I think a candidate needs to get people to believe them. It's pretty simple to show the cost of medical insurance, the savings and the proposed plan which would allow anyone to choose and stay with a doctor they have now. The bottom line is that none of the plans proposed now will be put through as proposed. The senate and house will amend, cut, and amend again until something that is drastically different from any of the candidates' proposals will be brought up and possibly pass.
This reminds me of Ross Perot trying to bring out charts and graphs during a debate in 1992. Isn't this the big problem, though? Dems promise to take away stuff from you, but then all their promises of the wonderful things you get might get screwed up by Congress. Why would people bet on that?
I don't think people worry about the process. The Dems did bring about the ACA which is very popular now. It wasn't all of the things it was proposed to be. Congress forced tons of changes. Either way, the Dems can and should take credit for that. Healthcare is the main area where they capitalized to win in 2018. It feeds into the idea that you mentioned about taking things away is scary. The GOP wants to take away your healthcare is a valid campaign line for the Dems. I also think that the ACA while popular is new enough that people remember the way it was before it was established so they will be more likely to believe changes can be made regarding health care. The waters of change on health care were tested and people found it was more to their liking they initially thought. So they are going to be more willing to take a chance on improving it. The timing of this won't last for too much longer, so they should take advantage now. Where I think the ACA failed is in taking those changes into account before bringing it to congress. I don't mean that they should have included them in the beginning. That is almost the opposite of what I mean. I think Obama's team knew what Republicans and conservative Democrats would and wouldn't buy. They then cut down their original ideas themselves before making the presentations. Those ideas were then further amended and cut. They need to go in with more radical proposals knowing that they will be reduced. If they go in with milder proposals those will also be reduced. Going in with what you feel the other side will agree to won't get you what you go in with. It will be reduced no matter what.
The ACA is very popular with people who A) Don't have to use the individual or small business market B) People who were shut out of those markets because of cost or pre-existing conditions previously C) People who get subsidies As usual, the middle-upper middle class is usually disrespected by the democrats on these issues. Fight for the poor and for minority classes while making sure to protect their rich donors and screw the rest.
Bernie has many various positions. His supporters don't have to match on all of them. (Ie these supporters can stop exhibit sexist behaviour of various degree ingrained into them by our culture) My point about Berners being capricious was in parenthesis meaning that it was an auxiliary point. Also if you allowed yourself to think that I was answering a different question than pissed by you to Major, then why do you criticize Biden for changing subject of his response to the Senate question on segregation. That question was designed for him to pigionhole himself into a controversial issue of reparations. No smart moderate politician would ever do that to her/himself. On TPP, I would just like to ask you what exactly do rust belt electorate think about TPP and trading agreements in general. Obama admin seems to have wanted to limit Chinese economic influence with it and Trump wants to do the same, more or less. So I'm confused what these people that you indicate you know intimately think about trade agreements. They dislike trade and economic growth that comes with it? They want tariffs and other barriers to trade? Is there an article that you know of that outlines these positions that Obama and Biden ignored? And you also never responded to my question of whether I should not believe into electability polls where Biden is projected to have best chances against Trump in places like Michigan. Did these people suddenly forget about TPP and Trump will remind them?
I gotta say , I really hope more people can get introduced to Andrew Yang ... and that he is able to answer these debate questions in a more interview style The more you hear this guy talk.... the more you realize that he’s the only one focusing on the problems and solving them vs just espousing some policy because the voters want it . He’s a policy guy and he’s got the most common sense of anyone I’ve seen. These formats aren’t that conducive , hopefully he gets better at making the emotional appeal that so many people depend on
For some, yes it absolutely is a big issue. The size of that blue collar vote in the Midwest has shrunk and Sanders has made some inroads. Still, in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania and Wisconsin; there are enough of these voters to change the election.
Bingo! Hey we are going to take away your very good work subsidized health insurance policy and replace it with a single payer system that will be inferior for those with good private insurance all so that we can give another group of people coverage... also we are going to raise your taxes... and if you have a problem with it you are a racist. How could these people EVER vote for Trump? I wonder.
It sure seems that Trump is much nicer to the rich donor overlords than the people that brought us ACA judging by the recent Trump cuts and the people that these cuts benefited the most. (And the guy wants to nix the pre existing conditions if I heard right) We need some "democracy dollars" to overthrow the rich overlords and drain the swamp some. Time to create "the people" lobby.
Isn’t this an argument against ACA+tweaks? M4A is very different from ACA, while it has all the popular features of it.
Most people don't know how shitty their coverage is until **** hits the fan. Also, your premiums subsidized by your employer means they are at the same time accounting for your salary understanding they are subsidizing your coverage. https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-health-insurance-medical-bills-20190502-story.html It seems like many middle class Individuals with subsidized health insurance through their employees are still having to pay massive deductibles when they run into severe accidents and illnesses. The whole concept of a for profit middleman is silly honestly. It's double dipping. You are paying for the profit motive of the hospital AND the insurer. A private insurance model inherently will have higher overhead costs. Also in a private for profit insurance model, it's the healthy 20-40 year olds who disproportionately pay for the treatment of the sick and in a public model it's the more wealthy who disproportionately pay for the sick. So this is a matter of which group of people you want to shift the burden to. Biden does make a good point that the savings corporations obtain by not needing to subsidize employees' healthcare most likely won't go back to the wages of the employees.
Those people could very well not vote for Trump as they would probably stay home and not vote at all. The real question is how have those people benefited from Trump? I understand your concerns but I don't see voters being driven to the polls to vote against a Democratic candidate. I also think any the Democratic candidate will not making a case to take away private health coverage.
The insurance that I have and my employees have is better than what they would receive under a single pay system. I have lived outside the USA and have been exposed to healthcare outside the USA. It depends on the healthcare provider and plan you have. Many middle class and upper middle class people have very good plans that they do not and and will not want to give up.
There have been several candidates that have discussed a single payer system and the prospect of losing their good insurance plans is certainly enough to drive people to vote for Trump. What has Trump done for them? Not take away their insurance policies for one. When the democrats go down a more radical road, they better get non voters to vote and off set the special interest and moderate voters they risk losing.
The devil is in the details honestly. Tweaking the ACA and a single payer system are quite different.
That's where we disagree I don't think it will drive voters to vote for especially when he is trying to do away with pre existing conditions and letting going adults stay on family policies. And Trump is exactly trying to take away inside policies for a large amount of people in the Midwest he definitely cannot run on his health insurance record. He is still in court trying to do away with the ACA.
You could also say the savings for the corporations can be off set by higher tax rates for those big corporations.
I think Warren made a good point. Almost nobody loves their insurance plan. What they love is being able to go to the doctors and specialists they want. Under her plan they will be able to go to the physicians and specialists they choose. Everyone will.
