|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Medicare for All was a bad policy and we need to stop saying it's something we should advocate for. Oh my god can you miss the point harder. Make it a good policy, but call it Medicare because PEOPLE LOVE MEDICARE!
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 09:33 |
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Medicare for All was a bad policy and we need to stop saying it's something we should advocate for. Do you really need to post this every time someone brings up that term? Can we agree it's an allegorical position and not a literal call to blindly try to scale Medicare to infinity?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Do you really need to post this every time someone brings up that term? Can we agree it's an allegorical position and not a literal call to blindly try to scale Medicare to infinity? Yes because any form of universal, single-payer healthcare would have be delivered in such a way as to be so unlike Medicare that you're just lying to people at that point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:Why do liberals desire 8 years of.Trump? Why do Democrats desire to be as irrelevant as the Greens? Because they find it more important to make excuses for the failures of their political idols than actually improving things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Because any form of universal, single-payer healthcare would have be delivered in such a way as to be so unlike Medicare that you're just lying to people at that point. WELCOME TO POLITICS! loving lol "you're lying to people!" Welcome to the game. Do you think advertising is truthful too?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:WELCOME TO POLITICS! And then when you have to tell them, "no it doesn't actually work like medicare (it wouldn't and couldn't) and uh, yes it will cost a whole, whole bunch of money" and the Republican goes "see, told you so" you lose.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:And then when you have to tell them, "no it doesn't actually work like medicare (it wouldn't and couldn't) and uh, yes it will cost a whole, whole bunch of money" and the Republican goes "see, told you so" you lose. I can't take anything you say seriously anymore. "You're lying to people!" he says in the politics subforum. E: VVV Of course you do! Every politician lies to the people!
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I can't take anything you say seriously anymore. The point is you don't have to loving lie to people. Like I am arguing that we don't have to give into that conceit. That we can win on honest, straight forward, unabashed leftism.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:This Perriello fellow seems like A Good Guy, and you should vote for him. Yeah he seems good, but Northam has also been a pretty good Lt. Governor although it's a shame he didn't get to do much due to the obvious corruption in the State Senate with a Dem Senator resigning to give the GOP control and receiving a massive amount of cash in return. I don't want to kick him to the curb unilaterally. Hoping we get some primary debates and an idea of what each guy is running on policy-wise. Being a Dem in a blood red district who voted for Obamacare and actively campaigned on it, knowing he'd probably lose takes balls so kudos to him for that. He also seems pretty sharp, at least from this interview, so I don't have any fears he'd try and come up with a platform that was politically unworkable. Can't wait till the Chair election is over and we can focus on some actual real races in VA and NJ. Anyone know who's planning on running for NJ governor? Dr. Fishopolis posted:I wish he wouldn't. You don't get to say "this is nothing like the primary" when you're a progressive black sheep candidate primarying the DNC establishment from the left. Just go with it, man. He's not super progressive though. He's from VA-05, that thing is as red as blood. He's using the outsider tactics Bernie used but not necessarily the same rhetoric/policy goals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:If you'd have read the post that you quoted, you'll know that I agree with you. The question is if Perez should have unilaterally blown up the settlements-pissing away the opportunity to (very successfully!) reform the OCR-in order to push for charges that, even if filed, would have been dropped immediately upon his "resignation"? It's disingenuous as gently caress to blame Perez for Obama's desire to not jail anyone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
i support ellison winning in favor of perez cause then racism loses in the dem party https://theintercept.com/2017/02/24/key-question-about-dnc-race-why-did-white-house-recruit-perez-to-run-against-ellison/ perez's candidacy is fueled by anti-muslim bigots and dems handwringing over whether a black muslim could possibly lead us
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:which is why SEIU, AFL-CIO and the teamsters endorsed Ellison And several other unions endorsed Perez. They both have union endorsements. However, the Democratic Party isn't the only institution where the balance of power has shifted too far toward a top-down leadership which got out of touch with the membership. They endorsed Hillary too, and look at how well that worked - union leaders voted Hillary, union members voted Trump. Perez, on the other hand, is popular among union members, not just the top leadership, and I recall a fair amount of people calling foul over AFL-CIO's "decision" to endorse Ellison. WampaLord posted:WELCOME TO POLITICS! Lying about having solutions for workers worked pretty well for Obama and the Dems, right? Let's repeat that all over again
