Bernie's vision would result in half the workforce effectively employed by the government

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Corporationists and neocons don't hate Bernie, but if they want to remain in power, they have to destroy him. His plans are very scary to war contractors, arm chair warriors--the biggest government spenders, by the way. The health insurance executives who steal twice as much from your pockets as they do in other OECD countries are scared shitless of giving up their mansions to go on welfare because they have no real job skills. Our Fossil Fuel Overlords starting wars in the Middle East using American boys and girls as fodder and killing civilians with drones feel very financially insecure because other capitalists are investing in renewable energy.

I thought the omissions and exaggerations before about Medicare for All costing $6 Trillion over the next 10 years were bad, but this op takes the cake.

 

[Elixir]

... guarantee all Americans a full-time government job paying $15 an hour, with full benefits...

WUT?
If there was any truth to what you were trying to say, you lost it right there.
I suppose you rolled the cost of private health insurance into the "benefits" package, even as you added the cost of MFA...

Your whole hyperbolic screed seems to typify the reality-defying paranoia of the privileged class.
Bernie might not be my first choice, but dishonest dialogue doesn't further anyone's cause, including your own.

 

[Toni]

I would truly appreciate some honesty from Sanders supporters. Why vote for Sandra except that you believe that Trump is the only other option?

1. he doesn’t take corporate donations (bribes) so would actually be working for the people instead of corporate donors
2. Medicare for all
3. He wants to move away from perpetual wars in the Middle East
4. For minimum wage to be something people could actually live on without taking 3 jobs
5. For a tax system that doesn’t move money to the top
6. Actually cares about climate change
7. Was for these same positions 30 years ago. He doesn’t follow political winds, he stands on his principals
8. Was arrested when protested for equal rights waaay back in his college years

I really do appreciate your list of Sanders' positions. I don't agree that he is the only candidate with those or similar positions.

1. Warren also relies on small donors.
2. Warren supports Medicare for all.
3. I think that Warren's foreign policy positions are more realistic than Sanders https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/03/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-foreign-policy-074193
4. Warren supports increased, livable wage
5. Warren not only believes in that but has a plan for that. Which she talks about.
6. Warren has strong environmental policies
7. So what has Bernie actually accomplished in his 30+ years? Not much.
8. LOTS of people were arrested. If your point is that Bernie is really old, we noticed.


As I've written before, my big problems with Sanders are his age--and anybody who isn't concerned about that is a fool and hasn't been paying attention to how much being POTUS ages the holders of the office. Yeah, Warren is no spring chicken but she hasn't had a recent heart attack and she seems much more energetic and healthy than Sanders. Fair or not, that is just how it is.

The other concern is that Sanders does not work well with others. He's mentioned that himself. It's not a secret. He's not well liked by his fellow legislators. Being POTUS is not the same thing as being king. Given his working relationship with legislators now, I don't see him as being effective at accomplishing any of his goals. I think that he would only serve to set the stage for another right wing Republican in 2024.

So to recap: I think a better candidate is Warren because she's slightly younger and because I think she's better at working with other people. Ultimately, working with others is probably the most important part of the job. If Bernie were in his 50's or early 60's, it would be much more of a toss up, although the works well with others thing is a huge one, IMO.

Why not support Warren instead of Sanders?

 

[marc]

I really do appreciate your list of Sanders' positions. I don't agree that he is the only candidate with those or similar positions.

Yes, which is why Warren is my second choice.

2. Warren supports Medicare for all.

which is good, but she has been softening on that which is why I think she has been dropping in the polls.

3. I think that Warren's foreign policy positions are more realistic than Sanders https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/03/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-foreign-policy-074193

Warren looses me when she goes the 'Israel can do no wrong' mode

7. So what has Bernie actually accomplished in his 30+ years? Not much.

I don't know of any comprehensive list of things he has helped to pass, but there are a few listed here. I've heard he does good at getting bipartisan support for bills. His voting record has shown him pretty consistent on voting the way I would want a senator to vote.

