Jump to content
disgruntledemployee

The Next President is...

Recommended Posts

As an additional thought, I also happen to agree that the individual mandate in the ACA was not desirable. I would have preferred that the government offer plans and subsidize employer-based plans that achieved 100% coverage without forcing people to buy a product from a private company. President Obama argued as much when he was a candidate for President in 2007 and 2008, but the realities of legislating and trying to reform the system within the construct of private insurance made the mandate necessary.

The idea behind that aspect of the ACA was that the government could not mandate that insurance companies cover all pre-existing conditions (very popular) without also mandating that everyone buy insurance (not so popular). The first without the second in theory leads to a cost death-spiral where actuaries at the insurance companies have to keep raising rates at extremely high rates since they are covering a sicker and sicker pool of insured people while healthy people go without coverage until they moment  get hurt or sick. That dynamic is also why you have specific enrollment windows in employer-based insurance rather than being able to sign up anytime.

Anyways, IMHO, it's part of the devil's bargain of trying to use market-based reforms for something (health care coverage) that ultimately isn't driven solely by market-based forces. For a lot of health care, you can't as a consumer just choose to do without or shop around a ton, and because of that market forces that normally stabilize prices don't work as well. IMHO other countries have solved this problem better than we have in a variety of different ways and it would be great if we could learn from those examples and adopt system-wide reform that both lowers costs and gets to 100% coverage, which again, many other countries have achieved using different mechanisms. T.R. Reid's The Healing of America is a great read on this topic that I highly recommend.

I'm interested to see what happens now that the individual mandate was repealed but the requirements for covering pre-existing conditions remain in effect. The cynic in me thinks that the point was to cause an ACA cost death-spiral and force Democrats to the table for new health care legislation, and the President has basically implied as much. TBD, hoping for the best, especially for those who rely on the ACA for their health coverage.

Edited by nsplayr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/31/2017 at 1:16 AM, HeloDude said:

The same Huffington Post which gave Hillary a 98% chance in winning the election?  Oh ok...

Didn't even click on the link did you? Sad.

Allow me to help you out. This is a small portion of the polls combined in the graphic. 

hbfoPsz.png

It's pretty clear that more Americans favor the ACA than those who do not favor it.

Edited by Seriously

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What were the demographics of the polls? I'm not a health insurance expert by any means, but from my family's experience, the ACA has fucked over the middle class big time. Examples of that is small business was hurt (e.g. my in-laws had to let their employee count drop because they could not afford ACA mandates) and my parents' premiums and co-pays went up substantially, to the point I think they're very close to being in the same position as some others' family members mentioned above. Even the blue collar world has been affected to some degree (reference less jobs available in my in-law's town).

Now, I do know there are a lot of blue collar/choose to be on welfare types that love ACA (again, referencing my in-law's town). It's damn near free health care for them, why wouldn't they like it? That crowd also doesn't care about less jobs in reality because they're happy to stay on welfare/suck at the government's tit for the rest of their lives.  Bottom line, healthcare is fucked and needs an overhaul, and it blows my mind that anyone in the middle class with sense thinks ACA is the answer.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Seriously said:

Didn't even click on the link did you? Sad.

Allow me to help you out. This is a small portion of the polls combined in the graphic. 

hbfoPsz.png

It's pretty clear that more Americans favor the ACA than those who do not favor it.

Strange... I looked at the entire list, and from October 10, 2009 to Jan 7, 2017 Americans are clearly and strongly opposed to the ACA. In the past year, yes, these every-so-accurate polls are showing more people in favor of the ACA... Maybe America is in an Enlightenment period and has finally discovered the amazing Utopia Obama wanted to create through government-provided healthcare/cell phones/everything else... After all, nothing says streamlined and monetary efficiency like government programs. We all remember the great successes of the VA hospitals and how Dems rode in like white knights to save the VA from the evil Republicans who wanted to defund it because Republicans hate Vets more than anything and wanted to screw them over under the guise of defunding a "corrupt and criminally negligent organization."

