Ryan Grim - DC bureau chief at Pro-Sanders The Intercept admits M4A will never pass.

[Scurrilous]

In response to this -

In new flyer, Culinary Union warns members Sanders would ‘end’ their health care if elected president

'Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders would “end Culinary Healthcare” if elected president, according to a new one-pager the politically powerful Culinary Union is posting back of house on the Las Vegas Strip.

The new flyer, a copy of which was obtained by The Nevada Independent, compares the positions on health care, “good jobs” and immigration of six Demoratic presidential hopefuls who have come to the union’s headquarters over the last two months to court its members. But the primary difference outlined in the document, which is being distributed in both English and Spanish, is in the candidates’ positions on health care, taking particular aim at the Vermont senator over his Medicare-for-all policy, which would establish a single-payer, government run health insurance system.

The flyer says Sanders, if elected president, would “end Culinary Healthcare,” “require ‘Medicare For All,’” and “lower drug prices.”

https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/in-new-flyer-culinary-union-warns-members-sanders-would-end-their-health-care-if-elected-president

Ryan Grim@ryangrim

Hey @Culinary226 check in with your government affairs people. There are not 60 votes in the Senate to ban the private health insurance you got in your union negotiations, nor will there be after the election. You're gonna be okay.

Link to tweet

[Indepatriot]

1. Well then, it's settled...

[Tom Rinaldo]

2. Bernie voted for Obamacare without a Public Option

He is not rigid about doing whatever is possible to move the ball forward. What he is adamant about is strongly advocating for what makes the most sense, because until people strongly advocate for what makes the most sense we will not make progress toward that end. Unions understand this. The eight hour day wasn't won in one election cycle.

All of the talk thrown around about how will Bernie get this or that passed without majorities in both houses supporting it to me is irrelevant, as long as Sanders accepts incremental progress when more substantial progress remains out of reach. Medicare for All may well not be possible at this time, but it becomes more possible to achieve at a later time if people use this time to advocate for the advantages of it.

Virtually every leading Democrat supports a Constitutional Amendment to overturn Citizens United. But they (and we) all know that the votes aren't there to pass that Amendment with two/thirds of Congress supporting it.Does that mean our candidates should stop calling for that Constitutional Amendment because it is not currently achievable? Hell no! You can't reach a destination without moving toward it, slowly building the support needed.

[boston bean]

48. That is not really who Bernie is.

He has voted against imperfect bills as a matter of his principle. It’s his thing.

[Scurrilous]

3. So zen. And true.

Link to tweet

[squirecam]

4. So is Bernie intentionally misleading his voters

For something he knows won’t happen?

[Scurrilous]

5. A lot of us have been saying M4A can never pass/

I was called a Republican for pointing that out. Now his staunch supporter is saying the same. Bernie has been in Congress 30 years. He knows the rules. He knows he doesn't have the votes. So he resorts to saying his movement will rise up and ensure passage. Something I've termed magical fairy dust revolution. He said it at one of the debates. And to the NYTimes. Someone is misleading someone. Draw your own conclusions. BTW..congrats on NH.

Twitter has lost its collective mind:

https://twitter.com/search?q=ryan%20grim&src=recent_search_click

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[squirecam]

6. Lol

Ryan Grim
@ryangrim
It's about having a fight that polarizes the electorate around a particular value--in this case, people's health care over profit, and it's about showing a willingness to fight. That fight is unlikely to lead to 100% of the M4A bill as written. Sorry if this comes as a shock. /3
12:24 PM · Feb 12, 2020·Twitter Web App

[Scurrilous]

7. Hah.

Link to tweet

This will reverberate...the dam has broken. Signature issue a lie?

Link to tweet

[squirecam]

8. Yes it a "negotiation" tactic

That we demand you agree to 100% or you are an evil corporatist shill.....

But we know it won’t ever be enacted.

[Scurrilous]

9. All the while refusing to help support ACA.

Bernie Sanders Won’t Support House Democrats’ Plan to Strengthen Obamacare

<snip>

"Fears that progressives will make support for a single-payer health care system a mandatory litmus test for all Democrats became more serious on Tuesday night as Bernie Sanders refused to support, or say anything positive about, a very high-profile House Democratic bill aimed at strengthening Obamacare. Per a Washington Examiner account of Sanders’s interview with Chris Hayes:

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who is running for president and has greatly influenced Democrats’ policy positions, said Tuesday that he does not support a bill introduced by House leaders to expand Obamacare.

“No, I support the ‘Medicare for all’ single-payer program,” Sanders said when MSNBC’s Chris Hayes asked him about the legislation that was introduced earlier that day. Asked a second time to clarify his stance and whether he supported incremental changes to the healthcare system, Sanders again replied that he did not support the bill.

<snip>

"It seems to represent a crossing of the Rubicon in which the candidate treats incremental reform as an abomination:

“Right now we’re working on what I have fought for my entire life,” he said. “Healthcare is a right. It has to be comprehensive. The current system is dysfunctional. It is enormously wasteful.”

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/bernie-sanders-wont-back-house-democrats-obamacare-bill.html


Then drawing up a pledge:

Sanders calls on Democratic rivals to reject drug, insurance industry donations

<snip>

'Sen. Bernie Sanders on Wednesday pledged to refuse donations from health insurance and pharmaceutical lobbyists and executives, as he challenged his rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination to do the same.

Sanders made the announcement hours before he delivers a speech defending "Medicare for All," a plan that would effectively eliminate private health insurance and guarantee government coverage for everyone. He said he will not not knowingly accept money from a list of companies that belong to leading lobbying groups, America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) and PhRMA. He will make an exception for donations received from the "rank-and-file workers" of these companies, which include corporations — like Johnson & Johnson, Kaiser Permanente and Pfizer — that collectively employ several million people.'

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/17/sanders-sanders-drug-insurance-donations-1596818


And his surrogate publicly denounces those who don't sign as corrupt:

‘Middle Class’ Joe Biden has a corruption problem

'Second, healthcare. On 25 April, the day he announced his campaign, Biden went straight to a fundraiser co-hosted by the chief executive of a major health insurance corporation. He refuses to sign a pledge to reject money from insurance and pharma execs and continues to raise money from healthcare industry donors. His campaign is being bankrolled by a super Pac run by healthcare lobbyists.'

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/20/joe-biden-corruption-donald-trump

All for a negotiation tactic.

[betsuni]

16. +1

[Fresh_Start]

38. one of many....nt

nt

[Cha]

10. KR

[Scurrilous]

11. Doesn't look good...

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Remember -

How do you fall for the Bernie Sanders scam? Martin O'Malley

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287464436

[Kurt V.]

27. this is an absolute nothing veggie burger. but a lot going on there in one tweet. ha!

[Scurrilous]

30. Yep. A tweet by a nobody. Means nothing. Who cares. Move along. All is well. Nothing to see here.

Link to tweet

Congressional candidate wishes “most malignant cancer imaginable” on former President Obama

<snip>

'A far-left candidate for Congress isn’t backing down from tweets in which the stated that fprmer President Barack Obama deserves worse than cancer.

Justin Lecea told reporters Monday that he stands by his comments about the former president .

Lecea tweeted a message over the weekend wishing “the most malignant cancer imaginable” on Obama. He’s a candidate for the 20th Congressional District in Texas, which is currently held by Democrat Joaquin Castro.

In Sunday’s tweet, which has been deleted, Lecea quoted a post from Obama encouraging people to sign up for health insurance.

“I just want you to think about all the people who have and will die because Obamacare is pointless and your entire presidency was a waste,” Lecea wrote. “If God was just you would get the most malignant cancer imaginable,” he added.'

https://www.ktsa.com/congressional-candidate-wishes-most-malignant-cancer-imaginable-on-former-president-obama/


'Bernie Democrat' Deletes Tweet Saying He Hopes Obama Gets Cancer....

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287383279

[squirecam]

12. Maybe they should have tried to con their way in

To the copy room to take the flyers.....but they would never do that, right?


https://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/sanders-staffers-posed-as-union-members-in-vegas-218351

[Scurrilous]

15. No boundaries. At all.

It starts with the boss calling a loss a victory and trickles down from there.

The brother Grim collection:

Link to tweet

[DrToast]

13. Yes, that's what Amy has been saying

[Scurrilous]

18. Nailed it.

Klobuchar says progressive proposals like 'Medicare-for-All' and Green New Deal are 'aspirations' (2/12/2019)

'When Cooper asked whether she supported "Medicare-for-all," Klobuchar replied, "I want to see universal health care, Anderson, and there are many ways to get there."

The senator said she supports expanding Medicaid and Medicare, but she did not commit to overhauling private insurance.

"The smartest transition right now would be to do a public option, and you could do it by expanding Medicaid, you can expand Medicare," Klobuchar added. "I'm on both bills that do that, and that's going to get us more quickly, I believe, to where we need to go."

When pressed on whether she supported a Medicare-for-all approach in particular, Klobuchar replied, "I'm happy to look at it as an option, but I'm not on that bill right now."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/12/politics/klobuchar-green-new-deal-ac360-cnntv/index.html

[Cha]

23. Good on Amy!

[Blue_Tires]

14. Grim is a fucking dudebro asshole

The Intercept is a perfect fit for him and his brand of "woke journalism"

[Scurrilous]

19. LOL

Last edited Wed Feb 12, 2020, 09:45 PM - Edit history (1)

Link to tweet

[Cha]

20. Oooops

[George II]

26. Bazinga!

[betsuni]

34. Good one.

[betsuni]

17. K&R

[Scurrilous]

21. ...

