Forum menu
I think I read they shut the mics off now when it’s the others turn to talk so there’s no interruptions.. Dunno if anyone can verify that..
They did that for the first (who knows perhaps only) debate - no audience and dead mics when not being questioned. Each debate is hosted by a different TV channel though so how any future debate will be organised and formatted who knows. Could be mud wrestling contest for all we know.
iirc it wasn’t envisaged to be that way when the constitution was written
Wasn't envisaged that it would be gamed and polluted in quite the way it was. Each of those 'votes' a state has is an appointee - an 'elector' who's charged with stating how a state/portion of a state voted in the final tally up. But theres the issue of Faithless Electors - people who charged with delivering that state result deciding they have a better idea
In the 2016 election seven electors decided to post their 'vote' for candidates other than the ones their state had voted for. Votes that should have been poled for Clinton were instead poled for Colin Powell, Faith Spotted Eagle and Bernie Sanders. More electors tried to similar but were either invalidated or replaced as electors
It was the first time since the 70s faithless electors had been an issue but no doubt inspired the trump campaigns 'Fake Electors' plot in 2020
@mattyfez Yes, it’s to stop Trump talking over everyone else.
@maccruiskeen Wikipedia suggests that there have been efforts to reform the electoral college since 1800, the one that’s most likely to succeed is the National Interstate Compact which will come into force when they control 270 of the college votes; they currently have about 200.
Makes sense to me:
Christopher Wray was updating Congress about the assassination attempt on Trump in Butler on Wednesday when he made the explosive statement.
'With respect to former President Trump, there’s some question about whether or not it’s a bullet or shrapnel that hit his ear,' Wray said.
Debated whether to post this, but ties in with the post above.
Seeing a few posts on SM questioning the miraculous healing of Trumps ear. Now it ties into the "fake assassination" conspiracy theory that I'm loathe to stoke up given the people killed and injured, but are there verified photos of his ear since he was shot?
Seen a few unverified pics on SM of a perfectly undamaged ear, but those pics could be old ones being recycled for effect.
I think it's more that Trump has played the "I got shot" card and its possible his ear was "only" grazed by shrapnel. Some are trying to take the political points away from him by suggesting it wasn't that bad, rather than a full on conspiracy, although of course plenty are doing that too, I'm sure.
mattyfez
Full Member
She’ll eat him for breakfast, surely?I think I read they shut the mics off now when it’s the others turn to talk so there’s no interruptions.. Dunno if anyone can verify that..
The problem she will have is that Clinton totally outclassed trump in their debate/s but ultimately it didn't matter. His base just doesnt care about truth or competence. It's a cult.
However, things are different now. They (swing voters, reluctant Dems) know what they are going to get with Trump and a lot of swing voters might see Harris totally outclassing him as the nudge they need to support her.
His base are lost, not even with considering, it's all about motivating Dem voters to go vote and convincing swing voters. I think she has a good chance of doing both. Ill be staying up late for the vote that's for sure!
I’m predicting a Kamala win
Sadly agree, Harris could well win the popular vote but not enough in swing states, she seems a better candidate than Clinton was too.
I think I read they shut the mics off now when it’s the others turn to talk so there’s no interruptions.. Dunno if anyone can verify that..
The problem with the shutting off the mics is that unless the host is prepared to cut in and tell Trump he is lying Harris won't get the chance to do it. He gets a free run to talk complete bollocks and spout lie after lie for 2 his two minutes every time it's his turn.
Debates are irrelevant though. How many of use bothered to watch them here? You might here about the summary of what went on but in the US where the televised 'news' channels are not regulated to same as here those analysis are so biased as to be worthless to anyone on the fence (the 0.0001% of the population) wanting a worthwhile summary.
Debates are irrelevant though.
I see where you are coming from but we need to remember that it was Biden's terrible debate against trump that sealed his fate.
If trump comes off poorly in a debate about abortion for instance, people will take note. They might not watch the debate but they will see highlights on SM and it can have an effect, particularly on emotive topics like abortion and gun control.
