If you vote Republican you will die ... earlier

[Warp12]

Making health care costs at least in part taxpayer-supported is in my opinion, bad policy. Your health, your life, you get what you pay for. Don't ask me to help you. Does this translate into a reduced life span for people of a certain income level? Sadly, it can. But that's the way life works. They don't drive a new Audi, either

I like the sounds of that. This level of honesty would be refreshing! We never see such truth in politics, sadly.

 

[Brainster]

Stop being obtuse, you know what the study really suggests: That Democrats care about people's health, and Republicans don't give a **** whether people live or die.

And this plays out at the county level and only affects white people. Totally seems credible to me.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

And this plays out at the county level and only affects white people. Totally seems credible to me.

Not what the article says.

I understand this need to dismiss the findings to save your worldview, but facts are facts.

 

[Brainster]

Not what the article says.

I understand this need to dismiss the findings to save your worldview, but facts are facts.

I guess I'm confused because the OP title says "If you vote Republican you will die... earlier." Have you backed away from that particular bit of misinformation? Maybe you could get the mods to change the title of the thread so you aren't deceiving people?

 

[johnny karate]

I guess I'm confused because the OP title says "If you vote Republican you will die... earlier." Have you backed away from that particular bit of misinformation? Maybe you could get the mods to change the title of the thread so you aren't deceiving people?

Because conservatives simply will not stand for misinformation and deception!

Brainster, I salute you in your noble effort to speak truth to power regarding the Very Important Issue of the journalistic integrity of forum thread titles.

 

[wareyin]

I guess I'm confused because the OP title says "If you vote Republican you will die... earlier." Have you backed away from that particular bit of misinformation? Maybe you could get the mods to change the title of the thread so you aren't deceiving people?

psst, buddy, did you know that "you" can be plural?

 

[ahhell]

So, I may have missed it but does this study account for things like educational attainment and socio economic status? The Dems are the party of elites, who do tend to also have better health outcomes.

 

[ponderingturtle]

So, I may have missed it but does this study account for things like educational attainment and socio economic status? The Dems are the party of elites, who do tend to also have better health outcomes.

Um no generally lower income voters vote democrat. They are not the party of the elite except in republican rhetoric. I think there might be an effect of the rural/urban divide here

 

[johnny karate]

So, I may have missed it but does this study account for things like educational attainment and socio economic status? The Dems are the party of elites, who do tend to also have better health outcomes.

Yes, the political party that wants to provide those "better health outcomes" to everybody is somehow the party of "elites".

 

[newyorkguy]

I wrote a message about how these kinds of threads never develop into real discussion. That just once I wish one of the posters here -- one of the posters, not a politician -- would take a deep breathe and write, 'Here's what I think.' I suggested it would be along the lines of-

Making health care costs at least in part taxpayer-supported is in my opinion, bad policy. Your health, your life, you get what you pay for. Don't ask me to help you. Does this translate into a reduced life span for people of a certain income level? Sadly, it can. But that's the way life works. They don't drive a new Audi, either.

Here's what I got which, ironically, makes my point-

I like the sounds of that. This level of honesty would be refreshing! We never see such truth in politics, sadly.

We never see such truth in one of the debates on this message board either. This level of honesty would be refreshing from the -- I don't know what to call them, Republicans, conservatives, their political orientation is apparently secret, too -- lets say 'the other side.' They snipe and snark but never present a clear argument.

They never explain their thinking. As I've stated previously, I think in part that's because there is no thinking. It's just pure reaction.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

So, I may have missed it but does this study account for things like educational attainment and socio economic status? The Dems are the party of elites, who do tend to also have better health outcomes.

I tries to account for certain factors, like age.
But it probably can't account for anything.

But that doesn't really affect the change over time, which shows a significantly lower decrease in mortality in Red Counties compared to Blue ones.

I guess with Abortion getting banned, that gap will widen.

 

[Warp12]

I wrote a message about how these kinds of threads never develop into real discussion. That just once I wish one of the posters here -- one of the posters, not a politician -- would take a deep breathe and write, 'Here's what I think.' I suggested it would be along the lines of-

Unfortunately you didn't articulate your wish very clearly:

You wish that some red/Republican/conservative -- whatever you want to call them -- would just once man up and write something like:

Nowhere does it say "forum member opinions". It seemed to me as though it was alluding to Republican policy makers being less than forthright about their agenda.

 

[wareyin]

Unfortunately you didn't articulate your wish very clearly:




Nowhere does it say "forum member opinions". It seemed to me as though it was alluding to Republican policy makers being less than forthright about their agenda.

I suppose if you think the Republican policy makers are here in the forum, your confusion would make sense. I mean "these discussions" and "write"....yeah, because the averade Republican policy maker prefers the written word over Fox soundbites, right?

 

[Warp12]

I suppose if you think the Republican policy makers are here in the forum, your confusion would make sense. I mean "these discussions" and "write"....yeah, because the averade Republican policy maker prefers the written word over Fox soundbites, right?

Exactly.

 

[wareyin]

A: "Your weasel worded attempt to claim 'Oh, I thought you were talking about Congesspeople when you complained about how conservative posters aren't honest about their agenda' isn't convincing for these reasons"

B: "Exactly'"

huh, there's something you don't see everyday.

 

[newyorkguy]

Okay, Killery, 'scuse me, brainstir, tell us what's the really true truth about it all and everything.

Context is everything. The message I wrote followed the above and was in reply. This was the last line of that message.

...But they never do. Instead this kind of discussion always goes around in circles.

Which is what 'someone' is doing now.

 

[Brainster]

I wrote a message about how these kinds of threads never develop into real discussion. That just once I wish one of the posters here -- one of the posters, not a politician -- would take a deep breathe and write, 'Here's what I think.' I suggested it would be along the lines of-


Here's what I got which, ironically, makes my point-


We never see such truth in one of the debates on this message board either. This level of honesty would be refreshing from the -- I don't know what to call them, Republicans, conservatives, their political orientation is apparently secret, too -- lets say 'the other side.' They snipe and snark but never present a clear argument.

Because the purpose of these threads is not to analyze things but to dunk on the opposition. I get it, it's fun when some study supposedly proves your side right and the other side wrong.

Here's part of the study that raised my eyebrows:

Overall, the team found that mortality rates in Democratic counties dropped from 850 deaths per 100,000 people to 664 (22 percent), but in Republican counties, mortality rates declined from 867 to 771 (11 percent). When the team analyzed by race, they found that there was little gap between the improvements in mortality rates that Black and Hispanic Americans experienced in Democratic and Republican counties. But among white Americans, the gap between people living in Democratic versus Republican counties was substantial.

When it comes to "why:

The authors note that the widening gap in death rates may reflect the influence of politics on health policies. One of the inflection points detected in the study corresponds to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which was passed in 2010. More Democratic states than Republican states adopted Medicaid expansion under the ACA, which expanded health insurance coverage to people on a low income.

See the issue? If your explanation is that some states went all-in on ACA and some didn't then why are you analyzing voting at the county level? Did Republican counties in New York opt out? The mismatch makes me suspect that the results were not nearly as interesting.

 

[johnny karate]

When it comes to "why:

The authors note that the widening gap in death rates may reflect the influence of politics on health policies. One of the inflection points detected in the study corresponds to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which was passed in 2010. More Democratic states than Republican states adopted Medicaid expansion under the ACA, which expanded health insurance coverage to people on a low income.

See the issue? If your explanation is that some states went all-in on ACA and some didn't then why are you analyzing voting at the county level? Did Republican counties in New York opt out? The mismatch makes me suspect that the results were not nearly as interesting.

Here, let me help you with that:

The authors note that the widening gap in death rates may reflect the influence of politics on health policies. One of the inflection points detected in the study corresponds to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which was passed in 2010. More Democratic states than Republican states adopted Medicaid expansion under the ACA, which expanded health insurance coverage to people on a low income.

 

[marting]

So, I may have missed it but does this study account for things like educational attainment and socio economic status? The Dems are the party of elites, who do tend to also have better health outcomes.

The study doesn't address that directly but many surveys have noted a large shift over the last half century in education v party affiliation.

In contrast, college graduates went from majority Republican in 1994 (50% Republican versus 42% Democratic) to majority Democratic in 2019 (57% of Democrats versus 37% of Republicans).

Article referencing a Pew survey:
https://www.courthousenews.com/american-voters-still-divided-by-race-and-education/

 

[Warp12]

I wrote a message about how these kinds of threads never develop into real discussion. That just once I wish one of the posters here -- one of the posters, not a politician -- would take a deep breathe and write, 'Here's what I think.' I suggested it would be along the lines of-

Making health care costs at least in part taxpayer-supported is in my opinion, bad policy. Your health, your life, you get what you pay for. Don't ask me to help you. Does this translate into a reduced life span for people of a certain income level? Sadly, it can. But that's the way life works. They don't drive a new Audi, either.

Here's what I got which, ironically, makes my point-


We never see such truth in one of the debates on this message board either. This level of honesty would be refreshing from the -- I don't know what to call them, Republicans, conservatives, their political orientation is apparently secret, too -- lets say 'the other side.' They snipe and snark but never present a clear argument.

They never explain their thinking. As I've stated previously, I think in part that's because there is no thinking. It's just pure reaction.

Maybe this what you are asking for? I really don't know. I consider myself a conservative. I would usually just sit out an election rather than vote for a Dem at this point.

I think there is a misconception that all people are obligated to care about the healthcare of the poor. Personally, I don't really care too much. I don't even care if they die a little bit sooner, tbh. I have good healthcare, and I am not poor. My medical insurance is mostly covered by work.

But taxes?" Yeah, I feel that directly. Now, if there is a way that me paying more taxes for healthcare of the poor will lead to me paying less taxes overall, that sounds great. I am not overly passionate about it, though...except I would prefer paying less taxes. I am not going to vote against someone strictly because they support government subsidy, unless it has a significant detrimental impact to my take home pay.