[betsuni]

22. Thank you for posting this, very interesting!

[Scurrilous]

31. You're welcome.

[Gothmog]

24. Without a magical voter revolution, none of sanders proposals can be adopted

sanders has no meaningful legislative accomplishments after being in Congress for a very long time. Without a magical voter revolution, sanders will be unable to get his proposals adopted in the real world.

[Yavin4]

25. If he can only pull 26% in New Hampshire, then there is no revolution coming folks.

Not by a long shot.

[OilemFirchen]

28. No matter how you cut it...

this is some epically funny shit.

[highplainsdem]

29. K&R

[Scurrilous]

32. Thanks.

[Cha]

33. Good time to Kick this..

[Scurrilous]

35. Reboinked.

[Cha]

36. yeah..

[MoonlitKnight]

37. And who will sign it if it does pass?

Warren
Sanders
Buttigieg

Anyone else?

[squirecam]

39. Attack anyone against our magic unicorn

Which we now admit doesn’t exist....

[Scurrilous]

41. Hilarious isn't it.

[Cha]

40. Kick

[Scurrilous]

42. AOC - Making sense. Good to see.

.
@AOC “The worst-case scenario? We compromise deeply and we end up getting a public option. Is that a nightmare? I don’t think so."

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

43. In other words, there will be no magical voter revolution in the real world

I have asked questions about this revolution repeatedly. It appears that none of sanders platform can be adopted in the real world without a voter revolution which cause new voters to rise up and make the GOP be reasonable. This concept makes no sense to me and I note that sanders has NO major legislative accomplishments

Here is on one more question

Link to tweet

[Scurrilous]

44. That's a hybrid answer. One and three from the infamous Daily News interview of 2016.

How? Seriously how? I mean.. How.


One - GOP says yes.


Two - Give up.



Three - Magic FDR



I quit talking about it on Twitter. The word limitation doesn't allow proper explanation.

I asked a few times here but got no answer.

Good to see Ryan Grim and AOC ending the argument in our favor though. At long last...vindication.

[Gothmog]

45. sanders does not have a magic wand

Link to tweet

[Scurrilous]

46. We win. LOL

How many useless arguments trying to convince others that what we saying was true. Now the big question. Why are you still voting for him knowing he was leading you on all this time?

[Gothmog]

47. No, radical policies won't drive election-winning turnout

The concept of a magical voter revolution is debunked

Link to tweet

Sanders’s explanation of why this is not a problem is simple, and he has repeated it endlessly. When a member of the Los Angeles Times editorial board asked him whether “a candidate as far to the left as you” would “alienate swing voters and moderates and independents,” the senator replied: “The only way that you beat Trump is by having an unprecedented campaign, an unprecedentedly large voter turnout.” Faiz Shakir, Sanders’s campaign manager, adds: “Bernie Sanders has very unique appeal amongst [the younger] generation and can inspire, I think, a bunch of them to vote in percentages that they have never voted before.”

This has remarkably little empirical support. Take the 2018 midterm elections, in which the Democrats took back the House (a net 40-seat gain), carried the House popular vote by almost nine points and flipped seven Republican-held governorships. Turnout in that election was outstanding, topping 49 percent — the highest midterm turnout since 1914 and up 13 points over the previous midterm, in 2014 — and the demographic composition of the electorate came remarkably close to that of a presidential election year. (Typically, midterm voters tend to be much older and much whiter than those in presidential elections.) This was due both to fewer presidential “drop-off” voters (people who voted in 2016 but not 2018) and to more midterm “surge” voters (those who voted in 2018 but not 2016)…..

This analysis shreds an implicit assumption of Sanders and other members of the turnout-will-solve-everything crowd: that if they polarize the election by highlighting progressive issues, “their” nonvoters will show up at the polls, but none of the nonvoters from the other side will. That view is also contradicted by many political science studies. Stanford political scientists Andrew Hall and Daniel Thompson, for example, studied House races between 2006 and 2014 and found that highly ideological candidates who beat moderates for a party nomination indeed increased turnout in their own party in the general election — but they increased the opposition turnout even more. (The difference was between three and eight percentage points.) Apparently, their extreme political stances did more to turn out the other side to vote against them than to turn out their own side to vote for them.

The turnout equation does not necessarily return positive results for a candidate like Sanders. The reverse is more likely. It is truly magical thinking to believe that, in a highly polarized situation, only your side gets to increase turnout. And if the other side turns out in droves, you might not like the results — a warning Democrats would be wise to heed.