Comments by "" (@TheHuxleyAgnostic) on "Status Coup News" channel.

  1. Bernie should hire Piper. She's quick on her feet.
    13
  2. It's not a matter of opinion. You're just wrong.
    9
  3. With AOC as her VP, then an AOC presidency.
    8
  4.  @ReaghNetwork  Rofl. No, the facts state the opposite. https://hartfordhealthcare.org/about-us/news-press/news-detail?articleid=27691&publicId=395
    8
  5. FACT: It won't stack with regular SSI disability. A disabled person with a child would already be getting $1000+ a month. Yang's plan would simply make most things, at least, 10% more expensive for them. FACT: A VAT is paid by the consumers, not corporations. Yang is outright lying when he says a VAT will force corporations like Amazon to "pay their fair share". Amazon would simply collect the tax and pass it along to the government. FACT: Many of those who do benefit from the UBI will spend their extra money on Amazon, making Amazon even more money. FACT: Amazon making more money will give more money to Bezos, for him to hoard, and hoarded money isn't affected by a VAT. FACT: Any plan that hurts some poor people, and will make giant corporations and the super rich even richer, is a shit plan.
    7
  6. The first amendment has little to do with this. A private property owner's right to have you removed from their private property has always trumped the non right to be on their private property saying stuff. If you want first amendment rights, want an actual public square, then it's the private ownership that's the problem.
    7
  7. Can you explain to Yang that a VAT won't make corporations like Amazon "pay their fair share", as he dishonestly promotes on his VAT page? And that, mixed with his UBI, it will actually make Amazon and Bezos even more money?
    7
  8. It does not recognize a lot of those people. A disabled person with a child could already be getting $1000 per month. With most things costing, at least, 10% more, they'd be worse off. It doesn't adjust for cost of living. It doesn't adjust for children.
    4
  9.  @dorothypage77  Where does he say that he will initially bump up all assistance programs by at least 10%, and that they will rise with inflation? Where does he even say UBI will rise with inflation?
    4
  10.  @MrCheckitout123  The American Dream is long standing right wing propaganda, that doesn't clearly state it only works for outliers. Mexicans have found out it's bullshit, and you've actually had a negative migration rate with Mexico, for a decade. Your current influx is from places like Honduras, where the US has supported a dictator with $100+ million in military aid. They're fleeing a dangerous place. That's not how you use a carrot, dumbass. You don't beat people with it.
    4
  11. A public option turns Medicare into a competing insurance company, and paying for it into a premium instead of through progressive taxation. The poorest person would have to pay the same premium as the richest person, to get coverage. It is regressive (as is a VAT). Phasing out private insurance allows for Bernie to also demand companies turn their per employee healthcare payments ($10k on average) into wages. With a public option, unless you convince the employer to switch over, it becomes pointless for an individual employee to start paying for something they already have, and makes it difficult for them to negotiate individually to opt out of the company plan and get wages instead. It's also just doesn't seem to get you universal coverage anytime soon ... https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/08/los-angeles-public-option-2020-democrats/597115/
    4
  12.  @kennethmcneil3478  Oh, sorry. There are dozens of sources for you not to believe, just like a Trump cultists. That one actually quoted a squad member. But, I guess you imagine they're inventing quotes, or something, like a proper nutter. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/09/progressive-covid-minimum-wage-468061
    3
  13. All laws would indicate otherwise.
    3
  14. How to fund UBI is extremely important. If you're not shaving wealth from the very top and handing it down, then the money is coming from elsewhere. Yang is lying when he claims a VAT is a way to make giant corporations, like Amazon, and the super rich like Bezos, "pay their fair share". It is built right into a VAT system that businesses get paid back for their input VAT, and the final consumer ends up paying the entire tax. Since it won't tax Amazon, handing consumers $3t will only make Amazon richer. If only 20% is spent on retail and Amazon owns 5% or retail, Yang's VAT/UBI scheme will make Amazon an extra $30b a year. That would make Bezos an extra $3.6b a year. He'd have to spend over $36b a year on goods and services with a VAT to pay in more than he gets out.
    3
  15.  @frankrohr41  I think that's mostly Biden's older black supporters, who still look on Biden fondly for the Obama-Biden bromance, but like Bernie second best. That's why it wasn't seen in the second round of mainly white Iowa caucuses.
    3
  16. Like this? Face masks prevent transmission of respiratory diseases: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.31.20166116v1
    3
  17.  @JohnP.Conley-gt5ce  Moron.
    2
  18. The same face that considered him a moron, before. https://www.newsweek.com/progressives-hold-biden-account-15-minimum-wage-he-suggests-it-dealt-later-1568050
    2
  19. Opting out won't change the fact that many things will cost, at least, 10% more and make that $1000+ worth less. You opt out, but your electric bill is now $110 instead of $100, for example.
    2
  20. She is the anti-Pence as Bernie is the anti-Trump.
    2
  21. Wearing masks, distancing, etc., is also going to reduce flu numbers. And, if something comes along and kills people, before they die of their heart disease, or whatnot, then yes that'll reduce heart disease deaths. Dropping bombs on 250k Americans would also reduce deaths due to other things.
    2
  22. The "messenger" is smearing anyone who doesn't whole heartedly agree with his tactics. The woman who took out the #2 corporate Dem, who got challenged again by a DCCC backed corporate Dem and won, who started her own progressive PAC, who just used that PAC to get even more progressives elected to congress, who's a member of the DSA which has been holding M4A rallies, ... she's a "shill"? If you, at all, doubt the strategy of the political mastermind who promoted Trump as better than Clinton, and claimed the moon would fall into Lake Michigan before Trump fills multiple scotus seats, then you're a "fake", "sellout", or "shill"? Piss off Jimmy Dore. The moron doesn't even know it would be possible for Pelosi, or even McCarthy, to win, if things weren't done just right, and somehow coordinated with both Republicans and all the corporate Dems. The speaker has to win the majority of votes cast, not the majority of the house. House members abstaining changes the number of votes needed to win. His plan isn't risk free. Considering forcing a vote guaranteed to lose not worth the potential risks, doesn't make someone a "shill".
    2
  23.  @Aj-zr8dz  Jimmy recently argued himself that corporate Dems would rather lose to Republicans than deliver to progressives. That's an argument against his own plan. If they'd rather things fail to the right than succeed to the left, that indicates progressives have less political leverage than he's claiming they have. I get that people are frustrated with the slow build up of progressives in congress, wish it could go faster, etc., but remember that Jimmy has an agenda too ... the People's Party. Making out like progressives aren't doing what they can, that they're "fakes", that they're "shills", etc., because of a tactics disagreement, plays into his argument for a People's Party ... which would have to start from scratch, and have even less power. He thinks fascists and neolibs are samesies, even promoted the fascist as a better option, in 2016. He thought Jill Stein had an actual shot at becoming president. He underestimates just how horribly worse Republicans can be, and overestimates how much influence and power underdog progressives, or third parties, have.
    2
  24. It kills about 500 per year, in the US. Samesies!
    2
  25.  @rolo2415  You just argued that transmission is the issue, and then started rattling off things that aren't transmitted, like a total nutbar. Starvation and heart disease aren't contagious, dumbass.
    2
  26. Most isn't all. There will be a pocket of people already collecting $1000 per month, or more, in assistance who will be worse off if most things cost at least 10% more. Any plan to help the poor shouldn't hurt some of the poor. Also, a single parent's $1000 per month isn't going to go nearly as far as a single non-parent's $1000 per month. Any plan for the poor that doesn't factor in children, and give an increase for children, is crap, especially if things for the children will cost at least 10% more. We exempt basic staples here in Canada, but that doesn't include clothing, which growing kids can plow through, toys, or other entertainment. On top of having a negative effect on some amount of poor people, he is completely bullshitting that a VAT is a way to make corporations like Amazon "pay their fair share". Corporations simply collect the tax and pass it along to government. The consumers pay the tax. Many who do end up in the plus will actually spend their extra money on corporations like Amazon, making Amazon even more money. That, in turn, will make people like Bezos even more money, and the more money someone has, the more they hoard. Hoarded money isn't affected by a VAT. The upper middle class and lower end rich, who already spend a lot but don't hoard as much, will be the ones paying into the VAT the most, as a percentage of their income/wealth. Yang's plan, as is, will hurt some poor people, hurt the upper middle class and low end rich, while making giant corporations and the super rich even richer.
    2
  27.  @torfinnzempel6123  Yeah. I, literally, just said she's not trying to be friends.
    2
  28.  @ChannelTwoFiftyTwo  Moron. Burlington wasn't the only city that was part of the US-USSR sister cities program, that started 15 years before Bernie's visit. Is every US city that eatablished a USSR sister city a bunch of communists?
    2
  29.  van wray  Quite right. Some might not be racist. His followers could be racist, bigoted, selfish, and/or complete morons.
