Shirley killing ISIS and allying with people best at killing ISIS was a US policy? Implied in that policy is protecting those people from invasion and genocide, at least to the extent that it cost the US basically nothing to do it.
1 Like
It would be nice if someone started a poll, or if someone with knowledge tried to list what our priorities our. Iâd be curious to see how people here rank whatâs most important to them. For me, off the top of my head, itâs probably:
#1 M4A
#2 End citizens united
#3 Immediately cease and desist separating children from their parents and locking kids up in cages
$4 End all unnecessary foreign intervention
#5 Expand the # of SCOTUS seats who counter seats stolen by GOP
$6 Hold accountable ALL politicians who either obstructed, committed perjury, or otherwise abetted the Trump administration to protect our democracy in the future
#7 End wealth disparity by taxing the shit out of billionaires and corporate greed
These are by no means listed in order of importance, but chronologically the most expedient way to set a progressive agenda going forward. I rattled this off the top of my head. Iâm sure Iâm missing many and I might have the order wrong. But this is pretty much whatâs important to me in the coming elections. Anyone else care to chime in their list of priorities? I think this should impact our votes. For instance if Sanders is great for M4A, but heâll do little for my rest, Iâd have to reconsider a candidate who hits all my proirities
1 Like
Not really. For one, we have been literally open about not allying with them. For two, we have been playing both sides, supplying the Free Syrian Army er Al Nusra er Al Queda er ISIS. (Edit: forgot âer âThe Army of Conquestââ)
And donât call me Shirley.
4 Likes
Yes. Because it doesnât say âDo you support M4A if private insurance is eliminated and replaced with Medicare, which means youâll have no premiums, no copays, never need another referral, etc and your out of pocket expenses will go down?â
It tells part of the story, not all of it. Itâs a poll question that is designed to get a negative response.
The issue were discussing here is whether people will lose their doctors. You said they will because some doctors will just start taking direct payments and stay outside the system. I said thatâs ridiculous because like 1% of people would do that.
Now you want to talk about disruptions and complications? Like people arenât going to be booted from their doctor like an insurance change because there will be no networks (well only one). Existing patients are not likely to be bumped for new patients. Wait times going up does not equal losing your doctor, donât shift those goalposts.
Different election, different circumstances. The GOP was literally trying to take away healthcare from people and controlled both the House and Senate. The voters had a chance to basically take back one chamber from them to stop that and did. Now weâre talking about making a case for the White House and Senate. A slightly better status quo is not inspirational and we canât run on âTheyâre trying to take it away and weâll protect it,â when we already have a lever of power to put the brakes on.
2 Likes
Haha I am NOT a Tulsi supporter! Anyone whoâs read my posts should know full well Iâm an all out for Sanders. Just pointing out that I think much of her opposition and media has been engaged in a smear campaign against her by giving her stances she doesnât actually hold
1 Like
I disagree, but even if youâre right about that heâs not a legit fascist authoritarian wannabe dictator who wants to put all the brown kids in cages and then build more cages to put more brown kids in.
So what you do if youâre a good person is you vote for Bernie, or whoever you like in the primary, and for bonus points you knock on doors and shit. Then you vote for whoever wins in the general and for bonus points you knock on doors and shit, and then you can start ripping them the day after the election and protest them and fight them and organize and volunteer for whoever you like in the next go around.
Because if Trump wins there may not be a next go around.
4 Likes
I know youâre a Bernie supporter.
Those are all different things,
All of these groups were there to fight Assad, but in addition to fighting Assad, ISIS had a side hustle doing the caliphate stuff and the international terrorism stuff, the Free Syrian Army wasnât. The US âalliedâ (were they supposed to sign a treaty or something?) with primarily Kurdish militias in the North East to destroy ISIS, not to topple Assad.
I was trying to set you up for a donât call me âSurelyâ reverse dunk but you couldnât handle the pass because of your freaky finger issues.
Itâs a good position to take, both as a practical plan and politically. I do wish she had started from this position though. I cringed when she raised her hand at the first debate. Abolishing private insurance would be great if it was within a Presidentâs power to easily do so, but as Matty Yglesias pointed out after that debate, itâs weird how she and others were flocking to a position that wasnât politically popular and wasnât going to happen in anyoneâs first term. She picked up a few Bernie supporters but made it much more difficult to consolidate the moderate vote, which is still a large block even if their politics are stupid. I donât know what prompted her to adjust her position on health care, but if she concluded that she didnât have a path to victory by staking out the most progressive position on everything, she wouldâve been correct.
