The political Left’s Chernobyl

Elizabeth Warren is a radioactive Nurse Ratched

she knows what’s good for you even if you do not

chernobyl

Your acquaintances are liberal, progressive or socialist if they vow with absolute certainty that if only more citizens would VOTE! America could put an end to Donald Trump, Ron Johnson, and Robin Vos and the earth would be healed.

Political numbers cruncher Nate Cohn pops that kiddie show balloon.

“Non-voters are a source of hope for Democrats; maybe a false hope,” Cohn writes in (of all places) the New York Times.

“Demographically, [non-voters] seem like people who’d want to vote out Trump. Yet, at least in the battleground states, many favor Republicans.

Tony Evers, Eliz Warren

“I have a plan”

Cohn’s survey findings “undermine the common assumption that Hillary Clinton lost simply because of low Democratic turnout.” Cohn reports:

In the battleground states likeliest to decide the presidency [which includes Wisconsin], nonvoters aren’t overwhelmingly favorable to Democrats. The president’s ability to stay close among nonvoters suggests he could remain competitive in a high-turnout election and expand his support beyond his 63 million voters in 2016.

Nonvoters are the likeliest group of Democratic leaners to oppose an assault weapons ban or to support reducing legal immigration to the United States. They’re likeliest to agree that discrimination against whites is as big a problem as discrimination against minorities, even though the group is only 50% white. They’re also likeliest to agree that political correctness has gone too far.

To the Guillotine!

But the Left appears determined to alienate — rather than attract — those non-voters. The Nation (John Nichols’ day job) is out with an “anti-endorsement” against Joe Biden.

The Nation knitting

Les Madames DeFarge

We at The Nation, like many other progressives, have come under increasing pressure to choose between Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren … because we find much to admire in both candidates’ programs: Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, and measures to rein in corporate power.  ... The Nation therefore calls on Biden to put service to country above personal ambition and withdraw from the race.

Can Trump be that lucky?

Blaska Policy Werkes says, bring it on! The indispensable Daniel Henninger asks if Elizabeth Warren has “wrecked the Left?” Her $52 Trillion (with a T) “Medicare for All” is just for starters. Sen. Warren would quadruple federal spending on education. “You almost have to admire a candidate who promises to quadruple spending,” Henninger snarks.

“The Warren meltdown could prove to be the Democrat Left’s Chernobyl, a lasting catastrophe.”

We give the Final Word to economics correspondent Neil Irwin in the New York Times: “A president seeking to pay for a policy agenda with taxes on extreme wealth might want to think ahead to what should be done if those taxes result in a lot less extreme wealth to tax.

What do YOU think?

About David Blaska

Madison WI
This entry was posted in Donald Trump, Election 2020 and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to The political Left’s Chernobyl

  1. White Hills says:

    Hey John, when you talk about breaking up Google, Facebook, and the NYT’s corporate power, we’ll take you seriously. You guys have been enjoying your monopoly speech as of late. When were you going to be good socialists and share?

    Like

  2. geo_ says:

    So how is it that most developed countries with a GDP much lower than ours can afford a system of healthcare similar to Medicare for All?

    Gotch, when we going to meet for a beer?

    Like

    • White Hills says:

      They have homogeneous cultures. It has nothing to do with economics.

      Like

    • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

      @geo_;

      “So how is it that most developed countries with a GDP much lower than ours can afford a system of healthcare similar to Medicare for All?”

      1st of all, for those of us that understand CMS, like yours truly, people that use the phrase Medicare for All are routinely, and unmercifully, mocked.

      To answer your question; gosh…I don’t know…maybe because they don’t have ~ 345,000,000 people to cover. A wide swath of those are…um…non-participants, financially speaking, and most of them are on the very unhealthy end of the spectrum

      You should ask my dear Cape Breton Island dwelling Sister (a career Lefty) how great she thinks Canada’s plan is.

      “Gotch, when we going to meet for a beer?”

      Sometime soon, Big Guy; and it ain’t like The Gotch hasn’t made himself available in times past, am I right?

      The Gotch

      Like

    • Kevin Wymore says:

      Here is a thought-provoking blog piece on the potential effects of a single payer system paying Medicare rates for all patients.

      https://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com/

      According to noted health policy analyst Bob Lazsewski, paying all doctors Medicare rates would bankrupt the health care system. Not to mention the political uncertainty of forcing more than 170 million Americans to give up their health care plans. Many of those are people like me, who have negotiated and earned those benefits as union members.

      Like

  3. Sprocket says:

    Fortunately for Trump the Democrats haven’t gotten any smarter since last time. Even as the super crazies are starting to fade from view, their candidates can’t keep themselves from babbling nonsense like they’ve been free basing cough syrup. Warren want’s to spend a couple of trillion dollars on government run health care. Biden is… being Biden. Sanders, after a life spent leeching off the public tit, is wondering why we’re not confiscating Bill Gates’ wealth.

    That said, our health care system is a dumpster fire. It is not designed to provide the most health care per patient dollar. Wherever you look in our system, the motivation is to pocket as many patient dollars as possible as they flow by. This of course starts with the insurance companies; tapeworms that provide no health care value, siphon off hundreds of billions of dollars that could be used for patient care and create overhead costs downstream that are ultimately paid for by patients.

    Though it goes against my every instinct, I don’t see a solution to our healthcare dysfunction that does not involve taking a flame thrower the current insurance system. I also don’t see a solution coming out of Washington that isn’t designed to transfer maximum taxpayer dollars to the politically connected. In short, we’re screwed.

    Like

    • patrickmoloughlin says:

      Yes, health insurance companies do not provide health care value. That’s not their job. Their job is to help people share risk. I believe the majority of our disfunction comes from the fact that my employer pays the insurance company for my health insurance, the insurance company then pays the doctor for services that I receive and I never see a bill. There’s no shopping. There is no price competition between the doctors. Pricing is based on, “Whatever you can get away with.” The people receiving services don’t care what it costs, and neither do the guys paying the bills.

      Like

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s