I was asking what the 20% was in reference to. Is that a poll, a voter participation percentage, like what is that number about? My criteria was grassroots organization, energy/passion, and the ability to inspire non-regular voters to become involved. From my perspective Bernie meets all 3, especially when you recall the large numbers of young people and new voters he was able to bring into the democratic party in 2016.
It may not be fair, but... "folks, this is real." It's the "crazy aunt" vibe, as I've said before. Not fair, but humans are mammals and they have reactions to one another.
is it just me, or is it strange that they prefer a moderate to a liberal by a huge margin, yet have a favorable view of Sanders?
Democrats backing Elizabeth Warren are just setting up Trump for re-election. A lot of moderates and conservatives and non-socialist liberals are sick of all the division, noise and anxiety and would want less friction in government. Someone like John Delaney or Amy Klobuchar or even Biden (though he could implode at an inopportune moment) would be a normal candidate that would probably win. Trump is pretty amazing at his ability to push people to the extreme so they may put forth a completely un-electable candidate.
The thing that worries me the most about Warren is how much the amoral psychopaths of the financial industry view her as their mortal enemy. If it looks like she might actually be President, there is very little in the dirty tricks category that I think they wouldn't consider, and I think it would be far more clever and believable than anything Trump's hamfisted goon squad could imagine. The degree to which the financial industry hates her for her time at the CFPB cant be overstated.
Nice job finding these swing voters. These aren't swing voters. Okay, they are, the one that eventually will break for the President in large numbers. Dem would be fool to go after this particular "moderate" group over alienating their base. The elusive swing voters - nice try, but I still haven't found a great analysis from anyone that can capture this group.
If I have to grade the potential path to M4A, her plan is more likely to be enacted then a M4A plan that tax the middle class based on political landscape. But as I said, none of them are realistic. And I absolutely do not think any of these candidates that mouth out M4A is not serious about it - they just have a different opinion on how to achieve it. The more popular and safer bet is buy-in to medicare, not M4A. So Bernie and Warren taking the M4A path aren't because it's more popular, but because they believe in them. The difference between them is Bernie has zero details but just a few options and he would leave it to Congress to do the job of picking the option. Warren lay it out much more on paper. I believe actually going through the exercise is more "serious". "her M4A" is her current M4A plan. It's already clear that she's not going through an ACA with buy-in option (although I believe that can also lead to M4A eventually) as she has repeatedly said she's against that in debates. I'm curious what is the transition from the current system to her M4A system. If you read her current plan, she essentially said M4A is a long term goal, but we can't wait so there needs to be something sooner - and that she will "have a plan for that" later.
The reality is a Single Payer system in most of the developed rich most similar to us is much less expensive -- approximately 50% less-- and eliminates the approximately 30% uninsured or severely underinsured, the 30,000 excess deaths, 500,000 medical bankruptcies etc. that we have. Fifty plus years or more of actual history shows that the corporations and the wealthy in countries there haven't found a "massive way to cut corners" The rich and corporations is a worn out trope in general for why the status quo can never change.
I agree that's a real risk. I am of two minds. One is that they are already looking for ways around her. The other is that they will go after her, but I think she's strong enough to do battle and win.
If it’s Biden or Sanders —I am still happy to vote for either of them. Biden for my wallet and Bernie for my soul.
I think in general, even people who don’t like bernie see him as honest. He’s a true believer. He also has some misplaced sympathy because people think the dnc screwed him against Clinton. he’s also generally nice and well liked by his opponents in the party. warren doesn’t come across as genuine. It’s not because she’s a woman, it’s because she’s been evasive on some policy questions and she’s outright lied about stupid stuff like her heritage. She comes across as condescending, not because she’s a woman but because she is condescending lol.
She didn't lie about her heritage. Her grandparents made her do native American arts and crafts as a child because they genuinely believed that had native American ancestry. She was brainwashed as a child to believe that. I don't know how you blame her for that when she was raised to believe it.
she has lied. She made up a story about an elopement, she has lied about when and where she used the heritage, she was stupid about releasing her dna test...it’s a stupid issue but she looks shifty because of it. She didn’t own the issue early like she should have. I’m constantly amazed by politicians letting small dumb stuff escalate because they don’t own it early
It's crazy you think a person believing their parents stories is them lying. These are stories she was told as a kid. She believed them. Get over it. She never used her claims of native American ancestry to claim to be a victim. Her first gig as a law professor at an elite institution, UPenn, she explicitly only selected "white/Caucasian" as her ethnicity. She only claims her heritage as a fun story her grandparents and parents told her. https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/na...complicated/wUZZcrKKEOUv5Spnb7IO0K/story.html
