Feb 15, 2020Imagine running for president and supporting the electoral college and not having a single tax policy proposal or verbalized opinion
Feb 15, 2020·1 reply
krishna boundShe doesn't do a good job explaining it on her website, the reason she says she still wants to keep private insurance is for secondary care which is specialized or experimental, she's explained it before on podcasts she's been on (as I understand it's similar to what's in Canada with a bit of nuance). Clearly if she's VP she's going to support Bernie's plans though, it's not like she's going to be VP and then advocate the complete opposite policy. Even on her website she has videos saying she supports M4A explicitly on the same page
how recent are these podcasts
- Feb 15, 2020Synopsis
how recent are these podcasts
within the last 6 months? pretty sure one of them was Red Scare
- Feb 15, 2020·1 reply
because i don't think saying you support medicare for all is enough
little ratfuck pete says he supports it, but with an exception
andrew yang said he "supported the spirit of it"
Feb 15, 2020·2 repliesSynopsisbecause i don't think saying you support medicare for all is enough
little ratfuck pete says he supports it, but with an exception
andrew yang said he "supported the spirit of it"
pete doesnt support medicare for all though, he supports a public option. like he's been fairly clear on this.
Feb 15, 2020·2 repliesSynopsis"I support a single-payer system that will allow individuals to access private insurance if they choose. I will also incentivize good health choices and lifestyles for a healthier, wealthier nation!"
this is a quote directly from her website. if she supports medicare for all she should know you can't have single payer and private insurance. does her position maybe have more nuance than that? maybe, idk. but the point is medicare for all single payer seeks the elimination of private insurance, so its contradictory to say you support both. dont really care what she's signed on to because im pretty sure kamala harris cosponsored bernie's plan and she is definitely not an advocate for single payer.
"you can't have single payer and private insurance."
Says who? Canada's system is literally single payer with private insurance available for stuff not covered under the public plan.
- Feb 15, 2020KimJongUn
pete doesnt support medicare for all though, he supports a public option. like he's been fairly clear on this.
i kno, but he supports it "as a glide path" to a medicare for all system
obviously he's a liar but that's what he treats it as
- Feb 15, 2020·2 repliesJaeRell
"you can't have single payer and private insurance."
Says who? Canada's system is literally single payer with private insurance available for stuff not covered under the public plan.
the point is that the two systems are in direct conflict with one another so in the long term, the private healthcare companies will attempt to dismantle the public healthcare system. you have to get rid of the private health insurers to ensure that doesnt happen. but this is also a bigger issue with capitalism because you can't have sustainable universal healthcare under the current economic system, which is why im not a reformist to begin with.
- Feb 15, 2020Synopsis
pretty sure she's also described herself as a hawk when it comes to things like the war on terror as well, which is essentially bernie as well. i highly doubt we'd be seeing regime change wars under bernie (which is basically tulsi's whole foreign policy, not supporting those wars) but it'd be most of the same when it comes to counterterrorism efforts. i don't see much of a foreign policy difference among them except she's probably a little bit more nuanced on those matters.
Gabbard's foreign policy is definitely more than just stopping regime change wars, it's about actively working with and establishing diplomatic relations with regimes which the US has long alienated solely because they don't play into the same cultural capitalistic complex (i.e. Syria). It's far more about establishing a cultural stability than economic stability (i.e. how allying with Saudis has caused economic stability for the US because of aligning foreign interests but has been a mess for the region). She's very close to isolationism in regards to her selective usage of troops for humanitarian aide and has said in a case as such she would deploy "all tools except troops" unless they were actively invading a direct US ally. She also actively wants to work on fundamentally dismantling and minimizing influence domestically of agencies like the CIA, and lowering things like defense budgets which go to contractors who then influence policymakers.
- Feb 15, 2020JaeRell
"you can't have single payer and private insurance."
Says who? Canada's system is literally single payer with private insurance available for stuff not covered under the public plan.
Yes, you can do that and if that's what Tulsi's plan is then that's one thing. I'm saying you can't have an overlap (basically public option)
- Feb 15, 2020·1 replyKimJongUn
the point is that the two systems are in direct conflict with one another so in the long term, the private healthcare companies will attempt to dismantle the public healthcare system. you have to get rid of the private health insurers to ensure that doesnt happen. but this is also a bigger issue with capitalism because you can't have sustainable universal healthcare under the current economic system, which is why im not a reformist to begin with.
but yes this lol. if we had universal healthcare in the US we'd basically have to continuously make sure that a majority of the senate and the president supported it until the end of time or pray it got popular enough, quickly enough that it would be a death sentence for any politician to think of changing it
- Feb 15, 2020·1 replySynopsis
but yes this lol. if we had universal healthcare in the US we'd basically have to continuously make sure that a majority of the senate and the president supported it until the end of time or pray it got popular enough, quickly enough that it would be a death sentence for any politician to think of changing it
even then it wouldnt be enough, for instance social security is the most successful poverty reduction program in american history and capitalists still foam at the mouth at getting rid of it, popularity be damned
- Feb 15, 2020KimJongUn
even then it wouldnt be enough, for instance social security is the most successful poverty reduction program in american history and capitalists still foam at the mouth at getting rid of it, popularity be damned
very true actually.
- Feb 15, 2020·1 replyKimJongUn
the point is that the two systems are in direct conflict with one another so in the long term, the private healthcare companies will attempt to dismantle the public healthcare system. you have to get rid of the private health insurers to ensure that doesnt happen. but this is also a bigger issue with capitalism because you can't have sustainable universal healthcare under the current economic system, which is why im not a reformist to begin with.
True. Bernie's plan is the ideal and goes further than a lot of European countries. Canada, France, England, Australia, and the Netherlands all have private insurance that fill the gaps that the public plan doesn't provide.
Bernie is going to compromise though and private insurance will still be around just like those countries I mentioned if we being real.
Feb 15, 2020·1 replyJaeRellTrue. Bernie's plan is the ideal and goes further than a lot of European countries. Canada, France, England, Australia, and the Netherlands all have private insurance that fill the gaps that the public plan doesn't provide.
Bernie is going to compromise though and private insurance will still be around just like those countries I mentioned if we being real.
What do you think of this?
- Feb 15, 2020
lmao tom steyer running an attack ad on bernie in Nevada
- Feb 15, 2020·1 replyBenito Mussolini
What do you think of this?
!https://youtu.be/sbqm3q1_yZk
- Feb 15, 2020JaeRell
Oh shoot my bad! I meant to send something else to Kim. :
Feb 15, 2020
mentallouhhhh
https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1228705022772490241Lmao lawd no
Feb 15, 2020·1 replyUltra Light_Beamsthis is the most insane, absurd, disturbing s*** I've ever seen happen in the US politics and nothing comes close.
https://twitter.com/blakezeff/status/1227976156936171520https://twitter.com/alexburnsNYT/status/1228707691469713408all the “blue no matter who” sheep in the comments disgusting
Feb 15, 2020
Loufound out meghan mccain is now married to a man that used to call her an ugly fat b**** on twitter for years
No way
- Feb 15, 2020Synopsis
Naming tulsi his VP would be a great way for me to give much less of a f*** about his campaign and presidency. She is nowhere close to him in terms of policy. Her health care is pretty much Pete's plan.
That tweet is from an anti-Bernie hack, there's zero evidence he's considering Gabbard as his VP.
- Feb 15, 2020
Bernie most likely won't have over 50% of the delegate support going into the convention, he has to pick a running mate who wouldn't get railroaded on the 1st ballot. I think Barbara Lee is probably the best progressive choice.
- Feb 15, 2020·1 replyhttps://twitter.com/tomwatson/status/1228680654163935232krishna bound
tulsi
If he picks tulsi i'm out
- Feb 15, 2020·2 repliesDickerSpaniel
all the “blue no matter who” sheep in the comments disgusting
the same twitter folks and media personalities who have spent last 5 years yelling about racist, sexist, dictator Trump turning the US into authoritarian oligarchy, are now embracing his buddy Bloomberg, who is far more advanced and far more dangerous version of Donald Trump and who is literally trying to buy an election. you can't make this s*** up. these people have have no guiding principles or an understanding of basic s***. it's so blatantly obvious that most of their problems with trump come down to his personality. if trump was better behaved with better vocabulary and if he didn't say the quiet part out loud and made them uncomfortable, they wouldn't have any problems with him.
