DUMP TRUMP (previously 2020 candidates)
nan said:
Then the President, the person with the most power, can say, "I am pushing this through (executive order, maybe) because it is clearly the will of the people."
This is delusional. An Executive Order launching what would be one of the largest spending programs in the history of the US would be so unconstitutional that its difficult to even imagine it being seriously proposed. The power of the purse lies with Congress. Its that simple. If you don't believe me, read the Constitution.
Not only that but if, through some unimaginable miracle, some smidgeon of the program survived the SCOTUS into the term of the next Republican President, they would simply repeal it through Executive Order on the first day of their administration.
If this is the magical mechanism that Bernie is going to use to "pass" medicare for all without 10 Republican votes in the Senate, then it is a non starter.
Establishment shill, Zerlina Maxwell, is super hated by Bernie Sanders' supporters because she constantly attacks him with false smears. But, now she has a new group of haters: black men.
On a recent MSNBC appearance, Maxwell said that certain men of color (ie. Black men) were against Harris because she is married to a white man and that they should seek therapy instead of not voting for her. Here is Zerlina making that point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PDuRRqOAIc. Maxwell was then surprised by the backlash from black men, who felt she was insulting them as superficial and not being capable of rejecting Kamala Harris based on her troubling record.
Maxell got notable criticism from the prominent Bishop Swan who posted from the beach ("all therapy I need" https://twitter.com/TalbertSwan/status/1149087225285677056) then he got into it with another guy who supports Harris and the whole thing was written up in an incendiary critique on Medium:
“Black” Men Are Always the Fall Guys for White Liberals & Their “Chosen” House Negroes.
Below is Tim Black, another pissed off black man who does not support Kamala Harris based on her policies, not husband.
Klinker said:
This is delusional. An Executive Order launching what would be one of the largest spending programs in the history of the US would be so unconstitutional that its difficult to even imagine it being seriously proposed. The power of the purse lies with Congress. Its that simple. If you don't believe me, read the Constitution.
Not only that but if, through some unimaginable miracle, some smidgeon of the program survived the SCOTUS into the term of the next Republican President, they would simply repeal it through Executive Order on the first day of their administration.
If this is the magical mechanism that Bernie is going to use to "pass" medicare for all without 10 Republican votes in the Senate, then it is a non starter.
Medicare for All gives the most coverage for the cheapest price. It will save trillions of dollars. It will be paid for through raised taxes.
nan said:
Medicare for All gives the most coverage for the cheapest price. It will save trillions of dollars. It will be paid for through raised taxes.
Well, I am not in agreement with you much, but I do agree we need to raise taxes. Especially for corporations and the wealthy (which probably includes many of us). And the other thing we need to do is cut spending on the military.
basil said:
Well, I am not in agreement with you much, but I do agree we need to raise taxes. Especially for corporations and the wealthy (which probably includes many of us). And the other thing we need to do is cut spending on the military.
Yes.
As of this moment, which of course is still very early, the race is Biden versus Warren.
nan said:
But, now she has a new group of haters: black men.
You mean certain black men.
STANV said:
As of this moment, which of course is still very early, the race is Biden versus Warren.
https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/new-nbc-wsj-poll-two-separate-races-emerge-in-democratic-2020-primary-63828037784
That is just the NBC poll which has been called into question for bias: https://twitter.com/QueenInYeIIow/status/1149915367323648001
Emerson Poll has different results:
As does Quinnipac
https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2631
Polls are a factor, but you can't count on polls as was shown in 2016. I also don't think you can say that the race is between Biden and Warren.
nan said:
Klinker said:Medicare for All gives the most coverage for the cheapest price. It will save trillions of dollars. It will be paid for through raised taxes.
This is delusional. An Executive Order launching what would be one of the largest spending programs in the history of the US would be so unconstitutional that its difficult to even imagine it being seriously proposed. The power of the purse lies with Congress. Its that simple. If you don't believe me, read the Constitution.
Not only that but if, through some unimaginable miracle, some smidgeon of the program survived the SCOTUS into the term of the next Republican President, they would simply repeal it through Executive Order on the first day of their administration.
If this is the magical mechanism that Bernie is going to use to "pass" medicare for all without 10 Republican votes in the Senate, then it is a non starter.
The President cannot raise taxes by Executive Order. Read the Constitution.
nan said:
Polls are a factor, but you can't count on polls as was shown in 2016.
On the contrary, you can count on them for months and months of saying Bernie Sanders was the most popular politician in America.
nan said:
That is just the NBC poll which has been called into question for bias: https://twitter.com/QueenInYeIIow/status/1149915367323648001
Polling organizations do not take the demographic breakdowns of respondents as they are; they adjust them, in their own ways, to reach what they consider representative proportions. These “special sauce” adjustments are open to second-guessing and bias critiques (if you could ever uncover what they are), but to repeat an old point: Drawing conclusions from the raw samples betrays an ignorance of polling.
nan said:
That is just the NBC poll which has been called into question for bias: https://twitter.com/QueenInYeIIow/status/1149915367323648001
Emerson Poll has different results:
http://emersonpolling.com/
As does Quinnipac
https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2631
Polls are a factor, but you can't count on polls as was shown in 2016. I also don't think you can say that the race is between Biden and Warren.
Both of the Polls you cite show Bernie down, Biden down points but still on top and Warren and Harris up.
Quinnipac seems to show a Biden v. Harris race.
I still see a Biden-Warren race but it's possible, given Biden's past performance that we could see a Warren v. Harris race.
Klinker said:
The President cannot raise taxes by Executive Order. Read the Constitution.
I'm sure there is a workaround. You can't start wars without approval either and presidents do that all the time.
STANV said:
Both of the Polls you cite show Bernie down, Biden down points but still on top and Warren and Harris up.
Quinnipac seems to show a Biden v. Harris race.
I still see a Biden-Warren race but it's possible, given Biden's past performance that we could see a Warren v. Harris race.
OK, but as I said, the race is not Biden vs. Warren. What we know is that the current front runners are Biden, Sanders, Warren, and Harris. The exact numbers, especially on CNN/NBC polls are not necessarily significant, especially for Sanders since the mainstream media hates him and sometimes pretend he's not running. Conversely they will poll more older people to stack the deck to favor Biden. They will say, "Biden is the front runner and Harris and Warren tied for third" never mentioning that Sanders is second.
So, I don't pay much attention to polls, even when my candidate is doing well. The give some indicators, but they are not so reliable as we saw in 2016.
DaveSchmidt said:
On the contrary, you can count on them for months and months of saying Bernie Sanders was the most popular politician in America.
Nate Silver said he got the most favorable rating after the last debate, which must be true because Nate Silver hates Bernie.
DaveSchmidt said:
You mean certain black men.
No, according to the article I posted, she said "Certain people of color" and she meant "black men." Some Black men sure took it as an indictment of the whole group, hence the blowback.
nan said:
Klinker said:I'm sure there is a workaround. You can't start wars without approval either and presidents do that all the time.
The President cannot raise taxes by Executive Order. Read the Constitution.
OK. What's the workaround? You said that Bernie has a plan to pass Medicare for All that can not be matched by Warren or any of the other candidates. What is that plan? Please don't tell me its a "secret" just like President Trump's.
nan said:
DaveSchmidt said:No, according to the article I posted, she said "Certain people of color" and she meant "black men." Some Black men sure took it as an indictment of the whole group, hence the blowback.
You mean certain black men.
I listened to the clip. When she said “Certain people of color,” she clearly did not mean all black men.
Your own reference to black men, however, could easily be read that way. I was just trying to be helpful.
DaveSchmidt said:
I listened to the clip. When she said “Certain people of color,” she clearly did not mean all black men.
Your own reference to black men, however, could easily be read that way. I was just trying to be helpful.
As I stated in the post, that was from the article, not the clip. The author felt she was singling out black men, while not saying that explicitly.
MSNBC puppet/pundant, Zerlina Maxwell decided that she would go on national TV and proclaim that “certain” men of color (code for black men)were against Kamala Harris because of her white husband, and they should in turn seek therapy and not take that out at the ballet box.
OK, continuing on with my response to Kamala Harris does The View. part 3.
In this segment she talks about the Epstein scandal and the Acosta resignation. This is my third segment and I was hoping they would start talking about her policies in detail, but instead they let Kamala, the prosecutor, go on and on and sound tough and super knowledgeable and passionate. I think this was deliberate, as the mainstream media is all in for Kamala and they wanted to plug in a free commercial.
Ana Navarro, the Republican who easily hangs with Democrats since they are practically Republicans too, asks her about Acosta giving Epstein a sweetheart deal. Kamala take right off saying that it was "absolutely not" the right thing to do and starts talking in depth about her experience prosecuting child sexual assault cases. So the audience gets to see one of the best Kamala ads ever and they come away thinking she is a super great person who will fight for justice for the most vulnerable victims. She gets a big round of applause. She says because Acosta could not see that Epstein was a pedophile, he was incompetent and should have been fired.
What the audience will not see is any member of the View mention the time Kamala gave Steve Mnuchin, the Foreclosure King, his own sweetheart deal, by letting him off even though her office had the evidence to prosecute. Lots of sad victims who lost their homes. And yet, Kamala did not seem to see that. Was she incompetent as she herself defines incompetence? Have to wonder. Steve later gave money to Kamala's next campaign, the only Democrat he donated to.
Were Kamala interviewed by the people I regularly post in videos, they would have called her on that for sure. But, the mainstream media, is not there there fight truth to power--they are their for propaganda and Kamala is one of their favorite candidates so you if you only watch mainstream news, you will likely come away from that clip thinking Kamala is a wonderful, competent candidate, who fights for truth and justice and may well get your vote. You will also think Bernie Sanders is a mean old man whose time has come and gone and that Medicare for All is not a good option, but I digress. . .
My parents generation called the people we called Black People "Colored People" and we found it offensive or certainly retrograde. Now they are called "People of Color".
STANV said:
My parents generation called the people we called Black People "Colored People" and we found it offensive or certainly retrograde. Now they are called "People of Color".
