ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Yeah well that didn't work so I've changed my tactics.
We'll see if you can learn from experience.
"I don't support universal healthcare because we don't have the support in congress.."
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
We'll see if you can learn from experience.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
she'll be a 71 year old former republican who made millions on wall street. pass.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i don't feel good about voting for assad either. pass.
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
It was in response to your, 'what more could you ask for' question.
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
Why did you call her, 'shillary'?
It sounds very right wing and 25 yrs. of right wing bashing was her real baggage, was it not?
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
I said it because of her acceptance of massive amounts of corporate sourced campaign funding. With which she still lost. Several episodes of $100k a plate dinners full of financial industry insiders, with sound cannons placed about to keep a potential 'Romney moment' at bay.
And when she won the nomination, I held my nose and voted for her anyway.
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
Well, believe what you will.
The right chased after the Clintons for 3 decades and wasted enough money on investigations to buy health insurance for all of Rhode Island.
And all they ever found was a cum stained dress that took a rat for it to come out.
It gets old.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
How long have people been bashing Trump?
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Why did the DNC and Democratic establishment decide to run a candidate you feel had so much baggage that it contributed to the outcome of the election over a relatively unknown senator from Vermont, with little to no baggage?
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
The goddamn baggage was a right wing creation.
And Bernie wasn't the strongest candidate as evidenced by the 4 million vote deficit. He also wasn't strong in minority areas and the right would have worked the 'communist' rhetoric to death.
Politics is historically dirty. You imply it can be cleaned up. I doubt it, man.
I really doubt it.
A politician is the only job where lies are actually accepted.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Whether or not it was fabricated is irrelevant. I think her voting record is enough to lose a significant amount of progressive votes; she voted in support of the Iraq war, the Patriot Act, supported NAFTA and the TPP, etc. Her record speaks for itself. She's a moderate Democrat. That's not what people want right now. Democratic voters don't want someone to continue to economic policies the Obama administration supported. The ACA was a step in the right direction, but it hasn't gone far enough. 27 million Americans still aren't covered, that's unacceptable. Even Republican voters support coverage for everyone by and large. This issue is sitting for us on a silver platter just waiting to be supported. If Trump came out tomorrow and supported a system of universal healthcare that covered all Americans, the GOP would hold control for the foreseeable future. Any Democrat who came out for single payer would be universally acclaimed and supported.
Fucking take it!
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
russ feingold voted the opposite way and lost wisconsin by more than hillary did.
i remain unconvinced.
ANC
Well-Known Member
I think the problem needs a two pronged attack.
Part of what is wrong with the system is the ridiculous cost of medicine.
To keep prices high one has to create scarcity, Many more places are needed for medical students, and the cost of studies need to be covered by the state.
The amount needed for this is a tiny fraction of what is spent on military campaigns with no physical goal, a war against people is so different from a war against a country. You don't just have to capture the king to win.
Also, the crazy profit making by pharma has to stop, they claim development and research would stop or slow down if they didn't have those incentives.
I say big deal because the only people who get to use this new tech are the super rich.
Part of what is wrong with the system is the ridiculous cost of medicine.
To keep prices high one has to create scarcity, Many more places are needed for medical students, and the cost of studies need to be covered by the state.
The amount needed for this is a tiny fraction of what is spent on military campaigns with no physical goal, a war against people is so different from a war against a country. You don't just have to capture the king to win.
Also, the crazy profit making by pharma has to stop, they claim development and research would stop or slow down if they didn't have those incentives.
I say big deal because the only people who get to use this new tech are the super rich.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Cool story, it must be because he's progressive, and no other reason. That's the only explanation
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
Ridiculously unfair
Yeah, they wanted Trump. But you think someone hard left would have done better? With who?
That is pure bull shit. They certainly do NOT!
As though that would ever happen. Trump doesn't care about the common man at all.
And even if he did, there's an ebb and flow In politics. It's hard for either party to hold the presidency more than 8 years. How many times has that happened since WW Il? Once?
It's jammed down your throat too.
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
I hope you're wrong.
I would hope YOU hope you're wrong too.
There's enough suffering here right now. The richest country on earth. But we don't share well.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
he's the antithesis of everything you hate about hillary, and he did not perform as well as hillary did.
your theories do not stand up to evidence whatsoever.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
in our state, democrats voted no on 69, 45% - 41%.
republicans voted no on 69 88% - 7%.
at some point you guys have to consider facts and evidence and whatnot.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
The Democratic Party is losing in states where voters prefer right wing officials to represent them. Your guess is based upon preconceptions and not evidence or facts.
Democratic voters outnumbered right wing voters last election. We haven't lost the majority. We lost middle america, where voters prefer more right wing candidates. To be successful, the Democratic party must be more accepting of good but more conservative candidates in states that prefer conservative policies. I'm not talking about full on fascist racist richy riches as candidates. I'm talking about socially progressive, thoughtful people who don't agree 100% with liberal left policies.
For example: Repeal of Citizen's United is an important issue to me. I'd find acceptable a candidate who accepts corporate donations at present but supports the repeal of Citizen's United decision. Also, I didn't find Hillary Clinton's vote on the Iraq war in 2002 or 2003 very much of an issue, nor was her accepting money from Wall Street individuals a big deal. I still think Hillary Clinton was well prepared and ready to be a good president as I think Obama was.