Wednesday, October 17, 2018

Do Some Voters Favor Cutting Medicare And Slashing Social Security?

>




Ostensibly this ad is about the Florida gubernatorial race. But even if you've never set foot on Floridians soil, please watch it, because it's about where you live and where everyone in your family lives. Andrew Gillum is the progressive mayor of Tallahassee I've personally known for over 20 years-- which was why Blue America was able to endorse him on the day he declared he was running-- and Ron DeSantis is a far right Trumpist with a record in Congress for voting to cut Social Security and Medicare, just like virtually every Republican in the House.

Andrew's campaign, on releasing the ad Tuesday morning noted that "It’s no surprise Ron DeSantis has refused to release a healthcare plan-- because his record is clear: slashing Medicare and Social Security and even to raising the retirement age. Ron DeSantis’ record speaks for itself and as governor, he’d continue these attacks on hardworking Floridians. Ron DeSantis does not have Floridians’ best interest at heart, and he has shown it over and over again. Andrew Gillum has a vision for our state where Florida seniors can retire with dignity and Ron DeSantis is more worried about protecting billionaires; Ron DeSantis is wrong for Florida."

Like Andrew Gillum in Florida, Randy Bryce is seeing a flood of sewer money being used to smear him and destroy him as a person. No one has ever seen such a filthy campaign in Wisconsin. But, like Andrew, he's staying strong and keeping the issues that matter to people front ands center [Please help us respond to the filth Ryan's sleazy SuperPAC has been unleashing by contributing to the IronStache Fund.] This morning, Randy told us that "This ad-- like the approach we are taking in Southeastern Wisconsin-- demonstrates that voters aren't looking for soundbites. Social Security and Medicare are way too important to be danced around with poll tested lingo like "putting seniors first." Folks don't want to hear that crap. They want to know what you will do and what the other person will do, period. We are taking that message right to the voters, and it is paying off."

Goal ThermometerIn the Texas 10th, Mike Siegel is picking up steam after appearing on Rachel Maddow, winning a victory for voting rights, and receiving the Houston Chronicle endorsement this morning. Siegel is running on a Medicare for All platform, while his opponent Michael McCaul celebrated his vote to repeal Obamacare. In a district that rates health care as its top priority-- regardless of party affiliation-- Siegel is poised to shock the country if voter turnout breaks the right way. "McCaul, he told us this morning, essentially voted to kill his own constituents. McCaul’s only chance to win re-election is the ‘straight ticket’ option here in Texas. Very few voters recognize him as a true representative of their interests."

J.D. Scholten's extremist opponent, Steve King didn't just passively vote against healthcare at every opportunity he got. King famously thundered about the Affordable Care Act, "Rip it out by the roots!" I asked J.D. if healthcare is still resonating in rural Iowa as a big issue. He told me that "On the trail, health care is the number one issue voters ask us about. I regularly drive across this district in our campaign RV and as you can imagine, we have to stop a lot to fuel up. I constantly see donation boxes at gas stations, to help with a loved one’s medical bills. We’re the richest nation in the world. We shouldn’t have to crowdsource our health care costs."



Labels: , , , , , , , ,

5 Comments:

At 6:10 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are about 62 million racist crackers and other complete dipshits who do, actually, favor cutting OR ELIMINATING all sustenance programs, even when doing so would absolutely kill several million including some of their own family members.

Reasons start with profound stupidity and go from there to:
1) a visceral aversion to paying a nickel in taxes that benefit anyone they hate (nonwhite, female, poor, young, old, gay, nonchristian...)
2) a visceral aversion to paying a nickel in taxes
3) religious delusion (god will provide...)

prolly more... but you get the picture.

There are also 65 million-ish voters who vote for a party that also wants to cut sustenance programs (and/or convert them to profitized schemes to enrich corporate CEOs), has offered to do so OR DONE SO on several occasions, but lies to their voters about this. The proof of their deeds does not seem to make an impression on these 65 million... making them even dumber than the 62 million Nazi crackers.

So... a total of not less than 127 million voters will cast ballots that SHALL end up in cuts to sustenance programs.

So... I guess it makes the titular question rhetorical??

 
At 8:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The propaganda organ owned by the world's richest American (that would be Amazon slave driver Jeff Bezos) declared not too long ago that 100 million eligible voters cast no ballot in 2016.

These "me ne frego" assholes, when added to those who did vote but voted for those who openly espouse the elimination of money intended to aid the elderly and the poor, essentially constitute the entire cohort of eligible voters. One could thus claim (I do not, for the record) that no Americans want Social Security, Medicare, OR Medicaid to continue.

So to conclude my deliberately extreme observation, I guess it's time to build that Soylent Green factory.

 
At 2:04 AM, Blogger Robert Welain said...

Now what do we have here actually?
Well written article with an understandable thesis! Thank you!

 
At 1:35 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:32, 127 million is still more than 100 million.

I'm sure someone will come up with the soylent green idea once the corpses start stacking up like cordwood.

I'm also positive that nobody remembers (because it was almost 90 years ago, and because we stopped teaching history in this cluster fuck of a shithole over 40 years ago) the great depression, and the corpses that stacked up then until FDR was elected.

When was soylent green written? must've been after that. See, I deduced this all by myself... it was '73.
By then, pretty much everyone had already forgotten the great depression... this is the dumbest fucking society ever to exist.

 
At 1:36 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

what's cordwood?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home