General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

The Jimmy Dore Show
comments

Comments by "" (@TheHuxleyAgnostic) on "The Jimmy Dore Show" channel.

I get the feeling that Warren knew the exact question coming to her, as well. Her response, and attack on the guys on stage, seem very scripted and prepared.
18
March 16: Bernie suggests primary voting should be postponed. April 1: Bernie suggests primary voting should be postponed. And not once has Bernie made out like it's safe.
9
Yeah, I totally remember Bernie running on a 6 month student loan deferment and Medicare for a single virus strain.
5
@thehusketeers4319 Not sure whacked out on Sudafed is a "bonus". They both suck.
5
Republicans, corporate Dems, and MSM, don't seem to be pissed at him.
5
@ACDCfan666tnt Exactly. The people who are openly opposed to M4A aren't pissed at him. Good job, Jimmy.
4
It's like you've never heard of Libertarians and ancappers before. They may agree on some anti-authoritarian issues, but they're economic opposites to socialism.
3
This guy is not the inventor. He is one of hundreds involved in research that led to the development of the vaccines. His vaccine nonsense has been debunked by multiple doctors and scientists. His ivermectin nonsense doesn't add up. You're peddling bullshit, as usual, Jimmy.
3
It's not permanent, and it only applies to the coronavirus, so it's not M4A. Jimmy is spouting bullshit.
3
Was it true that a Trump presidency led to a massive progressive wave that took over the house, senate, and presidency? Was it true that Trump filling multiple scotus seats was as likely as the moon falling into Lake Michigan? Dore is a pro at overestimating benefits and underestimating risks. And now he's just slandering anyone who doesn't make the exact same cost/benefit analysis he does.
3
Jefe Anson A bunch of bullshit. Anyone educated knows that other developed countries have more safety nets, more government healthcare regulation, and fewer fat and unhealthy people. Their healthcare systems are cheaper and get better results. Your "education" has also failed in teaching you what a "fascist" is. This is the Dore crowd? Right wing nutters?
2
You know the followers of the fascist you thought would be good for progressives are trying to stage a coup, yeah?
2
She just used her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, going against DCCC backed corporate Dems, you Dore knobs. You know, adding more yes votess to congress being that thing you have to do to ever pass a bill ... that thing you'd still have to do even if you got a vote that failed. Here's a great idea ... slander the most progressive politicians in congress, go third party with dummy Dore, and not get a seat in congress in the next 50 years, let alone get M4A. Maybe it could be just popular enough to split the progressive vote, hand the Dem party totally back to corporate Dems, and let Republicans rule for decades. Sounds fucking awesome ... if your a Republican.
2
@Scepticalasfuk Threatening to paralyze the house doesn't get you M4A. It could just get you a paralyzed house, with corporate Dems, Republicans, and the corporate media, then blaming progressives for no new covid relief, no new unemployment extensions, no new vaccine funding, etc., during a pandemic. Even if it got you a vote guaranteed to fail, you'd then still have to add more yes votes to congress, exactly as the "synthetic-progressive" AOC just did. You know that's the only possible way to pass a bill, yeah? Get enough yes votes. Your slander turns Jimmy's own "plan" into have a failed vote and then do nothing.
2
Lol, you might as well be campaigning for Trump and the Republicans, at this point Jimmy.
2
Imagine that a progressive politician just used her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, just backed Bernie (M4A) instead of Tulsi (public option), and morons thinking she's the one that doesn't support M4A.
2
He isn't proposing anything permanent, or covering anything beyond covid costs. This isn't M4A. Jimmy is spouting nonsense.
2
Bullshit. AOC just backed Bernie and his M4A and helped get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress. Jimmy promoted Tulsi, and her "Medicare choice" (public option) and didn't give two craps if that would possibly peel votes away from the more viable candidate, with the better healthcare plan, and help Biden win. Dore is the poser.
2
@andrefasset3266 The present is Dore slandering people who just helped add more yes votes to congress, while he's going for yet another third party that won't even win a seat in congress in the next 50 years, let alone get anyone healthcare.
2
Germany's covid deaths per million rate would translate into about 400k fewer covid deaths in the US. But, yeah, bash on countries with much better covid outcomes.
2
Rofl. They may be anti-authoritarian, Dore, but they're also anti-socialist. Once they're done kidnapping and killing off the government, they'll start shooting at anyone who tries to implement socialism.
2
Stop spewing your dumbass slander, Dore. AOC just used her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, the very thing that needs doing to ever pass the bill in congress, the very thing you'd still have to do even if you got a vote that fails.
1
@GGg-ug3jr No, no. Executing Chris Matthews in Central Park is Bernie's platform. Executing everyone over 65 is Bloomberg's platform.
1
Except the go to covid measures have worked great, in multiple countries. Australia's covid death rate would translate into about 26k total US covid deaths, instead of 800k. Having a bunch of morons not following guidelines, and not getting vaxxed, and then pretending like nothing has worked to slow down the spread and reduce deaths, is insanity.
1
They aren't "exactly" repeating your completely bullshit claim that Bernie has "backed off" M4A.
1
AOC just put her money where her mouth is, using her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, the exact thing you'd still have to do even if you get a vote guaranteed to fail. Meanwhile, Jimmy was busy bitching about shit Obama was saying on the campaign trail.
1
Trump is inciting his 60m followers, over standard election procedures, but Pete being a bit of a hypocrite is a great headline, Jimmy.
1
So, when you promoted Trump as the better option, in 2016, and predicted Republicans would fight against his agenda, this isn't what you were hoping for?
1
@Lbdataz1469 Yeah, that's not true. 75-90% of people dying are unvaccinated. Jimmy just cited a Gallup article (before dishonestly comparing the wrong "death rate") that showed the unvaccinated were being hospitalized at 89x the rate of the vaccinated.