8. LOTS of people were arrested. If your point is that Bernie is really old, we noticed.

No, my point is not that he is old. Why would someone even make a point of that? My point was he was fighting for civil rights since '63, that he has always been for the same things he stands for now, and not just talking about those stances. Biden's political history is not looking that great. Don't know what Warren's history is other than she used to be republican until '96, but I trust her a lot more than Biden on business regulations and the like.

As I've written before, my big problems with Sanders are his age--and anybody who isn't concerned about that is a fool and hasn't been paying attention to how much being POTUS ages the holders of the office. Yeah, Warren is no spring chicken but she hasn't had a recent heart attack and she seems much more energetic and healthy than Sanders. Fair or not, that is just how it is.

With every likely candidate in their 70's age does not seem to be a big difference. Bernie was pretty damn energenic before the stent was put in place, and now he should have even more energy. Even if he is forced to stand down because of health issues, I would feel a lot better with all the people he would appoint to government positions. Because it is not about Bernie, but the kind of government he wants to create.

The other concern is that Sanders does not work well with others. He's mentioned that himself. It's not a secret. He's not well liked by his fellow legislators. Being POTUS is not the same thing as being king. Given his working relationship with legislators now, I don't see him as being effective at accomplishing any of his goals. I think that he would only serve to set the stage for another right wing Republican in 2024.

Obama tried to work well with republicans. All that got him was 8 years of obstruction from them. The non-progressive democrats will be the problem. I don't see them any more eager to enact any real changes with Warren either. I think they voice token support to her to counter Sanders, but will resist any real change she offers as well. The thing is the democratic party has been running as republican lite for a while now, which has been hurting them in elections. They need to be pressured to support the policies people actually want, and voting for more progressive candidates is part of that pressure.

 

[southernhybrid]

So, regardless of whether or not you like what Sanders is saying, how do you expect him to accomplish any of his goals? That is one of the biggest problems that I see. Sanders may be well meaning, but I personally see him as being as more unrealistic then any other candidate who thinks he or she can change things. Change is very difficult. Change takes lots of time. Most people are far more moderate than Sanders. Congress is far more moderate than Sanders. How do you get enough of those moderates and conservatives in the Congress to back any of the platform that Sanders supports?

That's the question that's never been answered.

 

[laughing dog]

So, regardless of whether or not you like what Sanders is saying, how do you expect him to accomplish any of his goals? That is one of the biggest problems that I see. Sanders may be well meaning, but I personally see him as being as more unrealistic then any other candidate who thinks he or she can change things. Change is very difficult. Change takes lots of time. Most people are far more moderate than Sanders. Congress is far more moderate than Sanders. How do you get enough of those moderates and conservatives in the Congress to back any of the platform that Sanders supports?

That's the question that's never been answered.

The question is whether President Sanders is willing and able to compromise on his major initiatives when faced with a recalcitrant Congress. Any compromise on his part will either infuriate his base or expose their hypocrisy, depending on their reaction.

 

[marc]

The question is whether President Sanders is willing and able to compromise on his major initiatives when faced with a recalcitrant Congress. Any compromise on his part will either infuriate his base or expose their hypocrisy, depending on their reaction.

That would indicate you think anyone ever compromising is being a hypocrite?

I know that there will be compromises, deals made, and I have no problem with that. I'm sure there will be some extremist supporters that will get pissed off about it, just like there are right-wing nutcases who get upset with only getting 95% of what they want or anyone saying anything nice about any democrat. But I think the majority of supporters will be happy with compromises as long as there is an actual fight to get what we want, and some wins that come out of it.

 

[TV and credit cards]

So, regardless of whether or not you like what Sanders is saying, how do you expect him to accomplish any of his goals? That is one of the biggest problems that I see. Sanders may be well meaning, but I personally see him as being as more unrealistic then any other candidate who thinks he or she can change things. Change is very difficult. Change takes lots of time. Most people are far more moderate than Sanders. Congress is far more moderate than Sanders. How do you get enough of those moderates and conservatives in the Congress to back any of the platform that Sanders supports?

That's the question that's never been answered.

Change is also incremental. Either Bernie or Warren would be hard-pressed to get half the Dems on their side. Warren would have to compromise a lot. A whole lot. To the point she might as well call her positions a wish list. And Bernie... pffft. Forget about it. He thinks he’s going to rally the people to pressure Congress. As if the entirety of this nation is as passionate about government as he and his Bros are. Not going to happen. At least he can blame conservative Dems and the pragmatic left for getting nothing accomplished when we don’t take to the streets.

It’s like we are all at the breaking point about the cost of healthcare but for some reason we can not or will not pressure Congress to do anything about it unless Bernie is in office. Without him, we’ll just sit here and take it. But once he’s in, Medicare for all!

His positions and his hardcore followers are deluded. He’s an old man that thinks like a college student. He never looked at the way things actually are and amended his positions to reality. At least most twenty-somethings will observe, learn, and grow. Bernie belongs on a sitcom.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The famously evenhanded Manhattan Institute throwing their weight on the train tracks as Bernie's train gains momentum? Bring it on. Let's hear from the CATO people and Third Way while it's still January.

Yeah, bring it! The bros ain’t got nothin’ except fingers in their ears and nanananana. With a foot stomp and threat to hold their breath for added emphasis.

So you DON'T want medicare for all, etc? Before you were saying that you do but you don't think Bernie can make it happen. Yes, it will cost a lot. Yes, it is worth it.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

You are going to vote for Trump (probably again) because you don't want your taxes to go up, it's okay to be honest

I would truly appreciate some honesty from Sanders supporters. Why vote for Sandra except that you believe that Trump is the only other option?

Sanders is the only one who is truly for medicare for all instead of a 2 tiered system, and right away. That's a reason he has supporters. You know, democratic socialists, actual progressives rather than the milk toast ones you prefer.

 

[Toni]

The famously evenhanded Manhattan Institute throwing their weight on the train tracks as Bernie's train gains momentum? Bring it on. Let's hear from the CATO people and Third Way while it's still January.

Yeah, bring it! The bros ain’t got nothin’ except fingers in their ears and nanananana. With a foot stomp and threat to hold their breath for added emphasis.

So you DON'T want medicare for all, etc? Before you were saying that you do but you don't think Bernie can make it happen. Yes, it will cost a lot. Yes, it is worth it.

Not sure what the quoted post has to do with my stance on Medicare for All.

But:

I’ve discussed at length my concerns about the so-called Medicare for All many times on this forum. Absolutely none of them have to do with costs.

Short version: Medicaid and Medicare both underpay providers for services provided. That’s not sustainable now in the short term. It is one of the primary drivers behind shortages in general practice physicians, particularly in smaller cities and rural areas and areas with concentrations of poverty. Examples: more and more rural hospitals are deciding not to offer childbirth services—meaning that pregnant women must travel long distances in order to safely deliver their babies—addding stress and delaying care in urgent situations and more importantly belying the whole notion of a safe delivery. Other services which are vital to communities are being curtailed and even eliminated. Which isn’t a problem unless you need them.

The other reason is that Medicare is sometimes restrictive about what services can be provided. It’s not uncommon for people approaching Medicare age but who currently have good insurance to decide to have some procedures earlier so that they don’t have to deal with Medicare.

Would I like to have a system of national insurance similar to what is in Canada or Norway to France? Yes!!!! Do I think it’s realistic in the US now?? Nope. Look at the current court battles over women’s health care under the ACA. Funny how there’s never any quarrel about whether a man can get a vasectomy or have prostate surgery. That’s where we are. It’s frustrating and infuriating but it’s reality.

 

[PyramidHead]

Louder, for those in the back that ignore me every time I say it:

No candidate will get their legislation passed by Congress unless they have massive popular support willing to withhold their votes and their labor to extract concessions from the completely broken legislative system in our government.

Not Biden, not Warren, not Pete, not Amy.

They will all face the same intransigence and stonewalling that Bernie would face, and would all end up compromising their plans. Yet, while they are all starting the negotiations having already compromised, Bernie is not. When you ask for a piece of bread, you get crumbs. When you ask for a loaf of bread, you might walk away with a few pieces. Only a fool comes to the table with an offer that is handicapped ahead of time.

Bernie has the advantage of a more aggressive starting point and, if his play at being "organizer in chief" is successful, a mobilized and unyielding popular movement to ensure that it doesn't get diluted beyond recognition. Obama could have had this, and it helped get him elected, but then he immediately stocked his cabinet with Citibank, Goldman Sachs, and the worst specimens of neoliberal machine politicians you can imagine, and ignored the coalition of grassroots organizers that helped him win (remember ACORN?). Bernie isn't gonna do that, so we might have a cabinet of people that are actually trustworthy and care about working Americans instead of enriching themselves and their shareholders.

It comes down to this: of the candidates with a shot at the nomination, only Bernie is brave enough to voice the conviction that the United States is a deeply flawed, dysfunctional, and cruel country. The others can see room for improvement here and there, but defer to the tradition of patriotism that basically entails fawning and uncritical acceptance of a nation in the death throes of its imperialist phase heading towards collapse. Now more than ever, we need a President that can at least appreciate the scope of the problem and how important involving the public is to solving it, rather than relying on the failed model of technocratic reform behind closed doors that relegates the public to spectators.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

"We can't afford the Green New Deal." - some guy burning up in global warming.

 

[Toni]

I think of potential legislation as being a Venn diagram with what one side wants on one side and what the other side wants on the other and in the middle, what either both sides want or are willing to compromise on. The task is to expand that middle ground: what everyone agrees on and what people are willing to give up or compromise on. And yes, move that middle ground left! But don't blow up the world because it's not moving fast enough or far enough left to suit you.

Bernie's advantage is, in fact, a disadvantage.

It's just fine to think about going to battle when it's not your skin in the game. But the fact is that there are an awful lot of people hanging on by a thread and they will be the first to lose their tenuous grips in any such class war--which is really what you are promoting.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Would I like to have a system of national insurance similar to what is in Canada or Norway to France? Yes!!!! Do I think it’s realistic in the US now?? Nope. Look at the current court battles over women’s health care under the ACA. Funny how there’s never any quarrel about whether a man can get a vasectomy or have prostate surgery. That’s where we are. It’s frustrating and infuriating but it’s reality.

And you're standing in the way of the one candidate (Bernie) who is trying to make it happen, because you don't like some of his supporters and think he "doesn't get along" with others. Guess what? Yes he can. And guess what else? He doesn't have to get along and go along with them as Democrats have been folding to the Republicans over and over again.

He can do something novel for the Democrats and actually take a hard stand with the Republicans, and appeal to their voters, with whom many of his policies are polling very well (better than I think you realize; look it up). Republicans bulldoze. Guess what? Democrats can too. And when Republicans (and when corporate democrats) stand in the way, go straight around them directly to the people in their district.

Republican voters and Trump voters have a lot of brainwashing and propaganda and tribalism to see through (so do Clinton Democrats btw), but they are NOT the idiots or the evil monsters you may take them for. They can be appealed to and their minds can be won, but not if you come at these voters with a hostile approach, speaking of "deplorables" etc. Calling any voter that accomplishes nothing. Save that for what you call the people standing in the way of what the people want.

Bernie and Yang are to the far left, further left than you say you think is possible to make happen, yet these two have more independent and cross over republican and (ex)Trump voter supporters than Biden, Klobuchar or any of the establishment corporate Democrats do. These establishment democrats are seen by these voters as the "Swamp" Trump spoke to them about to win their votes.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Bernie has the advantage of a more aggressive starting point and, if his play at being "organizer in chief" is successful, a mobilized and unyielding popular movement to ensure that it doesn't get diluted beyond recognition. Obama could have had this, and it helped get him elected, but then he immediately stocked his cabinet with Citibank, Goldman Sachs, and the worst specimens of neoliberal machine politicians you can imagine, and ignored the coalition of grassroots organizers that helped him win (remember ACORN?). Bernie isn't gonna do that, so we might have a cabinet of people that are actually trustworthy and care about working Americans instead of enriching themselves and their shareholders.

It comes down to this: of the candidates with a shot at the nomination, only Bernie is brave enough to voice the conviction that the United States is a deeply flawed, dysfunctional, and cruel country. The others can see room for improvement here and there, but defer to the tradition of patriotism that basically entails fawning and uncritical acceptance of a nation in the death throes of its imperialist phase heading towards collapse. Now more than ever, we need a President that can at least appreciate the scope of the problem and how important involving the public is to solving it, rather than relying on the failed model of technocratic reform behind closed doors that relegates the public to spectators.

