Which Chamber of Government is most important?

[The Mark]

It is correct.
And I can prove it.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/oc...bout-how-to-pay-for-medicare-for-all-puzzling

She's making a point.

There are studies (or at least one I've heard of) indicating that medicare for all will be cheaper than our current system.
So she's saying "since it'll cost less, why would paying for it be hard?".
It's definitely not a nuanced point, nor does it go into details.

https://www.ajc.com/news/national/o...fore-fed-salary-kicks/tABRvIw0dA2b2VMnQiNWEN/

There is an obvious difference between "doesn't know how to do basic transactions like renting an apartment", and what is really going on here "I don't know if I have the funds to pay for an apartment until I start getting my representative salary."

The first would indeed indicate immense stupidity, or at least not having done any such before.
The latter indicates an awareness of her personal financial situation and potential issues which may arise.

https://www.debatepolitics.com/redi...y-house-democrats_us_5bf0e5f6e4b07573881f184a

Demographics and ideology is not limited to race, nor does this in any way indicate she "doesn't like people representing people if they aren't the same color".
Which is possibly the most ridiculous statement I've seen applied to her, and wildly inaccurate.

What she's saying is that people feel their representatives are out of touch with them, and identifying districts where this is most an issue will also find you good places to primary incumbents (if they're democrats, in this case).
Taking race into account makes some degree of sense, but somehow making the jump to "she doesn't want to represent people who look different" is....****ing insane.

 

[Renae]

She's making a point.

There are studies (or at least one I've heard of) indicating that medicare for all will be cheaper than our current system.
So she's saying "since it'll cost less, why would paying for it be hard?".
It's definitely not a nuanced point, nor does it go into details.


There is an obvious difference between "doesn't know how to do basic transactions like renting an apartment", and what is really going on here "I don't know if I have the funds to pay for an apartment until I start getting my representative salary."

The first would indeed indicate immense stupidity, or at least not having done any such before.
The latter indicates an awareness of her personal financial situation and potential issues which may arise.


Demographics and ideology is not limited to race, nor does this in any way indicate she "doesn't like people representing people if they aren't the same color".
Which is possibly the most ridiculous statement I've seen applied to her, and wildly inaccurate.

What she's saying is that people feel their representatives are out of touch with them, and identifying districts where this is most an issue will also find you good places to primary incumbents (if they're democrats, in this case).
Taking race into account makes some degree of sense, but somehow making the jump to "she doesn't want to represent people who look different" is....****ing insane.

32 Trillion in new spending. Nope it's not cheaper. And also, when in the HISTORY of the USA has a entitlement program especially in terms of healthcare EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER been at or under budget? Yeah, that's what I thought.

It means she doesn't have a clue how to handle her money. But she sure has ideas how to handle yours!

DEMOGRAPHICS IS RACE DUDE, Period, they want segregated representation.

 

[Surrealistik]

Yawn.

Another day, another lame attempt by partisan conservative blowhards to moronically attempt equating an isolated gaffe to straight up retardation.

 

[Winston]

hurricanes are tremendously wet from the standpoint of water.

 

[JMR]

Mean? Honesty is mean now? I'm sorry.

Searching for the honesty, must be there somewhere in the endless mockery of someone who has obviously snared your attention.

 

[Perotista]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/38491/watch-ocasio-cortez-has-no-idea-what-3-branches-ryan-saavedra

Congress has two chambers, government has three branches. Perhaps her statement say quite a lot about her. then again, if it was just a slip up, maybe not. Time will tell whether if she is an elected kook from that district of hers or not.

 

[The Mark]

32 Trillion in new spending. Nope it's not cheaper. And also, when in the HISTORY of the USA has a entitlement program especially in terms of healthcare EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER been at or under budget? Yeah, that's what I thought.

It means she doesn't have a clue how to handle her money. But she sure has ideas how to handle yours!

DEMOGRAPHICS IS RACE DUDE, Period, they want segregated representation.

We spend more than 32 trillion on healthcare already.
Thus cheaper.

