• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT4| Tyler New Chief Exit Pollster at CNN

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Orbis Tabula

Member
Man, Sanders may have just finally had something happen new cycle wise that would help him. Which is the news gonna care about more? The unqualified fight or Bill being stupid.
 
U

ugaboga232

Member
hawk2025 said:
Let me add this:

Nearly every week I walk into a seminar series on healthcare with people collecting data, estimating shit, and trying to understand the impact of our past system, our current system, and the best way to move towards our future system.

I have only one categoric conclusion so far: No one has a decent understanding on healthcare. We have some understanding. We know some aspects of it more than others. But no one has a truly, honest-to-goodness decent understanding!
Click to expand...

Hmm pretty different from the doctors/administrators that talk to us but who knows.
 
B

Bowdz

Member
Yeah, they just need to tuck Bill away until the general. Hillary's got this and doesn't need any help at this point. Bill's a great attack dog, but can't shake his past.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
Azzanadra said:
And thats a good thing. The Democrat party is a joke, a centre-right (at best, centrist) party masquerading as a leftist party.
Click to expand...

Let me re-state so that you understand what I'm saying. Bernie is a mediocre politician. He'd be a mediocre leader. Bernie is would not be a god President. The more I hear him speak, the less respect I have had for him. I used to think of him as a message candidate but I honestly don't even know if he understands his own message.

He's only better than a Republican by default. He will left wing people. He will appoint left wing people. He will not enact right wing policies. But I'm afraid he'd still do a poor or mediocre job at whatever he does.
 
H

hawk2025

Member
ugaboga232 said:
Hmm pretty different from the doctors/administrators that talk to us but who knows.
Click to expand...

As it frequently is -- the empirical evidence is often divorced from personal feelings of people within an industry.

An example:

Many, many doctors I've talked to hate the stable matching mechanism and hate the stable matching algorithm for kidney transplants. Both are overwhelming, incredible successes at the macro level, but will lead to doctors matching to bad hospitals thinking that they could have done better with a different system.
 
U

ugaboga232

Member
hawk2025 said:
As it should be -- the empirical evidence is often divorced from personal feelings of people within an industry.

An additional example:

Many, many doctors I've talked to hate the stable matching mechanism and hate the stable matching algorithm for kidney transplants. Both are overwhelming, incredible successes at the macro level, but will lead to doctors matching to bad hospitals thinking that they could have done better with a different system.
Click to expand...

Oh i meant doctors that have MPH's and have data, not just them spouting out their feelings (i thought that was obvious). The match algorithm is decent though we had a transplant talk about how the organ lists can be gamed.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
EskimoJoe said:
Man, Sanders may have just finally had something happen new cycle wise that would help him. Which is the news gonna care about more? The unqualified fight or Bill being stupid.
Click to expand...

Nah, stupid as it was, it won't be a huge deal. The "unqualified" thing came straight from the candidates mouth. It's new. It's shiny. The media loves it. Protesters interrupting a candidate is old hat. Not sexy. Not interesting, especially when the candidate herself wasn't involved.

Doesn't make his comments less stupid, though.
 
A

ApharmdX

Banned
Azzanadra said:
From this thread one would think Bernie was Satan himself, even worse than Trump.

Honestly maybe its bets he not become president, I fear for his well-being and life based on the vitriolic messages on the board, and I rather not lose a gem over a country that doesn't deserve him. Could we have Bernie Sanders, America? We are currently looking for a new leader of the NDP party.
Click to expand...

Don't get the wrong idea from this thread, lots of Americans like Bernie, and even a fair amount of our right respect him for his principles, though they disagree with him. You have to put it in context- America is the richest nation in the world. We can put a man on the moon but we can't fix our own fucked-up social services. A lot of that is cultural, and some of it is because we have a political system which primarily serves the interests of the few. Until that gets changed, we will continue to have disappointing presidents from the Democrats, and lunatics from the right.

gutter_trash said:
when his campaign guy says that Hillary's ambition is dangerous but then is okay with Bernie's ambition, that has a sexist undertone about ambitious women while the old man is okay

*edit, that Weaver guy, that's his name
Click to expand...

Drek said:
It wasn't meant as a casual insult, I apologize if my brusque style of dialogue made it read as though it was. I just don't see how someone can critique Obama without already equipping themselves with a thorough understanding of those issues.


Maybe, but only if you ignore that "unqualified", "ambitious", and various other terminology used by key members of the Sanders campaign are historical dog whistles used to denigrate women by men.

