MD-Gov: Don't be Jealous!
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 09:53:10 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  MD-Gov: Don't be Jealous!
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13
Author Topic: MD-Gov: Don't be Jealous!  (Read 31616 times)
Golden State Guy
Rookie
**
Posts: 22
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #175 on: June 27, 2018, 12:30:34 PM »

Jealous is screwed, Hogan will win, Likey R.
[citation needed]
Logged
Zaybay
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,076
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.25, S: -6.50

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #176 on: June 27, 2018, 12:35:41 PM »

I mean, currently, this race is lean R. Jealous was doing as well as Baker was, but Hogan is just below the magic threashold of 50%. Could this race shift in favor of Jealous during the summer and fall? Yes. Could this race become safe R under the same time period? Also Yes.
Logged
Skye
yeah_93
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,579
Venezuela


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #177 on: June 27, 2018, 01:21:20 PM »

Likely R.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #178 on: June 27, 2018, 01:35:59 PM »

While I'm open to the idea of single-payer, I don't think a state-level system would work, especially in Maryland where the resulting shock to the market would force health care companies to lay-off their workers. It doesn't inspire much confidence in me that Jealous said that people "would just have to get another job."

I agree. I think pro-single payer people are getting too impatient and trying to do this at a level that probably isn't sustainable. At the very least, it's not individually sustainable in every state, and I doubt MD is one of them. I'd rather just wait however long it takes for it to happen federally instead of trying a system that might fail big time and discredit the idea. There is already hesitation with it because of the potential costs, and if progressives force a big state-level experiment that implodes, it'll be hard to get support for it at the federal level where it might actually work.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #179 on: June 27, 2018, 01:53:16 PM »

I don’t think it’s sustainable at any state level of government since most state governments have balance budget amendments and no state has a printing press. California would’ve had to either raise 400 billion a year to fund single payer for example or risk another debt crisis.

The federal government can absorb the short term costs a single payer system would have to accrue as the markets adjust accordingly. The federal government has a printing press and the ability to run deficits. It’s always better to do healthcare at the highest level possible.

It is, but people are clearly tired of waiting and are trying to do it any way they can. They would probably do it on the city level if that was the only option available.

I just can't help but feel like if/when that happens, they are going to fail and its going to ruin the idea for a whole generation or more.
Logged
PragmaticPopulist
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,234
Ireland, Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -7.61, S: -5.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #180 on: June 27, 2018, 01:57:41 PM »

While I'm open to the idea of single-payer, I don't think a state-level system would work, especially in Maryland where the resulting shock to the market would force health care companies to lay-off their workers. It doesn't inspire much confidence in me that Jealous said that people "would just have to get another job."

I agree. I think pro-single payer people are getting too impatient and trying to do this at a level that probably isn't sustainable. At the very least, it's not individually sustainable in every state, and I doubt MD is one of them. I'd rather just wait however long it takes for it to happen federally instead of trying a system that might fail big time and discredit the idea. There is already hesitation with it because of the potential costs, and if progressives force a big state-level experiment that implodes, it'll be hard to get support for it at the federal level where it might actually work.
That's another thought I had. I don't want Maryland to become the left-wing equivalent fo what happened in Kansas or Oklahoma.
Logged
Co-Chair Bagel23
Bagel23
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,369
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: -1.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #181 on: June 27, 2018, 02:01:33 PM »


[common sense]
Logged
WritOfCertiorari
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 591


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #182 on: June 27, 2018, 02:12:54 PM »

One thing that seems to get overlooked is that the insurance industry, as well as the healthcare field in general, is one of the largest, if not the largest, employer in this state. Not only do those people have to be convinced single payer is worth it, but they also need some type of assurance that they'll be able to keep their job, or will be to get a similar paying job elsewhere. This is pretty much an immediate recession at a local level...

I support single-payer, but it needs to be on the Federal level. State by state, there are too many people who would be hesitant. People are willing to trust a national program that can point to the precedents of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, which are all very popular. State level programs don't have that track record.

I think Ben Jealous is a great candidate, though I feel Rushern Baker would have done better against Hogan. This race is not over by any means, as there is a history here of not giving Republicans second terms. If I was going to give a prediction at this point, though? Hogan by 7.
Logged
Progressive Pessimist
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,562
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.71, S: -7.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #183 on: June 27, 2018, 07:30:13 PM »

I hate to sound superficial, but I just can't get past Ben Jealous' Kermit the Frog voice. I just don't see him winning it for reasons beyond that too. I'm keeping it at a Likely R rating.  Baker probably would not be much better. But I must say, I was surprised that Jealous won so substantially against him in the primary. I was pretty sure that whoever would win would do so by the low single digits. Jealous' victory was kind of an underrated part of last night's primaries to me.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,809
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #184 on: June 27, 2018, 07:35:25 PM »

I am optimistic about Jealous chances, like I said earlier, there was a dropoff in support in Anthony Brown; instead, Blacks and leftist, will unite around Ben Jealous, from NAACP. But, I am expecting, like in WI, (Walker being reelected), Jealous elected, an upset.
Logged
Zaybay
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,076
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.25, S: -6.50

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #185 on: June 27, 2018, 07:41:43 PM »

I was originally supporting Baker, as I thought his support from PG county could make a difference. But now, looking at the primary results, its clear to me that Jealous is the better candidate to take Hogan on. It provides a stark contrast with a progressive in one corner and moderate R in the other. Some people keep saying this is R because of approvals, but what you see if you look at elections is that approvals go down as more voters look closer at the candidate or incumbent. I doubt many in NY-14 were angry at Crowley until they started looking closer at him and seeing his opponent. The "invincible moderate northeast governors" are not invincible, it just appears that way due to approvals. None of them f*ucked up the state, so they get approved of. Ask me about these races in September.
Logged
Calthrina950
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,937
United States


P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #186 on: June 28, 2018, 12:01:05 AM »

Although there are certain things on the progressive platform that I support (i.e. expanding preschool/kindergarten programs for public school students, protecting the environment and encouraging renewable energy, alleviating student loan debt), there are others (i.e. universal background checks, pro-choice policies on abortion, and single-payer healthcare), that are a little beyond the pale. I have no problem with single-payer healthcare in itself, but it must be made financially sustainable and administratively practical. I have yet to see any plans that would make it so.

If I were a Maryland voter, I would probably be leaning towards Hogan right now. He is a very popular Governor, and the Democratic legislature serves as a check on him. Jealous is probably too far to the left to win.
Logged
Co-Chair Bagel23
Bagel23
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,369
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: -1.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #187 on: June 28, 2018, 12:08:39 AM »

Justice Dems be all excited here, of course their talent will let them hold onto a D+29 district, but I am sure they will be thrilled when they lose Maryland.
Logged
junior chįmp
Mondale_was_an_insidejob
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,396
Croatia
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #188 on: June 28, 2018, 12:21:24 AM »

While I'm open to the idea of single-payer, I don't think a state-level system would work, especially in Maryland where the resulting shock to the market would force health care companies to lay-off their workers. It doesn't inspire much confidence in me that Jealous said that people "would just have to get another job."

I agree. I think pro-single payer people are getting too impatient and trying to do this at a level that probably isn't sustainable. At the very least, it's not individually sustainable in every state, and I doubt MD is one of them. I'd rather just wait however long it takes for it to happen federally instead of trying a system that might fail big time and discredit the idea. There is already hesitation with it because of the potential costs, and if progressives force a big state-level experiment that implodes, it'll be hard to get support for it at the federal level where it might actually work.

This doesnt have to be so. In 1909, Congress introduced the first Social Security bill which failed. In 1914, Arizona created the first state social security system which the state supreme court ruled unconstitutional. In 1923, a social security plan passed in Pennsylvania but was declared unconstitutional by the state supreme court, and a plan that passed in Nevada was later repealed. In Ohio, voters voted down a referendum for a government social security plan while Montana's Social Security law passed and was ruled constitutional by the state supreme court.

The point here being that whether or not a universal health care system fails in MD is irrelevant in the bigger picture of things. Just keep trying at the state level until it reaches the federal level.
Logged
wesmoorenerd
westroopnerd
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,594
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #189 on: June 28, 2018, 01:37:35 AM »

Justice Dems be all excited here, of course their talent will let them hold onto a D+29 district, but I am sure they will be thrilled when they lose Maryland.

As if Baker would've been substantially better? I would've supported Baker, but let's face it, he's about as charismatic as Anthony Brown. That's what got us into this mess in the first place.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #190 on: June 28, 2018, 08:50:48 AM »
« Edited: June 28, 2018, 08:54:16 AM by Virginia »

The point here being that whether or not a universal health care system fails in MD is irrelevant in the bigger picture of things. Just keep trying at the state level until it reaches the federal level.

But all those instances you gave were either repealed outright, rejected by voters or ruled unconstitutional. I'm talking about a system that goes live, stays operational and then proceeds to implode spectacularly, and maybe even leaving the state's finances in a catastrophic situation. If there is a plan out there that can avoid all that by more than just luck without raising taxes so much that voters themselves prevent it from going live, then I'd like to see it, but as it stands now the idea if expensive and it would require repurposing Medicaid dollars I think.  And it's not just about keeping it viable in the eyes of conservative voters on the fence with it, it's about keeping i viable in the eyes of Democratic politicians, who are easily spooked as it is. Another issue that state-level plans make me wonder about is people migrating to that state just for free healthcare, which could be a long-term issue if no other states do it. I don't think it's constitutional to ban interlopers from taking advantage of that system.

Also pre-1930s judicial rejection of Social Security seems like a nice preview of a conservative future: conservative judges reject everything big / notable the left wants to do, making up legalese to justify it as they go.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #191 on: June 28, 2018, 11:22:04 PM »

The point here being that whether or not a universal health care system fails in MD is irrelevant in the bigger picture of things. Just keep trying at the state level until it reaches the federal level.

But all those instances you gave were either repealed outright, rejected by voters or ruled unconstitutional. I'm talking about a system that goes live, stays operational and then proceeds to implode spectacularly, and maybe even leaving the state's finances in a catastrophic situation. If there is a plan out there that can avoid all that by more than just luck without raising taxes so much that voters themselves prevent it from going live, then I'd like to see it, but as it stands now the idea if expensive and it would require repurposing Medicaid dollars I think.  And it's not just about keeping it viable in the eyes of conservative voters on the fence with it, it's about keeping i viable in the eyes of Democratic politicians, who are easily spooked as it is. Another issue that state-level plans make me wonder about is people migrating to that state just for free healthcare, which could be a long-term issue if no other states do it. I don't think it's constitutional to ban interlopers from taking advantage of that system.

Also pre-1930s judicial rejection of Social Security seems like a nice preview of a conservative future: conservative judges reject everything big / notable the left wants to do, making up legalese to justify it as they go.

Saskatchewan and Alberta implemented systems with far more on the line, y'know what, the system was successful enough that now Canada has it.

And exactly how many Americans have seriously moved that way just for the free healthcare?
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #192 on: June 28, 2018, 11:36:33 PM »

Saskatchewan and Alberta implemented systems with far more on the line, y'know what, the system was successful enough that now Canada has it.

And exactly how many Americans have seriously moved that way just for the free healthcare?

Moving to another country is not quite the same as moving to another state. Can you even just move to Canada willy-nilly? Don't you need to get a job lined up there first and everything?
Logged
YE
Modadmin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,648


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #193 on: June 29, 2018, 12:21:39 AM »
« Edited: June 29, 2018, 12:27:38 AM by YE »

Did people all of a sudden move to Alberta and Saskatchewan when they implemented their single payer systems before the rest of Canada? AFAIK it wasn't a serious problem but correct me if I'm wrong. Did people start moving to MA when they passed Romneycare?  

But yes a state level single payer program is hard to execute (and to be fair any major government program is state or federally is) and not all states have the willpower to expand their government, especially a smaller state. The odds of it downright failing I think is overstated, however, even if it could temporarily hurt the state party (granted, in a non-swing state, the Dems wouldn't be wiped off the map. Not sure on Maryland, but the New York single payer bill which has been in the working for years projects sufficient savings.

If one state program failed, it wouldn't be the end of states trying single payer, given that it won't stop the overton spectrum from steadily drifting left in general IMO. Vermont failing didn't mark the end of states trying single payer, and many states tried their own version of more comprehensive health care pre-Obamacare with largely unsuccessful results. Didn't stop the Dems from doing Obamacare.
Logged
junior chįmp
Mondale_was_an_insidejob
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,396
Croatia
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #194 on: June 29, 2018, 12:28:20 AM »

The point here being that whether or not a universal health care system fails in MD is irrelevant in the bigger picture of things. Just keep trying at the state level until it reaches the federal level.

But all those instances you gave were either repealed outright, rejected by voters or ruled unconstitutional. I'm talking about a system that goes live, stays operational and then proceeds to implode spectacularly, and maybe even leaving the state's finances in a catastrophic situation. If there is a plan out there that can avoid all that by more than just luck without raising taxes so much that voters themselves prevent it from going live, then I'd like to see it, but as it stands now the idea if expensive and it would require repurposing Medicaid dollars I think.  And it's not just about keeping it viable in the eyes of conservative voters on the fence with it, it's about keeping i viable in the eyes of Democratic politicians, who are easily spooked as it is. Another issue that state-level plans make me wonder about is people migrating to that state just for free healthcare, which could be a long-term issue if no other states do it. I don't think it's constitutional to ban interlopers from taking advantage of that system.

