Opinion Is Jimmy Dore right wing now?

[Deleted member 592570]

Did anyone actually say that?

He's clearly a nutty rightist now, whatever his views used to be. He's gotten rich enough that the amount of taxes rich people pay is probably the most important issue to him.

Nutty? Nah. He's sharp as a tack!

 

[Jack V Savage]

You didnt answer any of my questions. Typical. Answer the questions i asked if youd like to continue this conversation.

How is holding the M4A vote a loss for dems politcally?
What did Nancy Pelosi have to lose in doing so?
Wouldnt having an M4A vote fail during a pandemic hurt republicans and any one who would vote against it, likely leading to them losing in their next primary?

Holding a vote for an unpopular policy that won't pass is a political loser for reasons that should be obvious. You stick your neck out if it can get good results (as Dems did with the ACA, for example--there was an initial political price but it was worth it to pass great policy, and it's now popular). Not just for no reason. Pelosi doesn't want to lose seats because she actually cares about expanding access to care. Why would Republicans be hurt if Dems are hurt politically?

 

[AZ103]

What year was this?

2021 I beleive. Maybe 2020? It was during the pandemic.

I notice you didnt answer a single question.

 

[AZ103]

Holding a vote for an unpopular policy that won't pass is a political loser for reasons that should be obvious. You stick your neck out if it can get good results (as Dems did with the ACA, for example--there was an initial political price but it was worth it to pass great policy, and it's now popular). Not just for no reason. Pelosi doesn't want to lose seats because she actually cares about expanding access to care. Why would Republicans be hurt if Dems are hurt politically?

If its so obvious why not plainly answer the question.

What did the democrats have to lose by have an M4A vote on record?

Why would an M4A vote cause democrats to lose seats?

How would holding an M4A vote help Republicans in any way at all?

 

[Jack V Savage]

If its so obvious why not plainly answer the question.

I don't know what question you think I didn't answer.

What did the democrats have to lose by have an M4A vote on record?

They could lose seats, which makes M4A or something equivalent less likely (and, in fact, Republicans have been pushing to cut existing healthcare programs).

Why would an M4A vote cause democrats to lose seats?

Because it's a big, unpopular policy.

How would holding an M4A vote help Republicans in any way at all?

So there are two parties in American politics. If Democrats lose seats to Republicans, that helps Republicans.

 

[AZ103]

I don't know what question you think I didn't answer.

They could lose seats, which makes M4A or something equivalent less likely (and, in fact, Republicans have been pushing to cut existing healthcare programs).

Because it's a big, unpopular policy.

So there are two parties in American politics. If Democrats lose seats to Republicans, that helps Republicans.

Are you implying that voting yes on M4A during the pandemic would have been detrimental to the democratic party because voters would turn on people who voted yes?

thats a pretty wild take. Not as wild as assuming Jimmy Dore is a secret republican for trying to push leftists to vote on leftist things but still wild.

 

[luckyshot]

2021 I beleive. Maybe 2020? It was during the pandemic.

I notice you didnt answer a single question.

Ok, so it has been 3-4 years since Jimmy Dore has (arguably) spent time promoting a "leftist" issue?

I think that's the answer.

(btw, Pelosi probably didn't bring the M4A vote to the floor because she either knew it didn't have the votes to pass or knew Biden would not sign it. I don't know if you've noticed, but the woman is not prone to fucking around.)

 

[Jack V Savage]

Are you implying that voting yes on M4A during the pandemic would have been detrimental to the democratic party because voters would turn on people who voted yes?

thats a pretty wild take. Not as wild as assuming Jimmy Dore is a secret republican for trying to push leftists to vote on leftist things but still wild.

It's funny to me that you're so out of touch that you've never even heard the argument against Dore's stupid stunt. You're making it clear that you only consume Republican media. Also, Dore's leaning isn't a secret. Just look at his Twitter page.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Ok, so it has been 3-4 years since Jimmy Dore has (arguably) spent time promoting a "leftist" issue?

I think that's the answer.

(btw, Pelosi probably didn't bring the M4A vote to the floor because she either knew it didn't have the votes to pass or knew Biden would not sign it. I don't know if you've noticed, but the woman is not prone to fucking around.)

It didn't have the votes to pass so the idea was to get Democrats committed to a big, controversial policy that would fail. Again, as Pelosi has said, you sometimes have to make sacrifices to get good policy done. That's why you want to win in the first place. But you don't make sacrifices for no reason.

Generally, one GOP leftist outreach angle is that the reason Democrats don't win every policy fight isn't that Republicans oppose them and also have power in gov't; it's that they are crawling with saboteurs who are secretly on the right.

 

[brothir]

Generally, one GOP leftist outreach angle is that the reason Democrats don't win every policy fight isn't that Republicans oppose them and also have power in gov't; it's that they are crawling with saboteurs who are secretly on the right.

Slight issue with parsing this. I think what you're saying is that there's an attempt to falsely convince people of the latter, when it's actually the former?

 

[AZ103]

Ok, so it has been 3-4 years since Jimmy Dore has (arguably) spent time promoting a "leftist" issue?

I think that's the answer.

(btw, Pelosi probably didn't bring the M4A vote to the floor because she either knew it didn't have the votes to pass or knew Biden would not sign it. I don't know if you've noticed, but the woman is not prone to fucking around.)

Is being anti war not leftist anymore? Hes against funding Ukraine, hes against what Israel is doing in Gaza. He still hates cops.

 

[brothir]

Is being anti war not leftist anymore? Hes against funding Ukraine, hes against what Israel is doing in Gaza. He still hates cops.

The idea that being anti-war means not wanting to support Ukraine is as stupid as saying that being anti-genocide means that the international non-response to Rwanda was correct.

 

[AZ103]

It's funny to me that you're so out of touch that you've never even heard the argument against Dore's stupid stunt. You're making it clear that you only consume Republican media. Also, Dore's leaning isn't a secret. Just look at his Twitter page.

Ive heard the limp wristed arguments about why the party who supposedly is all for UHC refused to bring a vote for it during a pandemic. It just doesnt play. If youre already known to be for the idea how does going on record hurt you? It doesnt. They just didnt want to vote and go on record for something they claim to support.

Its reminiscant of Barry Obama saying the first thing he'll do when he gets elected is sign the act that codifys roe v wade. Then getting elected and saying its not a priority. Generally if yoy say youll do something first thing its not only a priority its THE priorty.

What im saying is that the democrats pay lip service to UHC and M4A but wont lift a finger to implement it and then give half ass excuses like its not popular. Thats weak as fuck. And Jimmy sees it and as someone who wants his side to keep their word he has become increasingly frustrated and disillusioned with the democrats. Insert "the other side is bad too" comment here.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Slight issue with parsing this. I think what you're saying is that there's an attempt to falsely convince people of the latter, when it's actually the former?

Yeah.

On "M4A" (many different proposals were given that name), why don't we have it? I think it's pretty clearly because Republicans uniformly oppose the concept, and we have a pretty divided gov't. But one angle is that if Democrats *really* wanted it, they could somehow find a way to make it happen.

Look at the ACA. That first required winning over conservative Dems by making some compromises. The final bill involved expanding Medicaid (which provides gov't-funded insurance for the poor), creating healthcare exchanges so people on individual markets (self-employed, unemployed, etc.) could buy coverage (and it included subsidies to make it affordable), regulations requiring more employers to provide coverage, a reg allowing kids to be on their parents' plans until the age of 25 (previously a big source of uninsured Americans were young adults), a cap on insurer profits, and a few more things. There was a massive lobbying campaign against it, Republicans filibustered it (requiring a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate), they fought against it at the state level, and they filed a frivolous (and ridiculous) suit against it that narrowly lost in the SCOTUS (back when it was a 5-4 split, with Roberts going against the Republican majority). The effort was largely responsible for Democrats losing both houses of Congress, though eventually the law became very popular (Pelosi, infamously and then prophetically said to members that they'd have to pass it for people to see what was in it and appreciate it).

Dore was then pushing for that same process with a 50-50 Senate and a smaller House majority. It was DOA, but the hope was that the effort would be similarly damaging politically.

 

[AZ103]

The idea that being anti-war means not wanting to support Ukraine is as stupid as saying that being anti-genocide means that the international non-response to Rwanda was correct.

Was interfering in Rwanda going to put us in a proxy war with a nuclear power?

Did we cause the Rwandan genocide by overthrowing their government and installing a leader/puppet more to our liking?

Did we keep violating agreement after agreement in an attempt to push Nato onto a hostile border in Rwanda?

Our goverment played a very large part in what led up to and then caused the Ukraine war.

Your argument is so reductionist its idiotic.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Is being anti war not leftist anymore? Hes against funding Ukraine, hes against what Israel is doing in Gaza. He still hates cops.

Why is being against funding Ukraine an *anti*-war position? I think Dore pretty consistently sides with the far right, domestically and abroad--the GOP, Putin, Assad, Orban, Erdogan. And hating cops isn't leftist. That's just stupid.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Ive heard the limp wristed arguments about why the party who supposedly is all for UHC refused to bring a vote for it during a pandemic. It just doesnt play.

Your response suggested that you were totally unfamiliar with the argument. Now you're just saying it's "limp-wristed," which is critical with no content.

 

[brothir]

On "M4A" (many different proposals were given that name). Why don't we have it?

I think it's because liberals love crime, racism against white people and illegal immigration. Something along those lines.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The funny thing about the Republicans in this thread is that their arguments are self-refuting. If Dore isn't on the right, why are all his defenders partisan Republicans? You guys burn with hatred for the left generally, but you love Dore.

 

[brothir]

Was interfering in Rwanda going to put us in a proxy war with a nuclear power?

Did we cause the Rwandan genocide by overthrowing their government and installing a leader/puppet more to our liking?

Did we keep violating agreement after agreement in an attempt to push Nato onto a hostile border in Rwanda?

Our goverment played a very large part in what led up to and then caused the Ukraine war.

Your argument is so reductionist its idiotic.

Putin played a much larger part in actually invading Ukraine. Kind of gave the game away with that move, really. Moreover, Russia achieved the fear of the first question with their invasion anyway, so if they're not scared of it it doesn't make sense for anyone else to be either. And even if the international community had indirectly caused the Rwandan genocide, the correct thing to do would still be to try to stop it.

Your idiotic attempts to reflect the issue are not effective.