Zonkerbl wrote:So it's true we just wait until spring and it'll just die out?
SARS died out in 2003/4 in warmer weather.
But if you google the subject, the answer is, no one has a clue what's going to happen.
Moderators: nate33, montestewart, LyricalRico
Zonkerbl wrote:So it's true we just wait until spring and it'll just die out?
Who says Bernie would have even accepted such an offer from Hillary? I have no idea. Bernie very well might have but he also might have been more interested in keeping a certain distance from the RNC.Pointgod wrote:I_Like_Dirt wrote:dckingsfan wrote:Let's put the Warren as VP off the table. It would give the Rs another senate seat. Just never going to happen.
AOC is off the table as well (age). Of course, if AOC is the VP, we don't have to consider Bernie as POTUS.
Agreed. No sense in dumping any senate seats, to be honest.
It doesn't have to be AOC - the whole 35 year old thing - but my point was more that he could easily grab someone younger. He may not actually balance the ticket politically. Nothing says he has to and he's been pretty resistant to such overtures in general as a part of what he's trying to do. He'd honestly make an excellent VP candidate himself, but I can't see him ever agreeing to such a thing unless it was someone like Warren who shared many of his values and Warren is far to politically savvy to try it, were she in that position.
At this point, the running mate, irrespective of the candidate, really should come from outside of the remaining group. Yang could work but so too could any number of people out there, like Stacy Abrams, or other less well known people who would hit the spotlight and thrive (or not, depending on the choice).
Look at the data about voters and voting patterns and it seems the most important thing is having a unified ticket. Hillary should have picked Bernie as VP in 2016. If Bernie wins he should look to do the same, pick from one of the moderate candidates who ran (except Biden). There’s a already base there. I’m sure it will piss off some of his base but at the end of the day the Democrats need to unify. My worst fear is that he’ll pick someone like Nina Turner or already on his side of the political spectrum.
I_Like_Dirt wrote:Who says Bernie would have even accepted such an offer from Hillary? I have no idea. Bernie very well might have but he also might have been more interested in keeping a certain distance from the (D)NC.Pointgod wrote:I_Like_Dirt wrote:Agreed. No sense in dumping any senate seats, to be honest.
It doesn't have to be AOC - the whole 35 year old thing - but my point was more that he could easily grab someone younger. He may not actually balance the ticket politically. Nothing says he has to and he's been pretty resistant to such overtures in general as a part of what he's trying to do. He'd honestly make an excellent VP candidate himself, but I can't see him ever agreeing to such a thing unless it was someone like Warren who shared many of his values and Warren is far to politically savvy to try it, were she in that position.
At this point, the running mate, irrespective of the candidate, really should come from outside of the remaining group. Yang could work but so too could any number of people out there, like Stacy Abrams, or other less well known people who would hit the spotlight and thrive (or not, depending on the choice).
Look at the data about voters and voting patterns and it seems the most important thing is having a unified ticket. Hillary should have picked Bernie as VP in 2016. If Bernie wins he should look to do the same, pick from one of the moderate candidates who ran (except Biden). There’s a already base there. I’m sure it will piss off some of his base but at the end of the day the Democrats need to unify. My worst fear is that he’ll pick someone like Nina Turner or already on his side of the political spectrum.



dckingsfan wrote:I_Like_Dirt wrote:dckingsfan wrote:I have been holding my breath on the youth turnout since the Carter campaign.
Banking on youth turnout is like waiting for Godot. On average, people seem more inclined to vote when they actually have something to lose, and when they have something to lose, they're more likely to worry about how they might lose it rather than how they might improve things. It's been causing ripples in democracy for millennia.
Add to that as a young person, you are still in college, working your first job, moving from rental to rental. It isn't easy to vote.
Zonkerbl wrote:Now let me just say. The VA is a fricking nightmare, and that is what state run health care is going to look like. Just because our current cesspool of a healthcare system is a capitalist dystopian horrorshow doesn't mean medicare for all is going to be a walk in the park either. We're going to be working on improving the health care system ALL OUR LIVES. But we have to do it.



Zonkerbl wrote:Now let me just say. The VA is a fricking nightmare, and that is what state run health care is going to look like. Just because our current cesspool of a healthcare system is a capitalist dystopian horrorshow doesn't mean medicare for all is going to be a walk in the park either. We're going to be working on improving the health care system ALL OUR LIVES. But we have to do it.

Zonkerbl wrote:Friiiiiiiick this isn’t funny you can stop crashing now stock market


bsilver wrote:Zonkerbl wrote:Now let me just say. The VA is a fricking nightmare, and that is what state run health care is going to look like. Just because our current cesspool of a healthcare system is a capitalist dystopian horrorshow doesn't mean medicare for all is going to be a walk in the park either. We're going to be working on improving the health care system ALL OUR LIVES. But we have to do it.
There's a big difference between "medicare for all", which is what has been proposed, and the VA system. The VA system is state run healthcare like in England. The doctors, etc, all work for the state. Medicare/Medicare for All, is a single payer system. Our taxes go the govt. and the govt. pays the doctors, etc.
I don't think anyone has suggested state run healthcare. Maybe the VA (state run healthcare) should be abolished and veterans care becomes a single payer system. Veterans just go to the same doctors/hospitals as the rest of us, as in medicare.
Wizardspride wrote:?s=19