Or maybe less Republicans are voting in the polls because they know Trump and the Republican House/Senate want to get rid of the ACA and they don't have to fight the good fight via internet polls anymore; and more Dems are voting in the polls because they are afraid that the Obama Legacy will wither and Republicans will work in concert with the Russians to let the uber-wealthy deny all forms of healthcare to all the poor people of the land. The Trump administration will create a new form of AIDS and pump it into the inner cities while they laugh in their ivory towers as Hillary cradles a sick infant and cries out, "None of this would've happened if the electoral college didn't screw me out of a win!!"

Ok, sorry I've been reading too much Newsweek. In the end, the ACA sucks and badly hurt a close family member of mine because of the ridiculous regulations it put on small, private healthcare providers. But I'm not stupid enough to believe that the Republicans in DC are the answer to our healthcare woes. I think it would take cooperation from both sides to fix the shitshow going on in the system, so basically we're all fucked until the grandstanding idiots stop pointing fingers and start offering solutions.

Edited by tk1313

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tk1313 said:

I think it would take cooperation from both sides to fix the shitshow going on in the system, so basically we're all fucked until the grandstanding idiots stop pointing fingers and start offering solutions.

Preach.  Until we get past the "other side is the enemy" and not someone with a differing opinion of to get things done, we're screwed.  Compromise is a strength, yet we've stepped away from it in every facet.  Talking Heads on TV sure don't help.  

Hell, we've finally had R's in both Legistlature and Executive...and still can't get stuff done.  Not looking forward to the halt that'll be "Blue 2018."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was made to be difficult, it was made to be slow.  And if you think our politics are bad, watch the House in London sometime, we seem down right civilized.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, tk1313 said:

Strange... I looked at the entire list, and from October 10, 2009 to Jan 7, 2017 Americans are clearly and strongly opposed to the ACA. In the past year, yes, these every-so-accurate polls are showing more people in favor of the ACA... 

Like I said before, a lot of this reversal in popularity can be explained by loss aversion. 

6 hours ago, tk1313 said:

Or maybe less Republicans are voting in the polls because they know Trump and the Republican House/Senate want to get rid of the ACA and they don't have to fight the good fight via internet polls anymore; and more Dems are voting in the polls because they are afraid that the Obama Legacy will wither and Republicans will work in concert with the Russians to let the uber-wealthy deny all forms of healthcare to all the poor people of the land.

You may want to read up on how professional organizations do polling; your characterization of how it works is not remotely close to accurate. This is not a bad summary.

The biggest threat to modern political polling accuracy is reaching people who only have cell phones and actually getting them to respond to the poll questions. Today there’s a lot of art that goes into how you blend responses from land lines, cell phones and online surveys to still get an representative slice of the population...things were much simpler when the vast majority of voters had landline numbers listed in the phone book and you could call them during dinner and have them pick up.

There’s big money for the companies and organizations that can consistently demonstrate accurate results, so legitimate polling outfits have every incentive to be accurate and stay ahead of the curve in how to solve the challenges that exist. 

Edited by nsplayr
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Forget the polls. Just google how many people still just enrolled in the ACA in the last sign up period. About 9 million just did so which should indicate that there is enough Blue and Red need for some sort of health service. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were forced to do it, it will be more telling in 2019 when that force goes away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I guess that is one way to look at it. 

TBD 2018. I thought the penalty goes away in 2018. If someone does not sign up in 2018, do they still incur the penalty?

 

edit: disregard did not know  the ACA window for enrollment is so small. So TBD 2019

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, nsplayr said:

You may want to read up on how professional organizations do polling; your characterization of how it works is not remotely close to accurate. This is not a bad summary.

