Democratic Presidential Primaries & Caucuses |March OT| Last Tuesday was 1000 years ago, old news no one cares about (Discussion Guidelines in OP)

Steel · Mar 29, 2020

JABEE said:
No he wasn't. Everyone was joking about him being a Bernie supporter. He was just making the case that Bernie would be the best person to make Matty's moderate stances palatable to leftists.

Yglesias is ideologically opposed to Sanders and the left.

Bernie Sanders can unify Democrats and beat Trump in 2020

Bernie Sanders can unify Democrats and beat Trump in 2020

The first in a Vox series making the best case for each of the top Democratic contenders.

www.vox.com

Why Mainstream Democrats Shouldn't Fear Bernie Sanders

Mainstream Democrats shouldn’t fear Bernie Sanders

He’d be a strong nominee and a solid president.

www.vox.com

But MattY doesn't carry water for everything that Bernie or his supporters do and as such he's in ideological opposition.

lmcfigs · Mar 29, 2020

Steel said:
Bernie Sanders can unify Democrats and beat Trump in 2020

The first in a Vox series making the best case for each of the top Democratic contenders.

www.vox.com

Mainstream Democrats shouldn’t fear Bernie Sanders

He’d be a strong nominee and a solid president.

www.vox.com

But MattY doesn't carry water for everything that Bernie or his supporters do and as such he's in ideological opposition.

He must be a confused man.

thoughthaver · Mar 29, 2020

Steel said:
But MattY doesn't carry water for everything that Bernie or his supporters do and as such he's in ideological opposition.

Bangladesh is a lot poorer than the United States, and there are very good reasons for Bangladeshi people to make different choices in this regard than Americans. That's true whether you're talking about an individual calculus or a collective calculus. Safety rules that are appropriate for the United States would be unnecessarily immiserating in much poorer Bangladesh.

damn i wonder why progressives don't like this guy. seems like a swell fella.

Chaos Legion · Mar 29, 2020

JABEE said:
The entire country hasn't voted.

There are two options left to pick from.

I haven't voted yet.

JABEE. The primary is over.
Ohio and Georgia will go Joe by margins. Let's say that they split NY and NJ. I'll even throw in splitting PA.

How do you account for the rest of the difference? If they split the rest of the states, Biden wins. After GA and OH, he'd need to win almost 70% of the rest of the delegates. Bernie's only chance is Biden steps down and he can make a case he's the better choice than who Biden releases his delegates to...oh.

MHWilliams · Mar 29, 2020

dabig2 said:
Young People Aren’t Apathetic. They’re Facing Major Voting Obstacles

“It’s hypocritical accusing us of not being engaged politically when there are a lot of barriers to us voting," one college student said.

www.vice.com

It's systemic - an intended bug in the system - and a hell of a lot more complex than young people just being lazy/apathetic.

Same with the poor and minority voting which also lags a lot, but thankfully at least Era is more watchful of the lazy rhetoric and browbeating against these groups than it is when it comes to the youth vote, even though the youth vote includes way more poor and minorities in its group compared to the wealthy, more white dominant older generations. In other words, mind your crosstabs.

Why Are the Poor and Minorities Less Likely to Vote?

Even when America's underclass isn't formally stripped of its ballot, a slew of barriers come between them and full representation and participation.

www.theatlantic.com

But no, the 100K white vote just cares more about their country than the lazy young, the poor, and minorities in this country who just keep letting perfect get in the way of "good".

Actually, the replied question is always "Why don't younger voters match the voting of black voters, considering the same roadblocks and voter suppression are against them."

Which someone has answered with a detailed answer that's far more that just voter suppression, but again... people keep ignoring.

samoyed · Mar 29, 2020

MHWilliams said:
Actually, the replied question is always "Why don't younger voters match the voting of black voters, considering the same roadblocks and voter suppression are against them."

Which someone has answered with a detailed answer that's far more that just voter suppression, but again... people keep ignoring.

The same issues exist but the black old voters offset the black young voters, which is not possible for young voters to overcome... because there's no such thing as a young old voter?

Every old voter was at one point in their life a young voter so there must be some element of the system that favors olds over young or perhap olds care more by virtue of having lived longer.

MHWilliams · Mar 29, 2020

samoyed said:
The same issues exist but the black old voters offset the black young voters, which is not possible for young voters to overcome... because there's no such thing as a young old voter?

Every old voter was at one point in their life a young voter so there must be some element of the system that favors olds over young or perhap olds care more by virtue of having lived longer.

It's a combination of voter suppression, civic education, and how one views voting. HipsterMorty had a broad explanation of all the factors the last time we had this discussion.

HipsterMorty said:
This is pretty ignorant tbh. If you google "Why don't young people vote" here are some of the answers you would find:

They're not asked or encouraged to vote by candidates, campaigns, family, friends, or neighbors.

Young people who are contacted by an organization or a campaign are more likely to vote. Additionally, those who discuss an election are more likely to vote in it. [5]

A young person's home environment can have a large impact on their engagement. Youth who live in a place where members of their household are engaged and vote are more likely to do so themselves. [5]

Young people are more often transient and so they often feel less invested in local elections. [5]

If young people don't vote, they're less likely to be targeted by political campaigns. Leaving young voters off contact lists is a costly mistake. Some campaigns still bypass young voters, but research shows they respond when contacted. The most effective way of getting a new voter is the in-person door-knock by a peer; the least effective is an automated phone call. [5]

Research has consistently shown that contact by political campaigns is effective in engaging young people and driving voter turnout. This contact is particularly critical in civic deserts, where young people are less likely to vote than their peers in places where they perceive higher access to civic opportunities. [6]

They're not taught how the government and elections work or feel like they don't know enough to vote.

Whenever young people are surveyed, there is a significant lack of knowledge about how exactly the government works, and, therefore, how their vote actually matters- nearly 20 percent of young people said they don't think they know enough to be able to vote. [3]

Having information about how, when and where to vote can help young people be and feel prepared to vote as well as reduce any level of intimidation they may feel. [5]

They haven't learned how to register to vote. They haven't learned the best way to influence their elected representatives. They haven't learned that they have power. A healthy democracy needs well-informed, active citizens. But these citizens don't just magically appear. People learn citizenship. They learn it, for example, as children when they go the polling place to watch their parents vote. They learn it advocating for an issue they care about with their neighbors. They learn it by doing it. [4]

College graduates are more likely to look for information about politics. And they are more likely to have friends who vote. People without a college degree, he says, are less likely to seek out political information. They also are less likely to have friends who care about politics or talk about voting. [2]

There are too many barriers for them to overcome.

Too busy or had a conflict on Election Day / couldn't afford to spend time in long line; lack of transportation; inconvenient hours or location of polling place / trouble locating their polling place; registration problems / lacking proper ID; or being out of town / did not receive an absentee ballot in time to vote. [1]

Among youth 18 and 19 years old who were not registered to vote, 23% said they missed the registration deadlines, 6% said they didn't know where or how to register. [6]

Young people who are registered to vote turn out in high numbers. In the 2008 election, 84% of those youth 18-29 who were registered to vote actually cast a ballot. Guiding youth through the registration process is one potential step to closing the age-related voting gap. [5]

A state's laws related to voter registration and voting can have an impact on youth voter turnout. Seven out of the top 10 youth turnout states had some of the more ambitious measures, including Election Day registration, voting by mail (Oregon), or not requiring registration to vote (North Dakota). [5]

Many would-be voters face a range of barriers: voter ID laws, registration difficulty, or criminal records. [3]

They're not interested in politics or feel like voting won't make a difference.

They don't like the candidates or the issues. [1]

Some are apathetic or too busy. Others don't like their choices, they don't think their vote matters, or they think the system is corrupt. [3]

A majority of young people don't think voting is an effective way to change society. [3]

Over a third (38%) of non-voters indicated they were not interested in the election or not involved in politics. [6]

Point 1, 2, and 4 in that list are young voter issues directly and sort of phase out as you get older. Like, older folks know where their polling place is, they understand the system, they know how long they gotta wait, and voting is like paying bills to them. Aging also tend to lead to a slight shift in how one votes, trending more conservative from their generation's starting point.

So, some of it is stuff outside of their control, and some of it is on the voting bloc itself. Ignoring either in the context of talking about the youth vote, and the youth vote in relation to other voting groups that face the same issues, is a poor way to start.

samoyed · Mar 29, 2020

It is interesting to note that a black voter, for good or for ill, remains a black voter their entire life so issues that affect black voters as a bloc are inescapable for them. On the other hand, a 18-22 voter is only 18-22 for one election cycle. Basically, it falls upon the older generations to look out for the younger generations because the younger generations don't stay young long enough to become a powerful electoral bloc in their own right. They can only depend on the empathy and foresight of the older gens who traditionally hold the reins of power in every society in history.

This wasn't really meant to be a "kids are the future" post but I suppose that's the only reasonable conclusion here. Ignoring the youth vote, while tactically sensible, is a bit like ignoring your past self. They are who your base will be, in due time.

Antrax · Mar 29, 2020

Steel said:
Bernie Sanders can unify Democrats and beat Trump in 2020

The first in a Vox series making the best case for each of the top Democratic contenders.

www.vox.com

Mainstream Democrats shouldn’t fear Bernie Sanders

He’d be a strong nominee and a solid president.

www.vox.com

But MattY doesn't carry water for everything that Bernie or his supporters do and as such he's in ideological opposition.

Yeah, if Matt is an example of a bad faith actor in the media, then you might as well just have Sirota do a YouTube show or something. Until he veers says something in opposition to the Sanders faction. Then he'll be excommunicated.

samoyed said:
The same issues exist but the black old voters offset the black young voters,

You need data to show young black voters vote similarly to young white voters to make this point. I'm sure it's true to some degree, but I'd still guess black turnout is higher than white turnout regardless of age group.

MHWilliams · Mar 29, 2020

samoyed said:
It is interesting to note that a black voter, for good or for ill, remains a black voter their entire life so issues that affect black voters as a bloc are inescapable for them. On the other hand, a 18-22 voter is only 18-22 for one election cycle. Basically, it falls upon the older generations to look out for the younger generations because the younger generations don't stay young long enough to become a powerful electoral bloc in their own right. They can only depend on the empathy and foresight of the older gens who traditionally hold the reins of power in every society in history.

This wasn't really meant to be a "kids are the future" post but I suppose that's the only reasonable conclusion here. Ignoring the youth vote, while tactically sensible, is a bit like ignoring your past self. They are who your base will be, in due time.

Largely correct.

samoyed · Mar 29, 2020

Antrax said:
You need data to show young black voters vote similarly to young white voters to make this point. I'm sure it's true to some degree, but I'd still guess black turnout is higher than white turnout regardless of age group.

I guess if I had a point it would be to echo dabig2's assertion that there are systemic barriers against the youth vote and the youth don't have any "natural allies" like the young ethnic groups have, namely, their parents/forebears which is why minorities can overcome voter suppression (inter-generational alliance/solidarity) with enough time but the youth vote never does, at least not in this manner. Time itself is ironically stacked against young voters.

Another way to look at it is that its possible for any social bloc to build electoral power over time by consistently turning out and voting except for the "youth" vote because the concerns of the 18-22 bloc are typically not the concerns of the 22-26 bloc even if the 22-26s were the 18-22s the last cycle.

dabig2 · Mar 29, 2020

MHWilliams said:
So, some of it is stuff outside of their control, and some of it is on the voting bloc itself. Ignoring either in the context of talking about the youth vote, and the youth vote in relation to other voting groups that face the same issues, is a poor way to start.

Well I agree with that. My issues when it comes to this convo here and in the world is that it's virtually always approached from the enthusiasm angle. Like "the youth" is a glob of bored white kids who just want stuff but don't wanna work for it. Simply an other to ignore as inconsequential while at the same time castigating them as the main villains when elections don't turn out well.

