Bullish on Bernie: The Bernie Sanders 2016 Thread II

Trakar said:
I'm not into identity politics, but very much into public policy politics. I vote for policies not against or for individuals.

Show me a candidate that supports strong climate change regulation to include carbon taxes, single-payer healthcare, strict corporate oversight and regulation and promotes evidence-based, scientifically sound, public policy in general and I will support their candidacy whole-heartedly.
Click to expand...

Good luck on that, it's a public policy you'll never get in the US because your government works by compromise and agreement, and 50% of the US detest these ideas with avengeance.
 
Sanders protesters book campgrounds for Democrat convention

Campgrounds outside Philadelphia are getting booked up by Sanders supporters planning to protest during this month’s Democratic National Convention.

Thirty miles south of the city, all 200 short-term camp sites at the Four Seasons in Pilesgrove, New Jersey, have been booked during the week of the DNC.

Campground owner Cheryl Robinson says the vast majority have been booked by Sanders backers.

Tens of thousands of Sanders supporters are expecting to take part in rallies and demonstrations while the Democrats are in Philadelphia from July 25-28.

Read more:
http://fox17online.com/2016/07/04/sanders-protesters-book-campgrounds-for-democrat-convention/ (July 4, 2016)
Click to expand...


Occupy DNC Convention membership has risen to 30,800.

#OccupyDNC
#FeelTheBern
#BernieOrBust
 
Last edited:
Slings and Arrows said:
Occupy DNC Convention membership has risen to 30,800.

#OccupyDNC
#FeelTheBern
#BernieOrBust
Click to expand...

All 200 sites? My god, they're going to be crowded in those tents, what with the millions that Dr. Crazy is expecting. Wanna bet the site owner is a Bernie fan? How many campsites in the USA are not fully booked in July?

And they've picked up 5000 supporters in the past month alone. I'm convinced. A petition to float Trump out to sea on an iceberg would get more than that in a day. From "activist" campaigns on FB in the past, you can count on less than 1% of the sign-ups to actually show up. Anyone remember the hundreds of thousands that were going to be at Ground Zero for the tenth anniversary of 9/11? A hundred showed up.
 
Trakar said:
Show me a candidate that supports strong climate change regulation to include carbon taxes, single-payer healthcare, strict corporate oversight and regulation and promotes evidence-based, scientifically sound, public policy in general and I will support their candidacy whole-heartedly.
Click to expand...
As her actions indicate that she doesn't support or promote any of those things, she is not close enough to earn any support from me
Click to expand...
Here's a question for you...

If you really do believe in "evidence based policy", then why are you pushing for single-payer health care? Because the evidence shows that single-payer health care does not work!

I'm in Canada. Canada is probably the health care system which is closest to the "single-payer" model... yet when compared to other western nations we rank far behind countries that actually mix private and public funding. Granted, we do rank ahead of the U.S. in some measures (such as costs), but that's rather faint praise. And we rank far behind the U.S. in terms of waiting lists. We don't even have the cheapest health care in the world.

I'm not saying the U.S. health care system doesn't need improvement, but if the U.S. were to adopt a single payer model, they'd probably go from last place rankings to second last... not exactly a big step up. If the U.S. really wants to improve health care, giving both public and private options is the best way to go. Emulate countries that both control cost and give fast service.

Demanding a single-payer system is pretty much the opposite of "evidence-based" policy. Single-payer is based in dogma and unworkable promises. If I were in the U.S., Sanders' policy of single-user health care would be enough to make me not vote for him.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror
 
Mister Earl said:
Keep in mind that while Clinton may have had "advantage" in being better recognized, there were also drawbacks... being better known also meant that she would have been a bigger target for criticism by both Republicans and Sanders supporters.

On the other hand, the lack of media attention on Sanders wouldn't have been all bad... it allowed him to energize his base of supporters, but kept him largely free of potential criticism. He could be "Saint Sanders", making promises that his fans like but that make him un-popular to the general public. Had Sanders been a favorite to win and/or a front runner, you probably would have had more attacks by the republicans, more scrutiny by the media, and perhaps even a drop in support as people look at what he's promising.
Click to expand...
There's a couple of assumptions here I want to address. Free from criticism? He was criticized plenty during the debates.
Click to expand...
He may have been criticized during debates, but the attacks were far less than those directed at Clinton (who has had to deal not just with attacks during debates, but attacks from republicans, and attacks from Sanders supporters.)

The barbs they loosed didn't draw much blood because Bernie's pretty clean for a politician. He doesn't have near as many skeletons to haul out into the light.
Click to expand...
Actually Sanders has plenty of skeletons to drag into the light... Everything from his current policies (adding trillions in new government spending, a figure which will scare many), to his past history. (For example, the republicans could drag up his attendance at a political rally in central America where people were chanting "death to America". Or the fact that he had his honeymoon in Russia; The cold war may be over, but that doesn't mean that most people are accepting of communism. Heck, even calling himself a "socialist" would make him unpopular, since roughly 50% of people say they would not support a socialist regardless of the candidate.) With Obama, the right wing had to make up facts (secret muslim and all)... with Sanders, they wouldn't have to make up anything, and instead of claiming "its not true", his only defense would be "I don't really feel that way now".
And that last statement seems to say that you're assuming people support Sanders only because they're ignorant of his claims.
Click to expand...
I think different people are supporting Sanders for different reasons... some may be doing it because they examined his claims (and his history) and agree with them. Others may simply be supporting him because they "want change". Were Sanders the democratic nominee, he would have to appeal to both groups of people.
Got any evidence to support that assertion, or is that personal bias?
Click to expand...
Well, lets see... lets consider Sander's health care plan...

