Let's talk about the debate

[Anonymous]

Single-payer Medicare-for-All is actually quite fiscally conservative at its core because it is a measure that would save us millions in healthcare expenditures in the long-term. The ACA was supposed to be the stepping stone to prep America for what nationalized healthcare would look like. I think Sanders has it right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an American with German, French, and Canadian family, by marriage and extended. Many immigrants to these countries from elsewhere, so came to these nations from elsewhere (about half from oppressive communist countries). Guess what. They're doing well. Health care, child care, family leave, wages, education... They thrived. I received sad looks of condolence when I returned to work after 9 weeks post c section after baby 1, and considered quitting work after baby 2. My description of our college savings plans were met with gasps: HOW much does university cost??? When foreign grandparents got cancers or heart disease, their health care was covered, period. How bad is that life? Not bad at all...

Are you familiar with Medicare? The elderly are covered here too and have been for decades.

No exactly. I still work and pay $503 a month for Medicare, $2,023 a year or supplemental coverage and $53.00 monthly for drug coverage. My doctor will not accept Medicare, so I pay him out of pocket. How is this free?

Doctors who don't accept Medicare are part of what's wrong with the system. What Medicare pays is what those things actually cost in most of the rest of the modern industrialized world. There's no legitimate reason why routine procedures should cost 4x, 5x, 10x what they cost elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Robert Reich writes he has reviewed BS's overall plan, and it is sound and a huge improvement over what is currently and what was before in place.

Yeah, you know, he wrote that on Facebook and then the actual plan came out and nobody seems to agree with him. It's not Medicare for all, by any means. Medicare has deductibles and co-pays and doesn't cover everything, and people still get Medicare gap insurance. There's no country in the world that I know of that offers single-payer healthcare with no deductibles, co-pays or private insurance.

This is the emperor-has-no-clothes moment. There are so many pressing priorities for an incoming Democratic president. If he wanted to convince voters that this should be one of them, Bernie needed to come up with a much better plan than this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Single-payer Medicare-for-All is actually quite fiscally conservative at its core because it is a measure that would save us millions in healthcare expenditures in the long-term. The ACA was supposed to be the stepping stone to prep America for what nationalized healthcare would look like. I think Sanders has it right.

What will happen to all the health insurance companies and their employees?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Single-payer Medicare-for-All is actually quite fiscally conservative at its core because it is a measure that would save us millions in healthcare expenditures in the long-term. The ACA was supposed to be the stepping stone to prep America for what nationalized healthcare would look like. I think Sanders has it right.

What will happen to all the health insurance companies and their employees?

Do we still have switchboard operators? No.

We didn't get out of the stone age because we ran out of stone. It would not be the crisis that you want to make it out to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Single-payer Medicare-for-All is actually quite fiscally conservative at its core because it is a measure that would save us millions in healthcare expenditures in the long-term. The ACA was supposed to be the stepping stone to prep America for what nationalized healthcare would look like. I think Sanders has it right.

What will happen to all the health insurance companies and their employees?

Do we still have switchboard operators? No.

We didn't get out of the stone age because we ran out of stone. It would not be the crisis that you want to make it out to be.

Actually, economists are not sure what the effects on the economy would be. It's a lot more complicated than just closing down private insurance companies. Businesses will probably pass these new costs on to their workers, and of course the costs are in addition to the payroll taxes businesses and employees already pay. There are plenty of good analyses of the plan. You probably ought to read them so you can be more familiar with the objections to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clinton is a moderate reformer, which is exactly what the country needs. Sanders proposals are fantasies that are much too expensive and so poorly designed they would fail if enacted. As with the GOP leaders, scapegoating a few groups of people or interest groups is not a legitimate platform.

Clinton would be a divider. This is NOT what our country needs right now.
She views the Republicans as her enemy. She is not someone who instills a sense of patriotism or confidence in voters.

And Bernie is a uniter? Don't make me laugh. How many bipartisan bills has he seen through during his tenure?

[Anonymous]

How can Sanders not have found at least one Senator who will endorse him??? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How can Sanders not have found at least one Senator who will endorse him??? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/

Pretty simple: he was not seen as the ultimate nominee and those in Congress do not want to take a chance and endorse him thereby offending the Clintons if she does end up winning the nomination and the general. The Clintons are known to have a long memory and don't forgive those who go against them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can Sanders not have found at least one Senator who will endorse him??? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/

Pretty simple: he was not seen as the ultimate nominee and those in Congress do not want to take a chance and endorse him thereby offending the Clintons if she does end up winning the nomination and the general. The Clintons are known to have a long memory and don't forgive those who go against them.

Or rather, he has never compromised on any issue and therefore doesn't have any political allies. A man who sticks to his morals is great. Unless is it directly hampers his ability to forge partnerships and get things done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clinton is a moderate reformer, which is exactly what the country needs. Sanders proposals are fantasies that are much too expensive and so poorly designed they would fail if enacted. As with the GOP leaders, scapegoating a few groups of people or interest groups is not a legitimate platform.

Clinton would be a divider. This is NOT what our country needs right now.
She views the Republicans as her enemy. She is not someone who instills a sense of patriotism or confidence in voters.

And Bernie is a uniter? Don't make me laugh. How many bipartisan bills has he seen through during his tenure?

If you wondered why only two of his congressional colleagues have endorsed him, look no further than the debate. He basically said the entire Congress is corrupt and that he alone can make it Obey the Will of the People. No one will want to work with this guy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can Sanders not have found at least one Senator who will endorse him??? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/

Pretty simple: he was not seen as the ultimate nominee and those in Congress do not want to take a chance and endorse him thereby offending the Clintons if she does end up winning the nomination and the general. The Clintons are known to have a long memory and don't forgive those who go against them.

Or rather, he has never compromised on any issue and therefore doesn't have any political allies. A man who sticks to his morals is great. Unless is it directly hampers his ability to forge partnerships and get things done.

Barney Frank agrees with you. He's said Bernie alienates his natural allies and offends almost everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can Sanders not have found at least one Senator who will endorse him??? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/

Pretty simple: he was not seen as the ultimate nominee and those in Congress do not want to take a chance and endorse him thereby offending the Clintons if she does end up winning the nomination and the general. The Clintons are known to have a long memory and don't forgive those who go against them.

Take heart! One Senator supports Bernie for the Democratic nomination. Tom Cotton!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can Sanders not have found at least one Senator who will endorse him??? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/

Pretty simple: he was not seen as the ultimate nominee and those in Congress do not want to take a chance and endorse him thereby offending the Clintons if she does end up winning the nomination and the general. The Clintons are known to have a long memory and don't forgive those who go against them.

Or rather, he has never compromised on any issue and therefore doesn't have any political allies. A man who sticks to his morals is great. Unless is it directly hampers his ability to forge partnerships and get things done.

Sanders is basically the left's version of a Tea Party candidate.

[Anonymous]

Republican operatives actively campaigning to promote Bernie Sanders: http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-01-19/republican-operatives-are-trying-to-help-bernie-sanders

After the debate, the Republican political action committee America Rising promoted the narrative that Sanders won the debate. “Clinton needed a win last night. Instead, everyone is talking about how well Bernie Sanders, her chief rival, did,” spokesman Jeff Bechdel wrote to reporters. Meanwhile, American Crossroads, a group co-founded by Karl Rove, is airing an ad in Iowa bolstering a core tenet of Sanders’s case against Clinton .... These Republican operatives are attempting to pick their Democratic opponent in the general election, and they’re making clear they’d rather face Sanders than Clinton.

#BewareTheBernBait