The youth vote comprises so many sectors in socioeconomics that it's going to be the hardest subgroup to really nail down. In America, it's black youth, hispanic and asian youth (minorities who already vote at way lower levels compared to whites/blacks), poor youth, rich youth, suburban youth, 2nd generation youth, etc. It's a big tent, but each with its own special factors that might not be relevant to another tribe when we're talking the act of voting. And then of course, age has many different impacts on certain behaviors when it comes to civic duty.

What's also interesting is how this is repeated in other democracies with vastly different populations and histories.

Young people and voting —

aceproject.org

Although official voter turnout figures are not consistently available from electoral authorities across regions, data collected by surveys conducted in different regions are sketching a discouraging picture.

Findings mentioned in "Youth Civic Engagement," a 2016 UN World Youth report, reveal that voter turnout has decreased in all democracies since the 1980s and that the turnout decline is concentrated among youth.

Survey results from a sample of 33 countries indicate that close to 44 percent of young adults aged 18–29 years "always vote," compared with almost 60 per cent of all citizens.

The corresponding rate is more than 70 per cent among those over the age of 50. See Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), 2018,
Youth Participation in National Parliaments

. (ACE Election Materials)

So when I talk "systemic" like samoyed mentioned above, I really mean systemic on a global scale. And as we can see in other countries like in Europe and South America and even the Middle East to a degree is that we need the youth to not only increase voter participation but to be better represented as a collective unit they usually represent more progressive ideas than their settled older cohorts.

It's a complex bag, as the UN report alludes to, but one deserving of a lot grander discussion than the banal bullshit that goes on here most of the time.

Chaos Legion · Mar 29, 2020

samoyed said:
It is interesting to note that a black voter, for good or for ill, remains a black voter their entire life so issues that affect black voters as a bloc are inescapable for them. On the other hand, a 18-22 voter is only 18-22 for one election cycle. Basically, it falls upon the older generations to look out for the younger generations because the younger generations don't stay young long enough to become a powerful electoral bloc in their own right. They can only depend on the empathy and foresight of the older gens who traditionally hold the reins of power in every society in history.

This wasn't really meant to be a "kids are the future" post but I suppose that's the only reasonable conclusion here. Ignoring the youth vote, while tactically sensible, is a bit like ignoring your past self. They are who your base will be, in due time.

How many times does the 18-22 voter base actually get focused on? It's usually 18-29 or 18-30. Who will have then seen, or have the potential to see, 3 presidential elections.

I was far more politically active as an 18 year old than I am at 29. Regardless of race, I thinkthe world bruising you up a little bit makes you slightly more pragmatic as you age.

So I don't think it's fair to say black voters remain the same. I'm far more liberal now than I was after growing up in a religious afro-Caribbean household in the south.

samoyed · Mar 29, 2020

Chaos Legion said:
So I don't think it's fair to say black voters remain the same. I'm far more liberal now than I was after growing up in a religious afro-Caribbean household in the south.

I mean you are as black today as you were 8 years ago, but you're not the "youth" voter you were 8 years ago. Its impossible to grow out of your ethnic bracket, but everyone grows out of the "youth" bracket so when people say "young voters are unreliable", it speaks to an inherent weakness in electoral systems that weighs the political stances of olds over young even though it should probably be the opposite.

It is my opinion that we (30-60 voters) should compensate for this skew by leaning towards the issues relevant to young voters despite their consistent electoral underperformance relative to their population size.

How About No · Mar 29, 2020

I'll do it with a smile on my face

I'll do it to save America :')

Antrax · Mar 29, 2020

samoyed said:
I guess if I had a poiint it would be to echo dabig2's assertion that there are systemic barriers against the youth vote and the youth don't have any "natural allies" like the young ethnic groups have, namely, their parents/forebears

I think this is a good argument. In fact, the reason I think voting participation goes up over time is that in your thirties, you cease to interact with people in their early twenties, and you interact more with people 29-65 (because you're all in the same life stage; "career"), and those older folks vote. So you become more interested in voting (to either fit in or stick it your coworkers, depending on political alignment lol). What's interesting about the 18-24 demographic is it's a tight 6 years with more in common internally than externally, whereas someone at age 30 could be brushing elbows with 50 and 60 year old folks in the same position.

samoyed said:
Another way to look at it is that its possible for any social bloc to build electoral power over time by consistently turning out and voting except for the "youth" vote because the concerns of the 18-22 bloc are typically not the concerns of the 22-26 bloc even if the 22-26s were the 18-22s the last cycle.

