Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "The Hill" channel.

  1. I could have even given her a pass on not endorsing Sanders * but it rubbed me VERY much the wrong way when she could not be bothered to take a stand in the protests of the Water Protectors at Standing Rock.  (although in hindsight if you think about it SHE could have been the hinge that swings big doors, she tried to be gray eminence to Clinton. which shows her terrible political instincts. HRC had her thunder stolen in 2008 by this black guy with the muslim name and AGAIN by the old Jewish guy in 2016. Now way she was going to give Warren a position in her cabinet. Being outshone by another woman. No way. It was "conservative" bland right-to-work-for-less Tim Kaine as p pick
    2
  2. Union negotiated healthcare insurance is STILL overpriced, even companies like Microsoft pay way too much. No union, government employer or private employer can match the negotiating power of a single payer health insurance agency (in the U.S. Medicare). Medicare is good already (low administrative overhead) - if they would let them ! They can't even negotiate drug prices. And since funding is not enough (that is easily cured, tax the rich and DO fund them sufficiently), the eldery have to buy Medicare Advantage packages to have really good comprehensive coverage. That is bad enough (disadvantage for the poor) - but to make things worse these upgrades are NOT handled by Medicare but the insured are forced to buy them from a private for profit insurance company (which have much higher administrative costs). Medicare in its current form has the most expensive group of insured (over 65) - so the private insurers already have a cherrypicked pool. healthcare spending for elderly persons is very disproportionate, the most spending happens in old age. The unions would need to figure out a way to transfer those savings of the company into higher wages - I am sure they would rise to the occasion ;) Companies would still profit, because it is much easier to administrate. Payroll deductions (they are mandatory), one monthly payment. Done. Signing up of a new employee takes 5 minutes , of course no healthcare questions. And dependent family members are automatically included (one of the parents or spouses will give the the employer name and SS number and the secratary that makes the announcement to the insurance agency enters them as "included in coverage"). That's how it works where I currently live (Austria), 54 % of spending of the U.S. per person (in the U.S. it was USD 10,260 in 2017). Almost all wealthy nations are in the range of 49 - 54 % of the U.S. spending per person. The costs for the U.S. employers are not double (because the most expenisve segment, the elderly are not covered by the private insurers), but they still pay too much.
    2
  3. The enemies of Sanders were thrilled that they would be able to smear him by proxy. Cenk would have also gotten more unwanted coverage as long as they saw him associated with their favorite target. The networks would have dutifully (and eagerly) picked up the story from the L.A. Times and it would have snowballed (and been brought up again, and again). But the Sanders campaign was too smart for that, they nibbed it in the bud. Warrens plot did not work - also because they did not have the receipts. It was obviously self serving and Warren had no proof, it would have been worse if she could have presented a mail where he said a woman cannot be elected president. (but with Cenk writing dumb things, they had proof. Unlike Joy Ann Reed he did not claim someone had hacked his account and manipulated messages - over years ....) Viewers (and voters) don't do nuance (not if mainstream media is still their main source of information). If you have to start a lengthy explanation how it is not as bad as it sounds and how Cenk has other positions now ... viewers with short attention spans will not stay with you. You could explain all of that, IF people have an open mind and if those who control the flow of information act in good faith and are not paid to lie. So Cenk was a liability. And his viewers by and large like Sanders anyway, so the Sanders campaign had not much to win but much to lose, it was not worth the trouble. Rogan (except for the transgender stuff) did not say questionable things. He interviews "controversial" guests as well. And he is not so out there and enough of a celebrity that the arguments to accept the "endorsement" are self-evident: "Reject a Joe Rogan endorsement ? You mad ?" Mainstream media understands "celebrity" and Rogan is not Alex Jones after all. Except for some twitter flitter - mainstream media will not trod out the story. They would not credit Sanders a lot with having gotten that endorsement.
    2
  4. For good reason it is hard to kick an ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE out of office. for good reason. We do not even KNOW for sure that the visitors were rioters (that is possible, and then it would need proof that the reps or staff members knew that).
    2
  5. The question is: Why do they still have the support of the voters. Eric Salwell a Democrat promotes his book and talked about the fakeness of many members of Congress. He said that Ted Cruz met him in the bathroom and complimented him on his performance - at the same time he ripped him on twitter. Salwel: for them it is like a wrestling game. My take on it: being abrasive, lying, riling up the voters - if it works it is done... it is all a game to win. but in the end both sides make a living from the "performance". The Dems often "act" as weak opposition party (if only the Republicans would let us). Pretty much like in wrestling, the game needs two and one makes the "loser". If the voters give them too high majorities they have the likes of Joe Manchin or Joe Lieberman that are "conservative" / "work across the aisle" - and make sure that nothing gets passed that the big donors do not like. The donors that finance all Republicans and most Democrats. The filibuster is very helpful. If Democrats have the majority in the House or Senate they represent many more voters than Republicans, but that is still not enough they would need 60 % of the Senate AND some reserves (for the Machin types) to ever get something passed that the voters want and the big donors do not want. That is a very high hurdle. Good legislation has hurdles like constitutional amendments or impeachments. It shows: no big bill gets passed that isn't a giant giveaway.
