Who will you be supporting in the U.S. presidential election with our Catholic values in mind?

Status
Not open for further replies.
drcube said:
Do you mean besides trying to make sure everyone is insured and creating tax breaks to help those are poor having insurance so they could get their medical needs meant?
Click to expand...
Obamacare certainly did neither. It was a gift to insurance companies, not to the poor.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Obamacare certainly did neither. It was a gift to insurance companies, not to the poor.
Click to expand...
This is factually untrue. Many people qualified for 100% premium subsidies and got health insurance coverage through the exchanges. Whether insurance companies unduly benefitted from this arrangement is a separate question, but that does not detract from the benefits enrollees received.
 
At this point, I do not know for sure who I will vote for in 2020. But I do know who I will not vote for.
I will NOT vote for Donald J. Trump.
 
HarryStotle said:
Perhaps it is you who are being taken in by stealthy Russian propaganda designed to undermine Trump, a far more stalwart opponent to Russia and Putin than Obama was or that Hillary would have been?
Click to expand...
This is the funniest thing I have read yet. It reminds me of that comical line from Master of Disguise, “…so crazy, it just might work.” Yaaaayy, Trump is Putins’s greatest fear. 🤣
 
JoeShlabotnik said:
At this point, I do not know for sure who I will vote for in 2020. But I do know who I will not vote for.
I will NOT vote for Donald J. Trump.
Click to expand...
wait, he is going to be on the ballot?? I thought he’s getting removed this week?

talk about LETDOWN
 
How many of them had coverage before, either through employment or other means? And by what definition is a person (family of four) making $80,000/year “poor”? Obamacare was an income redistribution to expand those who pay regular premiums to insurance companies by making other, largely middle class people, pay for it.

But regardless, apparently some 30 million have no coverage of any kind, and since there was no certainty how many were without coverage before there is no certainty there was any net gain in persons covered. Yes, I realize there are Democrat explanations, but since even obama didn’t want Obamacare, there’s no particular reason to tout it.
pnewton said:
This is the funniest thing I have read yet. It reminds me of that comical line from Master of Disguise, “…so crazy, it just might work.” Yaaaayy, Trump is Putins’s greatest fear
Click to expand...
Well, since Trump has been president what parts of what countries has Putin conquered? None.
And under Obama? All of Crimea and a good part of Eastern Ukraine, displacing over a million people in the latter alone
 
Putin conquered those areas during the Obama term but I tend to agree with an analyst who said, “well, what would Trump have done?” And in the writers opinion and mine, I really doubt if we would have gone to war. Maybe there are other things we could have done, moved troops there.

Likewise, our withdrawal from Syria does seem to have given Russia some land they are now occupying for the moment. Just my opinion. My opinion is we need to stand by our allies… but even if I said, Trump’s foreign policy is questionable, that might not be able to budge me from not voting for him.
 
Victoria33 said:
Putin conquered those areas during the Obama term but I tend to agree with an analyst who said, “well, what would Trump have done?”
Click to expand...
He would not have sent aid to the Ukraine. He withheld it even after it had been appropriated by Congress and he had no authority to withhold it. No, he showed once again where his true loyalties lay.
 
pnewton said:
He would not have sent aid to the Ukraine. He withheld it even after it had been appropriated by Congress and he had no authority to withhold it. No, he showed once again where his true loyalties lay
Click to expand...
Ukraine’s present President was elected to fight corruption. There are countries we have withheld aid from because of corruption or other reasons so I don’t think that is a proper rationale. This is not a brand new phenomenon.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...cff802-0d27-11ea-8054-289aef6e38a3_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...845d54-5986-11e6-9aee-8075993d73a2_story.html

Also, I’d say Trump’s decision today, caves to Turkey. So, this benefits another strongman, Erdogan.
 
Last edited:
Victoria33 said:
Ukraine’s present President was elected to fight corruption.
Click to expand...
I will pass on that rather silly argument, in light of what “corruption” means to the current administration. I do not think anyone that is not already rather blindly pro-Trump buys it. The man is not without some redeeming qualities, but on his affinity to Russia, Turkey, and North Korea, he fails miserably. The point is, it is not his decision, place, or authority to authorize aid. Congress, in which his party controls the Senate, saw the need to aid the Ukraine. An honorable and just president would not have tried to block that. Period.

By the way, it is not corrupt to avoid entanglement in foreign elections, or stay away from all of our childish bickering. We are not the world leader we were three years ago. We are toxic.
 
pnewton said:
I will pass on that rather silly argument, in light of what “corruption” means to the current administration. I do not think anyone that is not already rather blindly pro-Trump buys it. The man is not without some redeeming qualities, but on his affinity to Russia, Turkey, and North Korea, he fails miserably. The point is, it is not his decision, place, or authority to authorize aid. Congress, in which his party controls the Senate, saw the need to aid the Ukraine. An honorable and just president would not have tried to block that. Period.

