dc2london
Admin
Press Secretary
Posts: 61,703 Likes: 419,690
|
Post by dc2london on Feb 3, 2019 12:08:38 GMT -6
Terry McAuliffe sure sounds like someone getting ready to run for president
|
|
|
Post by notblanche on Feb 3, 2019 12:13:31 GMT -6
Terry McAuliffe sure sounds like someone getting ready to run for president I thought this too. I read someone on Twitter who suggested they dropped the ball by “not vetting” Ralph thoroughly enough but idk. He’s coming out in force now.
|
|
|
Post by blurnette989 on Feb 3, 2019 14:26:30 GMT -6
Terry McAuliffe sure sounds like someone getting ready to run for president While totally expected, I'm pretty meh on this.
|
|
jaygee
Diamond
Posts: 28,308 Likes: 219,997
|
Post by jaygee on Feb 4, 2019 9:26:59 GMT -6
Terry McAuliffe sure sounds like someone getting ready to run for president No, go away Terry. Too many people. We need to start using the Lucille Bluth door shutting gif when new people announce.
|
|
|
Post by greykitty on Feb 4, 2019 14:30:42 GMT -6
Maybe UO, and maybe the shutting the door is just a joke, but I'm extremely eager to get an electable candidate (and defining that may be a big issue, I understand). Right now, don't think we have one.
I have the feeling health care reform or whatever we want to call it (Medicare for all) may be a third rail unless it's way better defined and shown how it can be funded and implemented, especially to the groups of voters who can be counted on to reliably turn out every election.
Again, I understand this is no doubt an outlier opinion.
|
|
|
Post by notblanche on Feb 4, 2019 14:42:01 GMT -6
greykitty I appreciate your perspective. I don’t think I agree that there’s not an electable candidate — because I don’t think we know what “electable” will look like a year from now. I keep going back to Obama; everyone scoffed at the junior senator. But I agree with your initial point in that I don’t want to shut the door.
|
|
jaygee
Diamond
Posts: 28,308 Likes: 219,997
|
Post by jaygee on Feb 4, 2019 14:50:05 GMT -6
Maybe UO, and maybe the shutting the door is just a joke, but I'm extremely eager to get an electable candidate (and defining that may be a big issue, I understand). Right now, don't think we have one. I have the feeling health care reform or whatever we want to call it (Medicare for all) may be a third rail unless it's way better defined and shown how it can be funded and implemented, especially to the groups of voters who can be counted on to reliably turn out every election. Again, I understand this is no doubt an outlier opinion. Oh no, I’m totally kidding. I think I have some nervous energy on what is a good field of candidates that leads to the best nomination and what is the clown car that was the GOP field for 2016. So far, with the exception of just a couple, I’m very pleased with what I would call the core candidates. There are people I don’t want to run AT ALL. But that’s just my opinion, you know.
|
|
|
Post by greykitty on Feb 4, 2019 15:15:07 GMT -6
greykitty I appreciate your perspective. I don’t think I agree that there’s not an electable candidate — because I don’t think we know what “electable” will look like a year from now. I keep going back to Obama; everyone scoffed at the junior senator. But I agree with your initial point in that I don’t want to shut the door. He was my junior senator and I voted for him for Senate and the presidency. He was our favorite son. And I think everyone was surprised at how that first run to the nomination came out. Then again, IMO McCain did the Dems a favor by picking Palin - I knew a lot of Republicans (and moderate Democrats) who didn't feel comfortable with McCain's age and her being next in line and just sat it out. I really think if McCain had just picked almost anyone else, he would have won. And, yes, things can change wildly. I'm just looking at how much more polarized everything seems to have become, and am a little worried that there will be such pushes to the extremes on both sides that most of the electorate will feel unrepresented. And, seriously - right now healthcare is such a hot topic - but such a dangerous one to candidates. For example, I'm really not sure I understood what Kamala Harris' position is, since it certainly doesn't seem viable to me, unless she was just using it as a blue sky talking point. But I am interested in how she'll do in Iowa, etc. Maybe she can pull it off. I do agree that almost everyone running right now is a capable person and could certainly be part of a dream cabinet, to say the least.