    2
  30. No. The Libertarian party is going on 50 years old without ever having won a single seat in congress. All yet another progressive third party might accomplish, if it's popular enough, is pull away enough votes from Dem progressives, totally hand the Dem party back to corporate Dems, and let Republicans rule for decades.
    2
  31.  @web-angel  They got the $15 minimum wage to remain in the house bill.
    2
  32.  @deep-n-yo-mind5061  It's just a fact that there will be more people spending their extra money on Amazon. Didn't say anyone had to. The tax would be on those buying the data, not those selling. Google wouldn't be taxed a cent.
    2
  33.  @deep-n-yo-mind5061  You're the one spouting the hypotheticals. I've been paying a VAT for almost 30 years, and have operated a business with a VAT. Any random UBI isn't the same as Yang's UBI plan, which involves not actually taxing giant tech companies, at all, and throwing your hands up in the air and pretending like there's zero way to close tax loopholes, or actually tax them directly. If things are going to be automated, more demand will simply require a supply of more automation, and not create any human jobs, leaving millions trying to live on $12k a month, while those giant corporations get richer and richer.
    2
  34. They can't even math correctly. -$2 (amount consumer paid in) + $2 (amount government received) = $0 (amount businesses paid in) https://images.app.goo.gl/FmZbfsYJZ1NubS6e6
    2
  35.  @Aj-zr8dz  How the hell can you get a different Dem caucus pick for speaker without the majority, when it's chosen by majority?
    2
  36.  @Aj-zr8dz  The corporate Dem majority is more likely to pick someone worse, rather than someone more progressive. Even Glenn Greenwald agreed with keeping Pelosi if the alternative is someone like Tim Ryan. How do progressives get someone more progressive, without the majority?
    2
  37.  @gabrielarcari72  Convert or replace the 300 odd house members who won't even sign onto it. Whip out the extra 100+ viable pro-M4A candidates that, for some reason, didn't run in the elections that just took place. Pelosi even introduced M4A last session, where it died in committees, where 90% of bills die. Where was the massive uprising?
    2
  38.  @gabrielarcari72  Where did you get that bullshit from? https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/180416/alexandria-ocasio-cortez/22/defense
    2
  39. Rofl. The most popular third party hasn't won a single seat in congress in going on 50 years. Taking that route is about as long term thinking as you can get.
    2
  40. The Tea Party wasn't a third party, ffs. Even the most popular third party hasn't won a single seat in congress in going on 50 years.
    2
  41.  @armandodelossantos736  Rules against targetting civilians, which the US has ignored btw, are ridiculous?
    2
  42. They shouldn't be fucking around with the senate, atm, anyway. Wait and see what happens in Georgia, first.
    1
  43.  @dorothypage77  You and Yang are lying, saying a VAT is a way to tax corporations. You seem to be clueless as to how a VAT actually works. Let's say Amazon currently buys a product from a manufacturer at $100, sells it for $200, and pockets $100. With a 10% VAT added, they'd pay $100 + $10 VAT, and the manufacturer would send $10 to the government. Amazon would still sell for $200 but with a $20 VAT added, so the final consumer pays $220. Amazon gets paid back $10, and sends $10 to the government. The government gets $20, but Amazon still pockets $100. So, explain how that's actually taxing them. Half the things you pointed at people spending UBI on (in a totally different UBI plan than Yang's) wouldn't pay into a VAT. That's actually not a good thing, for Yang's scheme. His scheme is totally dependent on increasing VAT revenues. His plan starts with massive deficit spending, no way to pay for a third of his UBI, and requires a ton more VAT revenue to be generated, than is currently generated. Food, housing, savings, debt ... will totally screw his plan. Also, what they bought doesn't say who they bought it from. Amazon is selling some groceries and household products. Amazon sells school books. Buying at WalMart would be no better. It would make giant corporations richer, and a VAT not a way to actually tax them.
    1
  44.  @dorothypage77  You're still lying. Just to be clear, I'm Canadian. I've been paying a VAT for almost 30 years, and have operated a business with a VAT. Don't even bother trying to explain to me how it works. We also have staples exempt, here, but there's still a VAT on electricity, clothes, toys, phone service, internet service, cable service, all other forms of entertainment, snack foods and pop, alcohol, etc., etc., etc. If you don't think any of those things costing more will leave some people worse off, then you're pretty daft. To cover the full cost of the UBI, he is totally relying on the economy growing by trillions and generating hundreds of more billions from future VAT. At the outset, a third of his UBI won't be paid for, and will run a deficit.
