If he thinks the best way to get there in 2020 is different from what the best way to get there would have been in 1987, there's no philosophical/ideological inconsistency.

Though actually, this clip is not sufficient to tell us even that much.

Even today, no one is proposing building specifically on the medicaid structure, which requires up to 50% of the money to come from the states, who in turn are constrained by the requirements of a balanced budget.

Also, this clip is (yes, Scurrilous) missing context. He appears to be interviewing someone, and we don't get to hear the answer. It is a common interview technique to put forth a point of view specifically to present the opportunity for the other person to blow it up. We really don't know what's going on here.

So there are multiple ways this clip *could* be misleading. Was he talking about how Medicaid is financed? He's right, that wouldn't work, and he's never said it would. Or was he actually saying that single payer (something akin to his MFA proposal) wouldn't work? If he was (and he may well not have been), believing that any particular method to accomplish his goal of healthcare for all wouldn't have worked in 1987 is not necessarily relevant to the approaches he thinks are viable in 2020. Or, was he specifically looking to get the interviewee to explain a way universal coverage COULD be done (in 1987)? Who knows?

The fact that whoever originally pulled and posted this 57 second clip did not reference where it came from or how one could view it in context makes me think that it was specifically done to hit Sanders rather than to provide useful information about what he was saying so one could answer those questions.

5..4..3..2..1

Last edited Tue Jan 28, 2020, 08:31 AM - Edit history (1)

- notably, an election Joe lost twice in 1988 and 2008 for reasons you should research - which will then lead to President Sanders' election.


Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

may the best candidate win!!


Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

There's no correlation between winning a state in a primary (where the opposite party does not vote) and winning a state in a general election (where they do). One can lose the first and win the second, or win the first and lose the second. It's really of no relevance whatsoever.

Or any
He's not going to win in GA, where Biden is currently ahead. He's not going to win in states that have a large black population. They wont be enthused about him & many will stay home. Like LAST time.
But hey, whatta I know. I've predicted every winner since Reagan. Whether I liked it or not

If so, we’d lose House and maybe drop some seats in Senate.

...what would work in the economy of 1987.

Also please see my post #20

Kinda changes the whole context. Sorry.

Link to tweet

And it's hilarious how context is now important when just a week or so ago it was dismissed.

And say they also "know" what revenue will be raised by fantasy revenue generators.
NOBODY knows. Usually nobody is even close on these types of programs. Savings & revenue are always over estimated
But hes still not going to win whats needed

...but Medicare for All. Everyone pays in, everyone takes out. Seems fair to me.

At time, Sanders probably didn’t know the difference. A lot of folks still don’t.

yet Bernie has been teflon on this ?

I thought he was "insanely consistent"? according the liar joe rogan.

CNN: Biden & Warren campaigns said they hadn't asked to appear on Rogan's show

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287446665