First Official GOP President Announcement

High school wasn't bad, it was just boring for the most part until mid junior to senior year.

College was amazing. I could have lived my whole life there, lol.

Classes were ok though.

I worked full-time and shared an apartment with my then girlfriend. College was just a time when I got very little sleep. Actually, I've basically got very little sleep since high school. No wonder I'm such a cranky ***.

Honestly? You're better off. You'll take it more seriously, be more focused, and finish sooner.

I recorded my lectures in college. It didn't do me any good because I absorbed info the same way Chaos did, but my problem in college was that I listened to too many other people about how to do well and didn't develop my own method for too long.

Except we still got that from Obama, somewhat.

Or are you going to deny that drone strikes are happening in areas not covered by treaty?

Also, there was no plans for tax reform when Obama ran, he just wanted to tax & spend. You may think that is reform, but it's just Carter 2.0. Also, some healthcare reform. A bill that promises affordable health care but makes it worse, with less doctors in the field now than ever before, healthcare systems run like government agencies, and everyone having to pay for health insurance one way or another, especially for health insurance that they will never use. Yeah, that's change you can believe in!
Blatantly ignoring the fact that the law only says an individual needs to be under one policy which would mean that legally you can carry your spouses on your insurance policy which would mean you personally wouldnt be using the female coverage, but your female spouse/carry would. Even if we like, pretend the package is not already available from third party insurers for double or equal to the price anyway. But live in your delusions where a single male or a single female is the only person in need of health insurance.
I no longer have the choice in the type of insurance I want. I have to buy insurance that I do not need. Like pregnancy insurance, or any woman's health insurance. A woman has to buy all male-only condition insurance. Old people have to buy children's insurance. Parents have to buy insurance specific to older people, especially for their children. We have to buy it because the law states so, or we will have to pay a penalty on top of that.

Because of the irrelevant insurances I have to buy, my premiums skyrocketed before the law went full effect, so the insurance companies can cap increases at the price ceiling of 15% increases. And they can keep doing that year after year after year. So, you are either left with a higher premium or higher deductible in order to make it affordable per year.

I'm sure you are going to say that your insurance hasn't increased, but decreased, but that's because you take subsidies, which I still pay for. So, not only am I forced to buy my own insurance, I'm forced to buy into your insurance too! Which you don't care, because you get free healthcare....
You still do. And refer to the first bolded response. I have not taken any subsidies, BCBS just offers cheap package deals sometimes before they completely reneg and drop you. Youre using more strawmans or some other more broad span fallacies than you allege me of using at this point. Please admit that you dont understand this is exactly as Medicare/caid went into effect and has the same starting problems that system did or atleast your ignorance of it so you can move on with this played out excuse and logical dissonance.
Nice strawman. Want to try it again?

Also, it doesn't help if you are parroting my argument back at me...
Not really, my argument actually has basis in reality if not parallels to yours that are actually formed with cognitive thought. Besides like, you know, the childish "BUT THATS WHAT I SAID" argument that is so a valid stance to take.
Yeah, anyone who thinks Reagan did a bad job really needs to set their priorities straight. Strong economic growth, an actual tax reform, and overall increased GDP really is bad for a nation in your viewpoint, isn't it?
Cherrypick all you want, most if not all of our problems are from Reagan, Bush sr/jr, Clinton (Though done in majority bipartisan in origin), and onward style needless deregulation and defunding. We had a surplus under Clinton too, does that mean that anyone who says anything bad about Clinton is Delusional as well or are you going to backpedal that argument and suddenly realize some bad choice figures that occurred under his presidency? The homeland may have been fine, but we still have the ripples of his (Reagan) inadequacy as a proper statesman today with cold war *** and useless deregulation. You can just wave that off, but it doesnt make it any less true no matter how many buzzwords and fallacious statements you throw at it.

You act like that is not what will happen if Ted Cruz or Rand Paul actually get elected.

I trust them both that they want to repeal, but it will not happen. They will end up meeting in the middle and instead of repealing stuff, it will be reforms. For medicare/medicaid, food stamps, just raise the requirements and lower the output.

For Social Security that ***needs to be utterly and completely removed with a grandfather clause.. Like say anyone born 1975 or earlier? is eligible to receive it. If born later, no Social Security for you. Most people my generation expect it to be bankrupt anyway, so what is the difference?

I would daydream a lot in class on stuff they were talking about, thinking about how to create it my own or how I would have discovered it. Everyone has their methods of learning though. The key is to find your own and not copy others.

