The Gauzy Myth of the Sanders Campaign

[Gothmog]

I never considered sanders to be a serious candidate. sanders has zero major legislative accomplishments in large part because none of his fellow Democrats in Congress support his agenda. I do not understand the concept of a voter revolution . Without such a magical voter revolution, none of sanders' agenda could be adopted and I am not comfortable in relying on a magical voter revolution

I am not only one to doubt the seriousness of sanders as a candidate https://newrepublic.com/article/156883/gauzy-myth-sanders-campaign

After Tuesday night, the undeniable truth is that the entire Sanders campaign was predicated on a gauzy myth. If there were ever hidden armies of would-be Democratic voters yearning for a visionary presidential nominee uncontaminated by the compromises of life, then these Bernie Brigades still remain well camouflaged.

Sure, as Sanders stressed in his Wednesday statement, some of his policies are popular with primary voters. In Michigan, exit polls showed that replacing private health insurance with a government program had the support of nearly 60 percent of the people who went to the polls on Tuesday. But since the February 29 South Carolina primary, most Democratic primary voters have been unwilling to buy the entire Sanders package: politically unattainable goals, such as canceling $1.6 trillion in college debt, combined with attacks on corporate interests and the “billionaire class.”

After Sanders’s two presidential runs, voters possess a pretty clear-eyed sense of who he is. He is a gadfly, a goad, and a left-wing Pied Piper. These can be valuable traits in politics since the moderate, accommodationist wing of the Democratic Party sometimes needs outside pressure to force it to focus on causes larger than the next election. But Sanders was never cut out to be a traditional president forging alliances, brokering compromises, and dealing with the messiness of governing in a bitterly divided democracy. That simply isn’t Bernie’s skill set. And his lifelong rigidity would have become an even larger governing problem if he ever succeeded Trump as president.

What Democratic voters have created by rallying around Biden is the American equivalent of the Popular Front, which, in the 1930s, was a broad, multiparty alliance against fascism in France and other democratic countries. The exit polls from Michigan echo a sentiment found in almost all primaries—voters, by a 58-to-37 percent margin, want a candidate who can defeat Trump more than someone who agrees with them on all issues.....

Sanders will undoubtedly fight on in the hopes that he can shape the Democratic platform. The problem with that strategy is that, even if Biden were to commit to supporting, say, Medicare for All, as a price for party harmony in Milwaukee, it would be a meaningless pledge. Currently, fewer than one-third of the Democrats in the Senate support eliminating private insurance. And if Chuck Schumer succeeds in getting the chamber back in Democratic hands, the new additions to their ranks are likely to be moderates like John Hickenlooper of Colorado, Mark Kelly of Arizona, and Steve Bullock of Montana, none of whom support Medicare for All.

There was never going to be a magical voter revolution and there was never any substance to sanders' campaign or any chance that sanders' agenda would be adopted in the real world

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. A big, fat K&R!

[Thekaspervote]

2. Time for senator sanders to go home

[Demsrule86]

3. past time...for Sanders to concede.

K&R

[B Stieg]

4. I teach these college kids. I love these kids, but...

they do not show up to vote in sufficient numbers to make a real impact. Period.
Why? Lots of reasons, many individualized.

[Mr.Bill]

6. I know one person is a small sample.

I have a granddaughter who is a huge Bernie fanatic. At one time she told me she would vote for him even if he was dead. I didn't argue with her much, I figured at least she's taking an interest in politics. She turns 30 this summer. She has still never voted in her life.

[Rebl2]

10. If she

was really interested, she would vote. Being thirty and never voted tells me she doesn’t really care. I am in my 60’s and have been voting since I was 18. I have voted in all Presidential elections.

[KPN]

12. Even in a primary? What State? Context would

be helpful.

[Mr.Bill]

15. In California. Never voted in any election. Still.

Her interest in Bernie was before the 2016 election.

