Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee

used2b

By used2b
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 23.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bad_teammate

    3638

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    2212

  • Hank Kingsley

    1252

  • Js1

    1230

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Huckleberry
Huckleberry

No it doesn't, this is absurd selfishness on a grand scale. Nobody is getting punished. My wife and I paid off our student loans, and you know what I think about younger people or even those in our ge

henrygandorf
henrygandorf

i’ve really enjoyed the 900 posts from bt explaining how bernie people aren’t aggressive, obsessive, and very-online.  truly a learning experience. 

Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton

3rd or 4th thread but whos counting.  Name recognition and ability to collect money is most important to the Democratic Party. They aren't trying to win 2020, they are trying to rebuild and colle

Posted Images

Dnaguy

Dnaguy 11775

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I hate this debate but the betting markets are saying (regardless of nominee):

Stacey Abrams, Buttigieg, Booker, Julian Castro, Kamala Harris

Maybe I’m showing my ignorance here, but what exactly has Abrams done other than get beat in Georgia. She’s like bizarro Beto.

Is she really all that inspiring of a candidate?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85109

Posted
Posted
Just now, Dnaguy said:

Maybe I’m showing my ignorance here, but what exactly has Abrams done other than get beat in Georgia. She’s like bizarro Beto.

Is she really all that inspiring of a candidate?

Nothing.

She said she's open to it.  But I think she's going to run again for governor in 2022.  She's still pissed she lost. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29175

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

At this point in time in 2015, Hillary was holding down a consistent 20 to 30 point lead over Sanders.  It wasn’t until Jan/February 2016 that Hillary’s lead over Bernie collapsed in the polls.

sounds like biden's lead over warren, just backtrack the timeline a little.

i wonder how long trump will be running attack ads on biden.  he was already in "operation get hillary's disapproval into the mid 50's" mode by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tantric superman

tantric superman 4667

Posted
Posted
Just now, bad_teammate said:

A lesson to the centrist/fear-based Dems... the people will follow if we boldly lead.

As a centrist, fear based Dem I have favored impeachment all along.  Certainly within a nano-second after reading the Mueller report.

My fear is simply that there is a bit of over-promising of big spending going on.  I'd rather the Dem focus on health care, gun licensing and treason rather than college debt forgiveness and reparations.

Being pro-impeachment hasn't taken any balls at all.  Just the simple idea that we have three branches and they need to be a check on each other. 

And only one half of one of those can be counted on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26279

Posted
Posted
I'm talking about the "oh universal healthcare would be good but we have to pre-pre-compromise" attitude of basically every single presidential candidate except 2.

Wanting the best version of universal healthcare instead of something every country western world has moved on from is the opposite of compromise.

A lot of us, myself included, oppose Bernie’s plan because it’s not as good at delivering the best care to the most people as several others. Better than what we have now, obviously, but from where I sit y’all look like the ones settling, due to a failure of imagination and ideological blindness.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:


Wanting the best version of universal healthcare instead of something every country western world has moved on from is the opposite of compromise.

A lot of us, myself included, oppose Bernie’s plan because it’s not as good at delivering the best care to the most people as several others. Better than what we have now, obviously, but from where I sit y’all look like the ones settling, due to a failure of imagination and ideological blindness.

Do you seriously think if we aren't aggressive as possible about ridding ourselves of the stranglehold of health insurance companies on access to healthcare that they won't beat back some piecemeal alternative that takes a decade to roll out? That is by far my biggest concern, the insurance execs will spend as much as it takes to influence opinion and politicians that give little more than winning a re-election (or appearing "centrist" for these never-trumper suburbanites).

You keep talking about this, afaik Bernie is simply proposing the kind of healthcare that Canada and most of Europe uses. Private health insurance is still available but must be paid extra for.

Edited by GSU&UT
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

A lot of us, myself included, oppose Bernie’s plan because it’s not as good at delivering the best care to the most people as several others. Better than what we have now, obviously, but from where I sit y’all look like the ones settling, due to a failure of imagination and ideological blindness.

No candidate has a more cost-effective plan to cover 100% of all Americans medical needs than Bernie's M4A. Name it. You can't. Either they maintain the expensive and wasteful profit centers of health insurance or they do not cover everything a human needs to live, which includes their teeth, eyes, and brain.

Name it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26279

Posted
Posted

Yawn. “No candidate”. You’re talking about politics and who wins (which is what this thread is about, so good for you). I’m talking about healthcare and payment systems and how to cover everyone and get the best outcomes in the most cost effective ways, which is the goal of winning elections. That’s fine, but Bernie’s plan is the most “compromised”, except his is with magical thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26279

Posted
Posted
Do you seriously think if we aren't aggressive as possible about ridding ourselves of the stranglehold of health insurance companies on access to healthcare that they won't beat back some piecemeal alternative that takes a decade to roll out? That is by far my biggest concern, the insurance execs will spend as much as it takes to influence opinion and politicians that give little more than winning a re-election (or appearing "centrist" for these never-trumper suburbanites).
You keep talking about this, afaik Bernie is simply proposing the kind of healthcare that Canada and most of Europe uses. Private health insurance is still available but must be paid extra for.

No, what Bernie proposes is what most of Europe and Canada have drifted away from and far more centralized than what is typically done today.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Yawn. “No candidate”.

Yeah it's fucked up I'd specify "candidate" in the Democratic Nominee thread. What an asshole I am!