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Condiv posted:enhanced oversight would make me feel better if this wasn't the same industry caught hiring prostitutes for the people charged with overseeing them. they should not have been managing pensions period. the magnitude of their crimes in recent memory was well beyond probationary poo poo like enhanced oversight. So, again, Perez was supposed to tell union workers to gently caress off because he knows best how to manage their money? I believe unions have a right to determine how their money is used and managed, and workers wouldn't (and shouldn't) respond positively to the government telling them they aren't smart enough to make their own decisions. The exemption was for a conviction that was not related to union funds, and was not committed by the Asset Managers (or their firms) who were seeking the waivers. As a condition of the waiver, they could not directly or indirectly influence the managed funds into entering into any transaction with CS, or to use CS for any (direct or indirect) fee-generating service or transaction. Literally, the unions asked that CS be granted a waiver so that subsidiaries may be used to manage union funds, with strict rules that CS cannot gain any revenue or benefit from the subsidiary managing the fund. Neoliberal centrism: Arguing for the union autonomy since wait, what the gently caress do words even mean anymore?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Lying about having solutions for workers worked pretty well for Obama and the Dems, right? He won 2 terms, so yeah. Are you all actually arguing for full honesty? Have fun with the worst campaign ever. "Turns out poo poo is complicated and hard and I can't promise anything will get better. Vote for me."
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
nachos posted:I get that it polls well but the Russia thing does not matter. Once it stops being daily news coverage those numbers are guaranteed to drop down. Bear with me here, this is going to sound a little bit crazy. We could embrace a strategy to make sure it continues to be daily news. There's no possible evidence that can exonerate Trump. The worst possible outcome for us is nothing more comes out, but the stuff we know already is plenty. This isn't going away.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:The point is you don't have to loving lie to people. Like I am arguing that we don't have to give into that conceit. That we can win on honest, straight forward, unabashed leftism. Except ~*Brands*~ Matter. I don't care if the thing is nothing like Medicare, but Medicare is super popular and if you call the thing Medicare For All it's going to resonate well with people. If there's some alternative branding that is extremely popular then go for it, but we know everyone likes Medicare, so why not use the branding?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
axeil posted:Except ~*Brands*~ Matter. I don't care if the thing is nothing like Medicare, but Medicare is super popular and if you call the thing Medicare For All it's going to resonate well with people. If there's some alternative branding that is extremely popular then go for it, but we know everyone likes Medicare, so why not use the branding? I can't believe that people are unable to grasp this poo poo. Campaigning is marketing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Bear with me here, this is going to sound a little bit crazy. We could embrace a strategy to make sure it continues to be daily news. There's no possible evidence that can exonerate Trump. The worst possible outcome for us is nothing more comes out Is it? The American public has the collective memory of an Alzheimer's-addled goldfish. If the "worst possible outcome" becomes reality, your strategy of "ALL RUSSIA ALL THE TIME" falls flat on its face and Dems are left holding their dicks for another election year.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:He won 2 terms, so yeah. Look what the backlash of eight years of Democratic failure to live up to Obama's promises got us. By becoming the standard lying politician who never brought the promised prosperity, he fed the populist backlash that led to Trump.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Lying about having solutions for workers worked pretty well for Obama and the Dems, right? Let's repeat that all over again With the small difference that universal healthcare is objectively the optimal way to run health services, and the amount of people who would care whether Medicare for All functions exactly like Medicare in every sense is entirely negligible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:So, again, Perez was supposed to tell union workers to gently caress off because he knows best how to manage their money? are you serious? yes! just like a food inspector has the right to close down your favorite restaurant when they commit too many violations. if the banks in question want to service union pensions, then they need to obey our laws.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:He won 2 terms, so yeah. But isn't the exact cynicism and bullshit you're mad about fueled by people promising the moon and then being unable to deliver on it? Like on the specific issue of Single Payer you need to be upfront about the issues, "yes, moving to single payer will increase the government role in healthcare. yes, your individual coverage will change. no, it will not look like medicare because medicare isn't designed to serve as national, single-payer insurance. yes, it will appear to have a large price tag -- but in the end, we, as a country will spend less money and you, the consumer and person, will get better, fairer coverage that isn't predicated on your ability to pay, but is instead a universal, inalienable right."
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
axeil posted:Except ~*Brands*~ Matter. I don't care if the thing is nothing like Medicare, but Medicare is super popular and if you call the thing Medicare For All it's going to resonate well with people. If there's some alternative branding that is extremely popular then go for it, but we know everyone likes Medicare, so why not use the branding? At some point people are going to notice that they're not even slightly similar. Marketing doesn't rewrite reality.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Condiv posted:and all the other centrists that lost since 2008 were also personally unpopular. but don't worry, there's a whole backbench of likeable centrists, such as: Franken, Duckworth...
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:At some point people are going to notice that they're not even slightly similar. Marketing doesn't rewrite reality. People are going to notice that they're suddenly getting better healthcare at prices that are a fraction of those they paid before, which is going to outweigh any ill feeling about New Medicare not being exactly the same as an upscaled Old Medicare.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:At some point people are going to notice that they're not even slightly similar. Marketing doesn't rewrite reality. They both have the same aim: to ensure that their beneficiaries don't need to worry about how they will pay for healthcare. Hence Medicare for All.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:But isn't the exact cynicism and bullshit you're mad about fueled by people promising the moon and then being unable to deliver on it? Like on the specific issue of Single Payer you need to be upfront about the issues, "yes, moving to single payer will increase the government role in healthcare. yes, your individual coverage will change. no, it will not look like medicare because medicare isn't designed to serve as national, single-payer insurance. yes, it will appear to have a large price tag -- but in the end, we, as a country will spend less money and you, the consumer and person, will get better, fairer coverage that isn't predicated on your ability to pay, but is instead a universal, inalienable right." You do that part after you win. During the campaign, you promise the good parts and say it'll all work out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I can't believe that people are unable to grasp this poo poo. Agreed. Trump is a sniveling little poo poo, but the dude is good at marketing. A smart Dem campaign for 17/18/20 is to pair anti-Trump stuff like the Russian hacking with actual policy goals like "fixing Trump's dumbness", Medicare for All, Student Loan Reform/Education Reform, etc. The student loan thing is huge. My generation has almost no wealth because they're saddled with huge loans that are not discharged in bankruptcy. Now, student loans are structured like that for good reason (can't repossess knowledge, unsecured loans require huge interest rates to work) but the key is you don't have to keep that framework. If you re-structure how higher education is funded you can do away with that stuff. The only time you get me going "Well Actually..." is when people argue we should just discharge all student loan debt or keep the same framework but make student loans dischargable in bankruptcy and banks will keep on giving them out because  .Solid leftist stuff is fine with me, a very centerist Dem, provided the proposal doesn't unintentionally break poo poo and make it worse than it is now. That's all I want. Main Paineframe posted:At some point people are going to notice that they're not even slightly similar. Marketing doesn't rewrite reality. People still think Obamacare and the ACA are different things. If you are good at messaging you can absolutely pull something like Medicare For All not really being Medicare off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:Is it? The American public has the collective memory of an Alzheimer's-addled goldfish. If the "worst possible outcome" becomes reality, your strategy of "ALL RUSSIA ALL THE TIME" falls flat on its face and Dems are left holding their dicks for another election year. The reason we should keep focusing on Russia is precisely because we shouldn't let people forget about it. "But what if your strategy doesn't work?" Is applicable to every strategy. I'm not suggesting that democrats need to talk about Russia to the exclusion of all other issues, I'm suggesting the people on the left who want us to stop talking about it are idiots.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Franken, Duckworth... Neither are Clintonites.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I can't believe that people are unable to grasp this poo poo. No, you don't understand, all voters are carefully reading the politicians' platforms and rationally voting based upon their opinions of those platforms!
