At this point it just seems like folks are blindly repeating twitter chatter, without any examples.

Like I'll give an example of a flip flop with a different candidate:

In an early town hall, Kamala stated she favored abolishing private health insurance. She later walked that back after significant outcry, and her healthcare reform plan allows private insurers to continue as long as they adhere to Medicare requirements and offer through the system, kind of like Part C. This to me was a flip flop (although, not necessarily a bad one).

But Pete saying he thinks "Medicare for All" (using the term to mean "Universal Coverage" NOT "Single-payer", which is actually the only way the term makes any sense since actual Medicare is not even single payer) is the "right goal", or is the "true center position" on healthcare (i.e. as a halfway point between a fully market-based system and a fully nationalized system like NHS) etc and then proposing a public option - is not in any way a flip flop lol. Public options ARE a way to achieve universal coverage. And if anything, he did the field a favor by offering a simple explanation to help folks understand that "ALL" the Dem candidates are in consensus to EXPAND health insurance coverage and simply offering different ways of doing so, and that it is Republicans that are trying to RESTRICT health insurance coverage (eg. by trying to repeal PPACA).

But there must be OTHER areas where people feel he has flip flopped since I keep seeing people say "flip flops" plural lol. What have I missed??


>
>Agreed. Pete's entire campaign, the changes and the flip
>flops, seem entirely disingenuous. Whether due to personal
>shortcomings, or bad advice from aides, I'm not sure. But
>either way it's been glaring and jarring.