Anyone here can read that link and decide if what Sanders and AOC wrote are tongue baths, or pro forma respect for the recently deceased.
The fact checkers checked something Sanders didn’t say and found it wrong. They didn’t check what he actually said.
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/08/the-cost-of-medicare-for-all/ You can argue could vs would is what was factchecked, and that is nitpicking.
Did the study show that Medicare for all would save a trillion dollars over 10 years? Do you believe that hospitals will take payments at a 40% lower level than they do today for all patients? I know you do not believe that repug tax cuts will pay for themselves when the economy grows at 4%+ over the next decade, because that was magnificent accounting by Republicans. It is the same with the single payer numbers. So yes if everything on the Sanders plan works as advertised and all the cost savings are implemented as they want with out much pushback from hospitals, doctors, insurance companies and other lobby groups it would save (according to the study) 1 trillion over the status quo. But it will not happen. Now as I argued above, even with the number that the dude on the Marcus study throws out of 3 T more with his projection, that I would assume is a very bias number trying to cherry pick the highest numbers to make the Single payer as bad as possible. An argument can still be made that so what, it means that 99.9% of all Americans are insured, it may be a price that we should be willing to pay for that. Even if Sanders numbers are low and we end up somewhere in the middle (who knows) if we end up paying 1 Trillion more over 10 years but all American citizens are insured, I think that would be a good thing and can be argued that that is a positive in favor of Medicare for all.
One thing I have tried to find out and have not been able is a breakdown on how much of the spending in the USA is done by Citizens vs Foreigners, this could be a small number and just a rounding error when we are talking Trillions, does anyone know of articles with this breakdown?
Here's a great example of stupid fact checking. https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...acks-police-shootings/?utm_term=.abe41a879222 Beto has some line in a speech about police killing too many unarmed black children. He specifically refers to Tamir Rice. Fact checker: "(A well-known case in 2014, involving 12-year-old Tamir Rice, would not qualify as “unarmed” under Washington Post criteria because Tamir had a toy gun.)"
I have hit my maximum allowed articles on the WP I am sure many conservatives find fact checkers stupid and bias also, They do seem to skew against Repugs/conservatives (Personal opinion is because they say more dumb or incorrect shit) and yes the fact checkers get shit wrong sometimes (really a toy counts as armed, I guess a phone and a comb would count also). But I can not read the details on the article to fully judge the article. The good ones (IMO) are the ones that give you links to articles that they reference (can send you down a rabbit hole), the ones about the Medicare for all were pretty good at how they linked to a few studies.
I could not find the thread about 3rd parties so I will post here. 3rd party votes are a drop in a bucket compared to.. http://www.people-press.org/2018/08...he-2016-electorate-based-on-validated-voters/
Pretty sure I was flamed for asserting this point last year. But vote shaming is still happening. (Shrug) The real effort should go towards the ones that couldn’t or wouldn’t vote.
Politics On The Sidelines Of Democracy: Exploring Why So Many Americans Don't Vote 40% turn out for a mid term election, wow that is low. Some want to but can, but that is about 4%, so those that just choose not to vote, is huge. https://www.npr.org/2018/09/10/6452...acy-exploring-why-so-many-americans-dont-vote
Yes, at least one person said that Trump is a fascist but did not like Clinton, most be her E-mails And obviously there were no other parties in the ballot that they could vote for, but finding that information is too difficult.
A whole lot of people feel alienated from society as a whole. I'm surprised that voting rates are as high as they are.
compulsory plus the make it easier. If people could mail in their votes nationwide, voting would go way up! Must be pre-stamped return type, though.
Anecdote: Even so...my wife is a “terrible” citizen. I have to harass her to go vote here in Germany. She knows I abhor the AFD and harp on her vote being important and not “just an exercise in Democracy “
Compulsory does not really work, what would the punishment be? Also it is minorities that do not vote, so if you pass laws to fine or punish non voters, then you are passing "anti-minority" laws, they would be called racist. Today on NPR they were talking about Australia, they have mandatory laws, the turn out rate is higher, but the results are not that different than before (according to the dude on the radio). A study done by UC Berkley had a projection that Democrats may gain at most 2% over current results, good for close elections but not overwhelming.
Many of them voted in 2016, they helped get Trump elected. People feel alienated for many reasons, not all of them would vote the same way. But will all bitch about how things don't change.