How do Democrats feel about Bernie looking like the eventual nominee?

I think Bernie Sanders has the potential to be a good president. His more outlandish ideas will be tempered, if not completely deterred, by the Republicans, and even by those in the Democratic party that are more moderate. Sanders isn't going to get into office and then we wake up Venezuela because he waved his hands. It's not going to be Bernie Sanders in a room by himself, cackling maniacally, as he conjures socialism out of the void to engulf us all. He'll be surrounded by intelligent people, and will actually be able to benefit from them unlike a certain president who can't stand a viewpoint that isn't his, even from his staff. And it'll be nice to have someone with some integrity in the Oval Office. And with a much better relationship with the truth.

I think there's a fair amount about what Sanders proposes that is too much and too extreme for my tastes. But I think he's got a good head on his shoulders.

He's not the nominee I want because he's too much to the left for me and because he's not going to flip enough states to win electorally. But we could definitely do worse.



And look, the first signs of Bernie Derangement Syndrome have already begun.

 

The country needs radical changes in how it works in terms of public-expenditures - principally in Healthcare (to increase lifespan age) and Post-secondary Education. So that our people have the qualifications necessary for a decent job in the new Information Age that is upon us. Who ever formulates such should do so clearly. For the moment, that has not happened.

But both of the above key-necessities find no-comers on the Right-side of the aisle in the Senate. Who just had the audacity to let Donald Dork go scott-free without allowing pertinent testimony of witnesses.

The come-down of the Replicant Party is long overdue. Let's hope it is more thorough than present evidence indicates.

Because the country needs badly the following:
*As said above decent National Healthcare and Post-secondary Education at very-very-low-cost (and funded by additional taxation on the super-rich).
*The reformation of the Electoral College to simply collect the results of the state-wide Popular Vote and confirm it to both houses of Congress without any manipulation whatsoever of the total Popular-Vote for the presidency.
*A Supreme-Court ruling doing away with Gerrymandering of the statewide popular-vote that gives preference to either extreme of a simple two-party system. Whoever presents themselves in whichever political-capacity should be allowed to seek office in any state of the nation. The two-party voting-system is antiquated and must be replaced.
*No further purely public funding of political-parties are acceptable. All political-parties whether statewide or national can be funded by state-expenditure plus a fixed individual but public annual contribution not to exceed $2500 to any independent political-party.
*Total national debt has got out-of-hand, and therefore the total government-expenditure ceilings should be set-fixedly in a manner that would require any additional-growth to not supercede the general inflation rate of the nation without a national public-vote authorizing it.. And all government administrations to be tested for necessity and performance along written guidelines.
*A totally independent "Government-Debt Authority" (not reporting to the Secretary of the Treasury and not nominated by the PotUS) should review all national government expenditure and bring before "both public-and-congressional oversight" any considered arbitrary, clearly unnecessary or excessive. (Which include expenditure-costs of both the Senate, the PotUS and the HofR.)

Discussion of the above welcome if consisting of more than just unacceptably Sarcastic One-liners ...

 

I dont really like Bernie, but will vote for him if he gets the nod. I made the mistake of not voting last time because they both sucked....never again.

 

History shows that on average 90% of Republicans and Democrats support their party's nominee regardless of who that is. So Democrats will be supporting Sanders. The Northeast and the West Coast will go to Sanders or any other Democrat for that matter. It's flyover country, swing states that is where a Sanders nomination might hurt the Democrats. I said might.

In swing states like Minnesota, Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Iowa, North Carolina, perhaps one or two more that Sanders does worst in a head to head match up against Trump than a couple of other Democratic nominee candidates.

As for moderates, I don't think they have a place in either major party. Both major parties have been shrinking as both are losing the more moderate voter to the independent ranks. Independents have grown from 30% of the electorate in 2006 up to 42% if Gallup is to be believed today. Those who identify with the Democratic Party has shrunk from 36% down to 30%, those who identify as Republicans down from 32% to 27%.

