Al! posted:

him and louise mensch should have hate babies

Squizzle posted:

how about suck my dick gop

how about it

GOOD TIMES ON METH posted:

I wager that there is some entrenched resistance (ie not just big donor money or whatever) from Dems who viewed ACA as their signature big career legislative accomplishment being told it kind of sucks. I don't know if that goes away if they get more public feedback/yelling about it or if you have to elect people divorced from the original process.

WhiskeyJuvenile posted:

🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

Oh Snapple! posted:

it's going to be fun when it comes time for them to make that call on what matters to them more: lower taxes for themselves w/ the same lovely, repressive economy or social justice

it's the former

punk rebel ecks posted:

Why doesn't Europe have this opioid problem?

quote:

The mere prospect of single payer, however, has elicited swift derision from some corners of the party, with Dick Gephardt, the former Democratic House minority leader, laughing off the idea at a health insurance conference earlier this month.

“Not in my lifetime,” scoffed Gephardt, when asked if the United States will ever adopt such a system.

Gephardt, who serves as a Democratic “superdelegate” responsible for choosing the party’s presidential nominee, was asked about the possibility of single payer at the Centene Corporation annual investor day conference at The Pierre, a ritzy five-star hotel in New York City.

“There is no way you could pass single payer in any intermediate future,” Gephardt declared. America, he added, has the “greatest health care system in the world, bar none.” And while single payer would provide universal coverage, there would be less quality and innovation without the “involvement of the private sector.”

Gephardt, notably, became a corporate lobbyist after serving as a populist Democratic lawmaker from Missouri. His clients have included Peabody Coal and Goldman Sachs, among others. He also serves on the board of Centene, receiving annual compensation of around $315,965 in cash and stock awards.

The Nastier Nate posted:

Democratic voters are stalwart progressives!

*Progressive candidates lose VA and NJ governor primaries, fail in Georgia, can't pass single payer in Calofirnia

Rand alPaul posted:

https://twitter.com/Litzz11/status/881932888018751488

the bitcoin of weed posted:

with all due respect, the article is about winning, not about what is right. And I think the current state of affairs demonstrates pretty clearly that, whether we like it or not, Democrats will have to move to the center in order to win. And winning now is essential. Just as you have been arguing with "move-to-the-center" ranters forever, so have the rest of us been dealing with "move-to-the-left" ranters for just as long, having now witnessed them (through Sanders and Nader) install two Republicans in the White House. Either the left wing of the Democratic Party will wake up to reality, or the Party will become even more irrelevant. Half of zero is zero.

Yinlock posted:

(as an aside that fact that republicans thought "emails" was more damaging than "literal slave-owner" is unsurprising but hilarious)

got any sevens posted:

already happening https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/03/11/opinion/sunday/are-your-sperm-in-trouble.html

Nonsense posted:

quote:

Six months after Donald Trump’s inauguration, Democrats in Congress are ready to adopt a populist economic agenda that blends ideas long entrenched in the liberal mainstream, like infrastructure investment, with promises that have not been a focus of the Democratic Party in recent years such as a pledge to rein in the power of corporate monopolies.

quote:

The economic platform is aimed at bridging ideological and demographic divides in the party, and Democrats hope it will have widespread appeal, in rural and urban areas, and with centrist, moderate, and progressive voters alike.

quote:

The agenda nevertheless showcases the influence of the Democratic Party’s populist-progressive wing. It diagnoses the problems facing America in terms that sound far more like Bernie Sanders than Hillary Clinton, arguing that prosperity and influence have become too concentrated in the hands of a wealthy few to the detriment of working-class Americans. One policy plank promises that Democrats will start “cracking down on corporate monopolies”—an ambition that prior to the 2016 presidential election would be far more likely to be championed by a progressive firebrand like Senator Elizabeth Warren, who has long warned of the dangers of market concentration, than most rank-and-file Democrats in Congress.

quote:

Promises to confront monopoly power are only one part of the wide-ranging platform the new Democratic agenda sets out. At the core of the agenda is a pledge that the party will create jobs, raise wages and income, while lowering the cost of living, for American workers and families.

“A Better Deal” is the product of months of meetings and deliberation between party leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, other House and Senate Democrats, and policy experts representing the full spectrum of liberal ideology.

Venuz Patrol posted:

dawg he's rolling the plan out over several days

Serf posted:

a lot of the young people i've talked to said they lost interest in voting when sanders dropped out of the race. most of them either can't afford to go to college, don't want to, or are gonna have to go into a lot of debt to do so. they don't want to live in a small town forever, and the ticket to getting out is education. they felt like clinton didn't have anything to offer them and they weren't gonna vote for trump either. a lot of them just plain skipped voting in their first election

MizPiz posted:

Podesta: Clinton absolutely supports the TPP, she's always valued the diplomatic power of trade and considers the deal to be a milestone achievement.

Obama: Clinton absolutely opposes the TPP, her primary concern is the well being of the American people and she wouldn't do anything to detrimentally affect the American people.

Clinton: *dabs*