2020 Democratic Presidential Candidates: Do They Have Policies? What Are Their Policies? Let's Find Out!

This whole story reminds me of the shit Palmer Luckey was pulling back in 2016 that got him fired from Oculus. He was funding some troll accounts to do “memes” for Trump.

Campaigns are doing memes unironically now, because it counts as “content” and the most important thing to a campaign now is “content engagement.”

I’m going to go remove the fingers I used to type that sentence now.

4 Likes

If Mike Bloomberg is nominated he’s going to get absolutely smoked in the general. “Rich people in NYC hate Trump” is the stuff of pro-Trump campaign ads.

10 Likes

Warren’s already starting to let him have it. If the last gesture of her campaign is to incinerate Bloomberg’s candidacy, she will have done this country a tremendous service.

8 Likes

I’m not worried about Bloomberg actually getting the nomination. I do worry about him using his campaign as a flimsy pretext to run attack ads against Sanders and move the needle just enough to throw the nomination to one of the centrist schmucks like Pete. He’s got a lot of money to throw around.

5 Likes

I genuinely believe that Bloomberg will have a massively destructive dummy-spit when his money doesn’t buy him a clear lead over Bernie, and will usher in the death of the Democratic party by throwing money at them to put anyone up except Bernie.

The dude’s stated goal is to kill any chance of a progressive nominee and he will split the party with his fuck-you money to reach it.

2 Likes

Yeah, as delusional as that amount of money tends to make people, I don’t think Bloomberg really believes he can win outright. I’m pretty sure his real objective is to fuck over Bernie and Warren.

I wish I could be as optimistic as y’all but I remember everyone saying uncannily similar things about Trump in 2016. It doesn’t help that they’re basically the same person in all meaningful ways except aesthetics, and I almost threw up earlier today imagining a general election between them.

3 Likes

I read the article this morning about the Nevada culinary/hospitality union that doesn’t like M4A because it would threaten the insurance they fought for, and I’ve been thinking about that for hours.

I’ll never be part of a union bc lol I can’t get into the kind of work with unions, so my perspective is limited. But reading their statement and worries, it feels… very much to me like the same sort of thing as the sentiment of people who think student loan forgiveness is unfair to people who already worked hard to pay off their loans. That sense of “I had to suffer through, why should anyone else get this free?”

Because it’s honestly fucking great they bargained for a healthcare plan they like, bravo to them. But… everyone needs coverage?

Am I missing an angle here?

6 Likes

I mean, the union frequently sacrificed pay increases and other benefits in exchange for better healthcare, but for some reason no one told them that 1. M4A is so comically unlikely to happen that their insurance probably isn’t going anywhere anytime soon and 2. even if we hit the M4A Powerball somehow, there’s a provision in there allowing unions to renegotiate their contracts to make sure any money they sacrificed for better healthcare can be funneled into better pay/pensions instead.

5 Likes

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

The polls/studies I’ve seen say that people with Medicare tend to be happier with it than people are with employer-provided care. There is absolutely room for improvement, but since Sanders’ M4A specifically calls for expansion and revision, that’s already a part of the conversation.

It is, as you say, annoying when people pretend the implementation will be easy.

3 Likes

Word, and as someone who has been on ACA plans for years now while my grandmother is on Medicare, the chasm in our quality of care is just disgusting. I’m sure Medicare needs work but like. I would jump at the opportunity over the ACA system. Esp since my employer care costs literally four times as much and is unfeasible to use.

Like again, cool that union got good plans negotiated for themselves, that’s genuinely great. But as someone who can’t go to FT bc I’ll make less money after the employer option care (which also is worse care) like… This system sucks and no one should have to deal with this.

6 Likes

It seems fairly apparent from Trump’s incessant tweeting that his strategy is going to be “Bernie was screwed!” if he faces anyone other than Sanders. So it’s cool that the DNC look set to just give him more and more ammunition for the general.

2 Likes

I can tell you for certain there’s a lot standard Medicare doesn’t cover. It’s why HMOs and PPOs (insurance companies) are going to need to still exist. But I’d probably feel a lot safer with a UHC Medicare HMO than the UHC POS plan my work gives me now that is entirely dependent on the whims of my employer to exist. Oh and my insurance has a $2500 deductible and that’s good in this market.

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

2 Likes

Medicare as a service isn’t something that should ever be transmutable via individual bargaining power, the slightest amount of wiggle room for providers and employers gives them a huge amount of control over individuals who desperately need certain medications and/or treatments in order to live. Speaking anecdotally, I had a roommate with leukemia whose work options were severely restricted because they couldn’t afford to lose affordable access to care.

The current ACA system is a hobson’s choice that has only afforded people in the working class the barest level of access to healthcare, with the added ticking time bomb of the individual mandate that guaranteed the eventual self-destruction of the service as a whole.

As far as I’m concerned, a blanket medicare-for-all system that covers the entire cost of any needed medical treatment is the only way to avoid the current situation of desperate individuals being taken advantage of by uber-wealthy bad actors in the system.

10 Likes

Yeah, I respect unions (less so union leadership - even the ones who haven’t cozied up to management, but that’s the anarcho- side of my anarcho-communism comimg through) and I am certain some strong unions have secured dental and other extended services that are likely to be omitted in the first draft at M4A that passes in America. If insurance companies are smart, they’ll make it smooth to transition to their Enhanced Services Plans, but it’ll likely still require a bunch of arduous negotiations and I respect that they don’t want to be forced to deal with that.

But I also will always care more about the people below them; ‘part time’ works (39 hours/week) who don’t qualify for hard-won benefits; non-union workers who get fired once whispers of collective bargaining are heard in the break room; the unemployed. And given how many people in these unions have gone against leadership to say they support M4A… well, see my previous aside about union leadership.

4 Likes

So, this is surprising…

I wonder if this will pull more moderate candidates towards Medicare-For-All, now that one of the big liberal TV shows that appeal to a wide audience endorses it.

3 Likes

It’s the leadership having different ideas than the members. Unions are a heck of a good thing but sometimes the leaders of them aren’t that great. With M4A, unions won’t have to negotiate for better medicare while sacrificing better pay or other benefits. M4A will take that aspect off the table completely and give them more leverage against those they’re negotiating with. Reminds me of the whole Working Families Party debacle where they endorsed Warren over Sanders and refused to release the polling data which people speculated that the majority of its members were in favor of him but the leadership’s vote were weighed more.

Let me put it this way: it’s the same kind of argument people have against eliminating student debt when they themselves already paid it off. It’s “unfair” to them. It’s a purely FYGM mindset.

3 Likes