Valid, I'm not an expert on polling nor will I ever be (or care to be), which is why I came sarcasm loaded. But, in my defense, the so called "experts" in political polling consistently get it wrong, even when everyone knows their estimates are very far off. I personally think it is mostly bias, but whatever the case I simply couldn't care less because polls are polls (like rumors are rumors), and I never take them unless I'm picking which football team is going to win.

As an aside, wouldn't my "people stopped taking the ACA polls once the Repubs won the majority" fit into the "boomerang effect" from your link? I.e. President Trump says he will repeal ACA so I'm not going to take a poll asking my opinion on whether or not it should stay. I already voted for someone who wants to repeal it, he got elected... what's the point of reaffirming my stance via polling now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Like I said before, a lot of this reversal in popularity can be explained by loss aversion. 

I agree.

21 hours ago, nsplayr said:

You may want to read up on how professional organizations do polling; your characterization of how it works is not remotely close to accurate. This is not a bad summary.

Yes, and no. That's a very basic and somewhat dated description of polling. Organizations rarely use "randomized numbers" anymore, and they can be very loose with determining who is a "democrat", "independent" and "republican", since most people won't outright say that on the phone. 

To make matters worse, most polling agencies won't release how they calculate or determine their poll numbers, because it's their "secret sauce". So, basically... trust them. Experienced politicos generally have an idea of how they slant (+5R here and +2D there) to gauge where things really sit, but the numbers given to the public aren't squeaky clean.

21 hours ago, nsplayr said:

The biggest threat to modern political polling accuracy is reaching people who only have cell phones and actually getting them to respond to the poll questions. Today there’s a lot of art that goes into how you blend responses from land lines, cell phones and online surveys to still get an representative slice of the population...things were much simpler when the vast majority of voters had landline numbers listed in the phone book and you could call them during dinner and have them pick up.

Cell phones are a big problem, primarily because of the porting of #s. It's no longer as simple as running a voter or property tax check with the state and sorting by area code. Big data is here and it's getting better, but we're having a very hard time tracking people and reaching them since they've basically "vanished" off the official record.

21 hours ago, nsplayr said:

There’s big money for the companies and organizations that can consistently demonstrate accurate results, so legitimate polling outfits have every incentive to be accurate and stay ahead of the curve in how to solve the challenges that exist. 

Yes, but there's bigger money (website ad revenue/membership fees) when an organization is the first to release a "shocking new statistic". The smaller outfits that aren't trying to keep up with the news cycle are invaluable, but very rare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, waveshaper said:

Here's one positive accomplished, by this administration, that most folks will profit ($$$$) a wee bit from. You can compare your 2016/2017 taxes paid to what you should be paying in 2018.

https://www.taxreformcalculator.com/

I'm saving over $1k, with the added bonus that I won't have to itemize deductions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the current official list of the worlds 25 worst shithole countries. Ref; United Nations Human Development Index (HDI) plus other factors. Note; 23 of the worlds worst countries are on the African Continent, the other two shittiest countries in the world are Haiti and Afghanistan. Also, according to UN Human Development Index Norway is the best/most livable country in the world. Note; There's not enough data for the UN to score the shittyness of Somali and North Korea but they would probably be in the top five shittiest countries on earth if the UN ever gets enough data for a UN HDI score.
- Here's the UN list (Niger is the #1 worst country in the world).

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2015/12/21/25-worst-countries-to-live-in-the-world/

1. Niger.
2. Central African Republic.
3. Eritrea.
4. Chad.
5. Burundi.
6. Burkina Faso.
7. Guinea.
8. Sierra Leone.
9. Mozambique.
10. Mali.
11. Guinea-Bissau.
12. Liberia.
13. Democratic Republic of the Congo.

14. Gambia.
15. Ethiopia.
16. Malawi.
17. Cote d-Ivoire.
18. Afghanistan.
19. Senegal.
20. South Sudan.
21. Djibouti.
22. Sudan.
23. Benin.
24. Haiti.
25. Uganda.

