we *should expect* this to start to level off in the coming days to show Obama with a couple point lead.
From there we get to the debates, where the bounces will be much more meaningful for the end game.
1) please don't use irregardless - not a word =(
2) I expect mccain to lead by a few points among likely voters until the end - coupled with the bradley effect and his superior campaigning, I don't doubt that he will win this.
That is fine, but what is to be said about McCain's character (and trustworthiness) that he has flipflopped on (almost) all of the issues that prevented him from getting the Republican base and the nomination in 2000?
There is no spin behind actual clips of things he said, sorry.
He is pandering to the Republican base, and offering much of the same things Bush was in 2000.
I liked McCain...when he was his own man.
So if you want to argue, as McCain's camp wants to, that this election is not about issues, but about character and personality, lets see how changing your core political beliefs just to get elected reflects on your character?
Twitter
Yes, and in the end I feel the same way about McCain/Palin as SSJAlakazam feels about Obama - I don't trust them. Of course their actions speak as loudly as their character, furthering my distrust of them. Of course the conservatives will say the same thing about Obama. November 2nd will tell us all what we really want to know.
Commander
Ezuri, Renegade Leader (Aggro/Combo - Favorite)
Skullbriar, the Walking Grave (Sac and Grave hijinks)
Azusa, Lost but Seeking (Landfall hijinks)
Kaalia of the Vast (Heavily modded)
Standard
Waiting for Innistrad...
Extended
Hah!
Modern
Living End Cascade (RGB)
Legacy
Burn
Vintage
None
Casual
WB Aggro-Control
Green Stompy
Pink Floyd (UWr Wall Control)
Lunch Box (Fatty ramp)
D-Bag (White Control)
Level 13 Task Mage
1.) I wasn't lobbying for McCain at all. SSJ was talking specifically about how he finds Obama untrustworthy and that is why he won't vote for him. I merely agreed that that's a fair line of reasoning.
2.) I actually disagree with SSJ's assertions of Obama being untrustworthy. I think he can be trusted.
I'm just saying that if you find a candidate for anything, ever, possessing a major negative character trait from your point of view then that's a valid reason to not want to vote for that candidate. I just rehashed SSJ's opinion for closure to my response to him.
Context.
Onto what you're saying, I don't think flipflopping bears much significance on whether or not someone can be trusted. If anything it would lead one to believe that the candidate is more prone to not being capable of staying firm to their first opinion.
I've stated my opinion about it over and over again. People will vote what they need to to show the major party they are on their side. That's just politics.
Finally, I wouldn't be surprised if flipflopping is more common in politics than we think.
Drop by my Helpdesk if you have any questions/concerns on the Limited forum.
Excited for M13 Limited? What do you think the format will look like? Head over to the limited forum and let us know what you think.
Except that accusations of flip flopping about the war in Iraq (Kerry changed his stance arguably because it was politically beneficial, but the American people initially supported the war as well...) combined with attacking Kerry's war record, got Bush to keep his presidency (or seemed to be the main downfalls of the Kerry campaign anyway) in 2004.
Attacking McCain's war record is never going to happen, but the flip flopping is pretty thick there. There is certainly a case to go for that point, and it surely will come up in the debates.
On a side note, I personally completely agree with McCain's original abortion stance, (Just because it is suddenly illegal doesn't solve 'the problem', people will still do it, just more dangerously) and it can also be pushed onto other issues, like abstinence-only education, just replace illegal with 'not allowed'.
Twitter
I always thought the problem with Kerry was that you nominated a man who was about as interesting as a pitcher of warm spit. Whatever else I can say about Obama, he's definitely interesting.
I don't condone such dishonest campaigning; I just think it's important to see the big picture.
So wait, you're saying he won't follow through on the campaign rhetoric (ya know, all the promises to do stuff every politician makes), but that we need to see the big picture - what is the big picture by your estimation?
I will offer as an example my basic "wants" and how they influence my decisions. I want -
1: Good healthcare for all Americans. The people need it, badly.
2: Better Education. It's a mess right now, and I speak as someone involved in education and hoping to have a full career in it.
3: Restored economy. Argue about recession or no recession, it doesn't matter, the economy right now is in dire shape for a lot of Americans, on many different fronts. This also includes the job market and keeping jobs on American soil.
4: Good Foreign relations. Needless to say our reputation has been dragged through the mud (or sand) for quite a while now, and it needs repair badly.
5: Success in Fighting terrorism. The way it has been done up to now has been a huge mess, and now we have to extricate ourselves from a quagmire without leaving everything behind us in ruin, and then we still have an enemy to defeat. Except we've been fighting that enemy on the wrong field most of this time.
I don't feel that McCain would help in any of these situations. Not even in fighting terror, which is supposed to be his strong point - I think he'll end up getting us into more trouble than anything else.
Commander
Ezuri, Renegade Leader (Aggro/Combo - Favorite)
Skullbriar, the Walking Grave (Sac and Grave hijinks)
Azusa, Lost but Seeking (Landfall hijinks)
Kaalia of the Vast (Heavily modded)
Standard
Waiting for Innistrad...
Extended
Hah!
Modern
Living End Cascade (RGB)
Legacy
Burn
Vintage
None
Casual
WB Aggro-Control
Green Stompy
Pink Floyd (UWr Wall Control)
Lunch Box (Fatty ramp)
D-Bag (White Control)
Level 13 Task Mage
1: McCain will give everyone a 2,500 dollar tax refund to be used to buy healthcare. Married couples will get 5,000 dollar refunds. This will make healthcare companies have to lower their prices to compete with each other, without reducing America's healthcare system to Canada's, which is dysfunctional - people in Canada cross the border to go to hospitals, the service is so bad.
2: McCain has called Education the most important issue of the 21st Century. He's for teacher accountability, just like Obama.
3: McCain will lower taxes on businesses, creating more competition and allowing more growth, getting us out of this recession. It is true that he won't lower taxes for most Americans, however.
4: McCain is the foriegn policy expert in this Campaign. He knew how to deal with the Russia-Georgia crises when Obama stumbled (McCain said famously, "We are all Georgians"). This is the area of McCains expertise I am least worried about. You're probably consindered about "Cowboy Diplomacy" however. I wouldn't worry...even Bush has laid off of that recently. And also, a critique of so called "Soft Power" - Europe is the master of it, and look at their response to the Georgia Crisis. Wholly inneffective.
5: McCain's plan to fight terrrorism in Afghanistan is about the same as Obama's, except that McCain has much more experience on the issue and knows much more about the military.
Thoughts?
Pretty much everything you say in this point is wrong.
First of all, why would people having more money make health insurance prices lower? That makes no sense. If everyone has more money to spend on health insurance, the rates will go up to reflect that.
As far as Canada's health care system, try living here for a while. The vast majority of Canadians are fairly pleased with our health care system and wouldn't change it to an American style system for anything in the world. And, you see, we spend much less per capita on health care, and yet every one of us is covered! Who's dysfunctional now?
If more people are able to afford Health Insurance, companies will compete to have prices that can accommodate those people.
Canada's hospitals are overflowing, as are the hospitals in the EU. I'm not saying Universal Healthcare can't be done right, but it requires an incredible amount of money to pull off. Yes, Canadians spend less on healthcare than those in the US, and they're all covered. But their coverage sucks.
If they can lower their prices without compromising their profits, why haven't they already?
They will compromise their profits if they do it now. But if suddenly everyone can afford Healthcare at say, 4,000 dollars, they may lower their prices to accommodate a much larger market. It's basic supply and demand.
At my parent's office, we have had 9 cases of people coming from canada and dying due to too little to late done in their ****** system. There is no way that piece of crap could ever be implemented on a larger scale in the US =/
they liked the fact that they were covered but hated the fact it took so long to see a doctor. to see their family doctor it took almost a month or more.
She needed to see a specialist and it was going to take a year just to get the consultation.
They needed to go to a doctor down here. they found a local one she couldn't believe she got in that day and it only cost her 80 bucks for the visit.
