If Democrats want to win, they should filibuster Trump early and often

SP5 Christine Conley - It provides coverage for the very poor. The working poor make too much to have coverage provided but not enough to afford their own coverage. Because of this, they are fined at the end of each year.

Also, having the government apply a tax credit that covers your entire health insurance cost is most certainly not what anyone considers "paying your fair share."

SP5 Christine Conley - 1. The whole point is that most of the working poor are not covered. Jesus, I'm not sure it can be explained any clearer.

2. If taxpayers are paying for them either way, why do we need the ACA at all? We either pay for their health insurance and preventative care they wouldn't have gotten or we pay for hospital visits when they are very ill.

Just so you know, most of the working poor do not go to the doctor unless it is an absolute emergency. They can't afford the trip, and can't afford to miss those hours of work.

This is clearly not something you have any experience with. I do. I don't receive health insurance at my job, and I don't make enough to afford the $350 a month to cover my wife and I on top of our other bills (rent, car insurance, food). Because of this, I get fined. If you haven't lived it, don't act like you know what you're talking about.

SP5 Christine Conley - You also seem to not realize that the bronze plans that are covered by the tax credit don't actually help if someone has a medical emergency.

When I last looked at the marketplace, the lowest plan ($375 a month or so out of my pocket) had a 10k deductible before the insurance company would pay. How does that help someone who can't afford to go to the doctor?

SP5 Christine Conley - Supposedly the burden of the uninsured was paid by their care all went to the emergency room, where they could not be refused. Has the ACA bent the price graph one bit down?

Plus if I understand PFC Jim Wheeler correctly he is supposed to pay $4,500 in premiums, and preventative care for he and his wife are covered, but he doesn't get a dime for unexpected illness or injury until he is $10,000 out of pocket. Then he still probably has a 20% or 30% co-pay on the unexpected. So the man $14,500 out of pocket for the unexpected. If it is a chronic condition and he isn't wealthy he still has his life circling the economic drain. The ACA is an OK idea so badly put together that it does more harm than good. Most people in America who are not currently making over $100,000 a year can expect to leave nothing to their surviving spouse or children if they die of a chronic illness that does not kill them in 3-5 years.

I am almost 57. My wife and I make a low six figure income. We have good insurance. I suffer from a chronic cardiac problem. If I pursue a medically intensive medical intervention over the next five or six years, I will literally lose an 80 acre farm and debt free agricultural business and become eligible for welfare. My life expectancy will then be about 75. If I do nothing I will not live 8 years, but my wife will be able to hire someone or my daughter and husband will be able to take over the business and my wife will be spared the indignity of becoming a burden on our daughter. I am currently exploring the costs of medical tourism to India. Once I understand all of the financials I will choose between longer life and debt or financial security for my wife. I will probably choose an early death.

The Democrats gave people access to crappy insurance, not affordable health care.

I would hope they use it selectively, without shooting themselves in the foot.

If winning means not allowing the GOP to remake the US as an anti-immigrant, anti-woman, anti-LGBT right-wing Christian theocracy, then I'm all for it.

, if you really want to see a good and ironic and sarcastic win for the Democrats, we should rename the 16 billion-dollar nuclear depository that is almost complete but purposely shut down by the Democrats we should rename it to the Harry Reid nuclear depository and underground soccer field and actually make it useful where we store nuclear waste and keep it there for Millennia until it becomes safe instead of having it sitting outside in pools of every nuclear power plant in the country. the win for Harry Reid is his depository in his home state will pashley be used as a nuclear depositories should have just some giant incomplete empty salt mine.

LTC Greg Henning - Is that what's going on here? Is RallyPoint a sterling example of said unity? Please, peruse through the posts, tally up how many times someone says snowflake, liberal or millennial in a pejorative manner, or imply that left-leaning parties are idiots. Compare it to a tally of the opposite. If this was a drinking game, we'd all have died already.

SSG Jessica Bautista - I taught high school for many years so, the familiarity with millennials is something I understand, As far as RP, historically, military is conservative and this is reflected in the various posts. Many of these comments are not PC and very direct. There are smart people on both sides of the political spectrum as well as idiots. I avoid labeling people based on their political convictions. Our diversity has made our nation great. Both sides need to work together or we will continue to decline as a nation. Your example of the drinking game is a good parity to explain how our government has operated for a long time. Thanks for sharing your point of view.

SSG Jessica Bautista - I guess it depends on how one defines the term.

Snowflake --To me the pejorative "snowflake" refers to someone who figuratively becomes immobilized, in the fetal position and cries when something doesn't go their way, then demands an accommodation from their daily routine because of their perceived stress level. As a for instance, I believe that you are politically aligned with the majority of "snowflakes" I have seen portrayed in the media. But I would never consider you a "snowflake". To quote a John Wayne movie I think you have "grit". I just happen to disagree with you far more than agree.

Liberal -- I do not consider liberal a pejorative. When I apply it to a group I consider it a broad sweeping general characterization of people with similar beliefs. I do happen to disagree with most but not all of those "liberal" beliefs. I recognize that any/every person can and does have some issues where they are liberal, and other issues where they are conservative. It is best to engage on the issue and not on the label.

Millennial -- I do not consider millennial a pejorative. It is a grouping of people by age. I personally know very liberal Millennials and very conservative Millennials. Their opinions sweep across the spectrum. Just like "...old, conservative, white men...", a label you used at least once as a pejorative, or the emasculating imagery of "..pearl clutching..." to marginalize your perception of older conservative white males.

I don't care who voted for who as long as you voted. I do seriously fail to understand why many democrats are losing their minds over the election. In four years you get another shot. Adjust your course or you may have issues again. I see Harry Reid say there is nothing wrong with the Democratic Party. Might be out of touch with reality or just needs to back to Pahrump, NV and watch the desert flora and fauna. Semper Fi.