Also, although her plan is closer to Peteâs, his plan never sucked. HE sucked because of his decision to disingenuously attack the full M4A plan on cost. Thatâs a distinction I think a lot of posters are forgetting.
2 Likes
1 and 2 are the big massive ones and ultimately are practically the same. We arenât getting M4A without ending citizens united. And health insurances will fight for dear life to keep Citizens United.
I debated going with âSurelyâ.
I mean American leadership very deliberately stated repeatedly that we were only temporarily working with the Democratic Federation of Northern Syria for a very limited and specific purpose.
They are not natural allies and this was inevitable. I mean lol at us partnering with eco-anarcho-feminists, with plenty of Marxism in there as well.
My understanding is that the âFree Syrian Armyâ is shit and, if not actually comprised of elements of Al Nusra et al, an open conduit for arms to flow that direction.
I feel Warren stringing along M4A uber alles people was shadier than what Pete did; he didnât change his position he used a sharp line of attack against M4A. But I mean, her plan if she can get it done is amazeballs, medicare at 50 seems like a gigantic leap to universal single payer system, but what the hell do I know.
Add democracy reform near the top⌠Statehood for PR & DC, a modern VRA, end voter suppression, end gerrymandering, etc.
Eco-anarcho-feminism, sign me up. Well not literally, Iâm not man enough to hang with those chicks.
It was a freaking brutal war. Assad was using chemical weapons and indiscriminately bombing civilians. The people that were there with the capability to fight Assad overlapped with terrorist groups, Iâm not disputing that. Moreover, the Sunni countries in the region financed/supplied most of these groups, so they were never going to be boy scouts. That still doesnât address that the US eventually partnered with a much nicer group of people to destroy ISIS, and the US betrayed them, for no reason other than Erdogan has a piece of stable genius.
Just come on, âDo you support x given that x is so undeniably awesome or do you support y even though y sucksâ is not a proper polling question.
If the question as asked gets a negative response, at least you will gain some information about how ignorant your respondents were.
Assuming itâs still legal to run a medical practice that accepts cash, I donât see why people who can afford to pay a little bit more for medical services wouldnât do so. Some doctors may opt for that, as some doctors already donât bother with medicare as it exists.
Letâs agree to disagree here, itâs a minimal thing, I think strengthening the ACA (which already exists) is a very strong political message for the GE.
1 Like
Definitely feel the opposite. M4A was and still kind of is a purity test. And not just for progressives, even guys like Pete had to use M4A branding (with caveats). Biden is the only serious contender who pushed back against it. Again, nobody is getting M4A passed in 2021 even if we somehow get 55+ Senators, and I think everyone understands that, so it seems like the only value in taking a specific position on it is to represent how willing you are to upend the status quo in the healthcare industry. It makes sense for Warren to back full M4A in that context because thatâs what sheâs about.
Unfortunately sheâs also about having detailed plans and she got stuck in a position where she either had to provide a soundbite telling middle class families their taxes would go up or release an actual plan for funding it. She went with the latter, it turned into a joke on SNL, and the consensus seems to be that she used some optimistic estimates just to continue to avoid saying that middle class taxes would go up. I donât actually know how realistic her plan was but I do know it wasnât being taken seriously and wouldâve been a liability for her moving forward.
Anyway all of this is to say that if sheâs still all about making big structural changes I donât consider it a betrayal specifically of the M4A hopefuls. The phrase was co-opted and separated from specific policy goals before she started using it.
1 Like
Iâm on team Liz (unless she tanks hard). Take your case to cuse.
1 Like
Do you support Y even though Y sucks is what âDo you support M4A even though it takes away all private insurance?â isâŚ
Yeah and the percentage of people who can afford to pay out of pocket for medical expenses and would choose to do so is like 1% or close to it. The sticker price on this stuff is absurd.
Or, door #3: youâre going to save money and get great insurance. Go read the plan if you want but those are the basics.
Just donât give the soundbyte, itâs not that hard.
Instead of paying larger premiums to a corporation youâll pay smaller premiums to Medicare for great coverage. If your employer pays for your insurance, weâll make them pass along the savings to you.
1 Like
Did you miss the last 2 debates? That was her plan, and she was forced into addressing the taxes specifically.
1 Like