    2
  6. Sagaar does the right wing talking points again: the problem of Warren is not the occasional "culturally left" statements: I very much doubt that the blue collars and lower income people follow her appearances closely enough to even catch those. (Sanders is as left in that area and longer than her). But they SENSE HER INAUTHENTICITY. - Warren has become a typical calculating politician. She tries to marry populist rhetoric and her eprsonality of academic and planner (fine !) with pandering to party leadership, superdelegates and big donors (that is like oil and water). She is not even good at playing that game. She miscalculates and many other politicians are better at glossing over their "compromises". The population in the fly over countries and blue collars also have a cultural aversion against the "coastal elites" academics etc. That is not rational, but of course her demeanour is that of an academic. Instead of embracing that she tries to put a populist spin on it. She was a corporate lawyer that helped them to pay less in damages, she was a republican in the Reagan era. Being incensed about the crooks of Wallstreet does not make you a populust (at least not a left one). Left populism does not come naturally to her. In the end the voters can sniff that she is inauthentic. They also prefer to have a straight talker (that can be trusted to walk the walk, Democrats have higher standards than the Trump crowd). She knots herself into a pretzel OR she freezes like a deer in the headlight when she gets more than softball questions. Recent black women event. She thought it would be good to embrace the struggle of mostly black working class washer women many decades ago, the women doing the laundry went on strike and they did got a rise. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts had to rescue her when there were hecklers. Pressley found the tone to get them to defer their issue to after the speech, so they would let Warren continue. it is tricky because if Warren came accross as rude or condescending then it could be used against her (the protesters were for charter schools so it could have been a set-up as well). BUT: if the event and the message would be dear to her heart (as opposed to her ex Clinton staffers thinking that would be a good move to do better with black voters) - she would have found the right words. Ayanna Pressley found them. (Secular Talk did a segement on that recently) When Amy Goodman asked her a legitimate question (and not a gotcha, Amy is a honest journalist and doesn't do gotcha) - Warren became visibly flustered - and then gave a short (clipped !) answer and left the stage. Warren shook the hand of the other journalist (or organizer) on the stage when she left, but was rude to Goodman when she thanked her for the interview. I think people can sense that weakness, also how she gets wordy when she is (or feels) challenged.
    2
  7.  @mrjamienorwood  If you can#t go yourself draft someone else ;) - P.s. there is a beautiful fan video for Bernie, just came out. The times are a-chaning (after the Bob dylan song).
    2
  8. The idealism and enthusiasm of the base were not squandered. Deflating it was a feature not a bug. - The job of Obama on behalf of the big donors (who ALSO finance the Republicans) was to DEFLATE the energy of the grassroots, and to distract. As soon as he was in power. In a weird twist the tantrums and the ugly racism of Republicans helped him cover up his neoliberal actions (it became clear immediately when his cabinet choices - well the choices from the list of names citibank sent to the campaign on Oct. 2008). The base rallied behind him no questions asked (especially those who were not evicted while he was busy bailing out the banksters). A long drawn out, weak, industry friendly health insurance reform to deflate the base. His reaction on police brutality was also weak - why would he bother, the big donors do not like the masses to be restless and the president confirming that they have good reason for their grief and anger would go against that.. 2006: Midterms, Blue wave (and the Great Financial Cisis had not even manifested). 2008 sensational Obama campaign and win 2010 lost midterms, after 2 years in which Obama intentionally abstained from turning to the base for support to put pressure on Corporate Dems and Republicans. The most import obstacle was Obama, the resistance of elected representatives could have overcome. FDR made some Democrats fall in line. Stage one: threaten them behind closed doors that he would campaign against them, so they would lose their seats. he did not have to escalate further. Many of his 2008 coalition returned to pre 2008 apathy 2012 Obama won, but it was not so certain, and Hurricane Sandy (and Mitt Romney's 47 % remark) may have helped him over the finish line 2014 midterms lost AGAIN The big donors of Obama (he got a lot of money from Wallstreet in 2008, and it showed) do not like the grassroots. If the unwashed masses wake up, ORGANIZE and march, who knows what could happen. A president using the grassroots could put the fear into the shills in Congress and Senate - or get a Congress and Senate elected, that is cooperative. People were not too dumb to vote AGAIN in the midterms, 2010 - they understood - at leas at the gut level - Hope and Change would not happen, not for them. Many people liked Obama as person, they did not follow politics closely enough to realize to what extent he sold them out - but they sensed nothing would change. So they stayed home in 2010, or voted Republican. Trump won 670 or 690 counties that had voted once or twice for Obama. (on the other hand Clinton picked up less than 5 counties that Obama had never carried - but she lost the other 670 or 690).
