-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Democratic Presidential Primary |February OT| It Can't be Worse than Iowa, Right? (Discussion Guidelines in OP)
- Thread starter Poodlestrike
- Start date
- Status
Bernie has switched to a very similar four year transition plan
No one is getting us that M4A anytime soon
lmao why man, Pete is basically the mayonnaise candidate if we want to use his own words to describe him. That's just baffling.
I don't know but I saw a video of Bernie Sanders stumping in NH today saying the poor dad in Parasite did the right thing at the birthday party.
It wasn't that she waffled on M4A- she just refused to admit that M4A would result in a tax increase and instead kept repeating the phrase, "your costs will go down." All the word-smithing made her look dishonest. Coming into that debate, she had pulled ahead of Bernie and into a virtual tie with Biden in some polls. After the debate, she fell double digits.
And she stepped away from M4A since then and adopted the generic party line
Seemed to have less to do with the debate than the release of her actual plan. A M4A plan predicated on passing comprehensive immigration reform and bending over backwards to ensure that no one in the middle class has their taxes go up a single penny was a silly way to make her argument. I was a huge Warren fan going into the Fall but she did herself in when the pressure was on.
Correct me if I'm wrong but she still pushes for M4A - her transition plan just uses a public option as a transitionary step before getting there. Her plan calls for full implementation of M4A by Year 3 as far as I'm aware.
Ending the Stranglehold of Health Care Costs on American Families | Elizabeth Warren
Elizabeth's Medicare for All plan gives everyone good insurance and cuts their health care costs to nearly zero -- without increasing middle-class taxes one penny.
elizabethwarren.com
Still calling for M4A
Last I checked she is making a transition plan to go from instantly public option to single payer system ("true" M4A) across 8 years.
That doesn't make it not M4A, it's just a different time period. Not even Sanders goes to single payer system within 3 years.
Both of them are smart enough to know that you can't upend the system in such an abrupt period of time, lots of people working in insurance companies who would lose their jobs along with other various issues to iron out.
The main difference between the two aside from this is that Warren has a method of paying for it (that is a bit outlandish) when Bernie doesn't really have it. Warren served as the meatshield for the "how are you going to pay for it" attacks that Bernie never had to really withstand. I guess people had higher expectations from Warren due to being the "I have a plan for that" candidate.
She Hasn't talked about it at all in the last two debatesEnding the Stranglehold of Health Care Costs on American Families | Elizabeth Warren
Elizabeth's Medicare for All plan gives everyone good insurance and cuts their health care costs to nearly zero -- without increasing middle-class taxes one penny.
Still calling for M4A
Bernie is running with the Health Care Ball. That specific issue is now all his.
Do like Yang, come up with a signature policy like UBI vs robots
Yeah, no. The transition plan has been part of the bill since it was released in the Senate... pushing for M4A's passage almost immediately after becoming president (Bernie's position from the start) has been consistent and not the same as Warren changing her stance from pushing for Bernie's bill to splitting the bill into two pieces, the latter of which wouldn't be brought to a vote until her 3rd year in office.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...-medicare-for-all-in-first-week-of-presidency
Yeah she hasn't talked about it because every time she talks about it on a debate stage she gets wrapped around in the conversation of the economics of how to pay for it... and whenever she does that her poll numbers go down so she stopped going into specifics.
The electorate really doesn't care about that sort of stuff, it was a trap by the media/pundits to have you focusing on the minutia to detract from the bigger messaging. NONE of the other candidates have plans nearly as detailed as Warren does but she unfortunately was the plan candidate.
This also a competition with other candidates and you can't just copy/paste other people's proposals.
User Banned (1 Month): Dismissive Commentary and Ignoring Staff Post with Regards to Trolling and Hostility Over Multiple Posts; Prior Related Warning
She wasn't even running yet when that happened.
The whole DNA thing was like 1.5 years ago
No one gives a shit
Edit:
This was a bad comment by me, I meant no one as in the media doesn't care
Last edited:
Any policy which isn't constantly pounded into the voters heads is probably one that is going to be defanged or swept under the rug. That's how it usually works.
Not every candidate just rings off the same speech every debate
You keep saying "no one gives a shit" but I personally know a number of Native Americans that do, in fact, give a shit. Are you a Native American? If not, you should probably stop being so dismissive about it, it's a gross tactic.
You guys are debating about policy from their campaign websites.
The average voter doesn't read those
You need a signature issue, easy to say in a few words "Medicare For All"
2nd hammer your signature finisher, the crowd will remember you for it
What's Bernie's Finishing Move? Medicare For All.