    1
  45.  @dorothypage77  And, again, you prove to be totally clueless as to how a VAT works. It's built in that it's passed along at each stage. There's no option to not pass it along. That's complete bullshit.
    1
  46. Warren supporters need to decide, before voting starts, if they can trust her to give her delegates to another progressive when she drops out, if she gets any.
    1
  47. Are you all out transitioning to an MPP propaganda channel? "The Congressional Budget Office is expected to soon release a report at the behest of Sen. Bernie Sanders that will make a persuasive fiscal case for hiking the federal minimum wage within President Joe Biden's pandemic aid package, according to a senior Democratic aide." https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/02/minimum-wage-increase-bernie-sanders-465249 "Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday said a "room full of lawyers" is working to make the case that raising the minimum wage to $15 squares with Senate rules that threaten its inclusion in President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion relief package." https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/07/politics/bernie-sanders-minimum-wage-cnntv/index.html
    1
  48.  @Aj-zr8dz  They aren't "well understood" by the "messenger". He has outright claimed it's impossible for McCarthy to win, calling anyone who says differently a "liar".
    1
  49.  @Aj-zr8dz  Do you mean build coalitions by doing things like having your progressive PAC help get more progressives elected to congress, or do you mean build coalitions by calling other progressives "fakes", "sellouts", and "shills" over a tactics disagreement? Ideas from discussions? AOC reaches 10m people (40x more than Jimmy) with every tweet, not to mention other social media. Her enemies even help spread her ideas all the time. Jimmy "trending" one thing, that barely anyone outside progressive circles is talking about, that has mostly just caused infighting, doesn't even compare. His retweets are mostly in the hundreds, and not over 2k. She had a single M4A tweet retweeted 70 fucking thousand times. That's worth more than 35 of Jimmy's few most shared tweets. What the ... ? People Party pusher, Jimmy Dore, pitted himself against progressives in congress. In 2016, he also pushed the Green Party, even pushed Trump over Clinton. He obviously doesn't actually give a fuck about winning anytime soon. He's obviously fully prepared to start from scratch, and even willing to let a "maniacal fascist", and a psycho fascist cult, run the show, and let the Democrat party fail, for however many years it would take for a third party to even get one seat in congress, let alone enough seats to pass any of their own bills. And, yes, he pointed at how much popularity Bernie gained in a little amount of time, and tried arguing Stein could possibly do it too, and maybe even become president. https://amp.reddit.com/r/jillstein/comments/4vwr6p/jimmy_dore_president_jill_stein_its_more_possible/ Trump has dropped more bombs than Obama, and Dubya killed more people than both of them combined. Who are these worse neolibs you speak of? You say I'm misrepresenting him, etc., over and over, but don't really get into detailing how, exactly. It's funny, though, reading a Dore fan go on about "character assassination", while defending Dore. Yeah, so let's trash the most progressive politicians in congress!!! That'll show those oligarchs!!!
    1
  50.  @Aj-zr8dz  You must not have made it through that short video. Do you have ADD or something? "Maybe Jill could win" "Maybe Jill will win" Hell, I'm not even sure you made it through the title. Rofl, I haven't eaten anything. How does that make them "worse" than the Republicans doing the same, dumb dumb? "Worse" indicates doing more damage, and it's generally the commander in chief deciding what damage to do. Which have been "worse"?
    1
  51.  @Aj-zr8dz  The only thing he made fun of, in that video, was mocking people saying she didn't have a chance, dumbass.
    1
  52.  @Aj-zr8dz  Which "way more" wars and refugee crises?
    1
  53.  @Aj-zr8dz  Lol, my only tears are from laughing at your nonsense and how much you can twist yourself into a pretzel.
