I wish the "debates" were called what they are: Q&A time with the Candidates. There's no debating going on, just the moderator asking questions and then the candidate(s) answering them.
I wish the "debates" were called what they are: Q&A time with the Candidates. There's no debating going on, just the moderator asking questions and then the candidate(s) answering them.
Except that's not true? Another candidate will typically respond to the first candidate's answer, and then the first will counter again. There's a back and forth between at least two candidates after each question.
It's, like, the one thing that's actually being done at least half-decently
While the debate rules should be stricter since all the complaints can be summed into the fact that is humiliating to have an event of your political party serve as add space for obvious hucksters like Williamson and Yang, the format itself isn't bad, though the moderation is embarrassing. But at least is a "controlled" brand of embarrassing, instead of "Democrat Candidate X, how will you deal with the #ClintonBodyCount?", that WILL happen with open town halls since everybody will send operatives anyways.
Is there anything of substance to Dooley being a "national surrogate" or is she just another sideshow biting off chicken heads?
I doubt it. And I don't even know what she's trying to say with the tweet since it starts off by saying she doesn't agree with Trump supporters. But sure let's take a vague, years-old tweet from a random Bernie campaign person and use it to drag Bernie through the mud
Bernie hiring assholes who say unacceptable shit is as relevant as Biden saying stuff that makes him look like he'd do a bad job as President. Being able to hire good and capable people is one of the tests that shows whether a candidate would be a good office holder.
More directly to the argument presented in the video, the racial health gap exists regardless of whether you have insurance or not (or what kind of insurance). Indeed even when healthcare is fully socialized there are racial health gaps. Its an attempt to argue universal programs will address racial disparities when the evidence does not exist.
Black women often claim their health concerns in pregnancy are not taken seriously, leading to preventable complications. Universal healthcare will do nothing for that. That's purely an internal attitude problem that doctors need to work on in themselves, hopefully with medical schools including some training on the subject.
Not going to undo the racism (and it's wider spread than just pregnancy, lots of medical professionals literally believe that black people are more capable of withstanding pain so they must be lying if they say they're experiencing it) without any kind of incentive structure. Warren has a plan for that, but it seems like one of her more half baked ones and I'm not wholly sure about it.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Im sorry, are we pretending there's something wrong with that Sanders tweet?
Wrong, no. Insufficient, yes.
The disparity in maternal death rates is there regardless of class. So the reason for it being higher among black women isn't that they're less likely to be covered (a problem M4A solves) it's that there is a racist belief ingrained in the health care industry that we have to address as a separate matter.
EDIT: Prominent example, Serena Williams almost died giving birth because her doctors didn't believe what she was telling them about what she was feeling in her body.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Not going to undo the racism (and it's wider spread than just pregnancy, lots of medical professionals literally believe that black people are more capable of withstanding pain so they must be lying if they say they're experiencing it) without any kind of incentive structure. Warren has a plan for that, but it seems like one of her more half baked ones and I'm not wholly sure about it.
Yeah her plan seemed to basically be no child left behind, but for hospitals.
Im sorry, are we pretending there's something wrong with that Sanders tweet?
It's literally promising something that M4A won't be able to deliver (at least not without major reform of healthcare providers and their education.)
I mean its a tweet, it seems dumb to complain it oversimplifies an issue when the policy itself will do a world of good.
There are two ways to read the tweet.
One, Sanders thinks that worse outcomes by race/gender is purely a matter of access, in which case he's sorely misinformed.
Two, Sanders is proposing that M4A will also reform healthcare provider education, which is picking a very ugly fight with doctors and putting them further against UHC.
Im sorry, are we pretending there's something wrong with that Sanders tweet?
It's literally promising something that M4A won't be able to deliver (at least not without major reform of healthcare providers and their education.)
I mean its a tweet, it seems dumb to complain it oversimplifies an issue when the policy itself will do a world of good.
There are two ways to read the tweet.
One, Sanders thinks that worse outcomes by race/gender is purely a matter of access, in which case he's sorely misinformed.