 

A LOT TO LEARN

I have my reservations too. He is too Bolchevik - that is, he remains adhered to a simplistic notion of socialism that was proven incompetent time and time again. That is, a socialism that is simply undoable because it is against human nature. Or, our common desire to better our lot in life.

Socialism was a great-promise to bring to the "proletariat" all that they needed and never had under a regime of royal-heritage. It was, and still is, a good idea - but in conception only and not presently operationally.

Warren knows what she is talking about, because she delves into the complexity of issues/problems. The only wrongness there is that most of Americas societal-failures today are immensely complex. Fixing them is equally as difficult. Perhaps even Mission Impossible.

It will take a series of left-leaning PotUS's to do a proper-job. Of what? Of bringing the US up to the point where Europe is today - where market-economies are competitive but taxation is sufficiently high to bring people the key Leftist-promises of National Health Care and Post-secondary Education.

Bernie is too extreme for the political palate of the present American center-left community. He does represents a lot of "hopes and desires" nonetheless. But Americans still have a lot-to-learn about what is exactly a Social Democracy ...

 

Social Democracy In a nutshell-

 

I don't fall for the whole "Socialist" bad Bernie clap trap and am well aware the even the most extreme of his stances will become heavily tempered by the realities of our political system which has ALWAYS limited promise fulfillment of every POTUS ever. I simply do not like the man but my dislike is love when compared to Trump.

 

Agree totally. Anybody will be much, much better than Trump

The major thing we have to do with Bernie to make him win is to convince everyone that the biggest misconception about him really IS that he is a radical. And that does have the virtue of being true. Bernie's "socialism" is really just what we have now and have been practicing for about the last 30 years only he wants us to be honest about and stop paying some businesses, like all the insurance companies, several trillion annually to maintain the illusion that they are totally capitalistic things.

 

It might also be a good idea to realize that regardless of dreams and promises our system and politics will do what they always do and everything will be tempered to pass.

 

That's really a heartwarming story, Rod must have had some good health care.

Problem is that one in 10,000 type stories aren't really much help when you have 27 million with no health care, and most people don't live on farms or even know where the closest one is, let alone run a 2000 acre going concern without help, or have ESP connections to the surrounding community.


People can't eat platitudes. You can dress it up in tough love homilies all you want. "**** you. Die" comes through loud and clear.

 

Like everyone I ever heard of with pancreatic, Rod eventually died from it in the fall. But his friends did save his crops last spring, and that saved his family. Rod did have good health coverage- but he had that because he was industrious, planned and prepared for the future, including the contingency of his dying before his time. Had he not been that kind of person, I doubt the community would have been there for him and his family to this extent- and of course, if he were one of those doing just enough to get by, he wouldn't have had much of a farm anyway.

The point is not about how many people want help. The point is that if people took the responsibility of taking care of themselves first, there would not be millions in need expecting someone else to compensate for the fact they did nothing to prepare for their own future. Some people are deserving- other are just expecting others to should pay their way, compensate for their mistakes. You don't have to live on a farm to help people. I do this kind of thing frequently. Small things, sometimes big things. But I don't help people avoid helping themselves- I consider that a stupid thing to do; it is enabling. It only insures that they will remain where they are. How many are willing to do that relates directly to how easy it is to do, and how little pride they have in themselves.

A better society promotes pride, spirit, strength- not dependence. You can't give that to people with legislation, with free stuff or labels- they have to want it enough to fight for it, to find it within themselves.
What we can do is not hold them back, and encourage them to try. Other than that, it's up to them. When you support someone who won't support themselves, you may think of yourself as generous- but in fact, you have only perpetuated the problem to soothe your conscience.

 

True enough. Frex, insurance companies are going to be with us a long time and probably a big part of even single-payer systems

 

WOW!

Yes, you are quite right. Bernie is singularly unique in his outlook, but that does not mean he is wrong to see American-politics for what it is.

I'm not convinced that if he knows what he wants (and he succeeds at becoming PotUS) that he also knows how to get it. Almost all legislation in LaLaLand on the Potomac is of constant negotiation. Not very much is free, gratis and for nothing. For instance, it is a damn fine idea to adopt National Healthcare because it would be much less expensive than private healthcare. But, as they did for Donald Dork's impeachment recently, the Replicants will stonewall any National Healthcare proposition.

So, if the Dems keep the House, they must still win the Senate to assure any passage of such profound importance.

In Europe a Medical degree does not cost an arm-and-a-leg (pun intended) as it does in the US! UK and EU students at English universities are required to pay up to £9,250 (~US$13,050) per year - which is the highest tuition-fee anywhere presently in the EU (and yes Britain is soon to be out of the EU). In the rest of Europe on the continent, however, annual fees are from "free" to about $1000 yearly (up to and including a Bachelor's degree).

Wow, wouldn't THAT be something if US university degrees were free of any tuition-fee! Double Wow ... !

 

IT'S ALL ABOUT NATIONAL DEBT

When one looks at the heartache of Communism (from 1917 to 1993 or thereabouts) it is amazing that it lasted so long. It was born-dead to begin with.

The Europeans in post-WW2 understood why. Because, like it or not Capitalism works! Perhaps not as fairly as it should, but it does work. And, if it works Highly Unfairly, then fix the unfairness with high upper-income taxation and expenditure on key social-programs like Health Care and free (or nearly free) post-secondary education.

That is not Mission Impossible. But, still Mission Improbable - Bernie or no-Bernie.

Socializing Healthcare and post-secondary schooling will be tantamount to magic. It is difficult to see it happening in the US - the Dems would need to control all three seats of power (the HofR, the PotUS, and the Senate).

Yes, and despite the fact that both Government Spending and Total Postsecondary Education fees are contributing to the highest level of Total US Debt ever achieved. Why is that key?

Here's why (from here):

PS: And who just lowered upper-income taxation? One guess. Only one guess!

 

Well it will be good that the closet Socialists in the Democrat Party finally come out of the closet and declare. We need a good debate and it may change the direction of our educational system.....let's hope anyway. The results will be four more years of Making America Great Again!

 

[QUOTE="Daniel Light, post: 1071457026, member: 68016"]I'm not going to vote for Sanders, but I will laugh my ass off knowing that every bit of power that Trump supporters have been handing to the office of President will suddenly be Bernie's if he wins. And if he was running against anyone but Trump - I wouldn't give him a chance. But the anti-Trump
vote is strong.[/QUOTE]
I am impressed Daniel, that you said that.

 

It has been said that if Bernie were to win and Pelosi held the House, she would hold him in Limbo as far as his Socialist extreme policies. She would be content to break her TDS fever by getting rid of Donald. ......but that's not going to happen!

 

What Sanders wants to accomplish can be done but it will probably take all of his first term, maybe most of his second. There will be Republicans left. We must cut out all the cancer that is killing our nation and eradicate the scourge of Trumperism entirely

But my question is how do we get Sanders that first term? Much more importantly, how do we defeat Trump whomever he is running against.

It is overwhelmingly imperative that we avoid the "circular firing squad" select ONE candidate and get behind him completely and totally. Our enemy is ruthless and will stop at nothing. Look at the purge he is doing in the White House now if you want some idea of what will happen to Democrats if Trump wins in November. There is no question that the USA faces an existential threat larger even than WWII (In WWII the enemy was not in our elections already)

https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2...l-employees-bowels-federal-government/163316/

 

As I never tire of saying: The man is sick, sick, sick in the head!

To wit:
*Psychology Today: Why Is the Trump Presidency of Extreme Psychological Interest?
*Amazon.com: The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President
*The Atlantic: The Mind of Donald Trump

 

I've often wondered what "too much to the left" meant for Americans.

Is nearly-free National Healthcare and Post-secondary Education "too much"?

And if it is, then why ... ?

 

IS MED-SCHOOL CHEAPER IN EUROPE?

Not where I live in Europe! Whyzzat?

Because medical-school tuition-fees do not cost the humongous amounts as in the US From here:

Med-schools are not like other post-secondary schooling. First, they are hard to get into because the slots are minimized in the sense one must speak a local national-language. In the UK, yes, they are in English. But certainly not in France! Second, the student fees (uniquely this profession) een in France are not zero-euros (as they are for most other subjects).

Med-schools in Europe costing (from here):

Even if one had to borrow that amount, that sum mentioned above is well within the means of any doctor practicing medicine in any EU-country.

So, you wanna study medicine in Europe? Uh, uh. You have to be a EU-citizen to obtain the zero tuition-fees shown here for a university in the Sweden where the courses are taught in English (wow!). Otherwise tuition-fees for non-EU students in Sweden are shown in this link here.

 

LIVING ABROAD

I've lived in Europe since posted here in 1980. I'll never go back.

The American community that lives in Europe is estimated to be around 800,000 - but that is only a Good Guess. Anyway, if you do want to live-to-work here, know that you will be obliged to pay American taxes on all amounts above $100K a year. (And do not expect to have any representative for you - your ex-stateside rep will assume that responsibility. And believe me, s/he wont give a damn about you. You simply no longer count.)

I have been a member of American clubs wherever I've lived in Europe. I never met a Yank who lived here permanently and wanted to go back. Inevitably (maybe after 5-years) one changes habits, likes, ways, etc. But most never eer step into a voting booth in their lives. And yet, their kids who have dual-nationality are VERY WELL EDUCATED and tend to get into any university stateside that they want.

Besides, automatic weapons are not allowed for sale in France. Nowhere. So, nobody gets killed by, say, an automatic weapon unless the assailant smuggled the weapon in from abroad. That has happened more than just-once in Europe ...

 

This:

is a rather interesting and growing trend. I wonder if the conservatives have plans to prohibit it.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/912009

Washington University Med School Latest to Offer Free Tuition
Ken Terry

April 18, 2019

• according to a school news release.
  
  The St. Louis medical school said it has committed $100 million over the next decade to allow up to half of future medical students to attend its classes for free. Many other students will receive partial tuition support, the announcement said.
  
  Unlike the tuition-free programs at some other schools, which are funded by wealthy donors, the one at Washington University will come "primarily" from the school of medicine via its departments and its affiliated training hospitals, Barnes-Jewish Hospital and St. Louis Children's Hospital, according to the news release.
  
  The tuition grants will start with the incoming class of 2019-2020. Scholarships will be awarded on the basis of need, merit, or some combination of the two.
  
  A portion of the $100 million will be spent on improving the medical school's curriculum. Among the goals of the revamp, the university wants to encourage more young doctors to become academic physicians.
  
  Before announcing the scholarships, Washington University School of Medicine was already helping students graduate with as little debt as possible. The school's policy is to freeze the tuition of incoming students so that they pay the same amount each year for the 4 years of medical education.
  
  Of the 120 students in each class, 20 already receive full scholarships, and 40 receive partial tuition. The annual cost of tuition for the 2018-2019 first-year class is about $65,000.
  
  Partly as a result of these policies, the average debt of Washington University medical students when they graduate is $99,088, 40% less than the national average of $166,239. In 4 of the past 5 years, the institution has been ranked as the second lowest nationally in average medical school debt, according to the school.
  
  
  
  "For most medical students, debt is a significant factor in selecting a school and a career path," Eva Aagaard, MD, senior associate dean for education and the Carol B. and Jerome T. Loeb Professor of Medical Education, said in the release. "We want to help alleviate that financial burden and instead focus on training the best and brightest students to become talented and compassionate physicians and future leaders in academic medicine."
  
  Rapidly Growing Trend
  The best-known free tuition program is the one at New York University School of Medicine, thanks to a recent segment on the television program, 60 Minutes. NYU announced last August that it would offer free medical school tuition to all current and future students, regardless of need or merit.
  
  The cost of a year's tuition there is $55,000, but students have to cover their university-subsidized living costs and insurance, which amounts to about $28,000 a year. NYU is paying for the students' education through an endowment that is currently worth $450 million.
  
  Although NYU is the largest and most highly ranked medical school to make this commitment, it was not the first. In December 2017, the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, in New York City, announced it would cover tuition for all students who qualified for financial aid and who received student loans. The scholarship, made possible by a gift from Columbia alumnus and former Merck CEO Roy Vagelos, replaces the student loan.
  
  
  The David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, also offers full, merit-based free tuition, room and board, books, and supplies to about 20% of each class. The program is funded from the endowment that entertainment mogul Geffen bestowed on the university in 2012.
  
  
  The Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine at Case Western Reserve University, in Ohio, has offered free tuition since 2008. Each year, about 2000 applicants vie for the 32 tuition-free slots in the medical school.
  
  
  Two new medical schools are offering free tuition as well. In July 2018, the University of Houston's new College of Medicine announced that all 30 students in its inaugural class will receive their education gratis when the school opens in 2020.
  
  
  Kaiser Permanente's School of Medicine, in Pasadena, California, which opens in summer 2020, will waive tuition for 4 years for its first five classes of students, it was recently announced.
  
  
  For more news, join us on Facebook and Twitter
  
  • Free Tuition for First Classes of Kaiser Permanente Med School
  • NYU to Offer Free Tuition to All Current, Future Med Students
  • Free Tuition for Entire First Class at New Medical School
  
  
  
  Comments (4)
  
  
  
  What to Read Next on Medscape
  Recommended Reading
  • NEWSWashington University Med School Latest to Offer Free Tuition
  • NEWSFree Med School Tuition Still a "Pipe Dream" for Most: Survey
  • NEWSU of Arizona Offers Free Med School Tuition for Primary Care
  • ARTICLEIs Free Medical Tuition Actually Working?
  Related Conditions & Procedures
  • Evaluating the Literature
  • Chromosomal Breakage Syndromes
  • Psychosocial and Environmental Pregnancy Risks
  • HIV Infection and AIDS
  Most Popular Articles
  According to MEDICAL STUDENTS
  1. Doctors Give Millennial Med Students a Bad Rap
  2. Advice Doctors Wish They Had Gotten During Med School
  3. Your Burnout Isn't Your Fault, but You Should 'Own' It
  4. New Admission Test Flawed, Won't Produce Better Doctors
  5. COVID-19: Osmosis Study Video
  View More
  
  
  
  FIND US ON
  
  ABOUT
  About MedscapePrivacy PolicyEditorial PolicyCookiesTerms of UseAdvertising PolicyHelp Center
  MEMBERSHIP
  Email NewslettersManage My Account
  APPS
  MedscapeCME & Education
  WEBMD NETWORK
  WebMDMedicineNeteMedicineHealthRxListWebMD Corporate
  EDITIONS
  EnglishDeutschEspañolFrançaisPortuguês
  All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2020 by WebMD LLC. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

 

All good news - if they can extend it to ALL SCHOOLS within a national public university system. These programs are being funded by the US government for all comers. Tertiary Education should be like Secondary-schooling - free, gratis and for nothing ...

PS: There is no reason whatsoever to make Tertiary Education a huge private-debt the second largest of the nation. (See here)

 

Another well thought out & highly accurate post. Even as a liberal, I agree with most of it--almost ALL of it. I too have had experiences trying to help people who abused that aid. I understand your logic completely. I don't disagree with your post in the way you present it. I agree, the government is even less likely to be capable of identifying these freeloaders beforehand than you or I would be as neighbors. But there are additional ways to approach these things--different ways of measuring the results than just individually. Nations themselves can be, & are valued on the number of citizens it endows with good living conditions, job opportunities, pay scales, healthcare access, standard of living, education, etc. Having the current disparity of wealth so strikingly extreme as it is now in America, isn't a positive measure for the success of our economic or political systems. Any cure will have to endure some negative outcomes, like the freeloaders or ingrates you describe in your post. But they always represent a minority group. The majority will not only be grateful for government improving their lives, but will forge forward helping themselves more because of it. We shouldn't allow the minority of despicables to dictate our options here. We would achieve making America greater again by raising the standards of everyone's lifestyles in any way we can, thru government & other means, while absorbing the costs of those ingrates as part of the loss in any good investment.