World map with UN HDI score for each country;

http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, waveshaper said:

Here's the current official list of the worlds 25 worst shithole countries. Ref; United Nations Human Development Index (HDI) plus other factors. Note; 23 of the worlds worst countries are on the African Continent, the other two shittiest countries in the world are Haiti and Afghanistan. Also, according to UN Human Development Index Norway is the best/most livable country in the world. Note; There's not enough data for the UN to score the shittyness of Somali and North Korea but they would probably be in the top five shittiest countries on earth if the UN ever gets enough data for a UN HDI score.
- Here's the UN list (Niger is the #1 worst country in the world).

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2015/12/21/25-worst-countries-to-live-in-the-world/

1. Niger.
2. Central African Republic.
3. Eritrea.
4. Chad.
5. Burundi.
6. Burkina Faso.
7. Guinea.
8. Sierra Leone.
9. Mozambique.
10. Mali.
11. Guinea-Bissau.
12. Liberia.
13. Democratic Republic of the Congo.

14. Gambia.
15. Ethiopia.
16. Malawi.
17. Cote d-Ivoire.
18. Afghanistan.
19. Senegal.
20. South Sudan.
21. Djibouti.
22. Sudan.
23. Benin.
24. Haiti.
25. Uganda.

World map with UN HDI score for each country;

http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries

 

 

Yeah. Fuck those people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 17D_guy said:

To me, it makes perfect sense why they'd want to come here.

And to me, it makes perfect sense why we would want to scrutinize the hell out of those individuals (all immigrants really) who wants to come here.  If it doesn't benefit American citizens then why bring in people who will be a net drain on society?  It's bad enough that our federal government fetuses to take border security/illegal immigration seriously, but intentionally welcoming people who do not share our values/have little offer is stupid.  Europe is starting to learn this the hard way...

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Y’all rationalizing POTUS saying certain (overwhelmingly black) countries are “shithole countries” and certain (overwhelmingly white) countries have more desirable potential immigrants is pretty sad. No one is arguing that Haiti is nicer than Norway, it’s pretty clear that it’s not; that’s not the point.

But have some damn decency Mr. President. You’re the POTUS and you speak for us and your words matter. You simply cannot talk like this.

The story of America is not that we built some modern-day Elysium by only letting in the “right” people with the “best” backgrounds. Far from it, and almost exactly the opposite in fact. Raise your hand if your ancestors immigrated here from a country that used to be considered not so great...my hand is raised.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/02/opinion/illegal-immigration-italian-americans.html

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
 

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
 

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
 

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
 

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
 

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Edited by nsplayr
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

Y’all rationalizing POTUS saying certain (overwhelmingly black) countries are “shithole countries” and certain (overwhelmingly white) countries have more desirable potential immigrants is pretty sad. No one is arguing that Haiti is nicer than Norway, it’s pretty clear that it’s not; that’s not the point.

But have some damn decency Mr. President. You’re the POTUS and you speak for us and your words matter. You simply cannot talk like this.

The story of America is not that we built some modern-day Elysium by only letting in the “right” people with the “best” backgrounds. Far from it, and almost exactly the opposite in fact. Raise your hand if your ancestors immigrated here from a country that used to be considered not so great...my hand is raised.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/02/opinion/illegal-immigration-italian-americans.html

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
 

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
 

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
 

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
 

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
 

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

1) He's not on tape saying "Haiti is a shithole". A "Democratic Aide" told the press that the comment was uttered at a bipartisan meeting. As any of us with significant others knows... What you say and what they hear are often VERY different things. He could have said it, or he may have never said it at all. We simply don't know.

2) Speaking of "rationalizing"... in the WaPo, HuffPo and NBC News pieces, they don't give any supposed quotes or tidbits that support your "this is racism" premise. It's hilarious really. Everyday I have to hear about how Trump is a child, he's stupid, he's not smart, he's mentally disabled, etc... but yet you (and liberals, writ large) seriously think someone who is all of those things, someone who can hardly manage to wipe his own ass... has this great, secret, racist plan that he's covering up by saying "shithole countries" when he really means "I hate black/brown people". So, either the left is wrong about him being so incredibly stupid, or they're wrong about this great racist master plan. 

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. The left lost their mind (cries of racism) when certain elements of the right wing hated Obama for the sake of hating him. That element of the right wing often concocted false stories and narratives to justify that hate. Well, look in the mirror. They (the left) are doing the exact same thing now.

3) America has a great history of letting in people whom we thought could contribute to society at large. Now, I guess it's racist to even ask if they want to contribute once they get here. If you're non-white and want to be an American, come on in! It would be racist of us to ask your skills and desires!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Kiloalpha said:

1) He's not on tape saying "Haiti is a shithole". A "Democratic Aide" told the press that the comment was uttered at a bipartisan meeting. As any of us with significant others knows... What you say and what they hear are often VERY different things. He could have said it, or he may have never said it at all. We simply don't know.

2) Speaking of "rationalizing"... in the WaPo, HuffPo and NBC News pieces, they don't give any supposed quotes or tidbits that support your "this is racism" premise. It's hilarious really. Everyday I have to hear about how Trump is a child, he's stupid, he's not smart, he's mentally disabled, etc... but yet you (and liberals, writ large) seriously think someone who is all of those things, someone who can hardly manage to wipe his own ass... has this great, secret, racist plan that he's covering up by saying "shithole countries" when he really means "I hate black/brown people". So, either the left is wrong about him being so incredibly stupid, or they're wrong about this great racist master plan. 

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. The left lost their mind (cries of racism) when certain elements of the right wing hated Obama for the sake of hating him. That element of the right wing often concocted false stories and narratives to justify that hate. Well, look in the mirror. They (the left) are doing the exact same thing now.

3) America has a great history of letting in people whom we thought could contribute to society at large. Now, I guess it's racist to even ask if they want to contribute once they get here. If you're non-white and want to be an American, come on in! It would be racist of us to ask your skills and desires!

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/01/12/senator-who-immigration-meeting-trump-he-said-hate-filled-vile-and-racist-things/1027816001/

1. Senator Dick Durbin, who was in the room, says on the record that the President said what was quoted in the Post story. So I mean, I wasn't there, but one of these two people is lying. I'll take my changes on that one given the track record.

2. Saying that immigrants from Haiti and El Salvador and Africa are not desirable, categorically, and ones from Norway are desirable, categorically, is pretty clear. Hummm...what do probably 99% of immigrants from the former "shithole" category have in common? What do 99% of immigrants from Norway have in common, other than being from Norway, that differs from the first group? Granted, the President didn't say explicitly, "I hate black people!" but come on man, put on your thinking cap and take a look at what he meant. IMHO he has a 1980s NYC attitude toward race that is inappropriate for 2018 in general and the office he holds specifically.

3. America has a great history of letting people in, period. Immigration has been a huge strength for our country in contrast to places like Japan or some European countries who were more insular and are now graying and in need of more young workers. And I'm not opposed to programs that take into account the skills and educational attainment of immigrants, we have programs like that. I am very much opposed to categorically labeling an entire country's population (or an entire continent's population) as being unworthy of immigrating to American because their birthplace is, in fact, a shithole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nsplayr said:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/01/12/senator-who-immigration-meeting-trump-he-said-hate-filled-vile-and-racist-things/1027816001/

1. Senator Dick Durbin, who was in the room, says on the record that the President said what was quoted in the Post story. So I mean, I wasn't there, but one of these two people is lying. I'll take my changes on that one given the track record.

2. Saying that immigrants from Haiti and El Salvador and Africa are not desirable, categorically, and ones from Norway are desirable, categorically, is pretty clear. Hummm...what do probably 99% of immigrants from the former "shithole" category have in common? What do 99% of immigrants from Norway have in common, other than being from Norway, that differs from the first group? Granted, the President didn't say explicitly, "I hate black people!" but come on man, put on your thinking cap and take a look at what he meant. IMHO he has a 1980s NYC attitude toward race that is inappropriate for 2018 in general and the office he holds specifically.