    1
  54.  @Aj-zr8dz  Yeah, Trump and Bush aren't libs of any kind. US intervention, and the refugee crises started in Yemen, Somalia, Phillipines, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, before Obama. And, although Obama was responsible for the deaths of far too many people, himself, there's no indication there would have been a Syrian civil war, for him to get involved with, or a rise of ISIS, which started under Bush, if the region hadn't been destabalized by Bush. https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2020/Displacement_Vine%20et%20al_Costs%20of%20War%202020%2009%2008.pdf
    1
  55.  @Aj-zr8dz  And I, literally, listed Syria as starting under Obama. Don't know why you're rambling on about it. Seriously, you know that, even amongst fascists, one can be worse than another, right? Hitler was worse than Mussolini, by miles. They weren't samesies. Sure, the US has been dancing near the edge of lake fascism for decades, but you have to be fucking insane to think being at the water's edge, even dipping a toe in, isn't worse by far, than being a little further away on the beach. You didn't actually provide an example of neolibs getting away with more crimes against humanity, killing more people, or anything of the sort. A bunch of the stuff you listed for Obama started under Bush. You can't even show they're just as bad, or worse, when it comes to foreign policy, let alone national policy. I don't know why you're even trying. Jimmy, himself, called Trump a "maniacal fascist". That's what he argued would be better for progressives than a neolib ... exactly because the "maniacal fascist" is worse. The idiot thought it would be a great idea to put a "maniacal fascist" in charge, to drive people left. He thought even the less fascist Republicans would jump on board and join the left to work against the "maniacal fascist". No. Didn't happen. Jimmy's 2016 "plan", if anyone followed it, turned Republicans even more fascist, caused a rise in hate crimes, caused a rise in right wing terrorism, caused stupid trade wars, caused multiple scotus seats to be filled, caused an incompetent covid response killing tens of thousands of fellow Americans, etc. If Dore convinced absolutely anyone in a 2016 swing state to vote Trump, to vote Stein, or even to not vote, then he is partly responsible for all that ... plus, dropping more bombs abroad. For someone who did their best to help bring all that about, to act like they are the fucking King of progressives, and call anyone not agreeing with him "fakes", "sellouts", and "shills", is bullshit. He doesn't really know how politics works. As I said, he doesn't even grasp that corporate Dems being more willing to lose to Republicans than work with progressives, is actually an argument against his own plan. His plan partly hinges on corporate Dems rather working with progressives than losing to Republicans. It partly hinges on them not propagandizing a paralyzed house against progressives, and the whole thing turning out worse for progressives. It partly hinges on a totally unknown amount of outrage ... what if there is hardly any, except amongst progressives? And sustained outrage, 2 years from now ... what if it does off? He's doing his best to trash the credibility of progressive politicians, who have done far more than him, all over a tactics disagreement, and a plan that isn't a completely risk free slam dunk.
    1
  56. He's lying. The nervous system isn't developed until about 27 weeks, after which most places don't do abortions unless the mother is at risk, or something.
    1
  57.  van wray  What a load of horseshit. A poor attempt to defend racism. You must be a racist PoS, yourself. Trump has not told Bernie or Warren, white folks, to go "back" to "their" countries. And the moron didn't think the US was "their" country, just because they aren't white. He didn't actually check to see what country they're from ... 3 being from the US.
    1
  58.  @dvrmte  Point one out.
    1
  59. Yeah, maybe get them to be as popular as the Libertarian party, that hasn't won a single seat in congress in its near 50 year existence.
    1
  60.  @kennethmcneil3478  Cute, that you think things are similar to about 170 years ago.
    1
  61.  @kennethmcneil3478  Gloriously? So you want Republicans to win, rather than see the progressive caucus become the majority of house Dems. You must be one of Dore's right wing chump fans.
    1
  62. AOC backed progressives who primaried against DCCC backed corporate Dems. She's not trying to be "friends", but does have to find a way to work with others, to get anything done.
    1
  63.  @TahtahmesDiary  Well, she also backed Bernie against their guy in the primaries, and backed other progressives against their DCCC backed corporate Dems in the congressional primaries. She didn't, exactly, play nice. Taking the lesser of two evils route, in the general, isn't necessarily "being nice", either. It could just be being pragmatic. Another Trump term could have ended the ACA and millions getting healthcare coverage, could have killed thousands of more Americans from covid than should be, doesn't get you the small gains of lowering the Medicare age and single payer, getting millions more on government healthcare insurance. We already knew, from the history of Bernie campaigning for Clinton, that they quickly forget the general election support and remain bitter about the primary opposition. After all that, she still has to find a way to work with others, to accomplish anything in the next 2 years. That's harder to do if you go full scorched earth on the party. It could even backfire.
    1
  64. Biden is a moron. He obviously has zero clue how emergency wards work here in Canada, or other single payer countries.
    1
  65.  Porky P Iggy  Telephone lines are akin to the internet, not the websites on the internet, and both of those (internet and phone lines) have been at least partly funded by the government. Every private number you call, though, has the right to hang up on you. Also like how you can use the public roads to get to others' private property, but you still don't have the right to go on their private property. Why do you have the right to be on someone else's privately owned servers? They could start charging membership fees tomorrow if they wanted. They could decide they've made enough money and pull the plugs on their servers.
