Excellent points, well presented! It made me think how simple things could be if we take big money out of politics and let the people choose their leaders. That is an obtainable goal if we all keep our eyes on the prize and not fall for “The democrats are in disarray” malarkey.
And "big money" is another reason why I detest the corporate Democrats. Democrats HAVE been in power more than once during the past 50 years, and they HAVE had a chance to get Big Money out of our election process, but since they are sucking from the same teat as their GOP colleagues, they've done nothing.
In addition, has anyone with power ever considered opening the primaries to Independents? Maybe we wouldn't get these extremist candidates and have to vote for "the lesser of two evils" if we did.
Without "extremists", our party would never move forward. I was an extremist in the 70s when we kicked Nixon out, stopped the Viet Nam war and moved the country firmly back toward the democratic ideal of making life better for Americans: All Americans. The biggest danger we face at this point is an entrenched and corrupt supreme court. They are the source of the biggest problems and they are the result of Regan and a system that has degenerated as a result of fox disinformation and propaganda services. Meidas is perhaps a step towards initiating our own response to that abomination.
Democrats weren't the only ones who sickened from Nixon's corruption and the Vietnam War, but at least the Republican party had a soul then and knew that cooperaton is essential for governing.
I was anti-war, protested, and was considered an extremist during the late 60s and early 70s. My parents shared my opinions on Nixon and the war, and we were all Republicans at the time.
I'll support the "extremist" or progressive (much nicer sounding word) Democrats now because I detest the establishment Democrats who haven't been much of an opposition party for decades, and have in their own "small" way contributed to this current malaise.
Ronald Reagan was one of the worst presidents this country ever had. He initiated the class warfare, division, corruption, and rightwing propaganda that have radicalized millions of Americans.
I have absolutely no arguments with your comments about the Supreme Court. And, of course, Meidas and other independent voices are providing a much needed alternative to the sold-out, soulless corporate media.
There is not only room for the disaffected republicans of the past, but we need them. They are every bit as American as any democrat. Together perhaps the reshaping of this poor, benighted country can begin.
My generation of Canadians will be boycotting and avoiding America for a long time. Until womens rights are returned, I will never set foot on American soil. Until healthcare is returned to the marginalized, the poor and every immmigrant, I will work 24/7 to protect my nation from American aggression.
And so you should. There is nothing worse than a betrayal of one's best friend. Most of us, including many of the Trump voters, have always had warm feelings for Canada, but Trump hardly had his inaugurals when he began insulting our friend.
Like you, I work to end this nightmare, but I don't expect any country who was once our ally to come back saying "All is forgiven" when Trump and this nightmare is over. Trump saves his worst verbal abuses for our allies, and no former ally is going to want things to be the way they were, knowing that Americans voted for a Trump twice and might do it again in the future.
George Washington advised us against political parties in his 1796 Farewell Address. He said that political parties serve as "potent engines" that ambitious and unprincipled people use to subvert the power of the people and usurp the reins of government.
He, the other Founding Fathers, and our early presidents had a lot of sage advice that this country's leaders have ignored. Including John Quincy Adams' remark about the US "not going abroad looking for monsters to destroy."
Our Founding Fathers must be spinning in their graves, because we have ignored their warnings.
Amazing the intelligence of our founding fathers and elected politicians had. Even many who were wealthy by 1776 standards, they were obsessed with freedom to make choices and pursue an enjoyable life. They talked, they discussed, they argued political opinions and they meditated, wrote and became statesman. All without Fox Entertainment News. They did not even have TV. Their brains were large, active and functional. Well maybe Hamilton and Burr got some bad moonshine.
If only DJT would challenge Gavin Newsome to a Hamilton-burr style contest.
Opening primaries to independents is a great idea, the trouble, however, is in there not being an "independent" political party, so independents have no independent party identification, which would then allow anybody of any political party to vote in primaries and that could badly skew a voting outcome. Picture one party overwhelming an opposition party's primary election, for instance.
There are two organizations of Independents trying to get state governments to allow Independents to vote. I certainly don't think the current system is working for me or for anyone else except those who are benefiting from the status quo.
We didn't "have" to have political parties, and we certainly were never restricted to two except by those who benefit from the current malaise. Serving in a public office was never intended to be a career. Third party candidates have a terrible time even getting on the ballot in this exclusive two-party system, because neither major party wants to reform the status quo. Other countries have had more than two parties and have done well with coalition governments.