|
|
jkjacq
Ruby
Posts: 21,742 Likes: 94,334
|
Post by jkjacq on Feb 4, 2019 15:25:08 GMT -6
greykitty I appreciate your perspective. I don’t think I agree that there’s not an electable candidate — because I don’t think we know what “electable” will look like a year from now. I keep going back to Obama; everyone scoffed at the junior senator. But I agree with your initial point in that I don’t want to shut the door. He was my junior senator and I voted for him for Senate and the presidency. He was our favorite son. And I think everyone was surprised at how that first run to the nomination came out. Then again, IMO McCain did the Dems a favor by picking Palin - I knew a lot of Republicans (and moderate Democrats) who didn't feel comfortable with McCain's age and her being next in line and just sat it out. I really think if McCain had just picked almost anyone else, he would have won. And, yes, things can change wildly. I'm just looking at how much more polarized everything seems to have become, and am a little worried that there will be such pushes to the extremes on both sides that most of the electorate will feel unrepresented. And, seriously - right now healthcare is such a hot topic - but such a dangerous one to candidates. For example, I'm really not sure I understood what Kamala Harris' position is, since it certainly doesn't seem viable to me, unless she was just using it as a blue sky talking point. But I am interested in how she'll do in Iowa, etc. Maybe she can pull it off. I do agree that almost everyone running right now is a capable person and could certainly be part of a dream cabinet, to say the least. Her answer initially was to rid of private insurance. She has back tracked a bit on that. The thing with Medicare for all. Its really at this point the best option, and had the GOP not gutted the public option out of the ACA we would now have a blueprint for how it would work.
I think we have every person in this country on Medicare and then if you so choose you purchase additional coverage. Which is exactly how my dads medicare works. Its 97/month for True Blue. It works for people over 65, to think we can't do it with a 7 year old or a 42 year old is shortsighted.
|
|
|
Post by blurnette989 on Feb 4, 2019 15:36:42 GMT -6
He was my junior senator and I voted for him for Senate and the presidency. He was our favorite son. And I think everyone was surprised at how that first run to the nomination came out. Then again, IMO McCain did the Dems a favor by picking Palin - I knew a lot of Republicans (and moderate Democrats) who didn't feel comfortable with McCain's age and her being next in line and just sat it out. I really think if McCain had just picked almost anyone else, he would have won. And, yes, things can change wildly. I'm just looking at how much more polarized everything seems to have become, and am a little worried that there will be such pushes to the extremes on both sides that most of the electorate will feel unrepresented. And, seriously - right now healthcare is such a hot topic - but such a dangerous one to candidates. For example, I'm really not sure I understood what Kamala Harris' position is, since it certainly doesn't seem viable to me, unless she was just using it as a blue sky talking point. But I am interested in how she'll do in Iowa, etc. Maybe she can pull it off. I do agree that almost everyone running right now is a capable person and could certainly be part of a dream cabinet, to say the least. Her answer initially was to rid of private insurance. She has back tracked a bit on that. The thing with Medicare for all. Its really at this point the best option, and had the GOP not gutted the public option out of the ACA we would now have a blueprint for how it would work.
I think we have every person in this country on Medicare and then if you so choose you purchase additional coverage. Which is exactly how my dads medicare works. Its 97/month for True Blue. It works for people over 65, to think we can't do it with a 7 year old or a 42 year old is shortsighted.
This what we have in Portugal. We all have the national health and then you can choose additional orivate coverage to go to see private doctors or hospitals. We pay 112€ a month for three kids under 5 and my husband. I just use the national health. My son needed his adenoids out recently. It was not urgent so in the national system we'd have to wait 3 months. We opted to go private for the surgery and it was scheduled in 2 weeks.
