Sure, I guess, could you explain?
See #8↑ above.
How about just universal healthcare?
Well, what does "universal healthcare" mean? And the reason we must ask this question at all is because of identity politics; we have a nasty tendency in this society to carve out exclusions, like the Hyde Amendment, and, hey, remember Mitt Romney and Blunt-Rubio?
Here's a fun one, though; I call it the Marco Rubio Question, and there are a few such questions, if we let him get to us, but the one I really, really want answered has to do with a voter asking about health care and contraception, since Republicans and especially Sen. Rubio, are constantly coming after women's health care access, and he answered that his religious faith guides how he uses an IUD. What I would like to know is how, exactly, Marco Rubio uses an Intra-Uterine Device. If you watch the politics surrounding IUDs and oral contraception as abortifacients, the idea that Democrats can avoid facing right-wing religious identity politics is not the sort of fantasy we can afford to entertain.
yeah sure were probably wont be getting vision and dental coverage off the bat, anyways could see this being worked into a economic justice platform that we need to spend most of our time on to win back the goverment.
We need to be watching California; Democrats really want it—
Readers of The Press Democrat have seen opinion pieces on Senate Bill 562, the “Healthy California Act.” That bill, often called single-payer or Medicare for all, is being held in the state Assembly, and I have been criticized for not doing more to overturn that decision.
Let me be clear, I have always supported health care for all. I am a health care provider, chairman of the Assembly Health Committee and strongly believe that health care is a right.
We all know the dangers of empty promises – remember when President Barack Obama said you could keep your doctor? We know that was his intent, but it just didn’t end up that way. So when supporters of this bill say it will eliminate premiums, deductibles and co-pays and guarantee that everyone receives all medically necessary care, including hospitalization, dental, vision, mental health and long-term care, I am skeptical and concerned. More than 60 countries worldwide have universal health care, and while no two are identical, none offer unlimited benefits.
(Wood↱)
Let me be clear, I have always supported health care for all. I am a health care provider, chairman of the Assembly Health Committee and strongly believe that health care is a right.
We all know the dangers of empty promises – remember when President Barack Obama said you could keep your doctor? We know that was his intent, but it just didn’t end up that way. So when supporters of this bill say it will eliminate premiums, deductibles and co-pays and guarantee that everyone receives all medically necessary care, including hospitalization, dental, vision, mental health and long-term care, I am skeptical and concerned. More than 60 countries worldwide have universal health care, and while no two are identical, none offer unlimited benefits.
(Wood↱)
—but haven't yet figured out how to do it.
(It is also important to note, as Chairman Wood points out: "Medicare for all has been a term used to describe the bill, and it is a concept I can actually support, but that’s not what SB 562 is.")
Just don't forget we need to spend most of our time campaigning about economic justice, to win back the goverment.
So, here's the thing: You know how politicians often talk about tax reform, and, you know, I mean, President Trump is particularly bad at this sort of dealing, but Congressional Republicans are their own special brand of stupid, but we can fight over how far to the left the Democratic plan should run all we want but nobody has the plan the Democrats are willing to raise for battle colors.
([House Democrat]: ... and that's the thing, we need these witnesses to cooperate so that the Committee can move forward with its investigation and, quite frankly the rest of our colleagues can continue with the business of keeping the nation running in a healthy manner, such as the Demcratic Tax Reform Plan my distinguished friends from [here] and [there] are preparing to present. This is a powerful plan aiming to push impact-aware, simplified graduations, margins, and sectors to a growth-sustainably distributed eighteen and a quarter to eighteen and a half percent GDP. They've been working real hard while we've been tumbling through the headlines as we try to attend the societal impacts of Donald Trump's election and presidency. And we're going to be here working on that, but we Democrats also have a tax plan and it's time to fix the tax code.)
We hear Democrats rallying 'round Sanders on health care; I figure if they can start sketching the plan during autumn and bring it by spring, they can keep Republicans on their case through the winter as an attempted distraction from Donald Trump, thus keeping the notion of a Democratic plan active in the discourse. And if they can bring it by spring, then they have a new health care plan to commit themselves to, and can run it for the midterm.
And when conservatives bring identity politics, what will Democrats do? What will Bernie's team be willing to give away in order to assuage who? When Warren and Harris and others say, no, we're not making these trades, what, are we right back to moaning about identity politics?
Well not really, poor whites (the ones that don't need abortions that is) are not going to see any obvious benefits from such laws
Which poor whites who don't need abortions? Say what you want about four word policy summaries, but this is also a society that has spent a lot of effort fretting about the intersectionality of having to suffer poor people in the first place. The most obvious benefits for people who aren't poor or don't need abortions, or both, or, you know, whatever, are the ones not noticed except for their absence.
Generally speaking, though—
An no don't go trying to make slogans for those laws just yet, it has to make sense within the very short sights concerns of these people, which is a lack of money, hence why "make america great again" worked and "i'm with her" did no.
—the problem with this approach is one of perpetually lowered expectations.
One of the striking aspects of your pitch is the question of simply getting elected versus the effects of getting elected. Quite frankly, if the Democrats have to stoop, in order to get elected, such that it doesn't matter one way or another—("But the parties are just the same!" people used to bawl)—nobody is accomplishing much of anything.
____________________
Notes:
Wood, Jim. "Close to Home: The path to universal health care". The Press Democrat. 25 August 2017. PressDemocrat.com. 9 September 2017. http://bit.ly/2xWLkb9