by "Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo" (rustyvandura)
Published 03/24/2017 at 20:36
by "Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo" (rustyvandura)
Published 03/24/2017 at 20:36
No Tags
STARS: 0
"My X-type is too a real Jaguar" (TomSlick)
03/24/2017 at 20:41, STARS: 1
Or it could be the fact that a Trump Whitehouse has finally knocked some sense into some republicans and shown the dangers of following the party line.
"Bman76 (hates WS6 hoods, is on his phone and has 4 burners now)" (bman76-4)
03/24/2017 at 20:49, STARS: 1
Yeah, left-right is pres results, up-down is their previous result.
"Junkrat aka Rick Sanchez: Fury Road Edition" (realasabass)
03/24/2017 at 20:51, STARS: 2
Most of the Republicans are probably voting no because it doesn’t cut healthcare enough.
"Birddog" (maintmgt)
03/24/2017 at 20:51, STARS: 0
Nope. Red and Blue can make Green though. I like Green.
"garagemonkee" (monke)
03/24/2017 at 21:00, STARS: 2
The key assumption in this garbage graph is that congress votes based on the political spread of their home districts and not based on the party line. Which is wrong.
"Rust and Dust - Oppositelock Forever" (rustanddust)
03/24/2017 at 21:05, STARS: 2
Are you supposed to use these to make it work?
"Highlander-Datsuns are Forever" (jamesbowland)
03/24/2017 at 21:08, STARS: 0
So my understanding is that the bill didn’t do enough to repeal the ACA. The ultra crazy rightwingnuts blocked it holding out for even more changes.
"Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo" (rustyvandura)
03/24/2017 at 21:33, STARS: 0
Maybe
"Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo" (rustyvandura)
03/24/2017 at 21:34, STARS: 2
As Miss Mercedes put it, the Republicans couldn’t agree on whom, nor how much, to screw people.
"Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo" (rustyvandura)
03/24/2017 at 21:35, STARS: 0
I find it symmetrical, but confusing.
"FTTOHG Has Moved to https://opposite-lock.com" (alphaass)
03/24/2017 at 21:55, STARS: 5
This graph fucking sucks. I have an MS in mechanical engineering and have had several papers published in peer-reviewed journals, and I had to stare at if for a minute to figure it out. When someone who deals with data and graphs for a living has no idea what you are trying to plot, you are doing it wrong.
"Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo" (rustyvandura)
03/24/2017 at 22:00, STARS: 1
That’s why I shared it. I couldn’t make any sense of it, but neither am I an engineer. The symmetry of it is curious, but it doesn’t say anything to me.
"FTTOHG Has Moved to https://opposite-lock.com" (alphaass)
03/24/2017 at 22:41, STARS: 1
The more I stare at it, the more I find it actually kind of interesting. (It’s still a bad graph.) Bare with me here a second analysis and rant inbound... The overall symmetry is expected - basically is says that reps from less competitive districts by and large won their seats by bigger margins. There are a few outliers, but it’s kind of an obvious thing to happen. The hollow circles are the expected “No” votes and how they fall on that line is what interests me. One of the big narratives that I’ve been hearing is that Republicans are voting “No” because the bill didn’t go far enough - that they think it keeps too much of Obamacare intact. That’s something you’d expect from reps of very conservative districts. And there is some of that. But a lot of the “No” votes are cluster to the center. While I haven’t heard anyone come out and say it, this indicates that some Republicans who are up for a tough reelection battle might be voting “No” because they know that being on the repeal side will cost them their seat next year based on what their constituents want. Alternatively it could mean that they think the best way to win is to double down on the conservatism (is that a thing?) because they ran on a full repeal platform and feel they’ll get voted out for not keeping their promise. It’s an interesting dynamic... both parties appear to be pretty split up internally on health care (Democrats fighting over single payer vs. more modest reforms), but the reasons why range from ideological to political to incompetence (and possibly corruption). One funny thing I heard from a Republican congressman was that he talked to the insurance companies and was worried that Trumpcare didn’t do enough to address their concerns over costs. It was one of the tone-deaf comments I’ve ever heard on this debate and speaks to why this has sewn such a deep divide in our country: we’re talking about people’s health - potentially if people can afford treatment to extend their lives - and you’re worried about whether the insurance companies can cope. UH made $13 BILLION in profit last year on $184B in revenue. That’s basically the same as General Motors! I’m sure they can find a way to deal with changes. GTFO.
"That's Engineering?" (ryan-jones)
03/24/2017 at 22:57, STARS: 1
This x1000. With basically the same credentials. Also, why does academic journal review take so damn long? It took nearly a year to get my first paper published. I’ve had another in review for like 6 months now, with no end in sight.
"FTTOHG Has Moved to https://opposite-lock.com" (alphaass)
03/24/2017 at 23:07, STARS: 0
I’ve been a reviewer... basically it comes down to the reviewers are all busy people who do it in their free time and it can take several hours to read/reread/crtitique/type up a review and that time is hard to find. Some reviewers are more diligent than others, but with 2-3 reviewers of a paper, usually one will drag ass. It’s part of the editor’s job to push them along or find new reviewers if one just can’t get it done, but a lot of editors aren’t good at confrontation so it drags out. Hang in there, it’s worth it.
"facw" (facw)
03/24/2017 at 23:14, STARS: 1
So the narrative I’ve read is that you had two groups of Republicans opposed.
The first is the House Freedom Caucus who wanted a total repeal, including getting rid of the requirements to cover preexisting conditions and to avoid lifetime benefit limits (as someone who has prescriptions that cost over $50,000 I think these are very bad ideas), as well as some other changes. The bill was altered to appease them by removing the set of essential benefits (also a bad idea), and also with some tweaks to speed up the removal of Medicaid expansion. These tweaks weren’t enough for them and many withheld their support.
The second group were more moderate Republicans. They were concerned about the number of people who’d lose coverage or see big premium increases in their districts. Ryan/Trump tried to appease them by redirecting some money to provide additional cash to older people. This also wasn’t effective, especially since they were handing concessions that made the problem worse to Freedom Caucus types. Additionally, these are people for whom association with Trump is generally not a good thing, so he can’t effectively promise to stump or fundraise for them, giving him little leverage if they act in their interest rather than his.
Honestly though, I can’t see any of that in the chart, which could mean that the narrative is false or incomplete, but likely just means the graphic is junk.