US Politics XXI: Old Man 3-Way

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sanders is running against a man who is becoming more senile by the day, and whose policies are to be more focused on in the coming months. It would be immoral for Sanders to drop out so soon, in my opinion.

Additionally, the reason Perez wants to go forward is that Biden has momentum. The longer this drags out and the more people are reminded that Biden vocally supported the Iraq War and has repeatedly lied about his record there, that he falls woefully short on healthcare, the more of a chance Sanders has to rally.

I still cannot believe how much everyone just let it slide that Biden repeatedly lied about his record in that debate.
 
He stayed in a little too late last time, but I also think its impact was greatly exaggerated. Most Sanders primary voters went for Clinton (about 92 percent), far less than the percentage of Clinton PUMA voters who went for Obama in 2008 (about 75 percent).
 
sanders is staying in to force as many left-ish concessions out of biden as possible before he drops out. it's not that complicated.
 
Disagree, he's staying in it to win. The odds are long but half of the delegates remain unpledged, and Biden's record has never held up under scrutiny in the past. Add in his clearly declining mental state and you have to keep fighting for now.

One of the reasons I (and many others) can't vote for Biden is I don't trust him, so getting "concessions" out of him doesn't interest me because it will all be lip service.
 
Why is it more reasonable? You yourself are saying he's done. The only reason why there's primaries now is because he won't drop out despite having next to no path.



Because non-traditional paths to victory might exist. If he does get an additional few months, does coronavirus put the US healthcare system on display for being as terrible as it is and does that prove to the american people that revolution is needed?

His core message is about healthcare. If people feel the healthcare system betrayed or failed them in this time of need, which I bet you it fucking will, they might change their mind.

A successful economy was also no place for someone coming in and saying “I’m going to redo the whole system.” But guess what... stocks have collapsed 30% over the last month and show no signs of recovering. When people get desperate and feel the government has failed them, they’ll be willing to support something more extreme.

I’m not saying that that’s necessarily how voters will respond and ultimately he will win, but it’s certainly a possibility at this point.
 
Because non-traditional paths to victory might exist. If he does get an additional few months, does coronavirus put the US healthcare system on display for being as terrible as it is and does that prove to the american people that revolution is needed?

His core message is about healthcare. If people feel the healthcare system betrayed or failed them in this time of need, which I bet you it fucking will, they might change their mind.

A successful economy was also no place for someone coming in and saying “I’m going to redo the whole system.” But guess what... stocks have collapsed 30% over the last month and show no signs of recovering. When people get desperate and feel the government has failed them, they’ll be willing to support something more extreme.

I’m not saying that that’s necessarily how voters will respond and ultimately he will win, but it’s certainly a possibility at this point.

so the hope is that the national emergency we're in reeks enough havoc on the system (which by the way, how exactly would the system not be overwhelmed with socialized medicine, too? medicare for all isn't going to solve the ventilator issue) that people come around to the Bern?

and the main focus for people's ire pre-coronavirus was trump. how does that change?
 
so the hope is that the national emergency we're in reeks enough havoc on the system (which by the way, how exactly would the system not be overwhelmed with socialized medicine, too? medicare for all isn't going to solve the ventilator issue) that people come around to the Bern?



and the main focus for people's ire pre-coronavirus was trump. how does that change?



A nationalized healthcare system has a nationalized response.

A nationalized healthcare system doesn’t require patients enter debt for being sick.

A nationalized healthcare system is unified in resource management and doesn’t require a competent administration to determine whether or not disaster relief occurs.

Say whatever you want about legit any European country, but their responses have all been better than ours in terms of testing and care.
 
Italy
Spain
France
UK

Not sure call any of them good, but we lowered the bar so low (with Italy)
 
A nationalized healthcare system has a nationalized response.

A nationalized healthcare system doesn’t require patients enter debt for being sick.

A nationalized healthcare system is unified in resource management and doesn’t require a competent administration to determine whether or not disaster relief occurs.

Say whatever you want about legit any European country, but their responses have all been better than ours in terms of testing and care.

lol of COURSE it needs competent leadership. If we had nationalized medicine now Trump probably would have put his personal masseuse in charge.

There are plenty of benefits to nationalized health care and I agree with it on premise but the idea that we'd be in a significantly different place is a bit much

People wouldn't be screwed with payments. Yes. Thousand percent.
 
Last edited:
A nationalized healthcare system has a nationalized response.

Not necessarily true. It definitely is not in Canada due to the division of constitutional powers.

And some of the European countries' responses here are nothing to write home about, let's be honest.

None of that is to say that the US system doesn't need total overhaul.
 
lol of COURSE it needs competent leadership. If we had nationalized medicine now Trump probably would have put his personal masseuse in charge.