    2
  9. people organizeing themselves in NGO's OR there will be countless ways to discriminate.
    2
  10. Those companies are not being owned by the public so the WW2 style effort will prop THEM up - at public expense. AND other low tech carbon caputure methods are not even ignored. Trees, using timber for qualtiy buildings, (small scale forestry as income source for homesteaders and small farms), carbon capture in form of humus (soil) and as Terra Preta (biochar). Grass fed lifestock ! Alley cropping: Rows of trees between fields or pastures. Up to 20 % of the area can be devoted to growing trees (and bushes under them or hedges) and there would not be less yield (or profits). Some trees can fix nitrogen, all mine up minerals and infiltrate and later pump up rain - the harvests of the cash crops are better, even though they grow on less space. Plus the trees start bringing yields, too as they mature. Trees support birds and insects, there is less pressure from pests and the farmers save on pesticides (and can save on fertilizer or fodder for animals if they can eat - damaged - nuts or fruits. Those that humans do not want or do not bother to harvest).
    2
  11. Biden did not start the virus ;) but he was certainly saved by the bell. - after the successful Super Tuesday (read longdays, working in the evening - sundowning, having to do inteverviews) and that intenese weekend from S.C. primary, the negotiations to clear the field for Biden and then Super Tuesday. He is not used to that much activity. South Carolina was the only state where he campaigned intensely like a normal candidate, IO and NH was half intensity, he had 1 year time for that. So the stress started showing. His campaign had him on 7 minute speeches at events. Then came the end of on the ground campaigning. No more gatherings.
    2
  12.  @rahimn9246  It is a vaccine and it does prevent most infections, it certainly hlpes agains worse outcomes and it still hinders spread. But even if the efficacy would be much more undermined it would be a vaccine anyway.
    2
  13.  Kevin Warburton  "free" college means community college. So that should help with cost control. (then there is the price gouging of books and the adminstrators have taken over - but that is true for the exclusive colleges as well).
    2
  14. they didn't report on the pete supporters, I am almost sure those were the next worried group (Warren and pete shared a base until Warren's somewhat friendly treatment by media dried up. Then many shifted to pete).
    2
  15. Progressives know full well that the Democratic leadership and Corporate media is the enemy, They are not obsessed with Trump (he is mean and a moron, a narcissist and in cognitve decline on top of it - what else is new). Progressives know that Trump is the symptom of the rot. His danger: he showed a more talented wanna be authoritarian far right winger what would be possible. Trump is too stupid to take full advantage of it. The powerful self-serving people around him do not fully control Trump, he is too erratic. I think there are a lot of power struggles going on within his team. He is not loyal to his people, they never know if they will be on the team in 1 month, the power brokers control each other (so no one gets the upper hand). He insulted the generals, the deep state is not on his side - so he cannot leverage the full power of the office. Mike Pence if he would have more time to consolidate his power (taking over after the election) would be much more dangerous. He does not have the ability to mobilize like Trump, but if Trump wins and Pence takes over soon (Trump being removed, maybe forcing him to resign officially citizen health reasons) - Pence would have time to get into the good graces of deep state, military and the former Trump fans.
    2
  16. @Sheep #5491 Trump sides with the oligarchs, big finance, fossil fuel industry. Media and Democratic party establishment and big donors would prefer Trump over president Sanders. (Not all but many). They could clutch their pearls. there would be war (the donors like it, and it is good for media, ratings). All could keep their tax cuts, fossil fuel industry, big healthcare, big finance would not be bothered. Democratic leadership could wag their finger at progressives blaming them for the lost election. What's not to like ? Of course they would not admit it. Impeachment should have been done earlier and on much broader grounds (emoluments clause). I think it was window dressing, throwing a bone to the base. Plus Trump went after Biden. Now, that is an outrage. GWB can start wars based on lies and be asleep at the wheel (9/11) and impeachment is not even considered .....
    2
  17. From 2004 to 2006, Patrick Deval was on the board of ACC Capital, the corporate parent of Ameriquest, the nation's largest originator of subprime mortgages. - They FORGED signatures. And they got a 325 million settlement for that. No doubt under the Obama admin likely under AG Eric Holder (who showed up in the list for appointments sent by citibank in Oct. 2008 to the Obama adming. The mail had lists with names sorted according to minority and other status (race, vets, disabled, ....) But good thing Holder was at least a black sellout.
    2
  18. Trump banned trans people from the military. Just saw an interview of a trans woman running for office in Oregon (on Humanist report Mike Figuredo is the host), she had to leave military service - because of the Trump ban.