1
Even the most popular third party, Libertarian, hasn't won a single seat in congress in going on 50 years. Bernie, the Justice Democrats, the squad, have accomplished more than them in 5 years. AOC, alone, has accomplished more in 2 years than the Green Party has in 20. Your third party fantasies are a joke. At best, it'd be popular enough to split progressive voting, hand the Dem party totally back to corporate Dems, and let Republicans rule for decades. Weird how you promote ideas that would benefit Republicans most.
1
Shove your garbage strawman, Dore. Pelosi introduced M4A last session, where it quietly died in committees, like 90% of bills do. The speaker, alone, can't force a bill through committees and onto the floor for a vote, even if they wanted to. AOC didn't endorse your bullshit FTV "plan". She also never campaigned on paralyzing the house, or threatening to paralyze the house. You're slandering someone who just helped add more M4A yes votes to congress, the very thing you need to do to ever pass the bill, the very thing you'd still have to do even if you got your failed vote. So what? So you can ditch having progressive seats in congress, start from scratch, and lead idiots down a third party route that hasn't won the most popular third party a single seat in congress in going on 50 years?
1
By "stand up to Pelosi", does that include using your platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, going against DCCC backed corporate Dems, exactly like AOC just did? And, exactly the same thing that will still need doing after a failed vote?
1
Are you idiots still blathering about a single investigation, that didn't even start before US and others bombed Syria ... and a final report, that didn't actually assign blame, and came out almost a year later ... meaning it had absolutely nothing to do with anyone's decision to bomb Syria?
1
Stop bullshitting. You don't care about others having healthcare. In 2016, you promoted Trump as a better option, not caring if that might lead to the repeal of the ACA and millions losing their healthcare, including people with preexisting conditions. During the 2020 primaries, you promoted Tulsi ("Medicare choice" aka public option) instead of Bernie (M4A), not caring about getting the better healthcare plan, and not caring that you might peel away enough votes from the more viable progressive and let Biden win. You spent the general basically running an attack ad campaign against Trump's only viable opponent, again not caring if that would lead to the ACA being completely repealed, not caring if he killed thousands of more Americans, and no longer advocated for getting even a public option, or the Medicare age decrease that would put millions more on Medicare. Plus, you're promoting yet another third party that won't even get you a seat in congress in the next 50 years, let alone get you M4A, and could just split progressive voting enough to lose the gains they've made within the Dem party, handing it back to corporate Dems, and let Republicans rule for decades, possibly destroying the healthcare system even more. If anyone is a "fake", "shill", "sellout", or whatnot, it's clearly you, Jimmy. AOC backed Bernie over Biden, Biden over Trump, and just helped get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress. Adding more yes votes to congress is the only thing that will ever get M4A passed, failed show vote or no failed show vote.
1
Are you going to apologize to those you smeared, if they disagreed with your lie that the house speaker vote required 218 to win? Pelosi just won with only 216, in case you hadn't heard. 8 more abstentions, absentees, or unfilled seats, and McCarthy could have won.
1
Ironic, considering the lawsuit was over them marketing a drug for unapproved uses, while you have marketed drugs for unapproved uses.
1
She took out the #2 corporate Dem in the house, and just used her massive platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, going against more DCCC backed corporate Dems. But hey, keep up the Dore knob slander. Probably the same bunch of posers who followed Jimmy on the Tulsi ("Medicare choice" aka public option) train, rather than backing Bernie (M4A). Oh ya, AOC backed Bernie, as well.
1
@mohmoony3918 Are you sure it wasn't Tulsi using weasel words, like "Medicare choice" (aka public option), which Jimmy backed over Bernie's M4A, that pushed her out of politics?
1
@brianhooper8563 Yeah, taking out the #2 corporate Dem is exactly what the DNC wanted, and they wanted AOC to use her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress going against DCCC backed corporate Dems. You Dore knobs are geniuses.
1
Weren't you two also complaining about news agencies and private internet companies deciding for themselves what they wanted to publish, or allow on their sites?
1
@l.w.paradis2108 No. Messenger is like using the phone. Facebook doesn't give a crap what you say on messenger. Posting on their privately owned webpages and servers, is like posting things on a community bulletin board inside a privately owned shop. The shop owner shouldn't necessarily be responsible for what someone publishes and sticks up on the bulletin board (unless maybe if they're made aware of something dishonest or unethical that's being posted, and they keep allowing it, only then would they become somewhat of a party to it, but could still argue they're the ones allowing "free speech"). On the other hand, the shop owner still has every right to read and take down whatever they don't like being posted in their shop. It's being posted on their private property. Just get the hell off Facebook, if you don't like it.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Glenn has been complaining about news agencies deciding for themselves if they want an editorial rewrite, or not.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 I said if Jimmy doesn't let me on his show, then he's "censoring" me. Not simply leaving my comment up, dumbass. That makes you the lying twit. You didn't have to tell me Glenn's story. He still cried "censorship", which is bullshit. And, obviously, whatever his contract actually said, it involved passing stories by editorial review, first, and not simply hand the story to print. Also, simply asking him not to print it elsewhere isn't much of an attempt to "prevent" him. Facebook isn't the entire internet, dimwit. It's one site on the entire internet, just like one shop in the entirety of all shops.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Calling editors asking for rewrites "censorship" makes "censorship" just standard practice ... something that happens at newspapers, publishing companies, television and film companies, and has been happening for their entire histories. Okay then, you were "censored", like millions of other writers ... so what?
