I doubt they understand the details, but I think most primery voters undrerstand sander's wants a goverment run/funded health system.
some were, some werent. italy is single payer. honestly dont think sp would have made any difrence here, it was pure incompetence/anti intellectualism.
Yeah but I think the details are important on this one. Saying you don't want healthcare for everyone flat out is not insight into nuanced perspective. it's usually because of something that I doubt most people would A: be able to explain B: have accurate information to back up.
People understand it conceptually. That much hasn't changed. I'd imagine a majority of Democratic Primary voters are well aware of Sanders position on healthcare.
Well Bernie isn't really much of a Socialist, he's somewhere between Democratic Socialist and Social Democrat given his policy positions. None the less, healthcare is consistently one of the biggest concerns for voters in the primary, and we've all previously operated under the notion that Sanders is "best" on this issue. I have severe doubts there's a huge number of "swing" voters that don't understand Sanders
Many countries with single payer have also failed, mostly due to cultural differences. France has a single payer system and they're seeing cases increase at a similar rate. The UK and Italy as well. Single payer isn't some panacea for combating the virus, and does very little to limit the actual spread of it.
I'm compelled to agree. David Pakman pointed out in his Bernie Lost video that how you ask the question dramatically changes support for M4A. Bernie's plan specifically of banning the option for private insurance is pretty unpopular, but a system that allows you to buy into Medicare is wildly popular.
Not on hand, sadly. I'd recommend checking out The Weeds' episodes on electability and the primary race, they've cited it at least once iirc. Might have been PSA, though.
I think they may or may not understand him, but I think that people don't generally read super in depth on this stuff in the way people who are really dialed in to political discourse think they should. It's about who knows who and who trusts who, as much as the actual nuts and bolts and terminology.
What about armchair neurological diagnosing people with dementia and concern trolling about it?
The whataboutism here doesn't feel like it's in good faith but I'll entertain a query that seems designed to deflect.
With businesses and schools shutting down, this will def show that as much "for all" things we can get the better. Whether healthcare, edu, and some sort of UBI or tax shifts.
What about the people not so quietly hoping for elderly to get sick so Bernie can pull an above zero chance of victory out of his hat
It's not that complicated, really. Saying things like "I hope the virus won't spread because of voting in general" is very different than "I hope the virus won't spread because Bernie wouldn't drop out" or "because Biden told people to go vote".
A candidate who is not getting people to turn out or vote for him to win over the candidate who actually is.
They want to "win" more than they want the policies they claim to advocate for in place. Biden is the most left leaning candidate we've had in decades (as was Hillary for that matter), and plenty of people don't care because he's not Bernie/Harris/Warren/etc.
Yep. Cancel student debt, universal child-care/pre-k, stronger GND policy would all be great. Biden's policy platform needs a facelift and if he's shopping around for better plans I'm all for it.
That just seems like an everyday bad post, nothing spectacular about. You'll know it's a spectacularly bad post if it just magically disappears.
