|
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 | ||
|
Kraftwerk posted:Why is M4A polling worse and worse with Americans now? Because M4A before meant whatever the gently caress people wanted it to mean now it's clarifying into single payer which is -less- popular than a buy-in
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 17:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 07:15 |
|
|
Typo posted:Because M4A before meant whatever the gently caress people wanted it to mean Well drat. The US will never have universal healthcare will it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:06
|
|
|
It's my understanding that Pelosi had to convince quite a few lawmakers to commit political suicide and vote for the ACA "because it was the right thing to do". That was for a bill that was basically written by the insurance lobby. M4A is going to be really, really hard to pass.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:15
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Well drat. The US will never have universal healthcare will it? it will get there by 2030s
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:20
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Well drat. The US will never have universal healthcare will it? We just have to wait until certain demographics begin voting in significantly fewer numbers. Whether or not Florida has a brand new coastline sans several major cities by that point is an open question.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:21
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Well drat. The US will never have universal healthcare will it? It's gonna have to be incremental, I think. There's only ever going to be the will to work on it when Republicans threaten to take away what is there. Loss aversion is probably the only way to get anything done on this issue for now. Roluth fucked around with this message at 18:25 on Mar 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:21
|
|
|
actual factual medicare 4 all the universal healthcare system still has majority support. it's more popular than the aca.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:22
|
|
|
Roluth posted:It's gonna have to be incremental, I think.  Bernie, pointing at hospital "nationalized" pointing at med school "nationalized" pointing at pharma company "nationalized" Neolib centrist,  "You can't just nationalize everything" Bernie, points to bird flying overhead, "nationalized" 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:27
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Well drat. The US will never have universal healthcare will it? Definitely never, but we are nonetheless obligated to try
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:27
|
|
|
Despite both parties attacking Medicare For All relentlessly on its proposal to abolish private insurance 43% of Americans support it anyway. If the Democrats ever actually tried to make a case for it (or, more realistically, if the party were taken over by people with actual convictions, clear moral vision, and a commitment to improving the country) they would make it immensely popular. No one likes insurance companies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:
Can you nationalize the Supreme Court?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
I think some folks ITT are forgetting the old truism that public opinion polls aren't for measuring public opinion, but for influencing it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:38
|
|
|
I'm sure that was just as true when M4A was polling at 80% as it is 45%
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Can you nationalize the Supreme Court? You can pack the hell out of it. Obviously I'm being glib and funny a bit, but I really do think we're rapidly approaching the point where much more radical ideas need to be considered, and this retreat to "uh oh, one bad poll, let's go back to incrementalism" is a foolish strategy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
Typo posted:I'm sure that was just as true when M4A was polling at 80% as it is 45% Show me an actual poll where M4A polls at 45% where the question isn't an obvious attempt to manipulate the result, tia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:51
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:You can pack the hell out of it. M4A will not happen without court packing. Like, seriously, just yesterday the DOJ decided to completely abandon defending the ACA, despite the obvious catastrophic consequences if it were judicially repealed. The courts have been overrun with trumpites at this point. Any m4a program at all will be sabotaged by right-wing bad faith judicial attacks unless the courts are reliably re-seized. Note: the only candidate I've heard seriously proposing court packing is Buttigieg.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:55
|
|
|
I want to say that the court can't overturn M4A without overturning Medicare, and they would never do that because it would lead to a GOP wipeout, but lmao who am I kidding the decision will just say "this is unconstitutional government overreach, Medicare isn't, don't ask us why we know it when we see it"
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:00
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I want to say that the court can't overturn M4A without overturning Medicare, and they would never do that because it would lead to a GOP wipeout, but lmao who am I kidding the decision will just say "this is unconstitutional government overreach, Medicare isn't, don't ask us why we know it when we see it" That's the thing though. These shitheads are absolutely willing to put the torch to Medicare, Medicaid, etc. It's a government by Fox News Grandpa and a certain percentage of federal judges are now fox news grandpas. We can see that because it's currently happening: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/aca-preexisting-conditions-doj/562442/
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
lol https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1110893851596644352
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Show me an actual poll where M4A polls at 45% where the question isn't an obvious attempt to manipulate the result, tia. Why does manipulation of the outcome matter? It's not like the process wont be subject to the same bullshit
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
Tired: Stacking the courts Wired: Packing the courts Inspired: Purging the courts Unoriginal Name posted:Why does manipulation of the outcome matter? It's not like the process wont be subject to the same bullshit If you have an actual election issue, then there will be two sides advocating for and against it. If you have a poll with a leading question there's only one side, and hence it will not reflect reality.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Why is M4A polling worse and worse with Americans now? Because the propaganda machine has been running full blast against it, while even the elected Dems have been reluctant to stand up for it. Pretty much the same thing happened in 2007-2009, with pretty much the same effect on polls. Plenty of people have posted their own readings of the tea leaves, but I'm inclined to say it has nothing at all to do with the specific details of programs, because the drastic swing is an impressively close match for what happened in about the same time period last decade. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:16
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Despite both parties attacking Medicare For All relentlessly on its proposal to abolish private insurance 43% of Americans support it anyway. Yeah, it's important to keep in mind that many people just like what they feel "a good liberal/conservative is supposed to like." If the Democrats made it clear that supporting a single-payer program like MfA was a expected as being pro-choice or something, you'd see support dramatically increase.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:29
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Show me an actual poll where M4A polls at 45% where the question isn't an obvious attempt to manipulate the result, tia. Write the poll question that you'd be satisfied with clearly defined what "M4A" is, what it accomplishes, and how.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Show me an actual poll where M4A polls at 45% where the question isn't an obvious attempt to manipulate the result, tia. https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1110602053649424384
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:32
|
|
|
I like how his pet theory directly contradicts the fact that this identical question got 51% agreement 18 months ago, was still winning in the next poll, but now he can draw conclusions from a single negative result that still falls within the MoE
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:35
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I like how his pet theory directly contradicts the fact that this identical question got 51% agreement 18 months ago, was still winning in the next poll, but now he can draw conclusions from a single negative result that still falls within the MoE well if we unskew the polls until only real voters are counted I'm pretty sure support is probably 65, 70% or even maybe 90%
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:37
|
|
|
Well, of course M4A is less popular when the Right attacks it, why is this surprising to anyone at all?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:41
|
|
|
pointing out that a poll is within the MoE is "unskewing" now? pointing out that polling aggregates are more reliable than a single poll that tells you what you want to hear is "unskewing" now?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:41
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:M4A will not happen without court packing. On what basis? It should be able to survive Sebelius.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:41
|
|
|
lol, and you immediately post a poll with an inaccurate and extremely obvious leading question. Because if you haven't noticed, M4A isn't "removing the current healthcare system", it's removing the heath insurance companies and if that was the question you'd probably get 80% in favor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:42
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:lol, and you immediately post a poll with an inaccurate and extremely obvious leading question. Because if you haven't noticed, M4A isn't "removing the current healthcare system", it's removing the heath insurance companies and if that was the question you'd probably get 80% in favor. Um, M4A is both. That question isn't leading at all?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:44
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:Um, M4A is both. That question isn't leading at all? M4A isn't nationalizing the hospitals, it's nationalizing insurance. The health care system is both and the question conflates them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:45
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:Um, M4A is both. What do you think M4A is. It doesn't get rid of the current "healthcare system". Alternatively what do you think is included in the term "healthcare system"
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:45
|
|
|
but I thought everybody hated the current healthcare system, why would getting rid of it be leading
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:48
|
|
|
Typo posted:but I thought everybody hated the current healthcare system, why would getting rid of it be leading People like their doctors (doctors are part of the health care system) whose job is taking care of them, they hate their insurance companies which only exist to suck money out of them and then deny them care
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:51
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Despite both parties attacking Medicare For All relentlessly on its proposal to abolish private insurance 43% of Americans support it anyway. I'm skeptical of that. People have loss aversion. It's going to be difficult to get people to overwhelmingly support eliminating private insurance. Especially as it will be hard for people to understand why it's necessary. It should be done, as private insurance keeps health care costs higher and weakens the leverage the public plan would have,, but it's not going to be easy to convince people to go along with it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:56
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:I'm skeptical of that. People have loss aversion. It's going to be difficult to get people to overwhelmingly support eliminating private insurance. Especially as it will be hard for people to understand why it's necessary. Even when you try to sandbag it with misleading questions it gets anywhere from 43-51% support and that's with both parties relentlessly attacking it. People adjust their own political views to conform with their tribe (see how Democrats became more pro-private insurance from 2009-2015 then shifted back once Democrats could no longer claim Obamacare will solve all our problems, or how opinions on Russia flipped in both parties as party leadership changed their opinions), it is not at all far-fetched to suppose that the Democrats could move the needle by the couple of percent they would need by adopting M4A and making a case for it (or at least not trying to defeat it)
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:00
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:On what basis? It should be able to survive Sebelius. on the basis of calvinball
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 07:15 |
|
|
Huh, it's awful odd that he cut out the crosstabs for the single-payer question so that readers can't directly compare the numbers. Turns out it's because the higher numbers on buy-in are entirely because its question doesn't contain any of the trigger words for right-wing berserk rages. Buy-in is actually less popular among Dems than single-payer is, and only gets slightly more support among independents.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:02
|
|