[House of Roberts]

7. Are they even registered?

Or are the Republican voter suppression efforts against college kids successfully preventing them from getting registered?

[Cha]

5. Hillary gave BS Concessions in the General Election

and it Wasn't appreciated one bit.

Sanders brought cornel west on the platform and he advocated and voted for jill RF stein.. so no.

[rickyhall]

8. It's all right. His progressive message was received & noted.

I see nothing wrong with that. I am tired of people putting him down, though.

[mountain grammy]

11. Such a terrible person to believe

healthcare should be a right. How stupid to think huge profitable multinational corporations should pay more in taxes and a living wage. How disgusting to think a few people shouldn’t own 90% of the worlds wealth.

Guess we’re all villains now for believing in honest liberal ideals.

[rickyhall]

13. Exactly. They want to call it communism, but is it that much different than The New Deal?

[mountain grammy]

20. Exactly.

And JFK gave a great speech for universal healthcare. We were behind over 50 years ago.

[KPN]

16. Yup. How could we take him seriously as a candidate? How naive, if not outright foolish

of us. We must be either stupid or at least not serious, rational people.

[Skittles]

9. I understand why people are unhappy

I just fail to see WHY they think Trump and Sanders are the answers.

[rickyhall]

14. Or Biden. I still like Senator Warren.

[Skittles]

21. yup

and I still think Beto was better than all of them

[uponit7771]

23. Democrats seem to be more objective and vote for proven performance, Joe had that imperfectly in

... spades

[ramen]

17. I know you don't like the guy, and you're far from alone,

but the repeated lowercase in his name seems like some middle school behavior. Or do you also decapitalize other candidates names and I just never picked up on it?

The idea that this country cannot afford health care doesn't hold up well to all the other countries with public health care. I know it's fashionable on DU right now to write that policy goal off but it is one I feel strongly about. I think people in this country should have access to health care and, last I checked, it is a pretty common belief among us Democrats.

Biden will do the best he can for me and you and all the rest of us, I trust him that far, for sure. I'll see you in the volunteer ranks if you feel the same, and I'll be working shoulder to shoulder with you. But Jesus, folks, can we just afford Sanders the same respect we would afford anyone else? The man's campaign is all done so you really don't have anything further to fear from him, right? He'll presumably go back to the independent senator from Vermont who votes with the Democratic party, and will not be running for president again.

[KPN]

19. Thank you for your honesty.

[Gothmog]

22. Sanders' agenda: Its cost -- possibly $60 trillion -- would set a peacetime US record - CNNPolitics

The real world is a nice place and in the real world you have to be able to pay for programs. sanders has zero significant legislative accomplishments because non of his fellow Democrats believe in adopting programs that cannot be paid for.

Link to tweet

Sanders' plan, though all of its costs cannot be precisely quantified, would increase government spending as a share of the economy far more than the New Deal under President Franklin Roosevelt, the Great Society under Lyndon Johnson or the agenda proposed by any recent Democratic presidential nominee, including liberal George McGovern in 1972, according to a historical analysis shared with CNN by Larry Summers, the former chief White House economic adviser for Barack Obama and treasury secretary for Bill Clinton.

Sanders' plan would also increase the size of government far more than any modern Republican president, including Ronald Reagan, has sought to cut it, Summers' analysis concluded.

"On the spending side, ... this is far more radical than all previous presidencies, on either the right or the left," Summers said in an interview. "The Sanders spending increase is roughly 2.5 times the size of the New Deal and the estimated fiscal impact of George McGovern's campaign proposals. This is six times as large of a growth of government than any of the Ronald Reagan dismemberments. We are in a kind of new era of radical proposal."

Exact cost projections on all of Sanders' proposals aren't available, in part because he hasn't fully fleshed out some of the ideas he's embraced (such as universal pre-K and child care). But a wide variety of estimates put the likely cost of the single-payer health care plan he has endorsed around $30 trillion or more over the next decade. Depending on the estimates used, including projections from his own campaign, the other elements of the Sanders agenda -- ranging from his "Green New Deal" to the cancellation of all student debt to a guaranteed federal jobs program that has received almost no scrutiny -- could cost about as much, or even more than, the single-payer plan. That would potentially bring his 10-year total for new spending to around $60 trillion, or more.

It is hard to take sanders seriously when he has zero legislative accomplishments and his magical voter revolution has flopped.

As for respect, I was a delegate to the National Convention and saw far too much of sanders and his supporters. Delegates to a national convention are vetted by the campaigns because these delegates are official representatives of the campaign and the candidate. I know that I was vetted and I helped vet other delegates.

I saw what happened there up close. sanders sent one very weak text the Sunday night before the convention and then did little or nothing to control his delegates. It was nasty I was there when the sanders delegates booed Congressman John Lewis. I was warned about this stunt 30 minutes before it happened by the Clinton campaign whip. According to my whip, sanders was asked to stop this event and declined. I also heard a Georgia delegate complain about sanders refusal to stop these planned stunts.

I was at the Texas delegation breakfast when a group of sanders delegates marched in and demanded that we condemn Hillary Clinton and change our votes to sanders.

sanders spoke to the Texas delegation the next morning and his speech was again solely about himself. There was a mini-riot due to his vetted delegates the prior morning and the only thing that sanders talked about was himself. sanders did nothing to deal with the fact that his delegates were out of control and did nothing to try to help Hillary Clinton win the general election.

Finally a group of sanders delegates yelled at my daughter and called her the c-Word because she would not try to get me to change my vote. Again sanders was asked to tell his delegates to behave during the convention and sanders refused

Texas and Georgia shared a bus from our hotels to the convention site. There were some really pissed off members of the Georgia delegation after John Lewis and Stacy Abrams were both booed as part of planned stunts by sanders vetted delegates. If sanders stays in until the Georgia primary it will be interesting to see if sanders makes the 15% threshold.

As for volunteering, I will be active with Lawyers for Biden the Texas state party on voter protection efforts.

[Gothmog]

24. Switzerland rejects single-payer in landslide, keeps its version of Obamacare

Link to tweet

Swiss voters resoundingly rejected a proposal to move the country to a single-payer system on Sunday. Instead, the country will keep its private health insurance system, which looks a whole lot like Obamacare.

Two-thirds of Swiss voters opposed creating a state-run health plan in the national referendum. The issue was put to a vote after Swiss campaigners gathered more than 100,000 signatures, the threshold for getting a national vote; some initial polls in 2013 had shown strong support for a state-run system.

For a country with a relatively small population (8 million), Switzerland comes up a shocking amount in debates over American health care. That's probably because the Swiss health care system looks pretty similar to the one Obamacare sets up.

Since 1996, Switzerland has required all residents purchase coverage through an individual mandate. "If you move to Switzerland, you have three months to buy coverage and it's retroactive to your arrival," Aaron Carroll explains in his excellent video primer on the Swiss health care system.

Swiss residents buy coverage from private health insurance plans, who compete for their business. The average monthly premium for adults, in American dollars, was $329 in 2013. There are no pre-existing conditions in Switzerland; insurers are only allowed to vary premiums based on age, charging different rates for children under 18, young adults between 19 and 25, and adults over 25.

[ramen]

25. Are we really doing this?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Health_Service

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_and_Social_Care_in_Northern_Ireland

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beveridge_Report this covers the Nordic countries

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_South_Korea

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_healthcare_systems_in_Canada_and_the_United_States

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Taiwan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Germany

That's all the time I have before going to work here, but the point is clear, hopefully. Note the details of how much public vs private funding makes up each country's system, and especially note cost of healthcare as expressed by portion of GDP. Said another way: note that the lower few countries on this list of links do incorporate private insurance but in a far, far more intelligently and compassionately limited way than we do in this country.

