Joe Biden, Senator from Citibank (oops, DELAWARE), to Run for President

I don’t know what the tell you man. The public option exists, has been a long term progressive goal, would help a lot of people out and he ran on it. I don’t that the difference between that and M4A is the best reason to go all blackpill but w\e you do you Jack.

― “Big” Don Abernathy, Tuesday, November 24, 2020 6:03 PM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

This is a funhouse mirror version of Rs treating Romneycare (aka the ACA) as some socialist plot instead of the product of conservative thinktanks.

No the public option passing would actually be major social legislation. Well yeah I know that the right wing think tank thing is something people say but not really true about the ACA. Right thing think tanks wouldn’t conceive of Medicaid expansion just for one thing and also Republicans desperation to repeal it is reason enough for us to know not to repeat that talking point.

There should be some questioning of “the public option is compromised corporatist shit (lol) but m4a is the ideal oh and both things are EQUALLY a non-starter in the senate”.

I use to believe in that theory that you go for the most ambitious legislation possible to get the best deal but idk that’s like out of some dumb book about how to win negotiations. Especially when you’re announcing that it’s a tactic at the outset.

But the public option is compromised corporatist shit, full stop.

Haha holy shit

No that’s...aggressively ignorant. Sorry.

I would say I missed gabbneb but I actually didn’t.

i do like* that ilx gets a wacky new centrist every few months

*not the right word

pub option was some wack olive branch 2008 shit that the Dems couldn’t even muster the sack to get behind. the kids are on some M4A now, old man.

*skateboards away*

here you go Big Don

You're aggressively ignorant, Big Don. Please leave.

If I thought everything outside of full m4a was garbage or a evil plot I would probably just kill myself. Because also maybe it would effectively demonstrate the severity of my feelings toward healthcare policy? I know I would be like “woah check out what this badass did. Maybe he has a point”

ok, implying people who have better ideas than you should kill themselves is EXTRA COOL, but you also spelled "whoa" like a dummy spells it. bye.

Wait Simon you find AOC to be an actually insightful intellectual wonk whom we have to gather around her learning tree and not just a charismatic politician who says some left things?

if you think healthcare is a right, and not a consumer product to be determined by markets, then the public option is indeed compromised corporatist shit. it's what corporate health care think tanks would (and did) cough up to steal the thunder from demands for true universal healthcare. many of us have supported it in the past, as with the ACA, because it would expand access to healthcare, somewhat, in the nearer term. IMHO it's possibly acceptable, incrementally, as something the process lands on while we're fighting to get something better. if we'd gotten the public option under Obama we'd be seeking to lock in that gain, and continue expanding from there. but if we actually want to solve the healthcare problem in this country in a serious and comprehensive way that doesn't leave huge populations still scrambling, still precarious, still undercovered or still un-covered, then the fight is for single-payer, and the public option is compromised corporatist shit.

No that’s the better way to spell woah.

"Big" Don do you have a counterargument to AOC's actual argument, or just implications that she is somehow not intellectually serious enough for her argument to be worth discussing?

I’m gonna watch it later. Relax.

f you think healthcare is a right, and not a consumer product to be determined by markets, then the public option is indeed compromised corporatist shit. it's what corporate health care think tanks would (and did) cough up to steal the thunder from demands for true universal healthcare. many of us have supported it in the past, as with the ACA, because it would expand access to healthcare, somewhat, in the nearer term. IMHO it's possibly acceptable, incrementally, as something the process lands on while we're fighting to get something better. if we'd gotten the public option under Obama we'd be seeking to lock in that gain, and continue expanding from there.

otm

I’m gonna watch it later.

lol

Random new centrist d-bag user shows up and mocks the intellect and policy positions of a brown woman, got it.

Get bent, Big Don

did nerdstrom get a new IP

"Big" Don, you do appear to be new around here, so lemme just say this forum is, over the long haul, shifting away from a kinda snarky, "bring it, debate me, I'm here to drop hard zings" vibe, to something more collegial and encouraging of conversation. Telling people their positions are "aggressively ignorant," or finishing posts with "Relax" or "Sorry" with periods after them, comes off as condescending and smug. people will shoot back with their own counter-insults, but that's about all you're going to get out of it. If you want other posters to engage with you long term, and see you as a valuable interlocutor bringing your own point of view, I'd reconsider that posting style. We often say that it'd be interesting to have more centrist voices in the politics threads, but the ones that have become pillars of the community tend to post in a much more conversational and respectful manner.

"The public option is smarter wonk-approved policy" bit would work better if it had any chance of passing.

We often say that it'd be interesting to have more centrist voices in the politics threads, but the ones that have become pillars of the community tend to post in a much more conversational and respectful manner.

― Doctor Casino, Wednesday, November 25, 2020 9:06 AM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

Who is this "we"? The politics threads quite literally belittle and badger leftists all the time. Also, on a more personal note, I have never said to myself, "what this politics thread needs is more centrism." I get enough of that manufactured consent crap already, thanks.

That said, agreed with your post in general—

okay, the "we" is some leftists including me and some other people, but not all of the leftists

"Big" Don, you do appear to be new around here, so lemme just say this forum is, over the long haul, shifting away from a kinda snarky, "bring it, debate me, I'm here to drop hard zings" vibe, to something more collegial and encouraging of conversation.

― Doctor Casino, Wednesday, 25 November 2020 17:06 (five minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Notwithstanding interjections since, doc, this is at best a mixed truth

You would know.

We'd all know, tabes

i admit that my "long haul" is doing a lot of lifting there, and also that i am hoping that statements like this can be projective as much as they are descriptive.

Fair enough!

my name's waterface and i'm here to say
i love to debate ilx in the old school way
i drop the zings and i rock the rhymes
just don't hit flag post on me too many times. . . *record scratch*

NEW: Reps @AOC @Ilhan @RashidaTlaib +others join a @justicedems petition to stop Biden from choosing his former chief of staff to lead OMB, calling Bruce Reed a "deficit hawk" & adding pressure on the president-elect as he begins his Cabinet announcements.https://t.co/xSc91Gdo2b

— Alexi McCammond (@alexi) November 24, 2020

And it's been almost a whole hour! The corruption, the venality — truly, we didn't know how good we had it with Trump!

― but also fuck you (unperson), Tuesday, November 24, 2020 10:36 AM (sixty eight hours ago)

ok point taken

‘WE DON’T NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS’ — Some in the Biden camp warn that the left wing of the Democratic Party is already spoiling the goodwill they built up during the presidential campaign with the flurry of attacks this week on President-elect JOE BIDEN’s early White House appointments.

"You voted for us, now shut up and fuck off, or it'll be your fault that we won't listen to you."

The chill in the relationship comes after a number of progressive groups and politicians made clear this week that there would not be any honeymoon period for the new Democratic administration.

The climate-focused group Sunrise Movement accused Biden this week of “betrayal” for hiring longtime ally Rep. CEDRIC RICHMOND (D-La.) because the fossil fuel industry has been a longtime backer. Justice Democrats bashed Biden for his “corporate-friendly” appointments, including his new senior counselor STEVE RICCHETTI. Opposition research is flying around on more potential appointments, including another close Biden aide, BRUCE REED.

Justice Democrats’ spokesperson WALEED SHAHID was unapologetic: “If you’re still going to consider giving a top position to deficit hawks like Bruce Reed, who led the Bowles-Simpson commission to have Democrats work with Republicans to cut Social Security, you have to be expecting push back from your own party,” he said in a text message.

SOUNDS LIKE WARREN WON’T BE TREASURY SECRETARY: Biden has already picked his Treasury secretary, he told reporters this afternoon. “You’ll find it is someone who I think will be accepted by all elements of the Democratic Party — the progressive and moderate coalitions,” Biden said — a description that wouldn’t seem to fit Sen. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-Mass.), whose nomination would alarm some moderates. Biden’s comments left some Warren allies feeling downbeat.

“I think we are at a fork in the road,” said one Democratic operative in close touch with the Biden campaign. “They can either continue to just beat the drums on the streets or they can start to leverage the relationship they have. It’s up to them which strategy they adopt.”

"Leverage the relationship they have by accepting everyone we choose without question and then we'll definitely do what they want later on, honest."

Who could have expected anything else, though?

Shills gonna shill. Biden isn't going to change his stripes, and the cop vice president isn't going to change hers either.

These people are out for themselves and their donors, and don't actually give a fuck about anyone else or what they think. It's been obvious.

It’s actually true that to be effective they need to build and leverage relationships in the party and outside it, that’s just How Things Work. But there’s every indication AOC et al are actually pretty good at doing that, which is the actual thing being resisted here. When they care enough to tell you’re being ineffective, it means you’re actually being effective. If you’re really being ineffective, you can and will be safely ignored.

"They can either continue to just beat the drums on the streets or they can start to leverage the relationship they have..."

--- One Democratic Operative ---

This is typically how operatives think. This is not about the people in the streets, who are much too messy to deal with. Operatives want a small, clearly identified set of people you can schedule a meeting with and broker a deal. That's what they're used to. Working with lobbyists and business associations who understand how to cut deals is so much neater and cleaner. Angry street protestors do not fit cleanly into their political world and the One Democratic Operative is just trying to tell them "what works". Pathetic.

Warren is a moderate Democrat and I don't even really understand the case that she's not. She's a technocrat who believes a robust welfare state is essential to the health of capitalism, not an anti-capitalist!

There is a GREAT reason not to appoint her as Treas Sec which is the Senate appointment thing. That is reason enough!

It would be strategically unwise to put Warren in the Cabinet at the expense of her Senate seat.

Wouldn't a Massachusetts Senate seat be safe Dem? In the cabinet wouldn't she be more able to actually implement policy than just advocate for it?

The seat would be appointed by the governor, who is a Republican (Charlie Baker).

(I have occasionally wondered whether Baker could be persuaded to appoint a Democrat, since he is a relatively moderate Republican in a blue state, but it's probably not worth the risk.)

Warren is a moderate Democrat and I don't even really understand the case that she's not.

When you're standing far enough to the right...

Well, let me put it this way, I'm a moderate Democrat (I voted for Biden over Sanders in the primary), I gave money to Biden's campaign and to my state Dem party and to plenty of downballot candidates; if Warren doesn't scare *me*, indeed strongly appeals to me, who are the "moderate Democrats" she allegedly scares?