3. America has a great history of letting people in, period. Immigration has been a huge strength for our country in contrast to places like Japan or some European countries who were more insular and are now graying and in need of more young workers. And I'm not opposed to programs that take into account the skills and educational attainment of immigrants, we have programs like that. I am very much opposed to categorically labeling an entire country's population (or an entire continent's population) as being unworthy of immigrating to American because their birthplace is, in fact, a shithole.

Fair, that's a good counter-point. I honestly hadn't seen that piece with Dick Durbin's comments.

Well, let's look at what separates those two countries. Haiti has an astronomically high illiteracy rate. Norway does not. The crime rate in Haiti is atrocious. Norway is much safer. I can put together a list of probably a hundred things that separates these two countries economically and socially. However, you'd rather focus on one thing, that being the race of the majority in those countries.

Think about it for a second. Imagine creating a list of all the people of Norway and Haiti, removing any names, race or identifying information and instead giving them a #. Then, rack and stack them based on their skills and talents. Norwegians are going to be HEAVILY favored. That's not an indictment of race, that's an indictment of the countries they live in. It's a basic acceptance that certain countries have people with more skills than others, through no fault of their own. The question then becomes, do we want to bring in people who have fewer skills and talents? Or, do we want to bring in people who can contribute immediately? That's a debate worth having, and there's valid arguments on both sides. Trump could be some old school 1980's NYC racist. I don't know, and I'm not going to assume he is. Much like Obama could have been a 1980's Chicago racist, but I didn't assume anything about him either. 

Yes, and no. Controlled immigration has been a huge strength for us. Assimilation is a word that seems to get liberals all in a tizzy as of late, but it's a key concept to keep in mind. We let in a certain amount of people, from certain places... then let in a few more. It's common sense, really. Let's say you've got a team of 10 guys and the chemistry, work ethic and camaraderie is fantastic. But, you need more people to grow and handle the next big project (or some guys decided to retire/leave). Do you add 15 new guys to your team? No, you add a little at a time, that way they have a chance to integrate, learn, grow and become a part of the squad. Once they're seasoned and on their feet, you bring in some more. Same concept applies to immigration. 

I see your outrage over the choice of words used, and on a basic level... I agree. However, I can promise you (from personal experience) that lawmakers in D.C. use much more abrasive, foul and disgusting language when they're behind closed doors than simply saying some country is a "shithole". This feigned outrage by them, is comical. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
2 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Y’all rationalizing POTUS saying certain (overwhelmingly black) countries are “shithole countries” and certain (overwhelmingly white) countries have more desirable potential immigrants is pretty sad. No one is arguing that Haiti is nicer than Norway, it’s pretty clear that it’s not; that’s not the point.

But have some damn decency Mr. President. You’re the POTUS and you speak for us and your words matter. You simply cannot talk like this.

The story of America is not that we built some modern-day Elysium by only letting in the “right” people with the “best” backgrounds. Far from it, and almost exactly the opposite in fact. Raise your hand if your ancestors immigrated here from a country that used to be considered not so great...my hand is raised.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/02/opinion/illegal-immigration-italian-americans.html

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
 

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
 

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
 

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
 

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
 

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

How about just a little decency!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump couldn't have chosen a worse target for his racist comments than Nigeria. 

Houston Chronicle:

"Data show Nigerians the most educated in the U.S.

BACHELOR'S AND BEYOND
In America, Nigerians' education pursuit is above rest
Whether driven by immigration or family, data show more earn degrees" 

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Data-show-Nigerians-the-most-educated-in-the-U-S-1600808.php

He's racist. Stop rationalizing. If you're OK with comments like this (it's not the first time he's made racist comments), you're racist too. 

Edited by Jaded
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×