I simply have never heard an argument about how the current health care system in this country is A) worth it compared to more modern approach consistent with economically powerful western countries, B) a more efficient use of the money it costs here at an UNBELIEVABLE 17.7 PERCENT of GDP but wherein medical bankruptcy is not rare with serious diseases or simply bad luck about what town you are in when you have a serious and urgent medical event, let alone all the more sadly boring examples of insufficient access to care, or C) unattainable by enough people in this country.

Hell, let's drop your vaunted Switzerland's numbers in to compare: with their compulsory purchase of private health insurance, they are the second highest in the WORLD. Want to guess which country they are second to?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland

[Gothmog]

30. LOL-the real world is a nice place and sanders cannot pay for his program in the real world

sanders has attempted to introduce this plan and has failed because he cannot pay for his plan in the real world. Such a plan in theory may generate societal savings but such savings would not pay for a program. Governments can only spend tax revenues and/or borrowings. This study does not say how one would pay for such a program in the real world. I note that Prof. Krugman like the concepts of such a plan in theory but notes that taxes will have to be raised a great deal to pay for such a plan
Back in 2016, here is his position Prof. Krugman compares Sanders hoped for health care savings to the GOP tax cuts. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/weakened-at-bernies/?_r=0

On health care: leave on one side the virtual impossibility of achieving single-payer. Beyond the politics, the Sanders “plan” isn’t just lacking in detail; as Ezra Klein notes, it both promises more comprehensive coverage than Medicare or for that matter single-payer systems in other countries, and assumes huge cost savings that are at best unlikely given that kind of generosity. This lets Sanders claim that he could make it work with much lower middle-class taxes than would probably be needed in practice.

To be harsh but accurate: the Sanders health plan looks a little bit like a standard Republican tax-cut plan, which relies on fantasies about huge supply-side effects to make the numbers supposedly add up. Only a little bit: after all, this is a plan seeking to provide health care, not lavish windfalls on the rich — and single-payer really does save money, whereas there’s no evidence that tax cuts deliver growth. Still, it’s not the kind of brave truth-telling the Sanders campaign pitch might have led you to expect.

Today, Prof. Krugman says that such a plan is feasible if you are willing to pay a great deal more in taxes
https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/paul-krugman-explains-why-single-payer-health-care-entirely-achievable-us-and-how

If we went to government provision of all insurance, we’d pay more in taxes but less in premiums, and the overall burden of health spending would probably fall, because single-payer systems tend to be cheaper than market-based."

The amount of higher taxes are not quantified in this article by Krugman. To pay for any such plan will require massive tax hikes

Again sanders has utterly failed in his attempts to get Vermont to adopt his magical single payer plan because the state of Vermont cannot use hypothetical societal saving to pay for this plan. Even Krugman admits that much higher taxes are needed

[Gothmog]

31. sanders totally failed in getting his plan adopted in Vermont

A deep-blue state’s failure to enact a single-payer system shows why a national version is unlikely to succeed. www.nytimes.com/2019/10/09/opinion/bernie-sanders-single-payer.html

Link to tweet

The first problem for any single-payer push would be political support: Mr. Shumlin campaigned on a promise to build a single-payer system in Vermont, but the public never quite bought in. An April 2014 survey showed 40 percent support, 39 percent opposition and 21 percent undecided — a lukewarm result for such a major undertaking. That year, Mr. Shumlin barely won the popular vote against an anti-single-payer Republican. As John E. McDonough of Harvard wrote in a perceptive New England Journal of Medicine analysis of the plan’s collapse, “a clear public mandate” for Mr. Shumlin’s health care agenda “was nowhere in evidence.”

One reason the plan lacked strong support was lawmakers were cagey about how to pay for it. The 2011 proposal included no specific financing mechanism, because Mr. Shumlin’s team worried that might kill its chances.

