It’s a rhetorical style that she has developed during this campaign. Probably in response to people saying she sounded too much like a professor giving lectures. So now, she constantly shifts to anecdotal stories to avoid getting into wonky policy discussion. It did her no favors last night, however.
1 Like
He is actually quite progressive, but he has read George Lakoff and knows how to frame his positions in ways that make sense to moderates. I suppose he gets the “moderate” label because he does not endorse eliminating private health insurance, free college tuition for everyone and other proposals that many voters oppose because they see them as breaking the bank. To me, that’s just practical. There is more to being progressive than throwing money at problems. I think many of Pete’s proposals are more progressive than those of Warren. For example, his proposed “Homestead Act” would give grants to residents of formerly redlined neighborhoods to rehabilitate properties in those neighborhoods and build wealth for their families. Warren proposes the traditional neo-lib approach of giving money to private developers to build affordable rental housing.
1 Like
I agree he’s progressive. I guess in my mind just being a run of the mill progressive makes you a moderate in the Democratic Party now that Bernie is mainstream. I don’t think the party has been this far left on economic since FDR or maybe LBJ.
How do you define “far left”? And which of the candidates do you see as far left and why? Asking in all sincerity.
1 Like
Economics - not saying these are bad
Considering how much we spend on healthcare, Medicare as the only plan is a huge transformation of our society. No matter who the payer is - private insurance or Medicare/Medicaid - they exert huge control not just on the care we receive but on the nature of the business of medicine.
Since Kennedy, lower tax rates have been seen as a fairly good thing - especially for the middle class. We are now talking about increasing middle class taxes as way to offset private costs to individuals. Childcare, college tuition, affordable housing, etc
On civil rights (right on) the party has never been further to the left or more inclusive.
On foreign policy I have no idea where we stand. Whether we are free market capitalist or globalists or protectionist or hawks or doves - we sometimes seem to be doing a lot more reacting than anything else.
Umm…
$1000*233,000,000(eligible people)=$233 Billion a month.
Maybe you meant a year? That comes out to $2.8B
Here’s how it is proposed that we pay for it.
Net cost per year, $320B/yr, or less than half what the Pentagon gets. With real numbers, we can debate whether the cost is worth what we get, or if we need to tweak some rates or values, or if we cut something else. The site has a google sheet that lets you run your own numbers.
You may disagree with the projections, but they have been thought through and documented.
You may think it is not worth it. But it is more worth it than the last tax cuts, or the wars in the Middle East, or the Wall Street bailouts, which cost even more. Did those multi-trillion dollar events destroy any ability to ever manage the nation’s money supply?
You say it doesn’t fix any problems. I could use it to buy a new car, or pay for my daughters tuition. Those are two problems fixed right there, so that particular claim is now disproven.