The huge advantage Harris has is that the Dems are yet to have their convention. If she comes across well in that and her party stay united she will almost certainly have a polling boost just when it matters most.
Debates are irrelevant though. How many of use bothered to watch them here?
I watched some, but TBF my mind was made up long before, they didn't change my mind but they did at least make me question aspects of Starmer a bit more. And it's worth considering that not everyone is as much of an entrenched 'Anti-Tory' as I am 😉
The Same basically applies in the US: The Donald has his MAGA and GoP core votes sewn up obviously, as will Harris and the Dems. Assuming those core groupings break down to ~1/3rd of the electorate either way, The remaining 1/3rd are your floating body of votes and in theory (stacked electoral collages not withstanding) you only need to sway half of those to take the day.
So an election can easily come down to as little as ~17% of a voting population being nudged by whatever debates/campaign ads/speeches, part of the reason the campaigns watch polling numbers so keenly after a big event like a speech or debate is that they're trying to discern if there's been any effect on those floating voters, if anti-abortion rhetoric seems to play well then they'll suggest to Donald he dials it up, if it's the inverse maybe he can blather more about 2020 being fixed.
Harris will have her own adviser watching the polls reactions to specific things.
Debates have the potential for more substantial swings as perceptions are challenged most when you put both candidates up for a direct compare and contrast. personality and behaviour has the potential to put off vibes based voters as much as policy...
Well, apparently Kamala Harris has just turned black. More racist bollocks from Trump. Who has always identified as a nutty shit covered in melted red Leicester.
^^ Yes, it's interesting. I think he and his campaign staff have been left completely wrong footed by Harris.
He is very close to alienating the more moderate Reps, they might vote for Harris or simply stay at home.
He's incredibly bad at dealing with women in power and it's really showing.
All they did with Hillary was yell about emails and Benghazi. He can't do that with Harris, so now he's got 'but she's black' as his only real option. As always, Jon Stewart did a good bit about the rep's confusion and shit.
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/article/2024/jul/30/jon-stewart-republicans-harris-trump
10
Full Member
All they did with Hillary was yell about emails and Benghazi. He can’t do that with Harris, so now he’s got ‘but she’s black’ as his only real option. As always, Jon Stewart did a good bit about the rep’s confusion and shit.https://www.theguardian.com/culture/article/2024/jul/30/jon-stewart-republicans-harris-trump/blockquote >
That Daily Dhow segment is excellent, definitely recommend people watch it for a good chuckle. 😀Thanks for sharing!
There is absolutely no overlap between the "could vote for Trump" and the "could vote for Harris" demographics.
Really, what this is about is motivating the most "could vote for Harris" people to actually bother to vote (ie: not abstain), and similarly demotivating the "could vote for trump" to actually get out and do so.
It's about motivating your respective potential voter pool, and converting that into votes - not increasing the size of the pool.
It feels like potential democrat voters are feeling good about voting for Harris - in a way they weren't about the prospect of voting for Biden. However, I feel like "voting enthusiasm" within Trump's voter pool might be waning.
My observation is that many Americans just want to be on the "winning team". If they feel like Trump/Harris might not win - then I think they'll stop voting for them, to avoid feeling like they "personally" lost. Like avoiding buying a ticket to see a game you think your team is going to lose..... you don't want to be walking home from the stadium feeling like a loser.
I think that attitude applies to both parties.... but is probably much more prevalent in potential Trump voters who (I'm just going to say it) are by-and large less intelligent than their counterparts.
I see hopeful signs that Harris will be able to mobilise and motivate sections of the electorate that were unlikely to vote. The young, BAME and women
That can only be good and we have to hope its enough
I see hopeful signs that Harris will be able to mobilise and motivate sections of the electorate that were unlikely to vote. The young, BAME and women
That can only be good and we have to hope its enough
Agree - but she is not winning-over these voters from Trump - they are potential Democrat voters, waiting for somebody to convince them to actually cast their vote. Hopefully Harris is the person who will get them to do that, where biden clearly wasn't
Christ on a **** ing bike! - just seen a clip of Trump being interviewed by the National Association of Black Journalists...... his most appalling performance to date (in my opinion) by some margin. Toe-curlingly cringeworthy.