Initial cost estimates were far too optimistic. A 2011 study led by William Hsiao of Harvard found that single-payer could reduce state health care spending by 8 percent to 12 percent immediately and more in later years, resulting in about $2 billion in savings over a decade. But by the time Mr. Shumlin ditched the plan, internal government estimates showed a five-year savings of just 1.6 percent.....

The Vermont plan was done in by high taxes, distrust of government and lack of political support. Any effort by a Sanders administration to enact a single-payer system at a national level would probably be doomed by similar problems.....

But if it couldn’t work in Vermont, with a determined governor, an accommodating legislature and progressive voters, Mr. Sanders will have a tough time explaining why it will somehow succeed on a vastly larger scale. Vermont represents a practical failure on friendly turf, and that is what makes it such a powerful counter to Mr. Sanders’s proposal.

“If Vermont can pass a strong single-payer system and show it works well, it will not only be enormously important to this state, it will be a model,” Mr. Sanders said in 2013.

As it turns out, it was a model. But instead of showing us how it would work, it showed us why it would fail.

The real world is a nice place. sanders plan was a complete failure in Vermont which is why this plan will not work nationwide.

[ramen]

33. I presume the countries I listed upthread in the message you ignored entirely

are located in an unreal world? Someone should really tell them, I hope they are ok there!

I am guessing you'll reignore this but just to recap: 17.7% of US GDP spent on health care, with most still unable to access it and many losing their savings and homes attempting to pay for it, let alone the gofundme awfulness. You honestly believe this is the way to go? Great, enjoy the privilege you presumably have in order to feel that way. Lawyers do tend to be fairly secure, financially. But a lot of us cannot play that game,and many who could simply face the moral and ethical and policy dilemma it presents, and think there are other ways such as the ones modeled in the dozens of countries who outperform and underspend us on health care.

Assuming their world is as real as ours, that is..

[Gothmog]

34. LOL at someone quoting wikipedia on this issue

That was amusing but your material did not help your argument at all. In the real world, the concept is to cite material that supports ones argument.

In the real world, sanders is not taken seriously because he has no serious legislative accomplishments. sanders has no way to pass any of his legislative agenda in the real world because his fellow Democrats do not take sanders seriously

Link to tweet

But Reid, who served as a Democrat in the U.S. Senate for 30 years, including as majority leader for eight years, said it didn't matter which candidate comes out in support of Sanders' signature health care plan: "I’m against it."

"It’s impractical ... There’s not a chance in hell it would pass," he told ABC News Political Director Rick Klein, instead advocating for strengthening the Affordable Care Act -- or Obamacare -- and looking to pass a public option.

There are not enough Democratic votes to get this concept passed in the real world

Link to tweet

Even sanders one friend in the senate does not take sanders seriously

Link to tweet

Good luck if getting anyone to take sanders plans seriously in the real world

[Gothmog]

35. Why has sanders refused or failed to tell us what his magical plan costs?

I am glad that sanders will not be the nominee. If sanders was serious about his plan, sanders needs to know how much it costs

Link to tweet

[ramen]

36. Cool, ok, so the talking-past-repliers behavior is not an exception but is your rule

I've found that tactic generally ineffective towards the goal of discussion, which I view as a primary feature of a discussion board.

My assumption is you'll keep on that train on your next reply. If that's the case then I won't continue this nondialogue. But to your possibly-sincere point about cost/benefit analysis of different health care approaches, here is one https://www.law.berkeley.edu/press-release/new-health-care-study-public-option-would-generate-more-benefits-savings-than-projected/ angle. And here is https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-management-administration/single-payer-vs-public-option-comparing-cost-coverage.html another related approach. Note the projected savings of the two different approaches in the second link. One saves significantly more. Neither involve the current nightmare of the reality that millions of Americans can't access health care because of cost and administration.

