You're desperately naïve if you think MFA could be remotely successful and not decimate private health services.
2020 Democrat hopefuls
- Thread starter UCFWayne
- Start date
You're desperately naïve if you think MFA could be remotely successful and not decimate private health services.
There are ways to address admin costs without throwing the entire system out the door and eliminating private insurance and health care in this country. That's the issue with this MFA debacle, you are taking problems on the perimeter and making the case to throw out everything. Whatever savings you may have in admin cost reductions very well may simply be given back in other areas, especially given how much MFA would struggle to actually reign in costs in the service/delivery sector when they demand far more be done with far far less.
Get that umlaut out of here no one thinks you're smart because you used unnecessary dots. Stop using those communist letters.
You use the word "debacle" so much it kind of feels like you just learned it and you're trying to force it in to normal conversation.
@UCFKnight85
You've used the word "debacle" 21 times in the last 2 months. I think it's odd that 1 out of every 3 days you're typing such an obscure word. Is this an alt right buzzword right now?
You've used the word "debacle" 21 times in the last 2 months. I think it's odd that 1 out of every 3 days you're typing such an obscure word. Is this an alt right buzzword right now?
Stop saying MFA would eliminate private health care. You can argue slippery slope debates or you can discuss what's actually being proposed on the merits. There are countries that have fully socialized health care systems, yet that's not what Bernie or anyone of significance is arguing for. I'm cautiously supportive of MFA but would be diametrically opposed to a fully socialized system.
The problems are not on the perimeter. They are systemic. 60% of bankruptcies in the US are due to medical costs. We have millions without insurance who forego basic care or ignore significant health problems. Our system is twice as expensive with average-to-poor outcomes. There's no marginal tweaks at the edges here.
The second largest doctor's association in the country came out last month in support of MFA and/or a public option. The largest group, the AMA, narrowly rejected a proposal 53/47 last summer to officially end opposition to a single payer system. The tide is turning, and it's turning because things are getting worse. Republicans should have been hard at work making Obamacare work with Democrats, or developing an actual functional alternative. Instead, the Republican position on healthcare for 8 years was "Repeal Obamacare." So now, something that seemed like a pipe dream 4 years ago is getting serious legs. If the current system continues to fester for 4 more years, it will have even more legs. There will be a tipping point eventually.
So bernie can pay for everything he wants by raising the top rates by 4, 7, and 9% or so it just MFA?
Sorry but I'll continue saying it because that's what will happen. If you want to push the myth/lie that we can somehow abolish private insurance, force down MFA whose sole mission is to crush costs in the system, and not usher in the mass collapse of the private delivery services then you're nuts. MFA would (in theory) only work if they removed so much cost from the delivery system that it justified those massive tax increases.
At some point the business case for staying open as a private practice or hospital will be erased if the payee system is removing allowable billable costs to the point that it's not possible to make money. That's exactly what would happen, and IMO, exactly what socialists like Sanders want. He doesn't want ANYONE making money in the health care system.
You do realize this yes? The only way MFA possible can control costs is if it controls the mechanisms of service delivery.
"The largest group, the AMA, narrowly rejected a proposal 53/47 last summer to officially end opposition to a single payer system. The tide is turning, and it's turning because things are getting worse."
How are they getting worse? And if they are, why are they getting worse if the government already has control over 2/3s of the market? Is it out of the realm of possibility that healthcare costs are on an arc just like any other system?
If the govt can help, they already have every opportunity to do so. It seems like they should be able to bring the costs of care down for the people they already cover.
How are they getting worse? And if they are, why are they getting worse if the government already has control over 2/3s of the market? Is it out of the realm of possibility that healthcare costs are on an arc just like any other system?
If the govt can help, they already have every opportunity to do so. It seems like they should be able to bring the costs of care down for the people they already cover.
Biden is toast. 10% right now in New Hampshire. 5th place.
No. Either is Buttiplug. It’s a cast of characters.
So this could be a 2016 situation where Trump was able to build off of 20% support because the other 80% was fragmented.
Bernie won with like 28% of the vote and the moderate candidates had 55% Warren only getting 9% is not great for Bernie because she's the second most liberal.
I honestly think it's Buttigieg if Biden drops out before super Tuesday and it's Sanders if he stays in for super Tuesday.
Bernie won with like 28% of the vote and the moderate candidates had 55% Warren only getting 9% is not great for Bernie because she's the second most liberal.
I honestly think it's Buttigieg if Biden drops out before super Tuesday and it's Sanders if he stays in for super Tuesday.
Biden isn't dropping out since he's still convinced everyone will come to their senses and pick Mr Electability, the other 2 aren't going anywhere so long as they're in close 2nd and 3rd, and then you've got Steyer and Bloomberg still taking votes and they aren't going anywhere.
It'll be Mr Socialism. These people will fragment the vote long enough, Waren will drop and her votes will go to Bernie, and the DNC will be too late in stopping Mr Socialism before the convention. Or they'll take Bloomberg there and try to contest it.
Nah. There are definitely 2 lanes, liberal vs centrist. In 2016, it was Trump vs Establishment. The democratic centrists won't let Bernie win and now Bernie's people have been emboldened. Those asshats won't support the eventually nominee once Bernie loses and Bernie will lose.
TLDR: Trump wins.
Biden doesn't have enough money to stay in the race. Bernie and Buttiguy have plenty of money. Makes me think that gay population is higher than the proclaimed 3%.
While I want Bernie over any of the other viable candidates I just don't think it's going to happen. Not because the DNC is going to stop him but because democrats have made the most progress since 2016 with moderates. The suburban women delivered in 2018 and I believe they aren't ready to jump on with Sanders I hope I'm wrong but that seems to be the case. You can tell by the numbers that the moderates are just getting way more votes in these early races. Sanders has almost fully consolidated the liberal voter in New Hampshire with Warren doing poorly and he didn't even get to 1/3.
Of the main 5 candidates Sanders Warren Buttigieg Klobuchar and Biden you have 2 liberals and 3 moderates.
The liberals got 93,212 votes and the moderates got 138,524.
Even if you take Biden out the moderates won by a huge margin. The idea that the DNC is going to rig this is just crazy. It's going to be pushed by Russian bots in order to try to divide the party and it honestly might work.
Of the main 5 candidates Sanders Warren Buttigieg Klobuchar and Biden you have 2 liberals and 3 moderates.
The liberals got 93,212 votes and the moderates got 138,524.
Even if you take Biden out the moderates won by a huge margin. The idea that the DNC is going to rig this is just crazy. It's going to be pushed by Russian bots in order to try to divide the party and it honestly might work.
Last edited:
Impeachment worked like a charm. For Trump.
Just means that he has a hardcore base. Nobody ever question that. The question is how big of a base is it?
Again, the Hillary factor. Trumpers, Obamabots, and Bernie bros like to proclaim that their candidate is special when in fact their success is highly dependent on the fact that people effing hate Hillary.
I have seen people saying this, and it is a ridiculous point. In 2016 there were only 2 major candidates, this time there are 5 or 6, so it isn't surprising in the least he got fewer votes. It also isn't any kind of indication his campaign is doing poorly.
I think the "moderate-progressive" angle is a bit over played. Just because someone supports Pete (or whoever) for instance, doesn't mean their second choice would automatically be different moderate, and the same can be said for progressives. I also don't think Iowa and New Hampshire are representative of the nation at large, and it is much to early to be declaring front runners based on those two states. I expect Biden to do much better in Nevada and South Carolina.
So you're saying that hillary was so unpopular in New Hamsphire that she lost to Bernie but won the state in the general election?
Huh? I didn't say anything about Hillary being unpopular, what are you talking about? I am pointing out that the vote is split amongst more candidates this year than in 2016.
Since it was a 2 person race, you're basically suggesting that there were people who voted for Bernie vis-a-vis Hillary. I think that's a reasonable position. If that's the case, then a drop in votes this time around shows that he's not as popular there as it may have seemed in 2016.
I honestly have no clue what you are talking about. I am saying when votes are spread around more people, the top people are typically going to get fewer votes than if it were just a 2 person race.
I think it's going to be more complicated than the liberal vs moderate lane talking point. I think I heard last night that Sanders was the number one backup choice of Biden voters in NH. And clearly Warren voters didn't flock to Bernie last night. Link to exit polls to sort through some of this.
My takeaway. Mayor Pete had the broadest support across age and education. Sanders support is young. Klobuchar's was old. There's good evidence in here of Pete's ability to appeal to a wide demographic range - at least when it comes to non-minority voters. The non-white vote in NH was only 9% of the electorate, but it went Bernie 32% - Biden 18% - Pete 15%.
Bernie's support is by far the firmest. National polling and NH exit polls show that his supporters are much less likely to switch candidates than anyone else. He's clear and away in the best position out of any candidate going forward financially (except Bloomberg). Klobuchar or Pete need a HUGE national bounce post NH.
Bernie is the only candidate at the moment that has a clear path towards an outright delegate win. FiveThirtyEights model (which is as good as anything) has him at 37% right now. Second place is "no one" at 36%. Biden is in third at 17% but falling fast. Sanders is now the favorite in both Nevada and SC.
I agree about the moderate vs progressive talking point. But I think Biden is toast. He's polled OK leading in because most voters don't pay attention until it gets close. So the "idea" of Joe Biden ended up being way better than the actual candidate. I suspect we'll see the same thing happen in Nevada and South Carolina when voters get an up close look and start paying real attention.
That could be true, I don't think Biden is ultimately going to win. But I do think we need to hold off a bit until we are at least get through SC before writing him off.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/482533-new-hampshire-2020-primary-results
CANDIDATE VOTES PCT.
Bernie Sanders 75,690 25.70%
Pete Buttigieg 71,999 24.44%
Amy Klobuchar 58,376 19.82%
Elizabeth Warren 27,181 9.23%
Joe Biden 24,800 8.42%
Tom Steyer 10,649 3.62%
Tulsi Gabbard 9,581 3.25%
Andrew Yang 8,259 2.8
CANDIDATE VOTES PCT.
Bernie Sanders 75,690 25.70%
Pete Buttigieg 71,999 24.44%
Amy Klobuchar 58,376 19.82%
Elizabeth Warren 27,181 9.23%
Joe Biden 24,800 8.42%
Tom Steyer 10,649 3.62%
Tulsi Gabbard 9,581 3.25%
Andrew Yang 8,259 2.8
so yang dropped out last night. i guess i wont be getting my $1k now. 
also a guy named MICHAEL BENNET (D-CO) was apparently in the race as well but just dropped out. lol
there were reports tom styer was dropping out, but havent seen any confirmation yet.
also a guy named MICHAEL BENNET (D-CO) was apparently in the race as well but just dropped out. lol
there were reports tom styer was dropping out, but havent seen any confirmation yet.
People used to say that Obama built the greatest voter coalition base in a generation and yet Trump had more than 2x the turnout as an incumbent.
Clearly it's because Ukraine announced an investigation into him. Just another fixed election by trump.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
OT: ESPN opts out of MLB Contract option for 2026-2028
- Latest: Knight_Light