I'm sure Sanders didn't mean his "unqualified" statement in that sense. I'd bet my house on Weaver's "too ambitious" statement trying to do exactly that however. The Sanders campaign is using language that the feminist movement have had to deal with from men talking down at them for decades and shouldn't be surprised if the reaction they get from women is uniquely negative.
Click to expand...

adam387 said:
It's really not a stretch, although I don't think Bernie meant it in a sexist way. I think he meant it in "I'm a ass, especially when I'm not getting my way." Look, there is no one in their right mind who doesn't think Hillary Freaking Clinton isn't insanely qualified to be President. People may not like her, may not think she's ideologically in line with them, but to say she's not qualified is a lie of epic proportions. There is no one in the modern era who is more qualified than she is. Period. Full stop.

So, when someone makes such an obviously idiotic statement, it's natural to look at what differentiates her from another candidate. If Bernie is saying he's qualified with his paper thin resume, then I think it's a bit natural for people to try and see what's the difference between the two. Gender jumps off the page.

Women are socialized to believe that they have to work twice as hard for half as much. As a society, we internalize that and just go with it. Women are always accused of being "ambitious," like it's unseemly for a woman to have any aims other than what we've collectively decided she should have. Bernie's campaign used the ambition line against her a few days ago.

So, I don't think Bernie meant this in an overly sexist way. But, when you combine a lot of the things his campaign has said over the last few months, reading slight sexism in this particular attack isn't entirely outside the realm of logical interpretation.
Click to expand...

Black Mamba said:
Because women are always told they're unqualified when they are. I don't believe for a second that Bernie even remotely had that in the back of his mind, of course. But for women it's a buzzword.

Like when men call them "crazy" or "that time of the month" bullshit. It's something women have had to fight through. Truth is, women often have to be "more qualified" than a man to get a job.
Click to expand...

Let me clarify- saying that Hillary is unqualified because she took money is an indictment of the system, not a sexist attack, and to call it as such is far-fetched.

On the other hand, I agree that the "ambitious" comment by Bernie's campaign staff goes over the line into dog-whistle sexist language. And is not acceptable.
 
B

Bowdz

Member
adam387 said:
Nah, stupid as it was, it won't be a huge deal. The "unqualified" thing came straight from the candidates mouth. It's new. It's shiny. The media loves it. Protesters interrupting a candidate is old hat. Not sexy. Not interesting, especially when the candidate herself wasn't involved.

Doesn't make his comments less stupid, though.
Click to expand...

Yeah, considering that video of Hillary snapping at the BLM protestor before SC didn't blow up before, I doubt this will garner much coverage. CNN just barely touched on it when it happened, but has let it go the last hour.
 
J

jack_package_200

Banned
Bowdz said:
Yeah, considering that video of Hillary snapping at the BLM protestor before SC didn't blow up before, I doubt this will garner much coverage. CNN just barely touched on it when it happened, but has let it go the last hour.
Click to expand...

I am sure it will be on the front pages of r/politics, antimedia.org, and UsUncut
 
H

hawk2025

Member
ugaboga232 said:
Oh i meant doctors that have MPH's and have data, not just them spouting out their feelings (i thought that was obvious). The match algorithm is decent though we had a transplant talk about how the organ lists can be gamed.
Click to expand...

Hard to get into the level of disagreement and certainty we are talking about here, but I'd trust PhDs in Statistics and Economics more in analyzing the impact of how markets are organized.

Regardless, I'm glad to hear that we may be wrong and you guys have a clearer notion of the path ahead -- I definitely do NOT mean to diminish the data smarts of MPHs, to be clear.

Perhaps the Health Econ literature is looking at it wrong. They certainly haven't convinced me so far of much of anything for the best path forward other than "ACA is a pretty good first step" and "What we had before was shit". I have my own hunches, but nothing that couldn't be swayed by marginally better studies.
 
<+)O Robido O(+>

<+)O Robido O(+>

Member
Bowdz said:
Yeah, considering that video of Hillary snapping at the BLM protestor before SC didn't blow up before, I doubt this will garner much coverage. CNN just barely touched on it when it happened, but has let it go the last hour.
Click to expand...

That incident was enough to make me want to vote Trump.
(I would never. Texas will go Trump anyway.)
Especially her haughty ass "Back to the issues," as the protester was escorted out.
 
S

Spoiled Milk

Banned
Azzanadra said:
And thats a good thing. The Democrat party is a joke, a centre-right (at best, centrist) party masquerading as a leftist party.
Click to expand...
This is, historically and currently, the party of
- minimum wage increases
- union rights
- environmental protection
- healthcare access
- pretty much every important social program in the past 50 years
- public universities and the grants associated with them
- clean energy research
- immigration reform with a path to citizenship
- sanctuary cities
- increased financial regulations

Qué fascistas!
 
B

Bowdz

Member
Effect said:
How badly has his fuck ups hurt her? This one? Does the media usually not hit her for them or go after him?
Click to expand...

