Obama Said He Would Speak Up To Stop Bernie Sanders Nomination: Report

2 weeks - 135 posts - Latest - RSS
OP: 1 Goods vs 1 No Goods
Thread: 326 Goods vs 265 No Goods

Sociology Job Market Rumors » Off Topic » Sport

Obama Said He Would Speak Up To Stop Bernie Sanders Nomination: Report

« Previous 123…7 Next »

Sociologist
6e94

TIL: Political party members tend to favor party-members over non-party members.
Bernie Bros have been acting brand new about this simple fact for years now. If you want to play stupid about it that's fine, by why should any of the rest of us get all breathless with you on this imaginary ride?

--
so dont try? hillary is that you?

Don't try what?

My comment is about Bernie supporters pretending to be surprised about members of a party wanting to be led by a member of their party.

WHY is that surprising or newsworthy to you?

My comments have nothing to do with policy or normative claims about which policies should be pushed.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 0 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
d2d3

Obama could have pushed for single payer. He didn�t.
Bailed out the banks and didn�t break them up after.
Continued Bush�s tax cuts.
Etc.
He�s a corporate lapdog who looks cool.
Yeah �he�s better than [fill in the blank with a P0S]� but that�s not good enough.
single payer would never have passed in '09, don't be absurd. i know you were still in high school at the time, but the political landscape on the left has changed significantly in the past ten years and what you think are relatively mainstream ideas are only recently coming into the mainstream

He didn’t even float the idea of single payer and then let insurance companies essentially co-write the ACA. It’s absolute bullcrap to imply that RomneyCare is progressive. Maybe if compared to doing the exact same thing as we were before.

“Hope.”

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 3 GOOD 4 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
d2d3

To put that differently, Obama did absolutely nothing to push that political landscape left. He hindered that movement, and still is today. Screw him.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 5 GOOD 8 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
a6e2

Obama's legacy is empty rhetoric and poor compromises, just look how easily his "signature" accomplishments unraveled in the Trump administration. If he had spent more time cultivating the support and political will of the coalition who voted for him twice by following through on bold proposals (single-payer, card check, immigration, marijuana legalization) rather than settling for incrementalism, he'd have been able to sustain/grow a legislative majority for much longer and therefore pass actually transformative legislation.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 9 GOOD 5 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
dd11

Show me a bernie bro who rolls their eyes at Obamacare cutting the % of uninsured Americans in half after we stagnated on that for over a half century, and I'll show you a dumb rich kid who has never spent a second of their life worrying about if they have health insurance or not.

The ease with which you dismiss things that aren't everything as if they're nothing shows how little skin the game you actually have.

There's not a single person I'm aware of on the left who doesn't support pushing farther on health care. Stop pretending otherwise.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 5 GOOD 2 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
ac6e

They didn’t have the votes in the senate to pass the public option bill which dems actually wanted. How could they have gone single payer if they couldn’t pass the public option?

Obama could have pushed for single payer. He didn?t.
Bailed out the banks and didn?t break them up after.
Continued Bush?s tax cuts.
Etc.
He?s a corporate lapdog who looks cool.
Yeah ?he?s better than [fill in the blank with a P0S]? but that?s not good enough.
single payer would never have passed in '09, don't be absurd. i know you were still in high school at the time, but the political landscape on the left has changed significantly in the past ten years and what you think are relatively mainstream ideas are only recently coming into the mainstream
He didn�t even float the idea of single payer and then let insurance companies essentially co-write the ACA. It�s absolute bullcrap to imply that RomneyCare is progressive. Maybe if compared to doing the exact same thing as we were before.
�Hope.�

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 5 GOOD 3 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
dd11

They didn't have the votes in the senate to pass the public option bill which dems actually wanted. How could they have gone single payer if they couldn't pass the public option?

Because Bernie Bro lives in a fantasy world and actually doesn't give a crap and this is all just purity tests for him.

Even Bernie is honest about not being able to pass his core proposals without the sustained pressure of a mass-organized social movement in favor of his policies, the likes of which we've never seen before.

Bernie Bros don't need to trouble themselves with those details though, so they just ignore them, and look down their noses at people for not having accomplished the Full Bern while actually doing things.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 3 GOOD 4 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
be17

The only reply to criticisms of the ACA is that the criticizer must be rich? What a sorry excuse for political dialogue. So now I tell you that I’m not rich and actually grew up in a working class household? Now my critique has more validity? Oof.

The problem is Obama never pushed for any established universal system. He could’ve even proposed a system similar to Germany’s or Japan’s, which isn’t socialized or single payer. But for-profit private insurance - the problem - was never questioned.

Then you’ll say “It wouldn’t fly.” But you have to propose bold, transformative plans to get them. Not Romney’s plan.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 3 GOOD 4 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
310b

Obama's legacy is empty rhetoric and poor compromises, just look how easily his "signature" accomplishments unraveled in the Trump administration. If he had spent more time cultivating the support and political will of the coalition who voted for him twice by following through on bold proposals (single-payer, card check, immigration, marijuana legalization) rather than settling for incrementalism, he'd have been able to sustain/grow a legislative majority for much longer and therefore pass actually transformative legislation.

His signature accomplishments were unraveled by the Trump administration because they largely had to be done via executive orders (because a Republican-led Congress wouldn't cooperate). As the executive, Trump could quite easily undo many of Obama's accomplishments. And Trump is slowly filling the judiciary with judges who are politically opposed to Obama-era policies. So if Trump gets a second term, he'll just keep chipping away at what Obama achieved in office.

Democrats definitely f**ked up by essentially forgetting to do a damn thing at the state and local level under Obama. That let Republicans mop up without much resistance. But at the national level, it's normal for midterm elections to swing against the party that controls the White House. I doubt Obama could have done much to hold onto Democratic majorities in the House (mayyybe he could have moved the needle in the Senate). And remember, the Senate filibuster was much more formidable at the time, so Republicans could use that to their heart's content.

It's easy to criticize, but practically, I think Obama's hands were more tied than he's getting credit for. He was also willing to abide by the political norms of the time, which the present administration is more than happy to blow off.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
dd11

The only reply to criticisms of the ACA is that the criticizer must be rich? What a sorry excuse for political dialogue. So now I tell you that I�m not rich and actually grew up in a working class household? Now my critique has more validity? Oof.
The problem is Obama never pushed for any established universal system. He could�ve even proposed a system similar to Germany�s or Japan�s, which isn�t socialized or single payer. But for-profit private insurance - the problem - was never questioned.
Then you�ll say �It wouldn�t fly.� But you have to propose bold, transformative plans to get them. Not Romney�s plan.

No, the criticism is not of any criticism to the ACA.

The criticism is of YOU as a critic of the ACA.

The criticism is substantive; you arguing like a rich kid without any actual skin in the game is just an attributive cause to the substantive criticism. When you blithely dismiss cutting the uninsured population in the US in half as nothing, that's what you sound like, regardless of if you like it or not.

That "you have to propose bold, transformative plans to get them" is just more bumper sticker sloganeering.

It's like me saying I'm going to keep on contacting Jennifer Lawrence until she marries me because you can't make the shots you don't take. It's just an empty and hollow statement used to ignore the real world reality of the situation.

Back out here in the real world, in 2008 Obama had to back off the public option and expend all of his political capital even to get the ACA through his own party, and that's even before the GOP spent his entire Presidency and the first two years of Trump's presidency repeatedly trying to destroy even what he could get through.

But he's just a dogsh!t sellout because he couldn't get Medicare for All?

I don't know if you're actually just some rich kid brat who has never honestly worried about if you have access to health coverage or not, but it's certainly what you sound like.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 3 GOOD 5 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
be17

He cut uninsured rates in half by forcing people to buy private plans that were already unaffordable. Made some of them a bit less unaffordable with subsidies and then the near poor in select states qualify for Medicaid.

That’s a terrible way to achieve “universal” healthcare. There is no worse way. There are far better ways - single payer, socialized, nonprofit private insurance - that could have been proposed and fought for. But to do that you can’t be a corporate lapdog like Obama is.

Like I said l, screw him and everything he represents.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 3 GOOD 4 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
be17

A brat that’s calling him a sellout?

I’m a citizen that thinks his healthcare reforms were crap and should have been better.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
482b

A brat that�s calling him a sellout?
I�m a citizen that thinks his healthcare reforms were crap and should have been better.

And also one who has never had to worry about insurance in his life

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 3 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
310b

He cut uninsured rates in half by forcing people to buy private plans that were already unaffordable. Made some of them a bit less unaffordable with subsidies and then the near poor in select states qualify for Medicaid.
That�s a terrible way to achieve �universal� healthcare. There is no worse way. There are far better ways - single payer, socialized, nonprofit private insurance - that could have been proposed and fought for. But to do that you can�t be a corporate lapdog like Obama is.
Like I said l, screw him and everything he represents.

Yeah, only that would have alienated vested interests in the healthcare industry (insurance industry, the AMA) who would have mobilized opposition to the plan. Meaning no progress, rather than imperfect progress.

Single payer means the insurance industry gets decimated. Probably also means lower wages for doctors. I have no love for insurance. I think it's mostly a legalized scam. And doctors could live on less. But it's in their interests to fight policy that threatens them, so they will. You can rail against injustice all you want. If you don't have a plan, you won't get you far.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 5 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
c160

He cut uninsured rates in half by forcing people to buy private plans that were already unaffordable. Made some of them a bit less unaffordable with subsidies and then the near poor in select states qualify for Medicaid.
That�s a terrible way to achieve �universal� healthcare. There is no worse way. There are far better ways - single payer, socialized, nonprofit private insurance - that could have been proposed and fought for. But to do that you can�t be a corporate lapdog like Obama is.
Like I said l, screw him and everything he represents.

"Life for low income Americans was better before the ACA, especially life expectancy! f**k Obama and his Obamacare for ruining it. "

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 2 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
a6e2

Democrats definitely f**ked up by essentially forgetting to do a damn thing at the state and local level under Obama. That let Republicans mop up without much resistance. But at the national level, it's normal for midterm elections to swing against the party that controls the White House. I doubt Obama could have done much to hold onto Democratic majorities in the House (mayyybe he could have moved the needle in the Senate)

He was leader of the party! He let the national party go to s**t (directing resources to his own group Organizing for Action) because they were arrogant and figured they'd never lose the presidency again and could continue with their technocratic agenda piecemeal through executive orders.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 3 GOOD 3 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
e8f8

He cut uninsured rates in half by forcing people to buy private plans that were already unaffordable. Made some of them a bit less unaffordable with subsidies and then the near poor in select states qualify for Medicaid.
That?s a terrible way to achieve ?universal? healthcare. There is no worse way. There are far better ways - single payer, socialized, nonprofit private insurance - that could have been proposed and fought for. But to do that you can?t be a corporate lapdog like Obama is.
Like I said l, screw him and everything he represents.
"Life for low income Americans was better before the ACA, especially life expectancy! f**k Obama and his Obamacare for ruining it. "

yup that's about as ridiculous as this Bernie supporter sounds

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 0 GOOD 2 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
39e0

If you call yourself a progressive and "hate" Obama, leave America. You'll never be happy here. Ever.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 3 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
be17

He cut uninsured rates in half by forcing people to buy private plans that were already unaffordable. Made some of them a bit less unaffordable with subsidies and then the near poor in select states qualify for Medicaid.
That?s a terrible way to achieve ?universal? healthcare. There is no worse way. There are far better ways - single payer, socialized, nonprofit private insurance - that could have been proposed and fought for. But to do that you can?t be a corporate lapdog like Obama is.
Like I said l, screw him and everything he represents.
"Life for low income Americans was better before the ACA, especially life expectancy! f**k Obama and his Obamacare for ruining it. "

You’re still missing the point. You’re framing the issue as if there were only two options. Same crap or same crap plus ACA. That’s false. If single payer was truly off the table -again, you have to fight for those kinds of programs, expect opposition - then he could’ve proposed a German or Japanese plan. He didn’t because he’s a corporate lapdog.

If all you want to hear is ACA is better than no ACA, of course. What a pointless claim.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !
Sociologist
7f49

Obama fans always pretend like he was secretly progressive but had to be a corporate puppet because of the GOP.

But now he’s planning to make speeches against an actual progressive when he’s not under the thumb of the scary GOP.

And now the Obama fans are out again implying that he was a reluctant corporate puppet. “HE WOULDA WENT SINGLE PAYER BUT THAT ISNT REALISTIC AT THE TIME.”

Now it is and Obama is against the candidate that supports it.

2 weeks ago # QUOTE 3 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

« Previous 123…7 Next »

Obama Said He Would Speak Up To Stop Bernie Sanders Nomination: Report

Reply »