|
|
|
Post by greykitty on Feb 4, 2019 16:38:27 GMT -6
He was my junior senator and I voted for him for Senate and the presidency. He was our favorite son. And I think everyone was surprised at how that first run to the nomination came out. Then again, IMO McCain did the Dems a favor by picking Palin - I knew a lot of Republicans (and moderate Democrats) who didn't feel comfortable with McCain's age and her being next in line and just sat it out. I really think if McCain had just picked almost anyone else, he would have won. And, yes, things can change wildly. I'm just looking at how much more polarized everything seems to have become, and am a little worried that there will be such pushes to the extremes on both sides that most of the electorate will feel unrepresented. And, seriously - right now healthcare is such a hot topic - but such a dangerous one to candidates. For example, I'm really not sure I understood what Kamala Harris' position is, since it certainly doesn't seem viable to me, unless she was just using it as a blue sky talking point. But I am interested in how she'll do in Iowa, etc. Maybe she can pull it off. I do agree that almost everyone running right now is a capable person and could certainly be part of a dream cabinet, to say the least. Her answer initially was to rid of private insurance. She has back tracked a bit on that. The thing with Medicare for all. Its really at this point the best option, and had the GOP not gutted the public option out of the ACA we would now have a blueprint for how it would work.
I think we have every person in this country on Medicare and then if you so choose you purchase additional coverage. Which is exactly how my dads medicare works. Its 97/month for True Blue. It works for people over 65, to think we can't do it with a 7 year old or a 42 year old is shortsighted.
I think it's more nuanced than that , and not sure where the $97 is coming from? Maybe an Advantage Plan in a low or medium COL state? Medicare B this year is about $135/month for everyone other than the pretty darn wealthy. Medicare D is usually at least $15-20/month, but can go higher. Medicare A is $0 if you've contributed 40 quarters of Medicare taxes into the system. Otherwise, the premiums can be reasonably hefty. Would the general population be happy with Medicare Advantage type plans? Managed care with limited providers can be a hard sell. Just saying, there would be a major structural shift to both fund a Medicare for All and to implement it. And an awful lot of details to work out that haven't been presented yet. And if you scare the AARP generation that Medicare may be adversely affected, you will see voters come out, and that generation is a group that traditionally has a high turn out to start out with - scare them and it'll be even higher. That's why I think the nuts and bolts (coverage, tax increases, the whole ball of wax) have to be worked out pretty well before presenting it as a key agenda for the party to run on. It's a third rail element. That's why I think it was unwise for Kamala Harris to present a talking point which did force her into backtracking - she should, IMO, have been more moderate in her approach to start with but to me she pandered to a certain element of the party by adhering to a Sanders approach. Sounds great, probably never workable in real life in the US. Personally I was very disappointed in her statement.
|
|
dc2london
Admin
Press Secretary
Posts: 61,703 Likes: 419,690
|
Post by dc2london on Feb 4, 2019 16:46:17 GMT -6
Maybe UO, and maybe the shutting the door is just a joke, but I'm extremely eager to get an electable candidate (and defining that may be a big issue, I understand). Right now, don't think we have one. I have the feeling health care reform or whatever we want to call it (Medicare for all) may be a third rail unless it's way better defined and shown how it can be funded and implemented, especially to the groups of voters who can be counted on to reliably turn out every election. Again, I understand this is no doubt an outlier opinion. No I'm glad you shared!! We need some differing opinions in here!
|
|
jkjacq
Ruby
Posts: 21,742 Likes: 94,334
|
Post by jkjacq on Feb 4, 2019 17:12:04 GMT -6
My kamala swag arrived!!
|
|
|
Post by greykitty on Feb 4, 2019 17:13:45 GMT -6
dc2london, thank you. That's the other thing I worry about quite a bit - with twitter, five millions self-styled 'news organizations', etc. just so many echo chambers and a general unwillingness to read up on other viewpoints (remember Sam Seaborn and the school voucher issue? Poor guy got beat up just for composing a heck of a good argument, as I recall). So easy to just validate and revalidate whatever opinion you started with. I'm not sure that's always a wise choice. Politics has almost always not been a good topic for the dinner table as one might say, but I really think these days reasonable people are almost afraid to voice differing opinions if they fear conflict with a group they're otherwise comfortable with. Somehow it leaves debate to just those folks screaming and denigrating each other. One thing here is people are almost invariably pretty darn civil - but it still can be difficult to debate topics that are near and dear to people's hearts.