If we had more than two parties, I might not be an Independent. But both parties have a monopoly over our system, and neither represent me, and other voting Independents. Why should I be forced to join the lesser of two evils? Why should I be satisfied with joining the likes of Schumer and the other establishment Democrats who have been sitting on their hands watching the working class dribble away for 50 years, and just itching for the GOP to make Americans so miserable that they vote for Democrats just to stop the pain?
If the big issue is medical care -- Medicare for All vs theft by deception -- we win. The unions and manufacturers have to be educated.... The same car model made in Windsor, Ontario is cheaper than one made in Detroit. Same car!
If the big issue is racism -- we lose. We need Slotkin and Peters and followers of the Levin brothers out front and center.
Most of the MAGA in MI are transplants -- generations of them.
"Last night I went to sleep in Detroit City
I dreamed about them cotton fields of home
I dreamed about my mother, dear old pappy, sister and brother
And I dreamed about the girl who's been waitin' for so long
Home folks think I'm big in Detroit City
From the letters that I write they think I'm just fine, yes they do
But by day I make the cars and by night I make the bars
The biggest stumbling block for Medicare for All has always been, and remains, a realistic discussion about the cost to taxpayers. Every time it's come up, the people advocating for it have been dodgy about the massive cost of implementing it. IF they address that, honestly, and make the case for it, it might start changing people's minds. But as long as they keep playing hide-the-ball on costs, they give republicans the opening to fear monger on it. For perspective, it took DECADES just to pass a proposal as moderate as the Affordable Care Act.
This is why I think those like Dr. Abdul El-Sayed are crucial in our Congress: as an epidemiologist, he has FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE that can stand against (R) disinformation; and he's already considered the path to ensuring that ALL Americans can choose to be healthy AND buy groceries/pay rent/etc. (He *literally* "wrote the book on Healthcare for All...)
Putting record-setting settlement fraudstars (no typo) like Rick Scott in office to grift and insider trade does NOT help America's need to provide a healthy workforce and children able to learn.
You can't hire The Three Stooges and expect to build the Burj Khalifa or Washington Monument: if we want good governance, we must elect good representatives to enact our goals; and that means hiring those who WANT to work FOR us (not just themselves or their Crime Family) and for America.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, also an epidemiologist, was just held in contempt of congress by the republicans. Don't be so sure that Dr. El-Sayed would be taken any more seriously by the deeply unserious people on the republican side. I hope he can make the case for universal healthcare, but he'll have to be honest about how much it will cost to individual taxpayers.
If implementation is accompanied by elimination of the "collateral source" rule in litigation, the costs drop like a rock. Medicare has a silent lien on all permanent future damages. If the contingent liability is reduced the cost of most other insurance, like workers comp and personal liability will drop.
The reason it wasn't instituted when Hilarycare was up was that the insurance industry was opposed. In essence, they lobbied Hilary.
AI Overview
The collateral source rule prevents a defendant in a personal injury lawsuit from reducing their payout by showing that the plaintiff’s medical bills were paid by an outside source, such as Medicare.
How Medicare Applies to the Rule
General Rule: In many jurisdictions, Medicare is treated like private health insurance. Juries cannot be told that Medicare covered the medical costs, and the final damages award is not automatically reduced just because the government paid the bills.
Billed vs. Paid Amounts: Courts vary on whether a plaintiff can recover the full "billed" amount from a hospital or only the discounted amount Medicare actually paid the provider.
There is no scenario in which the costs of Medicare for All 'drop like rock.' It will be massively expensive to implement. That expense may be worth it, and that's the case its proponents would have to make, but this continuous dodging of the cost to taxpayers is why it doesn't have a chance. At least until people start talking honestly about it.
Not true. Don't need to reinvent the wheel to implement. The structure is already in place. You accept propaganda from the insurance industry. Not socialized medicine. Socialized insurance.
The reason Part B is high is that all beneficiaries are the halt, lame, blind and old; high risk. Add the general population and less risk, therefore costs drop. Not only for health care, but as health care is a cost of goods sole ( a n economic term) the cost of production of virtually everything would be less.
E,G, Medical malpractice insurance costs, as no longer high, would be reduced, and therefore medical providers would not have to charge as much.
AI Key Differences: U.S. vs. Universal SystemsThe operational and financial differences fundamentally alter corporate overhead:Administrative Wastage:
The U.S. system forces businesses and hospital networks to spend over $1,000 per person annually on administrative costs (coding, billing, and coverage disputes).
