Official Bernie Sanders HQ: Not Me, Us!

[wtfyomom]

I would vote for dem nom even if its biden and I think he CAN win but my issue is what are we winning? just prolonging an eventual fascist takeover, the next repub will take trumps playbook but polish it and we are fukked

 

[AnonymityX1000]

I would vote for dem nom even if its biden and I think he CAN win but my issue is what are we winning? just prolonging an eventual fascist takeover, the next repub will take trumps playbook but polish it and we are fukked

I will say to counter that a member of The Squad can do the same with Bernie's platform. We fighting on two fronts right now changing the Dem party and trying to beat Republicans.

 

[wtfyomom]

I will say to counter that a member of The Squad can do the same with Bernie's platform. We fighting on two fronts right now changing the Dem party and trying to beat Republicans.

i hope so. i think what worries me is right populism is still going to be backed by the establishment even if its not their preference because it still aligns with their agenda. left populism is the total opposite and will be challenged and attempted to be squashed at every turn. I think AOC currently is the best chance but i also am the least certain about her, though campaigning for bernie has done A LOT to quell my concerns with her. I think ilhan and rashida still will have that Muslim stigma which I hope we will get over soon as a country but I have my doubts obviously

 

[AnonymityX1000]

i hope so. i think what worries me is right populism is still going to be backed by the establishment even if its not their preference because it still aligns with their agenda. left populism is the total opposite and will be challenged and attempted to be squashed at every turn. I think AOC currently is the best chance but i also am the least certain about her, though campaigning for bernie has done A LOT to quell my concerns with her. I think ilhan and rashida still will have that Muslim stigma which I hope we will get over soon as a country but I have my doubts obviously

Totally agree with your breakdown of the squad. Tlaib is my fav but AOC got the star power, I think she got caught up in the fame for a hot minute but she back. I think the dishonest attacks from Establishment Dems against her and Omar woke her up.

 

[FAH1223]

Depends how many young people vote. If they vote in historic numbers Bernie can win.

That's our only hope unfortunately. I mean if Biden wins the nomination I will vote for him and hope he beats Trump but I don't have a lot of faith in his chances.

One thing I just realized. If you guys recall, 4 years ago at this time, there were a lot of polls in the early states conducted.

Right now, its been 40 days plus since polls in all of the early states. Polls that are deemed qualifying for the debates.

Maybe... just maybe, things have changed especially with Bernie being on the airwaves in all of those states?

 

[Secure Da Bag]

I'm on mobile but Bernie should really hammer this point home.

Yahoo is now part of Verizon Media

Lobbyists squeeze even more new tax breaks from 2017 trump tax law.

 

[Strapped]

I'm on mobile but Bernie should really hammer this point home.

Yahoo is now part of Verizon Media

Lobbyists squeeze even more new tax breaks from 2017 trump tax law.

Give me term & age limits to drain the swamp

 

[afterlife2009]

My biggest donation. I believe I'm at $250 total since he announced

Spoiler

 

[goatmane]

 

[storyteller]

huh? What I'm saying is that there are rules to what can be passed through reconciliation and what can't, and Bernie's full M4A bill cannot. It's almost as if Warren designed her plan to remove those aspects that can't be passed and kept in the ones that can, so she can expand M4A healthcare as much as possible, knowing that the full thing can't be passed immediately.

It doesn't matter what his year one transition is, if the bill contains provisions that would eradicate private health insurance it cannot be passed with 50 votes...unless you get rid of the filibuster, which Liz supports but Bernie has steadfastly refused to support for some reason. I'm sure Bernie could get healthcare expansion implemented if he removed certain ineligible provisions from his bill...aka the Liz Warren plan

Let me try to explain this again...

Bernie attempts to pass everything we want. If that doesn't work THEN he takes a more piecemeal approach, giving concessions in exchange to get more of the bill implemented. That way, everything is on the table and the only aspects that get taken off are the ones that he's absolutely forced to take off. This is how you negotiate in any circumstance and it's the obvious approach you would take with trying to pass transformative legislation. Meet with lawmakers, put everything on the table and use those meetings to both whip votes and figure out what changes have to be made to get enough votes.

What you're advocating for is defeatist. Put only some provisions on the table and hope you can pass them without rabid opposition. Except that this means you may take provisions off the table that you could have gotten accepted and also you'd be crazy to think that rabid opposition wouldn't still arise from insurance companies.

Could both approaches end up with the exact same provisions getting through? Sure, but you're speculating and pushing it off as fact. Here's my guess for how Warren's plan plays out, she still has to make concessions and her already worse bill gets weakened further...meanwhile Bernie's starting point at a more extreme point allows for him to make some concessions while still passing a superior bill because he had more on the table to begin with and thus the compromises start with more options to trade off on. He may still be forced to only work within tight constraints, but he's not taking shyt off the table just to be like "well this is the only part that can pass"...if we get there, then we get there. We don't give up before trying though.

Simply put: Bernie tries for more and sets himself up to fall back toward Warren's M4A-Lite plan. Whereas Warren starts at M4A-Lite and if she has to fall back, it just gets worse. Why wouldn't you start bolder knowing that you can fall back to safer plays?

 

[AnonymityX1000]

Let me try to explain this again...

Bernie attempts to pass everything we want. If that doesn't work THEN he takes a more piecemeal approach, giving concessions in exchange to get more of the bill implemented. That way, everything is on the table and the only aspects that get taken off are the ones that he's absolutely forced to take off. This is how you negotiate in any circumstance and it's the obvious approach you would take with trying to pass transformative legislation. Meet with lawmakers, put everything on the table and use those meetings to both whip votes and figure out what changes have to be made to get enough votes.