Really, what this is about is motivating the most “could vote for Harris” people to actually bother to vote (ie: not abstain), and similarly demotivating the “could vote for trump” to actually get out and do so.
Interesting bit of motivating going on in Texas where registered republicans* are getting leaflets telling them we'll know who didn't vote and we'll tell Trump who you are
“Your voting record is public. … Your neighbors are watching and will know if you miss this critical runoff election. We will notify President Trump if you don’t vote. You can’t afford to have that on your record.”
* I don't get the whole party allegiance on the electoral roll thing in the states
Yep, it's appalling.
Yet he did almost the same thing to Obama and still got elected. He's tapping into the emotive gutter voter; he's saying what they're thinking and saying themselves, and he's been bigly successful in their eyes. He's a white* billionaire*.
The trick is to create a false narrative and go after the people who swallow it whole, much like Reform over here. It's binary politics, but it's effective if left unchecked or unchallenged by a mass media muzzled or even controlled.
Trump is toast. They clearly have no idea what they're doing.
I'll be very, very happy & relieved to revisit those posts above in a few months time if he doesn't get elected, and give respect where it's due.
I'm really not so sure, however.
That black journalists episode was to show the rednecks how racist he is so he can count on their vote (he was getting it anyway) and he has just managed to further alienate himself from anyone (especially minorities) with anything going on between their ears. That'll show them Donny.
batfink
Free Member
There is absolutely no overlap between the “could vote for Trump” and the “could vote for Harris” demographics.
I'm not so sure. The true cultists are lost of course but as CNN pointed out a couple of days back there are a lot of disaffected Republicans** (generally younger, perhaps female and likely college educated) that would have held their noses and voted for Trump as they didn't see Biden as a remotely viable option for them.
Now? With Harris seemingly surprising many Americans with her decent performance so far, the more moderate Rep voters might hold their noses and vote for her as they simply don't like Trumps version of the Republican party. Hell, it's not as good an outcome for Harris but even if she only manages to suppress those Rep moderates from voting, it's still a good outcome.
I think she's got a decent chance of beating Trump and with the Dem convention still to come she will be the centre of attention to hone her image even further. Trump will hate that attention and it will likely lead him to make even more irrational comments that further risk alienating the non cult members
** Like the more more sensible Tory voters that could see Boris/Truss etc were complete fools.
The election is a fair way off but it's difficult to see how trump regains the momentum he seemed to have a couple of weeks ago. Biden stepping aside has taken the wind out of his sails.
He can't intellectualise his way out of it, he only has the same old bs that is stale. They basically need to swap him for a younger model, but they are stuck with his brand now.
kormoran
Free Member
The election is a fair way off but it’s difficult to see how trump regains the momentum he seemed to have a couple of weeks ago.
It's actually pretty incredible how the assassination attempt is already old news. Biden stepping down, hugely ironically, seems to have consigned that to the old news file very quickly! Also ironically, Trump constantly banging on about her at a personal level is keeping her in the news cycle just as much as it does him.
It’s actually pretty incredible how the assassination attempt is already old news
I was actually going to type this but pressed submit to soon! Yes, nobody seems to be talking about it, despite it being an utterly outrageous act. To be fair, I've not really thought much about it either, the spotlight is firmly on harris now
I know I'm probably late to the party here, but does trump have anything at all that is a positive vision for the future? Something you could actually get behind, or look at objectively and say, yes that's a good idea. It seems he has nothing but grievance.
I know I’m probably late to the party here, but does trump have anything at all that is a positive vision for the future?
Grabbing at straws here but I do share his deep suspicion of China but then as usual, he undermines himself by basically saying the US wouldn't support Taiwan if it was invaded.
In addition, for all his tough talk in China, all he really did was slap a few tariffs on them. Hardly going to curtail any territorial ambitions they might have.
Erm... that's about it for me I think? So actually, I don't really even agree with him in China really. Lol
It’s actually pretty incredible how the assassination attempt is already old news
I think that shows how much he is disliked outwith his own worshipers. And perhaps from that how many privately though 'Damn, Missed'
It’s actually pretty incredible how the assassination attempt is already old news
Over the last few years I've often come to the office after being away for a week or two and found my browser tabs still open to some Trump scandal that has been overtaken by newer scandals and seems like ancient history already.
I think that shows how much he is disliked outwith his own worshipers
Yep, I kind of felt that too. Like, yeah whatever.
Or maybe shooting ls in the us don't elicit the same response as they would here
The guy saying the other day that it was shrapnel rather than a bullet was the last I've heard on it. Very little recognition of the poor guy killed in the stand.
Oh, another advantage Harris has is that she and the Dems already know Trumps running mate pick. It's fair to say Vance hadnt quite been the roaring success Trump and his team might have hoped for.
More importantly, the Dems can now choose a running mate best placed to counteract the Trump/ Vance combo. Vance doesn't broaden Trumps appeal in the slightest but Harris can choose a running mate to broaden her appeal. A person seen as more conservative perhaps, or rather simplistically, a white male... so as not to scare the horses.
Trump is stuck with Vance, if he ditches him the fundamentalist Christians will hate him, it also makes him look weak... and boy, Trump doesn't like that look at all.
It seems he has nothing but grievance.
I think this cuts through to quite a few voters who see him as someone who is pissed off with how things are so he will change them. No idea what that change might be - but he's like me he's angry, not telling me how much better things can be.
Much like Reform & Brexit.
It’s actually pretty incredible how the assassination attempt is already old news
I was chatting to the neighbour behind my house about his pointing a couple of evenings ago, and he casually said during one part of the convo, "I heard he was shot, is that right?" when we were talking obliquely about the US election. For some folks, it's not just old news, but is in fact; just news.
It would help Trump if there was any evidence he'd actually been shot but he doesn't even have a scabby lug.
In addition, for all his tough talk in China, all he really did was slap a few tariffs on them
My employer is ramping up production of a thing designed in China, but it's going to be manufactured in Thailand specifically to get around these tariffs. They are definitely having an effect.
I think there are two things at play here. Traditional media has figured out how to report on Trump: They highlight the bad things he says and does and report the other stuff like he's a regular guy. But they also don't try to maintain the balance similarly. They're not looking for something negative (except Fox) to say about Kamala. I've seen that she's getting mostly positive reporting in the current news cycle.
The other is that Trump is somewhat hoised by his own media-baiting petard. The typically short attention span of people these days with news used to work in his favor. Now it's just "oh, look, Trump said something stupid again." He's old news, so to speak. In 2016, he was a fresh idea to drain the swamp of established political dynasties. Now he's just some old rambling orange man, who shits his pants, can't remember who he's talking about, and keeps shouting at clouds. And the guy that's supposed to be helping him is off getting carnal with the sexy-looking sofa at American Furniture Warehouse.
The election is a fair way off but it’s difficult to see how trump regains the momentum he seemed to have a couple of weeks ago. Biden stepping aside has taken the wind out of his sails.
The thing that has perhaps impacted him the most possibly - is the Supreme Court's immunity decision.
It seems like a long time ago now - but there was a time when Trump had pretty much tanked - post election/ Jan 6th, with no Twitter account for his minute by minute brain farts,, his 'From the Desk of Donald Trump' newsletters that no-one was interested in, his endorsements of candidates that seemed to pretty much guarantee defeat. He was done.
The thing that seemed to turn things around for him was the documents raid at Mar a Lago - the more legal misfortunes, the more victimhood he could project, the more cases and money he lost, the more his stock seemed to rise. The 'state' was conspiring against him
But he blamed Biden for the whole witch-hunt thing - and Biden is now not there to blame. And the Presidential Immunity thing - even though he's been campaigning for it, and even though it actually doesnt get him off most of the hooks he's on - just bursts the whole victimhood bubble. He's got judges and justices rolling out a red carpet for him. The 'state' is conspiring with him.