Universal systems spend a fraction of this (averaging 1% to 3% of total healthcare spending) due to standardized billing frameworks.
Per-Capita Health Spending: The lack of price controls means the U.S. spends $14,775 per capita on healthcare, which is double the spending of peer nations like Canada ($7,301) or the UK ($6,747). Much of this financial delta is directly absorbed by American businesses via corporate premium inflation.
True and we need to be working both harder and smarter to make that happen. I appreciated the article the Contrarian did today about a winning 4 step plan to turn up the heat on GOP enablers. We need to be doing these things everywhere.
Start with banning AIPAC.......send Schumer and Jeffires packing and bring on the young progressives that want universal healthcare.....100 % retrurn of all womens healthcare and banning of child marrage.........50 year old MAGA pedos should not be allowed to legally marrry a 14 year old child.
The sooner … the better HOW WE “FEEL” IN SHOWING THE MOST IMPORTANT 250 years of reality in knowing that “American VALUES AS THE MAINSTREAM OF USA 🇺🇸 TRADITIONALLY SOUND AND STEADFAST SAFE COMFORT ZONES OF TRUTH, JOY, CHARITY AND FAMILY GROWTH TIME TOGETHER.”
What is of VALUE and BELIEFS to you personally? Do you know what your FEELINGS tell you?
There are two most important books in the world that I VALUE THE MOST … YOUR PARENTS
The HOLY BIBLE - KJV KING JAMES VERSION … The Ten Commandments and The Golden Rule
THE ENGLISH DICTIONARY Merriam-Webster
My # 3 Go to DEMOCRACY REFERENCE
The UNITED STATES 🇺🇸 of America CONSTITUTION OF LAW & ORDER
THE BILL of RIGHTS
This is of great VALUE for those who are beginning to READ at an early age and stage and of a firm foundational respected WISE everlasting VALUES SYSTEMS of time tested 250th Anniversary of FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS OF SUBSTANCE … BECAUSE TRUTH MATTERS. For those beginning to READ TODAY THEY WILL BRING FORTH AMERICA’S BETTER WISDOMS OF THE NEXT 250 YEARS … August 06, 2026 SC USA 🇺🇸🇺🇦🗳️🔔⚖️🤗🫡🧭🗽🦅✝️👏🙏❤️🤍💙⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Nothing is more idiotic than assuming I'm a progressive Democrat because I loathe Trump and his regime and everything it stands for.
Actually, I feel more affinity with NeverTrump Republicans. But since they have been ousted by the RINO MAGA Trump party, I haven't voted for anyone with an (R) next to their name since 2018. And that includes my innocuous state rep who is a Republican and has been in office for about 40 years -- long before the RINO MAGA Trump party lost its soul.
I hope Americans are tired of their hate, but even if they are just tired of lies and high grocery prices and gas prices and well, everything, I hope they are tired of that in sufficient numbers to vote for something else and vote out the GOP. Of course it is up to us to be sure they have the proof (do they really need more proof..we all go to the grocery store every week and see it get harder and harder to feed out families AND pay the electric bill). We have to hold our candidates accountable to keep the focus on reality and not the distractions the GOP tries to fool us with. It's a shame the media is such little help...I'd love to see reporters (you know, the old fashioned kind that asked real questions and did not let interviewees off the hook) ask Mike Johnson just what DOES he know about...he, and actually so many other GOP members of Congress just say they don't know about that issue...what in the world DO they know about? When to do stock trades based on inside information from trump? Seems like that's about it.
Good article. When political pundits stop pontificating about the "division in the Democratic Party", and those within the party realize that we all want the same things, perhaps those in the party will unite, avoid self sabotage, and avoid what happened in 2016 and 2024. Hope springs eternal.
Beware the narcissism of small differences. Reading this from the UK, the resonances with the debates and infighting in and around Labour are palpable and it was one thing that eventually undid Starmer’s premiership. Get it together folks. History will not be forgiving if the Democrats screw things up - especially given the opportunity and what’s at stake.
