Displaying 1 - 10 of 59 Forum Posts 1 2 3 4 5 Next
  • Jan 12, 2017 01:46 PM
    Last: 5d
    115

    And now the House has followed suit.


    I share your concern about the prospect of 20 million people losing their health coverage. My fear is that the Republican Party will rush through this repeal and then realize that it's much harder to come up with a replacement than they anticipated.

  • Dec 16, 2016 11:50 AM
    Last: 1mo
    1.4k
    I'm surprised this isn't getting more discussion in the media since this really has the potential to dramatically change Americas healthcare system and we are so far only hearing crickets. I don't think many people understand what privatizing Medicare actually means and how much privatization will impact seniors, especially those who are on a fixed income.
  • Dec 06, 2016 06:10 PM
    Last: 1mo
    511

    I'm just as excited about the future of online universities as well, but I think it's imperative for people to do their research before signing on the dotted line. The difference between for profit online universities and brick and mortars that offer online courses is vast.

  • Dec 05, 2016 03:27 PM
    Last: 1mo
    683

    I'm a former admissions counselor for a college in Illinois and it's amazing how much money is out there if students know what to look and ask for. Federal and state grants help out tremendously, but many colleges have grants available.

    The main difference about school specific grants is that they are often on a first come, first serve basis so it's important to fill our your FAFSA and get the process started as soon as you can. That way you will have a better shot at receiving a school specific grant if you are eligible.

  • Nov 29, 2016 09:55 AM
    Last: 2mo
    2.2k

    I can only hope that the next Congress will find a way to fix this.

    Why is there a minimum requirement for assets in the first place? Our veterans are not financial planners. They were soldiers who served our country.

    I understand having to serve a minimum number of years in the service in order to receive a pension, but that's about it.

  • Nov 30, 2016 05:50 PM
    Last: 2mo
    723

    Donald Trump's election has many people, including myself, worried that the huge strides forward we made in ensuring as many people as possible can receive healthcare will all be for naught. That fear is even more exasperated by Donald Trump's choosing ardent Obamacare critic Tom Price to be the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the federal department tasked with overseeing Obamacare. While I am very concerned about what lies ahead, I think it's very important to make sure President-Elect Trump, Tom Price, and Congressional Republicans understand that taking away healthcare from millions of Americans sounds great in theory, but it will very likely come back to bite them where the sun don't shine in reality.

    It is no secret that Congressional Republicans don't like the Affordable Care Act. It's easy to do so when you are in the minority. But now Republicans will soon be in control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency and will actually be able to dismantle the program. That is a very scary prospect for millions of Americans who may see their insurance taken away from them simply because they aren't rich enough to afford care.

    Republicans have been promising that they will keep the popular portions of the law while doing away with the unpopular ones, but the problem here is that they aren't explaining how they will pay for anything. It's great to do away with the tax penalty for not getting coverage in theory, but what happens when healthy people don't sign up for coverage?

    So I hope Republicans will remind themselves of the prophetic words of Colin Powell shortly before the Iraq invasion: if you break it, you own it.

  • Nov 08, 2016 02:40 PM
    Last: 2mo
    738

    I come from a family of straight ticket Republicans (with me being the exception) and this year seems to have really shook many of my family members to their core. My parents and brother lean more on the economically conservative side and not on the "burn everything down" side of the Republican Party.

    My mom told me that she is crossing the aisle to vote for Hillary, but my dad and brother have kept quiet about how they plan to vote. I have a feeling there are a lot of conservative/Republican families out there that are struggling with the same issue this year.

  • Oct 31, 2016 01:19 PM
    Last: 3mo
    215
    J.K.Logic Wrote: Anyone here see a viable path for the Democrat party winning the House majority? If so, must mean you are pretty plugged into politics.. I am curious.. what do you think would be the biggest pieces of legislation the Democrats could pass without a Republican majority in the House or Senate for 2 years?

    In short - no, they have no viable path to retake the House.

    The 2010 redistricting process basically guaranteed a Republican majority in the House through 2020 and perhaps beyond. They gerrymandered districts in such a way that clustered densely populated areas together to dilute their power and gave rural and sparsely populated areas more say. And we all know that densely populated areas are far more likely to vote Democratic than rural areas.

    Take a look at 2012. Democratic candidates won 1.17 million more votes than Republican candidates did, but Republicans still won 54 Percent of Seats in the House of Representatives. The same thing can (and very may well) happen again this year.

    I honestly don't see the House going back to the Democrats for another six years at the earliest. The 2020 elections will determine who controls the next redistricting process and if they control a majority of state houses and governorship's then it may be until 2030 until we see a changing of the guard in the House.

  • Nov 01, 2016 01:02 PM
    Last: 2mo
    848

    We are in the final stretch in the 2016 elections and pollsters are starting to release their final polls before election day.

    One thing that we need to know from the onset is that millions of people have already cast their ballots this year and we are expected to have roughly 20 million voters cast their ballots before November 8th. That's important to factor in when we start looking at these final numbers.

    Presidential Election: National polls have shown a tightening of the race, but we should pay far more attention to polls coming out from swing states because that is where the Presidential election is going to be won or lost. While national polls have shown a tightening of the race, swing state polls give Secretary Clinton the clear edge in the race to 270 Electoral College votes.

    Secretary Clinton has a clear advantage in Pennsylvania, Virginia, New Hampshire, Colorado, and Michigan while holding less clear advantage in Nevada and North Carolina.

    Donald Trump has a slight advantage in Florida, Ohio, and Iowa.

    If these polls are accurate then Secretary Clinton has a far clearer path to 270 than Mr. Trump. The reliably "blue" states have created a clear firewall for Clinton and she could lose one or two of the swing states leaning in her direction and still win the election. Mr. Trump would have to pick off two or three states leaning in Clinton's advantage if he were to have a statistically reliable chance to win.

    Senate Elections: The Democrats need a net gain of five seats (four if Secretary Clinton wins) to regain control of the Senate. Republicans come into November with a disadvantage from the get go because they are fighting to retain 24 of the 34 seats up for grabs. Many of these seats are considered "safe", but there are plenty of seats that could give the Democrats the majority.

    The main states to watch in the Senate are Pennsylvania, Indiana, New Hampshire, Illinois, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Missouri, and Nevada. The only state that is not currently held by a Republican is Nevada.

    Pennsylvania, Indiana, New Hampshire, Illinois, Nevada, and Wisconsin are the most likely to flip to the Democrats while North Carolina and Missouri are starting to look safer for the Republicans. If Democrats pick up five (or four with a Democratic President) of those six then they will hold the majority.

    House Elections: These are a lot harder to project due to the sheer number of them, so the best way to look at the House is the likelihood of the Democrats retaking control. If we look at it through that lens then Republicans should feel pretty good about their prospects.

    It's likely that Republicans will lose some seats, but their sizable majority should be enough of a buffer for them unless some unforeseen events shake up the race in the final week.


    This is where I'm seeing things as they are now. Am I missing something here or do you agree with where the race is standing based off the polling data we currently have?

  • Jul 12, 2016 05:21 PM
    Last: 6mo
    493

    I honestly think that Pence is the only realistic choice.

    Christie is an unpopular governor of a deeply blue state. Newt Gingrich hasn't been in politics since 1999. And Senator Sessions is hardly someone who would be able to excite any independent minded right of center voters.

    I may very well be proven wrong, but I think it's going to be Pence.