Two, Sanders is proposing that M4A will also reform healthcare provider education, which is picking a very ugly fight with doctors and putting them further against UHC.
I think Sanders thinks getting profit motives out of healthcare will help a population that is severely underprivileged on average get better health care results.
Not going to undo the racism (and it's wider spread than just pregnancy, lots of medical professionals literally believe that black people are more capable of withstanding pain so they must be lying if they say they're experiencing it) without any kind of incentive structure. Warren has a plan for that, but it seems like one of her more half baked ones and I'm not wholly sure about it.
Yeah her plan seemed to basically be no child left behind, but for hospitals.
I think, if I understand it, it's adding new money and then taking away the new money if improvements aren't made, which is a better idea than NCLB. Which was designed to close urban schools and replace them with charters.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Not going to undo the racism (and it's wider spread than just pregnancy, lots of medical professionals literally believe that black people are more capable of withstanding pain so they must be lying if they say they're experiencing it) without any kind of incentive structure. Warren has a plan for that, but it seems like one of her more half baked ones and I'm not wholly sure about it.
Yeah her plan seemed to basically be no child left behind, but for hospitals.
I think, if I understand it, it's adding new money and then taking away the new money if improvements aren't made, which is a better idea than NCLB. Which was designed to close urban schools and replace them with charters.
Thats basically what NCLB was, even if the new funding never materialized.
Not going to undo the racism (and it's wider spread than just pregnancy, lots of medical professionals literally believe that black people are more capable of withstanding pain so they must be lying if they say they're experiencing it) without any kind of incentive structure. Warren has a plan for that, but it seems like one of her more half baked ones and I'm not wholly sure about it.
Yeah her plan seemed to basically be no child left behind, but for hospitals.
Yeah I think Harris's implicit bias training bill is better, especially because its very achievable. Its not going to "fix racism" but its hopefully something that can achieve some progress in that area.
One of the downsides of Warren's strategy that I don't want to ding her too much on is the detail she includes in her plans means its easier to see the problems with them. I think not putting out detailed plans is itself a major problem though. So a plan like this which seems like a not-great idea that is attempting to address a real concern, I try not to penalize her too much.
Not going to undo the racism (and it's wider spread than just pregnancy, lots of medical professionals literally believe that black people are more capable of withstanding pain so they must be lying if they say they're experiencing it) without any kind of incentive structure. Warren has a plan for that, but it seems like one of her more half baked ones and I'm not wholly sure about it.
Yeah her plan seemed to basically be no child left behind, but for hospitals.
One of the downsides of Warren's strategy that I don't want to ding her too much on is the detail she includes in her plans means its easier to see the problems with them. I think not putting out detailed plans is itself a major problem though. So a plan like this which seems like a not-great idea that is attempting to address a real concern, I try not to penalize her too much.
I think that is something Bernie does quite well. Provide just enough to get his supporters really excited, but nothing so detailed that he can be pinned down on it.
Stacey Abrams is officially out, btw. Would be open to the VP slot though.
Unfortunately I don't think Stacey Abrams brings enough to the table for a VP slot.
The ideal VP is going to help you win Florida or Pennsylvania. Having Bidden on the ticket will help with Pennsylvania. If he wins the primary then they should look for someone to help win Florida.
If we win Pennsylvania and Florida. We win the presidential election.
Stacey Abrams is officially out, btw. Would be open to the VP slot though.
Unfortunately I don't think Stacey Abrams brings enough to the table for a VP slot.
The ideal VP is going to help you win Florida or Pennsylvania. Having Bidden on the ticket will help with Pennsylvania. If he wins the primary then they should look for someone to help win Florida.
If we win Pennsylvania and Florida. We win the presidential election.
I think her big plus would be to increase credibility/enthusism with black voters. How much the decline in black turn out in Milwaukee, Detroit and Philly was due to not having Obama and how much was voter suppression is an open question, but it was certainly enough to swing the outcome.
