Can Bernie beat Trump?

[Cecilie1200]

I asked what you asked. You're not very bright.

Do you drink like most American natives? It seems so

Both of you stop arguing and here is Bloomberg words:

Twitter

It is clear what Bloomberg said and he is correct no one is going to waste money on a 95 year old with cancer that can not be cured...

Then if Bloomberg contracts cancer no treatment for him, or his supporters.

Thank you

Hold on!

So in your opinion a 95 year old with late stage cancer should have treatment that will do nothing to save their life?

Get real because only a fool would waste their money that way!

Let the doctor and patient make the best decisions together. We don’t want the government rationing healthcare.

At 95 the government is already involved through medicare and no insurance is going to Rubber stamp a treatment for someone with late stage treatment.

They want to pay out of pocket, so be it...

No reputable doctor would do it, though. The risk is too high, for too little reward.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I really don't think so! I welcome any credible views to the contrary. Here is what I think:

1. If Bernie wins the democratic primary - we'll likely have four more years of Trump*.

2. If Bernie loses the democratic primary - his supporters will likely not support the winner. Trump* wins.

3. Therefore, either way, it looks good for Trump*.

4. I'm watching Bloomberg very closely.

I think we have four more years of Trump no matter who wins the Dems nomination. What the Dems need is the candidate that will bring out the most voters to vote down ballot and take back the Senate.

The country is always far better off with the Senate and the White House in different parties hands. Which has which is almost meaningless.

In a way, I think we might be better off to let Trump be Trump for four years. We could perhaps restore sanity in both parties.

Not sure that four more years of Trump is a prescription for political sanity, despite the fact that I'm voting for him this time.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So, you want me to prove a negative? Funny...

I asked what you asked. You're not very bright.

Do you drink like most American natives? It seems so

Both of you stop arguing and here is Bloomberg words:

Twitter

It is clear what Bloomberg said and he is correct no one is going to waste money on a 95 year old with cancer that can not be cured...

Then if Bloomberg contracts cancer no treatment for him, or his supporters.

Thank you

Hold on!

So in your opinion a 95 year old with late stage cancer should have treatment that will do nothing to save their life?

Get real because only a fool would waste their money that way!

My grandfather passed recently from advanced demintia. He passed in a home and my entire family contributed to make his last few months comfortable.

Your solution is what? Inject him to not be a burden? If so you're insane

Assuming facts not in evidence. Calm your hormones. No one is suggesting euthanasia, not even Bloomberg. No one is suggesting withholding palliative care, not even Bloomberg. What we ARE saying is that it is unrealistic and needlessly bank-busting to spend money on expensive curative treatments when there's little or nothing to be gained by them, and they would actually be more dangerous to the patient than the illness is.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I asked what you asked. You're not very bright.

Do you drink like most American natives? It seems so

Both of you stop arguing and here is Bloomberg words:

Twitter

It is clear what Bloomberg said and he is correct no one is going to waste money on a 95 year old with cancer that can not be cured...

Then if Bloomberg contracts cancer no treatment for him, or his supporters.

Thank you

Hold on!

So in your opinion a 95 year old with late stage cancer should have treatment that will do nothing to save their life?

Get real because only a fool would waste their money that way!

And Bloomberg did not say terminally ill patients should be denied palliative care.

He implied it. You know it and so do I.

No, he didn't. Not even close. You're inferring it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Both of you stop arguing and here is Bloomberg words:

Twitter

It is clear what Bloomberg said and he is correct no one is going to waste money on a 95 year old with cancer that can not be cured...

Then if Bloomberg contracts cancer no treatment for him, or his supporters.

Thank you

Hold on!

So in your opinion a 95 year old with late stage cancer should have treatment that will do nothing to save their life?

Get real because only a fool would waste their money that way!

Let the doctor and patient make the best decisions together. We don’t want the government rationing healthcare.

Well like it or not, what your private insurance decides is medically necessary treatement tracks what Medicare decided.

does private insurance or Medicare deny claims because of a patient’s age?

Not overtly, but they do deny coverage when combined factors create a risk that far exceeds any possible reward.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Although I'm watching Bloomberg closely - he has much to answer for. Such as...

Bloomberg Vetoed 2003 Bill Expanding Rape Victims’ Access To Emergency Contraception

Just curious. Did it dawn on you even once that that article made little to no attempt to actually address WHY he vetoed the bill? They were so busy trying to blame "eeeeevil Republicanism" for it in some sort of knee-jerk reaction that they didn't even ask him. What little they did say sounds like he had some legitimate concerns which had nothing to do with an objection to emergency contraception itself.

Personally, I neither know nor care, since I think Bloomberg's a paternalistic jackass and he was never much of a Republican, whatever he registered as. But I would think YOU would, since it's your party at stake here. Maybe you should research it a bit, instead of just lapping up what Hufflepuff Post spoonfeeds you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Then if Bloomberg contracts cancer no treatment for him, or his supporters.

Thank you

Hold on!

So in your opinion a 95 year old with late stage cancer should have treatment that will do nothing to save their life?

Get real because only a fool would waste their money that way!

Let the doctor and patient make the best decisions together. We don’t want the government rationing healthcare.

Well like it or not, what your private insurance decides is medically necessary treatement tracks what Medicare decided.

does private insurance or Medicare deny claims because of a patient’s age?

They will deny the treatment if the treatment will not cure the person.

It is wasted resources which is what Bloomberg is stating. It has been and will be done because at 95 with stage four cancer which can not be cured mean it is pointless to waste the resource...

It's not just that it can't be cured. The treatment is more likely to kill the 95-year-old than the cancer is. And even if you COULD cure it, the patient's life is measurable literally in months, weeks, or even days at that point, whatever happens.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I really don't think so! I welcome any credible views to the contrary. Here is what I think:

1. If Bernie wins the democratic primary - we'll likely have four more years of Trump*.

2. If Bernie loses the democratic primary - his supporters will likely not support the winner. Trump* wins.

3. Therefore, either way, it looks good for Trump*.

4. I'm watching Bloomberg very closely.

No one on the Democrat side, has a chance right now.

Your best hope, is that Trump trips himself so bad, even his followers desert him. Since that is not likely to happen, then you really don't have much of a chance.

The bottom line is, the Democrat party right now, has made itself abhorrent to a very large portion of the public, so that a good number of people (including myself), who previously did not vote for Trump ( I did not), will vote for Trump in this coming election (and I will).

And reason why is simple... the left-wing has clearly identified themselves as crazy, evil, and socialist.

Between AOC destroying jobs that would have directly benefited the people who elected her, and her claiming she can "use a tax deduction" (subsidy) to pay for schools and hospitals.....
And Warren saying "there is always more money" when asked how to pay for her stuff....
And Bernie "even the Boston Bomber should vote".....
And Pete "Christianity supports me, and doesn't support you, despite 2,000 years of doctrinal history".....
And Jessie Smollett...... and the Convington kids.... and Bret Kavanough.... and on and on and on... and Hillary Emails not important, but fake Russian Trump connection is important....

Unless Trump comes out to announce a national take over of all higher education and medicare for all, and the oil industry, and whatever else.....

Unless Trump literally destroys himself.... no the Democrats don't stand a chance. The Deplorables have determined they themselves are deplorable, and I don't see them winning this.

Wow, do you really believe all of that? Really? Anyone but Trump*!

. . . and THAT attitude is why you're stuck with such unpalatable choices now.

Do YOU really NOT believe all of that? Which part of it do you think is wrong?

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Trump* corruption/evil must end. I would even happily support Republican Bill Weld if he could beat Trump*.

Right... Well, that is not a fact based statement, but rather opinion.

Now there is nothing wrong with your opinion, but you haven't actually supported it with evidence.

Instead, you had a fabricated claims, that are not supported by evidence, and you impeached him over it. That makes *YOU* the corrupt one, who wants to remove someone from office, without justification.

So, in that statement alone, is yet another reason why I think Trump will win.

You right now, are directly illustrating why I will vote Trump this year. Your post... is why I will vote Trump.

You are on fire right now, dude.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Bernie Sanders’ Press Secretary Compares Call For Medical Records To Birtherism

Briahna Joy Gray also baselessly claimed Michael Bloomberg had suffered heart attacks. She later said she "misspoke."

What is Bernie hiding?

Like I said once before, the guy already had a heart attack on the campaign trail. Not sure what there is TO hide, after that.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I really don't think so! I welcome any credible views to the contrary. Here is what I think:

1. If Bernie wins the democratic primary - we'll likely have four more years of Trump*.

2. If Bernie loses the democratic primary - his supporters will likely not support the winner. Trump* wins.

3. Therefore, either way, it looks good for Trump*.

4. I'm watching Bloomberg very closely.

I think Walter Mondale could take Trump.

I liked Mondale. Hillary could beat Trump this time. I still believe she is politically viable.

And there's the wishful, delusional thinking back again.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I really don't think so! I welcome any credible views to the contrary. Here is what I think:

1. If Bernie wins the democratic primary - we'll likely have four more years of Trump*.

2. If Bernie loses the democratic primary - his supporters will likely not support the winner. Trump* wins.

3. Therefore, either way, it looks good for Trump*.

4. I'm watching Bloomberg very closely.

I think Walter Mondale could take Trump.