There are plenty of benefits to nationalized health care and I agree with it on premise but the idea that we'd be in a significantly different place is a bit much

People wouldn't be screwed with payments. Yes. Thousand percent.



You’re missing the point. Arming hospitals with kits requires executive action with FEMA and the CDC, not independent private hospitals ordering kits at uneven amounts.

Hospitals aren’t testing people because they don’t have kits. They don’t have kits because there was no executive action taken to arm them.

Other countries (yes even Italy) are testing at 10-20x the rate (and have been). That’s because their healthcare system is not beholden to what the president says, or what some board of trustees thinks is the right move. The only motive in public public health is public health. That system is more immune to the Donald Trumps of this world.

Case in point, look at Brazil.
 
You’re missing the point. Arming hospitals with kits requires executive action with FEMA and the CDC, not independent private hospitals ordering kits at uneven amounts.

Hospitals aren’t testing people because they don’t have kits. They don’t have kits because there was no executive action taken to arm them.

Other countries (yes even Italy) are testing at 10-20x the rate (and have been). That’s because their healthcare system is not beholden to what the president says, or what some board of trustees thinks is the right move. The only motive in public public health is public health. That system is more immune to the Donald Trumps of this world.

Case in point, look at Brazil.

I'm not missing the point whatsoever.

The Justice Department is not beholden to the president, either. How'd that turned out?
 
I'm not missing the point whatsoever.

The Justice Department is not beholden to the president, either. How'd that turned out?



Ok whatever dude, you can plug your ears and ignore the cold cut and dry fact that legitimately everyone else’s public health infrastructure is holding up better than ours in this global health crisis, and legitimately almost everyone else in the fucking western world has some form of nationalized healthcare.
 
Ok whatever dude, you can plug your ears and ignore the cold cut and dry fact that legitimately everyone else’s public health infrastructure is holding up better than ours in this global health crisis, and legitimately almost everyone else in the fucking western world has some form of nationalized healthcare.
I'm not saying that. I'm not even against nationalized medicine. I don't even know what we're arguing over other than that there would still be issues regardless and national health care wouldn't be this magical unicorn saving is all when our nation is still run by idiots.

Everyone's having issues. Maybe our issues would be slightly lessened by nationalized health care. Maybe the smaller size of these other nations has a bit to do with it and well.
 
I'm not saying that. I'm not even against nationalized medicine. I don't even know what we're arguing over other than that there would still be issues regardless and national health care wouldn't be this magical unicorn saving is all when our nation is still run by idiots.

Everyone's having issues. Maybe our issues would be slightly lessened by nationalized health care. Maybe the smaller size of these other nations has a bit to do with it and well.



Of course everyone is in trouble right now. It’s not like Italy deserves a medal for their outstanding response. But, we are definitely near or in last place for the western world response.

Anyways, the original point we were discussing was whether or not it changes the minds of voters. And I think a key component you’re missing here is that you’re trying way too hard to rationalize what the difference is between the systems. So far as I’d guess, more people in Europe will be against their nationalized healthcare systems and more people in the US will be against their private healthcare system, if only because nobody’s is looking good right now and that’s a natural emotional response.

Will it translate into votes? Oh I doubt it will, at least not enough to change the race. But is it a viable path? Certainly. More realistic than trying to win on superdelegates.
 
Of course everyone is in trouble right now. It’s not like Italy deserves a medal for their outstanding response. But, we are definitely near or in last place for the western world response.

Anyways, the original point we were discussing was whether or not it changes the minds of voters. And I think a key component you’re missing here is that you’re trying way too hard to rationalize what the difference is between the systems. So far as I’d guess, more people in Europe will be against their nationalized healthcare systems and more people in the US will be against their private healthcare system, if only because nobody’s is looking good right now and that’s a natural emotional response.

Will it translate into votes? Oh I doubt it will, at least not enough to change the race. But is it a viable path? Certainly. More realistic than trying to win on superdelegates.

Fair enough. I just don't see that it's viable. I see people looking at a situation here where we were in the shit no matter what, and seeing a president who is lying, hiding vital information, and slow to react in the interest of his political future. To me that plays more into the "let's pick the guy who we think can beat Trump cause he's an incompetent asshole" crowd.
 
I honestly don't see this as a healthcare issue at this point. All systems will be at capacity, all countries will face shortages of swabs and means to test everyone. More people will die in the developing world where the # of ICU beds and specialized staff are in short supply, yes.

It's an issue of the response at the top levels of government and a clear example of a total and abject lack of leadership in some places.

If you had private healthcare but literally almost anyone else in office - be it Hillary, or Mittens, or Obama, or even GWB, the US response would not be this pathetic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom