Buttigieg 2020

[TexArcher 37499]

7 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Please do not both sides this shit.  Israeli causalities are absolutely minuscule compared to Palestinian casualties.  Gaza is an open air prison and Israel is an apartheid state.  These are facts.

 

I'm aware.  But the fact that one side is winning does not make the other side the good guys.  The Palestinians lauch rockets indiscriminately into civilian areas.  And they vote Hamas members into their cabinet, the same Hamas whose mission statement is to wipe Israel off the map.  These are not the actions of good guys.

To be clear: I do not support Israel's tactics.  I find them disgusting.  But I feel the same way about Hamas.

[bad_teammate 13131]

No one said the Palestinians are good guys. Both governments seek the ultimate destruction of the other.

One of them has tremendous power and the shielding of the most powerful nation in the world and is killing the other by the thousands/tens of thousands. The side doing all that killing sustains relatively few/rare deaths or injuries.

It's not about finding a good guy and a bad guy, it's about looking at the bad things that are happening (and those are HEAVILY weighted on the Israeli side) and addressing those bad things.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

[Hank Kingsley 20673]

Lots of people unhappy with these statements as well. 

 

Edited November 14, 2019 by Hank Kingsley

[henrygandorf 29174]

11 hours ago, TexArcher said:

I find it strange that we Americsns are so polarized on Israel/Palestine.  Most of us seem convinced that one is the good guy and the other is the bad guy. 

it's because americans are lazy and stupid, and most equate "israel" with "jewish people" (see trump, donald j).  and since there are a bunch of prominent jewish americans, and not as many prominent palestinian americans, people are way on the side of israel.  the attitude goes back a long way through a dozen administrations.

[bad_teammate 13131]

16 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Lots of people unhappy with these statements as well.

Bernie's fanbase is, by far, the most passionate for their candidate and the most critical of their candidate.

The coup happened in Bolivia and Bernie's mentions were flooded with red roses howling "WHY HAVEN'T YOU SPOKEN OUT AGAINST THE COUP!?!?" at Bernie's campaign. He tweets this bad tweet about Israel/Palestine and he's flooded again.

Meanwhile, in both instances, Pete's fanbase demonstrates its characteristic lack of substantive engagement with anything beyond vague platitudes. He could put out any sort of substantive argument, and as long as his tone and rhetoric is consistent, his fanbase wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

 

Speaking of Pete, he touted more than 400 South Carolinians endorsing his Douglass Plan. Turns out... not all of them really did.

Including people and then sending them an e-mail that they could "opt-out" of endorsing is very Silicon Valley Terms of Service. Impressive.

Maybe that's how he's going to get his agenda passed, he's got some secret strategy to assume Republican votes are "yes" unless they scroll down on the e-mail?

Yet more fantastic black voter outreach! PETE! PETE! PETE!

Edited November 15, 2019 by bad_teammate

[Fozzz 152]

I wish there was a candidate who would retweet this.  Israel murdered eight kids this week but what's really important are those glorified Hobby Lobby rockets.

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

And it’s actually even worse.

Somehow this is all just a bunch of homophobia, I bet.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Pete just needs to do some hard time for a few years then run for President when he can relate better with marginalized groups. 

[Hank Scorpio 17720]

Mayor Pete trying to court the black vote is maybe my favorite political thing going on right now. Hopefully he meets his own Corn Pop and gets it turned around so he can focus on things he cares about like, uh synergy or something. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

Edited November 15, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Pete is just being savvy you see because he wants to win.  

[Hank Kingsley 20673]

22 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Pete is just being savvy you see because he wants to win.  

That's an interesting response. 

Diehard M4A supporters are killing Warren over her public option for the first 2 years. They're basically saying he's pivoted closer to Pete's Medicare For All Who Want It plan. 

Pete's campaign is basically saying, "nope, you said you were for Bernie's M4A plan, and we're gonna make you own it."

 

 

[bad_teammate 13131]

Hank, do you think Pete is being honest when he says that M4AWWI will not force people off of private insurance they want to keep? Do you think it's true?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

15 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Diehard M4A supporters are killing Warren over her public option for the first 2 years. They're basically saying he's pivoted closer to Pete's Medicare For All Who Want It plan

These are disinformation campaigns. Warren’s plan is arguably more aggressive than Bernie’s because she moves the age to 50 in the first year instead of Bernie’s 55 for Medicare coverage while simultaneously offering Medicare coverage to everyone that want it during the first term transition to full citizen coverage. 