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I'm suggesting the people on the left who want us to stop talking about it are idiots. 👏 nobody 👏 is 👏 advocating 👏 this 👏👏👏 We just want Russia to not be the only reason for: 1. hillary's embarrassing defeat 2. the same set of multinational corporations which donate to the dems having a massive stake in trump's administration (ie exxon)
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
Fiction posted:👏 nobody 👏 is 👏 advocating 👏 this 👏👏👏 Actually a small, incredibly dumb subset of the left is arguing exactly that. https://theintercept.com/2017/02/23/the-increasingly-unhinged-russia-rhetoric-comes-from-a-long-standing-u-s-playbook/ quote:We just want Russia to not be the only reason for: And this is exactly the dumb poo poo I'm talking about. Yes, embracing the Russian interference narrative will in some ways validate Hillary Clinton and imply that everything bad is not all her fault. Get over it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:But thhey didn't reform it. The right thing would have been imprision the parasites. Edit: Upon rereading, I see what you meant. I consider taking an office that was underfinanced, undermanned, and mistargeted under the Bush Admin and using it to overturn voter suppression efforts, suing over discrimination, and fighting corrupt and abusive cops to be reform. As such, I disagree that failing to override the administration on charging bank employees with misdemeanors means he failed to reform the OCR. Condiv posted:are you serious? yes! just like a food inspector has the right to close down your favorite restaurant when they commit too many violations. if the banks in question want to service union pensions, then they need to obey our laws. This would be like the food inspector shutting down your favorite local franchise because a different restaurant, with different ownership and management, in the same chain but under a different name committed a violation in another state. It's too bad, your local spot promised not to get any ingredients or supplies from the offending chain, but any moron dumb enough to eat there has to be saved from himself. Condiv posted:i support ellison winning in favor of perez cause then racism loses in the dem party To save everyone a click Glenn Greenwald posted:There’s no evidence that Saban’s attack on Ellison is what motivated the White House to recruit an opponent. But one would have to be indescribably naïve about the ways of Washington to believe that such a vicious denunciation by one of the party’s most influential billionaire funders had no effect at all. Paracaidas fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Feb 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:
Which she does not deserve. She ran a godawful campaign. Choosing to run at all with an open FBI investigation on her was one thing, but then ignoring the Rust Belt in the general because her magic computer box assured her she was going to win it anyway was downright stupid. The most galling thing about Hillary is that she's not stupid. She KNEW the importance of this election cycle. She KNEW how important it was that Democrats hold the Presidency in the year of Trump, and she allowed her arrogance to blind her to it anyway because she felt like she deserved the job. She spent the primary using her friends and allies in the party power structure to smear her opponents and grind them into dust, while securing backroom deals that would give her huge delegate advantages before a single vote was cast, something that (while not illegal) is shady as gently caress and it should hardly be surprising that Bernie supporters felt boxed out. Hillary Clinton is not responsible for all the world's evils, but her loss to Donald Trump is on HER. She needs to go run the Clinton Foundation and spend a few years in political exile. Fritz Coldcockin fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Feb 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Actually a small, incredibly dumb subset of the left is arguing exactly that. https://theintercept.com/2017/02/23/the-increasingly-unhinged-russia-rhetoric-comes-from-a-long-standing-u-s-playbook/ Great, go argue about it in the intercept comment section and stop assuming that everyone in this thread agrees with the dumb strawmen you keep bringing up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
You can use Russian hacking as a good talking point but as for factors that actually influenced the election it's pretty drat far down on the list, which is why using it to claim that Dear Abuela Did Nothing Wrong is loving idiotic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:I appreciate your slightly improved metaphor. It still wildly misses the point, which is understandable given that the outragepress on the waiver had to stay on the surface because it'd collapse under detail. and? the banks knew the law before they committed their crimes and they flouted the law for a decade. it sucks for the unions if they liked those orgs, but they don't have a right to do business with criminal institutions pretending it'd be like a violation in another state is way understating the banks crimes right? they literally stole from everyone (these pensions included) for a decade. wouldn't that be more akin to frequent serious safety violations nationwide? Condiv fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Feb 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:You can use Russian hacking as a good talking point but as for factors that actually influenced the election it's pretty drat far down on the list, which is why using it to claim that Dear Abuela Did Nothing Wrong is loving idiotic. Nobody is claiming Hillary did nothing wrong. But suggesting Wikileaks was some minor issue this election is nuts. "I'm not ratfucked, I'm not ratfucked" I continue to insist as I slowly transform into a matryoshka doll. Alter Ego posted:Hillary Clinton is not responsible for all the world's evils, but her loss to Donald Trump is on HER. She needs to go run the Clinton Foundation and spend a few years in political exile. If you're more worried about opposing Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump you're part of the problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 09:33 |
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:If you're more worried about opposing Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump you're part of the problem. Please point me to where I said anything remotely resembling this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:54
|
|