... sure Pete, but also Warren, Yang, etc. Some of the lower-polling candidates that failed to connect with voters too, like Castro, Booker...Kamala started to grow on me a bit before she dropped out *shrug* Not that wild, is it? I've defended others in posts on here too. Didn't you and I even go back and forth about UBI at some point lol? I should look for that post lol.

Anyway. I push back not out of some undying loyalty to Pete Buttigieg, but because I hate disinformation and selective attacks. He just happens to be one of the more frequently targeted candidates for both.
Lol


>You're also spouting off odd attacks at M4A. There is
>literally no question that America can afford it. Like, none.
>
>

Nope, this is false and the result of sustained disinformation and bad math from the left-wing. I'll indulge since you wanna go there tho lol:

First, its scale. The far-left often downplays the enormity of what Bernie's proposing eg. "People shrug off war spending but push back against single-payer healthcare" But what they fail to account for is that the estimated ~$3T+ of additional federal spending needed PER YEAR to cover Bernie's single-payer system is around what the Afghanistan + Iraq + AND Syria wars cost from 2001-2016 COMBINED:

https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2016/Costs%20of%20War%20through%202016%20FINAL%20final%20v2.pdf

lol


Next, Bernie's entire platform. Yes it sounds nice, but its likely it would also collapse the US economy lol. It tallies to about $90T of "additional" federal spending over 10 years:

$30T+ (Single-Payer Healthcare Plan)
$16.3T+ (Climate Plan)
$30T+ (Federal Job Guarantee @ $15 Minimum-Wage)
$3T+ (Student Loan forgiveness + tuition free public post-secondary)
$2.5T+(Housing Plan)
$1.8T+(Social Security Benefits Expansion)
$1.6T+(Paid Family Leave Expansion)
$1T+ (Infrastructure)
$0.8T+ (K-12 Investment)
$0.4T+ (Teacher Salary Increase)
----------------------------------------------------------------
= $87.5T+

Or $97.5T+ (https://www.city-journal.org/bernie-sanders-expensive-spending-proposals) if one uses the upper bound ($40T+) of what Bernie's single-payer system is supposed to cost (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNP-AQlVZKM).


Just to put ~$90T in perspective:

**the combined economic output of every country on the planet earth in a year is ~$80T (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/209.html#XX)

**The financing Bernie has proposed only covers a little over $20T of that (https://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/medicare-for-all-2019-financing) ... meaning he could exhaust every conceivable revenue stream, jack up everybody's taxes, and his agenda *STILL* would not be adequately paid for

**The federal debt is already scheduled to grow to its highest level since WWII by 2029 (~$30T, or 93% of GDP) (www.cbo.gov/system/files/2019-03/55013-BudgetSlides2019.pdf#page=7), and federal budget deficits already run at ~$1T/yr under current law (www.cbo.gov/system/files/2019-03/55013-BudgetSlides2019.pdf#page=2). Bernie's policies would add to the current annual budget deficit and increase it by a magnitude of *10*

So under a *successful* Bernie presidency, taxpayers could expect at least an extra 20%+ or whatever it will be off our paychecks, a completely fucked economy, rising inflation, etc, but yes.. unfettered access to an overstrained healthcare system and free public college.

But what if somebody still wanted to support social democratic outcomes... just *without* significantly hiking everybody's taxes and crippling the economy?? Then I'm sorry but the next frontrunner down the spectrum after Sanders and Warren is in fact Buttigieg lol: public option healthcare plan, public option 401k, tuition-free public college available to 90% of households,student debt cancellation for people screwed by for-profit programs, etc. No he is not a Republican just because his free college plan would help 90% of US households instead of 100%. No he is not the same as Biden; who's to his right given that he proposes a public option healthcare plan and prescription drug price relief but no free college (though, tbf, he does propose 2 years of tuition-free Community College), or Klobuchar who's to the right of even Biden since she's not proposing a public option or anything in the way of tuition-free education. These are just the facts.

The unfortunate truth is Bernie's just a cult figure whose entire platform amounts to little more than one big $90T+ gaslight. He 1) doesn't have even the revenue plan to implement what he's talking about and 2) doesn't seem worried about implementation anyway because, unlike Warren, he's against getting rid of the filibuster which is what would give any of his proposals the slightest chance of getting through Congress EVEN IF he could rally other Democrats. The man clearly just wants to be President, and he throws around these lavish promises and incomplete financing plans to advance that goal knowing damn well he's gonna do dick all from 1600 except rant about oligarchs every day and hold rallies. Waste of support.


>The debate is HOW do we pay for it and if it is a political
>loser regardless.
>
>If you want to argue its a loser, I'm tempted to agree
>(unfortunately).
>


lol yassss fact over fiction :)


>But this idea that America can't afford nice things is fucking
>untrue and insulting.

I do understand your frustration, actually. American Exceptionalism is a hell of a drug tho.


>
>But, if we engage in
>an elect-ability argument, you'd have to address how Pete
>could even enter Michigan after this BCBS shit.
>
>Oh and him polling at 0 with black voters. And his age.
>

Meh. I don't think anyone cares outside of the far-left tbh. And they'll find other things to froth at the mouth over by then I'm sure. It's not like there was this tsunami of Buttigieg stories across local media outlets in Michigan when the McKinsey thing dominated the twitter news cycle. Besides, his husband's from Michigan so he has family there. Michigan's closer to the part of Middle America he knows best anyway *shrug* Who knows tho.

The zero black support thing is based on old stats, imho. He started the race with zero name recognition so I wonder what people were expecting. The main issue I have with that talking point is, again, singling him out when in reality most candidates - other than Biden with older black demographics and Bernie with younger black demographics - haven't been polling well with black voters. Kamala and Booker weren't even polling as high as Biden in SC. I saw a poll the other day showing Klobuchar had literally 100% white support in a state. Lol. More recent polls show Pete making some inroads where he campaigns tho, so whatever. I just think a lot of folks are still undecided/uninspired. I'm not saying there isn't a clumsiness there lol, there is. But I do think the issue's been overblown.

Hell I'm a black Pete supporter lol. AMA


>
>As far as Liz?
>
>I agree with you on Bernie letting Liz take the heat. I also
>agree that the far left basically helped kill her campaign
>simply because she wasn't Bernie, and now we are all staring
>at a Biden nomination. The purity shit had them all punching
>themselves in the face.
>
>But, did Pete go at Bernie nearly as hard as he went at Warren
>and I missed it??
>
>Nah. Pete went at Warren, and we all know why. She was
>rising and he had to make a splash.


Good point, and you touch on a couple things:

1. You're right he didn't go at Bernie. Personally, I see this as part of a larger trend of Bernie being treated with kids gloves during this primary - by MSM and by his competitors - for reasons unknown to me. Maybe Pete wants to go easy on his former childhood hero or something lol, or maybe folks are weary of triggering another heart attack. Whatever the case, the far-left complains quite a bit about a Bernie Blackout but if we're being real he's benefitted tremendously from his own scandals eluding the spotlight.

2. I think some of the resentment floating around re: a public-option candidate for challenging a single-payer candidate(s) is super odd lol. It's a primary and healthcare is one of the top issues on folks' minds. That was exactly what needed to happen imho. In fact, it produced one of the most useful outcomes of the debates: Warren costing out Bernie's single-player plan. Now people at least have hard numbers to consider/compare. We should be thanking him lol.


>And lol at "repeal the tax cuts, close loop holes, and vague
>plan" = done!
>

Lol! Well, compared to the laundry list of legislative miracles (eg. comprehensive immigration reform, big defense cut, 77% estate tax, etc) Sanders and Warren are banking on to raise what is *still* insufficient revenue for a single-payer system?? Unfortunately for them, Pete's approach actually is more doable.


>
>I'll say this about Pete, he is making Biden not look quite as
>bad to me.
>

Lol that's fair. Support who you want man lol. Again, my main issue is with the disinformation, hysteria, and harassment that's come to define the far-left's tactics. I'm about facts, fairness, and objectivity. So I could care less if somebody just prefers Biden/Biden's platform as opposed to Pete's. But, for example, don't claim its about anyone's record on race when Biden eulogized Strom Thurmond, authored the 1994 Crime bill, and was a ringleader in the senate's humiliation of Anita Hill. Or, don't claim its about age/competency when Biden's displaying obvious signs of cognitive decline and is floating that he'd only serve one term. Lol. That sort of thing.