I couldn't disagree more people want change and electing the same old centrist corporate pac elected officials won't cut it. Because he's right about one thing people are pissed regular people are sliding out of the middle class and into the lower, everything is more expensive while wages remain flat. I'm not saying go far left I'm saying go populist stop with the same old malarkey "incremental change" and all that. America is at a cross roads our president is creating an oligarchy and Congress is doing nothing! People don't want things to go back to where they were they want change and until that happens we will continue to lose ground to the far right. Think of it like an old fashioned scale with the right on one side and the left on the other. Right now the scale is tipped way towards the right and the rich, you don't balance the scale by putting a tiny weight on the scale because heaven forbid the scale tips anywhere past even towards the left, you put a heavy weight to the left and if it goes to far you take some off. The scales for too long towards the right and the rich put something heavy on the left and take our country back from the oligarchy
I know as a voter I don’t care what you have to say. If you take PAC money any kind of donor money I will not vote for you. corporations and big donors are controlling our Congress and it’s got to stop. Term limits are of the most utmost importance.
It's time for people to grow up and that includes democrats. Yes we want change. Yes the system is corrupt. Yes it's true that not everyone agrees with me: that's called individualism. Any of you out there that think that others 100% agree with you truly fail to recognize the reality of life. We are, every one of us, different. Some of you get down on extremist newcomers who demand change. Some get down on the entrenched democrats who have been there, done that and demand they be replaced. Yes there is money in politics. Always has been. Always will be (hopefully not at current levels but....). Many of the old school democrats that young people get down on have in fact fought the good fight. Many of the new comers with new ideas are to be applauded. If we don't do this together, it won't get done. Once the primaries are done, we stand together and stop the bitching.
I generally have great contempt for "political strategists," but this essay is insightful. People's weakness for labels is such that we need something more meaningful than Left and Right. Maybe forward and backward, with emphasis that forward does NOT necessarily imply left-leaning, nor does backward imply right-leaning. The idea of Forward is dedication to facts and reason, with appreciation of the progress America had been making over time... until a vicious racist corrupt demagogue took over the government.
It's trite and lazy to accept the pundit class trope about two warring factions within the Democratic Party. The truth, at the voter level, is people hold both progressive and moderate views depending on the issue. And they get along with their progressive and moderate neighbors. When I hear about Democrats battling it out over ideas and issues, I don't see 'Dems in disarray'; I see a functioning political party where all views can be expressed. The opposite of the locked-down, Trump-censored republicans who can't even publicly admit that Joe Biden won the 2020 election.
Yes, there are certain factions among the Dems who hold the corrosive belief that if you don't agree with them 'you should start your own party.' But those people are a rump faction not the majority. Most of us - Dems, Indies, former republicans - are all on the pro-democracy team and we just want our country to return to normalcy, decency, rule of law, and fair treatment for ALL Americans not the privileged few.
I think the candidates on either side that have the best chances, are those who seem (at least) to sincerely believe in something instead of changing their strategy and policies after reading the polls, and see politics as a horse race. How many times have we heard "I voted for Trump, because he speaks his mind", which he does, in all its vulgarity, delusion and cruelty.
On the Democratic side, anyone who stands up for decency and the original values of the Declaration, who seems to see the big picture, to denounce the harm caused by the oligarchy and the stubborn attachment to fossil fuels, greed and pursuit of wealth and power, has a good chance. And I would not call them "leftists", but realists.
And I would not confuse socialism, which in my view means that the government owns common assets (like fire and police) and infrastructure (energy, bridges, roads) while maintaining healthcare for all and a social safety net necessary to maintain the economy (yes, making sure people don't starve or get deathly ill is actually good for the economy, for everyone even the rich) with communism, where the government owns the means of production for everything, which turned out so far to have opened the door to totalitarianism and privileges for the few, which probably caused Karl Marx to roll in his grave.
Good points made and I agree 100%. Voters don't sort themselves into categories. They resonate with someone who they think has their interests at heart authentically. Bernie Sanders addressed this issue really well in his interview with Ben last night. I'll try to paraphrase: It's not about labels, it's about raising the issues people care about and pretty much agree on (the state of healthcare, high prices, needless wars ...). That's how Mamdani campaigned for mayor in NYC and he seems to be keeping many of his campaign promises).
Excellent points, well presented! It made me think how simple things could be if we take big money out of politics and let the people choose their leaders. That is an obtainable goal if we all keep our eyes on the prize and not fall for “The democrats are in disarray” malarkey.
Well said, Mike!
And "big money" is another reason why I detest the corporate Democrats. Democrats HAVE been in power more than once during the past 50 years, and they HAVE had a chance to get Big Money out of our election process, but since they are sucking from the same teat as their GOP colleagues, they've done nothing.
In addition, has anyone with power ever considered opening the primaries to Independents? Maybe we wouldn't get these extremist candidates and have to vote for "the lesser of two evils" if we did.
