Jump to content

US Election: To NY and Beyond


davos

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Did you even read what I wrote? What Hillary thinks and wants re UHC is not at issue. It's what she's prepared to do and say to keep pushing the ideal that's the issue. I don't think she'll do anything to push it forward if she becomes president. Bernie as president would at least, I think, keep it as a key policy platform and keep it in the public mind. He will never achieve it even if he's fortunate enough to be president for 2 terms. But he will do more to push the discussion in that direction than Hillary.

TBH the only way UHC really ever becomes a reality in the USA in my lifetime is if a moderate republican president is elected who believes in UHC and there is a Democratic majority in the House and Senate, and enough moderate republican sentaors not to filibuster it. Which is to say, probably not in my lifetime.

Which is also to say that people should think long and hard about how much they want to base their vote on each Democratic candidate's current public statements about UHC.

You are confusing UHC and single-payer.

She's saying single-payer will never happen. She instead wants to expand Obamacare to cover more people and do it's job better. Which is another way to achieve UHC.

She will 100% push for more and better healthcare coverage in the US. It's one of her biggest issues. She's just not gonna do it via a single-payer setup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BloodRider said:

Seems to me like she is saying that UHC is nigh impossible, and in the meantime ACA is a great accomplishment and we actually have it in place.  And she should know, as she fought for UHC for decades.

Is it your contention that she would veto UHC?

It seems to me that the contention is that Clinton will not do anything to pursue or advance UHC since she thinks it's impossible to achieve, while Sanders will at least try.  Clinton has made it clear that her goal will be to improve the ACA, and not waste her time and political capital with something she doesn't think has a chance of ever happening.  If UHC is a voter's number one issue, then it may make sense for that voter to vote for Sanders over Clinton.

That said, it's a little late to have this type of discussion.  Clinton is going to win the Democratic nomination absent the extremely unlikely event that Clinton is charged by the FBI of committing some crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

It seems to me that the contention is that Clinton will not do anything to pursue or advance UHC since she thinks it's impossible to achieve, while Sanders will at least try.  Clinton has made it clear that her goal will be to improve the ACA, and not waste her time and political capital with something she doesn't think has a chance of ever happening.  If UHC is a voter's number one issue, then it may make sense for that voter to vote for Sanders over Clinton.

That said, it's a little late to have this type of discussion.  Clinton is going to win the Democratic nomination absent the extremely unlikely event that Clinton is charged by the FBI of committing some crime.

Again, UHC =/= Singlepayer. Don't confuse the two. One can achieve universal coverage with different kinds of systems. Obamacare was designed to do this and has mostly been hamstrung by the courts and shitty state governments and legacy issues with moving from the current system in a way that's politically viable.

Clinton has made it clear she thinks the only way to move towards UHC right now is to expand and improve Obamacare and that a "scrap it all and pass single-payer" approach is both non-viable and probably not a good political message to get behind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Shryke said:

Again, UHC =/= Singlepayer. Don't confuse the two. One can achieve universal coverage with different kinds of systems. Obamacare was designed to do this and has mostly been hamstrung by the courts and shitty state governments and legacy issues with moving from the current system in a way that's politically viable.

Clinton has made it clear she thinks the only way to move towards UHC right now is to expand and improve Obamacare and that a "scrap it all and pass single-payer" approach is both non-viable and probably not a good political message to get behind.

Sure, replace UHC with single payer health care in my post.  That's more accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

TBH the only way UHC really ever becomes a reality in the USA in my lifetime is if a moderate republican president is elected who believes in UHC and there is a Democratic majority in the House and Senate, and enough moderate republican sentaors not to filibuster it. Which is to say, probably not in my lifetime.

I'd suggest that the next time the Democrats control Washington you could easily see a public option tacked on to the ACA, and that, IMO, is the doorstep to single-payer. I don't know how old you are, but I wouldn't be so sure you won't see UHC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Rumor is that the first senator to endorse Sanders - a guy out of Oregon - is asking Sanders to suspend his campaign.

Along with Elizabeth Warren.

 

http://www.kptv.com/story/31797555/report-suggests-or-sen-merkley-may-be-urging-sanders-to-end-presidential-bid

How dare you repeat such establishment propaganda! You'll be hung by the lampposts before dawn!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, look: somebody finally decided to do some polling in Indiana. Trump has a narrow lead (+6 according to one poll and +8 according to the other). Also, his situation in California appears to have improved: the three polls in April have Trump at +18, +18 and +27 (he led before, but only by single digits in most polls).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cruz appears to continue being successful at getting his delegates to the convention:

Quote

 

Maine Gov. Paul LePage accused the Ted Cruz campaign Friday of going back on a promise to back a "unity slate" of the state's delegates, a move that the Donald Trump supporter saw as "stabbing us in the back."

In a statement, LePage said, "We reached a deal with Cruz's national campaign to put up a unity slate that would honor the wishes of the thousands of Mainers who voted at caucus. But Cruz's Northeast Political Director David Sawyer lied to us and broke the deal. Sawyer stabbed us in the back, reneged on the unity slate, and betrayed the people of Maine."

 

Unfortunately, this strategy comes with a significant drawback: to get anything out of it, Cruz must first force a second round of voting in which the delegates aren't bound anymore. Playing with the delegates like this feeds into the narrative that the system is rigged and thus decreases the chances of a second round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Trump campaign can only account for half of the 6 million dollars raised for Veteran's organizations. It's not "high on their priorities list" says Al Baldasaro, Trump's campaign adviser for veteran's issues...

 

http://theweek.com/speedreads/620286/even-trumps-campaign-doesnt-know-where-6-million-promised-veterans-went

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

Hanged. Kalbear is not a tapestry.

I actually self identify as an otherkin Persian rug. I can be Hanged or hung, whichever suits you well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...