I also think this is interesting, but this is cute both ways. You've covered the negative, but the positive is that any particular group of 18-24 year olds could wield massive electoral power in just one cycle if they showed up relative to other groups experiencing electoral barriers. That's literally what Obama's coalition did. 2008 was largely dominated by headlines and think pieces (either celebrations or lamentations, again depending on political alignment) about how "electoral politics had changed forever." Remember in 2008 pre-election, the only Democrats who could win the Presidency were Southern Dems, leaning on certain political nods to white rural voters, going back to JFK (IE civil rights). And the losses when the Dems left the South were brutal. McGovern and Mondale getting blasted so badly established the picture of the electorate that politicians, media figures, etc... all had, up to '08.

After '08, that all seems like ancient history.

If the youth put in an election like that (where they were the deciders, "X couldn't have done it without them") then future 18-24 year olds would get a seat at the table.

chezzymann · Mar 29, 2020

I know the constitution doesnt allow presidential terms to be extended past January 31st and the max the election can be delayed by congress is a couple weeks, but the virus doesnt care about that. What happens if people just cant vote? Papers and rules are meaningless when millions are potentially dying. Will there be no president for a period of time after January 31st if that happens?

ItWasMeantToBe19 · Mar 29, 2020

Voting is habit forming and it's pretty weird to vote at all if you don't have very strong beliefs as the probability of your vote mattering is very low.

So what probably happens is that a person gets very fired up for one election for whatever reason, votes in that election, and then just keeps voting because they've made being a voter into part of their personality.

And by the time that generation of voters hits 60, there's been 19+ elections in their lifetime and they've probably gotten fired up for one of those 19 and then just became a consistent voter afterwards and then it turns out all of the olds are voting.

Bad_Boy · Mar 29, 2020

chezzymann said:
I know the constitution doesnt allow presidential terms to be extended past January 31st and the max the election can be delayed by congress is a couple weeks, but the virus doesnt care about that. What happens if people just cant vote? Papers and rules are meaningless when millions are potentially dying. Will there be no president for a period of time after January 31st if that happens?

I cant imagine our economy lasting until november in our current state. Voting would probably be issue number 4 or 5 on the list of things we should be worrying about at that point.

Deleted member 2109 · Mar 29, 2020

chezzymann said:
I know the constitution doesnt allow presidential terms to be extended past January 31st and the max the election can be delayed by congress is a couple weeks, but the virus doesnt care about that. What happens if people just cant vote? Papers and rules are meaningless when millions are potentially dying. Will there be no president for a period of time after January 31st if that happens?

I would assume it would go to the speaker of the house.

Sign My Guestbook! · Mar 29, 2020

chezzymann said:
I know the constitution doesnt allow presidential terms to be extended past January 31st and the max the election can be delayed by congress is a couple weeks, but the virus doesnt care about that. What happens if people just cant vote? Papers and rules are meaningless when millions are potentially dying. Will there be no president for a period of time after January 31st if that happens?

Then the house elects the president and the senate elects the VP. But it won't get that far as 28 red states can just order their electors to vote Trump long beforehand and that's the end of that particular crisis.

How About No · Mar 29, 2020

US PoliEra 2019 |OT3| YOU WERE AT MY WEDDING, DENISE

The videos are always painful to watch and weird I don’t know how you can instantly jump to him sexually assaulting? I mean if you want to assume the videos are sexual then would you also call him a pedophile since it is usually with kids rather than adults? Accusing someone of sexual assault...

www.resetera.com

US PoliEra 2019 |OT3| YOU WERE AT MY WEDDING, DENISE

Nah. Believe women. Always. Why it was fair to demand Franken resign soon as the first accusations came out. False accusations are almost entirely non-existent.

www.resetera.com

https://www.resetera.com/threads/20...-cancelling-college-debt.109166/post-19469184
https://www.resetera.com/threads/20...-cancelling-college-debt.109166/post-19469184

LOL times are a changin'

ItWasMeantToBe19 · Mar 29, 2020

Assume that 10% of 21 year olds are interested in voting and there is an election every two years for them. Assume 4% of non-voters in the age demo get fired up for an election, vote in that election, and then stay voters from then onward. Then we get the results of 23% of 30 year olds voting and 75% of 85 year olds voting. I tried to upload a very pretty looking table and it looked just awful so... you can do this in Excel yourself.

This is way too simple, but voting as just a habit could explain basically all age differences in voting.

MHWilliams · Mar 29, 2020

chezzymann said:
I know the constitution doesnt allow presidential terms to be extended past January 31st and the max the election can be delayed by congress is a couple weeks, but the virus doesnt care about that. What happens if people just cant vote? Papers and rules are meaningless when millions are potentially dying. Will there be no president for a period of time after January 31st if that happens?

It falls to the Speaker of the House. President and vice president terms end automatically.

Another option is state governments simply decide to have their electors vote for either candidate, which is technically legal.

More on all these questions.

Trump Can Say What He Wants, He Can’t Legally Delay The Election On His Own

"He might well try, even though the answer is, 'No, he cannot.'"

www.buzzfeednews.com

Could the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election Be Postponed?

Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night — nor a pandemic — has much chance of delaying a presidential election.

www.snopes.com

PMS341 · Mar 30, 2020

And there it is. How can you still oppose healthcare for literally everyone when we're in the middle of a worldwide pandemic? Just backwards as hell.

Deleted member 4346 · Mar 30, 2020

PMS341 said:
And there it is. How can you still oppose healthcare for literally everyone when we're in the middle of a worldwide pandemic? Just backwards as hell.

Biden is clueless. How bad will the pandemic have to get before that wing of the party sees that the current system is failing?

TheGhost · Mar 30, 2020

PMS341 said:
And there it is. How can you still oppose healthcare for literally everyone when we're in the middle of a worldwide pandemic? Just backwards as hell.

On the flip side. How would it have made the situation better here in regards to the pandemic.

PMS341 · Mar 30, 2020

TheGhost said:
On the flip side. How would it have made the situation better here in regards to the pandemic.

People who have their insurance tied to their job during a time when unemployment numbers are reaching Great Depression levels means all of those people will not have access to healthcare during one of the most dangerous pandemics to ever hit the world. Healthcare is a human right and should never be about "access" or who can "afford" it - the answer is simply everyone should.

thoughthaver · Mar 30, 2020

PMS341 said:
And there it is. How can you still oppose healthcare for literally everyone when we're in the middle of a worldwide pandemic? Just backwards as hell.

centrists are just conservatives that don't like the racism

TheGhost said:
On the flip side. How would it have made the situation better here in regards to the pandemic.

universal healthcare would save thousands of lives. i imagine italy would be in a far, FAR worse place if they didn't have their healthcare system.

TheGhost · Mar 30, 2020

PMS341 said:
People who have their insurance tied to their job during a time when unemployment numbers are reaching Great Depression levels means all of those people will not have access to healthcare during one of the most dangerous pandemics to ever hit the world. Healthcare is a human right and should never be about "access" or who can "afford" it - the answer is simply everyone should.

So forget tuition forgiveness and do a corona forgiveness package when it's over?

With the way the system is currently set up the hospitals are already over burdened , I would imagine Medicare for all would cripple the hospitals at this time.

plus you're going to destroy whole industries by switching to Medicare for all. With out a plan to keep those people employed i would never agree to this If i was him.

then again it's nothing that can be done right this second anyway.

thoughthaver · Mar 30, 2020

TheGhost said:
So forget tuition forgiveness and do a corona forgiveness package when it's over?

