No Kings

#401
#401
LSU-SIU said:
I don't think I said that, I would say most of the uniparty has been either removed or neutered - the parties are kind of meaningless.
Click to expand...
The fact that you don't even realize how ironically absurd your position is at least partially explains how trumpism exists.
 
#403
#403
luthervol said:
The fact that you don't even realize how ironically absurd your position is at least partially explains how trumpism exists.
Click to expand...

No, the fact you don't realize that you are insane and you are scaring the rest of that sane party members away absolutely explains how trumpism exist. YOU.

You work for Trump now, he will send out some more mean tweets to get you to work some more later. You're his bitch.
 
#413
#413
EasternVol said:
If charity isn't available and a poor has a life threatening condition, what's the plan?
It's not at all disingenuous.
Click to expand...
Like he said, whether intentional or not... Here's what you are discussing.

McDad said:
The question is problematic. "Healthcare" is too broad for a simple yes or no. For example, no healthcare for a common cold? Yes. No healthcare for a life saving condition? No.

Also, the premise that it is either health insurance or no healthcare is faulty. private funding, donations, charitable associations, charity hospitals and providers who write off their charges are all viable.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#417
#417
EasternVol said:
If charity isn't available and a poor has a life threatening condition, what's the plan?
It's not at all disingenuous.
Click to expand...
Agreed. This post wasn't disingenuous.
Our system currently has a pathway for poor people who cannot get traditional health insurance or ACA coverage, to enroll in Medicaid. If we are to pay for the indigent and very critical, that pathway can remain.

ETA: but let me again affirm, I would prefer a charitable pathway be given a chance in this system as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#421
#421
luthervol said:
Speaking of marriage, it's interesting that.....
The states with the highest divorce rates are all red.
The states with the lowest divorce rates are all blue.
The states where the average age of first marriage is lowest are red.
The states where the average age of first marriage is highest are blue.

www.lovetoknow.com

The Bipartisan Issue: How Divorce Rates & Political Parties Intersect | LoveToKnow

Divorce is a bipartisan problem. Let's decode how divorce rates and political parties intersect and what cultural trends the stats reflect overall.
www.lovetoknow.com www.lovetoknow.com
Click to expand...
Because the people who scream about Jesus the most are typically the farthest from espousing true Christian values.

And they are probably talking about their gardener Jesus who Trump sent back to El Salvador.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#422
#422
FLVOL_79 said:
Because the people who scream about Jesus the most are typically the farthest from espousing true Christian values.

And they are probably talking about their gardener Jesus who Trump sent back to El Salvador.
Click to expand...
Listen, just last week Duolingo sent me a notification that Jesus is following me and asked if I want to follow Jesus. I swiped 'Yes'. You can keep your judgmentalism to yourself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad and FLVOL_79
#423
#423
BeardedVol said:
View attachment 783105

www.aei.org

The Republican Marriage Advantage: Partisanship, Marriage, and Family Stability in the Trump Era

The Donald Trump era has scrambled the relationship between partisanship and many of the most important social axes of American life—class, gender, region, and now even race and ethnicity. Since 2016, for instance, the White working-class has moved strongly into the Republican camp, the rich...
www.aei.org www.aei.org
Click to expand...
might want to read the next paragraph
" Democrats have had less time to divorce because they marry later. And because the GSS data are not longitudinal, we do not know if the Republican rate of divorce for any given marriage is indeed higher. Additional research will have to determine, conditional on length of marriage, if Republicans or Democrats have greater risks of divorce."

basically Rs have been married longer, thus the possibility of divorce is greater. also that quote you use, and the article itself use several terms I couldn't find definitions for that seem like they need to throw out some qualifiers for.

"ever-married" vs "shared married". they say Rs are more likely to be "ever-married", so beyond the Rs being married longer, and more being married, it seems like there is some qualifier they are throwing in with the part you quoted.

here are some other qualifiers they throw out. it sounds like they aren't tracking which way someone leaned when they divorced, they are just looking at the current status. the implications that divorced men are joining Rs would throw the metrics.
"his may be partly because divorced men have moved in large numbers into the Republican camp in recent years. It may also be due to the fact that Republicans marry at an earlier age, which may increase their lifetime risk of divorce. "
 
#424
#424
LouderVol said:
might want to read the next paragraph
" Democrats have had less time to divorce because they marry later. And because the GSS data are not longitudinal, we do not know if the Republican rate of divorce for any given marriage is indeed higher. Additional research will have to determine, conditional on length of marriage, if Republicans or Democrats have greater risks of divorce."

basically Rs have been married longer, thus the possibility of divorce is greater. also that quote you use, and the article itself use several terms I couldn't find definitions for that seem like they need to throw out some qualifiers for.

"ever-married" vs "shared married". they say Rs are more likely to be "ever-married", so beyond the Rs being married longer, and more being married, it seems like there is some qualifier they are throwing in with the part you quoted.

here are some other qualifiers they throw out. it sounds like they aren't tracking which way someone leaned when they divorced, they are just looking at the current status. the implications that divorced men are joining Rs would throw the metrics.
"his may be partly because divorced men have moved in large numbers into the Republican camp in recent years. It may also be due to the fact that Republicans marry at an earlier age, which may increase their lifetime risk of divorce. "
Click to expand...
Most Ds hang on to the first woman who doesnt think they're gay so it makes sense their divorce rates are lower. Now lesbians on the other hand..I think they lead the pack in divorce and domestic violence.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top