|
Who do you want to be the 2020 Democratic Nominee? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Joe "the liberal who fights busing" Biden |
|
27 | 1.40% |
| Bernie "please don't die" Sanders |
|
1017 | 52.69% |
| Cory "charter schools" Booker |
|
12 | 0.62% |
| Kirsten "wall street" Gillibrand |
|
24 | 1.24% |
| Kamala "truancy queen" Harris |
|
59 | 3.06% |
| Julian "who?" Castro |
|
7 | 0.36% |
| Tulsi "gay panic" Gabbard |
|
25 | 1.30% |
| Michael "crimes crimes crimes" Avenatti |
|
22 | 1.14% |
| Sherrod "discount bernie" Brown |
|
21 | 1.09% |
| Amy "horrible boss" Klobuchar |
|
12 | 0.62% |
| Tammy "stands for america" Duckworth |
|
48 | 2.49% |
| Beto "whataburger" O'Rourke |
|
32 | 1.66% |
| Elizabeth "instagram beer" Warren |
|
284 | 14.72% |
| Tom "impeach please" Steyer |
|
4 | 0.21% |
| Michael "soda is the devil" Bloomberg |
|
9 | 0.47% |
| Joseph Stalin |
|
287 | 14.87% |
| Howard "coffee republican" Schultz |
|
10 | 0.52% |
Jay "nobody cares about climate change  " Inslee |
|
13 | 0.67% |
| Pete "gently caress the homeless" Butt Man |
|
17 | 0.88% |
| Total: | 1930 votes | ||
|
Kobayashi posted:We'd have world communism by now if people would stop talking themselves in to dying for rich people's wars, which is all of them. Even the Great Patriotic War? Smh
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 19:56 |
|
|
That's deep.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Even the Great Patriotic War? Smh Killing fascists is a war for us all, not the rich. For your error, I sentence you to mandatory re-education in the countryside. Hope you enjoy killing those perfidious sparrows.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have even more diabetes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:42
|
|
|
 Yes the GOP will just make up a new name for anything we do and attack it, but maybe if we choose the name carefully enough they won't
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:50
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:
I guess you could call my main objection to "free" that it's objectively untrue, Jesus. "Free at point of treatment" is too many words. What point are you trying to prove? e: I even included parentheticals that indicated the futility of trying to avoid Republican slams, which you chose to ignore. Sorry if they were too vague, or whatever. Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Mar 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:51
|
|
|
So "free" is true unless you interpret it in a stupid way. K.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:57
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:And surely no one will make note that something isn't "free" if you pay for it in taxes. You're opening yourself up to be easily mocked. Certainly we wouldn't characterize the existence of the police as "free" because we don't have to pay per service. Using this rethoric you could say literally every govt program is being paid for by your taxes, even if the people in question don't pay enough to have actually had they're money applied to every social program. Just a bizzare way of looking at government spending all around
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:57
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:So "free" is true unless you interpret it in a stupid way. Yes, the extra 9% payroll tax that appears on peoples' paychecks = "free", and they won't consider that a betrayal at all. Sure. Fine. Okay. Whatever. I support the loving policy you weirdo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:59
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Yes, the extra 9% payroll tax that appears on peoples' paychecks = "free", and they won't consider that a betrayal at all. Sure. Fine. Okay. Whatever. Then stop trying to undermine it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:02
|
|
|
The police are free though? Even if you pay zero taxes the police still protect* you *Or murder you
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:03
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I guess you could call my main objection to "free" that it's objectively untrue, Jesus. "Free at point of treatment" is too many words. What point are you trying to prove? Mellow Seas posted:Yes, the extra 9% payroll tax that appears on peoples' paychecks = "free", and they won't consider that a betrayal at all. Sure. Fine. Okay. Whatever. Its free in the same way people call fire service as free. Or parking in front of their house as free. Or free public education. Or free water fountains. None of them are costless, but all of them are free at point of use. So call them free. Republican attacks on "free college" and "free healthcare" aren't as effective as you might imagine, doubly so when Democrats embrace the label rather than run away from it. "Hell yes, we want your kids to go to school for free, they want to bilk you for every dollar you have!" ~ Smart Dems We can create an America where you don't have to hand over your credit card when you get your life saved in a hospital just like you don't have to hand over your credit card when you get your live saved in a fire. It is foolish to run away from that positive vision of the future.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:03
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:Then stop trying to undermine it. Bernie is never, ever going to utter the words "free healthcare" so I don't see why you think I should. Oh no, I'm going to scare some of crazed leftists in a left wing thread on a left wing forum not to vote for Bernie by saying "it's not free"? You have no actual concern here, you're just being a dick.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:04
|
|
|
i guess national parks are the only actually free program, since homeless people can sleep in them
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:05
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Yes, the extra 9% payroll tax that appears on peoples' paychecks = "free", and they won't consider that a betrayal at all. Sure. Fine. Okay. Whatever. Medicare is the most popular insurance program in America, have you ever wondered what the FICA line on your paycheck means? Google it, it's gonna blow your mind man
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:05
|
|
|
I have literally no idea why I'm being attacked.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:07
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Bernie is never, ever going to utter the words "free healthcare" so I don't see why you think I should. Oh no, I'm going to scare some of crazed leftists in a left wing thread on a left wing forum not to vote for Bernie by saying "it's not free"? You have no actual concern here, you're just being a dick. I know all the leftists are just super stoked for candidates like Kamala the cop , Warren the capitalist defender , butt the ex military dude who has problems with Chelsea Manning’s pardon , and everybody else who sucks except Bernie . If we don’t nominate Bernie, the election is lost 100 percent
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:07
|
|
|
Your relentlessly stupid arguments might be a contributing factor, you could stop
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:07
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I have literally no idea why I'm being attacked. lol I'm being attacked
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
Pulcinella di Bund posted:I know all the leftists are just super stoked for candidates like Kamala the cop , Warren the capitalist defender , butt the ex military dude who has problems with Chelsea Manning’s pardon , and everybody else who sucks except Bernie . If we don’t nominate Bernie, the election is lost 100 percent What does that even have to do with the conversation we're having, and what does it have to do with me, who is a Bernie Sanders supporter? e: If one of the other designated "centrist" punching bags could step in and feed these guys, please do; I'm gonna step away for a little while.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:09
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I have literally no idea why I'm being attacked. the taxes you pay go to multiple different functions and programs and singling out one program to say "you're gonna pay for this one!!!" is weird
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
Pulcinella di Bund posted:I know all the leftists are just super stoked for candidates like Kamala the cop , Warren the capitalist defender , butt the ex military dude who has problems with Chelsea Manning’s pardon , and everybody else who sucks except Bernie . If we don’t nominate Bernie, the election is lost 100 percent You mean the Bernie who lost to Hillary Clinton of all people? That one? Hmm...
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
I think the funniest part about this is that Medicare has premiums, deductibles, and co-pays so it's actually not free anyway and would be called neolib shillery if someone proposed it today
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:12
|
|
|
bird cooch posted:You mean the Bernie who lost to Hillary Clinton of all people? That one? Hmm... Yes Bernie the one who would have won against Trump
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
bird cooch posted:You mean the Bernie who lost to Hillary Clinton of all people? That one? Hmm... yes , the very same Bernie. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
Refusing to say that we should have free programs because Republicans might attack is bad advice plain and simple. Embracing the good that free programs do is the way forward.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:I think the funniest part about this is that Medicare has premiums, deductibles, and co-pays so it's actually not free anyway and would be called neolib shillery if someone proposed it today No it wouldn't be, because it wasn't deliberately designed to be inferior to private insurance to ensure "competition" like neolib shillery inevitably is
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:14
|
|
|
bird cooch posted:You mean the Bernie who lost to Hillary Clinton of all people? That one? Hmm... Hillary Clinton isn't running. Thank gods
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:14
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Hillary Clinton isn't running. Thank gods It feels weird to quote somebody quoting me to show me support.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:17
|
|
|
bird cooch posted:It feels weird to quote somebody quoting me to show me support. That's deep.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:17
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:That's deep. Word.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:19
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Refusing to say that we should have free programs because Republicans might attack is bad advice plain and simple. The issue isn't whether republicans will attack "free." They'll attack anything. It's attacking any democratic candidate that chooses to use accessible or affordable instead of free because people interpret that as a weak proposal or not being serious about the broadest implementation of M4A. Republicans will attack the details in regards to how it's being funded. Either via lack of specifics in funding or outright falsehoods (a 9% payroll tax won't cover (free point of service healthcare for all with no quotas, unlimited access to premium care, etc) or class warfare rhetoric if there are ever funding details. VitalSigns posted:No it wouldn't be, because it wasn't deliberately designed to be inferior to private insurance to ensure "competition" like neolib shillery inevitably is Idiotic. How many people 65 retirees are enrolled in private insurance given the non-competitive premiums / OOPs vs. services for Medicare? KingNastidon fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Mar 23, 2019 |
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:22
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I have literally no idea why I'm being attacked. Help, Help, i'm being repressed! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8ukak8P2vY
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:26
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:The issue isn't whether republicans will attack "free." They'll attack anything. It's attacking any democratic candidate that chooses to use accessible or affordable instead of free because people interpret that as a weak proposal or not being serious about the broadest implementation of M4A. But the real question to ask yourself is why care what Republican attacks are? The only reason to care is as their able to drive the narrative. The establishment media is a ratings beast and social media requires the extraordinary to breakthrough. So by embracing transformative plans with material gains for the vast majority of Americans, stops mattering what their attacks on funding are, they will have lost the narrative. Candidates must run on the transformative vision of the world required for this nation to survive or they will be crushed by either the reality of their limited vision or fantasy that others produce.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:30
|
|
|
Solaris 2.0 posted:The second world war, maybe the first Gulf War but yea, not any examples afterwards that I can think of. And both of those examples featured a huge coalition, clearly defined goals, and nations invading other nation states and not “global power decides to intervene in internal civil war” restoration of aristide in haiti after he had been overthrown by a coup with possible US backing, whoopsiedoodle, and before he was overthrown in a coup in 2004 with possible US backing , possibly the hilariously illegal invasion of grenada
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:31
|
|
|
'I have literally no idea why I'm being attacked' I shout as I'm dragged out of the deli with my pants around my ankles
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:32
|
|
|
lol... that's hardly "seizing the means"
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 00:01
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:lol... that's hardly "seizing the means" It's a good start though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 00:51
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It's a good start though. If by start you mean, the government would be a competitor in the marketplace to help bring down the cost of drugs, then yeah. It's functionally the same thing as introducing a public option in health insurance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 01:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 19:56 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Refusing to say that we should have free programs because Republicans might attack is bad advice plain and simple. Also Republicans know this and specifically attack literally everything Democrats do as hard as they possibly can, and the Democrat response is to desperately consider 'how can we please these people?' harder than they do for literally everyone else including their own voters
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 01:43
|
|
