Yeah, I agree. Except I don’t think it’s so much “ticking” as “exploded”. No doubt it’ll be used against him (by both the left and the right) and his polling results with black voters already speak for themselves.
Even if Boykins was bad, replacing him with a white man and then presiding over 8 years of police racist behavior is, well, bad. 8 years is a long time, and people will say he’s done nothing.
It does not remotely cover the actual cost of Medicare.
It’s not a matter of “can we fund it.” It’s a matter of “will we, and who is going to end up paying for it.”
Taxpayers and users will end up paying for it, like in every other civilized country. If we’re clever, will favor taxing the rich, charging low premiums, and waiving / subsidizing them at low income levels. If we’re not clever, we’ll do it the Republican way.
Timex
3624
The push to expand the peace corps and Americorps is a good idea, I think.
From Eugene Robinson’s op-ed that @KevinC posted earlier:
Anyone who watched last week’s two-night candidates’ debate should be confident that the eventual Democratic nominee is virtually certain to support universal health care, comprehensive and compassionate immigration reform, reasonable gun control, measures to address climate change and bold steps to address income inequality.
These are apparently dangerously radical values, at least according to the corporate media. That message is working too as evidenced by not a few posts made here.
There is no definitive answer to the debate over whether a candidate’s path to the White House is better achieved by mobilizing the party’s base or by winning swing voters. What is clear is that democratic elections ought to engage all Americans, not just the less than two-thirds who currently vote. You would think that more ideas and debate would be preferable to less. But for corporate media, who have never wavered in their adherence to the belief in the centrist swing-voter path, the Democratic primary field is a “circus” that needs to get under control—specifically, centrist control.
CraigM
3626
And yet the same never applies to radical GOP ideas. Hmmm
Timex
3628
They loved those nazis to death.
KevinC
3629
I thought that had to be a joke, even for her, but I scrolled through her Twitter and found it. My god.
Timex
3631
Her twitter feed is amazing.
I seriously do not understand how she got on stage. I’m assuming some elaborate 4chan plot.
Apparently she will make the cut for the next debate, too. That’s crazy.
As far as I know, she hasn’t hit the polling threshold yet.
Americans spend a lot of time carrying on over the liberal bias of CNN and the conservative bias of Fox. But they forget that there is a generalized media bias towards creating a food fight.
It would be a corporate disaster if, come August 2020, some Democratic candidate emerged as the consensus pick in the next few months, and went on to poll 10-15 points ahead of Trump by the time most of America was following the campaign. They need the nation’s eyeballs riveted on months of highly entertaining brawling. And, to that end, they will give a megaphone to anyone who willing to shriek that the sky is falling.
So I don’t know that this article so much represents big media having a meltdown over Dems’ consensus over climate change and immigration reform, as it is their desire to generate controversy.
Not that this won’t cause us problems. When Republicans plant stories to promote dissension among Democrats, the media will offer saturation coverage, and don’t think the Republican operatives do not know this.
Marianne Williamson is a joke where the punchline is “The Libertarians!” A joke that flies right over Libertarian heads and who take her at face value and seriously.
