2020 Democratic Primary Thread: Focus on House & Senate races

[88m3]

Did Bernie ever release his medical records or his taxes?

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

If Bernie explained in detail exactly how his plan would work, Republicans (and half the Democrats) would immediately get to work changing everything they could to stop Bernie from making those exact moves.

You don't tell your opponent what you're going to do.

Warren had to spew out all this shyt because

A. "she's got detailed plans!"

and

B. she doesn't really intend to threaten the status quo and they know that

 

[88m3]

If Bernie explained in detail exactly how his plan would work, Republicans (and half the Democrats) would immediately get to work changing everything they could to stop Bernie from making those exact moves.

You don't tell your opponent what you're going to do.

Warren had to spew out all this shyt because

A. "she's got detailed plans!"

and

B. she doesn't really intend to threaten the status quo and they know that

Has Bernie released his health records after his heart attack yet?

 

[88m3]

Elizabeth Warren updates housing plan with focus on renters

Warren is such a worker

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

Has Bernie released his health records after his heart attack yet?

FDR was in a wheelchair

 

[88m3]

FDR was in a wheelchair

Don't need to go all ableist, Bernie Bro. I'll take that as a no then. One would think transparency would be expected after having to deal with Trump. Guess not.

 

[dtownreppin214]

Need Steyer dropping his millions in the same fashion, instead of buying polls.

And those do-nothing clowns in Hollywood too.

 

[FAH1223]

@Atlrocafella where’s Hawkset at?

 

[wire28]

all this nonsense stops in the South. Feelings will be hurt, dreams will be bursted, but we tried to tell ya

#BidenBoyz2020

thank God im still good with #BidenBoyz and i can walk in their hood with my chain out the south really bout to run things

 

[King Kreole]

Yes, a detailed financing plan is completely superfluous at this stage. Was the wealth tax suggestion enough for you to say "this student loan forgiveness plan can work" or did you need a detailed breakdown? She had to do this because she needed to justify why she was refusing to acknowledge a middle class tax increase. Since Bernie hasn't handcuffed himself to convincing Americans that their won't be any tax increase, he has a multitude of options and according to YouGov polling, the difference in feelings about the funding mechanism doesn't even break the margin for error.

Warren’s Head Tax Is Not More Popular Than A Payroll Tax

So to be clear, this was an unnecessary step except that she needed cover next time debates roll around. It's good political strategy, not great or necessary policy strategy at this stage (and I'll repeat for a clear good faith approach on the issue check out Bruenig's work).

Whether it's superfluous or not depends on your political approach. Bernie obviously wasn't planning on Liz coming out with a financing plan, and he doesn't want to get into details. That's fine, that's his strategy. He doesn't really do details. Liz's strategy is the opposite. They've each made their beds, and will be rewarded or punished by the electorate because of it.

And Breunig lost every shred of credibility he had on this issue. He is so far from a good faith approach it's pathetic. Dude turned a bunch of rose emoji leftists into Heritage foundation conservatives with one dumbass article. Pretty impressive.

We both know the difference between introducing a bill and getting a bill passed week one. You're too smart to misrepresent Bernie's promise like that. Was it a shot at Warren? Yes, her single payer bill won't be introduced until three years into her term on her proposed timeline. Did he promise M4A passage in week one? Of course not. Week one is when the fight to get it passed starts is what he's saying, not in year three right after a bunch of legislators just won elections and don't have to sweat out pressure from constituents to pass the president's key legislative goal.

Then what the fukk is the point of introducing the bill in week one when you know it will inevitably go down in flames? This is just like when McConnell put up that stunt vote for GND. Bernie's not doing this to advance health care, he's doing it to score cheap points against Elizabeth Warren. Her plan is to start the fight for single-payer universal healthcare in week one by taking realistic and meaningful actions to immediately expand healthcare to millions. I don't know what fight Bernie is waging by pulling a doomed stunt vote. Liz is straining credulity if she believes full M4A can get passed by her third year. Bernie and his supporters who believe he will get it passed earlier are out to fukking lunch. Liz is basically admitting this fact and has a backup plan to get millions onto healthcare in the meantime. I don't know what Bernie's plan for reality is. Saying you're going to primary Joe Manchin, who isn't up for reelection until 2024, by going to West Virginia, a state you will most likely lose badly in the Presidential election, and yell at him until he gives up is insulting to the millions of people who will die unnecessarily because you backed yourself into drawing idiotic distinctions with Elizabeth Warren in the 2020 Democratic primary. I believe Bernie is smarter and more compassionate than what his supporters are goading him into doing, so I trust that in reality he would just do exactly the same thing Liz would.