Well said.

And yes they can get things through congress, by threatening the congress critters with a popular uprising from their own voters. Appeal directly tot he voters. Show how popular what you're trying to push through is, and make it clear to these voters that their congress critter is voting against it. "Organizer in chief" is a great way of looking at it.

I think of potential legislation as being a Venn diagram with what one side wants on one side and what the other side wants on the other and in the middle, what either both sides want or are willing to compromise on. The task is to expand that middle ground: what everyone agrees on and what people are willing to give up or compromise on.

Except that isn't how it is working in your country. Your congress critters are corrupt. They are not doing the will of your people. How can that be so clear to somebody on the outside looking in but not clear to you? Maybe you're not seeing the forrest for the trees?

That's the whole point of the populist uprising that brought you the original Tea Party, then Occupy Wall Street, then Obama (Hope & Change; he talked a great game), then Trump, and that could bring you Sanders. These people speak to what the actual problems people are facing and are address their actual interests. Sanders is genuine in what he is saying, totally unlike Trump who was all hot air, and also quite unlike Obama, who sold you one thing and then did another on many issues.

 

[Toni]

Would I like to have a system of national insurance similar to what is in Canada or Norway to France? Yes!!!! Do I think it’s realistic in the US now?? Nope. Look at the current court battles over women’s health care under the ACA. Funny how there’s never any quarrel about whether a man can get a vasectomy or have prostate surgery. That’s where we are. It’s frustrating and infuriating but it’s reality.

And you're standing in the way of the one candidate (Bernie) who is trying to make it happen, because you don't like some of his supporters and think he "doesn't get along" with others. Guess what? Yes he can. And guess what else? He doesn't have to get along and go along with them as Democrats have been folding to the Republicans over and over again.

He can do something novel for the Democrats and actually take a hard stand with the Republicans, and appeal to their voters, with whom many of his policies are polling very well (better than I think you realize; look it up). Republicans bulldoze. Guess what? Democrats can too. And when Republicans (and when corporate democrats) stand in the way, go straight around them directly to the people in their district.

Republican voters and Trump voters have a lot of brainwashing and propaganda and tribalism to see through (so do Clinton Democrats btw), but they are NOT the idiots or the evil monsters you may take them for. They can be appealed to and their minds can be won, but not if you come at these voters with a hostile approach, speaking of "deplorables" etc. Calling any voter that accomplishes nothing. Save that for what you call the people standing in the way of what the people want.

Bernie and Yang are to the far left, further left than you say you think is possible to make happen, yet these two have more independent and cross over republican and (ex)Trump voter supporters than Biden, Klobuchar or any of the establishment corporate Democrats do. These establishment democrats are seen by these voters as the "Swamp" Trump spoke to them about to win their votes.

I’m standing in no one’s way. Despite what his bros are trying to sell, he’s not the only candidate to advocate for single payer universal health care in the US and despite his decades of public service, he’s done squat to as advance that cause. Other candidates talk a great deal more about the need for this and what the effects on real people are without universal health care and how to accomplish it.

Bernie just seems to think he can wave his hands and everybody who disagrees will bow down. Hadn’t worked for him so far.

 

[ZiprHead]

Would I like to have a system of national insurance similar to what is in Canada or Norway to France? Yes!!!! Do I think it’s realistic in the US now?? Nope. Look at the current court battles over women’s health care under the ACA. Funny how there’s never any quarrel about whether a man can get a vasectomy or have prostate surgery. That’s where we are. It’s frustrating and infuriating but it’s reality.

And you're standing in the way of the one candidate (Bernie) who is trying to make it happen, because you don't like some of his supporters and think he "doesn't get along" with others. Guess what? Yes he can. And guess what else? He doesn't have to get along and go along with them as Democrats have been folding to the Republicans over and over again.

He can do something novel for the Democrats and actually take a hard stand with the Republicans, and appeal to their voters, with whom many of his policies are polling very well (better than I think you realize; look it up). Republicans bulldoze. Guess what? Democrats can too. And when Republicans (and when corporate democrats) stand in the way, go straight around them directly to the people in their district.

