***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[gry60]

NBC News/WSJ poll: Biden, Sanders running even among black voters

NBC News/WSJ poll: Biden, Sanders running even among black voters

Latest NBC News/WSJ poll shows Biden and Sanders with almost the same level of support among African-American voters in South Carolina.

www.msnbc.com

I can only imagine that whoever repped that hasn't figured out that one candidate's trendline is declining while the other's is growing.

 

[RustyShackleford]

How is this an attempt to handwave? Again, no one that I'm aware of, including Bernie has said "We need to have a system just like xyz country, and that's what Medicare for All will be." In terms of the international comparisons, Bernie and others are making two points: (1) that we pay the most per capita on healthcare in this country in relation to comparable countries yet have the worst health outcomes, and (2) that we are the only such country that doesn't have universal healthcare. None of this is inaccurate. You can and have made the point that M4A isn't the only way to do universal healthcare. Okay, that's fine. But that's a different point than the point of the international comparisons being invoked. I don't see how this isn't clear. I don't prefer you ignore anything, I just have no idea what point you're trying to make that isn't being readily acknowledged.

The reason I brought up the other benefits of M4A is because you seemed to be trying to reduce the conversation to universal healthcare, which is one element of M4A. The point you've made time and again in here is M4A isn't the only way to get to universal coverage. My point is that Bernie's pitch for M4A isn't just based on universal coverage, nor has my position been simply about that in here (I don't know the particulars of everyone else's contributions to the conversation). I didn't say nor even insinuate that you were against those aspects of M4A. My point was that you can't reduce the conversation to just universal coverage, because the conversation is much bigger than that. I know that you know this, so I don't understand why you so often seem to do this in these conversations.

I am not reducing anything, I was raising a specific point about Bernie's sleight of hand. Like the post you quoted, did you even notice what motivated it was youngogjosh specifically implying M4A was the only way to get to get universal coverage. Like I don't want to complain because I enjoy chopping it up with you, I am just saying that I was if I was making a general point and ignored those things then you criticism would be completely fair, but I was not making a general critique of M4A, I was making a specific point motivated by specific comment by another poster.

You want to have the decision about specific other things, fine I am game. He does spell out other benefits to his plan, but when he gets pushed back he runs back to the same un-nuanced talking points over and over. He points to similarities of his policy to other countries, it is only fair people bring up the differences. Bernie doesn't say we need your system to be administered and structured like specifically such and such countries, I never made that claim, but he does say stuff like "similar" and "just like". Your whole issue with me comes of like there is an that I want a more nuanced discussion about that claim.

-You yourself have said that you purity test on M4A. M4A is not the only way to accomplish the other stuff you talk about, beyond universal coverage. Other countries accomplish some of the things you listed. There will be problems that arise with with instituting some of the stuff you outlined. There are other policy prescriptions to improve the system. Hell Bernie seem to fundamentally misunderstand **** that might sink the whole system. This disregard for so called technocratic details could sink the system even if it is passed, yet M4A want little to no discussion about these technocratic details.

I maybe I come off wrong. My beefs like M4A are for specific reasons regarding the constraints we face right now. I would be happy it passes, but for right now, in this forum, I think I am making completely fair criticism regarding M4A. It is far from perfect, it is not a panacea to the problem, the person pushing it is doing so by using sleight of hand.

I simply can't and won't accept the position that these issue should be ignored, and everyone should sign on without objection so public support can rise.

 

[handullz]

quick call the cops

somebody else is befitting from something I struggled through.

 

[mr s j king]

Bernie has large donors controlling his campaign?

All I see is white college kids

 

[RustyShackleford]

I shaved my head at 23 fam... and probably should have shaved it at 22.

Life ain't fair, indeed

Brah I been getting a low fade for the past couple years to try to hide the fact my temples arereceding faster than an ocean before a tsunami hits.

But I think it is finally time to come home.

Last time I went to the barber stop, mans that to go so far back to get a line, I felt like dude was trimming on top my head inside of in front of it.

When he was done, I looked up in the mirror saw the situation, then looked back at him and famb just said "Sorry my dude, I tried". I gave him a big tip, told to good luck in life and walked out.

