The Protest By Women is Too Huge to Dismiss as a One Hit Wonder.

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: carewemust

There's an official platform, you know. Here.


Just a few of the principles:

“Accountability and justice for police brutality” and “[dismantling] the gender and racial inequities within the criminal justice system”

Freedom from sexual violence

Ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution that would guarantee equal protection based on gender

Affirming that all domestic and caretaking work is work, even if unpaid, and that women — especially women of color — bear the brunt of that burden

“The right to organize and fight for a living minimum wage” for all workers, labor protections for undocumented and migrant workers, and “solidarity with sex workers’ rights movements”

Comprehensive reproductive rights, LGBTQ rights, and immigrant and refugee rights

As far as why so many are marching? Because being silent about these things is just wrong. I have several friends who went (one flew to Washington) and I would have went to the Portland one here if not for work schedules. Having a voice and using it is just about the only power left. Staying silent is not an option.

Could have swore I saw quite A LOT of police shootings under obama. In fact he almost encouraged a war between the African American community, and police. A liberal did this. So protesting trump seems a bit unreal for that fact. Liberals just need something new to cry about. After trump it will probably be god knows what. Stick around though we'll know soon enough. Couple months I'd say.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: kngfc
Trump got more fat women walking in 1 day than Michelle did in 8 years.

All it took was the threat of the GOP finally destroying healthcare.

Like it isn't destroyed already?

Why the hell would we want to go back before the ACA with junk plans, denial of service for extended illnesses, pre-existing condition refusals, payout caps and faster rising costs?

So a middle class family doesn't have to pay 10,000 premium/deductible or be fined if they can't afford to pay for it. The fine isn't just for middle class, it's for everyone who wants to opt out. It's the uACA unless you qualify for subsidies.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Phage

again you deflect
it is a simple statistic
the MAJORITY of white women voted for donald john trump

were the marchers rejoicing because their votes put trump in office?

did the marchers not vote?

So in essence, the protestors DO NOT represent the majority of women VOTERS in America. It's the "squeakiest wheel" gets the most attention. I wonder what Donald Trump signed today, while these protestors covered for him?

originally posted by: dreamingawake

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Throes

To be clear. I'm not saying that they're right by default or anything. All I'm saying is that belittling them or dismissing a million plus people gathered together in protest should be something that people take seriously. Especially when it's primarily all of one sex doing it.

I respect women and while I have no problem calling them on their BS like anyone else, I still respect them as the yin to my yang. They deserve that and I understand their position on some things. Men do treat women like sh*t quite a bit. But that goes both ways as well. But that doesn't make it ok in either direction.

I'd also like to think that if it was a million men pissed off together about something that women would show a little respect too. At least enough to hear us out like adults and not just laugh and make jokes about it. I think they deserve the same as what we would expect of them.

Oh if a million men marched I gaurantee there wouldn't be respect, unless it was a purely racial march.

Racial marches DO NOT deserve respect.

I meant the million man march for African American equality.

If a random million men started protesting over Clinton and her foundation, the redicule would be ENDLESS!

a reply to: Phage

So what? Why does it matter?
you asked for a source when i stated the fact

why did you ask for the source for something that doesnt matter to you?

why did they march if they voted for trump
why did they march if they did not vote

otherwise what magically changed in the last 7 years to make these women march?
did the big o not do enough for them?

or are these just angry losers?

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: kngfc
Trump got more fat women walking in 1 day than Michelle did in 8 years.

All it took was the threat of the GOP finally destroying healthcare.

Like it isn't destroyed already?

Why the hell would we want to go back before the ACA with junk plans, denial of service for extended illnesses, pre-existing condition refusals, payout caps and faster rising costs?

So a middle class family doesn't have to pay 10,000 premium/deductible or be fined if they can't afford to pay for it. The fine isn't just for middle class, it's for everyone who wants to opt out. It's the uACA unless you qualify for subsidies.

That Penalty/Tax/Fine is essentially gone for 2017, and going forward, thanks to a wide-ranging Executive Order that Donald Trump signed, shortly after being sworn in yesterday.

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: kngfc
Trump got more fat women walking in 1 day than Michelle did in 8 years.

All it took was the threat of the GOP finally destroying healthcare.

Like it isn't destroyed already?

Why the hell would we want to go back before the ACA with junk plans, denial of service for extended illnesses, pre-existing condition refusals, payout caps and faster rising costs?

So a middle class family doesn't have to pay 10,000 premium/deductible or be fined if they can't afford to pay for it. The fine isn't just for middle class, it's for everyone who wants to opt out. It's the uACA unless you qualify for subsidies.

So you want junk plans that insurance companies can cancel after you get sick or cap out and then not able to get insured again because now you have pre-existing conditions?

originally posted by: Throes

If a random million men started protesting over Clinton and her foundation, the redicule would be ENDLESS!

Yeah. They were called Trump Rallies and those million men ended up winning because everyone made jokes and didn't listen to them.

You should learn a lesson from that and try not to repeat it with these million women who are doing it now.

You can learn from the mistakes of others as well.

Organizer For DC Women’s March, Linda Sarsour Is Pro Sharia Law with Ties To Hamas

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: kngfc
Trump got more fat women walking in 1 day than Michelle did in 8 years.

All it took was the threat of the GOP finally destroying healthcare.

Like it isn't destroyed already?

Why the hell would we want to go back before the ACA with junk plans, denial of service for extended illnesses, pre-existing condition refusals, payout caps and faster rising costs?

So a middle class family doesn't have to pay 10,000 premium/deductible or be fined if they can't afford to pay for it. The fine isn't just for middle class, it's for everyone who wants to opt out. It's the uACA unless you qualify for subsidies.

So you want junk plans that insurance companies can cancel after you get sick or cap out and then not able to get insured again because now you have pre-existing conditions?

The legitimate companies didn't cancel you after you got sick, unless you lied to get the coverage. If you got sick without insurance, most states had high-risk pools operated by a Blue Cross company. The problem was that people couldn't afford those plans. Hopefully, under the new system, those "pools" will return and be subsidized higher than they were pre-2010.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: kngfc
Trump got more fat women walking in 1 day than Michelle did in 8 years.

All it took was the threat of the GOP finally destroying healthcare.

Like it isn't destroyed already?

Why the hell would we want to go back before the ACA with junk plans, denial of service for extended illnesses, pre-existing condition refusals, payout caps and faster rising costs?

Maybe because before the ACA if my family lost employer coverage, there would be more than one or two options available to us consisting of premiums equal to taking on the equivalent of a third mortgage in cost each month which would bankrupt us for which privilege we would lost our doctor and when we found a new one likely receive less care because we'd be bankrupt (not exaggerating; even cutting everything non-essential out of our budget and putting the kid in public school, we can't cover three mortgage size payments) so we couldn't pay out of pocket health expenses.

We could opt for no coverage and get punished for not having what they demand we have to avoid going bankrupt, but that means I'd have to go without any migraine management at all which would mean I couldn't hold down a job. So we'd go under from that end of things without my income.

We've thought over all kinds of options, but even getting legally divorced doesn't get us anywhere except putting me on Medicaid which still loses me all my doctors.

So, yes, let's get rid of Obamacare because we could have at least found plans we could squeeze to make work for us before the ACA.

a reply to: carewemust

Hopefully, under the new system, those "pools" will return and be subsidized higher than they were pre-2010.

Hopefully, the government will pay more to prop up insurance companies?

a reply to: Pyle

So you want junk plans that insurance companies can cancel after you get sick or cap out and then not able to get insured again because now you have pre-existing conditions?

Simmer down. It has already been established that provisions for pre-existing conditions will be kept.

Better is coming. Be patient.

a reply to: BlueAjah

I think you should do your own thinking rather than letting the GatewayPundint website do it for you. Because she sure doesn't sound like she's for Sharia Law.

originally posted by: Willtell

A rapists in the white house, a crotch grabber

Its a scary prospect for right thinking woman

Don't worry, Hillary didn't win so Bill will not be back in the White House anytime soon...

a reply to: queenofswords

It has already been established that provisions for pre-existing conditions will be kept.

Established?
What has not been established is how that can be implemented without a mandate.

So, arm waving.

a reply to: Phage

Give it a little time, Phage. There are things in the works regardless of what the opposition is spouting. Pre-existing conditions is the One Big Thing that everybody insists on keeping. It won't be done away with.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: carewemust

Hopefully, under the new system, those "pools" will return and be subsidized higher than they were pre-2010.

Hopefully, the government will pay more to prop up insurance companies?

It depends, Phage. If health insurance companies will be used to pay medical bills in the new system, their solvency will obviously be important.

ACA will fail so we can wait until it fully fails or replace it now. Unfortunately, unless we remove the power of insurance companies that dictate prices I do not see anything being a total success. We need a system outside the insurance umbrella and there are many examples, such as self improvement surgeries, and good care outside the US.

a reply to: carewemust

If health insurance companies will be used to pay medical bills in the new system, their solvency will obviously be important.

Obviously.
So you are in favor of government subsidy of corporations which act in the public interest. Cool.

What is the ultimate source of that subsidy?