|
|
richard
Emerald
Posts: 13,699 Likes: 128,724
|
Post by richard on Feb 4, 2019 17:34:11 GMT -6
greykitty, I don’t think there are any easy answers on healthcare so I was uncomfortable with Kamala’s answer in the town hall. Because I don’t think we should be blythe about talking about it like it would be easy and impact everyone in the same way. And I agree that the olds could freak out if they see think their Medicare will be impacted. Also do not want the hospital/health care industry painting a target on her or other Dems’ backs because they have the $$$ to play hardball. That said, I think the GOP has been so fucking terrible on healthcare the last 2 years that Dems have some room to be more bold than just defending the status quo. It’s a fine line to walk tho. This is one are where I prefer Amy to Kamala right now. Maybe Kamala will get some better talking points but Amy wouldn’t have been quite so breezy if she was asked the same question.
|
|
|
Post by blurnette989 on Feb 4, 2019 17:45:14 GMT -6
I also think it is important to have some people using the party s bit left, because you're frnjot Republicans have managed to pull everyone further right. The center isn't where it was 25 years ago, and I think big bold ideas help shake up people's perspectives. What is achievable, what is the goal, etc. It's good to ask those questions so that politics and politicians actually line u with what is important to constituents.
|
|
|
Post by greykitty on Feb 4, 2019 17:46:38 GMT -6
richard, you worded it far better than I did. I'm really hoping that Obamacare will prove the step we needed to move to a more rational form of healthcare, even with all the heartache that's happening as we struggle to find something that would work for this country. Look at all the people who now intensely dislike the preexisting condition clauses or love being able to carry their children on their insurance until age 26. To me, that's kind of a sea change. I will always fault the GOP not so much for finding faults with Obamacare but for not sincerely working to remedy whatever flaws may, or did, exist. They weren't, and aren't, serving their country.
|
|
|
Post by blurnette989 on Feb 4, 2019 17:49:07 GMT -6
greykitty different perspectives are good. E.g. I'm not all rah rah for Kamala. As a defense minded attorney I've yet to see her really answer for her very ambitious prosecutorial past. I like her, but I need her to say she regrets jailing parents for student truancy, no longer agrees with three atrikes policies and understands the impact that her policies had on the poor of Cali. Also, my phone is acting up an my keyboard sucks. So if anything is incoherent due to autocorrects, sorreh!
|
|
jaygee
Diamond
Posts: 28,308 Likes: 219,997
|
Post by jaygee on Feb 4, 2019 18:00:36 GMT -6
|
|
athn64
Ruby
Posts: 17,414 Likes: 76,728
|
Post by athn64 on Feb 4, 2019 18:02:02 GMT -6
Ugh. Can we all agree that Bernie is awful? Dude is such a narssicist.
|
|
|
Post by greykitty on Feb 4, 2019 18:08:29 GMT -6
greykitty different perspectives are good. E.g. I'm not all rah rah for Kamala. As a defense minded attorney I've yet to see her really answer for her very ambitious prosecutorial past. I like her, but I need her to say she regrets jailing parents for student truancy, no longer agrees with three atrikes policies and understands the impact that her policies had on the poor of Cali. Also, my phone is acting up an my keyboard sucks. So if anything is incoherent due to autocorrects, sorreh! I guess I would want to see what triggered a change in mind from being a 'tough on crime' prosecutor to regretting those actions. What it a philosophical change? Motivated by research that showed prior methods didn't work they way she hoped? Or shifting political tides and hoping to appeal to certain voters? Or a combination? It really is hard for any candidate - we expect so much, and give so little quarter for the hundreds or thousands of decisions they had to make. Some made egregious errors in judgment; some may have changed their minds on policies as they gained more experience. In the land of twitter, who has much time to make their arguments, even if people are willing to listen?
|
|
|
Post by enchanted on Feb 4, 2019 18:45:59 GMT -6
Ugh. Can we all agree that Bernie is awful? Dude is such a narssicist. I very much regret my primary vote for him.
|
|
jaygee
Diamond
Posts: 28,308 Likes: 219,997
|
Post by jaygee on Feb 4, 2019 18:46:22 GMT -6
I’m not against Senator Harris’ truancy policy. I think in a perfect world, it wouldn’t have been needed because social services would have been in place, but it’s not. Her policy was data driven and targets the population that needed to stay in school the most. Yes, it is tough but intervention is needed and typically the charges were dropped once the charged got into the social programs they needed.