1
@l.w.paradis2108 They have a web address, dimwit. Don't use it. I don't use it.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Walmart has slaughtered millions of shops in its existence. It is still just another shop. Don't fucking use it if you don't like it.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 No, Walmart isn't the government any more than Facebook is.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Walmart just deemed itself essential, stayed open, and carried on its small business destroying ways. Plenty of small businesses actually operate through Facebook, Amazon, and other online markets. The internet being open helped numerous small shops, that found ways to have curbside pickup, or used third party delivery. So we're clear, I don't think corporations should have the right to exist, let alone have the rights of people. So, come up with a new angle, than your bullshit "shill" nonsense. I just think it's stupid to reduce cries of "censorship" to refer to meaningless standard everyday private practices. Oh my, your editor asked for a rewrite ... who fucking cares. Oh my, the NYT didn't pick up the Post's Bigfoot story ... who fucking cares. Don't like something Facebook, Twitter, or whatever are doing ... stop fucking using them, just like boycotting Chick-fil-A. I think people are just too addicted to their social media.
1
Hey Jimmy, are you going to explain how Pelosi won with only 216 votes? Explain how you didn't even know how house votes work?
1
The problem is that Pelosi already introduced M4A last session, Dore knob. It died in committees, where 90% of bills die. The speaker, alone, can't force a bill through committees.
1
Yeah, just as the progressive caucus is an election or two away from becoming the majority of house Dems, and can then pick the speaker, and then put progressive bills up for a vote as often as they want, THAT'S the time to "challenge the system" (slander the most progressive politicians going), go third party, not win a seat in 50 years, and possibly split progressive voting enough to kill those gains within the Dem party, handing the party completely back to corporate Dems, and let Republicans rule for decades. Awesome strategy to "challenge the system"!
1
How is an editor suggesting edits and verifying authenticity, "censorship"? Even if a news outlet decides not to cover a story, that's still not "censorship". Not covering the NY Post's numerous Bigfoot and UFO articles, doesn't equate to "censorship". Why are you spouting nonsense, Jimmy?
1
@yoxat1 Something is either "censorship", or not, and a news outlet picking which stories it wants to run, or not run, all on their own, isn't. If the authorities were making them not run a story, that would be.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 No clue what you're on about. Still not censorship, by the sounds of it.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 I don't have to read what's on your poster, to know that me not letting you stick it up in my store window isn't censorship. To call it such, is nonsense. I highly doubt a writer has a contract saying they can write whatever the hell they want, whenever they want, and it'll 100% be printed every time, without any editorial input. Even if such a thing existed, breach of contract also doesn't equate to censorship. If we had a contract for you to paint a mural on my wall, and I changed my mind, because I didn't like your sketches, it may be a breach of contract, but that's also not censorship. Not letting an Armageddon preacher come into my restaurant and scream at my customers isn't censorship.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 You're arguing for the word to be pretty much meaningless. Everytime someone decides not to tell their boss, or a customer, or a spouse, or a child, to f*ck off ... censorship! Ok, then so what? You've now argued that censorship can be a good thing in many situations. So, every single time a news agency decides not to run a story, that's "censorship", and it is "censorship" if actual news outlets don't pick up every tabloid article in existence. Then, so what? You seem to be trying to convince me not to give a crap about "censorship".
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Again, it doesn't matter what it says, the action of not running a story, which happens all the time, isn't "censorship".
1
@l.w.paradis2108 What did I lie about? You argued "censorship" was a broad concept, going beyond the authorities silencing you, and covers everything from "self-censorship" to "censorship in violation of a private contract", as well. So, everytime someone decides not to say something that might hurt someone else, that's "censorship". That makes it a good thing, in many cases. Ok, Greenwald was "censored", using a broad concept. So what? It's you that doesn't seem to have read what I said about even if a contract did say that, because you keep going on about the contract. Again, if I sign a contract with you, giving you full artistic license, to paint a mural on the side of my building, but then I decide I don't like your draft sketches and ask you to alter them in some way, that's not censorship. It may be a breach of contract, but me deciding what goes on the wall I own, or what doesn't, is my freedom.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 How is "artistic license" different from Greenwald claiming he had "editorial freedom"? Greenwald has called what happened "censorship", but where has he said the word is in his contract? Not in his explanation for quitting.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Rofl, I can read just fine. You say that, but don't give specifics. You skipped pointing out exactly where I supposedly lied, too. Should we ditch all editors for spellcheck, then? Has every news article, since the dawn of printing news, that had an editor tell a writer to change something, been "censored"? That sounds nonsensical, and sounds like you don't seem to understand the role of editors. You're the one attacking the press for freely choosing not to run a story, as is.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Hey, you don't have to tell me twice. In fact, I had accepted you were slow, long before you mentioned it the first time, so you didn't even have to tell me once. As Greenwald posts his story on the internet, for the whole world to see, while whining about being "censored", maybe the two of you can get together and cry about all the meanie editors, throughout history.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Why would I use a different word than "meanie", when that describes your argument against editors, just perfectly?
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Rofl, I'm not a right winger, dumb dumb. Not even close. Do you have a multiple personality disorder, or something?
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Lol, it's funny that, no matter how many people are in that head of yours, they all have to be under a certain level of intelligence. I mean, for all of you to decide that it was good idea to fall back on not knowing that the word "snowflake" is generally used by people of a specific political leaning, is kind of self defeating.
1
His slander routine is moronic. If someone who just used her platform and PAC to help add more M4A yes votes to congress, the very thing that needs doing to ever pass it, the very thing you'd still need to do even if you get a vote guaranteed to fail ... if she isn't fighting for M4A, then Jimmy's own "plan" is to get a vote guaranteed to fail, and then not fight. His slander makes his own "plan" incoherent.