Without "extremists", our party would never move forward. I was an extremist in the 70s when we kicked Nixon out, stopped the Viet Nam war and moved the country firmly back toward the democratic ideal of making life better for Americans: All Americans. The biggest danger we face at this point is an entrenched and corrupt supreme court. They are the source of the biggest problems and they are the result of Regan and a system that has degenerated as a result of fox disinformation and propaganda services. Meidas is perhaps a step towards initiating our own response to that abomination.
Democrats weren't the only ones who sickened from Nixon's corruption and the Vietnam War, but at least the Republican party had a soul then and knew that cooperaton is essential for governing.
I was anti-war, protested, and was considered an extremist during the late 60s and early 70s. My parents shared my opinions on Nixon and the war, and we were all Republicans at the time.
I'll support the "extremist" or progressive (much nicer sounding word) Democrats now because I detest the establishment Democrats who haven't been much of an opposition party for decades, and have in their own "small" way contributed to this current malaise.
Ronald Reagan was one of the worst presidents this country ever had. He initiated the class warfare, division, corruption, and rightwing propaganda that have radicalized millions of Americans.
I have absolutely no arguments with your comments about the Supreme Court. And, of course, Meidas and other independent voices are providing a much needed alternative to the sold-out, soulless corporate media.
Yes, it's an abomination.
There is not only room for the disaffected republicans of the past, but we need them. They are every bit as American as any democrat. Together perhaps the reshaping of this poor, benighted country can begin.
What a wonderful, affirming thing to say! Thank you!
Our country is the greatest single experiment in the history of humanity and if we work together it will survive.
My generation of Canadians will be boycotting and avoiding America for a long time. Until womens rights are returned, I will never set foot on American soil. Until healthcare is returned to the marginalized, the poor and every immmigrant, I will work 24/7 to protect my nation from American aggression.
Elbows Up....Never 51.
And so you should. There is nothing worse than a betrayal of one's best friend. Most of us, including many of the Trump voters, have always had warm feelings for Canada, but Trump hardly had his inaugurals when he began insulting our friend.
Like you, I work to end this nightmare, but I don't expect any country who was once our ally to come back saying "All is forgiven" when Trump and this nightmare is over. Trump saves his worst verbal abuses for our allies, and no former ally is going to want things to be the way they were, knowing that Americans voted for a Trump twice and might do it again in the future.
Such a novel approach!
George Washington advised us against political parties in his 1796 Farewell Address. He said that political parties serve as "potent engines" that ambitious and unprincipled people use to subvert the power of the people and usurp the reins of government.
He, the other Founding Fathers, and our early presidents had a lot of sage advice that this country's leaders have ignored. Including John Quincy Adams' remark about the US "not going abroad looking for monsters to destroy."
Our Founding Fathers must be spinning in their graves, because we have ignored their warnings.
Amazing the intelligence of our founding fathers and elected politicians had. Even many who were wealthy by 1776 standards, they were obsessed with freedom to make choices and pursue an enjoyable life. They talked, they discussed, they argued political opinions and they meditated, wrote and became statesman. All without Fox Entertainment News. They did not even have TV. Their brains were large, active and functional. Well maybe Hamilton and Burr got some bad moonshine.
If only DJT would challenge Gavin Newsome to a Hamilton-burr style contest.
Opening primaries to independents is a great idea, the trouble, however, is in there not being an "independent" political party, so independents have no independent party identification, which would then allow anybody of any political party to vote in primaries and that could badly skew a voting outcome. Picture one party overwhelming an opposition party's primary election, for instance.
There are two organizations of Independents trying to get state governments to allow Independents to vote. I certainly don't think the current system is working for me or for anyone else except those who are benefiting from the status quo.
We didn't "have" to have political parties, and we certainly were never restricted to two except by those who benefit from the current malaise. Serving in a public office was never intended to be a career. Third party candidates have a terrible time even getting on the ballot in this exclusive two-party system, because neither major party wants to reform the status quo. Other countries have had more than two parties and have done well with coalition governments.
If we had more than two parties, I might not be an Independent. But both parties have a monopoly over our system, and neither represent me, and other voting Independents. Why should I be forced to join the lesser of two evils? Why should I be satisfied with joining the likes of Schumer and the other establishment Democrats who have been sitting on their hands watching the working class dribble away for 50 years, and just itching for the GOP to make Americans so miserable that they vote for Democrats just to stop the pain?
