So you agree then that Bernie is just as guilty of that then?
Or you believe that 'state rights should decide gay marriage' Sanders supported gay marriage?
Pelosi declines to endorse Sen. Bernie Sanders' single-payer healthcare bill
- Thread starter KSweeley
- Start date
- Status
So you agree then that Bernie is just as guilty of that then?
Or you believe that 'state rights should decide gay marriage' Sanders supported gay marriage?
TurnipFritters
Member
The party's split in that one group is saying "we should expand the ACA" and the other is saying "we should do single payer" which isn't that split, all things considered.
So did that guy Barack Obama who then proceeded to support^ gay marriage so...not sure this is as good an example as you think. Theres also Abe Lincoln who strategically flopped beliefs once he had the power to change things for the better
Cbajd5
Member
Even with all the shit behind real and replace they still were literally one vote away from moving forward with it, and "just needing one more push from the people to get rid of those obstructionist democrats" will probably work well for them in the next election. Because people literally see the ACA as bankrupting them even if it helps them get health insurance they need.
The overall goal (universal health care) is what matters to people, not the details. It's an unfortunate truth, and not supporting this even if it won't pass just tells voters democrats don't really care about it.
E-Cat
Member
Of course I agree. What am I, "team Bernie" that should blindly approve of everything he has or hasn't done?
eBay Huckster
Member
In general, House leaders do not engage in symbolic exercises.
Unless they're Paul Ryan.
Her record literally has an affirmative vote for single-payer on it. If that's not enough to be affirmative support, then I'm sorry, but you are being a fucking moron.
People don't care about details until it pertains to money and taxes.
Which unfortunately is the one thing no one has answers for regarding single payer and more specially Bernies version of it.
Aaronrules380
Member
Yep. People don't seem to understand that Pelosi's position is different from an ordinary congressman
Something something leftist erasure and generalizations.
And Paul Ryan is an AWFUL leader and Speaker.
Makes Boehner's Congress almost looks productive.
Obama didn't legalize gay marriage.
Cbajd5
Member
Again, they'll say democrats are going to raise their taxes/take their money anyways.
It's not something that needs answering because Republicans will say it's happening regardless.
My mistake, SCOTUS did. I meant to say he came out in support of it once he was President
of course she does, she's one of the main 'fund raisers' of the party. can't piss off those donors, or atleast not yet. a lot of the senate dems are cowards who think the insurance lobby will crush any attempts just like in vermont and California.
(and yes, read up on the guy who killed the california bill's chances going back to the insurance lobby a few days later and laughing it off if you don't believe)
its something that becomes politically possible as you explain what actually is in a single payer system, how it is paid for, and how that relates to the consumer.
We already knew how sanders would pay for his bill during the campaign(6.2% payroll tax increase, 2.2% income surtax for those making over 28k, (those making above 250k will be raised in increments of 4 up to 10 million dollars ect), and he also outlined a long time ago what that would mean for the consumer (no more insurance premiums, no more being dependent on an employer to have healthcare, aka if you lose your job you don't lose your insurance, money taken out of paycheck to cover for employer based insurance goes back into employees pocket, no more being dependent on whether or not your insurance even covers certain procedures ect ect)
None of the actual boogeymen arguments are real boogeymen,they are just old right wing talking points that the democrats adopted when they got too cozy with big money and the lobbies that like the status quo.
(and yes, read up on the guy who killed the california bill's chances going back to the insurance lobby a few days later and laughing it off if you don't believe)
its something that becomes politically possible as you explain what actually is in a single payer system, how it is paid for, and how that relates to the consumer.
We already knew how sanders would pay for his bill during the campaign(6.2% payroll tax increase, 2.2% income surtax for those making over 28k, (those making above 250k will be raised in increments of 4 up to 10 million dollars ect), and he also outlined a long time ago what that would mean for the consumer (no more insurance premiums, no more being dependent on an employer to have healthcare, aka if you lose your job you don't lose your insurance, money taken out of paycheck to cover for employer based insurance goes back into employees pocket, no more being dependent on whether or not your insurance even covers certain procedures ect ect)
None of the actual boogeymen arguments are real boogeymen,they are just old right wing talking points that the democrats adopted when they got too cozy with big money and the lobbies that like the status quo.
So the idea is to actually become the Strawman that the GOP use to attack Democrsts by making the voters worst ideas about them come true?
And that is a winning idea?
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Except this time it will actually be taking place.
gutter_trash
Banned
I find it this symbolic shenanigans to be pointless at this point with a Republican congress and President.
Democrats are better served to defend and protect ACA in the present tense, help Dreamers.
2020 is far away, if anyone wants to bring up during the DNC nomination race, then do if by 2019/20.
Now, concentrate on the present and defend what you've got now.
Democrats are better served to defend and protect ACA in the present tense, help Dreamers.
2020 is far away, if anyone wants to bring up during the DNC nomination race, then do if by 2019/20.
Now, concentrate on the present and defend what you've got now.
Cbajd5
Member
Why not? Pretty much everyone sees democrats that way already, why not try to do something good if that's the case either way?
Why's that matter if people will believe so regardless?
AngmarsKing701
Member
This
Poodlestrike
Banned
Maybe, but supporting a BILL probably should.
Because you need a majority of votes?
E-Cat
Member
With single-payer, for once your tax money is actually giving you something back. Why is this so hard to understand?
GurgleBot20
Member
SCOTUS did because of the President. People really do underestimate how the power to nominate Judges can affect this country.
E-Cat
Member
Again, what's the worst that could happen?
Aaronrules380
Member
She forces the hand of reps in places where single payer is unpopular due to her status as minority leader which leads to us losing seats in the mid terms that we could have kept?
This is a really bad way to win back the Congress in 2018, fwiw
Aaronrules380
Member
Pelosi endorsing the bill would do more damage for mid terms than good
Cbajd5
Member
And we might be able to get there if we try? (I don't really believe it's likely, of course, but trying for it gives a better impression than not trying for it.) Then democrats can actually use this as a rallying cry to get people to vote and have something to show for it.
(My argument is less for Pelosi supporting it than against people dismissing it wholesale though. She definitely has bigger priorities to focus on, but if the democratic base can't even consider a bill for universal health care then why should I believe they'll ever pass any regardless of any incremental steps it'll take? Why are we against the end goal?)
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
You are seriously asking what would be the difference between people saying you'll get huge chunks of your paycheck taken and people ACTUALLY getting huge chunks of their paycheck taken?
How is not relevant now when the Democrats don't even think healthcare is a right. It starts with ideology, policies follow. The ideology of the Democrats is not in line with what the working class needs.
Where did people learn that policies come before ideology? How do you even know what your ambitions are if you always look at what is possible today? How can you then even put today in context and plan to change it and win?
Yeah ok I'm done with this. You guys are so far gone, keep losing and incrementally going nowhere while people in the US starve and die.
Bolivar687
Banned
Barack Obama could not possibly have had less to do with it. Both his nominees replaced outgoing liberal justices. The swing vote and author of the majority opinion was a conservative Reagan-appointee who is responsible for nearly the entirety of the Court's gay rights jurispridence.
Aaronrules380
Member
do you honestly believe a single republican will ever support a single payer bill? Let alone the amount needed to pass the bill? Let alone the amount needed to override the inevitable Trump veto?
legacyzero
Banned
I really feel it would be the opposite. Right now the perception of the party is that they stand for noting but being anti-trump. That included working to defend existing laws like ACA. Is that really going to win elections?
Getting an actual platform with policy substance will do us some good.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Well he did put Kagan and Sotormayor in the supreme court.
We couldn't get the public option through a democratic majority. Not sure how the hell we're supposed to get single payer/medicare for all through. If Bernie can pull it off, god bless him.
Cbajd5
Member
People won't unless the bill passes though. They'll say it regardless, and everyone is convinced it won't pass, so why not have something good for democrats to point to to say they're working towards since the overall goal is part of the platform regardless?
E-Cat
Member
https://hotair.com/archives/2017/08...ngle-payer-heavy-majority-republicans-oppose/
According to the this poll conducted just last month, 67% of Democrats support a single-payer system, along with a slight majority of Independents, and even 29% of Republicans.
The majority of the Dem representatives have NOT supported single-payer thus far, and they keep losing elections. Hmm, I wonder why? And your solution is, presumably, to move even further right in order to appease this huge conservative base (who are they, btw?) because it's been working out so well in the past? The opposite hypothesis has never been tested; maybe it's the built-in assumptions that are wrong.
No.
Getting sick of this.
Far right carpet bags everything Hillary says and does... Section of the far left does the same.
Far right decided Pelosi is the devil, section of the far left does the same.
Far right engaged in pointless political theatrics (that led to nationwide embarrassment when they couldn't repeal but let's conveniently ignore that part) and now the far left wants to do that too.
How about no. No, no no.
Aaronrules380
Member
Which is useless if it costs seats in the mid terms because general support for single payer is shaky at best. By not endorsing it, she gives freedom to the individual reps to make their own decision on the act rather than forcing all of them to fall in line
Zap Rowsdower
Banned
Yeah, it's clear that doesn't give a shit about actually passing more social democratic policies, he just wants the spotlight. And he's taken advantage of the fact way too many Americans don't know how their own government works to get his own cult of personality going. As someone who actually really wants leftist policies its very disappointing.
Fenderputty
Banned
Here's a better poll with more questions. Shocker it runs counter to your claim.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=248798252&postcount=231
(I wasn't lazy this time Pigeon.)
You'll note that people's opinion change by simply re framing the question to those who originally supported single payer.
Aaronrules380
Member
67% is not a huge majority and it ignores that opinions are more likely to go down than up once we get to actually discussing the costs. And supporting single payer doesn't necessarily tell you it'll sway their votes
Vicetrailia
Banned
We need single payer.
I think a public option would be preferable to flipping the table. Like Hillary said in the Vox interview you are going to have a hard sell for a full single-payer bill.
Also the bill won't pass. They purity test just further divides the party.
Also the bill won't pass. They purity test just further divides the party.
Aaronrules380
Member
This bill isn't passing so this is irrelevant
Cbajd5
Member
Honestly I think they'd support it if it technically was overturning Obamacare, even if it was replacing it with something more liberal. A huge part of the republican party is laser focused on undoing anything Obama did, Trump especially. But the support is less for actually passing it than letting democrats be the party saying they're working towards universal health care with tangible proof.
Fenderputty
Banned
We need government funded UHC, not single payer.
Aaronrules380
Member
You're incredibly naive if you believe this
- Status