Then I walked down to coffee stop to meet my girl, she had to console me. Standing right in front the pastry display like....

 

[Wargames]

[

The foreign policy and dangerous short-sightedness of the last 4 years has basically guaranteed that the latter part of the century will belong to China in terms of influence on world affairs and markets regardless of who is gonna be in charge to be honest imo

That ship has sailed and 45 broke the bottle to set it away

What's gonna be more important than anything is going to be managing to maintain a collaborative and non-bellicose/aggressive relation with them to minimize the risk of a chaotic changing of the guard or great power conflict that has been the norm throughout the history of our international system/order

I don’t think China has us beat in world affairs. The same need for energy, food, and myopic need for control of the citizens in their country will keep them from dominating. Unless China and Russia go full colonial on other countries power/influence can and will fluctuate between them and us.

Well kids need to think long and hard about what they go to school for and how much they will pay.

that’s what I’m getting at, don’t fall into a trap at 18.

yea boomers had it easy, but you gotta realize you’re gonna be fighting an uphill battle that they didn’t have and you might have to change your tactics vs theirs.

Wtf do 18 years old know about making wise decisions?!?

I mean that is literally year 0 of them being adults. They can’t even drink legally yet, but hey...... make sure you have the foresight to not follow your unrealistic childhood dreams. You need to forecast the future to know majors for careers that will exist for the next 50 years of your life. Plus even if you do that right, make sure to pray to whatever Gods you believe in that you don’t graduate during a recession.

 

[dwalk31]

The student loan discussion is complex

- The federally backed loans have allowed these schools to comfortably raise tuition and costs with impunity

- Talking forgiveness while still giving out the loans is nonsensical

- I understand not wanting to place fault at the foot of young 16-18 year olds who take out these loans, but at the end of the day--they are loans. It is a sad but true reality. But I understand that 16-18 year olds might not fully grasp their decisions.

- This conversation changes for graduate school and professional school loans. Many of the students are aware and either don't care or don't think they'll have an issue paying for the loans later. I mean, tons of people in law school take out loans, stay at posh residences, buy nice cars, travel the world, brunch with friends every weekend, graduate and complain about loans. At some point, some personal accountability must be discussed.

- I think that advocating trade schools disproportionately hurts black families. I think finance, healthcare, stem, and law are important for black students, specifically.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

You do this too?

I had a Chinese homie at UNLV that had a plug back in China. He had every goon on campus draped in fake Yeezys and Louie V.

Famb was brining it fake Gucci belts by the case load, and slangin them all over East Vegas. Had dudes named Marcus, Tavaris and Reggie downloading WeChat to put in orders.

im nigerian my guy, you know I always have the plug.

peasants paying double the price for **** tier fakes on Aliexpress couldn't be me.

 

[Chopper]

Copped the Warren and Obeezy joints. Will post when they arrive.

 

[-Red-]

Brah I been getting a low fade for the past couple years to try to hide the fact me temples receding faster than a ocean before a tsunami hits.

But I think it is finally time to come home.

Last time I went to the barber stop, mans that to go so far back to get a line, I felt like dude was trimming on top my head inside of in front of it.

When he was done, I looked up in the mirror saw the situation, then looked back at him and famb just said "Sorry my dude, I tried". I gave him a big tip, hold to good luck in like and walked out.

Then I walked down to coffee stop to meet my girl, she had to console me. Standing right in front the pastry display like....

My come-on-home moment happened in like March 2009. I was waiting for the bus on 51st and Cottage Grove in Chicago, like half a mile from Obama's old crib.

The bus pulls up and I was reaching down in my pocket to get my bus pass and when I looked up, I caught a glimpse of the top of my head reflecting in the bus window. I was completely shattered. My **** looked like the back of LeBron's head, but directly in the middle of my dome.

I got to the crib and asked my girl "Why didn't you tell me?!" She was like "I was trying to drop hints without hurting your feelings—like 'When do you think you might end up shaving your head?'—but you weren't picking up on them."