With the way the system is currently set up the hospitals are already over burdened , I would imagine Medicare for all would cripple the hospitals at this time.

plus you're going to destroy whole industries by switching to Medicare for all. With out a plan to keep those people employed i would never agree to this If i was him.

then again it's nothing that can be done right this second anyway.

oh you are one of those guys that cares more about insurance jobs than lives. cool, cool.

PMS341 · Mar 30, 2020

TheGhost said:
So forget tuition forgiveness and do a corona forgiveness package when it's over?

With the way the system is currently set up the hospitals are already over burdened , I would imagine Medicare for all would cripple the hospitals at this time.

plus you're going to destroy whole industries by switching to Medicare for all. With out a plan to keep those people employed i would never agree to this If i was him.

then again it's nothing that can be done right this second anyway.

What? Tuition forgiveness and Medicare For All are both possible. No reason to settle for less.

What people are you referring to in regards to losing their jobs? Insurance agents, who make bank off people like my father, who died because he ran out of money to pay his premiums and couldn't continue treatment? Maybe those insurance agents can become healthcare workers instead, as Medicare For All would ensure more people are actually getting healthcare, which requires more staff and resources. That would also mean they now have a job that doesn't require them to want to fuck over poor people. The for-profit healthcare industry is what is crippling hospitals now.

Here's a good example of what health insurance companies exist for: Anthem Sued for Medicare Fraud by U.S. Attorney in New York

mugurumakensei · Mar 30, 2020

thoughthaver said:
universal healthcare would save thousands of lives. i imagine italy would be in a far, FAR worse place if they didn't have their healthcare system.

single payer is not the only universal healthcare system. france which is generally rated the best is not single payer. It's a mandatory health insurance system with a public option.

Zombegoast · Mar 30, 2020

Joe Biden was bought out by Private Health Insurance and Big Pharma.

That should already tell you who's side he's on.

Azzanadra · Mar 30, 2020

mugurumakensei said:
single payer is not the only universal healthcare system. france which is generally rated the best is not single payer. It's a mandatory health insurance system with a public option.

The reason that countries in Europe have health insurance that work is because they established them decades ago before the infrastructure was even advanced enough to cover the majority of the population, so by the current day government-provided healthcare is not only well-integrated within society and peoples consciousness but also of high enough quality to prevent the masses preferring private solutions.

An American public option would be bad because it would only be affordable if many people opt-in, and most people will stick with their work insurance. It also wouldn't be of the highest quality as its unlikely the best doctors would be on the public option network, meaning a lot of healthcare would prove not only suboptimal, but out of the way and inaccessible for vast swathes of the population.

Freedom = $1.05 · Mar 30, 2020

Public option is a tenable goal. I dont see why this is hard for people to understand.

Zornack · Mar 30, 2020

Single payer isn't an option, people need to stop acting like it is.

mugurumakensei · Mar 30, 2020

Azzanadra said:
The reason that countries in Europe have health insurance that work is because they established them decades ago before the infrastructure was even advanced enough to cover the majority of the population, so by the current day government-provided healthcare is not only well-integrated within society and peoples consciousness but also of high enough quality to prevent the masses preferring private solutions.

An American public option would be bad because it would only be affordable if many people opt-in, and most people will stick with their work insurance. It also wouldn't be of the highest quality as its unlikely the best doctors would be on the public option network, meaning a lot of healthcare would prove not only suboptimal, but out of the way and inaccessible for vast swathes of the population.

and single payer introduces a large swath of issues. You'd have to alter how hospitals are managed for one and this one is huge (hint: they'd have to become an extension of the government and there'd be a large amount of money the government would have to put up to legally buy the hospitals that's not accounted for in any proposals and eminent domain cases would like get shot down).

BobLoblaw · Mar 30, 2020

mugurumakensei said:
and single payer introduces a large swath of issues. You'd have to alter how hospitals are managed for one and this one is huge (hint: they'd have to become an extension of the government and there'd be a large amount of money the government would have to put up to legally buy the hospitals that's not accounted for in any proposals and eminent domain cases would like get shot down).

