Medicare Part C wrote:
WRONG. Medicare ALREADY has a private insurance "option" which any can pay for. It is called Medicare, Part C. It has been around since 1995 when Bill Clinton was president. Yup, a democrat was responsible for allowing private insurance in Medicare, and not a republican.
They are stupid. wrote:
Medicare Part C wrote:
WRONG. Medicare ALREADY has a private insurance "option" which any can pay for. It is called Medicare, Part C. It has been around since 1995 when Bill Clinton was president. Yup, a democrat was responsible for allowing private insurance in Medicare, and not a republican.
Yes, which has been repeated many times --
Yet still there are many STUPID IDIOTS who don't understand it.
You are Stupid. wrote:
Conundrum wrote:
Back to the debate question regarding insurance, the question was who would ABOLISH private insurance and replace it with a government program.
No one said they would ABOLISH private insurance you idiot.
They would get rid of the REQUIREMENT to have private insurance, by providing government insurance at less than 50 percent of the cost. Anyone could still pay more to have private insurance in addition - which they kept repeating several times but, even so, some idiots like you still managed to miss it.
the actual truth wrote:
You are Stupid. wrote:
Conundrum wrote:
Back to the debate question regarding insurance, the question was who would ABOLISH private insurance and replace it with a government program.
No one said they would ABOLISH private insurance you idiot.
They would get rid of the REQUIREMENT to have private insurance, by providing government insurance at less than 50 percent of the cost. Anyone could still pay more to have private insurance in addition - which they kept repeating several times but, even so, some idiots like you still managed to miss it.
You should be careful with insults especially when you are flat out wrong. Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All bill which has been submitted to Congress DOES ELIMINATE PRIVATE INSURANCE. Kamala Harris is a co-sponsor of that bill.
Of course now Harris is flopping around like a fish in a boat.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/27/18919494/democratic-debate-2019-kamala-harris-healthcare-policy
Harris also is not the poor little minority girl from an impoverished neighborhood.
I'm an old time leftie and have hated the way that both Harris and Booker have said, pretty much directly although tangentially, that Joe is a racist. First, busing was a GD disaster no matter your position on any policy matter. You also cannot be utterly present-determined when examining matters of the past. Anyone engaging in presentism in that way will be just as trapped in the future as those they condemn now.
No offense to her, but Harris is also pretty scummy in her personal life IMO. Booker is a shining example of good choices but he seems to be one of those "stars" identified when young, who basically decided to run for president when he was still a kid. I don't like those career arc stories very much, truth be told. It's part of the reason I never really liked Clinton, a future star in politics from the time he was a kid. Being excellent is great unless it's done to cynically drive future positioning.
Last, this busing garbage threatens to paint the dems into the position of supporting busing in the present, an absolutely disastrous corner to be painted into IMO. That's a national election-losing position folks, much worse than abolishment of private health insurance, which is bad enough.
coach wrote:
Harris also is not the poor little minority girl from an impoverished neighborhood.
coach wrote:
Harris also is not the poor little minority girl from an impoverished neighborhood.
Medicare Part C wrote:
WRONG. Medicare ALREADY has a private insurance "option" which any can pay for. It is called Medicare, Part C. It has been around since 1995 when Bill Clinton was president. Yup, a democrat was responsible for allowing private insurance in Medicare, and not a republican.
They are stupid. wrote:
Yes, which has been repeated many times --
Yet still there are many STUPID IDIOTS who don't understand it.
Fake CONservative Media wrote:
+1
They are blind to the truth because they rely entirely on what they hear, or read, on fake new, conservative media. For them reading something is NOT an option.
Harris is trying to win. In such a large field you have to be bold. Remember Trump '16.
No one whose vote is in question will care for or remember any of this in Nov 2020.
I'm going to go ahead and say Biden will lose, for the same reason he always loses. Good guy, great ideas, has no edge, does not have 'it'.
Beto has 'it', but no ideas.
Biden has ideas, but no 'it'.
Harris is quickly becoming the candidate with ideas and 'it'.
People get too wrapped up in bad branding and name calling. Quit being afraid of being called 'socialist' or 'liberal'. It's only a bad word if you let it be. For Christ sakes Obama ran on and gave us government health insurance. The most socialist idea since social security.
It's all about 'Yes You Can!' and 'Hope And Change' and 'Make America Great Again!'.
Do people like Harris? Do people like Harris more than Trump? Way too early polls, in which Trump should be ahead of the too little known Harris, show her ahead nationally and in key states.
Biden can still win. But he needs to start being more of a lion. Harris has the angry black woman vibe and will eat him alive if he doesn't start confronting her.
Alan
The first step is to win the nomination.
With 20 people running, the biggest challenge is to get your name known to the public.
Now one did better this week than Kamala Harris in these debates.
It seems like 90% of the comments are about her one way or the other.
Four years ago all people would talk about was Trump.
People who don’t want Harris to get the nomination should stop talking about her.
Were her parents on welfare? Did she grow up in a drug infested housing project? "Her father was a lowly professor." And her mother was?
She wasn't a poor girl
LOL, Ali Alexander is livid that Kamala is even calling herself black
https://mobile.twitter.com/ali/status/1144444244364410880
coach wrote:
Were her parents on welfare? Did she grow up in a drug infested housing project? "Her father was a lowly professor." And her mother was?
She wasn't a poor girl
coach wrote:
Were her parents on welfare? Did she grow up in a drug infested housing project? "Her father was a lowly professor." And her mother was?
She wasn't a poor girl
whatdoesthatchange wrote:
coach wrote:
Were her parents on welfare? Did she grow up in a drug infested housing project? "Her father was a lowly professor." And her mother was?
She wasn't a poor girl
So you're saying she was not bussed?
Runningart2004 wrote:
Obama ran on and gave us government health insurance.
I'm not claiming that she was rich. I'm claiming that she wasn't the typical poor underprivileged minority from the drug infested inner city who grew up without 2 educated and caring parents in a home without books. She probably would have had a decent education without busing unlike so many others who have needed it.
I taught in some of these schools, I taught kids whose parents could neither read or write.
I dont buy poor little Kamala.
coach wrote:
I'm not claiming that she was rich. I'm claiming that she wasn't the typical poor underprivileged minority from the drug infested inner city who grew up without 2 educated and caring parents in a home without books. She probably would have had a decent education without busing unlike so many others who have needed it.
I taught in some of these schools, I taught kids whose parents could neither read or write.
I dont buy poor little Kamala.
1971 wrote:
coach wrote:
Harris also is not the poor little minority girl from an impoverished neighborhood.
Her parents divorced in 1971 when Kamala was age 7. Her father did not publish anything until several years after the divorce . So, her father was a lowly professor at the time, and in fact, her father DID NOT join Stanford until 1972.
Starting in 1970, when Kamala's parents seprated, her mother, sister, and Kamala lived in a small apartment on Milvia Street in Berkeley, CA. That area is a very high density neighborhood where people who do not have much money live. There are no plush single family homes there.
Care to try again?