I had been in a deep denial. I shaved my **** that night and never looked back.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Bruh, you are the all-time champion defender of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and many other conventional liberals in here. Someone critiques them from the right, you jump to the defense. Someone critiques them from the left, you jump to the defense. So are you lost in the sauce when it comes to all of those folks? Are you the only one with principled positions in here? Are you the only reasonable one? No. And plenty of the shade thrown at Bernie in here is used to simultaneously attack his political vision, so let's not act as if these things are discrete.

I'm not disagreeing that there are lots of specifics to hammer out with M4A. You are a sharp and thoughtful dude who is able to identify a great deal more of these than the average informed. What I'm a little confused about is that you acknowledge M4A is the best option being discussed (we both agree on the ultimate superiority of socialized medicine) but your position seems to be so firmly against it. Instead of even saying "They should do [whatever] instead of [whatever]" to improve the policy and address some of your concerns, you continually berate it. I'm not saying you're obligated to do this, I just don't really understand that dynamic.

Sure, if you want to say I defend liberals a lot in here, find, that's true. I will never deny I am liberal defender #1 in here. But when I make these defenses, do make insane reaches, do I not show my work? And I never said or implied you not make principled arguments or I am the only one in here that does.

Also, everyone you listed, I have probably made harsher criticisms of them than you have ever made of Bernie. You can call me the #1 defender of conventional liberals in here, cool, but I have also provided some of the harshest criticisms. Sure there have probably been more defenses that shade, but I think my scales are more balanced than any Bernie supporter in here are. I don't complain that everyone in here is against Obama and no one else when people start criticizing him.

If it was a perfect world, and we were building an insurance system from scratch, then M4A would probably be the way to go, but we do not live in that world. There are fiscal, political, and economic constraints in place right now.

Speaking just economically, M4A relies mainly on market power to lower healthcare costs. Sure, that is a good thing, but M4A advocates seem to ignore the problems with the healthcare industry. M4A is going to cause capacity issues, so at the end of the day, you have to address the supply issues at hand. There is tons of market consolidation happening in the healthcare industry, with that providers will gain market power and have the leverage to bid up the price of healthcare, and restrict access.

The goal of a single-payer, and what makes it sustainable is for people to consume less, not more, healthcare in the long run. Having an overly generous plan actually does the opposite. It might not happen right away, but you have a situation where is a trip to the doctor is a 4-week wait, and a trip to the emergency room is a 4-hour wait, if they are both the same upfront price, what stops people from just using the emergency room as a clinic. The closest thing to Bernie's proposal is probably Taiwan, and they have exactly this problem.

It needs to be paid for, plain and simple, and it is a massive amount of money. It is a massive restructuring of the tax code. If it is done poorly, there will be economic consequences in regards to who bares what taxes. We can't deficit spend to fund it because, after a little while, we will be borrowing to finance payments on other debt. If we enter a debt crisis, we risk a massive recession, tons of middle-class people hurt, and there will be public pressure to tear apart the system and try something else.

There are self-sabotaging things with what Bernie wants to employ.

The technocratic details are things you want to disregard, but I am very concerned about them. A poorly written plan, no matter the best intentions, can collapse on itself if poorly instituted. And when it does, it opens up a political opportunity for conservatives to ripped it all up.

But at the end of the day, if there is a way to get it passed. Of course they should ****ing do it.

 

[RustyShackleford]

My come-on-home moment happened in like March 2009. I was waiting for the bus on 51st and Cottage Grove in Chicago, like half a mile from Obama's old crib.

The bus pulls up and I was reaching down in my pocket to get my bus pass and when I looked up, I caught a glimpse of the top of my head reflecting in the bus window. I was completely shattered. My **** looked like the back of LeBron's head, but directly in the middle of my dome.

I got to the crib and asked my girl "Why didn't you tell me?!" She was like "I was trying to drop hints without hurting your feelings—like 'When do you think you might end up shaving your head?'—but you weren't picking up on them."

I had been in a deep denial. I shaved my **** that night and never looked back.

If Bernie wants to get me on board M4A no questions asked, then he needs to announce it covers hair transplants. Universal hairline coverage is change I can believe in.

Catch Prime at the State of the Union address like...

Catch me cutting promos for his reelection campaign like...