There that's perfect messaging
The average voter doesn't read those
You need a signature issue, easy to say in a few words "Medicare For All"
2nd hammer your signature finisher, the crowd will remember you for it
What's Bernie's Finishing Move? Medicare For All.
There that's perfect messaging
Pete is so fixated about being in front of an audience of receptive black people that he Freudian slipped at the worst time. Then his attempts to catch himself felt like something written for Michael Scott.
well no one care because she was just
Disparaging native Americans and as a nation we don't care about native Americans at all but people definitely cared.
That's a different argument altogether.
You are right the electorate doesn't really care much or read too specifically into policies. For them on the surface, Warren and Bernie plans are about the same as they both are gearing towards single payer system. Unlike say Pete who is doing public option only despite trying to co-opt the name Medicare for All (who want it).
It's disingenuous to compare Jim Crow era incarceration rates to 90's tough on crime era rates specifically because we entered the era of mass incarceration—in no small part due to the 94 Crime Bill and a half dozen other changes at the federal level and multiple state level changes. The point I'll make is that CA is at least trying to address the problems where as most of these Bible Belt states fight any progress straight to the Supreme Court.
I'm sorry, that was a bad comment from me
I meant to say that the media doesn't care andthat the whoel conversation moved away from it
Messaging is key to voters understanding a candidates priorities and platform. As Sanders consistently polls at or bear the top the others could stand to learn from him in this regard.
She hasn't stepped away from M4A- and, IMO, you're ascribing more importance to policy stuff than is actually there. A quick look at 2nd choices for the various candidates reveals this.
The reason you can't compare the two is because tough on crime was significantly worse for incarceration rates of African Americans-in no small part due to CA's three strike policy. You don't get to hand wave that away because the bill itself was racist in intent, which is why you didn't see every other state adopt a three strike system. It remains one of the most racially discriminatory policies and its effects are still felt throughout the state. You can make a point about the bible belt without suggesting that CA doesn't have an incredible problem with racism. They just dress it up nicer.
It's interesting because at the Native American summit they did last year she consistently had the best positions and came away from it the clear winner. She actually had legitimate policy proposals to help Native American communities and strengthen their rights, where as most candidates were just reiterating the same stuff Democrats have said for decades.
I would sooner have Klob than Bootyjudge, but I'm really hoping all the moderates just cancel each other out
in a WWE post-Trump era, you cannot campaign like you did in the old days
the world has changed
you need to campaign in a post-Trump era and you need catchy policy issues, catchy tag lines, catchy slogans, catchy 3 word polices and merch.
and "Medicare For All" are three words that is all you need to hammer over and over and over and you win
the world has changed
you need to campaign in a post-Trump era and you need catchy policy issues, catchy tag lines, catchy slogans, catchy 3 word polices and merch.
and "Medicare For All" are three words that is all you need to hammer over and over and over and you win
Klobuchar has been so under the radar that I honestly can't think a single bad thing about her.
I just never thought she stood a chance.
but Pete flew too close to the sun and I think he's about to crash, and it will soon be Klobbering time.
I just never thought she stood a chance.
but Pete flew too close to the sun and I think he's about to crash, and it will soon be Klobbering time.
Blue Skies may be right in the sense people don't care ENOUGH about Liz pretending to be a person of color
And highkey racist
then to make it all worse, as if she learned nothing, she releases those DNA results. yeah she may be trying to put an effort now with Native American focused policy proposals, but it doesn't erase her complete lack of judgement and terrible instincts she displayed just before running.
And highkey racist
then to make it all worse, as if she learned nothing, she releases those DNA results. yeah she may be trying to put an effort now with Native American focused policy proposals, but it doesn't erase her complete lack of judgement and terrible instincts she displayed just before running.
But the point being made is that it isn't actually addressing the problems, because the problems are systemic. They're just dressing their racism up in nice clothing.
Can you explain what you mean when you say he "flew too close to the sun"
Do you consider mentally and physically abusing staff a bad thing?
Except Chris "I stole this land and made it my private beach" Christie. Never forget.
Isn't that a phrase, like he got way too high up there, further than he should have, and is now coming crashing down
She throws stuff at her staff and is repeatedly cited to be a terrible person to work for in shitty conditions.
How Amy Klobuchar Treats Her Staff (Published 2019)
Interviews with more than two dozen former staff members and internal emails reviewed by The Times reveal demeaning and unusual behavior by Ms. Klobuchar toward her subordinates.
Careful what you're saying; Amy's got a stapler with your name on it.
She throws stuff at her staff and is repeatedly cited to be a terrible person to work for in shitty conditions.
Yea that's poor leadership
But like, I never really thought about her since she didn't have a chance
- Status