She knows how to handle her money - if she didn't, she would have just gone to DC and then found out she couldn't afford it - but she didn't do that, because she knows how much money she has and approximately how much living in DC would cost.

Demographics is not just race.
Race is included.
Simply because the effort seeks to find candidates to primary incumbent democrats who are more demographically representative (which could include race, economic class, history in the area, and any number of other things) of their area, does not in any reality mean they want segregated representation...whatever that is.
Ocasio-Cortez doesn't want segregated representation...that is a bizarre claim.
Not even center-right democrats like Pelosi want that, I can't believe I'm even arguing this ridiculous point.

 

[Myview]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...y-house-democrats_us_5bf0e5f6e4b07573881f184a

You really should learn before you speak.

All deference to you..but this doesn't mean she is for racial segregation. Just like I said she is looking for districts where a minority has become the majority and is looking to primary the representative. She simply wants to promote
a far left agenda where she believes moderate democrats are out of step with their constituents. How you get racial segregation out of this is beyond me. Keep beating that drum loudly and some low hanging conservative fruit will be voting for her if they believe she is for segregation. She is sure working hard to try taking the party further left. Racial segregation is jim crow not a democrat trying to primary districts that have flipped demographics. It is war between democrats. The textbook case was her beating Crowley a moderate Democrat. She believes what she did will work in many other districts across the country. Rave on.

 

[Rogue Valley]

She doesn't. She doesn't know how to pay for things

Translation .... she wasn't bought by the NRA.

 

[Masterhawk]

The president can pass executive orders and veto bills. Unless opposition to the president holds a 2/3 majority in both chambers, the president can block legislation that he doesn't like. Although the president is limited without a cooperative congress, he can still get some things done.

 

[Puigb]

Stupid people elect stupid representation...

true, nearly 63 million stupid people voted for Trump, so...

 

[Puigb]

some would note that is a testament to how stupid her voters are. She beat a well established, well respected Democrat leader to get to her seat.

and Trump beat 16 GOP candidates, many well respected and established, to win the primaries, and then the presidency. You people are the last ones to call anyone "stupid" considering who your leader is.

 

[TurtleDude]

and Trump beat 16 GOP candidates, many well respected and established, to win the primaries, and then the presidency. You people are the last ones to call anyone "stupid" considering who your leader is.

that's really moronic. Most of us who voted for Trump in the race against Hillary did vote for other GOP candidates. And this twit has said more stupid stuff in a couple months than Trump has. And guess what, Trump was a better choice than Hillary

 

[Lord of Planar]

true, nearly 63 million stupid people voted for Trump, so...

Three million more stupid people voted for Hillary.

 

[concernedpuma]

In the Trump era of stupidity in public, Cortez's fumbling with words doesn't even register.

Nice try though, I can see you'll happily continue to contribute to attacking Democratic women. No no, I'm sure it's all because it's because of real policy issues that you have a solid grasp of, and not just petty bull**** and parroting Republican propaganda. Really.

Carry on your good work on this earth.

It doesn't register with you perhaps, but to many reasonable people, it is very telling of her knowledge and ability to function politically. If you can overlook her obvious ignorance, and still embrace her because of her Socialist/Communist views, go with it. Even if she were Republican and held a Conservative view, her shortcomings would be ferreted out before she could get a campaign going.
Regards,
CP

 

[concernedpuma]

and Trump beat 16 GOP candidates, many well respected and established, to win the primaries, and then the presidency. You people are the last ones to call anyone "stupid" considering who your leader is.

You people? Isn't that the first words a bigot learns? There is a bigotry against the President. It makes no difference the good he does, it seems like it isn't enough.
Regards,
CP

 

[Puigb]

that's really moronic. Most of us who voted for Trump in the race against Hillary did vote for other GOP candidates. And this twit has said more stupid stuff in a couple months than Trump has. And guess what, Trump was a better choice than Hillary

you're wrong on all counts, but that's to be expected. Trump is an idiot who is immensely unqualified for the position you people gave him.

 

[TurtleDude]

you're wrong on all counts, but that's to be expected. Trump is an idiot who is immensely unqualified for the position you people gave him.

His policies are far better for me than Hillary's would have been. Go ahead and pretend otherwise

and you are lying if you claim many of us did NOT vote for other candidates in the primaries.

 

[TheParser]

I agree that the House of Reps should be the most important, for its members are elected every two years and each rep speaks for a relatively small group of people.

In reality, of course, the president has become the strongest. I have read that the Founding Fathers never intended for this to happen.

And neither did the Fathers intend for the Supreme Court to be so powerful. It seems that one of the early chief justices decided that the Supremes had the power to decide whether a law was constitutional or not.


*****

Personally, I wish that we had a parliamentary form of government: the president would be, in essence, a figurehead and head of state; the prime minister would be head of government and serve at the pleasure of the legislature.

 

[Puigb]

His policies are far better for me than Hillary's would have been. Go ahead and pretend otherwise

and you are lying if you claim many of us did NOT vote for other candidates in the primaries.

he received 7 million more votes than the ghastly Ted Cruz who came in second. He may have not been your original choice, but he was the choice of your fellow GOP voters overall. The fact that him and Cruz were the #1 and 2# choices in the primaries speaks volumes to how far your political party has sunken into the gutter, and how far to the right you people have moved.

 

[rickc]

32 Trillion in new spending. Nope it's not cheaper. And also, when in the HISTORY of the USA has a entitlement program especially in terms of healthcare EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER been at or under budget? Yeah, that's what I thought.

It means she doesn't have a clue how to handle her money. But she sure has ideas how to handle yours!

DEMOGRAPHICS IS RACE DUDE, Period, they want segregated representation.

32 trillion in new spending?

now that one always makes me shake my head in wonder how stupid righties are. or rather can't think for themselves and only parrot the right wing comentators.

U.S. health care spending grew 4.3 percent in 2016, reaching $3.3 trillion or $10,348 per person.

we spend about 3.5 trillion dollars a year on health care in the us now. their 32 trillion number is over 10 years. math here is pretty simple. we are already spending the money. there is no new spending!

 

[TurtleDude]

he received 7 million more votes than the ghastly Ted Cruz who came in second. He may have not been your original choice, but he was the choice of your fellow GOP voters overall. The fact that him and Cruz were the #1 and 2# choices in the primaries speaks volumes to how far your political party has sunken into the gutter, and how far to the right you people have moved.

the fact you all nominated a carpetbagging twit whose main qualifications were whom she was married to, gives you no room to talk

 

[concernedpuma]

he received 7 million more votes than the ghastly Ted Cruz who came in second. He may have not been your original choice, but he was the choice of your fellow GOP voters overall. The fact that him and Cruz were the #1 and 2# choices in the primaries speaks volumes to how far your political party has sunken into the gutter, and how far to the right you people have moved.

You must have been smiling when you wrote the above. The Republicans could have gone 10 deep and still had a better candidate than the Vampire known as Hillary Clinton! At least the Republicans don't eat their own (i.e. Bernie Sanders) Though, if it makes your party choice more pure, please run Bernie next time. I'm fairly confident he would run a good race in Vermont.
Regards,
CP

 

[Puigb]

the fact you all nominated a carpetbagging twit whose main qualifications were whom she was married to, gives you no room to talk

it was your hero Trump who spent years calling her a "wonderful woman", so spare me your drivel.

BTW, I thought you people argued that the nomination was rigged in her favor. So unlike you GOP voters who specifically CHOSE Trump to be your leader despite your political party BEGGING you NOT to vote for him, the Dems forced Hillary down their own voters throats, and paid the consequences for it.

 

[Puigb]

You must have been smiling when you wrote the above. The Republicans could have gone 10 deep and still had a better candidate than the Vampire known as Hillary Clinton! At least the Republicans don't eat their own (i.e. Bernie Sanders) Though, if it makes your party choice more pure, please run Bernie next time. I'm fairly confident he would run a good race in Vermont.
Regards,
CP

You had a few good candidates running in 2015/2016, and the two clowns that led the GOP primaries were arguably the worst. Speaks volumes to how stupid the GOP base is, and how far right you people have moved.