Election 2020

[Teenwolf]

Are there never-Bernie voters? I'm not aware of a voting block of true democrats (blue dogs and independents are another matter) that wouldn't vote for Bernie in the general if he gets the nomination. I'm much more worried about progressives not coming out for someone more moderate, especially if the level of disgust and hatred for the Biden's and Beto's and Harris' out there that you have expressed is indicative of more progressive voters.

I'm still completely undecided on what candidate I want to win. Still waiting and hoping you will respond to why a candidate not supporting M4A should be a deal breaker for me as a voter who cares about universal healthcare. As I've outlined, it seems to be only one path toward the same goal, and not the best path.

Donny Douche stated this week on Morning Joe that he would vote for Trump over Bernie. Joe made him apologize, but it was a pretty funny admission.

As for Med4All, I fight for it because I'm a Canadian. I saw an article on CBC recently about a Canadian who was advised to get emergency surgery in the US, and she was bankrupted because of it. This was headline news up here, something so commonplace in the US. I think something like 30% of cancer patients in the US are bankrupted by it. It's completely inhumane.

Beto's "Medicare 4 All... Who Want it" is not even close to the same as Med4All. Look it up. Beto supports a Medicare option to compete with workplace health packages, etc. If you support half-measures from proven phonies, that's on you.

Beto already voted to destabilize the ACA with Trump. Why would you think he has the same goals as Bernie regarding Med4All?

[Sour Masher]

Donny Douche stated this week on Morning Joe that he would vote for Trump over Bernie. Joe made him apologize, but it was a pretty funny admission.

As for Med4All, I fight for it because I'm a Canadian. I saw an article on CBC recently about a Canadian who was advised to get emergency surgery in the US, and she was bankrupted because of it. This was headline news up here, something so commonplace in the US. I think something like 30% of cancer patients in the US are bankrupted by it. It's completely inhumane.

Beto's "Medicare 4 All... Who Want it" is not even close to the same as Med4All. Look it up. Beto supports a Medicare option to compete with workplace health packages, etc. If you support half-measures from proven phonies, that's on you.

Beto already voted to destabilize the ACA with Trump. Why would you think he has the same goals as Bernie regarding Med4All?

Donnie Douche is exactly as you label him. I didn't even know he identified as a Dem.

I am not familiar enough yet with Beto to defend him or want to, unless it is from completely bogus attacks not related to real issues. This is a real issue, so appreciate insights into the candidates from all. I didn't say Beto and Bernie have the same goals. I said Beto SAYS he is for universal healthcare. It is certainly fair to question that based on voting records. I didn't know Beto voted to destablize the ACA. I will definitely be looking into that. That ain't good. I haven't been looking at the candidates closely yet, because I know in such a crowded field, some will fall off fairly quickly. But I'm gonna start now. This will be one of the first things I look at--thanks for hipping me to it.

You said you wanted to focus on policies, not labels, and so I wanted to know why a candidate like Bernie is better than another candidate who claims to be for universal healthcare, because M4A seems like a solution pushed for because it is easily understandable to the masses and polls well, not because it is the best solution. So, I remain unconvinced that label should immediately determine my vote. But the issue of Beto not walking the talk he is now talking--that is a matter worth more concern to me than whether he labels himself a proponent of another path toward universal healthcare than M4A.

[Sour Masher]

TW, let me know if you think this is a fair assessment of the competing plans of Bernie and Beto: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/...ealthcare.html

It looks like I misunderstood Bernie's use of the term M4A. He really means to make it totally single payer, so a complete overhaul of the current medicare system. Frankly, I find it to be an impossible task given our current system. Whether it is a good idea or not (and in a vacuum, I see benefits, as I've argued here before, of single payer), I just don't see enough support for completely doing away with all private insurance options. I don't see any way it happens. Too many people (not enough, mind you, but still, too many) like their current employer insurance options to support giving that up, especially with how effective Republicans have been for years making people afraid of long waits for are, limited choice, and poor overall care with such a move.

It is really one big example of the larger push back I think Sanders would get in the general election that makes me afraid of his viability in a general election. Most in this country is all for giving more to more people, but few want to do that at the expense of what they already have. The sacrifice for the greater good message will play better in the primaries, I think, than it would in the general. Millions will be spent to get people scared of what Sanders's promises to give to others will take from them. As a Canadian, maybe you see this fear mongering as baseless and have confidence American voters won't fall for it. I'm not sure, but I have strong reservations about that. I know you will hate me saying this, and may attack me for it, but I can't help but think Beto's approach is more, dare I say, practical.

ETA: It seems grossly unfair to label Medicare for America plan as a tepid plan. It is certainly less radical than Bernie's plan, but it would still be a massive overhaul to our current system. Here is a quote from the article:

"That this initiative isn’t some sort of timid Clintonian, incremental improvement of existing law is signaled by the names of its two chief congressional sponsors, Rosa deLauro and Jan Schakowsky, both stalwarts of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. It is probably best understood as a “public option” on steroids: it would enroll Medicaid and Obamacare participants in Medicare, while making it a voluntary option for everyone else, regardless of age."

[The Feral Slasher]

TW, let me know if you think this is a fair assessment of the competing plans of Bernie and Beto: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/...ealthcare.html

It looks like I misunderstood Bernie's use of the term M4A. He really means to make it totally single payer, so a complete overhaul of the current medicare system. Frankly, I find it to be an impossible task given our current system. Whether it is a good idea or not (and in a vacuum, I see benefits, as I've argued here before, of single payer), I just don't see enough support for completely doing away with all private insurance options. I don't see any way it happens. Too many people (not enough, mind you, but still, too many) like their current employer insurance options to support giving that up, especially with how effective Republicans have been for years making people afraid of long waits for are, limited choice, and poor overall care with such a move.