Stacey Abrams is officially out, btw. Would be open to the VP slot though.
Unfortunately I don't think Stacey Abrams brings enough to the table for a VP slot.
The ideal VP is going to help you win Florida or Pennsylvania. Having Bidden on the ticket will help with Pennsylvania. If he wins the primary then they should look for someone to help win Florida.
If we win Pennsylvania and Florida. We win the presidential election.
I think her big plus would be to increase credibility/enthusism with black voters. How much the decline in black turn out in Milwaukee, Detroit and Philly was due to not having Obama and how much was voter suppression is an open question, but it was certainly enough to swing the outcome.
I would agree here, she could help strengthen a ticket with someone like Warren who polls well with pretty much every subgroup within the Democratic Party except for African Americans.
Not going to undo the racism (and it's wider spread than just pregnancy, lots of medical professionals literally believe that black people are more capable of withstanding pain so they must be lying if they say they're experiencing it) without any kind of incentive structure. Warren has a plan for that, but it seems like one of her more half baked ones and I'm not wholly sure about it.
Yeah her plan seemed to basically be no child left behind, but for hospitals.
I think, if I understand it, it's adding new money and then taking away the new money if improvements aren't made, which is a better idea than NCLB. Which was designed to close urban schools and replace them with charters.
Okay, hear me out.
What if we close the hospitals and replace them with charters.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Stacey Abrams is officially out, btw. Would be open to the VP slot though.
Unfortunately I don't think Stacey Abrams brings enough to the table for a VP slot.
The ideal VP is going to help you win Florida or Pennsylvania. Having Bidden on the ticket will help with Pennsylvania. If he wins the primary then they should look for someone to help win Florida.
If we win Pennsylvania and Florida. We win the presidential election.
I think her big plus would be to increase credibility/enthusism with black voters. How much the decline in black turn out in Milwaukee, Detroit and Philly was due to not having Obama and how much was voter suppression is an open question, but it was certainly enough to swing the outcome.
I would agree here, she could help strengthen a ticket with someone like Warren who polls well with pretty much every subgroup within the Democratic Party except for African Americans.
I think it would also make the whole thing more fun. Both Warren and Abrams are nice people, tough but funny and clever. I think they'd have great chemistry. I'd rather watch them than Biden having a dick-measuring contest with Trump.
I've possibly got some female voter bias here. Male voters would probably hate the combo.
CelestialBadger on
+2
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
Sympathetic, but its a weakness I don't want in a candidate. Like you can't keep your words straight against another person who struggles the same way, so don't run? Like there are qualified candidates who can beat trump, we don't need JOe Biden.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
"This is who I am and I don't want to change..."
Okay, points for honesty.
"... but I'm not going to stop trying to get the job I can't do."
Aaaaand sympathy gone.
Im sorry, are we pretending there's something wrong with that Sanders tweet?
It's literally promising something that M4A won't be able to deliver (at least not without major reform of healthcare providers and their education.)
I mean its a tweet, it seems dumb to complain it oversimplifies an issue when the policy itself will do a world of good.
There are two ways to read the tweet.
One, Sanders thinks that worse outcomes by race/gender is purely a matter of access, in which case he's sorely misinformed.
Two, Sanders is proposing that M4A will also reform healthcare provider education, which is picking a very ugly fight with doctors and putting them further against UHC.
I think Sanders thinks getting profit motives out of healthcare will help a population that is severely underprivileged on average get better health care results.
Basic intersectionality really.
Except that he's not saying "we'll get better results" - he's saying "we'll close the gap." The problem is that the gap isn't just about access, but is just as much about institutional racism and sexism in healthcare. Removing profit motives won't fix that, and the communities impacted know this.
Im sorry, are we pretending there's something wrong with that Sanders tweet?
It's literally promising something that M4A won't be able to deliver (at least not without major reform of healthcare providers and their education.)
I mean its a tweet, it seems dumb to complain it oversimplifies an issue when the policy itself will do a world of good.