Sanders 2024: Make Follicles Great Again

 

[whywesteppin]

If Bernie wants to get me on board M4A no questions asked, then he needs to announce it covers hair transplants. Universal hairline coverage is change I can believe in.

Catch Prime at the State of the Union address like...

Catch me cutting promos for his reelection campaign like...


Sanders 2024: Make Follicles Great Again

for far too long, the elites have hoarded the secret formula to a full head of hair. Obama, George, Bill, Ronald, they have access to this technology, just like Magic has the cure got aids.

It's time that all Americans get to live on a level playing field. Bernie, before free health care and tuition free college, the people demand we make our hairlines great again.

 

[rexanglorum]

Sure, if you want to say I defend liberals a lot in here, find, that's true. I will never deny I am liberal defender #1 in here. But when I make these defenses, do make insane reaches, do I not show my work? And I never said or implied you not make principled arguments or I am the only one in here that does.

Also, everyone you listed, I have probably made harsher criticisms of them than you have ever made of Bernie. You can call me the #1 defender of conventional liberals in here, cool, but I have also provided some of the harshest criticisms. Sure there have probably been more defenses that shade, but I think my scales are more balanced than any Bernie supporter in here are. I don't complain that everyone in here is against Obama and no one else when people start criticizing him.

If it was a perfect world, and we were building an insurance system from scratch, then M4A would probably be the way to go, but we do not live in that world. There are fiscal, political, and economic constraints in place right now.

Speaking just economically, M4A relies mainly on market power to lower healthcare costs. Sure, that is a good thing, but M4A advocates seem to ignore the problems with the healthcare industry. M4A is going to cause capacity issues, so at the end of the day, you have to address the supply issues at hand. There is tons of market consolidation happening in the healthcare industry, with that providers will gain market power and have the leverage to big up the price of healthcare

The goal of a single-payer, and what makes it sustainable is for people to consume less, not more healthcare in the long run. Having an overly generous plan actually does the opposite. It might not happen right away, but you have a situation where is a trip to the doctor is a 4-week wait, and a trip to the emergency room is a 4-hour wait, if they are both the same upfront price, what stops people from just using the emergency room as a clinic. The closest thing to Bernie's proposal is probably Taiwan, and they have exactly this problem.

It needs to be paid for, plain and simple, and it is a massive amount of money. It is a massive restructuring of the tax code. If it is done poorly, there will be economic consequences in regards to how bares what taxers. We can't deficit spend to fund it because, after a little while, we will be borrowing to finance payments on other debt. We enter a debt crisis, we risk a massive recession, tons of middle-class people hurt, and there will be public pressure to tear apart the system and try something else.

There are self-sabotaging things with what Bernie wants to employ.

The technocratic details are things you want to disregard, but I am very concerned about them. A poorly written plan, no matter the best intentions, can collapse on itself if poorly instituted. And when it does, it opens up a political opportunity for conservatives to ripped it all up.

But at the end of the day, if there is a way to get it passed. Of course they should ****ing do it.

Politics and political fights define the broad contours. What M4A means to me at least, is that the profit motive is subordinated or eliminated in order to maximize access.

Within that very broad mandate, we’ll need expertise to set it up and run it and finance it. We’ll have to be creative especially in the first year of the program. Once the political contours are decided, we’d love to have some very smart liberal economists and policy experts to make this project work.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Politics and political fights define the broad contours. What M4A means to me at least, is that the profit motive is subordinated or eliminated in order to maximize access.

Within that very broad mandate, we’ll need expertise to set it up and run it and finance it. We’ll have to be creative especially in the first year of the program. Once the political contours are decided, we’d love to have some very smart liberal economists and policy experts to make this project work.

Yeah I don't want people to get mistaken, my concern for technocratic details are not greater than my concern for doing what is right to help people.

Problem or no problems, if there is a way to pass the program, Dems should just ****ing do it.

 

[Armada]

Live look at RustyShackleford and -Red- when they realized they had to come home

 

[Rootin4EverybodyBlack]

I feel like any conversation about Bernie gets hung up on healthcare. I’m interested in who he would pick as AG, and the criminal justice initiatives he would put forward. I feel like that’s an area where a Sanders presidency would be different from a Biden presidency.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Live look at RustyShackleford and -Red- when they realized they had to come home

Soundtrack for when I finally break out the razor...