    2
  19. So ... where is Sanders on that.
    2
  20. 3:04 this has NOTHING to do with labor or vaccination. More goods come from China to the U.S. than the other way round. That route always cost more than the route from the U.S. to China (or Asia) Because of the pandemic now a LOT of imports are coming. Transports from the U.S to China were always cheaper. NOW the ships do not take the time to load the U.S. exports (agricultural products). They RUSH back to China to pick up the next load (which is highly paid right now), that is more lucrative than losing some time for loading goods for the travel back. THAT is a reason for a lot of disrupted supply chains. And U.S. farmers already complained about it during summer.
    2
  21.  @RaquelSantos-hj1mq  + Fran A Roose had a nuanced and informed comment.
    2
  22. Nope, she had a short appearance early on in the race of bloomberg (for the charity for which she got the money), and at least did not sell access for cheap (it is about voter registration, which IS a big issue in Georgia). 5,5 mill are not a lot for Bloomberg, but she got more than the DNC (at least then !). She did not endorse Bloomberg. I'll give her a pass on the Bloomberg donation, he did not get a lot for those 5,5 million. She is at least a fighter, an uncommon feature for a Democrat. If only Sanders had courted her to get her endorsement. This lady may have reduced the gap in South Carolina. She could have campaigned there while Sanders was stuck in the Senate in January, and busy in the early states in February. I think she may not have declared allegience though, she knew she might be considered by Bloomberg, Biden or Sanders. The time to do this would have been January before it was clear how Sanders would fare in the early states.
    2
  23.  @johnmcque4813  The Trump campaign manager was recently on Rising. He bragged about the well filled war chest of the RNC (you bet) and the well funded Trump campaign. And he said even if the Dems can fundraise well in the 2020 cycle the party is in financial trouble (and will be broke AFTER they have spent a lot in the general). He might have a point. If the DNC is not needed for the oligarchs (the RNC is in power and represents them just fine) they might miss out on a lot of money. Which they should not take in the first place).
    2
  24. the job of the workers of PG&E is not safer if they cause fires and do not invest - they extract money and hand it over ot shareholdes (and politicians). It is not only dissatisfied customers (paying higher prices than in other states), people literally burnt to death, it is also not only the fires of last year, they were just the worst. these fires have caused immense damage and cost human lifes before.
    2
  25. @Shadow The Afghanistan war was prepraed in SUMMER 2001 and had nothing to do with 9/11. That was the pretext for the sheeple that quite willingly accepted it. It is not only the vile leaders - it is also to completely unfazed voters, that allow that to happen. Unlike the people of Afghanistan the U.S. citizens could influence their government, they just can't be bothered. If the U.S. would still use the draft the citizens would protest more. The oligarchs learn from their mistakes: after Vietnam they switched to a professional army. Of course they had to make sure the lower classes do not have too many economic options or they would have a hard time finding cannon fodder. And people that end up with PTSD, there are not enough psychopaths that actually enjoy killing. And they ramped up glorifying "out troops" (playing the anthem during the NFL games, usually anthems are only played when teams from DIFFERENT nations play against each other). The "thank you for your service" is almost automatic in media. More brainwashing. Even intelligent people seem to be unable to question that. And the children are brainwashed with the pledge of allegience - in PUBLIC schools. A child does not understand what that means. Many adults coming from that culture don't understand it either. Their patriotism does not go as far as wearing masks during a pandemic or the desire that everyone - even the low income folks - should get a living wage or first world heathcare. They seem to like the land or the army (as long as they can make do without their enlistment OR taxes), but they do not like the people in the land. Especially the non-whites or the low income folks are despised.
    2
  26.  @markclayton8977  WHAT SERVICE ?? that's the problem - people have been brainwashed. What service did a person that was sent to Iraq or Afghanistan to destroy these countries on behalf of the ruthless U.S. leaders - WHAT service did they perform for you ??
    2
  27.  @markclayton8977  The & mujahedeen & Taliban were created with U.S. and Saudi money, training, they got top modern arms and intel. How did that serve you ? Same now with Al Qaeda and their spin offs (allegedly Al Qaeda was involved with 9/11). How does it help YOU that the U.S. finances them and helps them in Syria ?? Does it make you more safe. is it an investment into the future of the U.S.
    2
  28.  @markclayton8977  Osama bin Laden was an US asset - I hope you did not forget that. - Thank you for your service, indeed. - U.S. soldiers guarded pipelines and poppy fields.
    2
  29. please go to info@berniesanders.com and beg the campaign so that Sanders does NOT play the surrogate FOR Biden. People like the ideas of Sanders, "but later, now it is time to beat Trump". * They vote for Biden over Sanders because they think Joe is a) a nice guy and b) he is BETTER or well able to beat Trump. Sanders CONFIRMS THAT he did so several times in recent days (Joe is my friend, and yes he can beat Trump, of course he can). It is not even true. And Sanders goes OUT OF HIS WAY to "endorse" Biden. It is like he is self-sabotaging. Fear of being successful comes to mind. Sanders has given several interviews recently where he decisively confirms that Biden CAN beat Trump. (Ari Melber or Jack Tapper) * I come from an Ari Melber clip On the beat in Queens, that is what the nice older voters say. Bernie has good ideas but for now it must be Biden because he can beat Trump. as if that would be the same: beating Trump is a point in time, and if the ideas of Sanders are good that should help with winning, especially since Biden has no policies. Then AFTER having won, (some) of the good ideas are implemented. That is not the same and it is not mutually exclusive. I very much dispute that Biden can beat Trump unless the economy tanks completely. Biden is likely in cognitive decline, at the minimum he has much less stamina than Sanders, he does a light schedule, many "gaffes", not to mention how much BAGAGGE Biden has. Sanders should say: I am better because I have proven myself in a rigorous LONG campaign, and there are many issues where I can drag Trump, but Biden can't go there or worse will be attacked by Trump - the most important issues bein - Iraq war, and trade deals. Plus family corruption, the Biden family made hundreds of millions. Biden is status quo regarding healthcare and NO cuts in pharma costs - issues that are important for voters. (Obama / Biden could have reigned in pharma in 2009 / 2010 already, Sanders is not going to say THAT, Obama is taboo, but it will be the reason why Biden would not bring that up, but Sanders could kick Trump on it, with ads and on the debate stage. Pharma prices are the low hanging fruit if an admin EVER would be willing to serve the citizens and not the donors. In the end debates between Biden and Trump would be about petty stuff, how Trump is mean (not enough voters care), insults (and Trump is better at that). Trump's family has as much profited from nepotism as Biden's so either they avoid that, or it becomes a mud slinging contest that turns people off. Sanders could kick Trump on that, what is Trump going to say in return to him: that he has 3 houses ? (1 nice in Burlington, one old fashioned vacation home at the lake, and a duplex in D.C.) Trump didn't hold his promise regarding healthcare. THAT should sway some of his supporters (or keep them at home). There are studies: People that lean to the right do not react well to appeals on empathy (so the separated children are not a reason for them to not vote for Trump, also no empathy for dreamers, at least not enough to overcome their perceived self interest). But right wingers appreciate holding promises and LOYALTY. Sanders CAN hit Trump on that, Biden can't ALSO: Sanders IS the stronger debater.
    2
  30. You did not miss a lot +Leo9 - but it is an interesting spin on Joe Biden. Time to quite Upton Sinclair: it is hard to make a man understand something, when his livelihood depends on him not understanding (paraphrased).
    2
  31. Why would it matter NOW how much herd immunity is needed ? No one is going to ration production of vaccines whether he estimates that 65 or 85 % are needed. Krystal is wrong on that (and no it was NOT Dr. Fauci that ever said masks worn by the public could even be harmful. (there were considerations if people would be less attentive to not touching their faces or washing hands. That was not an unreasonable consideration. An aceademic anyway. If only a part of the population that can buy up the masks can wear them, while healthcare workers do not get them, the effect of mask wearing in the general population is lost. You have to have high compliance numbers to get even the modest effects we have now. And no - the public was not going to be rational. At all. Remember toilet paper craze ?? In what alternative reality would that be ?? Not in the U.S. with the Trump presidency. And Biden getting the nomination of the Democratic party. Maybe voters were set up by decades of FOX New, the education system, and also the scare araound Ebola in 2013 (making money with fear mongering and disinformation) Remember tobacco, the War on Drugs, being anti gun regulation, denying evolution, global warming and pushing abstinence as sex ed. Yes, that America ! Rachel is correct that the public (riled up and sadly also by segments like this) will not trust. Because they have no nuance, are not factual and do not care about insights or fact checking. It is completely irrelevant if Fauci SAYS that 60 or 90 % herd immunity are needed. We can have mass rollout for all (first shot) in spring and still no one can know for sure. In one or two years (after scientists did the assessments AFTER the fact) we can know. Important: he was one of the few people that could contradict Trump (ever so politely) and not get fired. He always maintained how important it was to get a vaccine. behind the scenes that may have translated to the admin directing budgets to developers and ordering vaccines (even though it is not clear that will be a good enough vaccine or even work at all). It means as soon as it is greenlighted they have the production ready to go. One criteria for a full success story: a high participation of the population as soon as it is available for all. We still do not know how effective the vaccines (one of the 4 that are in the most advanced stages) will be. For the general population. Not the test subjects (still a cherry picked group - for ethical reasons they must start out with young and healthy persons, so the results for them can be expected to be better). We would like to have 80 - 85 % herd immunity. Yeah, if we are lucky. It works like that: one can hope for a vaccine (several vaccines) that achieve good results (over 90 % of those who get both shots are protected and it does not wear off soon) and governments must try to have as many people participate in the vaccination as possible - ideally well over 90 %. With some luck that could mean that the virus can be eradicted. if people do not get the vaccination in sufficient numbers or if the virus mutates like the flu virus (I do not think it does) or if the vaccines are less effective than the tests let us hope - then we will have to make do with fairly good protection. Which is still much better than the current situation. It does not matter what the pharma companies SAY how effective their vaccines are. The studies and tests are an indicator, but since they start the tests with young and healthy persons, the response of the general population could be less positive. One factor to influence the outcome is the messaging, encouraging the population to get the shots as soon as they can have them. Which Dr. Fauci tries to do. Well, they badmouth him for his efforts, and pick on statements that have no influence on the research, the break through with the vaccines, do not hinder rollout or production. Just being petty for the sake of it. Of course with the public being positive * - he tried to ride that wave and to nudge the population to get the shots. As any good public health servant would do. And instead people are petty, w/o nuance and hypercritical. * or at least they should be - never mind pandemic fatigue - finally good news, with some luck it will get much better in spring already, in summer it is likely over. Dr. Fauci never said masks could be even negative. The truth is they are not especially effective. They can't tell the public either. (Healthcare workers have more exposure to risk AND likely are more professional in wearing them correctly = with a tight fit). Even if the masks worn by the general population only prevent 5 % of infections * it is still worth the trouble to make the public wear them (as soon as healthcare workers have them). Good luck with explaining that to the riled up citizens. Riled up by this admin and cynical politicians. Mask wearing has some, but little effect. It is the least disruptive of several inadequate measures. Lockdown is effective in controlling the spread, but there is the economic and social fallout. The best way to control a pandemic is to have a vaccine, the 2nd best is to have a highly effective treatment. We had neither, so we had to make do wit the imperfect measures (and can't sneer at them because of their limited efficacy. Even measures that prevent "only" 5 or 10 % of infections are crucial if you have no good tools available.) So as soon as the supply of masks for the people that needed them the most (medical staff) was secured, dr. Fauci advocated for all wearing masks. It is not the fault of Dr. Fauci that production was outsourced and that there were not sufficient stocks, and not even preparation in late winter when it became evident this was going to be bad.
    2
  32.  @cybrhunk333  When those photo ops were done he ALWAYS put the young girls in front of him. And then got "handsy". With Lucy Flores he took the liberties of a husband / lover. And since he does not know them what business has he touching them at all. - I think there is a hint of power display in it. at the minimum he gets off on showing "inappropriate" bevavior in broad daylight, as an old man he is supposed to know what goes and what not. But he could ignore these social norms.
    2
  33. New York is losing residents ? Good - there are too many people considering the affordable housing options. A city is MORE than a place for businesses and more is not always better. A city is supposed to be a place where people live, commute, raise their kids, have healthcare. New York underfunds those activities a city cannot only live from the affluent top 30 %. As for businesses - they lose SMALL businesses ! = they go under. That are ruined by the likes of Amazon and I remember how these two neoliberal stooges bemoaned the fact that Amazon did not get the 500 million direct subsidy to bribe them to move HQ2 to NYC. Plus 250 million in tax cuts. What became of government not picking winners ? Truth is - Amazon did not weasel out because of 2 or 3 tweets of AOC, she does not deserve credit for scaring off Amazon (I think NYC dodged a bullet). Grassroots and local politicians held Cuomo's and De Blasios feet to the fire, so they had to ask for guarantees, and New York is a STRONG union city. There's the problem. They could not sell out unions (officially) and Bezos hates the unions. I guess the bribes from the other side were even better.
    2
  34. Wait until he speaks up agains war (or trade deals) he will be a gonner soon.
    2
  35. So the DCCC with follow its own recent rule, and will blacklist all people and companies that DARE to work for Kennedy's campaign (consultants, ....)as he primaries an incumbant .... Just kidding that rule was only created for progressives challenging right wing Democrats. They would be quite happy to have one win to the right of the incumbent.
    2
  36. 4:13 Kim quoting that stats with that claim (SHE not the CDC is making) is another outright DECEPTION. In 3 ways: Corona related hospitalization by age. Yep, and most of them unvaccinated, but she does not give those percentages. and it is always the share of 100 %, but that can be a very different absolute number ! In a nunanced (not misleading) discussion the absolute number of cases is crucial. Not to forget most of the cases are now AVOIDABLE. AND: The CoVid-19 patients in the ICU's (that is more important than even those in hospital beds with a bad case but not yet critical care levels) are now often in the 40 - 50 year old range and even younger and UNVACCINATED. Not only in the U.S. also in Germany, Switzerland, France, ....the difference is that in these nations they still have enough beds for other emergencies and the case numbers (harmless, in hospital, in ICU) in total are lower. But the typical CoVid 19 patient with severe complications / ICU need is very different now - compared to one year ago. the VULNERABLE among the vaccinated might need a hospital stay if they have a breakthrough infection (think old age and other risk factors) but they are usually spared the ICU and the hospital is spared the most labor intense care. The most recent study of France (a large one) data from Feb. 2021 till Juli 2021 the chance to land in the hospital OR to die is 9 times higher if people are unvaccinated. That is why the old are not occupying the ICU beds now like they did before vaccines were available. They were concerned enought to get the shots (especially if they have other risk factors) and that protection is enough to keep the worst at bay: Even IF they get a breakthrough infection they will rarely ! land in the ICU. The healthy and young among the fully vaccinated that get a break through infection (which is not that common) have an uncomfortable week at home - at worst.
