Oakvale/Potus for Atlasia: Concession & endorsement

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I've never known Oakvale to govern in this or any game as anything but a strong, conservative leader who can deliver for all of us.

Then why did he support Maxwell against Rfayette? Tyrion against Superique? Adam fing Griffin over Lumine? Remember Tyrion's election was the decisive factor in enabling Labor to push for Nationalization of energy in the first place. Oakvale not only voted for him, but got Cincy and others too as well. If Adam had won that 1 vote margin special, Labor would have blocked every Conservative measure Duke passed in his second term, including repealing Single Payer. Yes he has supported you, but it has long been clear that Oakvale doesn't support people based on ideology or party, but based on who his friends are.

He can cite Duke all he wants, but time and again when Duke of all people tried to help me elect the more Conservative candidate including Rfayette (whose conservatism is undisputed I would trust), Oakvale was thwarting us. Why didn't he help elect you to the House in August? He didn't even for you.

Just like always, his game proposals get in the way of Conservatives winning. He wants to abolish the House so he doesn't care about Labor getting a majority. But guess what, the House will not be abolished before Labor can pass a Carbon tax. He says there are no ideological differences between us, well I can tell you I most certainly don't support a carbon tax and would have been able to prevent it from passing it, had the right won a majority.

Nobody on the right realizes just how close we came to having single payer, and instead we got a market based healthcare system that is focused at the regional level. When Sjoyce was trying to push for Single Payer, we fought back and outmaneuvered him.  I am hesitant to say this (because they might try to reverse it ), but we basically got Labor to vote to repeal almost every ACA regulation at the Federal level. If Oakvale can claim a heterodox exception, to excuse all his past support for socialists and attempts to destroy the Federalist Party, then I think we deserve at least some kind of credit for pulling that rabbit out of our hats, even if the final product isn't something the Freedom Caucus would role out the beer to celebrate.

He can attack me as some kind of evil manipulative bastard all he wants, but at the end of the day I have always done everything I could to help Federalist candidates win, to help ACP candidates and solid conservatives like CMB222 and Rfayette get elected to house and pulled my hair out trying to get Conservatives to vote for you Potus in August. I contacted almost 10 people for you, and only 3 of them voted, many didn't even know who you were or asked that you contact them. Where was he?

Oakvale is your friend Potus, and I respect that. But he is no friend of Conservatism and has at every chance he could strove to undermine conservative majorities, leading to Laborites being in a position to pass horrible stuff. It was the same way in 2014 where his actions and supported candidates led to very power nationalization crisis he always cites to prove he is conservative. And it is the same way now where his failure to support, well anybody, will lead to labor passing a carbon tax.

Oakvale may have become a conservative over the last four years, but it doesn't matter because his position on game structure will always come first. And the next time a conservative is running against a socialist, who just so happens to support abolishing the House, the GM, or the Cabinet, don't be surprised when he screws Conservatives and you, over again.

Look this is nothing new, Conservatives always want everything and I understand that. Some troll comes around tells them what they want to hear, they get all pissed off, the party ends up being divided and Labor laughs all the way to bank with the next item on the socialist agenda, and once again it is my fault that "Conservatives never win". No it isn't!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nobody on the right realizes just how close we came to having single payer, and instead we got a market based healthcare system that is focused at the regional level. When Sjoyce was trying to push for Single Payer, we fought back and outmaneuvered him.  I am hesitant to say this (because they might try to reverse it ), but we basically got Labor to vote to repeal almost every ACA regulation at the Federal level.

Let's not rewrite history too much, shall we?

Yankee, at no point was single-payer seriously considered because:

1. I have always preferred the multi-payer German system over single-payer, and the original bill (which became the RRPHA) I introduced would not have established a single-payer system.
2. I am the longest-serving Labor member of the Senate; I essentially lead the Labor "caucus" (small as it might be because it's a 6-member body), and I made clear to wavering Laborites, including SJoyce, that multi-payer was what we were pushing for.  And we got it done.  With a Labor-controlled Senate.

So no, we never came close to having single-payer.  Yet the bill we passed was the largest expansion of public healthcare since the creation of Medicare and Medicaid.  The ACA was "repealed" because its provisions were no longer necessary, since the RRPHA made access to healthcare truly universal.  We did not "repeal" the ACA because the Federalists pushed us to.  So let's put that myth to rest.

I disagree. Were it not for our bill we would have eventually had Single payer. You won't be there forever.


I also disagree with that last bit. The RRPHA regionalized healthcare regulation and gave the regions the ability to opt out of the public option for the individual healthcare market.

It also consolidated the gov't programs into one and allows the regions to determine the nature of their exchange.

The only expansion was the subsidy being  more generous, other than that it merely consolidated existing structures and programs and reduced the bureaucracy as a result.

Also it is very possible for a regional outcome that is not "universal". Regions can opt for a monopoly, but they don't have to. The main goal to remove the barrier to access caused by financial limits, via a subsidy, but only to the poor and middle class. So while access is made "universal" it is only done so by gov't intervention for those who need it most, since access for the rest is already present. Assuming rising costs don't bury them, which we need to address with the subsequent actions on drugs, tuition, torts etc.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nobody on the right realizes just how close we came to having single payer, and instead we got a market based healthcare system that is focused at the regional level. When Sjoyce was trying to push for Single Payer, we fought back and outmaneuvered him.  I am hesitant to say this (because they might try to reverse it ), but we basically got Labor to vote to repeal almost every ACA regulation at the Federal level.

Let's not rewrite history too much, shall we?

Yankee, at no point was single-payer seriously considered because:

1. I have always preferred the multi-payer German system over single-payer, and the original bill (which became the RRPHA) I introduced would not have established a single-payer system.
2. I am the longest-serving Labor member of the Senate; I essentially lead the Labor "caucus" (small as it might be because it's a 6-member body), and I made clear to wavering Laborites, including SJoyce, that multi-payer was what we were pushing for.  And we got it done.  With a Labor-controlled Senate.

So no, we never came close to having single-payer.  Yet the bill we passed was the largest expansion of public healthcare since the creation of Medicare and Medicaid.  The ACA was "repealed" because its provisions were no longer necessary, since the RRPHA made access to healthcare truly universal.  We did not "repeal" the ACA because the Federalists pushed us to.  So let's put that myth to rest.

I disagree. Were it not for our bill we would have eventually had Single payer. You won't be there forever.

"Our bill," as in a bill that was constructed by members of, uh, both parties.  My point is I wasn't pushed to support ACA repeal by the conservatives here.  In fact, I questioned whether ACA repeal was necessary or not because the alternative I had in mind would have been better, because it would have expanded public healthcare more than the ACA did.

I never said you did Scott. ACA really became irrelevant to the discussion, once we settled on the framework that we did. We kept the notion of subsidies and yes expanded them, but regionalized the regulations. We also got rid of Medicaid in the process. We can spend hours arguing over who is up and who is down and leave people scratching their heads, but the simple fact is I think we both achieved what we were looking for.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

AtlasCare is still available to all populations, and regions can easily make AtlasCare the single provider without running into the same problems that, say, Vermont did.

 

The unfortunate aspect of regional rights is the right to make mistakes, yes

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Okay, it consolidated programs to cut red tape and simplify the public system.  It's still going to result in more people being on public care and guarantee coverage to those who opt for private care.

Would we have ended up with a single-payer at some point?  Maybe.  But since, I believe, last summer, the Federalists have been in control of either the White House or one house of Congress.

Yes, because there are people who cannot have access to care, there was the necessity of providing support to those people who were being left behind to die in the streets yes.

But there is ignoring a problem in the name of conservative dogma and telling them if they want healthcare they can just get a job like so many in RL want to do, which ignores reality of the healthcare system. Or you can acknowledge a problem exists and work towards addressing that with conservative solutions (Regions, markets and competing options), which is what "we" did. Germany as you said, with a more decentralized structure.

But yes, it is possible single-payer will be back on the table eventually.  Maybe next time I'll support it.

One thing is for sure, if you don't address a problem your way, the other wide will eventually address it their way. And so many on the left see everything as a path to single payer, thus I can hardly understand you balking at me stating the obvious.

I would trust you would not toss a superior system that you yourself helped to enact, in name of omg omg Single Payer, bandwagon.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

A familiar chill went down my spine when I saw that Senator Reluctant Nay had posted in my beautiful thread, and yes indeed I see he has filled it with his incoherent senile ramblings.

No matter - it's clear that as every slimy creature crawls from the depths of the swamp to bark at us we are moving ever closer to the nomination. From tomorrow I will be revealing our ambitious plan of action for our first week in office - big stuff!

I'd also encourage all Atlasians, not just Federalists, to watch the debate between the President and myself.

Says someone who joined only a year after I did.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

That said, Elizabeth Warren's platform is a marked improvement from the heady days of TNFism.

Well when 60% top tax rate is considered "moderate" and 50% is considered an extreme Conservative position (all the times I tried and failed to get it back down to 50% only to have Labor vote as a block to kill it), just illustrates how far left he pulled the spectrum. I remember arguing up an down how 90% wouldn't work now and didn't even work in the 1950's.

I remember when he tried to nationalize railroads, that was an especially fun debate since I know a bit about railroads and his only response was oft resorted to marxist dogma.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Who can forget the energy debate?

Sadly I missed most of the fun after Spiral won that special election. It was the last election I was able to really GOTV hard for until April 2015. Damn good thing he won it and not Labor, otherwise power would have been nationalized and Tyrion confirmed as VP weeks earlier.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=194522.msg4253857#msg4253857

There was still a lot of anger brewing in the Feds against third parties after what happened in June and so getting all but 1 JCL voter to second Spiral over Cynic was not easy. I recall nationalizing power was still sitting in the queue at time or perhaps it had the floor, but I used TNF Socialism and nationalization in the GOTV PMs asking them to second Spiral for the sake of blocking his radical agenda.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Basically I defined every election for Senate from the October 2013 Regional Senate elections through August of 2014 when I was no longer able to get online, in terms of "If more conservative candidate doesn't win, the Labor candidate will be a vote for the TNF agenda". Which was not a lie as Labor always seemed to vote as a block on most key issues. So whether or not "bore or Tyrion" were considered "reasonable laborites", made little difference and people finally learned that distinction was meaningless, when it was almost too late.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The more time passes, the more weird the DemPGH Administration looks in retrospective. Such a horrible time, yet at the same time ironically fun.

I think DemPGH was a horrible President to have "as a Laborite" with a split Labor Senate and TNF the leading LAborite in the Senate.

Had DemPGH been President with a 6-4 Non Labor Senate from the getgo , I think a lot of things would have been much better. You probably would have taken the PPTship after I lost my internet, without that 2 months of TNF control, and bills like nationalizing power would have died 6-4 in the Senate. Like they had died 5-5 with Cincy's tie breaker for no under Duke's administration.

But unfortunately, it seemed too few people seem to care enough about Senate seats. Be it Superique against Tyrion, or you against TNF, there were many opportunities to avert that near disaster, but too many people were focused on other considerations and not on knocking out Socialist Senators.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

OF course in the best of all worlds, my financial situation would have been stable, and instead of no Federalist running I would have ran in June with Cincy or Superique as my VP and there never would have been a DemPGH Presidency in 2014.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If you win the nomination, I will support you. I hope to see you run again if you don't win though. You remind me of a Reagan-esque figure.

I am not sure what Reagan has in common with the villain in an Alistair MacLean novel, or movie based on the same if you prefer. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I am not sure what Reagan has in common with the villain in an Alistair MacLean novel, or movie based on the same if you prefer. 

This is what our FEDERALIST "UNBIASED" Chair has to say about one of the candidates! Clear bias on his part! Crooked Yankee must be taken down!

Says the man who couldn't even show up for single god damn NSC meeting.

What are you gonna do, get that guy who can stop me? What was his name? Michael Mac Doesn't Exist!

The rules are the rules, the votes are the votes. I will certify it based on what it is. But I am not going to stand by for this bullsh**t any longer.

I am severely disappointed in your Rpryor. You sent out a PM mentioning a Nuclear attack that did not happen. This is what I call lying. Come back to me, where is the Rpryor I knew and loved?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

And where the hell is your campaign thread, Rpryor?

You haven't been active in most any of your recent offices, the voters deserve to know you give a sh**t enough to at least make a thread about where you stand.

I might even still endorse you in it!