DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus ‘Stop Sanders’ Democrats Are Agonizing Over His Momentum

I support Bernie. Have never said I was a SJW.

Moderate centrist dem === republican lite. We don't need that. The GOP moved the goal post so far to the left that people think it's ok to have a racist fascist Trump regime... that is extremist right.

Bernie's ideas have become so mainstream in the last 4 years that only the diehard corporatist dems and GOPers are against them. Big money wants you to vote to protect them sheople, wake up.

What socialist ideas are mainstream in America?

Are you just tuning in? Here's a short list, then use google if you want more:

Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
VA Medical Services
Interstate Highways
USPS
Libraries
US Military
Fire Departments
Police
EMS
911 System
US Parks and Recreation
Head Start
Snap
Meals on Wheels
HEAP
Food Stamps
Welfare
FEMA
WIC
Government R&D
Most Drug and Medical R&D

This is a partial list. Pretty much anything we as individuals or families cannot do for ourself but as a community we share the expense to do provide service for all is socialism.

Now explain to me how we will never be a socialist country and all socialism is bad?

You said Bernie's ideas. That was what I meant. I just substituted Socialists for your hero.

Medicare for All is wildly popular. About 80% of Americans support it. Taxing the Big Corps and 1% more to make them pay their fair share is popular with over half the country. Lower college costs or tuition free college is too.

Just some, there are more that are liked by many.

Pictured below: Most individuals when they learn of socialist programs in the U.S.

ikr

Medicare for all is not popular, let alone wildly popular unless you want the USA bankrupt. What amount is the "fair share" amount? I will tell you. They already pay their fair share (37% top rate is already too high) . Taxing "big corps" is horrible for business, that has been proven. USA cannot compete with other economies if we have high corporate tax rates. Free college tuition is popular? For who? You think hard working Americans want to pay for spoiled kids to get a free education? You are hallucinating.

This is why the Dem need a moderate candidate.

The socialist wonderland of free stuff sounds lovely until people learn how much their taxes will be jacked up.

So many tantrums about "Trump tax cuts". Now go tell those same people their taxes are getting jacked up 7% to pay for "free stuff".

Nobody is voting for that.

Dems need to wake up fast.

Corporations did just fine with higher effective tax rates years ago.

Keep moving the goal posts!

Some facts to guide you:

Medicare for all popular

Free college popular

I'd swallow extra taxes to give the future of America a better chance with people from all backgrounds.

I can't make you believe bro, so you'll just have to witness it when it happens.

YOU would. But most people arent you. Most people care about their own welfare over anything. Also most people can do math and know that 7% tax increase costs way way waaaayyyyy more to them personally than paying for health ins under Obamacare.

Medicare for All
New Poll: Medicare for All Is Popular Until You Explain How It Works
Support drops when you tell people it would require higher taxes, longer lines, and switching insurance plans.

Peter Suderman |

1.24.2019


Douliery Olivier/Sipa USA/Newscom

A new poll shows that a clear majority of Americans support Medicare for All—until they are told what it is and how it would work.

The survey was conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation, which regularly asks Americans about health policy issues as part of its Health Tracking Poll series. It finds that 56 percent of the country supports a “national health plan, sometimes called Medicare for All” and an even larger percentage—71 percent—supports the idea when told that it would “guarantee health insurance as a right for all Americans.” When told that such a plan would eliminate health insurance premiums, 67 percent say they’re in favor.

One way to look at these numbers is as strong public approval for the broad outlines of a single-payer health care system, which would create a single national health insurance plan run by the federal government and financed through taxes. That public is support is why so many 2020 Democratic presidential contenders have been warming up to the idea.

But the more revealing part of the survey, I think, comes from the questions focused on the costs of single payer, all of which caused support for Medicare for All to drop below 40 percent. Told that it would eliminate private health insurance and require people to pay more in taxes, for example, support fell to 37 percent. Told that it would cause some medical treatments and tests to be delayed, support dropped even further, to 26 percent.

Medicare for All supporters might complain that these are loaded descriptions that don’t accurately capture the reality of single payer, which they say is about freeing people from premiums while offering a guarantee of access. But these are, at a very basic level, just descriptions of what an American single-payer system would do. The most prominent such plan is the one put forth by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.), which would eliminate all existing private health insurance plans in a four-year period. Although it allows for some secondary private coverage once the system is in place, it requires most everyone in the U.S. to enroll in a new, government-run plan. Arguably the whole point of the most ambitious single-payer schemes is to move everyone off private insurance and onto a single federally managed plan; that’s not possible unless people who currently have private insurance get new coverage. Some single-payer proposal would make the transition more slowly, but coverage disruption is not incidental; it’s the point.

Financing that plan would require a massive increase in federal spending—about $32 trillion over a decade, according to estimates from think tanks across the political spectrum. Even with the most carefree attitude toward debt and deficits, it is nearly unthinkable that an increase in government spending of that size would not come with higher taxes, probably much higher taxes, which would likely affect the middle class.

The contention that waiting times for health care services would be longer is the most debatable of the bunch, but given the experience of other countries and the probable design of a full-scale single-payer plan, it’s a more than plausible outcome. Government-run health care systems like the ones in the United Kingdom (which is fully socialized) and Canada (a territorial single-payer system) are notorious for having long wait times for services such as cancer treatment.

Furthermore, the Sanders plan calls for significant reductions to reimbursements for health care providers, which, if implemented, would almost certainly put some health care centers out of business, reducing the number of doctors and other medical professionals. And although it’s possible, in theory, to imagine a system that doesn’t cut provider rates, that would be far, far more expensive, and would require even higher taxes while robbing supporters of one of their favorite talking points—that Medicare for All is much cheaper, overall, than the current system.

Medicare for All proponents might be pleased with the show of support found in the survey, but what those questions mostly revealed was that people say yes when you ask them if they favor a health care system that is essentially cost-free. Clear public support, in other words, only materializes when you ignore the practical reality of making a transition from a mixed public/private system to single payer—higher taxes, longer waits, and the loss of existing private insurance arrangements.

So it’s not surprising that Medicare for All backers are remaining relatively vague about the particulars of their plans—especially when it comes to financing—and that the phrase’s popularity has coincided with its transformation into a non-specific catchall for additional government intervention in the provision of health care, whether or not that intervention amounts to a single-payer system. Vagueness serves the cause here. The imaginary version of Medicare for All that entails no disruption or tradeoffs is popular; the reality is not.

https://reason.com/2019/01/24/new-poll-shows-medicare-for-all-is-popul/

So the alternative of Trump and the GOPers repealing Obamacare 100% then replacing it with nothing or some crap like the tax cut where all the money goes to the top... I'm not going to change your mind, you just do you.

The past 3 years has nothing but doubling down on just about every issue despite how fraudulent it appears to be. I suspect no different, they will oust all moderate candidates. I'm pretty stoked to see Tulsi Gabbard got enough donations to be in the debates. The REEEEEEing at a Democratic candidate who isn't a war mongering socialist is going to be excellent to watch.

Sorry bud, but even by your own rationale, it's still discrimination. It doesn't matter that the considerations are justified or reasonable.

tantrums exactly describes their behavior and is exactly why those same people can't be trusted to establish and oversee such an important system.

Hell, if the VA actually ran well and provided consistent, quality care, and the Dems tried to present that as a model for what it could be like for everyone, they might get some traction. Then you can point to a product.

But it doesn't ( or atleast the Dems won't claim it does so long as R is in office). If gov't can't or won't fix the VA problems, there is no reason to believe that those issues won't be problems in national healthcare system.

So are a lot of republicans, but you don't want them to have any say in the party...

Yes, centrist dems and centrist reps are not that far apart on a lot of things. And I will take that group and a candidate from that group every single day over Trump and his supporters or Bernie and his... every single day.

Don't you know DC, we need MORE radicals and LESS people willing to meet in the middle....

And there is the truth from both sides in a nut shell.

This is not the narrative that they are being sold.. the narrative that makes this stuff so popular among many is that YOUR taxes won't be impacted.. it will all come from the evil rich and the evil corporations.. they owe you. We will take from them to provide for you....

and the reality is that the bar of what constitutes "rich" will start out high and just keep getting lower and lower to pay for it as costs mushroom.