 

[boris]

 

[whywesteppin]

things could get interesting. these numbers are from wapo entrance polls at Nevada:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/entrance-polls-2020-nevada-caucuses/#TIMEPRIFEWDAYS

 

[gry60]

 

[gry60]

 

[-Red-]

Sure, if you want to say I defend liberals a lot in here, find, that's true. I will never deny I am liberal defender #1 in here. But when I make these defenses, do make insane reaches, do I not show my work? And I never said or implied you not make principled arguments or I am the only one in here that does.

Also, everyone you listed, I have probably made harsher criticisms of them than you have ever made of Bernie. You can call me the #1 defender of conventional liberals in here, cool, but I have also provided some of the harshest criticisms. Sure there have probably been more defenses that shade, but I think my scales are more balanced than any Bernie supporter in here are. I don't complain that everyone in here is against Obama and no one else when people start criticizing him.

If it was a perfect world, and we were building an insurance system from scratch, then M4A would probably be the way to go, but we do not live in that world. There are fiscal, political, and economic constraints in place right now.

Speaking just economically, M4A relies mainly on market power to lower healthcare costs. Sure, that is a good thing, but M4A advocates seem to ignore the problems with the healthcare industry. M4A is going to cause capacity issues, so at the end of the day, you have to address the supply issues at hand. There is tons of market consolidation happening in the healthcare industry, with that providers will gain market power and have the leverage to bid up the price of healthcare, and restrict access.

The goal of a single-payer, and what makes it sustainable is for people to consume less, not more, healthcare in the long run. Having an overly generous plan actually does the opposite. It might not happen right away, but you have a situation where is a trip to the doctor is a 4-week wait, and a trip to the emergency room is a 4-hour wait, if they are both the same upfront price, what stops people from just using the emergency room as a clinic. The closest thing to Bernie's proposal is probably Taiwan, and they have exactly this problem.

It needs to be paid for, plain and simple, and it is a massive amount of money. It is a massive restructuring of the tax code. If it is done poorly, there will be economic consequences in regards to who bares what taxes. We can't deficit spend to fund it because, after a little while, we will be borrowing to finance payments on other debt. If we enter a debt crisis, we risk a massive recession, tons of middle-class people hurt, and there will be public pressure to tear apart the system and try something else.

There are self-sabotaging things with what Bernie wants to employ.

The technocratic details are things you want to disregard, but I am very concerned about them. A poorly written plan, no matter the best intentions, can collapse on itself if poorly instituted. And when it does, it opens up a political opportunity for conservatives to ripped it all up.

But at the end of the day, if there is a way to get it passed. Of course they should ****ing do it.

No, you don't make insane reaches and you do show your work. For sure. I'm just pointing out that you're not the only one. And I think I defend Bernie more and critique him less than you do with Clinton and Obama and company mostly because my politics are closer to his than yours are to theirs. You defend them for various reasons in various instances—again, reasonably enough, even when I disagree—but my sense is that you're also pretty solidly left of them politically. So you also have your own critiques because of that dynamic, which seems evidence since your own critiques of them tend to come from the left. The person whose politics yours seem to align most closely with, Elizabeth Warren, you hardly criticize at all—probably because you don't find much reason to, since you agree on nearly everything. Plus there isn't tons of Lizzie slander in this thread, so there's basically never a time when you have to defend her. (The Bernie dynamic in here has obviously been very different—no judgment, I'm just saying.) Hell, based on Belgium 's informal poll the other day, something like 10% of Warren's overall base seem to be posters in this thread

I say all of this to say I don't think either one of us is drinking any Kool-Aid.

But let me ask you this. You raise some thoughtful criticisms of M4A. You also raise some thoughtful criticisms of the public-option–oriented alternatives being floated. Yet you think that M4A is the better policy overall, and if you had your pick, you'd go with M4A over the immediately available alternatives. So why are you arguing against it so vociferously? Like, I'm not handwaving your critiques. I'm just wondering why your critiques of M4A seem to disqualify your support for it, while your critiques of a public option plan don't have the same effect, despite your stated preference for the former over the latter. What is/are the ultimate hangup(s) on M4A shaping your position in relation to a public option policy?

