General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: You might not like Bernie Sanders, or you might even hate him [View all]ehrnst
(32,640 posts)I don't put legislative accomplishment in and of itself as the main barometer of how one will do as president. I pointed that out in my support of Obama and HRC.
However, a poor legislative record should not be ignored - especially if they are campaigning on passing legislation, and especially if they are campaigning on legislation that they (and others) have failed to implement.
Is that clearer?
Paul Wellstone introduced Single Payer in 1993 (he knew better than to call it "Medicare for All" - and Wellstone ended up supporting Hillary's plan. Why do you think that was? Perhaps it was the defeat of California's single payer ballot initiative by a margin of 73 to 27 percent? Perhaps he and Ted had the skill and insight to learn from and incorporate new data?
And yes, you need to qualify the "Roll Call Amendment King" as I pointed out. To me, that says more about Bernie not being able to work with legislators on the actual crafting of the legislation that he wants to amend.
Actually, by calling it "Medicare for All," it is being misrepresented, however good a marketing ploy it is. Here is that link again, in case you missed it:
https://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/voters-who-like-medicare-for-all-may-not-like-single-payer.html
How about this: When one responds to the criticism of a candidate's lack of legislative success that it's a positive, (or not to "go with the flow of power') one is presenting the same praise that Trump supporter use to support Trump.
See also: if you want a colonoscopy, you don't go to a plumber. (and before you go there, no, I'm not referring to anyone specifically. It's called a metaphor)
Is that clearer?