His 'if they can do it to me they can do it to you' schtick suddenly rings a little hollow.
I know I’m probably late to the party here, but does trump have anything at all that is a positive vision for the future?
He never has had. His vision for the presidency is to win the presidency - its a popularity contest in his eyes and he feels he deserves to win it. Thats it.. He wants to do that now in particular because it would be revenge for having lost a popularity contest . During the 2020 campaign in an interview he was asked exactly that - asked what his ambitions for a second term as president were. He just rambled on about no other president in history being treated as unfairly as him....... and that was it. He had absolutely nothing on offer for a second term other that observe that up til now people hadn't been nice enough to him even though he was president
And he hasn't anything on offer now - just a bunch of mostly empty threats (and some that need to be taken seriously) about revenge and retribution - for him. And him only. He has no vision for the country, nothing to offer the voters who vote for him, other than the spectacle of him getting revenge.
He has no vision for the country, nothing to offer the voters who vote for him, other than the spectacle of him getting revenge.
That is why he has no policy, no strategy, no plan. He honestly doesn't give a shit about the future and certainly nothing beyond the next four years. He simply doesn't care, he just wants to be re-elected for himself, its nothing to do with the country or even the party. He is a narcissist, dictionary definition narcissist.
I've been watching clips of the black journalist interviews.
Absolute car crash after car crash,
I really think he's lost the plot.
As someone with a penile implant... I think trump might need a follow up visit with his consultant...
https://twitter.com/PaulleyTicks/status/1819158884990517506
the mad thing is that the dildo through his head is not the oddest thing about that discourse.
That dildo misses his brain by inches.
I know it's a clip and all that but I'm struggling to put the words he's saying into any sort of context. Hes basically a what 3 words random generator
I’ve been watching clips of the black journalist interviews.
Watched that too, the US obsession with race seems to go one way. Trump's of Germanic stock I believe - he's certainly not a native American.
I’m staggered that the Democrats tactic of calling him weird is making the news. Did people not realise how ****ing odd the man is? It took a public campaign for some people to go “shit, yeah! He’s a bit strange” FFS he’s bright orange, has the craziest hair I’ve ever seen, always seems to be wearing another mans suit and talks absolute bobbins!
judge rejects Trumps efforts to dismiss case.... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6p22n0z5m2o
I’m staggered that the Democrats tactic of calling him weird is making the news.
Its actually quite and interesting tactical shift. Perhaps previous efforts gave too much validity to Trump, grouping Trump together with other right-wing forces in America and treating them as a valid threat. The 'weird' tactic and the way it's being deployed instead singles Trump out as oddity distinct from the broader republican movement, which of course he is. Their campaign now makes a distinction between Trump and republican voters - denigrating him without alienating them. You of course have to win people over to win. The 'weird' thing isn't just in the word, its in the delivery - Walz who coined the term delivered it with a chuckle, its dismissive but not inflammatory, its not adding to the polarised atmosphere becuase at the same time he's incredibly conciliatory to republican voters. Something both he and Harris have in common in the campaign is they seem to smile and laugh a lot - and that comes along with a very interesting observation from Walz - when have you ever seen Trump actually laugh?
Trump in his own way is playing right into that, partly by rage tweeting nonsense about Biden conspiring to seize back the democratic nomination from 'Kambala' but also with his 'you'll never need to vote again' plea to rightwing christians.
You could read that as him signalling the end of democracy in the US - but I think what he's really expressing his same selfish ambition- he's running again for no reason other than to go out as a 'winner'. As it stands his legacy is a loser and sore one at that, if he can win in November he corrects that record- what happens over the 4 years that follow? He doesn't care. When he says you don't have to vote again - he maybe just means you don't have to vote again for him. He's got no care about whether anyone votes for the Republican Party in future, he's not got any successor lined up to carry forward any political legacy he has, he's dismissed Vance as irrelevant to his campaign as the vote is only a referendum on him. He just wants to change the wikipedia entry from 'loser' to 'winner'.
When he says you don’t have to vote again – he maybe just means you don’t have to vote again for him.
I was thinking this - as far he is concerned this is it. In his narcissistic world this is the last vote ever and that was the slip of the tongue.
He’s ****ed and his inevitable loss will consume him to a prompt grave. And I will laugh my tits off.
NPR took the time to fact check the News Conference that Trump called at Mar-a-Lago recently.
They counted 162 incorrect statements is a 64 minute press conferences More than 2 a minute on average. Particularly impressive when you consider that it was a press conference rather than a speech and therefore a proportion of that 64 minutes was people asking him the questions that his lies were the answers to
During his term as president the Washington Post kept a tally of his publicly stated lies while in office- recording over 30,000 of them across years. Which sounds like a lot, but only works out at as a trifling 20 or so a day. On his current form he could hit that 30,000 tally in just over a fortnight if he was prepared to put the hours in.
If you haven't seen or heard the Trump interview with Musk, here is Brian Tyler Cohen's take.
In the Musk interview Trump was doing that weird slurpy voice thing again. It sounds a little like he has had a stroke but I think it’s actually him sucking his false teeth back in.
He hasn’t been campaigning in public at all. On Newsagents, Matlis was speculating that he might have PTSD from the shooting, or at the very best, be scared of big public rallies. I guess that’s kind of understandable.
Sit back and wait, I guess. There might be fireworks or a small fizzle.
Another reason for Trump’s lack of campaign rallies is that venue owners don’t want him as they still have a stack of unpaid bills from last time. He’s only left with outdoor venues that leave him exposed of shooters, but the secret service having messed up the last one, aren’t too keen.
From a voter perspective, he only appeals to his MAGA fan-base and nothing to appeal to the swing voters who make up a third of voters, predominantly college-educated women and the momentum is already moving against him. Hoping for ritual humiliation.
I'm pretty sure he did a big rally yesterday, not seen any clips of his deranged ramblings yet (I'm trying to avoid twitter these days)
He is really fkn old, I'm sure he's waited on hand & foot, but intensive campaigning must take its toll
A small venue of 2500 apparently- nothing like the stadiums that Kamala is filling.
I guess even his fans are getting bored of hearing the same shit. He's trotting out the same attacks on Harris as on Biden—nearly word for word. It's the Old Boy remake no one asked for, and no one except the most loyal of MAGA ****s wants. He's also been flying around in Epstein's plane, which is a great look for the Q (remember them?) weirdos who thought he would smash some international ring of child smugglers.
It's been touched on here but I also read on some US sites that he is struggling in lots of areas.
He thought he was a shoe in against Biden, and that when your looking like winning it's an easier ride. Now he actually has to put in the hard work, and maybe he just hasn't got the energy now. He's an old guy, he doesn't have the intellect that can be deployed with elder statesman ease, and his schtick is 8 years old.
On top of that, someone tried to slot him, which is going to have an enormous affect on pretty much anyone, and then to cap that, it turns out no one really cared. Who'd want to go out and put themself in the limelight when you know there's folk who might try again?
The slightest sniff that he's not gonna make it without a struggle and he's basically sod that for a game of soldiers
I think there is just a lot of apathy around him. He doesn't really shock anyone now, he hasn't really got anywhere to go to outdo the absolute shit he's been talking for years. People expect it now, it's barely news worthy anymore other than in a "rolls eyes way".
It's obvious he really, really doesn't like Harris taking the limelight off him, ironically kick-started by the whole Biden stepping aside mess. It's said often but it's true, he's a narcissist, hence why he's obsessed with crowd sizes etc which are of no importance in the real world.
I bet he's a right bastard (even more so than usual) to work for/advise at the moment and I bet it's utter chaos in his inner circle.
Biden stepping down was an even better choice than we realised at the time.
This is savage
He thought he was a shoe in against Biden, and that when your looking like winning it’s an easier ride.
Plus all his attack lines have now been flipped. They were risky enough as it was (trump accusing anyone of being incoherent was always a push) and now he is completely exposed.