Well the fascist reps seem controlled and cowardly ( confused and destructive except about his own $ gain)
And dems campaign on honesty, human rights, preserving democracy, and stopping inflation& corruption!
VOTE BLUE 🗳 NOV
Hear! Hear! Seconded, Mike!
If the big issue is medical care -- Medicare for All vs theft by deception -- we win. The unions and manufacturers have to be educated.... The same car model made in Windsor, Ontario is cheaper than one made in Detroit. Same car!
If the big issue is racism -- we lose. We need Slotkin and Peters and followers of the Levin brothers out front and center.
Most of the MAGA in MI are transplants -- generations of them.
"Last night I went to sleep in Detroit City
I dreamed about them cotton fields of home
I dreamed about my mother, dear old pappy, sister and brother
And I dreamed about the girl who's been waitin' for so long
Home folks think I'm big in Detroit City
From the letters that I write they think I'm just fine, yes they do
But by day I make the cars and by night I make the bars
If only they could read between the lines."
The biggest stumbling block for Medicare for All has always been, and remains, a realistic discussion about the cost to taxpayers. Every time it's come up, the people advocating for it have been dodgy about the massive cost of implementing it. IF they address that, honestly, and make the case for it, it might start changing people's minds. But as long as they keep playing hide-the-ball on costs, they give republicans the opening to fear monger on it. For perspective, it took DECADES just to pass a proposal as moderate as the Affordable Care Act.
This is why I think those like Dr. Abdul El-Sayed are crucial in our Congress: as an epidemiologist, he has FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE that can stand against (R) disinformation; and he's already considered the path to ensuring that ALL Americans can choose to be healthy AND buy groceries/pay rent/etc. (He *literally* "wrote the book on Healthcare for All...)
Putting record-setting settlement fraudstars (no typo) like Rick Scott in office to grift and insider trade does NOT help America's need to provide a healthy workforce and children able to learn.
You can't hire The Three Stooges and expect to build the Burj Khalifa or Washington Monument: if we want good governance, we must elect good representatives to enact our goals; and that means hiring those who WANT to work FOR us (not just themselves or their Crime Family) and for America.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, also an epidemiologist, was just held in contempt of congress by the republicans. Don't be so sure that Dr. El-Sayed would be taken any more seriously by the deeply unserious people on the republican side. I hope he can make the case for universal healthcare, but he'll have to be honest about how much it will cost to individual taxpayers.
Most politicians are penny wise pound foolish.
If implementation is accompanied by elimination of the "collateral source" rule in litigation, the costs drop like a rock. Medicare has a silent lien on all permanent future damages. If the contingent liability is reduced the cost of most other insurance, like workers comp and personal liability will drop.
The reason it wasn't instituted when Hilarycare was up was that the insurance industry was opposed. In essence, they lobbied Hilary.
AI Overview
The collateral source rule prevents a defendant in a personal injury lawsuit from reducing their payout by showing that the plaintiff’s medical bills were paid by an outside source, such as Medicare.
How Medicare Applies to the Rule
General Rule: In many jurisdictions, Medicare is treated like private health insurance. Juries cannot be told that Medicare covered the medical costs, and the final damages award is not automatically reduced just because the government paid the bills.
Billed vs. Paid Amounts: Courts vary on whether a plaintiff can recover the full "billed" amount from a hospital or only the discounted amount Medicare actually paid the provider.
There is no scenario in which the costs of Medicare for All 'drop like rock.' It will be massively expensive to implement. That expense may be worth it, and that's the case its proponents would have to make, but this continuous dodging of the cost to taxpayers is why it doesn't have a chance. At least until people start talking honestly about it.
Not true. Don't need to reinvent the wheel to implement. The structure is already in place. You accept propaganda from the insurance industry. Not socialized medicine. Socialized insurance.
The reason Part B is high is that all beneficiaries are the halt, lame, blind and old; high risk. Add the general population and less risk, therefore costs drop. Not only for health care, but as health care is a cost of goods sole ( a n economic term) the cost of production of virtually everything would be less.
E,G, Medical malpractice insurance costs, as no longer high, would be reduced, and therefore medical providers would not have to charge as much.
AI Key Differences: U.S. vs. Universal SystemsThe operational and financial differences fundamentally alter corporate overhead:Administrative Wastage:
The U.S. system forces businesses and hospital networks to spend over $1,000 per person annually on administrative costs (coding, billing, and coverage disputes).
