Harris isn’t pushing Medicare for All anymore. Progressives say that’s OK.

I think “For Now” should be in that headline. No progressives I know are okay with this, but they are okay with her political messaging shifting, for now, in order to get elected. We understand how politics works, but she better not betray us.

17

I think discussion is fine. I think the article fosters discussion. I also completely agree with them sidelining what could give the Republicans ammo and votes in this critical time.

But I'm just a Canadian who hates headline gore and want to point out that:

Harris isn’t pushing Medicare for All anymore. Progressives say that’s OK.

Is a shitty headline. It doesn't match the tone or even fully the bias of the article and is click baity at best. It instantly paints the discussion for headline readers and article for the clickers as contrarian.

Harris isn’t pushing Medicare for All anymore. Is that OK?

Is what a headline should look like in this case and would probably foster discussion and less downvotes. But one can't even tell shitty journalism from manipulation these days, can we?

Edit: whipped out my black highlighter for some bolding.

11

could give the Republicans ammo and votes in this critical time.

But republicans will immediately pivot to another area they want her to be more conservative with, and this change will have a negative effect on Dem turnout.

This one thing won't erase her lead, but she's also said she's not for banning fracking anymore either. That will also negatively effect Dem turnout.

Everytime she becomes slightly more conservative to appease Republicans, she gains no votes and loses a little.

That's not even getting into how at the end of the day, we desperately need to do these things she's now say she won't even try to do.

There's no way to look at this and honestly say it's a good move, unless you just always personally agreed with Republicans on these issues. And for those people, they were probably never going to vote D anyways.

3

Dunno who those progressives are but most of the progressives I know are not okay with the shift.

11

And yet they will all vote for her anyway because she is not Trump and is pro-choice.

-14
- Yup we all (all the progressives I know IRL, not everyone here - I don't know yall) will fucking vote for Harris while giving her shit and trying to push her to the left because if Trump is elected a lot of people will die. It fucking sucks but we've got to play the hand we're dealt.
  
  I was, for the record, also planning on voting for Biden in the general if he didn't drop out while being fucking pissed off about Gaza.
  
  I'm fully behind whatever pressure you want to put behind trying to force candidates to the left (I have no patience for fucks that decry the "lack of decorum" in protesters) but come election day I'm fucking voting for Harris.
  
  17
- Honestly, as I’ve grown older I’ve come to realize most voting is risk mitigation. I was brought up to think it was about making positive change but votes that do that are less common than the risk mitigation votes.
  
  15
- and is pro-choice.
  
  At least for now.
  
  -7
- Democrats claim to be pro choice while doing nothing to protect women's choice is rather suspect.
  
  -12

She supported it 5 years ago when she was running against Bernie Sanders in the primary.

She no longer has to do that.

3

So, I'm reading the article. This is what I'm getting out of it.

Medicare for All is off the table.
Harris is worried that a full-throated embracing of Medicare for All will turn off voters happy with their current insurance.
She's got other plans, such as building off of Biden's wins in Student Loans, Infrastructure, and Medicare expansions.
The votes aren't there for Medicare for All.
Progressives are taking the mindset that it's better to stop Trump than hold Harris accountable.
This doesn't mean they are going to go quietly into that night.

My thoughts are that the Progressives would be served by pushing for RCV in more places, while pushing Progressive candidates in the Primaries in 2026 and 2028. Hopefully the shitgibbon will be dead by then and the next person won't be worse on Team Red, so the Progs have some room to hold the Dems accountable. And hopefully the Progs recognise the reality on the ground and maybe advocate for Medicare Buyin before Medicare for All.

That said? If you're saying "We'd like better behaviour out of the Dems, but no way do we want Trump in office," I'll never have beef with you.

3

If you're saying "We'd like better behaviour out of the Dems, but no way do we want Trump in office," I'll never have beef with you.

This is what I'm trying to say but I think the time to get them to listen is now. The threat of Trump looms regardless. Everyone knows who he is and no thinking person will vote for him. I have been voting for more years than a lot of lemmings have been alive and I'm tired of picking the lesser of two evils again and again. If we keep giving everyone a pass I don't believe we will ever get what we want because there is always another threat.

1
- This is where I point you to a simple fact. We don't always get what we want in elections. I know, that's defeatist mindsets, but let's get real. We live in a country where 3 out of every 4 voting aged adults say they are NOT liberal.
  
  I know the lines that come next, but I think that's just ignoring the polling, which is never a good place to be. The good news is that the largest collection of people, the people who call themselves Moderates, outnumber the hard-alt-Right side of the Conservative spectrum. Like us on the Left, they don't want to see a Trump in office, nor Project 2025 implemented. But they also don't want to see many changes in their lives. Here's the hard part -- they get a say as well. If you push Medicare for All, just saying 'it's that or Trump', they're going to say, "I don't want either, so I'm just going to stay home." It's a lot easier to sell putting 3 million houses on the market, or forgiving loans after you've paid the principle back, or even 'if you want, you can pay a premium to Medicare and switch to that, or keep your insurance otherwise.' As the reminder goes to all voters -- it's not a marriage where you must find the Best Candidate Ever. It's public transit. You take the bus that gets you closest to where you're trying to go, and not all busses go exactly to the destination. Doubly so when other people want to go to different places than you want to!
  
  2

Bullshit it's "ok" with progressives.

1

We need enough representatives and senators in the house and senate who will pass it then Harris can just sign it when it crosses her desk. She’s not the one that has to push it. The down ballot candidates need to win their elections and get MFA through congress.

1

Politico - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for Politico:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/19/medicare-for-all-harris-progressives-2024-elections-00174447

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

-5

They don't need to lie about what they support anymore. They don't have to offer anything because they've never been held accountable for their lies. All they need is that D next to their name to get elected. Policy means nothing as long as they are not the other fascist team.

-8

Outright bullshit. You are a fucking chod and chods like you don't deserve respectful replies.

5
I don't think she lied in 2019 about M4A being what this country needs.

I think the same thing that happened to Obama happened to her

I might think Biden is a poor president, but fuck, anyone that spends four years with the guy does become a lot more conservative. He's incredibly effective at that apparently. It's probably why he's always got along so well with Republicans.

It's debatable if her mind has really changed on the matter, or she's just been convinced to take this stance for donations.

But I don't think she lied in 2019.

-1

I'm not allowed to post things from the candidate's own blog. I'm not allowed to post articles from 2019, but what about this?

Her reversal is not ok and we should be allowed to discuss it.

-10

I want it, but I’m willing to wait a while longer in exchange for freedom now. Bigger problems to work on with Project 2025. I got a preteen niece that cannot grow up in that kind of world. And couchfucker needs to go away.

12
- OP posted a similar article a few minutes ago, and I will say again they're like MAGA and are using anything and everything to kill the momentum.
  
  10
The headline saying progressives are ok with it is bullshit.

But if stupid headlines broke any rules, there'd be a lot less posts here.

This one will likely stay up

1
- That's the headline from the article and I'm not allowed to change it. I ended up having to copy paste it as the automatic import did not work, so I suppose the title tag could be different. I can't quite tell on my phone.
  
  -4