1
@davidackerman6837 You mean like Jimmy, who has his own healthcare, and didn't care if promoting Trump as better than Clinton would lead to the ACA being repealed and millions losing theirs, including those with preexisting conditions? Like Jimmy, who promoted Tulsi ("Medicare choice" aka public option) over Bernie, not supporting the better healthcare plan, and not caring if peeling away votes from Bernie could let Biden win? Like Jimmy, who spent the general running an attack ad campaign against Trump's only viable opponent, again not caring if that would lead to total ACA repeal, and suddenly not supporting a public option that also included lowering of the Medicare age, which would add millions more to Medicare? Like Jimmy, who's backing a third party route that won't even get you a seat in congress in the next 50 years, let alone get you M4A, and could just be popular enough to split progressive voting and hand the Dem party totally back to corporate Dems, and let Republicans rule for decades, possibly destroying the healthcare system even more? That guy doesn't give a flying fuck if anyone ever gets healthcare. Threatening to paralyze the house could just get you a paralyzed house, with corporate Dems blaming progressives for no new covid relief, no new unemployment extensions, no new vaccine funding, etc., during a pandemic. Slandering progressive politicians, who just help add more yes votes to congress, just as the progressive caucus is an election or two away from becoming the majority of house Dems, when they can actually have the majority to pick the speaker, and then bring up progressive bills for votes as often as they like, is moronic. Jimmy is a pro at overestimating the benefits and underestimating the risks.
1
@davidackerman6837 Have fun slandering progressives, going third party, and not getting a seat in congress in the next 50 years, following a dimwit with his own healthcare.
1
Oh my gosh, he forgot something 30 years ago, when Bush was VP, and right before his Bush appointment. Big woop. Oi. Attorney Generals exonerate people all the time. You're spouting Republican bullshit.
1
@Wallaby Ted The report fully said they would have exonerated. They couldn't because there is evidence of obstruction. There was also evidence of conspiracy, but they decided they couldn't prove Jr knew he was breaking any laws. His ignorance saved him.
1
@Wallaby Ted Every investigation can decide there's no reason to suspect someone of a crime, and cross them off their suspect list.
1
Stop bullshitting. You don't care about others having healthcare. In 2016, you promoted Trump as a better option, not caring if that might lead to the repeal of the ACA and millions losing their healthcare, including people with preexisting conditions. During the 2020 primaries, you promoted Tulsi ("Medicare choice" aka public option) instead of Bernie (M4A), not caring about getting the better healthcare plan, and not caring that you might peel away enough votes from the more viable progressive and let Biden win. You spent the general basically running an attack ad campaign against Trump's only viable opponent, again not caring if that would lead to the ACA being completely repealed, not caring if he killed thousands of more Americans, and no longer advocated for getting even a public option, or the Medicare age decrease that would put millions more on Medicare. Plus, you're promoting yet another third party that won't even get you a seat in congress in the next 50 years, let alone get you M4A, and could just split progressive voting enough to lose the gains they've made within the Dem party, handing it back to corporate Dems, and let Republicans rule for decades, possibly destroying the healthcare system even more. If anyone is a "fake", "shill", "sellout", or whatnot, it's clearly you, Jimmy. AOC backed Bernie over Biden, Biden over Trump, and just helped get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress. Adding more yes votes to congress is the only thing that will ever get M4A passed, failed show vote or no failed show vote.
1
75-90% of people dying are unvaccinated. According to the very Gallup article Jimmy cited recently, the hospitalization rate for the unvaccinated is 89x higher than the vaccinated (then he went on to dishonestly compare those rates to a "death rate" that's based on totally different math and also a year and a half old). So, yeah, people not getting vaxxed are morons. The UK has a totally socialized healthcare system, not just socialized health insurance. Their moron of a leader also didn't take it seriously, for some time, and they also had a shit result because of it. Some other countries with single payer health insurance, also had shit responses. They, and the US, all had pathetically low trace testing rates, testing fewer than 10 people per confirmed case, for months, allowing the virus to spread. Countries with high trace testing rates (50+ people per confirmed case), and a high percentage of the population following guidelines, like S Korea, Vietnam, Australia, New Zealand, and some others, had excellent responses. Their covid death rates would translate into 750+k fewer deaths, in the US. Even the death rates in countries with mediocre testing rates (15+ people per confirmed case) and somewhat better following of guidelines, like Canada, Germany, Denmark, Finland, Norway, and some others, would translate into hundreds of thousands fewer deaths, in the US. So, no, simply having universal healthcare didn't save a lot of lives, and yes, the go to covid measures can save hundreds of thousands of lives, if people follow them. People fighting and arguing against them are morons. Jimmy is also a moron.
1
@krook5158 Oh yeah, that's brilliant, comparing developed countries, with 20+ years higher life extectancies, to countries that have life expectancies as low as 55. Definitely a bright bunch, here. What "known issues and risks", do you think there are, exactly?
1
@krook5158 It's not "what I think of Africa", it's a fact that the life expectancy of all of Africa is 63. "October 30, 2020 -- A new study conducted by researchers at Imperial College London found the COVID-19 infection fatality ratio is about 1.15% of infected people in high-income nations and 0.23% in low-income nations." "The disparity between high and low-income nations is due largely to facts that high-income nations tend to have larger number of elderly in their populations whereas low-income nations’ population tend to skew youngers." Looking at the death rates in low income countries, with much lower life expectancies, is stupid and isn't an honest comparison to high income countries, with much higher life extectancies. But, I get that Dore knobs like being lied to. The main cause of myocarditis is viruses, dimwit, including covid. Covid causes myocarditis at a higher rate than the vaccines. Plus, it's not a serious condition. Specifically, the J&J and AZ vaccines, you mean. The mRNA vaccines have nothing to do with blood clots. There were 3 deaths definitely confirmed to be caused by the J&J vaccine, early on, in the US. Then, they figured out who it affects most and what to watch for. There haven't been any reported since.
1
Andrew McMillan No, you lying twit, it was specifically about whether primaries should be postponed.
1
You're destroying your own argument Jimmy. If they'd rather lose to Republicans than progressives, then why wouldn't they rather have a Republican speaker than vote on a progressive bill and give progressives some kind of win? Then, they and the media, could blame progressives for losing control of the House to a Republican speaker, for years.
1
Because the Republicans will have their own speaker candidate, and then you'd have a Republican speaker?
1
@Scepticalasfuk It's whoever gets the absolute majority of votes cast. If they abstain, the Republicans would win. They'd have to cast a vote for someone else to force a revote. Who gets to put the big target on their back?
1
@LG123ABC The speaker election doesn't need the majority of the house to win, it needs the majority of votes cast. If you've convinced enough progressives to abstain and not give Pelosi a win, then you've either orchestrated a perfect tie with the Republican candidate, or Pelosi loses to the Republican candidate. Someone would have to volunteer to receive votes cast that don't go to Pelosi for her to lose but not lose by the majority of votes cast.
1
@squidsquiddly5970 Yeah, her progressive PAC just helped get more progressives elected to congress. Kick her out for disagreeing on tactics with Jimmy Dore! Dore knob.
1
You Dore knob. You missed a possibility between Pelosi getting enough votes and nobody getting enough votes. That possibility being that Pelosi doesn't get enough votes, but the threshold needed to win is lowered enough for McCarthy to get enough votes. If your 15 progressives simply abstained, that 15 plus the 1 unfilled seat, would lower the threshold needed to win down to 210. Pelosi could only get 209 of the 224 Dem votes, even if every other Dem voted for her. McCarthy would get 212, if every Rep voted for him. McCarthy would win.
1
Yep, just another centrist, that backed Bernie (M4A) and helped get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress going against DCCC backed corporate Dems, while M4A champion Jimmy was backing Tulsi ("Medicare choice" aka public option) and bitching about Obama.
1
AOC's PAC just helped get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress. How much did you donate to it, Jimmy?
1
@lastfirst5154 Spreading ideas on your platform counts as fighting when Jimmy does it, but not when she does it? A single M4A tweet of hers has an audience 40x larger than Jimmy's. One was shared about 70x more than Jimmy's, even as he's "trending" (not actually on any top trending lists). She totally destroys Dore at the only way he fights, if that counts as fighting. Getting more pro-M4A voters in congress is the actual fight, isn't it? That's the only way it's ever going to pass. Is Jimmy putting his money where his mouth is, or is he just a "fake" and a "wimp"?
1
@lastfirst5154 Shove the delusional bullshit. Her M4A tweet with 70k retweets was before Jimmy's showboating, and reached her millions of followers even without retweets. Even now, while he's "trending" (not actually on any top trending lists), Jimmy can't break 2k retweets. She absolutely annihilates him at the only thing he does. If that's considered fighting, then she's laying waste to the social media battlefield. He's an armchair general, shitting on someone fighting in the trenches, someone who actually moved the M4A agenda ahead by helping get more pro-M4A progressives elected, while Jimmy was whining about Colbert crying, and shit Obama (no longer an actual politician) said. Jimmy doesn't give a crap if anyone has healthcare. He has his. He knew the only thing between the small gains the ACA provided, and the repeated attempts to have it repealed, had been Obama vetoes. He knew conservative judges could be bad for women's health. He still promoted Trump as a better option than Clinton, or Stein (which only helped Trump win). He didn't give a crap if millions of previously uninsured, including those with preexisting conditions lost their healthcare. Again, in 2020, he spent the general election basically running attack ads against Trump's only viable opponent. Jimmy didn't care if the fascist fuck who helped kill thousands of Americans won again, and he fought against the Medicare age being dropped and a public option, with no alternative on the Republican side. He's also ready to start from scratch with another third party, and not get M4A for decades, if ever. He's a poser.
1
@lastfirst5154 If anyone is a "shill", Dore is a Republican shill.
1
@lastfirst5154 You just made out like using your platform counted as doing something, now you don't give a crap how big a platform someone has. You're incoherent.
1
@lastfirst5154 She just used her platform and PAC to get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress. That's what what you'll still have to do, even if you get a vote that's guaranteed to fail. She used her platform to do exactly what needed doing. I doubt Jimmy even has 100 new pro-M4A candidates lined up, to replace the ones who will need replacing in the house and senate. When he does, go to her to actually do what needs doing. Dore? Rofl. He peddled the shit that Trump would be better for progressives than Clinton, claimed the moon would fall into Lake Michigan before Trump could fill multiple scotus seats, claimed it would bring about a massive wave of progressives and flip the house, senate, and bring about a 2020 Warren presidency. He peddled the shit that Stein had a chance. Now he's using his platform to peddle the shit that he actually cares if anyone gets healthcare coverage. He did what he could to get Trump elected in 2016. He didn't care that could lead to the repeal of the ACA and millions losing their healthcare coverage. Jimmy, basically, spent the 2020 general election running an anti-Biden campaign, Trump's only viable opponent. During a pandemic, he didn't care if Trump stayed in power and killed more Americans, he didn't care that millions more would get coverage by lowering the social security age to 60. Jimmy is also, once again, promoting a third party. He's willing to start from scratch and maybe win a house seat in a few decades, while Republicans run the show because you've split the vote. Anyone who believes that that guy gives a shit about getting you healthcare coverage anytime soon, is overflowing with the amount of shit they've been shovelled.
1
Stop pretending like you care if people have healthcare. You didn't in 2016. You didn't this election cycle. Slandering progressives who just added more yes votes to congress and going third party won't even win you a seat in congress in 50 years, let alone get anyone healthcare, but could split progressive voting enough to hand the Dem party back to corporate Dems, and let Republicans rule for decades. The progressive caucus is maybe only another election away from becoming the majority of house Dems. Then they can actually pick the speaker in caucus, and bring M4A up for a vote as often as they want. All they can do now is paralyze the house. Corporate Dems can just let them, and then blame progressives for people not getting new covid relief, not getting more unemployment extions, not getting more vaccine funding, not getting a minimum wage increase etc., during a pandemic. If anyone is a "fake", "shill", or "sellout", it's Jimmy Dore, who keeps encouraging progressives to take the dumbest road possible.
