truly amazing; trump entrance is perfect

Who says a voucher will only be able to cover one semester at "the" local non-government school?

That's brilliant. I'd like to see it with Bannon instead of Conway though.

Problem with this targeting the rural strategy is that they would have to actually deliver goodies to poor rural America, and sure as **** that's not gonna happen. The only thing for sure you can say about Trump is that the idiots who back him will get thrown under the bus.

Yeah, who needs empiricism when we know axiomatically that The Market Will Provide?

I mean there are tons of private and charter schools in my area along with a bunch of public schools and the only one I am 100% sure I can send my kid to is the public school. The charter schools all work on a highly-rigged lottery system, and private schools can refuse to take your kid simply because they don't like your face. AFAIK none of this is addressed in any voucher program that has ever been proposed.

Trump thought that they were actually trying to improve healthcare, that's why he said everyone will have coverage but, as we know now, this as nothing to do with "fixing" healthcare.

https://twitter.com/foxandfriends/st...91250226561024

Apparently "Journalism Matters" is an anti-Trump slogan now.

Yeah and he now knows this is an utter turd, which is why he doesn't want his name on it, yet SOMETHING has to pass or he looks weak. Tough spot for the poor guy.

Doesn't really seem like a tough spot to me...No one cares if this passes this week or next week or next month. The easy decision was for Trump to say the bill sucks and try again Paul Ryan. Time for him to show off all his great deal making and negotiating skills his supporters think he has.

Well, my example was plucked from real life.

http://jackontheweb.cbslocal.com/201...ing-education/

Saw that on the Daily show. Has to be one of the best gifs ever. Yuge!

That article doesn't really go into the details, so there's only one school they can opt to use their voucher with like you said? Whatever your answer, I'll take you at your word.

They have three examples, and one is from the Chicago Tribune, which idk about its overall slant, but it has a rate of being 100% pro-Trump in my newsfeed.

They're absolutely correct that "Journalism Matters" and "Democracy Dies in Darkness" are anti-Trump sentiments, but it's funny to see Fox admit that Trump stands in opposition to what are essentially paraphrases of the Founders on the First Amendment.

They're anti-Trump statements because they're anti-Fascist statements.

I don't know, but that's what the parents at the meeting were suggesting. It's a plausible situation either way. Think about rural markets and how they might not get as much competition.

Exactly. I called this when Muslim Ban 2.0 came out.

It's a pretty simple strategy.

I'm not sure what district this guy represents, looks like El Paso

Here's a list of a dozen El Paso charter schools:

http://www.greatschools.org/texas/el...ls/?st=charter

Here's a list of 100 in Dallas (in case that's where this was from)

http://www.greatschools.org/texas/da...ls/?st=charter


Looks like what the parents were saying, if we can up the education level to college just so we all have a common example, is "If the (college) voucher doesn't pay for everyone to go to Harvard, it's not good enough".

Sure, this is one idea. However, it has a big problem. Any bill that is more friendly to Ryan will be worse for people like Tom Cotton (who already opposes the bill because it's too conservative). Anything to appease Tom Cotton makes the bill worse for Freedumb Caucus types like Rand Paul. They are really stuck between a rock and several very hard places here--getting nothing done is not a great outcome for their constituents either and they know that.

Another way the GOP could legally concentrate their subsidies on their voter base is something like "Each state gets $X," where the X does not depend on the state. Similar to the Electoral College, where every state gets two EVs automatically.

That's exactly the completely out-of-touch response the state Senator gave.

Yeah, and living in the Bay area, I have the choice of dozens of Ferrari dealerships.

OK, where is it wrong?

This isn't my example, its yours Einbert. This was your example of what happens when the voucher doesn't pay for the one option in town. Turns out there are hundreds of options in your example.

As long as we're talking about education, Trump cutting funding for the arts and science obviously hurts a big section of university graduates.

First of all you completely ignored my example of rural markets. Take someone who lives an hour away from any major market. They won't have the same level of choice as someone in Dallas, not even close.

Second of all, even if the person does get to send their kid to a third-rate private school on the voucher, do you not see the problem with this? Their money (taxpayer money) is going to finance other kids' first-rate private educations, while their kids have to get by with the very basics. Even though their parents work, pay taxes, and live in the district just like everybody else. You are literally financing the first-rate schools on the backs of the poor, while they don't get to enjoy any of the benefit. It's a scheme designed to enhance income inequality and segregation, creating more poverty, crime, and drug addiction in our society. It's the opposite of what we need.