It is really one big example of the larger push back I think Sanders would get in the general election that makes me afraid of his viability in a general election. Most in this country is all for giving more to more people, but few want to do that at the expense of what they already have. The sacrifice for the greater good message will play better in the primaries, I think, than it would in the general. Millions will be spent to get people scared of what Sanders's promises to give to others will take from them. As a Canadian, maybe you see this fear mongering as baseless and have confidence American voters won't fall for it. I'm not sure, but I have strong reservations about that. I know you will hate me saying this, and may attack me for it, but I can't help but think Beto's approach is more, dare I say, practical.

ETA: It seems grossly unfair to label Medicare for America plan as a tepid plan. It is certainly less radical than Bernie's plan, but it would still be a massive overhaul to our current system. Here is a quote from the article:

"That this initiative isn’t some sort of timid Clintonian, incremental improvement of existing law is signaled by the names of its two chief congressional sponsors, Rosa deLauro and Jan Schakowsky, both stalwarts of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. It is probably best understood as a “public option” on steroids: it would enroll Medicaid and Obamacare participants in Medicare, while making it a voluntary option for everyone else, regardless of age."

These are the questions and discussions that will hopefully be answered during the campaign. It would be really good to hear the candidates discuss their beliefs, vision, and plan to implement health care changes. Sanders plan does sound problematic to implement, so I think he needs to explain how to make it happen, and what compromises he will make to move toward his vision. One of the other considerations is the trustworthiness and belief in the candidates commitment to universal health care. So great questions, hope we learn a lot more over the next year.

[onejayhawk]

Good post but I think you're brushing over the corporatist influence within the Democratic party.

I agree with this. Are you feeling well? If anyone does not believe it, look at the large donations to AOC and Beto.

The Democrats have become the party of the elites--Academia and K-12, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, Social media, News media, Law--and a chunk of banking and Wall Street. It should be no surprise that among whites most liberal demographic is the also most educated.

It happens that highly educated whites is also the least tolerant sector, but that's another thread.

J

[Teenwolf]

I agree with this. Are you feeling well? If anyone does not believe it, look at the large donations to AOC and Beto.

The Democrats have become the party of the elites--Academia and K-12, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, Social media, News media, Law--and a chunk of banking and Wall Street. It should be no surprise that among whites most liberal demographic is the also most educated.

It happens that highly educated whites is also the least tolerant sector, but that's another thread.

J

AOC doesn't take money from corporate PACs. She is a Justice Democrat, disallowed from taking corporate money. That's part of why she won, and a big part of why she's so popular.

Beto had a midterm campaign promise not to take money from the fossil fuel lobby, and he broke that pledge. He represents the liberal elite that you speak of to an extent.

Two diametrically opposed figures.

[DMT]

I agree with this. Are you feeling well? If anyone does not believe it, look at the large donations to AOC and Beto.

The Democrats have become the party of the elites--Academia and K-12, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, Social media, News media, Law--and a chunk of banking and Wall Street. It should be no surprise that among whites most liberal demographic is the also most educated.

It happens that highly educated whites is also the least tolerant sector, but that's another thread.

J

This is just hilariously dumb. Start with a falsehood, then pile on a heaping of bs to hope no one catches it.

[B-Fly]

Donny Douche stated this week on Morning Joe that he would vote for Trump over Bernie.

Who Is "Donny Douche" in this reference?

[Sour Masher]

Who Is "Donny Douche" in this reference?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donny_Deutsch

I have only seen him in passing, so I don't know much about him, but that moniker doesn't surprise me based on what I've seen.

[B-Fly]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donny_Deutsch

I have only seen him in passing, so I don't know much about him, but that moniker doesn't surprise me based on what I've seen.

Never heard of him.

[revo]

Axios reporting that Biden may announce his bid combined with a guarantee that Stacey Abrams will be his running mate.

[B-Fly]

Axios reporting that Biden may announce his bid combined with a guarantee that Stacey Abrams will be his running mate.

If true, I wonder what Abrams' "terms" were and how her agreement to this will be perceived by "progressives" and by Black voters, more broadly. Will it include an expressed or implied endorsement of Biden over all other contenders and will she stump/surrogate for him throughout the primaries, OR would it be more that she's agreed to accept his offer should Biden secure the nomination, but she's not making an endorsement and will not stump for him or promote him over other Democratic contenders? (And would she also potentially be open to joining, say, Bernie Sanders, should he win the nomination and offer her the VP slot?

[hacko]

Never heard of him.

He is on morning Joe alll the time

[B-Fly]

He is on morning Joe alll the time

Got it. I basically only watch any of the cable news channels on Election Day or for debates, so I don't know any of the regular pundits unless they become topics of conversation on Facebook or on one of the websites I check regularly.

[Teenwolf]

Clarification on Donny Douche. He's a never-Trump Republican who fled the party to go to MSNBC and attempt to guide the left further towards the right through denouncing Trump on moral terms. Bill Kristol, Max Boot, Ana Navarro, etc, all took this route. So I guess they aren't really Democrats, but they represent the "pragmatic center" on MSM, and I think a lot of these folks will echo Trump in saying "if the Dems nominate Bernie, some people might vote for Trump." Hint hint.