What you're advocating for is defeatist. Put only some provisions on the table and hope you can pass them without rabid opposition. Except that this means you may take provisions off the table that you could have gotten accepted and also you'd be crazy to think that rabid opposition wouldn't still arise from insurance companies.

Could both approaches end up with the exact same provisions getting through? Sure, but you're speculating and pushing it off as fact. Here's my guess for how Warren's plan plays out, she still has to make concessions and her already worse bill gets weakened further...meanwhile Bernie's starting point at a more extreme point allows for him to make some concessions while still passing a superior bill because he had more on the table to begin with and thus the compromises start with more options to trade off on. He may still be forced to only work within tight constraints, but he's not taking shyt off the table just to be like "well this is the only part that can pass"...if we get there, then we get there. We don't give up before trying though.

Simply put: Bernie tries for more and sets himself up to fall back toward Warren's M4A-Lite plan. Whereas Warren starts at M4A-Lite and if she has to fall back, it just gets worse. Why wouldn't you start bolder knowing that you can fall back to safer plays?

It is simple negotiation strategy, it isn't even complicated. Don't point out the undesirable parts of your argument, make your opponent do it.

 

[King Kreole]

Let me try to explain this again...

Bernie attempts to pass everything we want. If that doesn't work THEN he takes a more piecemeal approach, giving concessions in exchange to get more of the bill implemented. That way, everything is on the table and the only aspects that get taken off are the ones that he's absolutely forced to take off. This is how you negotiate in any circumstance and it's the obvious approach you would take with trying to pass transformative legislation. Meet with lawmakers, put everything on the table and use those meetings to both whip votes and figure out what changes have to be made to get enough votes.

What you're advocating for is defeatist. Put only some provisions on the table and hope you can pass them without rabid opposition. Except that this means you may take provisions off the table that you could have gotten accepted and also you'd be crazy to think that rabid opposition wouldn't still arise from insurance companies.

Could both approaches end up with the exact same provisions getting through? Sure, but you're speculating and pushing it off as fact. Here's my guess for how Warren's plan plays out, she still has to make concessions and her already worse bill gets weakened further...meanwhile Bernie's starting point at a more extreme point allows for him to make some concessions while still passing a superior bill because he had more on the table to begin with and thus the compromises start with more options to trade off on. He may still be forced to only work within tight constraints, but he's not taking shyt off the table just to be like "well this is the only part that can pass"...if we get there, then we get there. We don't give up before trying though.

Simply put: Bernie tries for more and sets himself up to fall back toward Warren's M4A-Lite plan. Whereas Warren starts at M4A-Lite and if she has to fall back, it just gets worse. Why wouldn't you start bolder knowing that you can fall back to safer plays?

1. Our discussion so far has been about whether or not Bernie is talking shyt when he says he'll pass his M4A bill through reconciliation. None of this negates the fact that yes, he will have to get 60 votes to pass his M4A bill.

2. I think the negotiating approach you're outlining makes sense in theory, but I don't think that's how it will work in practice. Political negotiations aren't math where you add 1 and subtract 1. Joe Manchin's optimal position isn't to eradicate healthcare. He voted no on repealing Obamacare and is already on paper as supporting a public option expansion. He just doesn't believe in M4A, so what is Bernie going to do in a negotiation to move him to accepting M4A? We know what Bernie has been saying he would do, which is threatening to hold rallies in WV and support a primary of Manchin...who isn't up for reelection until 4 years after this negotiation would be taking place. It's a frankly ridiculous negotiating strategy. But let's say Bernie is smarter than he's been acting and he begins negotiating in earnest. He presents his full M4A bill and Manchin says no. Bernie asks what has to be removed to get him to support it, and Manchin says to remove the private insurance ban. This is the lynchpin of Bernie's full M4A plan, and its the major difference between his plan and Warren's plan. It's the main thing standing between Manchin's stated position and Bernie's stated position. There is no negotiation taking place before a private insurance ban is taken off the table because Manchin holds all the cards. He's the key vote on this, not Bernie. He's the Lieberman to Bernie's Obama. Basically what you're arguing is that Bernie will have the pleasure of being told "No." to his face before starting real negotiations on an actual viable plan...which is where Warren is already at. And oh yeah, keeping a private insurance ban in the M4A bill means that Bernie isn't even having this discussion with Manchin, he's having it with McConnell . Bernie's gonna have to get rid of that provision from the jump if he even wants to begin negotiating with Manchin. Warren's transition plan is her being real and not assuming her constituency are low-info idiots.

Anyway, the point is that under a Warren or Sanders administration, there would be a sufficient political mandate to expand healthcare. Every democrat is on record as supporting advancing the ball from Obamacare. What will determine who is able to extract the best deal isn't the starting position, it'll be who is the better negotiator and politician. Warren has already been doing the work of ingratiating herself to these key votes ("spirited defense of Joe Manchin") which is a better strategy for getting their support than spitting in their face by telling them you'll primary them. Bolder does not always equal smarter.

 

[FAH1223]

 

[Heelish]

Copped 3 tees.

Protest Unisex Tee
For me (reminds me of this old school Supreme tee I used to have - “Illegal Business Controls America”)

Tio Bernie Tee
For my wife

"Bern Bright" Unisex Youth Tee by Isaiah Maldonado – Bernie Sanders Campaign Store
For my daughter

 

[FAH1223]