4 ms·
I’ll reply to this since I cannot reply to the sibling comment - but Medicare for all is not an actually popular or feasible idea. The polls that show support f
by sonotathrowaway 6y ago
I’ll reply to this since I cannot reply to the sibling comment - but Medicare for all is not an actually popular or feasible idea. The polls that show support for Medicare for all have wording you the effect of “would you like free healthcare?”. Support quickly drops once polls start asking about the real trade offs that would have to be made in order to actually afford this change in healthcare, and the tax hikes needed to make it work.
Trying to pass off m4a as a feasible plan isn’t real, so it’s supporters all cling to support that a magical free plan would garner. They don’t actually have a plan to make it feasible, nor do they take the time to explain that part to their followers.
- enraged_camel 6y agoYou can actually reply to comments, there's just a timeout period where the reply button is hidden (to discourage quick/dismissive replies).
- ianleeclark 6y ago> tax hikes needed to make it work. Crazy how when you word polls to indicate that taxes would be "hiked," that people get spooked. Never mind how we'd save money overall. > Trying to pass off m4a as a feasible plan isn’t real This is the real tragedy of the Bernie campaign. It wasn't feasible because it'd be spiked by Democrats in addition to Republicans. It's really heart-rending. You've got an entire voting base who simply can't imagine a better future where you're not squeezed for every cent, where you're not represented by people who are more focused on representing Pfizer, and where you don't have to be constantly in fear of accidentally getting cancer and, whoops, kids can't go to college now. Or say you catch a stray bullet, take an ambulance, and you're not covered--youre double fucked then.
- sonotathrowaway 6y agoSee I guess that’s the exact reason I’m not a sanders supporter. I care about outcomes and couldn’t care less about the strategies used to get there. I see a public option as feasible, cost effective, minimally disruptive, and effective. I don’t fantasize about a 40 trillion dollar plan that would upend the largest American industry with uncertain effects. I’m especially not fantasizing about this effort being led by a man who spent his entire career in politics yet couldn’t manage to get a single large piece of legislation passed, and who actively burned his ties to the party he emigrated to because their politics weren’t radical enough.
- ianleeclark 6y agoYeah, instead of all that fantasizing, you're instead fantasizing a world wherein 40 trillion was the quoted number. Again, when Tucker Carlson is the president, think long and hard about this moment.
- sonotathrowaway 6y agoSanders actually played fast & dumb about the m4a numbers, then attacked warren when she tried putting actual numbers to the plan and tried to make it feasible. And the plan would actually cost around 40 trillion over a decade to implement, sorry if you were misled. And didn’t sanders lose this primary worse than his first? Don’t blame us for whatever conservative you want to slot into the president slot next, blame sanders for campaigning for the past four years only to bank on Biden and Kamala splitting the black southern vote as his path to victory, then getting destroyed when that didn’t happen. There was no reason for him to antagonize those voters and tell them they don’t share his politics - at some point you’re just going to have to admit that sanders is a poor politician, as the rest of Washington has long realized.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]