If the difference leaves you blinking in wonder, there is plenty of material online, from all sorts of perspectives, that sheds light on the term and its use.
Klinker said:
OK. What's the workaround? You said that Bernie has a plan to pass Medicare for All that can not be matched by Warren or any of the other candidates. What is that plan? Please don't tell me its a "secret" just like President Trump's.
I already told you. Bernie has a huge movement behind him that will demand Medicare for All. He has over 1 million volunteers. He has made it clear that we will still be needed after campaigning, that our work will just be starting. Think Vietnam era anti-war protests. This is how change happens. You don't get much unless you demand it.
nan said:
Klinker said:I already told you. Bernie has a huge movement behind him that will demand Medicare for All. He has over 1 million volunteers. He has made it clear that we will still be needed after campaigning, that our work will just be starting. Think Vietnam era anti-war protests. This is how change happens. You don't get much unless you demand it.
OK. What's the workaround? You said that Bernie has a plan to pass Medicare for All that can not be matched by Warren or any of the other candidates. What is that plan? Please don't tell me its a "secret" just like President Trump's.
Ok. He is going to use his 1 million volunteers (how many of those volunteers vote in red state primaries?) to convert 10 Republican Senators to his side. Which ten GOP Senators do you think he will be most likely to convert? Ted Cruz? Lindsey Graham? Tom Cotton?
Personally, I don't think this is going to get a single Republican vote once the industry has renamed it Baby Eating for All. To be honest, I think there are a couple of conservative Democrats who won't vote for it either. That said, if you know of ten GOP Senators who's minds can be changed, to quote Ross Perot, I am all ears.
nan said:
You don't get much unless you demand it.
Right but demanding things isn't in and of itself sufficient. There is actual legislation that has to go through Congress to make a law. This is basic School House Rock kind of stuff.
nan said:Think Vietnam era anti-war protests.
This is thread drift but I am curious. How much of a role did the protests really play in ending the Vietnam War? My understanding was that, by 1972, the protests had really died down. Nixon campaigned on ending the war but I don't think he was really appealing to the protesters for their votes.
I was two years old at that time so I don't have any first hand memories of events. Can anyone offer me their opinions on the matter?
(it goes without saying that videos need not apply)
Klinker said:
Ok. He is going to use his 1 million volunteers (how many of those volunteers vote in red state primaries?) to convert 10 Republican Senators to his side. Which ten GOP Senators do you think he will be most likely to convert? Ted Cruz? Lindsey Graham? Tom Cotton?
Personally, I don't think this is going to get a single Republican vote once the industry has renamed it Baby Eating for All. To be honest, I think there are a couple of conservative Democrats who won't vote for it either. That said, if you know of ten GOP Senators who's minds can be changed, to quote Ross Perot, I am all ears.
People in red states also need healthcare. Medicare for All is an easy sell to the poor who live paycheck to paycheck. Even Republicans facing bankruptcy and cancer treatment start to think socialism is not a bad idea when they understand what will be available. I posted on Facebook about Medicare for All and suddenly a person I have not talked to since the 1970's asked me about it and another guy who is retired too. Nothing else I post about politics gets that kind of interest. The mainstream media tries to keep people confused about Medicare for All, but once they hear that they can go to any doctor for free, they are ready to stand up with others. This is how we got out of Vietnam and this is how we will finally get single-payer. Because just trying to do it through Congress will never happen--the Democrats will oppose just as much as the Republicans. Nancy Pelosi assured the insurance lobby that they would not be for single-payer. Real change comes from the bottom up. Congress will have to be bullied and shamed into compliance.
nan said:
People in red states also need healthcare. Medicare for All is an easy sell to the poor who live paycheck to paycheck.
Yeah, but, as I said, it won't be "Medicare for All" it will be "THEY"RE GOING TO EAT YOUR BABY". The insurance companies will spend so much money that, by the time their through, even Bernie won't want to vote for his bill. How are your army of volunteers (how many of that million live in red states) going to counter the hundreds of millions or, more likely, billions of dollars the industry is going to spend tarring, lying and defaming?
Also, specifically, which ten red state Senators do you think are going to support this bill. I would like to hear at least a couple of names.
Bingo! "Those things happened as a a result of mass movements of the people." And imagine if the President at the time supported Women's Suffrage, Civil Rights, and ending the war. Then the President, the person with the most power, can say, "I am pushing this through (executive order, maybe) because it is clearly the will of the people." Only then is there a chance to take down the very powerful insurance companies. You need a mass movement behind you to get this through. Just trying to go through normal channel will get you nowhere and then you can just say "Oh, I tried but the Republicans won't let me. It's all their fault."
A person who actually intends to enact Medicare for All, wll do lots of rallies and get the people to rise up and demand. A person who wants to pretend to enact Medicare for All will tepidly endorse it and then say it was just not possible at this time--everyone has to wait.
No matter who gets elected, Medicare for All will be very difficult to get through because of the strong forces against with limitless pockets and support of mainstream media. But, unless we want to just roll over and give up, we have to look at the candidates and go for the one with the best chance and that is, hands down, Bernie Sanders.