Republican voters and Trump voters have a lot of brainwashing and propaganda and tribalism to see through (so do Clinton Democrats btw), but they are NOT the idiots or the evil monsters you may take them for. They can be appealed to and their minds can be won, but not if you come at these voters with a hostile approach, speaking of "deplorables" etc. Calling any voter that accomplishes nothing. Save that for what you call the people standing in the way of what the people want.

Bernie and Yang are to the far left, further left than you say you think is possible to make happen, yet these two have more independent and cross over republican and (ex)Trump voter supporters than Biden, Klobuchar or any of the establishment corporate Democrats do. These establishment democrats are seen by these voters as the "Swamp" Trump spoke to them about to win their votes.

I’m standing in no one’s way. Despite what his bros are trying to sell, he’s not the only candidate to advocate for single payer universal health care in the US and despite his decades of public service, he’s done squat to as advance that cause. Other candidates talk a great deal more about the need for this and what the effects on real people are without universal health care and how to accomplish it.

Bernie just seems to think he can wave his hands and everybody who disagrees will bow down. Hadn’t worked for him so far.

Do presidents really get much involved in the crafting of legislation?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I’m standing in no one’s way. Despite what his bros are trying to sell, he’s not the only candidate to advocate for single payer universal health care in the US

He is the only one that is pushing hard for it now. Not with a long long phasing in period. Not some two tiered system with a public option for "those who want it". Sanders alone (and its where I disagree with Yang) will push hard for it and not start with a lame compromise before even trying as Obama did.

I know. I know. You think this is "magical ponies" as Hillary put it and that it can't be done in your political climate etc. Blah blah blah. And so here you are not only failing to try, but standing against the one candidate who does want to try.

The argument is so rarely made by anyone but Bernie, for a universal single payer system, not two tiered, not "over 8 years" or some crap like that. And even Bernie doesn't sell it as well as he could. Why do I never hear the argument made to Republican business owners that they shouldn't have to shoulder the weight of health care for all of their employes, even non-work related illness? Why should that be attached to work? That's not fair. That holds you back from competing with other countries who don't require that of their employers, and who get the entire public at large to pay in.

Listen to some Canadian conservative politicians talking about our health care system. This argument gets made by them when they speak with Americans who have your weird Obama care forcing money into the hands of for profit insurance companies. Don't want the guv'ment between you and your doctor? How about an insurance adjuster who has a profit motive to screw you over and deny you care? etc. There are a lot of arguments like this that can appeal to the right.

Other candidates talk a great deal more about the need for this and what the effects on real people are without universal health care and how to accomplish it.

They won't push with anywhere near the force or vigor that Bernie will. For them it is a talking point to win votes with. For Bernie it is something he actually intends to push.

And as for the 2 tiered system that so many (sadly including Yang) advocate for, as a "tansition period".... they are pretty much assuring it will fail. That period will attract all the best medical care to the more expensive insurance based system and rob the rest of you from good affordable health care we have here in Canada. Then the Republicans will have it as a talking point to show how they "tried" universal single payer and how it failed.

Bernie just seems to think he can wave his hands and everybody who disagrees will bow down. Hadn’t worked for him so far.

That's your perception of him. I get it. But that's not what he has been doing lately. He has been convincing more and more people that what he is fighting for matters and that it can happen. He has shifted the Democratic party leftwards and paved the way for AOC and other progressive candidates (including to an extent Warren now running in this election). And I know you think he's all about ego, but he will be the first to tell you that this movement isn't about him. Its about the progressive message for change, bringing your country up to par socially with mine, and if Bernie truly knocks it out of the park, surpassing mine.

That or you can vote for more of the same old, return to what was, which is what Biden represents.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Do presidents really get much involved in the crafting of legislation?

Hence why he is seeking to be "organizer in chief". This doesn't stop with Bernie. This keeps going until you've got more and more of the people of your country demanding better representation for what they actually want and getting others in who will work to make it happen instead of lining their own pockets.

Its been slowly building for a long time now, and Bernie in office as president is just another step along the way. "We are the 99%"