The Democratic Presidential Debates
Comments
-
They adapt to a changing market or they dissolve, I guess.Lerxst1992 said:rgambs said:
Where does this notion come from?Lerxst1992 said:mrussel1 said:
That's the beauty of policy. There's almost always a third, fourth, or fifth way.ecdanc said:
And if you did?mrussel1 said:
Pete offers a choice, as does Biden. I don't have to make that decision.ecdanc said:
Would you give up your choice if it meant everyone had healthcare?mrussel1 said:
Exactly.. it's very frustrating.. and when a candidate like Pete offers a real choice for us, he gets smeared from the left because Bernie and his crew knows what's best for me. I can't be trusted to make such an important decision for my family.Lerxst1992 said:mrussel1 said:
This is so rational and the argument I've made for quite a while. If medicare offers comparable services at a better cost, it will choke out private insurance OR force private to lower its premiums. It's a great strategy and proof of concept. M4A presumes that every American prefers that gov't driven insurance. I support choice.cincybearcat said:
Have you watched the debates?Spiritual_Chaos said:
He has said he thinks it's the best option...but...not everyone wants it AND Bernie can;t pay for it. He said in the last debate that a medicare for all who want it plan would first and foremost ensure everyone has coverage (which is the important part no?) and create the public option. And if it's as good as bernie says and he thinks, people will choose it over time.
Stuck between no choice Republicans and no choice democratic socialists.Not to the Bernie gang. They’d rather run on no choice and watch the Supreme Court go conservative for the next fifty years.
democrats are in the middle of the dumbest policy debate right now. Do we give everybody the option of Medicare or ram it down their throats with socialism, while the gop is galvanizing their base with the Court motivating them to show up.
which leads us to the bigger picture, we risk this election with socialism, the court that ends up as a result of this loss would never allow the govt to seize the assets of all the insurance companies and allow a full mandate until at least 2112. Hell, the current court might strike down the Obamacare mandate, let alone forced socialism.
Bernie is on a collision course to decimate our party and country. I definitely feel the burn.Bernies plan, word for word:Create a Medicare for All, single-payer, national health insurance program.
so what happens with all the other insurance companies?
im ok with it, I but don’t think 270 electors would be.
I've never heard a word about the government seizing insurance company assets.
Maybe back when I listened to Rush Limbaugh for shit's and giggles, but never from a reasonable source.
Where did you hear it?Monkey Driven, Call this Living?0 -
pjl44 said:Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:
Would be pretty low on my list. Authoritarian who's trying to buy the nomination.wndowpayne said:Without reading through all posts, what are thoughts on Bloomberg?Until we pass a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending, this is our system.
democrats can either play this game or watch from the sidelines.
The majority of New York is low crime. High crime does exist but is centered in very specific neighborhoods. You need to put the cops where the crime occurs. Unfortunately Bloomberg made disparaging comments about alleged criminals and focused his comments towards race instead of location. But in no way did I support stop and frisk. It went too far.
You're definitely preaching to the choir on campaign spending. He's not doing anything illegal but it's obnoxious to watch and one more reason for me to not like the guy.
Stop and frisk is a big part of it for me. And his deference to China and wrangling a third term. If you look at his record, it's easy to see how he was a Republican. I'm surprised how much he's being embraced.This does not look so republican to me-- Create a Medicare-like public insurance option
- Improve and expand enrollment in Affordable Care Act plans
- Allow people to keep their private insurance
- Cap health care prices
- Lower drug costs
- Expand access to dental, hearing, and vision coverage
- Create a permanent reinsurance program that reduces customer premiums
0 -
A normal moderate Republican similar to Romney.Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:
Would be pretty low on my list. Authoritarian who's trying to buy the nomination.wndowpayne said:Without reading through all posts, what are thoughts on Bloomberg?Until we pass a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending, this is our system.
democrats can either play this game or watch from the sidelines.
The majority of New York is low crime. High crime does exist but is centered in very specific neighborhoods. You need to put the cops where the crime occurs. Unfortunately Bloomberg made disparaging comments about alleged criminals and focused his comments towards race instead of location. But in no way did I support stop and frisk. It went too far.
You're definitely preaching to the choir on campaign spending. He's not doing anything illegal but it's obnoxious to watch and one more reason for me to not like the guy.
Stop and frisk is a big part of it for me. And his deference to China and wrangling a third term. If you look at his record, it's easy to see how he was a Republican. I'm surprised how much he's being embraced.This does not look so republican to me-- Create a Medicare-like public insurance option
- Improve and expand enrollment in Affordable Care Act plans
- Allow people to keep their private insurance
- Cap health care prices
- Lower drug costs
- Expand access to dental, hearing, and vision coverage
- Create a permanent reinsurance program that reduces customer premiums
The spectrum has moved so far right that he seems almost left.0 -
Talking more about his record than his platforms. He's running to be the Democrat nominee so platitudes like that are the minimal table stakes.Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:
Would be pretty low on my list. Authoritarian who's trying to buy the nomination.wndowpayne said:Without reading through all posts, what are thoughts on Bloomberg?Until we pass a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending, this is our system.
democrats can either play this game or watch from the sidelines.
The majority of New York is low crime. High crime does exist but is centered in very specific neighborhoods. You need to put the cops where the crime occurs. Unfortunately Bloomberg made disparaging comments about alleged criminals and focused his comments towards race instead of location. But in no way did I support stop and frisk. It went too far.
You're definitely preaching to the choir on campaign spending. He's not doing anything illegal but it's obnoxious to watch and one more reason for me to not like the guy.
Stop and frisk is a big part of it for me. And his deference to China and wrangling a third term. If you look at his record, it's easy to see how he was a Republican. I'm surprised how much he's being embraced.This does not look so republican to me-- Create a Medicare-like public insurance option
- Improve and expand enrollment in Affordable Care Act plans
- Allow people to keep their private insurance
- Cap health care prices
- Lower drug costs
- Expand access to dental, hearing, and vision coverage
- Create a permanent reinsurance program that reduces customer premiums
0 -
The thing about Medicare that I don't really see discussed is that beneficiaries today still have plenty of out of pocket costs. They pay a premium. Most have a supplemental private plan that controls Medicare's coinsurance. Do people know that? Or do they think they'd be getting something free? Are candidates proposing to keep the current structure but just expand eligibility? Or are they purposefully staying away from all that?mrussel1 said:
This is so rational and the argument I've made for quite a while. If medicare offers comparable services at a better cost, it will choke out private insurance OR force private to lower its premiums. It's a great strategy and proof of concept. M4A presumes that every American prefers that gov't driven insurance. I support choice.cincybearcat said:
Have you watched the debates?Spiritual_Chaos said:
He has said he thinks it's the best option...but...not everyone wants it AND Bernie can;t pay for it. He said in the last debate that a medicare for all who want it plan would first and foremost ensure everyone has coverage (which is the important part no?) and create the public option. And if it's as good as bernie says and he thinks, people will choose it over time.0 -
pjl44 said:
The thing about Medicare that I don't really see discussed is that beneficiaries today still have plenty of out of pocket costs. They pay a premium. Most have a supplemental private plan that controls Medicare's coinsurance. Do people know that? Or do they think they'd be getting something free? Are candidates proposing to keep the current structure but just expand eligibility? Or are they purposefully staying away from all that?mrussel1 said:
This is so rational and the argument I've made for quite a while. If medicare offers comparable services at a better cost, it will choke out private insurance OR force private to lower its premiums. It's a great strategy and proof of concept. M4A presumes that every American prefers that gov't driven insurance. I support choice.cincybearcat said:
Have you watched the debates?Spiritual_Chaos said:
He has said he thinks it's the best option...but...not everyone wants it AND Bernie can;t pay for it. He said in the last debate that a medicare for all who want it plan would first and foremost ensure everyone has coverage (which is the important part no?) and create the public option. And if it's as good as bernie says and he thinks, people will choose it over time.This is correct. I have Medicare but no supplemental insurance. What Medicare doesn't cover is out of my pocket. And not everything is covered. No dental, only partly vision. No Shringrix vaccination (ouch! that one hurt twice!) Don't get me wrong- I feel fortunate to have what coverage I have through Medicare- but it isn't all covered, that's for sure.Since we're on the subject of insurance- I know most here are not old enough to worry about it yet, but eventually you might want to consider long-term care insurance. We both did and it was a smart move. It is not something you want to be without when the time comes. I'm not there yet, (so no wise cracks you jokers, lol), but we are paying into it. Only $38 per month and could save us hugely in the future."It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
BI writes about an international endorsement of the leader of that crazy up-to-no-good gang called the Bernie Bros.