    1
  66.  Porky P Iggy  The invitation came with rules for membership. Break the rules, lose your membership. Pretty simple concept. If Trump has his gym membership revoked for walking into the women's change room too many times, so what? People have been having memberships revoked since the dawn of memberships. If you want a public square, argue public ownership.
    1
  67.  Porky P Iggy  Sure, and it's the owner's interpretation that decides. These social media sites don't generally have these moments, like with Trump cultists, where a bunch of staff is actively looking for something specific to delete or block. They, generally, just let the program handle some things, and depend on other users reporting on other things. Sometimes it takes just one asshole to report a specific video, that separates it from other similar videos.
    1
  68. Don't go all Jimmy Dore stupid. "But progressives are pushing for the wage increase to remain, and the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) has already ensured that it will be included in the House Democrats' version of the legislation." https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/progressives-hold-biden-to-account-on-15-minimum-wage-as-he-suggests-it-be-dealt-with-later/ar-BB1dxEOV?li=BBnbcA1
    1
  69. It was her punishment for using her platform and PAC to go against DCCC backed corporate Dems and help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress. Adding more yes votes to congress is exactly what needs doing, failed vote or no failed vote. Threatening to paralyze the house might just get you them letting you, and then blaming you for no new covid relief, no new unemployment extensions, no new vaccine funding, etc., during a pandemic.
    1
  70.  @acharris  Just freeze the government, have people pissed they aren't getting money to survive, and that will bring tons of people over to progressivism? Just how delusional are Dore fans?
    1
  71.  @Hunter_Brandon  What was so "behind closed doors" about it? https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/09/progressive-covid-minimum-wage-468061
    1
  72.  @graywalkerjoin3rdparty74  Even if every progressive voted third party, each district general election would then look like a Dem primary, with seperate Dem and progressive candidates, running against a single Republican, with Republicans winning most everything, due to first past the post.
    1
  73. To actually get Pelosi out, or prevent someone worse being picked, you'd need the majority of votes in the Dem caucus. Blocking her at the house vote just paralyzes the house. It then goes back to Dem caucus, where they can keep picking Pelosi as their speaker choice over and over and over, or someone worse. How long do progressives paralyze the house as they get blamed for no new covid relief, no minimum wage hike, no Medicare age reduction, no student debt relief, or whatever else they can use to make progressives look bad in the eyes of the people? If Dore is right, that corporate Dems would rather work with Republicans than progressives, that's actually an argument against his tactic, not for it. Corporate Dems could work a deal with Republicans to dodge paralyzing the house. Pelosi could quietly agree to a Republican request in exchange for having enough Republicans play sick, or abstain, lowering the threshold needed for her to win. None of the movements you mentioned included threatening to paralyze the house. AOC just did exactly what needs doing, used her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, going against DCCC backed corporate Dems. Exactly the thing that would still need doing after the vote fails by almost 100 votes (it only has 124 people signed on, and would need 218 to pass a full house vote, so not sure where you're getting 30 from). If you, or Jimmy, have 100 (or even 30) new pro-M4A candidates in your back pockets, why didn't you run them in the election that just happened? I'm sure AOC would have done what she could to help them get elected too. Or are these 100 new candidates going to magically appear after a failed vote? It only took a single question, to get Biden to say he'd veto M4A. It doesn't seem that hard to get a politician to publicly say they're opposed to M4A without having to threaten to paralyze the house.
    1
  74. There's UBI and then there's how to pay for UBI. Alaskans have partial ownership of their resource, and get paid for it. Yang isn't proposing everyone get a share of Amazon, and their profits. He's proposing taxing Amazon's consumers with a VAT. Amazon would still pay zero taxes. They'd simply collect it and pass it along to the government. Toss in the UBI and even more people will spend money on Amazon making them and Bezos even richer.
    1
  75.  @deep-n-yo-mind5061  You keep strawmanning me. I didn't automatically dismiss UBI. I opened by saying there's UBI and then there's how to pay for UBI, and that Yang's plan is just bad. He's the one throwing his hands in the air about tax loopholes for corporations and the rich. He's the one promoting a VAT that doesn't actually tax corporations, and will make them and their owners richer. He's the one not accounting for some poor people who will end up worse off. Other studies will say nothing about his plan, unless they're designed exactly like his plan, and he's the only one with a UBI plan.
    1
  76. I think you're all delusional as to just how much leverage progressives actually have. You all know Pelosi can just let progressives paralyze the house, and then blame them for no new covid relief, no minimum wage increase, no Medicare age decrease, etc., etc., etc., right?