Warren’s plan merged all of Bernie’s plan and Pete’s plan while making some nominal but more aggressive tweaks. 

[Hank Kingsley 20673]

14 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Hank, do you think Pete is being honest when he says that M4AWWI will not force people off of private insurance they want to keep? Do you think it's true?

Just say want you want to say, BT. I'm not in a fucking classroom. 

 

[bad_teammate 13131]

Bernard's plan also has a buy-in option for everyone, he just doesn't make it a big part of his messaging.

The main difference is that Bernie wants to pass it as one big thing in reconciliation right away and the phase-in will already be legally established by the end. Liz seems to want to break it into multiple piece of legislation, which seems like would be more legislatively vulnerable. Though her initial aggressiveness makes it hard to fight against.

Either way, we have two candidates to be excited and hopeful about.

3 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Just say want you want to say, BT. I'm not in a fucking classroom.

lol

Pete's plan is going to force people off of their chosen private health insurance.

Pete knows his plan is going to force people off of their chosen private health insurance.

Agree/disagree?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Liz seems to want to break it into multiple piece of legislation, which seems like would be more legislatively vulnerable. Though her initial aggressiveness makes it hard to fight against.

Breaking into multiple pieces of legislation could also make it more likely to succeed if the electorate warms up to the taste they’re getting.  That seems to be Liz’s justification.  Could also help prevent sabotage prior to full implementation by popularizing the idea enough for democrats to run on and win in the midterms. 

[bad_teammate 13131]

12 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Breaking into multiple pieces of legislation could also make it more likely to succeed if the electorate warms up to the taste they’re getting.  That seems to be Liz’s justification.  Could also help prevent sabotage prior to full implementation by popularizing the idea enough for democrats to run on and win in the midterms. 

Makes sense. A gamble, but it's some hair-splitting honestly, in the scheme of it. Good plan. Right direction with the right spirit.

Edited November 15, 2019 by bad_teammate

[Bama Chick 28596]

Just say want you want to say, BT. I'm not in a fucking classroom. 
 

Nuttin to say about this Douglass Plan stuff?

[Hank Kingsley 20673]

1 minute ago, Bama Chick said:

 

Nuttin to say about this Douglass Plan stuff?

 

Sloppy work by his campaign staff, amplified in the worst context by journalists that have a clear axe to grind with Buttigieg. 

All part of the game, I guess. 

 

 

[BradInATX 9208]

Breaking into multiple pieces of legislation could also make it more likely to succeed if the electorate warms up to the taste they’re getting.  That seems to be Liz’s justification.  Could also help prevent sabotage prior to full implementation by popularizing the idea enough for democrats to run on and win in the midterms. 

So what you're saying is that she wants to start out with a public option and make sure it's effective and an upgrade to what we have now before implementing the whole thing?

Great idea. I feel like we've heard that before, but I can't place it...

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Just now, BradInATX said:

So what you're saying is that she wants to start out with a public option and make sure it's effective and an upgrade to what we have now?
I feel like we've heard that before, but I can't place it...

Nope, 100+ million eligible for Medicare immediately.  The option is for the folks not automatically enrolled in the early transition period.

[BradInATX 9208]

Nope, 100+ million eligible for Medicare immediately.  The option is for the folks not automatically enrolled in the early transition period.

"Eligible" being the key word. 70% of the country would still have the option to keep what they have.

I'm glad you finally came around to the "let it prove itself out" plan. All it took is your complete subservience to every word out of your candidate's mouth, and said candidate slyly backing into a very similar plan. Good job Hugo.

 

 

 

[bad_teammate 13131]

8 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

So what you're saying is that she wants to start out with a public option and make sure it's effective and an upgrade to what we have now before implementing the whole thing?

No. It's an immediate and massive expansion of Medicare. The opt-in for those not already put in has been in M4A from the beginning. Nothing new here except breaking it into multiple pieces of legislation.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

18 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

"Eligible" being the key word. 70% of the country would still have the option to keep what they have.

I'm glad you finally came around to the "let it prove itself out" plan. All it took is your complete subservience to every word out of your candidate's mouth, and said candidate slyly backing into a very similar plan. Good job Hugo.

Lots of people outing themselves as never read a goddamn MFA plan before.  “Oh, you don’t instantly go to single payer over night?!? Total fraud, not legit.”  Never mind that no one has ever advocated for that.

Edited November 15, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[BradInATX 9208]

12 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Lots of people outing themselves as never read a goddamn MFA plan before.  “Oh, you don’t instantly go to single payer over night?!? Total fraud, not legit.”  Never mind that no one has ever advocated for that.

I was debating the very fine print of Bernie's M4A plan with bad_teammate for endless pages on here long before you glommed onto Warren as your deity. I can say with 100% certainty that I'm more knowledgeable about M4A and the funding thereof, the ACA, and healthcare in general than you are. Don't try that trash argument with me.

Anyway, do you think that if she implements a public option for two years and it is unsuccessful (ie higher cost and/or lower quality of care), that she'll still push to implement full M4A in year three?

Edited November 15, 2019 by BradInATX

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Not sure how a public option is going to raise costs or reduce quality but the subsequent legislation seems to be an effort to eliminate the possibility of Republicans killing a Bernie bill in the midterms which would put single payer out of reach for another generation.  

Warren’s plan gives the democrats something real to advocate for in their 2022 campaign instead of playing defense for a Bernie plan not even fully realized yet.  

It’s smart politics if the goal is to truly fix our broken healthcare system.

[BradInATX 9208]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Not sure how a public option is going to raise costs or reduce quality but the subsequent legislation seems to be an effort to eliminate the possibility of Republicans killing a Bernie bill in the midterms which would put single payer out of reach for another generation.  

Warren’s plan gives the democrats something real to advocate for in their 2022 campaign instead of playing defense for a Bernie plan not even fully realized yet.  

It’s smart politics if the goal is to truly fix our broken healthcare system.

Okay, but you didn't answer my question. If the public option for the first two years is largely considered a failure (for whatever reason), do you think she'll still push for full M4A in year three?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Warren is going to keep pushing for a single payer system regardless of how it goes.  She has been proving this for a while now.  Like Bernie, I really think she believes in it because she’s getting crucified over it and she just keeps doubling down. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

I almost feel bad for Bennett, almost 

[henrygandorf 29174]

4 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Pete's plan is going to force people off of their chosen private health insurance.

Pete knows his plan is going to force people off of their chosen private health insurance.

i've heard you say this again and again but never heard the reasoning behind it.

are you saying that employers will choose the public option therefore kicking their employees off their current plans and onto something else without them personally choosing to do so?

(not trying to sound condescending, actually asking.  it's been a really long week).

[bad_teammate 13131]

Just now, henrygandorf said:

are you saying that employers will choose the public option therefore kicking their employees off their current plans and onto something else without them personally choosing to do so?

Yes.

Also, providers will change their plans to comply with any new regulations.

[henrygandorf 29174]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Yes.

Also, providers will change their plans to comply with any new regulations.

there just seems to be a "both sides" argument out there about it.  pete wants a public option, but says it should be good enough to win out and become the primary option, thus reducing the need for private insurance through the market, and eventually paving the way for single-payer.  the counter argument to this seems to be "well, people don't always know what's best for them, and if they don't choose to switch, then insurance companies win, status quo, etc."

but your argument is implying that people will switch (or employers at least will, if it's better for them).  which seems to go in the opposite direction of what m4a proponents would say.  it almost seems like it's just a way to prove pete wrong (which he clearly would be, because i agree with you that employers will always look out for themselves).

i think a lot of us have been agreeing (ish) lately that the finish line looks the same, it's about process, execution, incremental change, rollout, funding, and so forth.  if warren wins (and i'm hoping she does), it looks like she'll grab some from pete (and others') plans, some from bernie, and some from herself as the rollout happens.  i know (from you) that part of bernie's plan requires employers to compensate workers if there's a financial benefit to them by switching.  does warren (or anyone else) have that as part of their plan?  seems worthwhile.

(this may have been covered upthread, i am not fully caught up on anything outside the impeachment soap opera).

[bad_teammate 13131]

9 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

but your argument is implying that people will switch (or employers at least will, if it's better for them).  which seems to go in the opposite direction of what m4a proponents would say.  it almost seems like it's just a way to prove pete wrong (which he clearly would be, because i agree with you that employers will always look out for themselves).

No, this predates Pete. This was a discussion back when Pete was 27 years old and Obama was pushing the public option by (dishonestly) saying, "If you like your plan, you can keep it."

We've tried this before. We literally did this exact same thing, for the exact same reason (we don't want to fight monied power), 10 years ago. It's a clusterfuck and a lie. And it's not going to work if we are lying and the Republicans and insurance industry can credibly say, "They're lying."