Finland's millennial prime minister said Nordic countries do a better job of embodying the American dream than the US
Sanna Marin, the millennial prime minister of Finland, said her country and other Nordic nations were best equipped to provide their citizens a chance to achieve the American dream.
She told The Washington Post's Ishaan Tharoor at Davos, Switzerland, in January: "I feel that the American dream can be achieved best in the Nordic countries, where every child no matter their background or the background of their families can become anything."
The American dream is, at its most basic level, the idea that everyone should be given the opportunity to reach their life's goals and ambitions.
Finland can provide the American dream because of its public services, Marin said.
"We have a very good education system," she said. "We have a good healthcare and social-welfare system that allows anybody to become anything. This is probably one of the reasons why Finland gets ranked the happiest country in the world."
She warned, however, about forcing such a system on other countries.
"Every country's situation is different," she told The Post. "Every country's political atmosphere is different."
Marin, 34, became the world's youngest prime minister in December when she was chosen to lead her party, the Social Democrats, which has the most seats in the Finnish coalition government.
Marin, who has a working-class background, was the first person in her family to attend university and worked as a sales assistant during her studies.
While she did not mention him by name, Marin's remarks to The Post suggested a tacit endorsement of Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, one of the frontrunners to secure the Democratic nomination in the 2020 US presidential election.
https://www.businessinsider.com/sanna-marin-finland-nordic-model-does-american-dream-better-wapo-2020-2?r=US&IR=T
Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0
-
Jonas Sjöstedt. Obviously.oftenreading said:
Who is the other one?ecdanc said:Lerxst1992 said:mrussel1 said:
That's the beauty of policy. There's almost always a third, fourth, or fifth way.ecdanc said:
And if you did?mrussel1 said:
Pete offers a choice, as does Biden. I don't have to make that decision.ecdanc said:
Would you give up your choice if it meant everyone had healthcare?mrussel1 said:
Exactly.. it's very frustrating.. and when a candidate like Pete offers a real choice for us, he gets smeared from the left because Bernie and his crew knows what's best for me. I can't be trusted to make such an important decision for my family.Lerxst1992 said:mrussel1 said:
This is so rational and the argument I've made for quite a while. If medicare offers comparable services at a better cost, it will choke out private insurance OR force private to lower its premiums. It's a great strategy and proof of concept. M4A presumes that every American prefers that gov't driven insurance. I support choice.cincybearcat said:
Have you watched the debates?Spiritual_Chaos said:
He has said he thinks it's the best option...but...not everyone wants it AND Bernie can;t pay for it. He said in the last debate that a medicare for all who want it plan would first and foremost ensure everyone has coverage (which is the important part no?) and create the public option. And if it's as good as bernie says and he thinks, people will choose it over time.
Stuck between no choice Republicans and no choice democratic socialists.Not to the Bernie gang. They’d rather run on no choice and watch the Supreme Court go conservative for the next fifty years.
democrats are in the middle of the dumbest policy debate right now. Do we give everybody the option of Medicare or ram it down their throats with socialism, while the gop is galvanizing their base with the Court motivating them to show up.
which leads us to the bigger picture, we risk this election with socialism, the court that ends up as a result of this loss would never allow the govt to seize the assets of all the insurance companies and allow a full mandate until at least 2112. Hell, the current court might strike down the Obamacare mandate, let alone forced socialism.
Bernie is on a collision course to decimate our party and country. I definitely feel the burn.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
You should read Michelle Alexander's _The New Jim Crow_.mrussel1 said:
Sure, socioeconomic conditions are irrelevant. In fact, before there was such a thing as a police force, it was like Eden.ecdanc said:
Crime occurs where you put the cops.Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:
Would be pretty low on my list. Authoritarian who's trying to buy the nomination.wndowpayne said:Without reading through all posts, what are thoughts on Bloomberg?Until we pass a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending, this is our system.
democrats can either play this game or watch from the sidelines.
The majority of New York is low crime. High crime does exist but is centered in very specific neighborhoods. You need to put the cops where the crime occurs. Unfortunately Bloomberg made disparaging comments about alleged criminals and focused his comments towards race instead of location. But in no way did I support stop and frisk. It went too far.0 -
Hmmm, wonder if that was the robocall that popped up as “political” that I screened out the other day.Spiritual_Chaos said:Post edited by PJPOWER on0 -
dignin said:
A normal moderate Republican similar to Romney.Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:
Would be pretty low on my list. Authoritarian who's trying to buy the nomination.wndowpayne said:Without reading through all posts, what are thoughts on Bloomberg?Until we pass a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending, this is our system.
democrats can either play this game or watch from the sidelines.