From: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...lectable_than_hillary_don_t_believe_them.html
Two months ago, an Associated Press-GfK poll asked Americans about Sanders’ proposal to replace “the private health insurance system … with a single government-run and taxpayer-funded plan”...A 39 percent plurality favored the idea. Then the poll asked people whether they’d still support the plan if it meant “your own taxes would increase.” Suddenly, the plurality disappeared: Only 28 percent still favored the plan; 39 percent opposed it.
 
There aren't any Bernie supporters here still thinking he can win, so you collect links to other sites so you can mock people who aren't even here? At what point does 'debate' morph into 'self-congratulatory masturbation'?

I would have thought the $hilltards should concentrate on attacking the Orange Menace now, but I guess beating a dead horse is more her style.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Good luck on that, it's a public policy you'll never get in the US because your government works by compromise and agreement, and 50% of the US detest these ideas with avengeance.
Click to expand...

Care to support that assertion?

A casual search seems to suggest otherwise:

Single-payer Health care-
Nearly 60% of Americans including more than 40% of Republicans and Republican leaning individuals - http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/16/m...o-replace-obamacare-with-single-payer-system/

Carbon Tax -
68% of all registered voters, 86% of Democrats, 66% of Independents, and 47% of Republicans - http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/politics-global-warming-spring-2016/2/

Corporate regulation -
Over nine in ten voters (91%) agree that it is important to regulate financial services and products to make sure they are fair for consumers,
i and four-fifths(79%) say Wall Street financial companies should be held accountable with tougher rules and enforcement for the practices that caused the financial crisis.
ii By nearly a 3:1 margin, voters want to see more, not less, oversight and regulation of financial companies.
iii Fewer than a quarter(23%) believe tough regulations on Wall Street will hurt the U.S.economy​
- http://www.responsiblelending.org/media-center/press-releases/publicmemo_afr_f3_070615.pdf

Sounds pretty much "mainstream" to me.
 
Segnosaur said:
Here's a question for you...

If you really do believe in "evidence based policy", then why are you pushing for single-payer health care? Because the evidence shows that single-payer health care does not work!
Click to expand...

We obviously have different takes on what constitutes compelling "evidence-based, scientifically sound, public policy."

That said, you should probably not list as supporting evidence a source that contradicts your assertions:

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror


"Evidence supports single payer" - Physicians For a National Health Program
...So, what is the actual evidence? According to the Commonwealth Fund’s 2014 report on 11 industrialized nations (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States), the United States ranked last on issues of access, efficiency, and equity. An interesting feature of this study is that it showed that even higher-income and insured Americans were often unable, as compared to those in other countries in similar positions, to get needed treatment. This may be due to the fact that even with insurance coverage, many Americans face high out-of-pocket costs...
Click to expand...

"The case for an improved Medicare for All" - http://www.pnhp.org/sites/default/files/case_for_medicare_for_all_2015.pdf

But the PNHP is not alone in such assessments and considerations, which is important as reproducibility of results and weight of supporting evidences is important to matters of whether or not evidence should be considered compelling.

"Research ethics and health care reform"
Yet for health care reform writ large — i.e., the basic payment system — there is no equipoise. Research from dozens of developed countries demonstrates convincingly that single-payer financing reduces costs, assures access, and improves outcomes. (2, 3).

To ignore this compelling evidence risks lives in the United States as we experiment with partial fixes to the multi-payer system...
Click to expand...
- http://science.sciencemag.org/content/348/6241/1325.2.full

Now if you want to discuss health policy, we can have that talk, but attacking me and then throwing out wild assertions that disagree with the references you offer to support them is not an auspicious start to that process.
 
Democrats are booing Bernie Sanders. But his movement is succeeding.

Politico reports that Bernie Sanders was booed by House Democrats in a private meeting today on Capitol Hill. Apparently they were irked with Sanders for withholding his endorsement of Clinton, and reacted badly after he said this: “The goal isn’t to win elections. The goal is to transform America.” One Dem even accused Sanders of “squandering” his movement.

But if Sanders is squandering his movement, it is odd that he continues to rack up meaningful victories in the battle to transform the Democratic agenda, if not the country.

Read more:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ernie-sanders-but-his-movement-is-succeeding/ (July 6, 2016)
Click to expand...


The House Democrats may live to regret their mistreatment of the well-respected Senator from Vermont. There is a growing group of unhappy individuals who are planning to do some booing themselves in a few weeks from now:

Occupy DNC Convention membership continues to rise, now reaching 31,127.

#OccupyDNC
#SeeYouInPhilly
#BernieOrBust
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom