Bluntly, the policy differences between Biden and Sanders simply don't matter

[Recursion]

They're a waste of time to talk about. They're both more liberal than Steve Bullock, who is the best shot at being the 51st Senator, so whatever their personal beliefs are, that is the limiting factor.

[pnwmom]

1. And much more liberal than Joe Manchin and Doug Jones -- and we need them, too. n/t

[Recursion]

2. Unfortunately I'm assuming Jones won't be returning

God, that would be nice, though. But, yeah, Manchin is going to be controlling a lot of things if we have a bare majority.

[House of Roberts]

15. We're trying to get Roy Moore to endorse Tommy Tuberville.

Haven't heard back on that yet.

[betsuni]

3. I don't get what the "movement" and "revolution" stuff is about.

Why small policy differences are dramatic life or death situations, why Democrats are blamed for Republicans' terrible policies.

[beachbumbob]

5. sander's pie-in-the-sky free giveaways and thats about it

sanders would have been 10000x better off to say "we need a total rewrite if the IRS tax code and I propose a blue ribbon panel to come up with on with my first 100 days in office".

Now thats what a visionary says, and sanders is NO visionary

[pampango]

10. What Europeans have is not 'pie in the sky free giveaways' though that is what Trump

will call his ideas. Plus he will call them SOCIALIST 😱

[beachbumbob]

12. US is not Europe

[pampango]

20. It sure as hell isn't. You are right about that.

Will we ever be? Or are we doomed to poor safety nets, poor infrastructure and terrible income inequality?

[beachbumbob]

21. so why do we have lines of people coming to america if its so bad?

[pampango]

23. Do you seriously not know the answer to that question?

Do have no idea what life in poor and authoritarian-run countries is like? Are you satisfied with the state of affairs in the US just because people who have it worse off are still lining up to come here?

[beachbumbob]

24. I never buy into the bullshit that we have it bad here. We have lots to improve on but that

can be addressed within our govt by getting people elected who KNOW HOW to compromise, negotiate and lead. Not pie in the sky ideologues who demand instant change without having any idea how to accomplish

[pampango]

26. We have crumbling infrastructure, inadequate health care, terrible income inequality, weak unions.

That may not be BAAAAD compared to the Third World (where people are 'lining up to come here'), but it ain't nearly as good as it is in other developed countries.

And if you perception of Bernie supporters is "pie in the sky ideologues who demand instant change", I don't know where you get your information from but I understand your distain for us.

[Kali]

54. right, and nobody is trying to get into Europe or Canada, or...

[NYMinute]

17. One cannot apply a policy that works in a country of 5 million

and try to extrapolate it to an extremely diverse country of 350 million.

[pampango]

22. Germany is 83 million. The EU is 500 million.

The New Deal seemed to work when our population was about 125 million. What is the population figure that makes a progressive government unattainable?

[NYMinute]

30. Germany doesn't have all the things Bernie wants

Nor does most of EU

[pampango]

40. What exactly do they lack? I'll take their level of income equality, infrastructure and health care.

If they fall short of what 'Bernie wants', I would be interested to hear your analysis.

At any rate, their government does much more for regular people than ours does. They may not be perfect - who is? - but they are a good model of a large industrial country that provides much for its citizens.

[NYMinute]

43. Germany's health care system is much like ours

Germany has what's called a universal multi-payer health care system. It encompasses both statutory health insurance for people who earn less than a certain salary, as well as private health insurance for those who earn more and choose to purchase their own.

This is similar to medicaid and private insurance like we have. Our medicaid is restrictive but under Obamacare's expansion would have created a system exactly like Germany.

[pampango]

45. Fair enough. What about their infrastructure, income equality, strong unions, climate

commitment and strong safety net? Some things that we could achieve?

[Midnightwalk]

65. Rx for the country

Pick any of those topics. Let’s go back over the past 20 years.

Eight years under Bush. What progressive legislation could we pass? None.

First two years under Obama we made progress.

Then we lost the house in 2010. No more progress legislatively for the next six years

Now 4 years of trump. Again no progressive legislation

The problem to me appears to be losing elections means we don’t get to govern. It’s even worse because republicans don’t have any interest in a functioning government, they just want power for power’s sake and to push more money to the rich.

I don’t understand the argument that the failures are due to policy differences between democrats. There’s an indirect kind of argument maybe for an inspirational message but if that really worked we would have far left (better term?) representatives and state officials in more parts of the country

[pampango]

68. There's lot more that separates us from Germany than just health care and prescriptions.

I do agree on the importance of defeating republicans if we are to achieve anything.

[Demsrule86]

44. Italy is now letting the old die...rationing health care and the UK is coming up with their own

rationing plan...the dirty underside of government/Medicare for all. Universal care is the goal for me...not M4A and as the news comes out of Europe...Sanders plan will be DOA...when people see how it was implemented and care was rationed.

[pampango]

46. Medicare for some is bad? Or Medicare for all is bad? n/t

[Demsrule86]

49. The rationing is bad and Sanders plan is now doomed. He will never be able overcome those optics...

good, we can do better with a 21st century plan.

[pampango]

56. There will always be rationing of some sort - by ability to pay, by government budgets that

require some kind of screening before certain medical services are provided.

There is 'screening' in Medicare now. Us old folks don't get to have the government pay for anything and everything that we want. 'Screening' ain't going away. You will never be able to go to any doctor/specialist and receive any medicine you want for free.

If Medicare is good enough for old people and the disabled, it should be good enough for others. And if we come up with a better health care system for younger people, us oldsters are going to want in on that too.

He will never be able overcome those optics...

I could not care less. I was not looking at this as a 'my candidate' vs 'your candidate' discussion. Bernie is going to lose but some of his ideas may survive and prosper in the future. If that is all that matters to you, congratulations. You win!

M4A has popular support but it will not happen in my lifetime. Conservatives and 'moderates' will water them down or kill them outright. It will take a long time but we will get to a 'European' (or 'FDR') style society - strong unions, great infrastructure, an effective safety net and a more equitable distribution of income - one day.

[Demsrule86]

63. Sorry Sanders does't bet to inflict a bad health care plan on this country...obviously it is

failing in the real world when most need it the most...we can do better. M4A is a bad plan...we do need universal coverage...which includes some sort of planning for health emergencies...so we don't have to let people die.

[Midnightwalk]

59. Covid overwhelming icus is different

If you are referring to the recent triage decisions on who get icu rooms and ventilation that’s because of the virus. The screwed up response so far in the us means we might be in the same ugly situation.

I prefer buy in as a first step and with price controls we might be able to permanently keep private insurance but I also don’t like being gouged by our healthcare system to the tune of a trillion dollars a year. We need reforms and we will face resistance at every step.

That resistance will tell us controlling costs will mean waiting for urgent treatments, pharmaceutical companies stopping research and development.

[Demsrule86]

62. I prefer a 21st century plan that begins with the ACA and a public option...I also want more

hospital beds and intensive care sites. Let's plan for our health emergencies.

[onetexan]

38. Even Yang's UBI (universal basic income) idea is more realistic than the rotten pie Bernie proposes

[Renew Deal]

6. It's not about policy.

It’s idolatry. And he can’t admit defeat, again.

[betsuni]

14. True, not about policy. No matter how often they say it is.

[onetexan]

39. LOL looks like Ebinezer Scrooge

[dalton99a]

47. When leader worship is called a "people's movement"

[pampango]

48. Yeah that's it. We don't care about policy (though Bernie is criticized here for his pie-in-the-sky

policies? It's idolatry.

I thought it is VP Biden who is running, not so much on policies, but as the unifying force who can defeat Trump. Idolatry or policy?

[HarlanPepper]

50. I prefer the term cult of personality

[pampango]

57. There is certainly a contrast between a focus on issues and on personality. n/t

[Renew Deal]

60. You would encourage Bernie to drop out if you cared about policy.

Bernie sticking around only helps Trump at this point.

[pampango]

66. Bernie dropping out on March 18 rather than March 12 is not helping Trump.

And talking about his policies for another 5 days is not going to kill anyone or doom Biden in the general.

The vast majority of his supporters will see that he gave it one last change at the debate and March 17 primaries and was rejected by Democratic voters. They will understand that he fought the 'good fight' and lost and will be much more likely to support Biden.

[Magoo48]

11. Willingness to embrace focus on every issue through the lens of eminent

Climate Catastrophe will determine the amount death and suffering endured by next generations as well as billions of young folks alive today.

Courage to accept future reality in spite of corporate push back is not a matter affecting a few hundred people.

Think I’m over the top? Consult the latest science available today.

[betsuni]

13. President Carter installed solar panels on the White House and told people to conserve energy.

Al Gore talked about global warming for decades. The Democratic Party is the party of environmentalism. This is not a new issue. What are you talking about. Republicans know this. Why they freak out about new light bulbs.

[Magoo48]

16. Sadly, in light of what the world is now facing what you mention is irrelevant.

Bernie has the determination to push towards the society changing measures needed. Biden is too friendly with the corporate problem.

[betsuni]

18. Why is Bernie better and Biden "too friendly with the corporate problem"?

Why did Bernie vote against gun control and in favor of corporate gun manufacturers? Why did he not vote against Russian oligarchs? Why vote for the 1994 crime bill? Why vote for the Afghanistan war?

[Magoo48]

25. Come on with the talking points.

Bernie has a documented history of publicly declaring opposition to corporate control of our nation, which btw corporate-conservatives now have. Biden is a moderate. We the people can not moderate with corpropolitical greed and corruption; they only understand public and grassroots pressure which Bernie is more likely to provide.

[Recursion]

28. And?

Bernie has a documented history of publicly declaring opposition to corporate control of our nation

And?

You say that like it matters.

You know that doesn't matter, right? Being right doesn't matter in a democracy. Repeat that sentence to yourself until you understand it.

[Magoo48]

29. Let's politely disagree.

I see corporations as a major stumbling block to a livable world for next generations and the reason for our decent into Oligarchy and early non-representative fascist government.

You do not see things that way would be my guess.

So, Blue no matter who, but question everyone and everything.

[NYMinute]

33. You know most average people either work for corporations

or depend upon corporations for their bare necessities to entertainment don't you?

[Magoo48]

37. To the best of my ability, I avoid or limit consumption of corporate commodities.

Nevertheless, I see the reality of looming Climate Catastrophe and the devastating prospects for next generations and am open to all changes required by strong leadership. Are you?

[NYMinute]

42. Oh come on

You probably live in a home built by a corporation, buy groceries at a supermarket owned by a corporation, buy clothes at a mall built by and owned by a corporation where the stores owned by corporations are located. You get your medicines from corporations. You go to movies made by corporations inside movie theaters owned by corporations. You drive a car made by a corporation and drive it on roads built by corporations, fuel it with a gas station owned by a corporation with oil provided by a corporation and refined by a corporation. When you travel, you fly in an airline operated by a corporation and stay at a hotel owned by a corporation while driving a rental car owned by a corporation. You are on the internet because of a corporation and you are able to call people on your phone made by a corporation and service operated by another corporation. All those corporations employ people like you and I - average people.

If you don't work for a corporation yourself, your business probably depends upon corporate employees patronizing your establishment.

So unless you live in a log cabin you yourself built in Northern Alaska and hunt/fish your food with bows and arrows you made yourself and communicate with smoke signals or pigeons, 95% of your life is dependent upon corporations of one kind or another.

Stop demonizing corporations. Yes, they are greedy but they take the risks of losing money every day and thus look for efficiencies to reduce costs. Why do they need to make profits? Because corporations are owned by millions of small shareholders whose retirement savings depend upon those profits.

[Magoo48]

72. Like Maya Angelou said, " when we know better, we do better."

Are you opposed to people attempting to limit the influence of corporate America in their daily lives?

Do you believe corporate America will institute the necessary changes out of the goodness of their hearts?

[betsuni]

31. Talking points: corporate-conservatives, moderate, we the people, corpropolitical greed

and corruption, grassroots, Bernie blah blah blah blah.

You left out neoliberal, status quo, establishment and speaking truth to power.

[NYMinute]

34. And none of those with an iota of foundation

Just parroting

[Magoo48]

35. We entertain different views of the world and future scenarios.

But, if eminent Climate Catastrophe is Blah, Blah, Blah, well, that’s denial.

[Demsrule86]

53. Well judging by Sander's catastrophic multiple losses...this world view isn't popular with voters.

Joe Biden is the presumptive nominee.

[Magoo48]

71. It's regrettable so far, but there's time.

Anyway, we keep pushing left all the way to the end.

Blue no matter who, but still question everything.

[onetexan]

41. oh sure he had opposition to corporate greed, but where were his ideas to combat it?

He had a long stint in the Senate. Why hasn't he had anything achieved if he feels so passionately about it?

The old adage comes to mind: "you can talk the talk, but you'd better walk the walk".

[Demsrule86]

51. The Virus is killing people now and as I pointed out UK is looking to ration care...the

old are already being denied lifesaving care in Italy...I expect UK will have the same sort of thing. Bye bye...M4A...you were always a bad plan...use the ACA to get something better.

[rpannier]

4. Very true

[treestar]

7. And giving in to them

would only get them to think that works, and demand more. Joe could come out for M4All and they would not vote for him, they would continue with another demand to "earn" their votes.

[DanTex]

8. Of course they do.

There are executive actions, appointments, the bully pulpit, etc. It makes a big difference who is president.

[IronLionZion]

9. And if these 2 get sick, we'll be stuck with Tulsi Gabbard

who is young and healthy, at least physically

[NYMinute]

19. Those policy differences were minuscule to begin with

The free giveaways to college students was a political ploy to get the youngins involved and fill up the rallies which were always held on or near campuses of major universities.

Some students were of the belief that as soon as Sanders is elected, he would cancel tuition and cancel everyone's student debt.
I have seen chat transcripts where students were already talking about not paying after October and buying a BMW or Porsche in January.

[pampango]

27. Some posters refer to Sanders' policy ideas as "pie-in-the-sky" which they do not use for Biden's.

Those folks may think that policy differences do still matter.

[Demsrule86]

52. Biden has rational plans with numbers...unlike Sanders who won't say what the numbers are.

[pampango]

58. How does Bernie pay for his major plans:

https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-does-bernie-pay-his-major-plans/

[Demsrule86]

64. Ok...that is not a plan...but a fantasy.

[TwilightZone]

55. It's because Biden's plans are more realistic and more likely to make it through Congress.

It's not complicated. A good example is the original discussion about the ACA. Sanders and a few others wanted single-payer, but Sanders himself said there was no support for it, 10 Senators at most.

Wanting or promising something doesn't mean it can get through Congress. Biden is much more likely to be able to get his proposals passed for two reasons: 1) he understands how to build coalitions, and 2) his proposals are much more likely to pass by default, because they're more realistic.

[pampango]

61. There is support for single-payer, M4A has popular support. Should we not promote

popular, people-oriented ideas because congress, as currently constituted, won't pass them? "Let's be realistic!"

I doubt that was the way FDR thought in 1932. Was the New Deal 'realistic'? If so why, didn't congress pass in it 1931?

Of course, "Wanting or promising something doesn't mean it can get through Congress...". Nor should the perceived congressional prospects of a policy prevent us from discussing its merits and promoting it - for the long run if nothing else.

[Demsrule86]

67. Corona has killed Medicare for all..wait until the pics of older people gasping for air as they die

horrible deaths because they were determined to be to old to receive care... a horrible death. It always was a bad plan and impossible to pass in congress and impossible to implement also. We need a good 21st century universal healthcare plan.

[pampango]

69. I am glad you think so but I will wait for polls to bear out your opinion.

When people die without insurance, M4A may gain some appeal.

[Demsrule86]

70. I don't need polls to tell me we can do better. But then I was never much of a fan...

[Recursion]

74. If, inshallah, we take the Senate and WH, Pelosi has the initiative

And she has her own agenda and her caucus to wrangle, and in that caucus the kind of moderate Democrats that are actually beating Republican incumbents in House seats will have a huge say.

Then Schumer gets his say, and he has an even more ornery herd of cats to manage, and suddenly Joe Manchin and Steve Bullock start to be the limiting factor. POTUS only even sees a bill after both of those steps happen.

[Happy Hoosier]

36. Ultimately, you're right. NT

[Hortensis]

73. Nonsense. Hasn't electing a bunch of RW extremist incompetents

who CANNOT perform properly awakened people to the reality that competence and goals matter? We should never accept candidates' descriptions of themselves and their promises without checking them against reality.

All the wishful thinking and dreams of revolution Sanders has done over 50 years, and that's what it has added up to, cannot equal the ability to develop, pass and implement even one important, sensible bill that people need.

Sander entire history suggests he's incapable of that kind of good sense and leadership. Because he always has been. He's always "earned" his $174K+golden benefits as a bizarre congressional gadfly, badmouthing Democratic legislation, voting for it, then badmouthing it again. (Except when breaking with Dems to vote for his big donors or against Dems AND Republicans to support Russia.) What kind of person spends a quarter century in the center of great power doing that?!

Now he's running on outrageously promising to force congress to spend 7-10 years (IF Dems don't lose congress and/or the presidency over that period!) replacing the ACA with a bizarrely similar capitalist, for-profit MfA. How's he plan to do that? By creating as many national uprisings of support as needed to force congress to cower before the will of the electorate -- while he can't even produce one to get himself elected.

Get it?

Sanders is no Sen. Warren. He's no VP Biden. He's no any of the other senators who ran, whose congressional records are all far more impressive than his, even those far shorter than his. And comparing him to even one of the governors who successfully administered the incredible complexities of whole states and offered their leadership to the nation is ludicrous.