Also pre-1930s judicial rejection of Social Security seems like a nice preview of a conservative future: conservative judges reject everything big / notable the left wants to do, making up legalese to justify it as they go.

My point was only that any social movement in America takes an ungodly amount of time to reach the federal level and faces a ton of roadblocks along the way. A state separately setting up its own Universal Health care system would not be so bad even if it failed because throughout American history, most legislation like the 8 hour workday, overtime, workers comp, the minimum wage, started at the state level and took decades to reach the federal level.

In Canada for example, Alberta passed a bill in 1935 creating a provincial insurance program, but the plan was scrapped due to the majority party losing and because of the great depression. In 1936, a health insurance bill passed in British Columbia, but it too was scrapped due to objections from doctors.

Saskatchewan passed universal health care in 1947 but the province was too broke to pay for it. In 1950, Alberta passed a health care plan that covered 90% of the population (a bit like Obamacare in that regard).  It wasnt until 1957 that federal implementation happened in Canada and it took until 1961 for all provinces to participate. The program was further expanded in 1966.

Logged
PragmaticPopulist
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,234
Ireland, Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -7.61, S: -5.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #195 on: July 23, 2018, 03:22:46 PM »

Hogan is out with his first attack ad, and it looks like an effective one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1y1u10tWY&feature=youtu.be

As I've said, unless Ben Jealous has some plan to pay for it, state single-payer is a no-go. A single payer system in MD would cost a bit over half the state's budget. Despite Maryland's left-leaning ideology, people here do care about the debt. It's why most people think the state is going in the right direction.

I will note however, that the ad doesn't mention that a single-payer system would remove healthcare costs.
Logged
Zaybay
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,076
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.25, S: -6.50

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #196 on: July 23, 2018, 03:40:58 PM »

Hogan is out with his first attack ad, and it looks like an effective one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1y1u10tWY&feature=youtu.be

As I've said, unless Ben Jealous has some plan to pay for it, state single-payer is a no-go. A single payer system in MD would cost a bit over half the state's budget. Despite Maryland's left-leaning ideology, people here do care about the debt. It's why most people think the state is going in the right direction.

I will note however, that the ad doesn't mention that a single-payer system would remove healthcare costs.

surprised Hogan went on the offensive already. Not the best strategy, but I guess hes trying to define him early.
Logged
MAINEiac4434
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,269
France


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #197 on: July 23, 2018, 04:38:47 PM »

Hogan is out with his first attack ad, and it looks like an effective one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1y1u10tWY&feature=youtu.be

As I've said, unless Ben Jealous has some plan to pay for it, state single-payer is a no-go. A single payer system in MD would cost a bit over half the state's budget. Despite Maryland's left-leaning ideology, people here do care about the debt. It's why most people think the state is going in the right direction.

I will note however, that the ad doesn't mention that a single-payer system would remove healthcare costs.

surprised Hogan went on the offensive already. Not the best strategy, but I guess hes trying to define him early.
Because he's actually in trouble.
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #198 on: July 23, 2018, 04:56:15 PM »

God these ads are so predictable.

1.) Single word title.

2.) Buzzwords like 'Risky' 'Dangerous' 'Untrustworthy'.

3.) Unpopular place/Politician (I'm old enough to remember when it was 'Ted Kennedy')

4.) 'State X can't afford Politician Y plan...'
Logged
WritOfCertiorari
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 591


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #199 on: July 23, 2018, 04:56:25 PM »

Hogan is out with his first attack ad, and it looks like an effective one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1y1u10tWY&feature=youtu.be

As I've said, unless Ben Jealous has some plan to pay for it, state single-payer is a no-go. A single payer system in MD would cost a bit over half the state's budget. Despite Maryland's left-leaning ideology, people here do care about the debt. It's why most people think the state is going in the right direction.

I will note however, that the ad doesn't mention that a single-payer system would remove healthcare costs.

surprised Hogan went on the offensive already. Not the best strategy, but I guess hes trying to define him early.
Because he's actually in trouble.

He’s in much less trouble than he could be. Listen guys, don’t fall into the trap of thinking just because MD is a blue state, that Jealous should be favored. There are a lot of people here who are liberals or progressive who can’t stand the thought of an increase in the sales or income tax. There are plenty who still remember the hysteria over the rain tax. Jealous is going to have to run one hell of a campaign to get the people he needs out to vote. I think Rushern Baker would have been a better choice, honestly. Jealous’s plans are really better implemented at the Federal level.

I think it’s too early to make a prediction right now.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.072 seconds with 11 queries.