1
You're, literally, insane Dore. Advocating for M4A, which they've been doing with M4A rallies all along, doesn't equate to advocating for your poorly thought out tactic that could backfire, nor does it equate to advocating for slandering any progressive that don't back your poorly thought out tactic. AOC advocating for a floor vote and advocating for Pelosi to be replaced also doesn't include advocating threatening to paralyze the house. You keep making out like people once supported your tactic, when nobody has ever said anything of the sort.
1
@claybrown1258 His "point" is bullshit, because Trump hasn't proposed permanent M4A to cover everything, Bernie proposed the same temporary covid measures, and Bernie sure as hell hasn't "backed off" medicare for all, moron.
1
@foxbodyblues6709 It only covers covid-19 costs, dumbass. What the hell would permanent covid-19 coverage do for anyone, once it's under control?
1
@claybrown1258 Moron. How the fuck does the right have both Ayn Rand spouting right libertarian types and authoritarian crony capitalist fascist types? How the fuck is calling for gays to be killed, or pushing conversion "therapy", or the "right" to discriminate, "inclusive"? How the fuck is regularly calling a penisless, sexless, imaginary friend "him" or "father", but not seeming to understand the difference between sex and gender when it comes to humans, compatible? How the fuck is calling for throwing people who do get abortions in jail, "inclusive"? How the fuck is most of them thinking you, a supposed atheist, to be the least trustworthy group in the country, at all accepting? Just sounds like they're being two faced. How the fuck is both claiming to be for democracy and supporting every fascist dictator on the planet, compatible? Etc. The right has boatloads of contradictions and non acceptance, you dumb shit.
1
@claybrown1258 You're a walking contradiction, yourself, saying that having both atheists and theists on the left doesn't mesh, and then praising right wing theists for supposedly accepting atheists. You are, objectively, stupid.
1
@claybrown1258 You gave a bunch of "examples", plural, fucktard. Nice try at moving the goalpost though.
1
@clintonflynn815 Sure, but this plan isn't going to get M4A now. If you get the vote, which is guaranteed to fail, you get a list of names that'll be pretty much the same as the list of names you'll get when the bill is reintroduced in the new session anyway. And then you have to replace them, just like AOC just helped do. Or, you don't get the vote, and corporate Dems let progressives paralyze the house and blame them for no new covid relief, no new unemployment extensions, no new vaccine funding, etc., during a pandemic. Jimmy is exaggerating the potential gains and ignoring any potential risks. The idiot doesn't even grasp how the speaker vote actually works, as he's reading it aloud.
1
@Galadriel333 She was for "Medicare choice", dipshit, and wanted to let people who liked their private healthcare keep it. That would make opting into Medicare an option, dumbass. No he doesn't. It's the majority of votes cast that wins. He even brought up a webpage and read that aloud, but still didn't clue in that abstentions don't count as votes, absentees don't count as votes, unfilled seats don't count as votes. For every 2 of those, the threshold needed to win is reduced by 1. Although unlikely, it is possible for McCarthy to win. Jimmy dishonestly, or moronically, claims it's impossible.
1
@michael pugliese If you've actually resorted to paralyzing the house it wouldn't be hard to sell that you've paralyzed the house, making it impossible to get anything passed.
1
@andrefasset3266 Someone who just used their platform and PAC to help add more pro-M4A votes to congress isn't a fucking "fake", "shill", "sellout", or whatever other bullshit. It's the very thing that needs doing to ever pass a bill, it's the very thing you'd still need to do after a failed vote. Saying it's not fighting, not doing anything, means Jimmy's plan is to get a failed vote and then not fight and not do anything. Show me the video where she ever advocated threatening to paralyze the house, and then flipped. She was obviously talking about getting a vote through normal means, you morons. Threatening to paralyze the house doesn't even guarantee you get a vote, you dumb shits. It could just get you a paralyzed house, during a pandemic, with corporate Dems blaming progressives for no new covid relief, no new unemployment extensions, no new vaccine funding, etc. You morons grow up and stop slandering other progressives over a secondary tactics disagreement.
1
Truth: AOC just used her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, the very thing that needs doing to ever pass it. She backed Bernie (M4A), rather than Tulsi ("Medicare choice" aka public option). When Bernie dropped out, she supported Biden (public option + lower Medicare age) over Trump (ACA repeal). Jimmy, on the other hand, backed Tulsi over Bernie, and then spent the general running an attack ad campaign against Trump's only viable opponent. He also promotes going third party, that realistically won't win a seat in congress in 50 years, let alone get anyone healthcare anytime soon. The truth is that Dore doesn't give a flying fuck if anyone gets healthcare.
1
By your "logic", Jimmy, you've "censored" the president, by not airing his entire speech.
1
You can stop campaigning for Trump now, Jimmy. He lost.
1
Australia's covid death rate would translate into about 26k total US covid deaths, instead of approaching 800k. They're doing fantastic.
1
She just used her massive platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, going against DCCC backed corporate Dems. Adding enough yes votes to congress is the very thing you need to do to ever pass a bill, it's the very thing you'd still need to do after a failed vote. Pretending she's not fighting turns Jimmy's own "plan" into have a failed vote and then not fight.
1
AOC just used her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, going against DCCC backed corporate Dems. It makes no sense to claim that's doing nothing, when that's still what you'll need to do after a failed vote. That would mean Jimmy's plan is to have a vote and then "do nothing".
1
Sorry ... where was the part where she made a campaign promise to paralyze the house, during a pandemic, freezing any new covid relief, new unemployment extensions, new vaccine funding, etc.? Hey, Dore knob, how did Pelosi win with only 216 votes? You claimed winning with anything less than 218 was impossible. Please don't tell me that a political mastermind, with a well thought out plan, that totally depended on how house voting works, didn't actually know how house voting works.
1
Meh, that's kind of like saying you are "part" of your house, because you live in it, and then assigning your feelings to your house. Your house doesn't give a crap about you. Have a nice day.
1
Only a moron would think temporary measures are an actual move left.
1
Most of the older voters, who aren't voting for Bernie, aren't even in YouTube or Twitter comment sections, interacting with Bernie supporters. They're getting their info from MSM, which has been spouting endless bullshit.
1
@Atmost11 Most seniors aren't even on YouTube or Twitter, at all, let alone political forums. Maybe Facebook, interacting with their family, but likely not joining political groups there either, for the most part. The internet is mostly irrelevant to who is voting Biden over Bernie. When it comes to younger voters, more of whom are on the internet, a majority are voting Bernie over Biden. Most older voters will just hear this bullshit outrage spouted on MSM, probably never have actually interacted with online Bernie supporters themselves, and have no clue what it's actually like.
1
You just argued in a video that Pelosi and corporate Dems would rather lose to Republicans than progressives. That could have your "plan" end with Pelosi not giving in to progressive threats, not holding a M4A vote, progressives then abstaining electing her speaker, and a Republican speaker of the House getting elected.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 The speaker election doesn't require a majority of the house, it requires a majority of votes cast. "Present" isn't casting a vote.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Absolute majority of votes cast, not absolute majority of the house. So the plan can't be to simply vote "present". That counts as abstaining, not casting a vote.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 They'd have to find someone to volunteer to not just be unsupportive, but openly opposed to the rest of the party. Then enough of them would also have to be openly opposed and vote for that someone, instead of Pelosi. That way they'd have cast votes, and Pelosi could lose without giving Republicans the majority of votes cast. Then you'd have a paralyzed house, and all the corporate Dems, Republicans, and the corporate media, would likely point at those progressives and blame them for the house not being able to accomplish anything. Jimmy's plan isn't completely risk free.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Right, you have to vote for someone, for the Republican to only win a plurality of votes cast. Then there'd be a revote. If you abstain, then the Republican wins the majority of votes cast, and is speaker. Yeah, I think it's a voice vote anyway.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 Another complication is figuring out if any Republicans won't be voting for their guy, McCarthy. He has had a bunch of Republicans abstain, before. If you don't know that, then you don't know how many people you need to get on board to make Pelosi lose.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 The whole point of my post is what if Pelosi treats the threat as a bluff, and you go through with not voting for her. Either a) you abstain and she loses to a Republican, or b) you vote for someone else and she loses by a plurality not a majority, forcing a revote.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 So you make your protest votes, Pelosi doesn't get elected speaker, it returns to caucus. How do you then get a progressive elected while you're in the minority? Corporate Dems can keep picking Pelosi, or even someone more right wing, and keep going back to the house. How long do you paralyze the house, while they, and the corporate media, propagandize it and blame you for not being able to vote on anything, like minimum wage, or whatever? AOC just used her progressive PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, she actually made a little progress, while Jimmy the armchair quarterback was whining about shit Obama was saying. Corporate Dems openly stated that's why she didn't get the committee seat she wanted. She threw some punches, by endorsing and helping fund progressives primarying corporate Dems, and they punched back. And now she's also getting stabbed in the back for her efforts. Progressives should be crying foul at Pelosi, atm, not crying "fake", "shill", and "wimp", at AOC. Primaries are part of the democratic process. There shouldn't be a penalty for it. That's anti-democratic. Have her back, instead of a knife in it, over a tactics disagreement.
1
@l.w.paradis2108 There's no disagreement on M4A. It's a debate on tactics, both Jimmy's proposed force the vote tactic ... what it would accomplish exactly, whether there's any risk ... and also his own tactic on how to "pressure" (slander) progressives in congress.
1
Ooo, a circle jerk. That'll be productive. Can you have the balls to do your slander routine in front of Cornel West this time? I'd like to see his reaction, as he praises progressives and you call them "fakes", "shills", "wimps", or whatnot.
1
@gerwin07 Last time, Jimmy used words like he was "pressuring". Have him do his actual "pressuring" routine in front of Cornel, who was saying nice things about progressives, and Jimmy didn't have the balls to contradict him.
1
AOC just used her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress. You know, that thing you'll still have to do once the vote fails. The only "fake", "shill", and "wimp", would be the guy stabbing her in the back, while she's doing the actual real fighting against DCCC backed corporate Dems, by helping to primary progressives against them and increasing M4A support in congress. Here's a brilliant idea ... mislead people into thinking that even progressives aren't on their side, then promote another third party, start from scratch, and then not even win a seat in congress over the next few decades let alone M4A. You might as well be shilling for the Republican party, Jimmy.
1
C'mon Jimmy. They're private companies and their servers are their private property. It's not censorship, if my newspaper and magazine store doesn't stock the NY Post. It's my f*cking store, and I'll stock what I want. Likewise, they have every right to pick and choose what they allow on their private property. "Censorship" is when the authorities do it. Let me on your show, or you're censoring me. Lol
1
And? Did he convince them to support having a guaranteed to fail M4A vote? Because that's been your purity test for who is an ally, for weeks. You now seem to have broadened that to outright anti-M4A far right libertarian Boogaloo Bois, who completely disagree on the economics front.
1
Still never saw any US commentators call him out about how a VAT doesn't tax businesses. In fact, a VAT is specifically designed to not tax businesses, in order to avoid double taxation. He was either completely clueless as to how his key tax plan actually works, or completely full of shit.