    1
  77.  @Aj-zr8dz  Remaining few? Corporate Dems are still the majority of Democrats. The majority of the Dem caucus picked Pelosi. Progressives can keep sending it back to caucus, but have no actual way of voting her out there, or someone worse, because they don't have a majority. Even the majority of Dem voters just picked Biden over Bernie. Progressive numbers are growing, but they don't yet have the power some people seem to think, and corporate Dems aren't rolling over dead quite yet.
    1
  78.  @Aj-zr8dz  Yeah, you do need to convince the majority to get rid of her, or they can just keep picking her over and over, let you paralyze the house, and blame you when people are desperate for more covid relief.
    1
  79.  @Aj-zr8dz  Other than getting more progressives elected to Congress, exactly like AOC just helped do, until you get the majority, you can't force the majority to do anything in caucus. You can paralyze the house and keep sending it back to caucus, but there you have no power again. They can just let you paralyze the house and blame you when people start asking for more covid relief. Dore and Kyle also argue that Pelosi would rather work with Republicans than progressives, and is the queen of backroom deals, but then don't seem to consider the possibility of Pelosi simply making a backroom deal with Republicans. She could give them something in exchange for 20 Republicans playing sick, reducing the threshold needed to win, and easily dodge the progressive threat.
    1
  80.  @Aj-zr8dz  A Tim Ryan isn't exactly "less established". Parties generally pick amongst senior members to be speaker.
    1
  81. @WeAreIt Yeah, finally M4A is an established part of mainstream political conversation, and progressives are adding multiple seats to their numbers each election, THAT'S the time to bail and start yet another third party that won't even get a single seat in 50 years. Jimmy Dore: I'm so impatient, I'm going to take the longest fucking road possible to reach my destination!!! That'll show em!!!
    1
  82. @WeAreIt Adding multiple new yes votes in a single election is a full slice of bread, compared to starting from scratch.
    1
  83.  @Aj-zr8dz  What do you mean wouldn't last as long? Pelosi says this is her last ride as speaker. Swapping Tim Ryan in now would likely give him more of a chance to stay in longer than her 2 years left.
    1
  84.  @Scepticalasfuk  You work for a third party that just wants to slander progressive politicians, destroy confidence in them, start from scratch, and not even win a seat in the house in 50 years, let alone get M4A?
    1
  85. Bullshit. Progressives got the $15 minimum to remain in the house bill.
    1
  86.  @gabrielarcari72  The progressive caucaus got the $15 minimum to stay in the house bill. Justice Dems and AOC just helped add more M4A yes votes to congress.
    1
  87.  @gabrielarcari72  The broader progressive caucus, which include M4A on their platform, is about 10-15 seats away from becoming the majority of house Dems. They could then pick the party speaker candidate at the party caucus. That could happen next election, if that many viable progressive caucus candidates can replace non progressive caucus candidates. On the other hand, the most popular third party hasn't won a single seat in congress in its near 50 year existence. The second most popular hasn't won a single seat in its 20 year existence. Having a broader group of about a hundred progressives, and even a smaller group of 15, or so, completely corporate free progressives, in congress, are both more than any third party has accomplished. Third parties don't get to put forward even a single bill, don't get to cast even a single vote for, or against, even a single bill. It's a fantasy, thinking a third party would be the faster route. That system needs to change, to make third parties more viable, but you can't really change it from the outside.
    1
  88.  @gabrielarcari72  Because first past the post works against them. Even if you peeled off all progressive voters, from the Dem party, that would just end up letting Republicans win in most places. It would be like Dem primaries vs Republicans in the general.
    1
  89.  @graywalkerjoin3rdparty74  Progressives don't have the numbers to pick a different party speaker candidate in caucus. The corporate Dem majority could have kept picking Pelosi over and over and over, or someone worse. And if you go all out war within the party, how do you think things will go when the progressive caucus gets the 10-15 more seats it needs to become the majority of house Dems, and they pick the party speaker candidate?
    1
  90.  @gabrielarcari72  Uh huh. That's why you need to take over one of those parties, instead.
    1
  91.  @gabrielarcari72  That's a lie. AOC, and others, vote against the seperate military budget, every year.
    1
  92.  @graywalkerjoin3rdparty74  Pelosi introduced M4A just last session. It died in committees, where 90% of bills die. The speaker, alone, can't even force a bill through committees.