There are two ways to read the tweet.
One, Sanders thinks that worse outcomes by race/gender is purely a matter of access, in which case he's sorely misinformed.
Two, Sanders is proposing that M4A will also reform healthcare provider education, which is picking a very ugly fight with doctors and putting them further against UHC.
I think Sanders thinks getting profit motives out of healthcare will help a population that is severely underprivileged on average get better health care results.
Basic intersectionality really.
Except that he's not saying "we'll get better results" - he's saying "we'll close the gap." The problem is that the gap isn't just about access, but is just as much about institutional racism and sexism in healthcare. Removing profit motives won't fix that, and the communities impacted know this.
It brings to mind Bernies other economic rhetoric that feels "rising tides lift all boats" that generally tends to leave minorities behind.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Im sorry, are we pretending there's something wrong with that Sanders tweet?
It's literally promising something that M4A won't be able to deliver (at least not without major reform of healthcare providers and their education.)
I mean its a tweet, it seems dumb to complain it oversimplifies an issue when the policy itself will do a world of good.
There are two ways to read the tweet.
One, Sanders thinks that worse outcomes by race/gender is purely a matter of access, in which case he's sorely misinformed.
Two, Sanders is proposing that M4A will also reform healthcare provider education, which is picking a very ugly fight with doctors and putting them further against UHC.
I think Sanders thinks getting profit motives out of healthcare will help a population that is severely underprivileged on average get better health care results.
Basic intersectionality really.
Except that he's not saying "we'll get better results" - he's saying "we'll close the gap." The problem is that the gap isn't just about access, but is just as much about institutional racism and sexism in healthcare. Removing profit motives won't fix that, and the communities impacted know this.
It brings to mind Bernies other economic rhetoric that feels "rising tides lift all boats" that generally tends to leave minorities behind.
Probably not fair to criticize Sanders for sounding vaguely like bullshit Reagan rhetoric. Literally every politician claims they'll help the poor
Actually, no, it's completely fair (IMO) when there's another candidate who does lay out her plans in detail. Meanwhile, Sanders is still doing his "2. ???, 3, Prosperity" thing.
Actually, no, it's completely fair (IMO) when there's another candidate who does lay out her plans in detail. Meanwhile, Sanders is still doing his "2. ???, 3, Prosperity" thing.
Are you saying Sanders hasnt laid out an actual health care plan?
Actually, no, it's completely fair (IMO) when there's another candidate who does lay out her plans in detail. Meanwhile, Sanders is still doing his "2. ???, 3, Prosperity" thing.
Are you saying Sanders hasnt laid out an actual health care plan?
I'm saying it's vague and tenuously connected to reality.
Man doesn't have plans, he has ideas. Great ideas! Bold, inspiring ideas! If only that was all it took.
Actually, no, it's completely fair (IMO) when there's another candidate who does lay out her plans in detail. Meanwhile, Sanders is still doing his "2. ???, 3, Prosperity" thing.
Are you saying Sanders hasnt laid out an actual health care plan?
I'm saying it's vague and tenuously connected to reality.
Im sorry, are we pretending there's something wrong with that Sanders tweet?
It's literally promising something that M4A won't be able to deliver (at least not without major reform of healthcare providers and their education.)
I mean its a tweet, it seems dumb to complain it oversimplifies an issue when the policy itself will do a world of good.
There are two ways to read the tweet.
One, Sanders thinks that worse outcomes by race/gender is purely a matter of access, in which case he's sorely misinformed.
Two, Sanders is proposing that M4A will also reform healthcare provider education, which is picking a very ugly fight with doctors and putting them further against UHC.
I think Sanders thinks getting profit motives out of healthcare will help a population that is severely underprivileged on average get better health care results.
Basic intersectionality really.
Except that he's not saying "we'll get better results" - he's saying "we'll close the gap." The problem is that the gap isn't just about access, but is just as much about institutional racism and sexism in healthcare. Removing profit motives won't fix that, and the communities impacted know this.
It brings to mind Bernies other economic rhetoric that feels "rising tides lift all boats" that generally tends to leave minorities behind.
Probably not fair to criticize Sanders for sounding vaguely like bullshit Reagan rhetoric. Literally every politician claims they'll help the poor
One of the criticisms of Sanders when he ran in 2016 was that he often too focused on economics being the solution to problems, even ones like racism. This is a sign that he still thinks that way.
You might agree with him, but for a lot of people it was an issue.
Im sorry, are we pretending there's something wrong with that Sanders tweet?
It's literally promising something that M4A won't be able to deliver (at least not without major reform of healthcare providers and their education.)
I mean its a tweet, it seems dumb to complain it oversimplifies an issue when the policy itself will do a world of good.
There are two ways to read the tweet.
One, Sanders thinks that worse outcomes by race/gender is purely a matter of access, in which case he's sorely misinformed.
Two, Sanders is proposing that M4A will also reform healthcare provider education, which is picking a very ugly fight with doctors and putting them further against UHC.
I think Sanders thinks getting profit motives out of healthcare will help a population that is severely underprivileged on average get better health care results.
Basic intersectionality really.
Except that he's not saying "we'll get better results" - he's saying "we'll close the gap." The problem is that the gap isn't just about access, but is just as much about institutional racism and sexism in healthcare. Removing profit motives won't fix that, and the communities impacted know this.
It brings to mind Bernies other economic rhetoric that feels "rising tides lift all boats" that generally tends to leave minorities behind.
Probably not fair to criticize Sanders for sounding vaguely like bullshit Reagan rhetoric. Literally every politician claims they'll help the poor
One of the criticisms of Sanders when he ran in 2016 was that he often too focused on economics being the solution to problems, even ones like racism. This is a sign that he still thinks that way.
You might agree with him, but for a lot of people it was an issue.
Sure, Im aware if the criticism, but it also seems fairly obvious to me that a lot of people forget all about intersectionality as soon as it applies to left wing policy prescriptions
Like you guys say he doesnt have plans but there are actual m4a bills you know right?
+5
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
It’s tremendously sexist that Biden doesn’t get dinged in the media the way Hillary did for being just as ambitious, arrogant and presumptive
“I’m worried people won’t forgive my obvious weaknesses, why won’t they just give me the fucking job already” is the vibe I get from him constantly; his first debate closing was basically “why is anybody even on stage with me right now, I’m the fucking guy,” an anger and resentment at not just being easily given what he seems to believe is his right
It’s extremely obnoxious, not to mention white/male privilege-y
Posts
Except that's not true? Another candidate will typically respond to the first candidate's answer, and then the first will counter again. There's a back and forth between at least two candidates after each question.
It's, like, the one thing that's actually being done at least half-decently
Well what do you want him to do spend all winter TIED TO THIS FUCKING COUCH!?
pleasepaypreacher.net
Ok Joe there is a simple solution to this, quit.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Black women often claim their health concerns in pregnancy are not taken seriously, leading to preventable complications. Universal healthcare will do nothing for that. That's purely an internal attitude problem that doctors need to work on in themselves, hopefully with medical schools including some training on the subject.
It's literally promising something that M4A won't be able to deliver (at least not without major reform of healthcare providers and their education.)
Wrong, no. Insufficient, yes.
The disparity in maternal death rates is there regardless of class. So the reason for it being higher among black women isn't that they're less likely to be covered (a problem M4A solves) it's that there is a racist belief ingrained in the health care industry that we have to address as a separate matter.
EDIT: Prominent example, Serena Williams almost died giving birth because her doctors didn't believe what she was telling them about what she was feeling in her body.
I mean its a tweet, it seems dumb to complain it oversimplifies an issue when the policy itself will do a world of good.
Yeah her plan seemed to basically be no child left behind, but for hospitals.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/elizabeth-warren-black-maternal-mortality_n_5cc0e93fe4b0ad77ff7f717b
It is good that this appears to be an issue that lots of them are attempting to address.
https://www.vox.com/2019/6/26/18691611/2020-democrats-maternal-mortality-medicaid
There are two ways to read the tweet.
One, Sanders thinks that worse outcomes by race/gender is purely a matter of access, in which case he's sorely misinformed.
Two, Sanders is proposing that M4A will also reform healthcare provider education, which is picking a very ugly fight with doctors and putting them further against UHC.
I think Sanders thinks getting profit motives out of healthcare will help a population that is severely underprivileged on average get better health care results.
Basic intersectionality really.
I think, if I understand it, it's adding new money and then taking away the new money if improvements aren't made, which is a better idea than NCLB. Which was designed to close urban schools and replace them with charters.
Thats basically what NCLB was, even if the new funding never materialized.
Yeah I think Harris's implicit bias training bill is better, especially because its very achievable. Its not going to "fix racism" but its hopefully something that can achieve some progress in that area.
One of the downsides of Warren's strategy that I don't want to ding her too much on is the detail she includes in her plans means its easier to see the problems with them. I think not putting out detailed plans is itself a major problem though. So a plan like this which seems like a not-great idea that is attempting to address a real concern, I try not to penalize her too much.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
That being said I think Bernie is too old.
Unfortunately I don't think Stacey Abrams brings enough to the table for a VP slot.
The ideal VP is going to help you win Florida or Pennsylvania. Having Bidden on the ticket will help with Pennsylvania. If he wins the primary then they should look for someone to help win Florida.
If we win Pennsylvania and Florida. We win the presidential election.
I think her big plus would be to increase credibility/enthusism with black voters. How much the decline in black turn out in Milwaukee, Detroit and Philly was due to not having Obama and how much was voter suppression is an open question, but it was certainly enough to swing the outcome.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
I would agree here, she could help strengthen a ticket with someone like Warren who polls well with pretty much every subgroup within the Democratic Party except for African Americans.
Okay, hear me out.
What if we close the hospitals and replace them with charters.
I think it would also make the whole thing more fun. Both Warren and Abrams are nice people, tough but funny and clever. I think they'd have great chemistry. I'd rather watch them than Biden having a dick-measuring contest with Trump.
I've possibly got some female voter bias here. Male voters would probably hate the combo.
Joe, deep down, I think you care about this country and want to help.
The best way you can do that at this point is drop out and stump for the party as a whole.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Okay, points for honesty.
"... but I'm not going to stop trying to get the job I can't do."
Aaaaand sympathy gone.
Except that he's not saying "we'll get better results" - he's saying "we'll close the gap." The problem is that the gap isn't just about access, but is just as much about institutional racism and sexism in healthcare. Removing profit motives won't fix that, and the communities impacted know this.
It brings to mind Bernies other economic rhetoric that feels "rising tides lift all boats" that generally tends to leave minorities behind.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Probably not fair to criticize Sanders for sounding vaguely like bullshit Reagan rhetoric. Literally every politician claims they'll help the poor
The disconnect.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Are you saying Sanders hasnt laid out an actual health care plan?
I'm saying it's vague and tenuously connected to reality.
Man doesn't have plans, he has ideas. Great ideas! Bold, inspiring ideas! If only that was all it took.
Agree to disagree I suppose.
One of the criticisms of Sanders when he ran in 2016 was that he often too focused on economics being the solution to problems, even ones like racism. This is a sign that he still thinks that way.
You might agree with him, but for a lot of people it was an issue.
Sure, Im aware if the criticism, but it also seems fairly obvious to me that a lot of people forget all about intersectionality as soon as it applies to left wing policy prescriptions
“I’m worried people won’t forgive my obvious weaknesses, why won’t they just give me the fucking job already” is the vibe I get from him constantly; his first debate closing was basically “why is anybody even on stage with me right now, I’m the fucking guy,” an anger and resentment at not just being easily given what he seems to believe is his right
It’s extremely obnoxious, not to mention white/male privilege-y