Universal systems spend a fraction of this (averaging 1% to 3% of total healthcare spending) due to standardized billing frameworks.
Per-Capita Health Spending: The lack of price controls means the U.S. spends $14,775 per capita on healthcare, which is double the spending of peer nations like Canada ($7,301) or the UK ($6,747). Much of this financial delta is directly absorbed by American businesses via corporate premium inflation.
PERFECT 🤩 EXACTLY RIGHT … VOTE 🗳️ ALL BLUE🇺🇸🇺🇦🤗🗳️🤍💙🫡⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️🧭🗽🦅📣🔔⚖️
I agree. We need to get these Republicans out of office.
True and we need to be working both harder and smarter to make that happen. I appreciated the article the Contrarian did today about a winning 4 step plan to turn up the heat on GOP enablers. We need to be doing these things everywhere.
AGREED, plain& simple, TRUE!
We definitely need to clean House!
Start with banning AIPAC.......send Schumer and Jeffires packing and bring on the young progressives that want universal healthcare.....100 % retrurn of all womens healthcare and banning of child marrage.........50 year old MAGA pedos should not be allowed to legally marrry a 14 year old child.
The sooner … the better HOW WE “FEEL” IN SHOWING THE MOST IMPORTANT 250 years of reality in knowing that “American VALUES AS THE MAINSTREAM OF USA 🇺🇸 TRADITIONALLY SOUND AND STEADFAST SAFE COMFORT ZONES OF TRUTH, JOY, CHARITY AND FAMILY GROWTH TIME TOGETHER.”
What is of VALUE and BELIEFS to you personally? Do you know what your FEELINGS tell you?
There are two most important books in the world that I VALUE THE MOST … YOUR PARENTS
The HOLY BIBLE - KJV KING JAMES VERSION … The Ten Commandments and The Golden Rule
THE ENGLISH DICTIONARY Merriam-Webster
My # 3 Go to DEMOCRACY REFERENCE
The UNITED STATES 🇺🇸 of America CONSTITUTION OF LAW & ORDER
THE BILL of RIGHTS
This is of great VALUE for those who are beginning to READ at an early age and stage and of a firm foundational respected WISE everlasting VALUES SYSTEMS of time tested 250th Anniversary of FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS OF SUBSTANCE … BECAUSE TRUTH MATTERS. For those beginning to READ TODAY THEY WILL BRING FORTH AMERICA’S BETTER WISDOMS OF THE NEXT 250 YEARS … August 06, 2026 SC USA 🇺🇸🇺🇦🗳️🔔⚖️🤗🫡🧭🗽🦅✝️👏🙏❤️🤍💙⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Nothing is more idiotic than assuming I'm a progressive Democrat because I loathe Trump and his regime and everything it stands for.
Actually, I feel more affinity with NeverTrump Republicans. But since they have been ousted by the RINO MAGA Trump party, I haven't voted for anyone with an (R) next to their name since 2018. And that includes my innocuous state rep who is a Republican and has been in office for about 40 years -- long before the RINO MAGA Trump party lost its soul.
It's more Republican think tank bullshit. I hope Americans are done listening to their hate.
I hope Americans are tired of their hate, but even if they are just tired of lies and high grocery prices and gas prices and well, everything, I hope they are tired of that in sufficient numbers to vote for something else and vote out the GOP. Of course it is up to us to be sure they have the proof (do they really need more proof..we all go to the grocery store every week and see it get harder and harder to feed out families AND pay the electric bill). We have to hold our candidates accountable to keep the focus on reality and not the distractions the GOP tries to fool us with. It's a shame the media is such little help...I'd love to see reporters (you know, the old fashioned kind that asked real questions and did not let interviewees off the hook) ask Mike Johnson just what DOES he know about...he, and actually so many other GOP members of Congress just say they don't know about that issue...what in the world DO they know about? When to do stock trades based on inside information from trump? Seems like that's about it.
Good article. When political pundits stop pontificating about the "division in the Democratic Party", and those within the party realize that we all want the same things, perhaps those in the party will unite, avoid self sabotage, and avoid what happened in 2016 and 2024. Hope springs eternal.
Beware the narcissism of small differences. Reading this from the UK, the resonances with the debates and infighting in and around Labour are palpable and it was one thing that eventually undid Starmer’s premiership. Get it together folks. History will not be forgiving if the Democrats screw things up - especially given the opportunity and what’s at stake.
Well, this actually makes sense!!