Fatty looking pretty angry earlier today
https://twitter.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1824133565883338949
Press conference seems to be going as expected.
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1824195621319749987
Damn commies gonna give everyone health care.
https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1824544757235978359
Damn commies gonna give everyone health care.
This is something I just cannot understand. The Republicans were vehemently opposed to Obama helthcare plans, so it isnt something new, but why are they opposed to such stuff? Surely anyone can see it is for the good of everyone to get some type of healthcare plan? The ridiculously high cost of treatment in the USA would make you think that the bulk of people would be really happy for the Government to provide some cover for them, but a large minority are against it. It’s baffling.
The Republicans were vehemently opposed to Obama helthcare plans, so it isnt something new, but why are they opposed to such stuff? Surely anyone can see it is for the good of everyone to get some type of healthcare plan?
It's just politics. Obamacare was modeled on Romneycare, which Romney introduced when he was the Governor of Massachusetts (which is a pretty liberal state). Democrats thought that Republicans would get on board with it because it was basically a Republican health-care plan. What they didn't count on was the scorched earth strategy that the modern GOP has adopted of absolutely rejecting anything that a Democratic President supports. The recent border security bill is a prime example - it was basically everything that the Republicans had been demanding but when Biden agreed to do it, they changed their minds and tanked it purely because they didn't want to give Biden a bipartisan win.
Trump kept on promising that he would replace Obamacare with something better but he personally knew nothing about the details of it and Republicans couldn't come up with any alternative that made any sense (because Obamacare was a Republican policy in the first place.) They don't have any alternative policy, they're just opposed to anything that Democrats support.
The problem with Health Care as a topic in the US is the odd way it has always been delivered. There are plenty of countries that have an insurance based healthcare system but in the US your health isn't in the hands of your doctor, it's in the hands of your employer's HR department. Healthcare has therefore become an employment 'perk'. So it's not just a case of having healthcare or not having healthcare, it's one of having incrementally better healthcare than the next guy.
It has become part of the rewards system of little pats on the head people get for doing a good job. All sorts of workplace rewards are absurd. I remember during the small portion of my life where I actually had a job needing to order a new chair and being shown the catalogue and the specific chair specs that went with my grade - somewhere in the middle between 'admin' and 'the manager' so my chair could have armrests, unlike our admin assistant who didn't qualify for them, but it couldn't have adjustable lumber support like my bosses, because thats for a different class of employee. It didn't matter that Jeanette the office admin was the only person in the office who actually had to sit in her chair all day.
All these little rewards, a parking space nearer the door, being senior enough to not have to wear the company's stupid uniform, a nicer office, they're not a material difference like actually taking home more pay but they signal to everyone the comparative worth to the employee by giving them something that others pointedly don't have.
So by accident rather than design thats how healthcare works in the states, it was never the idea, but by making healthcare an employer-managed system that meaning that has become attached, and becuase thats been happening for a century or so its baked into the society. The boss gets the better healthcare package even though its the guys in the warehouse that do the real physically strenuous work - they need better care, but its more important for it to be clear that the boss deserves better care.
And sadly it really, really works. Although everyone views the unfairness of healthcare provision as tragic and pity those that suffer for the lack of it, making it universal also robs people of that sense of reward. You're giving away something that they feel like they've earned on merit.
Roger Stone documentary (iPlayer - watch it if you’re into rats in a sack). He lightly mocks the socialist healthcare system that the Danish documentary maker relied on during the making (it’s a plot twist), but you can tell it’s mocking and not jocular.
Universal healthcare in the US would be a tax, it would also need a nationwide bureaucracy to administrate it. Republicans in general are against tax rises and larger government.
Knowing a fair few Americans, I’d also suspect there’s an aspect of “why should I work hard to pay for them?” It’s often very much a case of making YOUR money, YOUR life, YOUR American dream.
“why should I work hard to pay for them?”
I heard this expression on a BBC radio program at a gop convention years ago. Why should my money go towards saving this little girl? She's nothing to do with me.
I was repulsed by it then and still am