dagblog - Comments for "Clinton and Sanders on Guns and Healthcare"

People aren't marching for

HSG — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 12:43:28 +0000

In reply to I agree with you that Single

People aren't marching for the ACA because, for many, it's only marginally better than what they had before. For some others, it may actually worse. If it's not, it feels like it is because insurance companies reduced the quality of options available to many at around the same time as the ACA was implemented. Medicare-for-all is simple, easy to understand, and would actually provide a marked improvement in many people's lives and would only negatively affect those in top income brackets because their income tax rates would rise. I doubt this would prevent the great unwashed from taking to the streets.

You're right, Hal. A last

barefooted — Sun, 17 Jan 2016 03:31:42 +0000

In reply to Clinton and Sanders on Guns and Healthcare

You're right, Hal. A last minute shifting of a previously stated position is obviously a matter of political expediency and/or pandering.

I agree with you that Single

CVille Dem — Sat, 16 Jan 2016 22:58:13 +0000

In reply to Having observed "single payer

I agree with you that Single Payer is best, and also that there will be no "citizens marching in the streets" for it. Hell, in most polls, people don't even like the ACA, including many of those who benefit from it. Hal operates under the fantasy that Progressives have won the day, and that most Americans are on their side. Remember all the Red State Democrats who refused to run on the ACA? Those who wouldn't even admit they voted for Obama?

Bernie has pulled away the scab of what Republicans stand for, and I believe he has given new life to Progressives: Democrats, run against health care for all, MEDICARE, and Social Security at your peril. We owe him accolades for that. We don't owe him the Presidency, and furthermore, as a Socialist (which I am too, BTW), he cannot possibly win the general.

Having observed "single payer

Flavius — Sat, 16 Jan 2016 20:40:26 +0000

In reply to Thanks Flavius - I disagree

Having observed "single payer" in action while living in several single payer countries, of course I agree it's best.

Sadly, Obamacare was the best we could (barely) do in 2009 .

Deeply involved at the time , Brad DeLong felt that the more comprehensive 1993 Hillarycare package could have been implemented , which provides at least some basis for my admittedly over- optimistic hope that what could have been done then , could be done now. Defining "now" as being the next 8 years .

However the only thing I consider less likely than a massive organization of impassioned healthcare supporters is the likelihood it would work. Individual -as opposed to collective- initiative became so deeply engrained in the American character from Plymouth Rock to Ellis Island that a snowball's chance in hell accurately describes its chance.

I admire Bernie and wish him well. But not this year.

Thanks Flavius - I disagree

HSG — Sat, 16 Jan 2016 14:37:48 +0000

In reply to Hal: on guns Sanders'

Thanks Flavius - I disagree that Clinton's "let's improve Obamacare" plan is more politically feasible than Sanders' Medicare-for-all. At this moment, neither has a snowball's chance in hell of making it through Congress. Down the road, massive organizing by impassioned supporters is the only way we'll get healthcare reform. I think it is much more likely that millions of people will take to the streets in support of single-payer than around tweaks to a plan that, while much better than what was in place before, is still woefully inadequate. Of course, Clinton's dishonest attack on single-payer (it's too expensive and could lead to millions losing healthcare) makes it that much more difficult to achieve the most humane and efficient healthcare solution.

Hal: on guns Sanders'

Flavius — Sat, 16 Jan 2016 12:18:27 +0000

In reply to Clinton and Sanders on Guns and Healthcare

Hal: on Guns Sanders' position is wrong .On Health care it's not that Hillary's position is wrong it's that her ethics is wrong. She misrepresents Sanders' position.

Yup.That's what politicians do. The ones who don't are known as ex-politicians.

In the specific case of Health care what matters is not who's nicer but who's right:.Hillary.

Sanders has a dream that will always remain a dream. Particularly if he is nominated since he would then be defeated. . Hillary has a plan to keep what Obama achieved and make it a little better.Could happen.

Reminds me of D'Amato and Moynihan:

Write to Moynihan for assistance on a Visa and you could well get back a fascinating discussion on the evolution of the comparative international visa policies. Write to Al and you got a visa.

That was good too (had

PeraclesPlease — Sat, 16 Jan 2016 06:50:26 +0000

In reply to The Globe article was from a

That was good too (had already seen her posting), but thinking about the New Yorker analysis

;-)

barefooted — Sat, 16 Jan 2016 03:57:06 +0000

In reply to Hal: on guns Sanders'

;-)

The Globe article was from a

rmrd0000 — Sat, 16 Jan 2016 00:12:23 +0000

In reply to Nice article there

The Globe article was from a link provided by barefooted

I guess theres the point that

anonpp — Fri, 15 Jan 2016 22:18:30 +0000

In reply to The author obviously knows a

I guess theres the point that some bankers like democrats and could be supportive and wall street can be a golden egg so dont kill it - dont see how this helps bernie