Doing what he said he would do, is not a favorable thing. He is the President with the lowest polls at this point in a Presidency. Only competitor? Trump in his first term.
Off topic Current events thread
- Thread starter bucshon
- Start date
Doing what he said he would do, is not a favorable thing. He is the President with the lowest polls at this point in a Presidency. Only competitor? Trump in his first term.
Medicare covers those who have paid in during their working days, and have reached age 65. If you had a preexisting condition prior to Obamacare you were uninsurable. If you did not pay in for a sufficient time or reach age 65 you don't get Medicare.
Enough with the single opinions on TIKTOK. What do you think they prove. 80% still vote Democratic?
First, 100 percent wrong on the polls. His poll numbers are fine. The history making low poll numbers belong to the Democrat party - doesn't mean they won't win Congress next year - but killing Charlie Kirk will work against them.
Are you kidding me? You want a candidate for president who when elected does the opposite?
As great lefties, you and Jeff naturally opposed Trump's campaign promises and voted for the radical leftist Kamala who is in line with your views. As a Trump voter, I can say he is largely doing what he said he would do and that is a thumbs up. We just discussed corrupt John McCain - a man who lied to be reelected. People hate snakes which is why the term RINOs exists.
But, leave it to Stoney to denigrate a politician who does what he says he was going to do. Imagine if Democrats were honest? They'd never win. Wasn't it Walter Mondale who said, yes, I am going to raise your taxes in 1984? I certainly don't look back on Mondale as a bad guy - seemed quite nice to be honest.
The 1,000 he mentions are the USNA Plebes (Frosh) that always stand in the Mid's Section closest to the field.
After a NAVY score ALL the Plebes go onto the field sidelines and do the amount of pushups equal to the current total points score as a group !
Younger people that do not yet qualify for Medicare, but also have conditions that previously would have gotten them declined for private coverage.
Private insurance carriers have been required to "insure" people that will undoubtably add major expenses to their plan. My idea would be to allow private insurance carriers to decline people like they did in the past. Those people would then qualify for Medicare.
If insurance carriers could go back to declining people with chronic conditions, and guaranteed claims (someone who currently has cancer), they could lower their premiums significantly.
This would require both parties to invest more $ in Medicare for those that don't qualify for private insurance. It also amplifies why we need to remove all the waste and fraud currently in Medicare, hospitals, etc.
Definitely a positive brought about by his appointment. They are looking at chronic conditions and what causes them.
They were one Senator's vote away from providing for a Medicare for All option when they passed the ACA. But that clown Senator from Connecticut voted no as he was mad at the progressives. Medicare is the most efficient healthcare plan we have. I think the administrative costs are about 5% when Private Insurance is at 20%. Plus, we hamstrung ourselves for years by barring negotiated pricing on pharmaceuticals like every other country in the world has.
Medicare for all would be pretty bad for most people. I know your experience is probably different, but most people would rather deal with a private company than the state or federal govt. People my parents age have to purchase Medicare + plans to give themselves comprehensive coverage. Medicare denies a lot of claims, something people are unaware of.
Medicare should be for older people and those that don't qualify for private insurance. Working age people should have higher quality private insurance available, if they qualify.
Agree with you on negotiated pricing. We need to put pressure on distributors, service providers, etc. to bring their pricing down for all Americans.
OK, a new Atlas poll. Atlas is our guys in Brazil. They were by far the most accurate in the 2024 election. Thousand respondent’s um about Trump's approval rating among various groups. First question, "Do you approve or disapprove the job Donald Trump is doing as president overall?" Disapprove 52%, approve 47%. That looks pretty accurate to me. Then I go by race Asians 74% disapprove, approve 25%. That's an interesting number. Black look at that number 46% disprove, 54% of African Americans approve. I don't, wow. Hispanic disapprove 58%, approve 42%, that's immigration. White is almost tied, 51%, 48% disapprove. And gender, men, 55% disapprove, 45% approved. Look at that women number. Disapprove 49.5%, approve 48.5%. A tie. So, the African American on the Atlas, and again, based on their past performances, and pretty accurate.