October 24, 2018 at 7:49 am #39927October 24, 2018 at 8:59 am #39929Master of DisasterParticipant
Honestly Missing, the only piece of policy stated in that four minutes of drivel is/was “Medicare for All”, which went undefined while the opposition was attacked for being the opposition.
And the term “Medicare for All” has been thrown around so much that nobody knows exactly what that means anymore. Would it be catastrophic coverage only? Would it punish those who were/are unable to get preventative care for whatever reason (including, but not limited to, no insurance, insurance didn’t cover it, no access to a doctor, or they worked for a business where they were refused time off to see a doctor)? Would it cover mental health/psychological benefits? Or would it be a tax grab to fund the salaries of administrators who are paid to gripe about how ‘socialism restrains the free market and prohibits us (the companies) from delivering quality care’? (Except they never define quality of care.)
The Master of Disaster, who is nonpartisan, thinks it’s time for the Democratic Party to have a serious discussion about 2020, specifically on abandoning all other policy positions and running on ‘healthcare for all’. The Master of Disaster realizes this has probably a zero percent chance of happening.October 24, 2018 at 9:43 am #39930
Did you know 9% of Democrats voted for Donald Trump?
More importantly, do you know why?
That isn’t a policy advocacy piece. It is a strategy piece.
People here, have said I’m crazy, mental, and a whole bunch of other ugly things. And that’s okay, I’ve got pretty thick skin. No worries.
They say a progressive rise isn’t real. They say that the Russians are why Clinton lost. Whole bunch of other goofy things in my opinion.
That video is from a network who owns the under 40 demographic, whose mind share is greater than MSNBC Fox and CNN combined.
The core thrust of that video, is vote for policy, the strategy behind why it is on the rise, what it’s going to mean, and medicare-for-all serves only as a national easy to point to and understand example.October 24, 2018 at 9:45 am #39931
Abandoning all other public policy positions would not be wise.
Adding the two or three top Progressive issues would be a very smart move. But they have to mean it. Lucy and the football type politics won’t cut it.October 24, 2018 at 11:18 am #39932
KSKD’s of the world are why we have Trump. And those that helped Trump win by not voting or voting 3rd party don’t get to complain about things. You had your chance and blew it.
The choice the left needs to make is to fucking vote to WIN, not to make a point to yourself.October 24, 2018 at 2:36 pm #39933
No, we have Trump for one and only one reason, and her name is Hilary Clinton.
Vitalogy, you are becoming a relic. Quickly.
People under 40 are rejecting fear, blame and shame politics in ever increasing numbers. Under 35, 30 ish? YUGE.
They are the future, your lame, blame fear and flame politics are increasingly old news, good for a snooze, or perhaps to lose, again.
Fact is the rapidly growing progressive coalition is speaking to people on class, and across a lot of lines currently being ignored by the party leadership.
One of the more notable things is they do tend to ack for votes and do so directly with clear policy goals in mind.
I will enjoy watching you learn a hard lesson: namely, that telling others what to do, blaming them, does not work. And, it just is not about you. It is all about that struggling majority of which you are obviously not a member.
If you put even a fraction of your current energy expenditure toward actually understanding where most people are at and why, you would be a seriously effective advocate.
Just know you can blather on all you want and will have exactly zero impact on me. Already told you I doubt you are even capable of it.
And there are a whole lot of me out there, numbers growing every day. People done with shitty politics.
And there is the choice! The people who produced that piece framed it up sweet, nice and easy.October 24, 2018 at 3:00 pm #39934
I watched the entire video, Missing_KSKD.
A few observations.
Covering everyone who needs a basic form of health insurance is a noble goal and one I don’t dismiss or suggest isn’t a good idea.
But to start, calling the majority ‘knuckle-draggers’ and fascists in that video is the first problem. You can’t win people you despise and it will show through. Fact is, Mr. Trump won a majority of electoral college votes. If such insincerity is that pervasive on the left, I suspect that they aren’t really about helping people. They’re about power and control. Big difference.
A larger scale medicare could work under one scenario. Namely, a Chevrolet version for needy Americans who want it. If it has basic coverage, without needless ‘bells & whistles,’ expect incentives for a free market version to compete and actually provide choice for those who want a bit more and can pay for it.
I have no problem with Medicare and suggest instead of ‘Medicare for All,’ it be named ‘Medicare Access for All.’ Just don’t try to ram a state-controlled scheme in the guise of health care down the throats of those who don’t want it. Otherwise, like Barrycare, it’s doomed to fail.October 24, 2018 at 3:01 pm #39935
Spare us your retread of a diatribe.
We have Trump because the Bernie Bros needed their balls to be cupped to vote.
Trump voters? They hated the guy but still voted for him in lock step.
Bernie Bros? Not so much. Too good, had to prove a point, both are equally bad!! Seriously, STFU with your complaints about Trump. You shit your own bed so enjoy the stench.
And I’ve yet to see anyone here on this board embrace your rhetoric.October 24, 2018 at 4:50 pm #39938
You did not watch. I will wait.October 25, 2018 at 1:10 pm #39946
If the left can’t come to common cause on key issues, how on earth can they expect to compel Republicans to do anything?
Fact is, Democrats tend to win when they’re civil. Yet Hillary is now on the record against civility.
I thought liberals were smarter than this. They used to be better at controlling the narrative. Now, even with their media acolytes, they’re the gang that seemingly can’t shoot straight.
Progressives aren’t being helped any by those images of antifa running the streets in Portland, mobs threatening to invade from South America, crazies pounding on Supreme Court doors, plus the conga line clown show of Democrat leaders like Maxine Waters supporting attacks and ‘getting in their faces.’
The sooner such people are persona non grata in ANY party, despite their largesse, the better we all are. Besides, in the long run, they’re an albatross around the neck of any political campaign, anyway.October 25, 2018 at 2:14 pm #39949Andy BrownParticipant
“Yet Hillary is”
Not running. Who’s running? Slimey hypocrites like Cruz. Polls show him leading. He’s going to lose. The media will amplify his loss (rightfully so, after all he is such a fuck faced liar it isn’t funny) and Cruz will yell foul for some reason, but his campaign has been aggressive, not civil.
Herb, you really need to chill. At your current rate you may run out of purple microdots before Election day.October 25, 2018 at 2:38 pm #39950
‘Who’s running? Slimey hypocrites like Cruz. Polls show him leading. He’s going to lose.’
You sure about that?
“Herb, you really need to chill.”
There seems to be a trend of so-called ‘progressives’ trying to squelch speech with which they disagree.
It doesn’t work with antifa on the streets of Portland and it won’t work on PDXRadio.com, either.
Just who are you mad at, anyway?October 25, 2018 at 2:52 pm #39952
You gonna mail us a pipe bomb? That’s how your side works things.October 25, 2018 at 3:57 pm #39953BroadwayParticipant
Where’s Bill Ayers bomb building expertise when you need it? 🙂November 8, 2018 at 12:41 pm #40102
Progressives’ plan for victory just took a gut-punch. Now what do they do?
The Left has been eager to show it can build a winning coalition for 2020 and beyond. But that didn’t happen in the midterms.
Progressives were hoping Tuesday’s elections would finally give them definitive proof that Democrats can run and win on unapologetically liberal issues in swing districts and states.
That didn’t happen.
Despite a good night for congressional Democrats overall, nearly all of national progressive groups’ star candidates fell short in their contests in red or purple districts and states, potentially slowing the momentum the emboldened left had enjoyed since Hillary Clinton’s loss two years ago.
“Progressives have to really do some hard thinking about the shape of the movement looking at 2020 and beyond,” said progressive strategist Jonathan Tasini, adding that while the left had successes in some local races, they struggled in statewide contests.
“The failure, for example, of the Ben Jealous campaign in a very Democratic state says both that sticking a simple ‘progressive’ branding on a candidate’s campaign may sustain a small cult, but that isn’t enough to win enough elections.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.