 

[RustyShackleford]

No, you don't make insane reaches and you do show your work. For sure. I'm just pointing out that you're not the only one. And I think I defend Bernie more and critique him less than you do with Clinton and Obama and company mostly because my politics are closer to his than yours are to theirs. You defend them for various reasons in various instances—again, reasonably enough, even when I disagree—but my sense is that you're also pretty solidly left of them politically. So you also have your own critiques because of that dynamic, which seems evidence since your own critiques of them tend to come from the left. The person whose politics yours seem to align most closely with, Elizabeth Warren, you hardly criticize at all—probably because you don't find much reason to, since you agree on nearly everything. Plus there isn't tons of Lizzie slander in this thread, so there's basically never a time when you have to defend her. (The Bernie dynamic in here has obviously been very different—no judgment, I'm just saying.) Hell, based on Belgium 's informal poll the other day, something like 10% of Warren's overall base seem to be posters in this thread

I say all of this to say I don't think either one of us is drinking any Kool-Aid.

But let me ask you this. You raise some thoughtful criticisms of M4A. You also raise some thoughtful criticisms of the public-option–oriented alternatives being floated. Yet you think that M4A is the better policy overall, and if you had your pick, you'd go with M4A over the immediately available alternatives. So why are you arguing against it so vociferously? Like, I'm not handwaving your critiques. I'm just wondering why your critiques of M4A seem to disqualify your support for it, while your critiques of a public option plan don't have the same effect, despite your stated preference for the former over the latter. What is/are the ultimate hangup(s) on M4A shaping your position in relation to a public option policy?

I have not criticized Warren that much as others, but I have criticized Warren for her idiotic and privilege move regarding the DNA test. I said she snake she can be a snake in the grass toward other Dems, with implying that only she is the one that really cares, I cited examples of her doing this to Obama. I have said her views on trade made no damn sense. When she wrote her plan to pay for Medicare 4 All, I was in here shortly afterward, criticizing it harshly. I had raised the issue in the past about her only stop being Republican later in life because of being people in bankruptcy court, but why did she not doing for the GOP explicit racism for decades. I think there is less to criticize her for than most, but I have shaded her on nonsense when necessary.

I mentioned a while back is that besides my hang-ups, one of my major issues with the M4A movement is that they expect to pass it in full, as soon as next year. At best, we have a budget reconciliation period if we get the Senate, I know the votes will not be there for M4A. I know Sinema, Manchin, and Tester are not going to budge. But I also know the, but something has to pass. If it doesn't pass anything, we risk reverting to a pre-ACA world and then possibly having to negotiate with the GOP to get stuff like preexisting conditions protections back. Passing Joe Biden's plan won't be the end of the health insurance debate or push. Even Obama called the ACA, in its best form, was a stepping stone. So I am just perplexed by people being so against taking everything we can now, and continuing to try to back into a single paper more and more. The M4A advocates in the press call it a movement here for the fight, and they will keep fighting until it is done. So why do they restrict themselves to get things done with one sweeping bill, instead of demanding smaller ones push us in the direction constantly.

Hell, a doable road to single-payer in one term, would be passing Biden's plan in 2021. In 2022 you turn Biden's plan into Americare type plan with all-payer rate setting. Then sweeten the public option in 2023. Soon you will have most of America on one public healthcare plan, and then when the market value of insurers drop, you nationalize them. If we can hold the Senate majority (which I admit will be hard), and people are willing to accept cost-sharing for higher-income people, this is entirely doable. During this time, we can work on reform to the healthcare industry to put down pressure on prices, and make sure the most vulnerable are protected.

Secondly, there is a ton of other issues that need addressing, too, from climate change to income inequality to poverty, education, etc. M4A is so expensive it might crowd out different stuff, both fiscally and politically. For lack of a better term, if the objective was doing the most positive change as possible, I think I can get more bang for the buck with a public option (with income subsidies) and other programs than I would with just M4A.

 

[mplsdunk]

Full heads of hair is for socialists!