Right now health insurance companies can charge what they want since most people can't pick where they get their insurance.
by giving people 2500-5000 (which i think is a bit much however) people can then choose whoever they want as their insurance provider. kinda like car insurance. you can shop around to who ever you want to.
now that people can afford it on their own companies will have to start competing with each other on price's. otherwise people will go somewhere else.
the other thing that needs to happen is the deregulation of the insurance coverage. people should be able to pick and choose what coverage they want and how much they should also be able to go where ever they want to get their insurance.
if you live in GA and see that insurance in ND is cheaper you should be able to get an insurance policy at that price.
again it breads competition something that is not in the system right now.
obama's plan of a NHS is folly and the taxes associated with that plus his other tax increases are just going to kill the working family and businesses.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TiQCJXpbKg
Netdecking is Rightdecking
My latest data-driven Magic the Gathering strategy article
(TLDR: Analysis of the Valakut matchups. UB rising in the rankings. Aggro correspondingly taking a dive.)
I'm perfectly fine with paying for healthcare.
I don't care how free your healthcare is. If it's not good and/or not the best, then it probably isn't for me. I'd rather put quality ahead of cost. Anyone from Canada simply boasting how their system is better cause it's free.....well.....you sound as though a doctor with rusty razor blades is cool and all if you don't have to pay for it.
Quality needs to be considered before deciding what's 'dysfunctional'. The truest dysfunction is letting people believe they're in good shape cause they get free healthcare, while giving you the bare minimum for treatment and run a risk of undertreatment.
I'm willing to believe that comparatively more money gets pumped into the American healthcare system than Canada's. This happens because instead of the government footing the whole bill they can cut back on some spending on health care and let us pay the difference and maybe a little extra. This has more money going into the system which lets us have better doctors, more/better supplied hospitals, and other extras.
Drop by my Helpdesk if you have any questions/concerns on the Limited forum.
Excited for M13 Limited? What do you think the format will look like? Head over to the limited forum and let us know what you think.
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
Canada : 30th
Us : 37th
I doubt they would get the Canadian healthcare system ahead the American by 7 ranks just for being free.
Speaking of Flip-Flopping. I heard a rumor about the sneaky Dems yesterday. I heard that they are debating kicking Biden off the ticket and instead having Clinton run. I don't know how much truth is there...but I personally think that this would end up biting the Dems in the ass. On top of that wouldn't that be against what Hillary wants anyway...to run in 2012? What are your thoughts?
[EDH] Ob Nixilis the Fallen
Unless there is something very nasty hidden in Bidden's past, this is just a wild rumour. The last time a VP candidate was kicked off the ticket it hurt the party a lot in the election. It would have to be a desperation move at best.
It is just like the speculation there was for a while that Cliton would try to steal the nomination during the convention. Just not ground in reality.
When was the last time?
But yes, there's no way in hell Hillary is going to get on the nomination. I guess people just have a hard time accepting a world where Hillary has zero chance of being on the Democratic presidential ticket.
The polls are currently deadlocked right now, so awesome time. GOOOOO McCain!
In 1972 McGovern replaced his running mate Eagleton after it was found out that the guy had received electro shock therapy. It made McGovern look indecisive (what we now would call a flip-flopper) and cost him support.
Actually, McCain has a small lead overall, and a larger lead among likely voters.
Link
My Eternal Cube on CubeTutor| |My Reject Rare Cube on CubeTutor| |My Peasant Cube on CubeTutor
I used to write for MTGS, including Cranial Insertion and cube articles. Good on you if you can find those after the upgrade.
In one poll, yeah. If you take a look at polling across the board it is more even. Irregardless, we are at the height of the McCain bounce (I talked about this earlier in the thread), we *should expect* this to start to level off in the coming days to show Obama with a couple point lead.
From there we get to the debates, where the bounces will be much more meaningful for the end game.
- Enslaught
Which just goes to show. Repeatedly rubbing your nose in your own mess for 8 years straight works on dogs and cats, but not on the average American voter.
Netdecking is Rightdecking
My latest data-driven Magic the Gathering strategy article
(TLDR: Analysis of the Valakut matchups. UB rising in the rankings. Aggro correspondingly taking a dive.)
Cool, I suppose equating mccain to bush makes a TOTALLY valid point - that is, you either are retarded, or you are being hand-fed democrat talking points (total lies, btw?).
That's a flame.
1) please don't use irregardless - not a word =(
2) I expect mccain to lead by a few points among likely voters until the end - coupled with the bradley effect and his superior campaigning, I don't doubt that he will win this.