1
It doesn't take "balls" to compare hospitalization rates per total population, to death rates per total confirmed cases. It takes pure stupidity, or dishonesty.
1
@egobrain6826 If he knows full well that the hospitalization rates are based on total population ... because he 100% totally read the article, and he 100% isn't a lying grifter, or a moron ... then the number he would be comparing is the 800k deaths in a 330m total population, which is a population mortality rate of 0.24%. There's nothing incompatible with a 0.24% population mortality rate a 0.9% population hospitalization rate. It means about a quarter of those hospitalized die. The hospitalization rate for those with covid has been estimated up to 5%. Nothing incompatible with that and the current US case fatality rate of 1.5%, or the covid infection fatality rate, which has been estimated at about 1% all along. The infection fatality rate would suggest that 800k deaths means that there have actually been about 80m infected Americans (many of those missed are probably because the US testing rate - tests per confirmed case - has been pathetically low). A 0.9% hospitalization rate for the total population, is about 3m hospitalizations, which is a 3.75% hospitalization rate based on total estimated infected, and a 5.63% hospitalization rate based on confirmed cases. The 1% infection fatality rate is close to a quarter of the 3.75% infection hospitalization rate. The 1.5% case fatality rate is close to a quarter of the 5.63% case hospitalization rate. All the numbers are quite compatible. If anything, Dore's Gallup numbers help confirm all the others are fairly accurate. He's just stupid, or dishonest, as are you.
1
@egobrain6826 No. If the hospitalizations rates, you're going to go dig up "death rates" to compare to, are based on total population, then the only honest comparison is the overall population mortality rate. They very clearly started with the Gallup article. To compare infection fatality rates to population hospitalization rates would be equally stupid, or dishonest. Ahh, no, the infection fatality rate is about 1%, for developed countries. If you want to compare them to countries with a life expectancy of 55, then that's also dishonest, or stupid.
1
@egobrain6826 No. He was obviously starting with the hospitalization rates in a newer Gallup article, then went searching for the covid "death rate", and somehow couldn't find any from the past year and a half. If you're starting with hospitalization rates of the total population, then the comparable "death rate" is the overall population mortality rate. "October 30, 2020 -- A new study conducted by researchers at Imperial College London found the COVID-19 infection fatality ratio is about 1.15% of infected people in high-income nations and 0.23% in low-income nations." "The disparity between high and low-income nations is due largely to facts that high-income nations tend to have larger number of elderly in their populations whereas low-income nations’ population tend to skew youngers." Averaging developed countries with countries that have a life expectancies of 55, is nonsensical.
1
So you're not manufacturing consent for going third party, by portraying progressives who just increased the M4A yes vote count in congress, as evil doers, "fakes", "shills", "sellouts", or whatnot? You haven't manufactured consent for an idea, by misinforming people about potential risks, by slandering those who do mention potential risks, by overexaggerating support, overexaggerating benefits, etc.? You've both convinced people to be impatient, and to take a third party path that likely won't even win a seat in congress in the next 50 years (the Libertarian party turns 50 in a couple years), let alone get you M4A anytime soon. You've convinced people that progressive politicians doing their thing to increase the M4A yes vote count is considered doing nothing, but that your idea to increase the M4A yes vote count is considered doing something. You've convinced people that spreading progressive ideas, including M4A, on social media platforms a ton larger than yours doesn't count as fighting, but you spreading your ideas on your much smaller platform counts as you fighting.
1
Editors asking for a rewrite isn't "censorship". The Times not covering the Post's many UFO and Bigfoot stories, isn't "censorship". Me not stocking the Post in my store, isn't "censorship". Get a grip.
1
I love the subtitle names, "Mary Matace" and "do me Dore". You should stick with them.
1
Why are you so proud of being a moron? No vaccine is 100% effective. A tiny percentage of vaccinated people do still get polio. A larger percentage of vaccinated still get measles and mumps, and the mumps vaccine doesn't last for life. About 50% of vaccinated still get the flu, and is the vaccine is only good for one flu season. And they're all made the old fashioned way. How effective a vaccine is, and how oong it lasts, depends more on the type of virus. Anyone who expects a COVID vaccine to work the same as a polio vaccine, is a complete and utter moron.
1
Trump did that? The guy you promoted as the better option for progressiveness in 2016? Weird.
1
Stop bullshitting. You don't care about others having healthcare. In 2016, you promoted Trump as a better option, not caring if that might lead to the repeal of the ACA and millions losing their healthcare, including people with preexisting conditions. During the 2020 primaries, you promoted Tulsi ("Medicare choice" aka public option) instead of Bernie (M4A), not caring about getting the better healthcare plan, and not caring that you might peel away enough votes from the more viable progressive and let Biden win. You spent the general basically running an attack ad campaign against Trump's only viable opponent, again not caring if that would lead to the ACA being completely repealed, not caring if he killed thousands of more Americans, and no longer advocated for getting even a public option, or the Medicare age decrease that would put millions more on Medicare. Plus, you're promoting yet another third party that won't even get you a seat in congress in the next 50 years, let alone get you M4A, and could just split progressive voting enough to lose the gains they've made within the Dem party, handing it back to corporate Dems, and let Republicans rule for decades, possibly destroying the healthcare system even more. If anyone is a "fake", "shill", "sellout", or whatnot, it's clearly you, Jimmy. AOC backed Bernie over Biden, Biden over Trump, and just helped get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress. Adding more yes votes to congress is the only thing that will ever get M4A passed, failed show vote or no failed show vote.
1
@resistapathy You're against the "status quo" of adding more yes votes to congress ... exactly the same thing you'd have to do after a failed show vote anyway? You're incoherent.
1
Man you guys are dishonest twits. You make it sound like the report was made by the inquiry. It was a report presented to the inquiry, by a debunked charlatan.
1