Besides the millions that would be out of a job, you'd also have to deal with Republicans fucking with YOUR healthcare.

Dude Abides · Mar 30, 2020

Freedom = $1.05 said:
Public option is a tenable goal. I dont see why this is hard for people to understand.

Perhaps because there's no evidence for it.

Deleted member 5666 · Mar 30, 2020

Zornack said:
Single payer isn't an option, people need to stop acting like it is.

People need to stop being surprised Biden doesn't support single payer I think. He openly campaigned on not supporting single payer and won the primary.

Public option is a very achievable goal under Biden however.

Volimar · Mar 30, 2020

Zombegoast said:
Joe Biden was bought out by Private Health Insurance and Big Pharma.

That should already tell you who's side he's on.

The guy who wants to force drug prices down to what they cost overseas and is pushing for a public option?

Deleted member 4353 · Mar 30, 2020

thoughthaver said:
centrists are just conservatives that don't like the racism

universal healthcare would save thousands of lives. i imagine italy would be in a far, FAR worse place if they didn't have their healthcare system.

Oh shut the fuck up with this nonsense please.

AppleMIX · Mar 30, 2020

Dude Abides said:
Perhaps because there's no evidence for it.

We have polling data dude. Public Option is more favorable with the public.

https://www.kff.org/health-reform/p...n-including-significant-share-of-republicans/

PMS341 · Mar 30, 2020

Also relevant:

Half of Americans support Medicare for All amid the coronavirus pandemic, new poll finds

Let's go!

Dude Abides · Mar 30, 2020

AppleMIX said:
We have polling data dude. Public Option is more favorable with the public.

https://www.kff.org/health-reform/p...n-including-significant-share-of-republicans/

So what? It's not politically viable. You're not going to break a filibuster to pass it any more than you would single payer.

PMS341 · Mar 30, 2020

Dude Abides said:
So what? It's not politically viable. You're not going to break a filibuster to pass it any more than you would single payer.

*shakes fist like a Scooby-Doo villain* "IT'S NOT POLITICALLY VIABLE!"

Even Mr. Peanutbutter gets it:

thoughthaver · Mar 30, 2020

jrush64 said:
Oh shut the fuck up with this nonsense please.

1. i'm not shutting the fuck up
2. you know deep in your heart that centrists would like trump if he was just a bit more civil. just look at how quickly and easily they rehabilitated dubya.

TheGhost · Mar 30, 2020

PMS341 said:
What? Tuition forgiveness and Medicare For All are both possible. No reason to settle for less.

What people are you referring to in regards to losing their jobs? Insurance agents, who make bank off people like my father, who died because he ran out of money to pay his premiums and couldn't continue treatment? Maybe those insurance agents can become healthcare workers instead, as Medicare For All would ensure more people are actually getting healthcare, which requires more staff and resources. That would also mean they now have a job that doesn't require them to want to fuck over poor people. The for-profit healthcare industry is what is crippling hospitals now.

Here's a good example of what health insurance companies exist for: Anthem Sued for Medicare Fraud by U.S. Attorney in New York

I have worked in health insurance for the last 20 years. Me and thousands of others who will never support Bernie Sanders or Medicare for all. Sorry

Zornack · Mar 30, 2020

PMS341 said:
*shakes fist like a Scooby-Doo villain* "IT'S NOT POLITICALLY VIABLE!"

Even Mr. Peanutbutter gets it:

So you're just going to ignore reality?

Explain how M4A gets through the senate.

Democratic Presidential Primaries & Caucuses |March OT| Last Tuesday was 1000 years ago, old news no one cares about (Discussion Guidelines in OP)

The Wise Ones

The Wise Ones

User-requested account closure

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt-account

User requested account closure

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt-account

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt-account

Elizabeth, I’m coming to join you!

Elizabeth, I’m coming to join you!

This Guy Helps

user requested account closure

volunteer forum janitor

User-requested account closure

Prophet of Truth

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt-account

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt-account