There is no plan that exists that would actually preserve the existing choices. The only way to possibly achieve that would be to pass a law mandating employers and providers both keep all existing plans available at their current rates.

Pete's public option plan is going to kick thousands/millions of people off their current plans. His actual goal is for people to lose their current choice by making the public option preferable to employers.

Quote

i know (from you) that part of bernie's plan requires employers to compensate workers if there's a financial benefit to them by switching.

The plan forces companies to negotiate contracts with recompensation in mind. Those workers without collective bargaining or non-unionized workers won't have the same protections.

(Bernie will also dramatically increase union representation and otherwise strengthen worker bargaining.)

Quote

does warren (or anyone else) have that as part of their plan? 

Don't know.

[henrygandorf 29174]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

No, this predates Pete. This was a discussion back when Pete was 27 years old and Obama was pushing the public option by (dishonestly) saying, "If you like your plan, you can keep it."

the irony in all of this, is the illusion that "liking your plan" is the same thing as "not wanting to get forced off your plan onto something else."  people, especially americans, are inherently lazy.  pretty much anyone you meet would rather do nothing than do something, even to their own detriment.  i think there are plenty of people that aren't particularly enamored with their plan, but if it means filling out a couple of forms, fuck it, i'm fine where i am.

when polls come out saying the majority is opposed being forced to blah blah, it's really people being lazy.  yeah, sure, my plan is fine.  i know how it works, and i don't have to think about it.  they don't care about anything other than the card in their wallet works when they or their family has to go to the doctor.

all of this begs the question - if your employer changes to a public option, and you're not tasked with actually doing anything, then would anyone really care?  does anyone even notice?  if the level of care is the same, and the $ withheld for medical + $ for taxes stays ~ the same on your paycheck, then i doubt anyone would give two shits.  the average schmo doesn't care that the insurance companies are getting rich, as long as their kid's teeth stay relatively clean.

pete and warren are going after each other's plans like they're the polar opposites of each other.  ahh, politics.

[Pancho 44429]

 

[zork 629]

45 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

thisisfine.jpeg

[Message Board User 12389]

Non-zero chance that Mayor Pete says at some point in Wednesday's debate, "I have black friends."

[Bama Chick 28596]

No no no no no

[Hank Kingsley 20673]

I read the piece. It's about Chasten's tough relationship with his super religious brother. In the article, the journalist wrote that Pete wants to 'build a bridge with the religious right', but the accompanying article hyperlinked was actually about Pete courting the religious left. 

So as far as I can tell, Butting wanting to 'build a bridge to the religious right' was completely manufactured by the WP journalist. Wonderful. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 18, 2019 by Hank Kingsley

[Hank Scorpio 17720]

 

Pete continuing to lock down the black vote by bringing in the heavy hitters like Mandy Moore. 

[Message Board User 12389]

6 hours ago, Hank Scorpio said:

 

Pete continuing to lock down the black vote by bringing in the heavy hitters like Mandy Moore. 

And doing outreach at...Tulane?

And then there’s this -

https://mobile.twitter.com/benkesslen/status/1196233122037280769

[Pancho 44429]

8 hours ago, Hank Scorpio said:

 

Pete continuing to lock down the black vote by bringing in the heavy hitters like Mandy Moore. 

They couldn’t find 1 Black person in New Orleans?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

I see an Indian kid in there, he counts for the mayo Pete campaign.

[Js1 85084]

1 hour ago, Message Board User said:

And doing outreach at...Tulane?

And then there’s this -

https://mobile.twitter.com/benkesslen/status/1196233122037280769

My people never miss an opportunity to take a photo and post it. 

[HenryJames 65884]

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

My people never miss an opportunity to take a photo and post it. 

Millennials? Gays?

[bad_teammate 13131]

Having seen Chasten speak in person, I can comfortably say that he is way more interesting than Pete and sounds like an actual human being when he talks. IIRC, after Chasten came out he was ostracized from his family and had to live in his car for a while.

Regardless of what happens with Peter, I think these stories are vital to hear and make national because we've convinced ourselves that homophobia is a relic or is dying more quickly than it actually is.

War Chasten

[Js1 85084]

8 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

Millennials? Gays?

Both! 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

6 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

IIRC, after Chasten came out he was ostracized from his family and had to live in his car for a while.

If you name your kid Chasten and he turns out to be gay, that is 100% on you.