Progressives (Liberals)

She wasn't asked whether she "controlled them". Why not indicate some awareness of the meddling and the problems it raises for candidates like herself?

Notice the way expressing any concern about (proven) Russian interference has become yet another litmus test that the not-too-far left can use to label its critics as neo-liberals and centrists.

I notice. So many litmus/purity tests its past ridiculous.

Stone her stone her.

That shouldn't be necessary. I just didn't see much wisdom in her response, just the same old politician's dodge of refusing to answer a direct question or even address the concerns which may have prompted it. Color me unimpressed.

Precisely. It would have been the simplest thing for her to condemn Russian activism in the election and to encourage her followers to be discerning in their information sources. But she chose to slither away instead. This does not speak well of her.

Neither does it speak well of her that she has never disavowed the imprimatur of David Duke or Stormfront, nor that she has more than once chosen Sean Hannity’s show as the place from which to voice her opinions.

Or are we supposed to judge every candidate except Gabbard by the company and endorsements they keep?

Ooh. She slithers. Stone her.

BERN NOTICE: Biden Destroys His Own Tax Argument Against Medicare for All
The former vice president commits an epic self-own in an attempt to protect his health industry donors
Oct 21
Public post


Bern Notice is a production of the Bernie 2020 campaign. Please forward this on to your friends and tell them to subscribe. The views expressed here are solely of the bylined author.

The health insurance industry is relying on Democrats like Joe Biden to try to convert a debate over health care into a standard GOP anti-tax crusade. But there’s one problem: Biden just told on himself and undermined the entire misinformation campaign that is being promoted by right-wing organizations and health industry front groups.

Biden recently excoriated Bernie’s Medicare for All plan, claiming that under Bernie’s Medicare for All plan, “for people making between $50,000 and $75,000 a year, their taxes are going up about $5,000 because the fact is, they will pay more in new taxes.”

Biden, of course, is presenting the harshest interpretation of the numbers to try to undermine Medicare for All — and his figures have already been challenged by Politifact. However, even if you accept his skewed interpretation, you realize he is actually making the case for Medicare for All. He is doing that by inadvertently confirming what University of California economist Gabriel Zucman recently reported: “Medicare for All dramatically cuts taxes for the majority of workers.”

Biden Is Admitting Medicare For All Saves Middle-Class Families Thousands of Dollars Every Year
The Washington Post recently reported that many economists now acknowledge that “Americans already pay a massive ‘tax’ to fund health care…It just happens to go to private insurance companies, rather than the federal government.” These health industry taxes are insurance premiums, co-pays, deductibles and other out-of-pocket expenses.

According to Kaiser Family Foundation data, the average healthy family of four making $50,000 pays $6,050 worth of those health industry taxes every year — even when they have employer-sponsored health insurance. Biden insists eliminating this $6,050 of health industry taxes will require this family to pay $5,000 of Medicare for All taxes — which means even if you accept Biden’s argument, he is admitting that Medicare for All saves this family $1,050 every single year.


If this same $50,000-a-year family is on the individual market, they are paying $8,150 of health industry taxes. Paying $5,000 in Medicare for All taxes to eliminate $8,150 of health industry taxes means Medicare for All would save this family $3,150 every year.

It’s a similar story for the average healthy family that makes $100,000 on the individual market. They are paying $19,250 of health industry taxes. Biden claimed that under Medicare for All, that family could pay up to $10,000 more in taxes. Even if you accept Biden’s assertion, it would still mean this Medicare for All would save this family $9,250.

Biden’s Argument Is Even More Ridiculous When It Comes to Families With A Sick Kid
The tax argument against Medicare for All becomes even more ridiculous in other common situations. For instance, consider a family that has a sick child and that makes $50,000 a year.

If this family has employer-sponsored insurance, they are paying $7,850 of health industry taxes. Biden wants you to believe it would be horrible for this family to pay $5,000 of Medicare for All premiums to eliminate $7,850 of health industry taxes — even though under that scenario, the family would save $2,850 every year.

Similarly, if this family gets its insurance on the individual market, they are paying $12,550 of health industry taxes. Replacing those taxes with $5,000 of Medicare for All taxes means this family would save $7,550 every year.


Medicare For All Would Halt New Projected — and Regressive — Tax Increases
Matt Bruenig recently reported in the New York Times that when accounting for health industry taxes, “Americans pay some of the highest and least progressive labor taxes in the developed world.” And if there is no change, the situation is likely to get worse: the upcoming year, insurance corporations are projected to push for a 10 percent increase in health industry for those on the individual market, according to a recent report.

That would be an enormous corporate-mandated tax increase for roughly 13 million Americans — a tax increase that would boost profits for insurance corporations and help pay for the $2 billion of annual pay that health industry CEOs rake in.

By contrast, Bernie’s Medicare for All plan would eliminate those health industry taxes while guaranteeing Americans high-quality care. It can do that because it will be using health care resources to provide actual health care — not to provide more profits to health care corporations and their executives.

Bern after reading,

Sirota

Golly. I wouldn't want her to be stoned. You think I'm some kind of monster?

But if Tonya Harding was to bash her about the head and ears with a pickup truck hubcap, fine.

It's no wonder we can no longer have nice stuff.

The mouths of both Hillary and the Donald are as Pavlov in his laboratory. We could drown in the slaver.

Recent research has shown that the Pavlovian response is attenuated if you teach your dog to smoke weed.

What would be your response as an (individual)?

How about judging them by what they do.

I think you need to provide some evidence on that slithering. Couldn’t help but to imagine her snapping you in two for that crack.

Ah. Well.

The Gabbard thing is just a distraction, but a petty ugly one. She has said that she has no intent to go 3rd party. She barely shows in the polls. Clinton is lashing out because she wants to sound authoritative again and considers Tulsi an easy target to make her mark.

https://www.conservativereview.com/scorecard/tulsi-gabbard/<br />

Since it's been agreed that she is a Russian Asset, we now can appreciate that the Conservative Review is lying here to protect her.

7 "conservative" votes! My God! She's a stealth neo-Nazi!

Sanders, Warren, Castro, Harris, Booker, Ayanna Pressley, and Ilhan Omar, all have higher "Liberty Scores" than Gabbard.

Good God! The Russians have taken over the Progressive Wing of the Democrat Party

Bernie Sanders
@BernieSanders
· 1h
Tulsi Gabbard has put her life on the line to defend this country. People can disagree on issues, but it is outrageous for anyone to suggest that Tulsi is a foreign asset.
—————————

I love Bernie Sanders.

I remember you pitching a bitch about the company that Hillary kept.

Only as a sideline.

She, by herself, is enough for any thinking human being to reject on her own merit.