    2
  37.  Vinny Holiday  The DNC, the media ( and the big donors that finance BOTH parties) have no problem with Trump getting elected (they would not admit that of course) - but it would teach the normie Democratic voters a lesson. And maybe the young voters to get off their behinds and VOTE in the primaries.
    2
  38. 2015 after Corbyn wins the race for party leader. Relentless attacks * Loses big time on Dec. 12th, 2019. NEXT day: "Does Bernie Sanders have an anti-semitism problem" - so far the right wing media in the U.S. uses that trope. * Corbyn's enemies within and OUTSIDE the Labour party decide to take him out using "anitsemitism" and he is "unelectable in a general election". Corbyn does not deal correctly with that: With the backstabbers in the party and an extremely hostile media serving the interests of rich people. Plus the Brexit desaster). I guess the "liberal" U.S. Corporate media and the DNC establishment will ultimately use "Sanders gets help by Russian bots" and "Sanders-is-aRussian-stooge-by-proxy" to attack Sanders. - HRC alreydy did a test balloon on the Howard Stern show - approx. in Nov. 2019. Fortunately Sanders is more politically calculating and less likely than Corbyn to go into such traps. He better be extremely smart and savvy how do deal with it - since the despicable Hillary Clinton / Howard Stern interview was aired Sanders did very well in some polls. You bet they plan their attacks right now. I guess Obama is right now seriously considering to make the unprecedented move to take sides even before the primary voting starts and will try to inofficially endorse someone else than Sanders in the primary of South Carolina and California. Warren brings "progressive plausibility" (Obama might lose credibility if he supports Bloomberg or even Mayor Pete. And he seems to be annoyed that Biden is running. Well aware of his cognitive decline, and that he taints his "legacy" by doing poorly. Biden is going to fall once he gets more exposure, once other candidates doe well in the early states. The "default" support of Biden as VP of Obama will crumble. The establishment propping up Warren likely does not work for SC - but it could help to take votes away from Sanders in California. Obama does of course not want Warren to win the primary either. The goal is to undermine Sanders and to make sure there will be no one with a majority in the first round - thus taking it to the second round where the superdelegates and the party machine decide. In an emergency - Sanders does very well in the first three early states - Obamam might even officially tip the scales in Feb. 2020.
    2
  39. Noam Chomsky: Manufacturing Consent
    2
  40. Can't wait - automation is the friend of the population - if they get most of the spoils. As they did between 1947 and 1970.
    2
  41.  @ocumstweezers  Mind you if Zephyr had worded the article more slyly team Biden and his media might have decided to just leave it alone and not mention it. (videos are more problematic). NBC (gloatingly) reported how Sanders apologized for the "inflammatory" article of a surrogate. How surprising it is, since he usually "finds it hard" to apologize etc. etc. - They reported on the headline showed it, and also that it is the guardian. People WILL notice that Biden and corruption is mentioned in one sentence. And might feel encouraged to check it out, the article is not long so ...
    2
  42.  @deehudspeth2877  Chauvin and Floyd had disputes over how Chauvin handled black patrons. They did not work at the same place (inside / outside), but they knew each other form the club. The first pair of police that arrived was the brother in law of Chauvin. Then came Chauvin and partner. FOUR officers over a 20 USD bill. I think Chauvin had scores to settle, his BIL knew it, and he saw a chance and called him in. Chauvin had a problem if he was under the influence (he had driven to the store). But he could have driven or walked away and turned himself in later. Claiming ignorance about the USD 20. He was not feeling well .... had to go to the hospital ... But he waited for police so he likely was confident nothing would happen, this would be a formality. Well, then the BIL of Chauvin showed up.
    2
  43. I think Sanders had a lonely time in D.C. He became a Senator in Jan. 2007 (in congress since 1991), so he and Biden worked together until Biden failed upwards to become VP in Jan. 2009. - It is possible that Biden was really gracious to him, which counted because Biden has status and influence in the party. Sanders was the one vote that gave the Dems the majority in the Senate, when he got in. Normally that means a politician can extract favors for that. It is possible that Biden helped him to secure favors for VT in that time. Vermont got a part of the F35 production (not sure when that was). I assume Sanders is not really good in those "games" maybe his "good friend Joe" helped him push it through.
    2
  44.  Joe  Yes. Trump bad. Republicans bad. No one in their right mind expect good things from them. On the other hand Mr. Hope and Change paved the way for someone like Trump to emerge. The country is lucky that Trump is such an idiot. He showed the possibilities. The next TRrump will be more skilfull. And sellout Biden will have paved the way for him.