Yet at the same time people will tell you the costs without telling you how some of those costs are offset. People on medicare pay a premium. They have co-pays. Yet when some people tell you the cost of a proposed program, they refuse to tell you that some of that cost will be offset by what will be paid in by those using that program.

And you've misunderstood what I've said in the past. I can see it as an honest mistake, but let me clear that up. I don't blame corporations like Walmart or Amazon for using the laws at their disposal. The very job of a corporation is to maximize profits.

But when we have a system that allows multi billion dollar corporations with healthy profit margins to not only avoid paying income taxes, but also use their wealth and power to extort local governments to avoid paying sometimes even millions upon millions of dollars in state and local taxes, there's something terribly wrong with that system.

This isn't a one size fits all for who is and isn't being honest in these things. Claiming major corporations be some protected class has led to a lot of what has gotten us to this point.

No way most Dems in this country are moderates.

Where are you arriving at that conclusion from?

Just because the most outrageous ones get the most publicity doesn't mean that they are speaking for the majority. The squeaky wheel gets greased first but one needs to remember it's only one piece of the vehicle.

Let's look at what happened with the Republicans in 2016. Do you really think Trump represents anything close to what the party and the Christians within the party stand for? Do you think that Trump is representative of the average Republican? I say no.

What happened was the vote of the average Republican was split among several worthy Republican candidates. As such, there were enough fringe votes in the party that when they were all concentrated on a single candidate, Trump, the fringe selected the nominee, not the average republican.

Trump ran on border security, lower taxes, conservative justices. I think they are Republican values.

That wasn't the question or the point. Obama deported more illegal immigrants than any other president before him so the entire "border security issue" is just hot air. But people do buy into it.

We all remember that.. because there is a bunch of video out there of Hillary and Chuckie Schumer and Nancy Pelosi all talking about the crisis at the border... but even as the numbers are higher now than they were then, somehow it's not a crisis any more... weird.

I wasn't specifically agreeing with the word "most" as it applies to dems or reps.. but if the moderates from both parties could come together behind a common candidate, they would be MORE than either extreme.. but they won't...

We just have to face facts, there are some districts where a glass of water could get elected if it had a "D" beside it.

I could probably get behind its watered down policies.

Hmmmm... Sometimes a crisis can be created. I mean if you keep screaming you're going to build a wall and then scream you're going to close the border, anyone thinking of trying to come here is going to see a reason to do it in a hurry. That might even cause an influx of immigrants.

And it seems you think that the Dems don't believe there is a crisis. I don't think that's true. They just have a different solution for how to solve the problem.

People seem to love technology until the opposing party wants to use it for border security. Then they seem to claim they just don't care.

I 100% agree with securing the border or increasing funding to do so. I do not and never will agree with building a wall. I thought the fence we built was stupid and a waste of money.

Bernie rocks! <- just returning to the thread topic!

I bet President Bernie won't be investigated for collusion or a history of fraud.

Just so you know, my point about his age is something I consider to be a factor. There are several factors I use as a gauge for the office of president. It's certainly not the only one.

In all honesty all it does is make me take a much closer look at who is running with him for VP. It certainly isn't a single issue that determines who I vote for.

I'm backing Bernie in the primaries, but I will vote Dem in the general no matter who the nominee is. I say that knowing and expecting that the DCCC, DNC, MSM is probably going to do all they can to derail Bernie's primary run. He scares the establishment.

He's been leading since the day he announced and you would think he is at the back of the pack from the coverage. So much talk about Biden leading but he hasn't even entered the race, how could he be leading?

I think the MSM is being very fair to Bernie. The FOX News town hall has gotten very wide spread coverage and I haven't seen him slighted in any way.

Now the DNC is another matter. I would agree with you that they certainly aren't happy having someone who has been a self appointed independent his entire political career being the leader of the party.

I'm talking about when the MSM discusses the field of candidates. Bernie raised more money, has led in polls since he announced, has a bigger base, and has a huge grassroots system in place... Yet he gets down played by them talking about Biden and Pete (centrist candidates) or the progressives Kamala, Liz, and Corey... never Bernie. When he is mentioned it's usually an afterthought. Maybe I'm jaded but I notice it.

That just doesn't line up with my observations. I certainly support the Dems run a centrist candidate though.