[Gothmog]

39. The study cited is amusing but does not help your case

The first study backs up the Biden plan and is contrary to sanders' magical plan. The second study you posted was amusing. You may want to re-read the prior post on societal savings. The second study relies on magical societal savings that are not tax revenues in the real world and cannot be used to pay for a program. Societal saving are speculative at best and cannot be used to pay for a program which is why sanders utterly and completely failed in getting Vermont to adopt his magical plan.

I used to be a college debater and I know now studies such as the one cited are prepared. It seems that there are some fairly aggressive assumptions used in this study and I doubt that these savings will be realized in the real world. There is a reason why sanders has totally and utterly failed to get his magical single payer plan adopted in the real world which is that policy makers cannot us magical or theoretical savings to pay for a program.

Prof. Krugman and I treat the so-called societal savings the same way that we both treat the magical economic growth that is supposed to be generated from GOP tax cuts. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/weakened-at-bernies/?_r=0

On health care: leave on one side the virtual impossibility of achieving single-payer. Beyond the politics, the Sanders “plan” isn’t just lacking in detail; as Ezra Klein notes, it both promises more comprehensive coverage than Medicare or for that matter single-payer systems in other countries, and assumes huge cost savings that are at best unlikely given that kind of generosity. This lets Sanders claim that he could make it work with much lower middle-class taxes than would probably be needed in practice.

To be harsh but accurate: the Sanders health plan looks a little bit like a standard Republican tax-cut plan, which relies on fantasies about huge supply-side effects to make the numbers supposedly add up. Only a little bit: after all, this is a plan seeking to provide health care, not lavish windfalls on the rich — and single-payer really does save money, whereas there’s no evidence that tax cuts deliver growth. Still, it’s not the kind of brave truth-telling the Sanders campaign pitch might have led you to expect.

GOP tax cuts are not magical and never pay for themselves.

If you want the second study to be taken seriously in the real world, then identify how the plan will be paid for. A government cannot spend magical savings and can only use tax revenues. The study identify societal savings which are nice but which are not tax revenues

The real world is a nice place. Magical savings are nice but cannot be used in the real world. sanders has utterly and completely failed to get his magical plan adopted anywhere including Vermont. sanders is careful to never tell anyone how he would pay for his program and cite amusing but worthless studies like the one in the OP. No governmental entity have accepted sanders plan because it would need a large raise in taxes.

The real world is a nice place.

[Squinch]

26. Have you seen BSs new campaign ad? Apparently its showing non-stop

in upcoming primary states and it really trashes Biden. It will probably lose him votes in the General.

So...no.

[ramen]

27. No.. goddamn it. Any link?

I definitely am not in support of trying to tear down Biden as the guy will almost certainly be our nominee.

[Squinch]

28. .

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287665895

Showing around the clock in Florida too.

And PS: see this post about how it is completely deceptive and untrue:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287665895#post3

And this post on how BS did the SAME thing:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287665895#post3

So no. He needs to go, and he needs to go now.

[Gothmog]

32. Florida will be interesting

Link to tweet

[ramen]

37. This is an unflattering use of Biden's words..

he did say them, though, no? I do personally not want to see social security cut because it is the only safety net (though inadequate) that a lot of people have.

It does read as a somewhat misleading presentation, though, given Sanders words in that same era, although it does seem that Sanders took a stand in the end and refused to 'compromise' with republicans trying to gut or end social security. Sometimes compromise is the right thing to do and sometimes it is the wrong move.

When you initially posted this, I was worried it was going to be some kind of grotesque attack ad. That is not what I am seeing here. I think it is part of Sanders' effort to try and keep the American progressive agenda on the radar even as we pivot out of the primaries.

My 0.02. Thanks for linking me to this video.

[Gothmog]

40. sanders ad was rated false and is bogus given sanders proposed Social Security cuts

This is not a good issue for sanders when sanders is guilty of the exact same conduct in the real world

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[betsuni]

29. K&R

[Gothmog]

38. Biden is leading sanders by a 2 to 1 margin

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

?s=20