This is very much in line with Simon Rosenberg this morning!!! We can do this!!
I couldn't disagree more people want change and electing the same old centrist corporate pac elected officials won't cut it. Because he's right about one thing people are pissed regular people are sliding out of the middle class and into the lower, everything is more expensive while wages remain flat. I'm not saying go far left I'm saying go populist stop with the same old malarkey "incremental change" and all that. America is at a cross roads our president is creating an oligarchy and Congress is doing nothing! People don't want things to go back to where they were they want change and until that happens we will continue to lose ground to the far right. Think of it like an old fashioned scale with the right on one side and the left on the other. Right now the scale is tipped way towards the right and the rich, you don't balance the scale by putting a tiny weight on the scale because heaven forbid the scale tips anywhere past even towards the left, you put a heavy weight to the left and if it goes to far you take some off. The scales for too long towards the right and the rich put something heavy on the left and take our country back from the oligarchy
I know as a voter I don’t care what you have to say. If you take PAC money any kind of donor money I will not vote for you. corporations and big donors are controlling our Congress and it’s got to stop. Term limits are of the most utmost importance.
It's time for people to grow up and that includes democrats. Yes we want change. Yes the system is corrupt. Yes it's true that not everyone agrees with me: that's called individualism. Any of you out there that think that others 100% agree with you truly fail to recognize the reality of life. We are, every one of us, different. Some of you get down on extremist newcomers who demand change. Some get down on the entrenched democrats who have been there, done that and demand they be replaced. Yes there is money in politics. Always has been. Always will be (hopefully not at current levels but....). Many of the old school democrats that young people get down on have in fact fought the good fight. Many of the new comers with new ideas are to be applauded. If we don't do this together, it won't get done. Once the primaries are done, we stand together and stop the bitching.
The party I want is called “The do something about it” party.
I generally have great contempt for "political strategists," but this essay is insightful. People's weakness for labels is such that we need something more meaningful than Left and Right. Maybe forward and backward, with emphasis that forward does NOT necessarily imply left-leaning, nor does backward imply right-leaning. The idea of Forward is dedication to facts and reason, with appreciation of the progress America had been making over time... until a vicious racist corrupt demagogue took over the government.
FWIW I have contempt for them too :)
It's trite and lazy to accept the pundit class trope about two warring factions within the Democratic Party. The truth, at the voter level, is people hold both progressive and moderate views depending on the issue. And they get along with their progressive and moderate neighbors. When I hear about Democrats battling it out over ideas and issues, I don't see 'Dems in disarray'; I see a functioning political party where all views can be expressed. The opposite of the locked-down, Trump-censored republicans who can't even publicly admit that Joe Biden won the 2020 election.
Yes, there are certain factions among the Dems who hold the corrosive belief that if you don't agree with them 'you should start your own party.' But those people are a rump faction not the majority. Most of us - Dems, Indies, former republicans - are all on the pro-democracy team and we just want our country to return to normalcy, decency, rule of law, and fair treatment for ALL Americans not the privileged few.
I think the candidates on either side that have the best chances, are those who seem (at least) to sincerely believe in something instead of changing their strategy and policies after reading the polls, and see politics as a horse race. How many times have we heard "I voted for Trump, because he speaks his mind", which he does, in all its vulgarity, delusion and cruelty.
On the Democratic side, anyone who stands up for decency and the original values of the Declaration, who seems to see the big picture, to denounce the harm caused by the oligarchy and the stubborn attachment to fossil fuels, greed and pursuit of wealth and power, has a good chance. And I would not call them "leftists", but realists.
And I would not confuse socialism, which in my view means that the government owns common assets (like fire and police) and infrastructure (energy, bridges, roads) while maintaining healthcare for all and a social safety net necessary to maintain the economy (yes, making sure people don't starve or get deathly ill is actually good for the economy, for everyone even the rich) with communism, where the government owns the means of production for everything, which turned out so far to have opened the door to totalitarianism and privileges for the few, which probably caused Karl Marx to roll in his grave.
Good points made and I agree 100%. Voters don't sort themselves into categories. They resonate with someone who they think has their interests at heart authentically. Bernie Sanders addressed this issue really well in his interview with Ben last night. I'll try to paraphrase: It's not about labels, it's about raising the issues people care about and pretty much agree on (the state of healthcare, high prices, needless wars ...). That's how Mamdani campaigned for mayor in NYC and he seems to be keeping many of his campaign promises).