(You know, because drug testing people that get EBT/WIC will actually fix the system when most abusers of the system are not drug addicts nor do they live in huge mansions with 60 inch TVs and a full assortment of top of the line industry kitchen appliances [like an actually running refrigerator]).

Actually, Hillary has made public statements of wanting to do what he wants. What you want from Ted Cruz has been publicly seen as probably never going to happen and in the opposite. Someone who signs a pact with 26 other senators to shut down the government over a healthcare law and filibusters the vote on said government funding for 21 hours isnt exactly the person that screams "Im going to do broad sweeping reform on large portions of policy" to an actually informed voter. The Paul family is just pathetic enough that at some point they will be elected because people feel sorry for them for running every cycle and not getting to the finals. Even then, As most politically inclined folks have said, The most impacting reason people will have to vote for Hillary Clinton is the Republican nominee. Trust me, of the people that have announced so far, i have no faith in their ability to properly perform needed reform instead of slash and burn politico-economic tactics rather than needed socio-economic reform and systemic protocol reform that actually has a relevant impact (You know, because drug testing people that get EBT/WIC will actually fix the system when most abusers of the system are not drug addicts nor do they live in huge mansions with 60 inch TVs and a full assortment of top of the line industry kitchen appliances [like an actually running refrigerator]).

Actually, Hillary has made public statements of wanting to do what he wants. What you want from Ted Cruz has been publicly seen as probably never going to happen and in the opposite. Someone who signs a pact with 26 other senators to shut down the government over a healthcare law and filibusters the vote on said government funding for 21 hours isnt exactly the person that screams "Im going to do broad sweeping reform on large portions of policy" to an actually informed voter. The Paul family is just pathetic enough that at some point they will be elected because people feel sorry for them for running every cycle and not getting to the finals. Even then, As most politically inclined folks have said, The most impacting reason people will have to vote for Hillary Clinton is the Republican nominee. Trust me, of the people that have announced so far, i have no faith in their ability to properly perform needed reform instead of slash and burn politico-economic tactics rather than needed socio-economic reform and systemic protocol reform that actually has a relevant impact (You know, because drug testing people that get EBT/WIC will actually fix the system when most abusers of the system are not drug addicts nor do they live in huge mansions with 60 inch TVs and a full assortment of top of the line industry kitchen appliances [like an actually running refrigerator]).

That is the longest paragraph I've ever seen in my life. Kudos !

because plz keep in mind.. our 'poor' is still damn near 'rich' when it comes to certain other countries

So you want more government programs for the poor ?

I'd like to see better paths out of poverty

Right, because the wealthiest nation in the world should be compared to failed states and piles of sand... Compare our lower class to the lower class in remotely well-off nations. Median incomes, PTO, health care, education, etc. We're not doing all that well when you consider how much more money per-capita the US has.

But the rest of the people that are anti-union I truly don't understand. KN I get to a point, I guess, if I assume since he's in a position that involves a trust fund, his family is more on the "employer" than "employee" side of things, but that just says to me he's grown up never having to sweat anything, and never knowing the fear of unemployment because someone doesn't like your tattoo, the timbre of your voice, or that you're too under-or-over-weight for their tastes.

I have a hard time believing that so many people who post here so regularly make mid-to-higher six-figures+ in annual income to allow them to think like people in those upper tax brackets.

I pay even less, and without disclosing too much about what I do or my payscale, $600 a year is a minuscule price to pay to keep my benefits and hourly wages. Retaining a lawyer for my private affairs would cost more.

You shouldn't automatically dismiss people's opinions because of what tax bracket they are in.

Especially opinions who are knowledgeable of the topics and stances you are against.

Really, you shouldn't dismiss my argument because I'm on the "employer" side of the union argument. Fine, I get that you are on the "employee" side, and I'm correcting your ideas because somebody (most likely a union representative) told you incorrectly that it's better to be in a union than not. I have presented my argument and evidence associated with my argument, all you have done is said "no u!" and then proceeded to dismiss it.

I can't help you if you are going to start going Altima/Lordgrim on us.

You presented a single website with facts, as did I, and you summarily dismissed mine, so I'm just going to do the same to yours.

You're never even going to pretend to care about people "beneath" you, which sort of just proves my point of why these protections are needed.

A basic runnning refrigerator is considered top of the line?

Every household has at least a refrigerator, a microwave and/or a stove. If you don't have at least those 2 things then you are like 3rd country poor and that is bad

-----------

because plz keep in mind.. our 'poor' is still damn near 'rich' when it comes to certain other countries

I'm not replying to your post until you actually make it understandable, and reply to each point individually.