    2
  45. I think Trump tries to create some unrest by casting doubt on the legitimacy of the elections, in order to have leverage over the incoming Biden admin, so they will NOT sue him. And his goons help him (mail voting becomeing more widespread following the precedence set in the pandemic) would be very bad news for the Republican party. - The IRS will be going after him (even if that only means he has to pay them money, he is broke !). The only hotel / club that made money is Mar-A-Lago, and he trippled fees after he became president. That is going to dry up. He is so incompetent that he loses money on his hotels, and real estate. I also assume that his taxes will be published (with no repercussions on the leakers) as soon He may have laundered money for Russian oligarchs. After his billion dollar (almost) bankrupcy, the banks did not give him any money. The U.S. or European banks ! A New York columnist says he raped her years ago. Then she was advised to not go against him, but she kept the garment with his semen on it. AND she told a few close friends immediately. And those friends are alive. She is wealthy and well established in New York, so the she-is-in-it-for-the-money will not hold. And the friends she told are alive. I am sure that there are plenty of people who would finance her lawsuit. Trump is broke. Oh, and Deutsche Bank is going after him seizing his assets. DB and Trump had some shady stuff going on, so the Trump admin could investigate that. Now Biden is a servant of Big Finance, so likely he would not touch those banksters anymore than Obama touched them. (DB has a LOT of shady stuff going on, not only with Trump, and they are big donors. So neither party is likely to touch them. A Sanders admin might have gone after them).
    2
  46.  @photonAP  (affluent) U.S. citizens "loving" their insurance plan (or if they are lucky to have a job that offers a good plan) is sign of the dysfunction. In the U.S. it is possible to NOT have sufficient coverage - people fear not having it and there is an awareness that that can happen to a family (that fear is completely absent in other first world nations !) Affluent voters travel and are more likely to meet people from other first world countries. They KNOW that they and their employers are fleeced (that means they could get higher wages in a more cost efficient non-profit system). BUT: they can afford to lose that money and have been trained to see healthcare TREATMENTS in the United States ! as a scarce resource. They are the ones that are getting the treatments, so what happens if EVERYONE gets them, wouldn't that mean there is not enough for them ? All U.S. citizens are brainwashed into conflating admin around healthcare (for instance "insurance coverage") with the real thing: getting care from PROVIDERS. Affluent voters (like the many in the district of DWS) also sense or fear that they would have to share their doctor with the unwashed masses, and that the experience would get worse for them - although they will not admit to that. A multi millionaire could take a gamble and NOT have insurance but for most incl. the upper class it is health insurance coverage that makes or breaks access to good, timely and comprehensive care. It can cost hundreds of thousands or even in rare cases millions of dollars. Most people would need insurance for that and could not pay that out of pocket. They only lose some money (and they can afford to) but the most important thing works for them - MEDICAL CARE when needed. They - like everyone else in the U.S. - have been brainwashed into the scarcity mindset (if you hear stories that some families are unlucky that is a natural position. I am sure most affluent citizens do not think too much about the situation, or they do some intellectual somersaults to justify their privilege. But even if they prefer not to know, they cannot help but pick up a few stories). And they prefer the "devil you know ... " - in their case the devil is more of an annoyance. For them it is not a life and death / quality of life issue. It is only about paying too much.
    2
  47. Many affluent R voters have a stay at home spouse .... they would not like the vote being taking form the females in Utah, would they ?
    2
  48. People pay sales tax, have payroll taxes, come up for the property taxes of their landlord (part of rent) People that are getting so low wages that they do not owe income tax make someone a profit. Chances are a big profit if the employer is a large company,and exploits their necessary contribution to the economy - but the profiteers also do not pull their weight with taxes - and they COULD.
    2
  49. Campaign team Reagan (with former CIA director George Bush as VP pick) had secret negotiations with the mullahs of Iran in Paris, so they would keep the hostages until after the elections (see October surprise). Release under Carter would have helped the sitting president with reelection. Announcing the release of the hostages on the inauguration day of Reagan was a not so subtle reminder to keep the deal. The former shah that had been ousted, had purchased a lot of U.S. military equipment over the decades (Iran had a capable army which the mullahs inherited) and of course they knew war was coming. (Sure enough: Reagan had Iraq start a proxy war). They wanted spare parts and weapons and they got them (via Israel). Needless to say there were officially sanctions on Iran. - search for Iran / Contra scandal.
    2
  50.  @tatiz1406  please vote for green party or any third party. THEY get at least public funding if they have 5 % of the popular vote. Noam Chomsky has recommended that strategy for many years: I saw through Obama in 2008 immediately: all rhetoric no substance. But there are small differences where the Democrats are better than Republicans. With a powerful country like the U.S. small differences add up. His strategy: in safely blue or red states strengthen alternatives. In swing states hold your nose (firmly) and vote for the Democrat. (Or vote the alternative anyway in your case).
    2