• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Bernie Sanders town hall feat. Elizabeth Warren, Michael Moore

And NO democrat in the past half century has EVER won an election with views that far to the left. Never. Ever.
Click to expand...

Err...

FDRin1944 said:
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
Click to expand...
 
kellyb said:
I think they made a strategic mis-step by radically overplaying the whole "massive government takeover of healthcare!" thing.

Today, most support single payer.

:)
Click to expand...
Its really easy to say "I support single payer health care" when you have just a single statement with little or no contextual information. It allows people attach certain "best case" scenarios that they may prefer. Its a totally different story if you pose a question along the lines of "Do you want your taxes to go up to pay for health care?"

Something else to remember... from your reference, the support for single payer is actually fairly slim (52% for-48% against). More importantly, the majority of elderly residence actually rejected single payer. And on average older people tend to be more reliable voters.

So great... Sanders becomes the candidate and proposes his single payer system. All the 18 year olds are all excited about the possibility of single payer health care, but they forget to go vote, because young people are . Meanwhile all the seniors rush to the polls to vote republican because they don't want the government wasting their hard earned tax dollars on those young ones who should really be supporting themselves. Result: republican victory. Hurrah!
 
kellyb said:
I think they made a strategic mis-step by radically overplaying the whole "massive government takeover of healthcare!" thing.

Today, most support single payer.

:)
Click to expand...

No, they made a huge mis-step in blasting Obamacare for 7 years and then proving that not only did they have nothing to replace it, what they did come up with was going to be so much worse than Obamacare and that everything that Trump had promised as a candidate was a total lie. That is what pushed people in the direction of single payer.

and even there it's pretty much a 50-50 split.

You're trying to play games by looking at a poll that was taken after the Republican health care stuff up and thinking it would be the same prior to that event.
 
Its a totally different story if you pose a question along the lines of "Do you want your taxes to go up to pay for health care?"
Click to expand...

Of course. You could also ask "Do you want free healthcare if it means all puppies and kittens will be brutally murdered?" and that might get a different response, too.

All the 18 year olds are all excited about the possibility of single payer health care, but they forget to go vote, because young people are
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how many actual 18 year olds have enough life experience to get enthused about single payer, but with millennials and Gen Xers in general, give them something compelling to vote for and voter turnout goes up. See: "Hope and Change" ala 2008.
 
PhantomWolf said:
You're trying to play games by looking at a poll that was taken after the Republican health care stuff up and thinking it would be the same prior to that event.
Click to expand...

I'm not playing games. I'm referencing the available data.
 
kellyb said:
Fair enough. The "never ever evers" kind of blinded me to the precise 50 year limit, I guess. Heh.
Click to expand...
Well lets see:

From post 46:
- Provided a reference to an analysis (see the Mother Jones link in a previous post) that shows that NO democrat holding far-left views has won a general election in the past half century. None. Election success (at least on the democratic side) tends to go to the moderates. Those with far-left views tend to go down to defeat (Oh, but I'm sure somehow Bernie would have been different!)

From post 57:
Sanders is on the far left of the American political spectrum. And NO democrat in the past half century has EVER won an election with views that far to the left. Never. Ever. (But I'm sure THIS time it will be different.)

Gee... seems rather obvious to me that I was specifying a 50 year time frame.

By the way, I notice that you haven't really addressed the actual argument made... that an analysis showed that Democratic candidates who tend to favor far-left views go down to defeat more often than those that maintain moderate views.
 
What democrat has run in the general who's as far left as Sanders or FDR in the last 50 years?
 
kellyb said:
I'm not playing games. I'm referencing the available data.
Click to expand...

If you weren't playing games you would be referencing the data available before the 2016 election, not that near the end of 2017 after the Republicans showed that their own healthcare bills weren't worth the pot they pissed in.
 
PhantomWolf said:
If you weren't playing games you would be referencing the data available before the 2016 election, not that near the end of 2017 after the Republicans showed that their own healthcare bills weren't worth the pot they pissed in.
Click to expand...

I just googled the phrase to find a link to the most recent poll result.

Cherry picking old, no longer relevant data would be "playing games".
 
kellyb said:
I just googled the phrase to find a link to the most recent poll result.

Cherry picking old, no longer relevant data would be "playing games".
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Yes because using the data available during the election when talking about the election is "cherry picking"
 
kellyb said:
Of course. You could also ask "Do you want free healthcare if it means all puppies and kittens will be brutally murdered?" and that might get a different response, too.
Click to expand...
False comparison.

Suggesting that 'killing puppies' would change polling results is irrelevant because that would never be a part of any health care plan. However things like tax increases are VERY relevant, because the money for health care actually has to come from somewhere.

Not to mention any other details about the health care plan that people might ignore during a simple polling question but would affect people's ultimate vote.

I'm not sure how many actual 18 year olds have enough life experience to get enthused about single payer, but with millennials and Gen Xers in general, give them something compelling to vote for and voter turnout goes up. See: "Hope and Change" ala 2008.
Click to expand...
This smacks of the whole "we don't have any evidence but we will assume some magic appears that automatically changes voting patterns. All hail the wizard Bernie!" Hope you understand why some of us don't exactly find that argument compelling.

So, 2008... Hope and change. Participation rate among young (18-29) voters was ~50%. Participation rate for senior citizens: ~70%. So even with "hope and change", the chance to make a very historic selection for president, young voters STILL turned out at a lower level than senior citizens. But I'm sure with Bernie in charge it would be TOTALLY different. Because he's magic!

https://census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2014/demo/p20-573.pdf
 
A vast amount of focus on the previous election makes me wonder what that says about our hopes for the next one...

This is where the tapatalk signature that annoys people used to be
 
kellyb said:
What democrat has run in the general who's as far left as Sanders or FDR in the last 50 years?
Click to expand...
Nobody, according to the article I referenced. But it would seem rather foolish to assume that if you fail to elect a candidate that is very far left, that somehow if you select someone that is very VERY far left (like Sanders) that it will somehow change the results.

Many people don't like extremes. Its a pretty simple concept.
 
Delphic Oracle said:
A vast amount of focus on the previous election makes me wonder what that says about our hopes for the next one...
Click to expand...

Sometimes it's important to know where the last war went wrong before fighting the next one, and making knee jerk reaction changes might just put you in a worse losing position overall if you don't pay close attention to the things that led to the first failure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom