In fairness running anti M4A ads is pretty bad in 2019. Definitely not a good look. Say you want to do it incrementally fine, but actually attacking people for wanting to do what the rest of the world is already doing is pretty screwed up. Not enough for me to say Pete should quit the party, but I’m obviously not happy.
3 Likes
This whistlestop episode on it was pretty solid
but tl;dr Nixon dirty tricks
1 Like
Lawrence O’Donnell said this best. He essentially said this is a stupid issue for any candidate to talk about. They have no power over what happens, and every single one of them will sign whatever health care bill Congress can pass. His point is that it’s dumb to argue over this or to try to sink candidates on either side of it, and he thinks it’s an absolute waste of space in the debates despite it taking up a large chunk of them. It’s part of why Joe’s spiel is so dumb and bad. If he were president and the Congress passed Medicare 4 All, there’s no way he wouldn’t sign it.
2 Likes
I agree with this post. There’s a lot that Warren/Bernie are claiming they’d do that will literally never happen. I say this as a mostly Warren supporter. At the same time with the impeachment looking super spicy we aren’t drawing dead to M4A so nobody should be attacking it. If we can get it it’s obviously better than all the alternatives.
That’s called being an idealist. That’s what they’re supposed to do. If it galvanizes voters for them, great.
1 Like
I mean, that article doesn’t even show the ad. Here it is. watch it for yourself. This is why I’m so frustrated. It’s not at the candidates, it’s at people just reading an article about an ad, or a speech, and reacting to the spin. I thought the folks here would be a little more diligent, and I suppose that’s why I’m disappointed. If you still want to cancel him over something that is much less inflammatory than the CNN article makes it out to be, then fine, but at least decide for yourself.
1 Like
Exactly. So pouring cold water on them in a primary is pretty shitty.
This is why I am pissed at the “debates”. they spend the entire first hour arguing about health care, when they SHOULD be asking about foreign policy and other things the president actually has daily control over.
2 Likes
I mean he’s not yelling or anything but it’s pretty clear he’s supporting private health insurers remaining in business… which is just bad. I get that we may not be able to force the issue and might be forced to accept some watered down version of M4A, but the actual economics of this are not in doubt. His plan would cost more over time and provide worse care for the typical American. There’s nothing better about it other than the healthcare lobbyists being slightly happier about it (although they will fight it like they did every version of Obamacare with a public option… which ultimately doomed the entire thing in the long run because it did nothing at all about cost). I would definitely prefer if we didn’t run on the watered down version, because realistically whatever we ask for we’re going to get something worse.
I also really dislike him holding big money fundraisers. No offense but at this point he looks like a younger, hipper, and vastly more capable version of Biden. He’s more right on the issues, but that’s because he’s a lot younger and understands what’s actually going on to a higher degree. I’d vote for him in a heartbeat over any Republican and probably donate in the general… but he’s not who I’d pick to reform the political system. He claims to be for a lot of stuff while his acts are the opposite and that bothers me. Warren>Yang>Pete for me with Warren and Yang being close and Pete being a distant third. And that’s mostly because at your urging I read his book and believe that he’s a highly competent person who probably wouldn’t be a bad president.
1 Like
Here’s the thing though: you think I’m a centrist because I don’t believe that canceling a trillion dollar industry in 4 years is realistic. I am not a centrist. Can we not be pragmatic progressives? I want progressive values to win, but i want a practical way to get there.
Also, this idea that two issues define progressivism is fucking ridiculous, and it’s so fucking tiresome to hear it over and over.
2 Likes
He would be fine being “pure” if he also had $10M he could transfer from previous campaigns (that was raised the same way, I might add).
I don’t give a shit about rich people wanting to write a $2800 check. He can never ask them for more money, anyway. At what dollar amount does a “grassroots” supporter become a “big money” donor? According to the FEC, it’s $200, but what is it according to you?
1 Like
That trillion dollar industry is strangling the rest of the economy. Healthcare is the biggest economic problem we have and it isn’t close. The idea that it makes more sense to fight it over and over again for every incremental improvement instead of just going to war with it and crushing it utterly makes no sense to me from a tactical perspective.
I think we’d be lucky to beat them once (it’s never happened before I don’t think). I want to take as much as we possibly can if we manage that. They’re super powerful and super corrupting. If we beat them but let them live they’ll start to grow again like the tumor they are the day after we win. In a few years we’ll be right back to spending 18% of GDP on healthcare again.
And that’s one of the other big misconceptions about this fight… this isn’t about everyone being covered. That’s a symptom not a cause. The cause is that we allow for profit healthcare. Healthcare is one of those industries that straight up breaks capitalism. It has crazy low price elasticity of demand and that results in it being able to charge patients based on what patients can afford to pay as opposed to what they can do it for. It’s a massive headache to do healthcare in a for profit way.
I’m not normally someone who is in favor of price controls except in VERY narrow circumstances. This is one of them. The right way to do healthcare is to have a budget and figure out how to get the best healthcare possible to the population by spending that budget efficiently.
1 Like
I don’t have a good answer for that. I’m fairly confident that Warren’s donors from her senate campaign weren’t from the healthcare industry or big finance. They hate her passionately. Those are the two groups I want my candidate to have taken exactly zero money from if possible.
Smh really. This is as bad as Victor’s posting. You have a problem with Victor, talk about him, not the “progressive wing” (apparently regressive iyo) of the party or this pretend it’s not a shot at Smacc.
4 Likes
I think you’d be surprised. Our goals are probably quite similar. We just disagree on how to get there.
Elizabeth Warren is my idea of what a pragmatic progressive looks like.
Incrementalism is not pragmatic. Change comes swiftly. Otherwise, we’d still be debating over gay civil unions.
The time for moving with all deliberate speed on universal health care has passed. Just like impeachment, this is something where we need leadership to lead and drive public opinion towards what is right instead of waiting for the country to catch up.
Maybe my view is tainted by where I live and the people I interact with daily, but I like Liz. I hope she can draw out the base if she gets the nom, because left-leaners and nevertrumpers will never vote for her. I talk to them every day.
The question is: who outnumbers who?
I don’t think that trying to appeal to nevertrumpers is a good electoral strategy.
what about Obama-Trump voters? Not that I really understand them at all, but should we be going for them?
No. You should only go for voters who already agree with you and your candidate.
2 Likes