The majority of New York is low crime. High crime does exist but is centered in very specific neighborhoods. You need to put the cops where the crime occurs. Unfortunately Bloomberg made disparaging comments about alleged criminals and focused his comments towards race instead of location. But in no way did I support stop and frisk. It went too far.
You're definitely preaching to the choir on campaign spending. He's not doing anything illegal but it's obnoxious to watch and one more reason for me to not like the guy.
Stop and frisk is a big part of it for me. And his deference to China and wrangling a third term. If you look at his record, it's easy to see how he was a Republican. I'm surprised how much he's being embraced.This does not look so republican to me-- Create a Medicare-like public insurance option
- Improve and expand enrollment in Affordable Care Act plans
- Allow people to keep their private insurance
- Cap health care prices
- Lower drug costs
- Expand access to dental, hearing, and vision coverage
- Create a permanent reinsurance program that reduces customer premiums
The spectrum has moved so far right that he seems almost left.
"Create a Medicare-like public insurance option"
Would be the most progressive healthcare system in the history of the United States
0 -
brianlux said:pjl44 said:
The thing about Medicare that I don't really see discussed is that beneficiaries today still have plenty of out of pocket costs. They pay a premium. Most have a supplemental private plan that controls Medicare's coinsurance. Do people know that? Or do they think they'd be getting something free? Are candidates proposing to keep the current structure but just expand eligibility? Or are they purposefully staying away from all that?mrussel1 said:
This is so rational and the argument I've made for quite a while. If medicare offers comparable services at a better cost, it will choke out private insurance OR force private to lower its premiums. It's a great strategy and proof of concept. M4A presumes that every American prefers that gov't driven insurance. I support choice.cincybearcat said:
Have you watched the debates?Spiritual_Chaos said:
He has said he thinks it's the best option...but...not everyone wants it AND Bernie can;t pay for it. He said in the last debate that a medicare for all who want it plan would first and foremost ensure everyone has coverage (which is the important part no?) and create the public option. And if it's as good as bernie says and he thinks, people will choose it over time.This is correct. I have Medicare but no supplemental insurance. What Medicare doesn't cover is out of my pocket. And not everything is covered. No dental, only partly vision. No Shringrix vaccination (ouch! that one hurt twice!) Don't get me wrong- I feel fortunate to have what coverage I have through Medicare- but it isn't all covered, that's for sure.Since we're on the subject of insurance- I know most here are not old enough to worry about it yet, but eventually you might want to consider long-term care insurance. We both did and it was a smart move. It is not something you want to be without when the time comes. I'm not there yet, (so no wise cracks you jokers, lol), but we are paying into it. Only $38 per month and could save us hugely in the future.
Yeah but the upside is you got to see Hendrix!
I'm close enough that Medicare is starting to be on the horizon and am aware of the 20% not covered. And the gop wants to make it worse. The dems should be fear mongering about the gop taking away healthcare instead of squabbling over which Medicare version is best.... I've thought about LTC insurance but am too worried about insurance companies going bankrupt or being bought out and not honoring older policies.0 -
Will it tell me that there was no crime before law enforcement? I mean I guess you could argue that there was no crime before a criminal code. But that would be a short book.ecdanc said:
You should read Michelle Alexander's _The New Jim Crow_.mrussel1 said:
Sure, socioeconomic conditions are irrelevant. In fact, before there was such a thing as a police force, it was like Eden.ecdanc said:
Crime occurs where you put the cops.Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:
Would be pretty low on my list. Authoritarian who's trying to buy the nomination.wndowpayne said:Without reading through all posts, what are thoughts on Bloomberg?Until we pass a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending, this is our system.
democrats can either play this game or watch from the sidelines.
The majority of New York is low crime. High crime does exist but is centered in very specific neighborhoods. You need to put the cops where the crime occurs. Unfortunately Bloomberg made disparaging comments about alleged criminals and focused his comments towards race instead of location. But in no way did I support stop and frisk. It went too far.0 -
Yes, but is that really the measuring stick?Lerxst1992 said:dignin said:
A normal moderate Republican similar to Romney.Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:
Would be pretty low on my list. Authoritarian who's trying to buy the nomination.wndowpayne said:Without reading through all posts, what are thoughts on Bloomberg?Until we pass a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending, this is our system.
democrats can either play this game or watch from the sidelines.
The majority of New York is low crime. High crime does exist but is centered in very specific neighborhoods. You need to put the cops where the crime occurs. Unfortunately Bloomberg made disparaging comments about alleged criminals and focused his comments towards race instead of location. But in no way did I support stop and frisk. It went too far.
You're definitely preaching to the choir on campaign spending. He's not doing anything illegal but it's obnoxious to watch and one more reason for me to not like the guy.
Stop and frisk is a big part of it for me. And his deference to China and wrangling a third term. If you look at his record, it's easy to see how he was a Republican. I'm surprised how much he's being embraced.This does not look so republican to me-- Create a Medicare-like public insurance option
- Improve and expand enrollment in Affordable Care Act plans
- Allow people to keep their private insurance
- Cap health care prices
- Lower drug costs
- Expand access to dental, hearing, and vision coverage
- Create a permanent reinsurance program that reduces customer premiums
The spectrum has moved so far right that he seems almost left.
"Create a Medicare-like public insurance option"
Would be the most progressive healthcare system in the history of the United States
I'm baffled by the people here who think M4A is some pie-eyed betrayal of DNC principles. Harry Truman of all people supported a universal system (that went farther than FDR and the New Deal). Christ, if Harry fucking Truman showed up in 2020, he'd be labeled a Socialist!0 -
It will tell you why the post to which I was responding is a gross oversimplification, and explain how law and law enforcement have *produced* new/specific forms of criminality (as part of the long history of systemic US racism). If one wants to understand Bloomberg's stop-and-frisk, et al, there's probably not a better starting point.mrussel1 said:
Will it tell me that there was no crime before law enforcement? I mean I guess you could argue that there was no crime before a criminal code. But that would be a short book.ecdanc said:
You should read Michelle Alexander's _The New Jim Crow_.mrussel1 said:
Sure, socioeconomic conditions are irrelevant. In fact, before there was such a thing as a police force, it was like Eden.ecdanc said:
Crime occurs where you put the cops.Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:
Would be pretty low on my list. Authoritarian who's trying to buy the nomination.wndowpayne said:Without reading through all posts, what are thoughts on Bloomberg?Until we pass a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending, this is our system.
democrats can either play this game or watch from the sidelines.
The majority of New York is low crime. High crime does exist but is centered in very specific neighborhoods. You need to put the cops where the crime occurs. Unfortunately Bloomberg made disparaging comments about alleged criminals and focused his comments towards race instead of location. But in no way did I support stop and frisk. It went too far.0 -
It's because you're ignoring the culture of health insurance today. There was not a structured, mature market of employer based health care until the post war period. So Truman's 'idea' as it were, was new, novel and filling a void. There's a big difference between filling a void and trying to replace something that the vast majority of working Americans are on today. This is why 'choice' is so appealing to many on the left.ecdanc said:
Yes, but is that really the measuring stick?Lerxst1992 said:dignin said:
A normal moderate Republican similar to Romney.Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:
Would be pretty low on my list. Authoritarian who's trying to buy the nomination.wndowpayne said:Without reading through all posts, what are thoughts on Bloomberg?Until we pass a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending, this is our system.
democrats can either play this game or watch from the sidelines.
The majority of New York is low crime. High crime does exist but is centered in very specific neighborhoods. You need to put the cops where the crime occurs. Unfortunately Bloomberg made disparaging comments about alleged criminals and focused his comments towards race instead of location. But in no way did I support stop and frisk. It went too far.
You're definitely preaching to the choir on campaign spending. He's not doing anything illegal but it's obnoxious to watch and one more reason for me to not like the guy.
Stop and frisk is a big part of it for me. And his deference to China and wrangling a third term. If you look at his record, it's easy to see how he was a Republican. I'm surprised how much he's being embraced.This does not look so republican to me-- Create a Medicare-like public insurance option
- Improve and expand enrollment in Affordable Care Act plans
- Allow people to keep their private insurance
- Cap health care prices
- Lower drug costs
- Expand access to dental, hearing, and vision coverage
- Create a permanent reinsurance program that reduces customer premiums
The spectrum has moved so far right that he seems almost left.
"Create a Medicare-like public insurance option"
Would be the most progressive healthcare system in the history of the United States
I'm baffled by the people here who think M4A is some pie-eyed betrayal of DNC principles. Harry Truman of all people supported a universal system (that went farther than FDR and the New Deal). Christ, if Harry fucking Truman showed up in 2020, he'd be labeled a Socialist!0 -
"the left"mrussel1 said:
It's because you're ignoring the culture of health insurance today. There was not a structured, mature market of employer based health care until the post war period. So Truman's 'idea' as it were, was new, novel and filling a void. There's a big difference between filling a void and trying to replace something that the vast majority of working Americans are on today. This is why 'choice' is so appealing to many on the left.ecdanc said:
Yes, but is that really the measuring stick?Lerxst1992 said:dignin said:
A normal moderate Republican similar to Romney.Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:
Would be pretty low on my list. Authoritarian who's trying to buy the nomination.wndowpayne said:Without reading through all posts, what are thoughts on Bloomberg?Until we pass a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending, this is our system.
democrats can either play this game or watch from the sidelines.
The majority of New York is low crime. High crime does exist but is centered in very specific neighborhoods. You need to put the cops where the crime occurs. Unfortunately Bloomberg made disparaging comments about alleged criminals and focused his comments towards race instead of location. But in no way did I support stop and frisk. It went too far.
You're definitely preaching to the choir on campaign spending. He's not doing anything illegal but it's obnoxious to watch and one more reason for me to not like the guy.
Stop and frisk is a big part of it for me. And his deference to China and wrangling a third term. If you look at his record, it's easy to see how he was a Republican. I'm surprised how much he's being embraced.This does not look so republican to me-- Create a Medicare-like public insurance option
- Improve and expand enrollment in Affordable Care Act plans
- Allow people to keep their private insurance
- Cap health care prices
- Lower drug costs
- Expand access to dental, hearing, and vision coverage
- Create a permanent reinsurance program that reduces customer premiums
The spectrum has moved so far right that he seems almost left.
"Create a Medicare-like public insurance option"
Would be the most progressive healthcare system in the history of the United States
I'm baffled by the people here who think M4A is some pie-eyed betrayal of DNC principles. Harry Truman of all people supported a universal system (that went farther than FDR and the New Deal). Christ, if Harry fucking Truman showed up in 2020, he'd be labeled a Socialist!
0 -
ecdanc said:
Yes, but is that really the measuring stick?Lerxst1992 said:dignin said:
A normal moderate Republican similar to Romney.Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:Lerxst1992 said:pjl44 said:
Would be pretty low on my list. Authoritarian who's trying to buy the nomination.wndowpayne said:Without reading through all posts, what are thoughts on Bloomberg?Until we pass a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending, this is our system.
democrats can either play this game or watch from the sidelines.
The majority of New York is low crime. High crime does exist but is centered in very specific neighborhoods. You need to put the cops where the crime occurs. Unfortunately Bloomberg made disparaging comments about alleged criminals and focused his comments towards race instead of location. But in no way did I support stop and frisk. It went too far.
You're definitely preaching to the choir on campaign spending. He's not doing anything illegal but it's obnoxious to watch and one more reason for me to not like the guy.
Stop and frisk is a big part of it for me. And his deference to China and wrangling a third term. If you look at his record, it's easy to see how he was a Republican. I'm surprised how much he's being embraced.This does not look so republican to me-- Create a Medicare-like public insurance option
- Improve and expand enrollment in Affordable Care Act plans
- Allow people to keep their private insurance
- Cap health care prices
- Lower drug costs
- Expand access to dental, hearing, and vision coverage
- Create a permanent reinsurance program that reduces customer premiums
The spectrum has moved so far right that he seems almost left.
"Create a Medicare-like public insurance option"
Would be the most progressive healthcare system in the history of the United States
I'm baffled by the people here who think M4A is some pie-eyed betrayal of DNC principles. Harry Truman of all people supported a universal system (that went farther than FDR and the New Deal). Christ, if Harry fucking Truman showed up in 2020, he'd be labeled a Socialist!
Probably Eisenhower would be labeled a liberal as well. That's the point and it's why moderation is the proper vote in 2020.
The point is to WIN. The electoral college gives a disproportionate voting power to the swing states and trumps base.
We risk everything if we start giving the oppositions socialist argument validity with a too progressive plan right now.
The 2 oldest Justices are liberal and over 80 and might need to be replaced between now and Jan 2025.
We could be risking a 7-2 supreme court. That could be staunchly conservative for at least 30 years and ANY liberal healthcare mandate would be out the window until 2055.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help