I think they covered his fuck ups early on a bit more, but now it is all about the candidates. Unless Bill explodes to the point that he did in SC in 08, I can see his stumbles getting more that a few minutes here and there and a segment or two on Fox News.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
Kristoffer said:
This is, historically and currently, the party of
- minimum wage increases
- union rights
- environmental protection
- healthcare access
- pretty much every important social program in the past 50 years
- public universities and the grants associated with them
- clean energy research
- immigration reform with a path to citizenship
- sanctuary cities
- increased financial regulations

Qué fascistas!
Click to expand...

But in the 90s it supporter DADT so it's center right!
 
U

User1608

Banned
Kristoffer said:
This is, historically and currently, the party of
- minimum wage increases
- union rights
- environmental protection
- healthcare access
- pretty much every important social program in the past 50 years
- public universities and the grants associated with them
- clean energy research
- immigration reform with a path to citizenship
- sanctuary cities
- increased financial regulations

Qué fascistas!
Click to expand...
I don't believe you!
 
U

ugaboga232

Member
hawk2025 said:
Hard to get into the level of disagreement and certainty we are talking about here, but I'd trust PhDs in Statistics and Economics more in analyzing the impact of how markets are organized.

Regardless, I'm glad to hear that we may be wrong and you guys have a clearer notion of the path ahead -- I definitely do NOT mean to diminish the data smarts of MPHs, to be clear.

Perhaps the Health Econ literature is looking at it wrong. They certainly haven't convinced me so far of much of anything for the best path forward other than "ACA is a pretty good first step" and "What we had before was shit". I have my own hunches, but nothing that couldn't be swayed by marginally better studies.
Click to expand...

They had good data and referenced papers (I'm a researcher first then a med student) and brought up good policy that made sense on a macro scale (btw NY state publishes basically all of the healthcare info if you want to play around with it).

They may not have had the strictest financial models but they identified the big problems they saw which are related to just a shitty healthcare model (medicare will pay you less than it costs to do outpatient catheterization but more than it costs to do inpatient but if you switch to outpatient which is pretty much always prefered, you lose money where private corporations can negotiate and more stuff like that).

And all of them agreed that moving to a capitated system would be beneficial for everyone (focusing on incentives, kinda similar to what kaiser is doing). They mostly focus on hospital healthcare as thats like 90% of all spending (of which 50%!!!! is waste according to some reports which is absurd but defensive medicine and improper incentives makes it easy i guess)
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Bill Clinton's words are a nothing burger. In the video he was talking about "super predators", the murderers and rapists in the context of BLM movement. BLM should not consider their lives matter too because they are the ones who have murdered most blacks. It's a detailed response.
 
H

hawk2025

Member
ugaboga232 said:
They had good data and referenced papers (I'm a researcher first then a med student) and brought up good policy that made sense on a macro scale (btw NY state publishes basically all of the healthcare info if you want to play around with it).

They may not have had the strictest financial models but they identified the big problems they saw which are related to just a shitty healthcare model (medicare will pay you less than it costs to do outpatient catheterization but more than it costs to do inpatient but if you switch to outpatient which is pretty much always prefered, you lose money where private corporations can negotiate and more stuff like that).

And all of them agreed that moving to a capitated system would be beneficial for everyone (focusing on incentives, kinda similar to what kaiser is doing). They mostly focus on hospital healthcare as thats like 90% of all spending (of which 50%!!!! is waste according to some reports which is absurd but defensive medicine and improper incentives makes it easy i guess)
Click to expand...


Thanks for your insight :)
 
H

Hindl

Member
RustyNails said:
Bill Clinton's words are a nothing burger. In the video he was talking about "super predators", the murderers and rapists in the context of BLM movement. BLM should not consider their lives matter too because they are the ones who have murdered most blacks. It's a detailed response.
Click to expand...

Very true, but this is politics, and it's way too easy to take things like this out of context. See the original super predators comment, people think she was talking about black kids in general. It was just a terrible thing to say and he should've known better.

Edit: I dunno about the murder part, it was a bad comment all around, regardless of the context
 
A

ApharmdX

Banned
RustyNails said:
Bill Clinton's words are a nothing burger. In the video he was talking about "super predators", the murderers and rapists in the context of BLM movement. BLM should not consider their lives matter too because they are the ones who have murdered most blacks. It's a detailed response.
Click to expand...

But their lives do matter too. It's a terrible response. And the stupidity of defending the 94 crime bill after what it did to black Americans, that's just immeasurable. Bill should have just kept his mouth shut.

edit: and the super predators, that whole thing, should never be revisited. It was bullshit dog-whistle politics in the 90's, and in today's clime it's unacceptable.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
RustyNails said:
Bill Clinton's words are a nothing burger. In the video he was talking about "super predators", the murderers and rapists in the context of BLM movement. BLM should not consider their lives matter too because they are the ones who have murdered most blacks. It's a detailed response.
Click to expand...

wait what
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom