scrubbedexpat099

I do not have access to the NYT.

Anyway what she did was deceptive at best, Tactically a win but Strategically a defeat.

Biden in the format of these debates tried to put across the nuance of the situation but it was impossible.

Now a cursory look shows that she has many similar issues and it will be very easy for somebody else to do the same to her as she did to Biden.

And it is very early in the game, why go after somebody who can hurt you. Biden may not be able to win but he can make a serious dent in anybody else chances.

So I know she is not stupid, her and her team must have considered all this beforehand. My only conclusion is that she has cashed in early, she knows she can not win, well there can be only one winner and has been persuaded or has sought to be somebody's attack dog. They can keep their chips in hand, she does the dirty work and gets a nice earner out of it. VP, Cabinet Post.

So the thing to watch is who she will not go after, she will not waste energy on the no hopers. Whoever is last standing is the one who made the best offer.

scrubbedexpat099

Because Medicare is something you pay into and Medicaid is not, they said Medicare. They did not say, I think, free Healthcare for people undocumented.

scrubbedexpat099

I did not know here background until recently, I had heard about the issues when she was a Prosecutor, I would imagine very few people know her history. Not sure I know the family history of any of the Candidates, well except Warren.

Steerpike

"They DID NOT SAY ... free healthcare for people undocumented" - so if they didn't say that, why did you bring it up?

Ingles

Sadly the "nit pickers" like to nit pick, to try to confuse the issue !

Giantaxe

So you can only make a point about segregation and busing if you fit Boiler's definition of being black enough? Really, you're going down the same racist route as Trump has with Warren.

Giantaxe

Strictly speaking the ACA doesn't provide tax credits, but "premium subsidies". It just happens that the tax system is used to reconcile what one's subsidy is. And that subsidy may exceed one's tax liability. Of course, even tax credits can be "refundable", meaning you get the credit even if it exceeds your tax liability. The earned income tax credit is an example.

From what was said in the debates, it's not clear what would happen to Medicaid (and VA) under various guises of "Medicare for all". The US healthcare system is such a shambles of differing methods of access, that rationally reforming it - as we've seen over the last decade - is fiendishly difficult.

Oh, and after 10 years we're still waiting to hear the "replace" part of the Republicans' "repeal and replace" of the ACA. At least the Democrats are trying to tackle the issue of improving healthcare access.

scrubbedexpat099

We are at risk of going off topic and yes like many policies it is unclear what is proposed, what you are putting your hand up for.

I assumed maybe incorrectly that Medicare For All related to the way that works, Medicaid For All would be different. Medicare you qualify for through contributions or in a few cases buy into so was following that principal.

It is an unholy mess, makes me wonder are they saying yes to the same thing?

Giantaxe

Another take on busing. If this wasn't a comment made through pure ignorance, it would be quite amusing:

scrubbedexpat099

ROFL That would probably have been my answer, ask a stupid question...

Assuming Trump stands then all the Dems have to do to win is nominate somebody down the middle and they would walk it, let us say a Biden without the baggage, so why are they so intent on making their top priority so hard?

Giantaxe

ROFL.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.e2e26d2bc6bc

scrubbedexpat099

What does it say, can not read it.

Giantaxe

Buy a subscription then.

scrubbedexpat099

Think I will give it a miss.

Giantaxe

Would have thought an independent like you would want to have access to a paper such as the Washington Post.