By the way, it is not corrupt to avoid entanglement in foreign elections, or stay away from all of our childish bickering. We are not the world leader we were three years ago. We are toxic.
Click to expand...
Although, I don’t like the perceived abandonment of the Kurds and possibly Christians included in that (we’ve helped restore Christian Churches in Iraq.

ISIS beaten way way back under Trump.

Under Obama, these countries became highly inflamed, not always the US’s fault but sometimes:
Honduras
Libya
Yemen
Iraq
Syria
Egypt
And ISIS rose to power and basically committed genocide.

So, many places became embroiled in turmoil, I don’t think that’s a comparison even. So, your “toxic” is a bit of a projection. Some countries now, ask for our help, Sudan now says with their dictator deposed who didn’t like the USA, they want to become our friend. Some progress has been made with North Korea, they are not firing missiles as wildly as they were, cross-fingers. South Korea just worked out a deal to buy a billion dollars of weapons systems from the US. Not too bad.

And no, I don’t see the Trump as being corrupt, a bunch of minor players who might have done something in 2006 like Manafort, so that is very long ago. If Roger Stone lied to congress, that’s on him, I don’t see any position he held in the administration. So, I think your assumptions are shallow as well.

And the cherry on top per a lot of the trouble in the Middle East was that Iran deal where Iran received billions of dollars. Someone here said that was their money already, fine. But apparently, the Iranian people suffer while Iran has been in quite a few conflicts and situations in the region. Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria.
 
Last edited:
World Corruption Map and low and behold, Ukraine is just a shade lighter than some of the worst offenders:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Nobody can tell me, Ukraine has not had very major problems with corruption.
 
pnewton said:
Then vote for him. I will not. He does not live or work within my framework of morality, which is the question here.
Click to expand...
Fine. He has done well for the pro-life cause, I vote for issues, not men or women.
 
Victoria33 said:
World Corruption Map and low and behold, Ukraine is just a shade lighter than some of the worst offenders:
Click to expand...
You miscounted. It is either two or three shades lighter. Nonetheless, trying to bribe a leader with aid for political favors is not exactly a healthy response to corruption. But hey, for a man who place his children who lacked experience in political administration in his own administration because he can, it is a minor point. Nepotism is hardly draining a swamp. It is dumping in more pollution.
Victoria33 said:
I vote for issues, not men or women.
Click to expand...
If issues ever run, I will too. So far we have only had men or women run for president.
 
Last edited:
Ridgerunner said:
How many of them had coverage before, either through employment or other means? And by what definition is a person (family of four) making $80,000/year “poor”? Obamacare was an income redistribution to expand those who pay regular premiums to insurance companies by making other, largely middle class people, pay for it.

But regardless, apparently some 30 million have no coverage of any kind, and since there was no certainty how many were without coverage before there is no certainty there was any net gain in persons covered.
Click to expand...
All you have here are questions and doubts, or denigration of those that received coverage, but no evidence or data to show that people have not been covered.
 
Last edited:
All I know about Obamacare is that it caused my sister’s premiums to triple.
Click to expand...
To be fair, weren’t a lot of the premium hikes in order to cover the cost of preexisting conditions and regulations which meant that insurance companies won’t defraud claims? Or personally, do you think it would have been preferable to solely subsidize the uninsured/preexisting conditions but leave plans alone (what about the benefits of improved coverage for mental health services and substance abuse treatment, ending annual/life caps and reducing the incidence of “junk plans” that might leave you high and dry when you really needed them)? That said, could that also be attributable with the disconnect with employer plans where someone has to settle for a plan through work than selecting an individual plan and reading the fine print?
But there are already a number of community health centers in most states.
Click to expand...
I think the issue is scale but also capacity in that even modest Co pays might be too much for people, also while I think CHCs can be part of the solution, isn’t their care limited, that said free and low cost basic health care access seems good and all but without increased capacity, aren’t they limited? I know you’re s fan of Direct Primary Care though, wouldn’t you be worried about free and universalized CHCs killing off that industry (Concierge Care might survive and do well though).

Regarding market based health care, I know there’s an argument that free markets are necessary but why hasn’t the industry innovated or moved forward over time by adjusting to regulation? If markets are so weak, or entrenched, what if Medicare for All is the only feasible option?

I’d like to hear your answer.
 
No, he will not be removed from office. Despite breaking the law, his cronies in the Senate will make this all a political issue. I believe Trump thinks he is above the law. He has used his wealth to buy his way out of contracts and deals all of his life. But when he passes from this world, he will face judgement that he will not be able to bypass. Thanks be to God Almighty!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top