|
|
jaygee
Diamond
Posts: 28,308 Likes: 219,997
|
Post by jaygee on Feb 4, 2019 18:49:06 GMT -6
I think Senator Gillibrand is doing a better job speaking about the Medicare for All transition since she used to favor the more moderate Medicare buy in approach. I think that’s the logical next step. I definitely don’t mind people campaigning on Medicare for All and I strongly believe it is the best solution. But any candidate needs to be realistic that it make take 1 or more interim steps from where we are now to full blown Medicare for All. It’s kind of a mouthful to explain and people are going to get tripped up on it.
|
|
jaygee
Diamond
Posts: 28,308 Likes: 219,997
|
Post by jaygee on Feb 4, 2019 18:51:58 GMT -6
Ugh. Can we all agree that Bernie is awful? Dude is such a narssicist. I very much regret my primary vote for him. 2016 primary Bernie was a different man than we know today. I mean, same man, but we didn’t really KNOW him like we do now.
|
|
athn64
Ruby
Posts: 17,414 Likes: 76,728
|
Post by athn64 on Feb 4, 2019 18:59:11 GMT -6
I think Senator Gillibrand is doing a better job speaking about the Medicare for All transition since she used to favor the more moderate Medicare buy in approach. I think that’s the logical next step. I definitely don’t mind people campaigning on Medicare for All and I strongly believe it is the best solution. But any candidate needs to be realistic that it make take 1 or more interim steps from where we are now to full blown Medicare for All. It’s kind of a mouthful to explain and people are going to get tripped up on it. I really appreciate your view points when it comes to healthcare stuff.
|
|
|
Post by flippinchica on Feb 4, 2019 19:19:48 GMT -6
I think Senator Gillibrand is doing a better job speaking about the Medicare for All transition since she used to favor the more moderate Medicare buy in approach. I think that’s the logical next step. I definitely don’t mind people campaigning on Medicare for All and I strongly believe it is the best solution. But any candidate needs to be realistic that it make take 1 or more interim steps from where we are now to full blown Medicare for All. It’s kind of a mouthful to explain and people are going to get tripped up on it. 100% we are going to need interim steps. No way are we getting sweeping legislation to get a national universal healthcare system immediately. It just isn't feasible. I agree that a buy in option for people who don't have access to commercial insurance but make too much to qualify for Medicaid would be a good start.
|
|
jkjacq
Ruby
Posts: 21,742 Likes: 94,334
|
Post by jkjacq on Feb 4, 2019 19:20:17 GMT -6
WRT premiums Medicare for all is a BIG idea. But so was Obamacare at one point I agree there needs to be interim steps which is why the buy in option when it was implemented would have been ideal. I don’t have a problem with it being the ultimate goal because that’s where we as a country need to be to cover those that need it most.
As far as my dads plan I can’t remember what his straight Medicare premium was but I put him on an advantage plan the minute I could because h has high health needs and maxed out his 100 day hospital stay and Cross had longerstays allowed. I don’t know why his premiums are that low but it is what it is. And it’s cheaper that what I pay for dependent on my employer plan.
|
|
|
Post by greykitty on Feb 4, 2019 20:00:13 GMT -6
The Advantage plans definitely are appealing, and I read recently that Advantage sales are increasing (UHC, Aetna, Anthem). The expanded coverages for vision, hearing, and dental in many plans are really enticing, and that logistical ease in claims are pretty darn appealing. If your preferred providers are in network, gosh, hard to turn down, even with the copays and deductibles.
I vaguely remember the Clinton Health Plan proposals in 1993 and what a mess that was, but maybe it laid a foundation for Obamacare. The stupid thing, IMO, is that I read the insurance and healthcare industries were really getting their arms around Obamacare and watching it stabilize, and, boom, the election. Most businesses like some stability - see the mess with Brexit.
|
|
jaygee
Diamond
Posts: 28,308 Likes: 219,997
|
Post by jaygee on Feb 4, 2019 20:26:16 GMT -6
Medicare Advantage plans are a huge growing segment of the market. Even if nothing changes, I suspect that will continue with the boomers.
I have pretty good insurance and I would jump at the chance to have Medicare. It’s great insurance. Granted it needs to be reconfigured to handle full demographics, but that’s not that difficult all things considered. I think if people got a taste of Medicare they would be converted to the idea. Just like how many people who had never been insured felt once they got ACA coverage.
|
|