There's a baked in assumption here that I don't particularly agree with. Whether you go with M4A or a Public Option, the Republicans and donor push back will likely be just as bad. That means you'll need a heavy amount of pressure to pass even a Public Option. Setting that up as the first benchmark just takes it off the table as the compromise position for the Manchins, Sinemas and Blue Dogs in the race. Even getting a simple majority via Budget Reconciliation is not going to be a walk in the park unless we get a really good election result. And at the point where a first hundred days Public Option is feasible, I think the path for M4A is likely a lot clearer as well.

Republicans and donors will push back against both M4A and a public option, but the latter is a much more defensible proposition for the centrists and squishes. The vast majority of Democrats were ready to pass it back in 2009, it was Lieberman who killed it. Sinema and Manchin have already come out and said they're open to a public option but will absolutely kill full M4A. Passing a public option would be a dogfight for sure, but it's at the edge of what will be realistically passable. M4A is out. They are definitely not equally plausible.

Hang on here too. Liz's transition plan gets us to a Public Option. The M4A next step would have the face the same legislative challenges that Bernie's would. Now if you're assuming that the Public Option will be so successful that passing M4A next will be easy...Congratulations, you've endorsed Pete Buttigeig's Medicare for all who want it stance. That's not a bad thing, but let's call it what it is and personally, I don't think it works out that way.

You've now drawn a line in the sand for the Republicans at that Public Option. You've just spent however much time fighting to get it passed and you had to use legislative trickery to get it through (this is the optics, not how I view it personally). Now you are pressing an even bigger policy movement and the plan is to do it within a couple of years of that last major fight over legislation.

The reality is that even if you view a Public Option as the only feasible option to pass, you'd actually give yourself better leverage to get that passed quickly by starting the fight at M4A. It's a simple negotiation tactic and you'd also begin to introduce arguments in the affirmative for M4A out the gate instead of waiting while you pass a Public Option before going, "by the way, we know we just passed this one...but here's an even better one." You even acknowledged this in the past and in this thread responding to Harry Reid's belief that Warren would eventually pivot to a Public Option...

Pete's former position of M4A-who-want-it or whatever as a glide path to full M4A is defensible. His current anti-M4A position is not. You have never seen Liz talk down on the principles of M4A or the fact that it needs to be passed. Pete has been out here using Republican talking points to harm the M4A movement.

The year 3 M4A push under Liz's plan would not be an even bigger policy movement. Showing the country that the government can be trusted to roll out and implement genuine, high-quality healthcare via a public option would both suffocate the political power of the insurance/anti-M4A forces and weaken them for the final year 3 blow, as well as reduce the size and scope of this year 3 final push.

Ultimately, this whole discussion depends on whether you think the M4A movement is currently strong enough for Bernie's bill to be passed into law. Liz doesn't believe so, and her plan is to build that credibility around public healthcare while giving the M4A squishes a way to support getting to the end goal without having to buy the whole thing right now. Bernie's apparently does believe so, and his plan is to pull everyone's cards right now.

I 100% agree with this post. If Bernie's hands are tied, he will push through whatever the best legislation is that he can get passed. The criticism of Warren here is that she's using poor strategy by showing her hand. And even by your old standards, that isn't a necessary evil.

Fantastic. My point still stands. In order to pull this off, Liz cannot divorce herself from M4A like Biden and Pete have. She needs that as the end goal to walk the tightrope. She very easily could have just come out and said "fukk all this M4A stuff, my plan is a public option" but that would broken the coalition she needs. She is still fully committed to M4A in 4 years like Bernie. She just gave it a pressure release valve to acquire the necessary buy-in in this political environment, which is definitely riskier from the standpoint of structural integrity of full M4A. But it looks like she's more optimistic that the more people have high-quality government healthcare, the easier it will be to expand it. Bernie is apparently pessimistic about this and believes that any non-M4A healthcare expansion will inevitably cause Republicans to gain power.

 

[Atlrocafella]

thank God im still good with #BidenBoyz and i can walk in their hood with my chain out the south really bout to run things

you good in our hood breh LOL, the rest of these fools might just catch one for all the disrespect. We ain’t forget

 

[JoogJoint]

This fukknut has zero purchase within the black communinty. He cannot survive the south. Lord as my witness he will not win. He cannot win. Hold strong.

Spoiler

I'm not too worried because he will get destroyed by us Black Southerners. We're not f_cking with Pete like that and his sexuality doesn't have anything to do with, for White folks down here his sexuality DOES have something to do with it.

He won't survive the South. Mark my words.

 

[JoogJoint]

South Carolina's choices should be: Williamson, Castro, or Sanders. But everything suggests it'll be Biden. The CRM and Gen X era aren't doing us any favors.

I'm going for Williamson, but these older Black folks don't hear us younger people who are still here.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Yes, a detailed financing plan is completely superfluous at this stage. Was the wealth tax suggestion enough for you to say "this student loan forgiveness plan can work" or did you need a detailed breakdown? She had to do this because she needed to justify why she was refusing to acknowledge a middle class tax increase. Since Bernie hasn't handcuffed himself to convincing Americans that their won't be any tax increase, he has a multitude of options and according to YouGov polling, the difference in feelings about the funding mechanism doesn't even break the margin for error.

Warren’s Head Tax Is Not More Popular Than A Payroll Tax

So to be clear, this was an unnecessary step except that she needed cover next time debates roll around. It's good political strategy, not great or necessary policy strategy at this stage (and I'll repeat for a clear good faith approach on the issue check out Bruenig's work).




We both know the difference between introducing a bill and getting a bill passed week one. You're too smart to misrepresent Bernie's promise like that. Was it a shot at Warren? Yes, her single payer bill won't be introduced until three years into her term on her proposed timeline. Did he promise M4A passage in week one? Of course not. Week one is when the fight to get it passed starts is what he's saying, not in year three right after a bunch of legislators just won elections and don't have to sweat out pressure from constituents to pass the president's key legislative goal.



There's a baked in assumption here that I don't particularly agree with. Whether you go with M4A or a Public Option, the Republicans and donor push back will likely be just as bad. That means you'll need a heavy amount of pressure to pass even a Public Option. Setting that up as the first benchmark just takes it off the table as the compromise position for the Manchins, Sinemas and Blue Dogs in the race. Even getting a simple majority via Budget Reconciliation is not going to be a walk in the park unless we get a really good election result. And at the point where a first hundred days Public Option is feasible, I think the path for M4A is likely a lot clearer as well.




Hang on here too. Liz's transition plan gets us to a Public Option. The M4A next step would have the face the same legislative challenges that Bernie's would. Now if you're assuming that the Public Option will be so successful that passing M4A next will be easy...Congratulations, you've endorsed Pete Buttigeig's Medicare for all who want it stance. That's not a bad thing, but let's call it what it is and personally, I don't think it works out that way.

You've now drawn a line in the sand for the Republicans at that Public Option. You've just spent however much time fighting to get it passed and you had to use legislative trickery to get it through (this is the optics, not how I view it personally). Now you are pressing an even bigger policy movement and the plan is to do it within a couple of years of that last major fight over legislation.

The reality is that even if you view a Public Option as the only feasible option to pass, you'd actually give yourself better leverage to get that passed quickly by starting the fight at M4A. It's a simple negotiation tactic and you'd also begin to introduce arguments in the affirmative for M4A out the gate instead of waiting while you pass a Public Option before going, "by the way, we know we just passed this one...but here's an even better one." You even acknowledged this in the past and in this thread responding to Harry Reid's belief that Warren would eventually pivot to a Public Option...



I 100% agree with this post. If Bernie's hands are tied, he will push through whatever the best legislation is that he can get passed. The criticism of Warren here is that she's using poor strategy by showing her hand. And even by your old standards, that isn't a necessary evil.

Prolific posting.

 

[Atlrocafella]

I'm not too worried because he will get destroyed by us Black Southerners. We're not f_cking with Pete like that and his sexuality doesn't have anything to do with, for White folks down here his sexuality DOES have something to do with it.

He won't survive the South. Mark my words.

breh I live in the south. His sexuality is still of concern to the average black church goer. And that’s ALOT of them.