Quote

I’m talking about healthcare and payment systems and how to cover everyone and get the best outcomes in the most cost effective ways, which is the goal of winning elections. 

Name the more cost-effective system that covers 100% of Americans. I am very eager to hear it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:


No, what Bernie proposes is what most of Europe and Canada have drifted away from and far more centralized than what is typically done today.

Again I ask you more specifically, if we propose some sort of hybrid/centralized system where health insurance still plays a role, you don't think they won't successfully water it down by fighting against it? These companies aren't giving up their power willingly and I seriously think they'll be much more successful in retaining it if the most popular plan put forth lets includes them in a major way (i.e. they can successfully influence it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Scorpio

Hank Scorpio 17723

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, GSU&UT said:

Again I ask you more specifically, if we propose some sort of hybrid/centralized system where health insurance still plays a role, you don't think they won't successfully water it down by fighting against it? These companies aren't giving up their power willingly and I seriously think they'll be much more successful in retaining it if the most popular plan put forth lets includes them in a major way (i.e. they can successfully influence it).

Knowing that we won't get everything we want, we have to start in the middle. That way after compromising we end up somewhere on the right. It's the shitlib Dem playbook. But you probably don't understand that as you don't possess sufficient expertise in this extremely complicated issue like my shitlib friends and I do. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Knowing that we won't get everything we want, we have to start in the middle. That way after compromising we end up somewhere on the right. It's the shitlib Dem playbook. But you probably don't understand that as you don't possess sufficient expertise in this extremely complicated issue like my shitlib friends and I do. 

It's this too. I'm not under the impression that Bernie's M4A comes close to passing in the Senate (especially if he's only for filibuster reform and not abolishment), but I want his old crotchey ass up there really speaking to the American people that if they elected him that they need to push their representatives to not piss their pants and get on board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26279

Posted
Posted
Again I ask you more specifically, if we propose some sort of hybrid/centralized system where health insurance still plays a role, you don't think they won't successfully water it down by fighting against it? These companies aren't giving up their power willingly and I seriously think they'll be much more successful in retaining it if the most popular plan put forth lets includes them in a major way (i.e. they can successfully influence it).

But they wouldn’t be able to “water down” a plan with a 10 year ramp up? Okay.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26279

Posted
Posted
Knowing that we won't get everything we want, we have to start in the middle. That way after compromising we end up somewhere on the right. It's the shitlib Dem playbook. But you probably don't understand that as you don't possess sufficient expertise in this extremely complicated issue like my shitlib friends and I do. 

Wanting the best policy outcome isn’t the middle.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:


The best system in current operation in the world that would fit here or the best one proposed in this country so far?

The best plan proposed would be the thing that makes sense because you want the best policy outcome, right?

It's hilarious that you dismiss Bernie for magical thinking but you're perpetually offended that anyone would ask you to name even a proposal, much less a candidate who is pushing it.

Immensely popular candidate + massive movement of people who support the proposal = magical thinking for stupid idiots

No candidate + unnamed policy = smart stuff for brain geniuses

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:


But they wouldn’t be able to “water down” a plan with a 10 year ramp up? Okay.

They're just going to willingly take less profits because it takes longer to implement? My point is I don't want them being able to have a say in any of this, I more or less want them to be abolished unless you pay into a single-payer system and then pay for private insurance after that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26279

Posted
Posted
The best plan proposed would be the thing that makes sense because you want the best policy outcome, right?
It's hilarious that you dismiss Bernie for magical thinking but you're perpetually offended that anyone would ask you to name even a proposal, much less a candidate who is pushing it.
Immensely popular candidate + massive movement of people who support the proposal = magical thinking for stupid idiots
No candidate + unnamed policy = smart stuff for brain geniuses

No, I’m asking you to clarify your question. Are you asking for the best model in the world for UHC that would fit here or the best model that has actually been proposed?

If it’s the former, probably the German Universal Multi-payer model. If it’s the latter, it would have been the final version of Wyden-Bennet, which would have been revenue neutral and achieved universal coverage in combination with a small vestigial form of Medicaid within a two year window.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26279

Posted
Posted
Bozo knows they will, and he's fine with it because he knows he will be OK.

One of the best examples of how progressive maximalists are exactly like Trumpian Republicans is how they characterize simple disagreement or non-ideological policy directions as evidence of ulterior motives. It’s a tool for enforcing tribal boundaries and cleansing.

Do you recommend expulsion or do I get a chance to take the loyalty oath?
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted

Wyden-Bennett funding is pretty much exactly the same as what is proposed to cover M4A. Eliminate premiums and raise taxes.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More specifically, under [the] proposal, most health insurance premiums that are now paid privately would flow through the Federal budget. As a result, total Federal outlays for health insurance premiums in 2014 would be on the order of $1.3 trillion to $1.4 trillion. Those costs would be approximately offset by revenues and savings from several sources: premium payments collected from individuals through their tax returns; revenue raised by replacing the current tax exclusion for health insurance with an income tax deduction; new tax payments by employers to the Federal government
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, Wyden-Bennett is not universal.

99% of people covered, $1.5T in savings over a decade

That's good.

Better?

100% of people covered, $2T in savings over a decade

Meanwhile, that second one actually has two major presidential candidates supporting it.

As opposed to Wyden/Bennett, which has zero.

..............

An obviously better plan with real support and movement? Fuck that tribal zealotry! The REAL shit is dead bills no one supports and no one is even talking about. That's practical, results-based thinking!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...