    1
  93.  @graywalkerjoin3rdparty74  How do you scare the crap out of people who many say would prefer losing to Republicans than progressives, when Republicans would be who benefits most from a popular progressive third party?
    1
  94.  @graywalkerjoin3rdparty74  The election that just happened would suggest you're exaggerating. Libertarians and Greens did worse than in 2016. Bernie didn't get overwhelming support.
    1
  95.  @gabrielarcari72  So, you don't want them to just vote against the stand alone defense appropriation bill, you want them to vote against the entire budget? Vote against the budget that includes funding for Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, public housing, etc.?
    1
  96.  @dragonbutt1218  Justice Dems and AOC with her PAC, just helped add a few more progressives to congress. Winning even one seat is more than any third party has accomplished. Bernie, running within the Dem party, was also a potential presidential candidate in every state. Third party presidential candidates only have the potential to be on the ballot in about a dozen states, even after 20 years for Greens, and almost 50 years for Libertarians. There's no real contest as to which is the better approach.
    1
  97.  @bluesrockfan36  Sounds like you're referring to his end vision, as was LA's end vision. His "burden shifting", transition, phase he outright describes as a public option, which hasn't worked as a transition phase for LA.
    1
  98. Adding more M4A yes votes to congress is pretty straight forward. It's what you have to do to ever pass a bill. Keeping the $15 minimum wage in the house bill, is also pretty straight forward. And yet you still seem confused.
    1
  99.  @kennethmcneil3478  Oh, do explain how you can ever pass a bill without enough yes votes, dumb dumb.
    1
  100.  @griffmustard  And how many votes are third parties getting on any bill in congress, dimwit? Zero. 10 is immeasurable times better than 0. You seem to be ignoring the 100, or so, cosigners. It's more like half way there. What's your other option to adding enough votes to get it to pass?
    1
  101. A private property owners right to remove you from their private property has always trumped the non right to be on their private property saying stuff. People have been having their memberships revoked, or been removed from private property, since always. Argue for public ownership. Arguing free speech rights on someone else's private property is nonsense.
    1
  102.  @TheRantingRooster  The Tea Party was backed by the Koch brothers, who also applied their own pressure and funded Tea Party friendly candidates. If anything, it had more similarities to the Justice Dems trying to take over the Dem party, than it did any third party.
    1
  103. Or they, and the entire progressive caucus, got the $15 minimum wage to stay in the house bill. https://www.newsweek.com/progressives-hold-biden-account-15-minimum-wage-he-suggests-it-dealt-later-1568050
    1
  104. And if Pelosi just lets progressives paralyze the house, and uses it to blame them for no new covid relief, no new unemployment extensions, no new vaccine funding, etc., during a pandemic?
    1
  105.  @timberdoodle6924  At this point, we're 1-0, because you didn't post a single one. Make this 2-0. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.31.20166116v1
    1
  106. You know the only way to ever actually pass M4A is to get enough votes in congress, right? Getting more pro-M4A candidates elected to congress, which she just helped do, is pretty much the most important thing you can do. Even if you have a failed vote, that would still be the main thing that would need doing.
    1
  107.  @abelgonzalez158  Yeah, I just said that, vote or no vote, replacing corporate Dems, which she just helped do, is still the main thing that needs doing. The bill will be reintroduced in the next session, and you'll get a new list of people who won't sign onto it, during a pandemic, already. Almost 100 more people need replacing in the house alone. Finding 100 new pro-M4A candidates to run, and backing them, is more important than trying to ferret out a few fakes. All it took was one reporter's question to get Biden on the public record saying he'd veto M4A. It didn't take threatening to paralyze the house, and possibly having to go through with that.
    1
  108.  @abelgonzalez158  That's what I said, threaten to paralyze the house for a vote. No, that wouldn't necessarily lose her the speakership. It would go back to the Dem caucus, where corporate Dems have the majority, and progressives have no power to block the majority, and they can keep picking her over and over and over, while letting you paralyze the house over and over and over, and then blame you for no new covid relief, no minimum wage increase, etc., to help ease people's suffering during a pandemic ... you know they, and the corporate media, would propagandize the shit out of it, making progressives look bad in many people's eyes. Dore and Kyle have even argued Pelosi would rather work with Republicans than progressives and that she's the queen of backroom deals. She could just cut a backroom deal with Republicans, in exchange for enough of them to say home, or abstain, to lower the threshold needed to win. It isn't risk free and the only possible outcomes pluses.
    1
  109.  @armandodelossantos736  Which one don't you like? https://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/usa1203/11.htm
    1