I liked Mondale. Hillary could beat Trump this time. I still believe she is politically viable.

She is toxic. Mondale is only 92.

Who made her "toxic"?

She did.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I really don't think so! I welcome any credible views to the contrary. Here is what I think:

1. If Bernie wins the democratic primary - we'll likely have four more years of Trump*.

2. If Bernie loses the democratic primary - his supporters will likely not support the winner. Trump* wins.

3. Therefore, either way, it looks good for Trump*.

4. I'm watching Bloomberg very closely.

I think Walter Mondale could take Trump.

I liked Mondale. Hillary could beat Trump this time. I still believe she is politically viable.

She is toxic. Mondale is only 92.

Who made her "toxic"?

Bernie bros. They would all vote for Trump if she were the nominee.

Nah. They'd stay home again.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I really don't think so! I welcome any credible views to the contrary. Here is what I think:

1. If Bernie wins the democratic primary - we'll likely have four more years of Trump*.

2. If Bernie loses the democratic primary - his supporters will likely not support the winner. Trump* wins.

3. Therefore, either way, it looks good for Trump*.

4. I'm watching Bloomberg very closely.

I think you're wrong, and Bernie can beat tRump. It seems to me like it's finally time for his ideas to get a shot. Yes, the tRumplings are already crying "socialism" the same way religious fanatics cried "heresy" during the Inquisition but it doesn't seem to have the impact it had last time around. The electorate is changing, responding to four years racism, Russians, and ineptitude. The people are sick of tRump.

I agree that the electorate is changing - but Bernie is too far left for this time. America isn't there yet.

I think we are, or at least enough of us are.

By all means, run him and let's see.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Bloomberg's wealth didn't help him in the debate tonight: Net worth: $64.2 Billion.

Forbes: Michael Bloomberg

Why would his money help him in a debate?

 

[FA_Q2]

The nation is not going to vote in a communist.

Bernie is the real thing no matter how much he has tried to co-op another title. On top of that, 40 years in government and he has never accomplished anything.

I'm certainly not a Bernie fan - but do you know the difference between communism and socialism?

We already have many socialism programs - but I certainly would not call them communism.

75 Ways Socialism Has Improved America

I do and Bernie is a communist. He was 50 years ago and as he said, he has not changed positions on virtually anything in that time.

Bernie wanted to nationalize virtually everything then and has never explained how his positions have changed from nationalizing everything he can get his hands on. Sure, he pays lip service to the USSR as not being democratic but that has nothing to do with his draconian and asinine view of economics.

Sanders has never advocated for the CAPITALISM of the welfare states like Norway or Sweden. He advocates for governmental control of everything much closer to states like Venezuela.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So, you want me to prove a negative? Funny...

I asked what you asked. You're not very bright.

Do you drink like most American natives? It seems so

Both of you stop arguing and here is Bloomberg words:

Twitter

It is clear what Bloomberg said and he is correct no one is going to waste money on a 95 year old with cancer that can not be cured...

Then if Bloomberg contracts cancer no treatment for him, or his supporters.

Thank you

Hold on!

So in your opinion a 95 year old with late stage cancer should have treatment that will do nothing to save their life?

Get real because only a fool would waste their money that way!

Now that may or may not be 'realistic' thinking, unless you are the 95 year old with late stage cancer (or his family)

Deciding who and who does not receive care based on (fill in the blank) criteria is socialism/communism at it's finest (cough, cough)


Thing is 1.) Most 95 year olds would not seek treatment...…...and even if they did?

2.) There is no treatment if 'late stage' such as stage 4, which has usually spread throughout the body

No, the decision as to whether or not someone gets care based on risk vs reward isn't socialism. It's just reality.

The socialism comes in when the government is paying the bills, and therefore is the one making that calculation.

Anyone on either side of the aisle who's arguing that their plan will simply make that calculation vanish is delusional or lying.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well, if Bernie does win the nomination - I hope he picks Pete as his VP. We may as well go for broke.

Not sure what it is you think Pope Pete adds to anything, but okay.

 

[bendog]

Che, Fidel and Josef are all dead, so may as well be Pete.

 

[FA_Q2]

Bloomberg's wealth didn't help him in the debate tonight: Net worth: $64.2 Billion.

Forbes: Michael Bloomberg

He did better in the second half. He was bloodied pretty good though in the first half and again on that me-too thing at his company. Not sure what that story is about.

He got obliterated.

I cant see how he could have done worse. I cant recall a single salient point, his 5 second clip was ineffectual in the current primary climate (calling sanders out) and every major issue from the far SJW left - who have a very real impact in the primaries - was a total loss for him. He will not be able to run from his own comments.

That and Warren, who has no chance anymore, strapped on a suicide vest and chased him at every opportunity she could get.