A question I would have liked to see asked last night

[BainsBane]

Hypothetical: Bernie is president. Congresses passes a bill to overturn Obamacare, just like the one that recently made it to President Obama's desk. Does he sign it or use his veto?

[Kalidurga]

1. Veto

There is no reason to overturn Obamacare. Not even if it's to replace it with single payer. We can like the person who hates their job look for another job while keeping the one we have.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

2. What a ridiculous question. He'd veto it, of course.

People who tell you that he'll get rid of the ACA before single payer is instituted are liars.

[BainsBane]

3. I'd like to see him answer the question

last night he said ACA had increased expenses and made health coverage worse for some people.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

4. He's already answered it. Did you not notice Chelsea Clinton taking body blows for telling that lie?

Have fun with the hypothetical.

[BainsBane]

7. I don't watch TV news

but I read a bit about it.

The fact is the GOP just got a majority vote to defund Obamacare. They even got a veto proof majority in the House. The idea that a Bernie presidency will miraculously make them want to embrace single payer is sheer folly. The question about whether or not he is committed to Obamacare is the key one, because it is only path for expanding or even maintaining health coverage.

I also have serious problems with his forthrightness on the issue. In 2009, when we had a Democratic majority in both houses, he declared single payer dead in the water. Now he insists all we have to do is elect him and we'll get single payer. I find that absolutely and completely unbelievable, and given his previous comments I don't think he believes it either. That relates very much to your poll about honesty. When politicians make promises they know they can't keep, that is not honest. That is one of the THE principle reasons why I cannot and will not support Sanders. I don't like bullshit. I don't like politicians who pretend to be revolutionaries. I find it cynical and manipulative.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

8. Document his lies, please.

[BainsBane]

10. Okay

In 2010, he said single payer never had a chance during the negotiations the year before.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) reminded the progressive media gathered on Capitol Hill today that single-payer health care reform was dead before it started in the Senate.

"It would have had 8 or 10 votes and that's it," he said, addressing a topic central in the minds of many who the bloggers and left wing talk show hosts gathered for the 4th annual Senate Democratic Progressive Media Summit in Washington reach everyday. . .


Sanders said it was still possible for single-payer to come to the U.S. eventually -- but he said the road will not begin in Washington. If a state like California or Vermont ever instituted a single-payer system on its own, Sanders said, it would eventually lead to national adoption of universal coverage.


http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/sanders-single-payer-never-had-a-chance

On Obamacare:

Sanders has said repeatedly that he wants to build on the health-care system created under the Affordable Care Act and to expand it to provide health insurance regardless of income or age. It’s clear that the provision in his bill to “repeal” ACA state exchanges was not just for the sake of repealing the law, in the way critics who oppose passage of ACA use the term “repeal.”

But the language of his legislation — all three times he introduced it — clearly stated that existing federal programs would be replaced with a new program that he sought to create. It wouldn’t simply increase current levels of coverage but would create a whole new health insurance system with new quality-control methods, a new standards board, and more.

We wavered between Two and Three Pinocchios. Sanders makes it sound as if he would tack on some additional provisions or coverage to ACA — when, in reality, his new single-payer health system would replace the ACA and all other existing federal coverage. He employs political wordsmithing by calling the criticism of his bill “old-fashioned political gimmickry.” However, he did “help write” ACA by pushing for an alternative (community health centers) to his single-payer system, making an important contribution to help get the law passed. So that tipped his rating to Two Pinocchios.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/11/23/bernie-sanderss-claim-that-he-would-expand-not-dismantle-the-affordable-care-act/


On a few other issues: three pinocchios

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/01/11/bernie-sanderss-claim-that-glass-steagall-banned-commercial-bank-loans-to-shadow-banks/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/11/05/a-bipartisan-failure-in-talking-about-prisons-and-the-war-on-drugs/

two pinocchios

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/11/03/sanders-evolving-and-wishy-washy-stance-on-same-sex-marriage/

Superpacs (see links in post below)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=549584

Politifact rulings

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/bernie-s/statements/byruling/false/

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/bernie-s/statements/byruling/barely-true/

[DisgustipatedinCA]

11. I thank you for the links, and I've read them (mostly), but these are not lies.

Can you document any actual lies, as opposed to documenting how correct a columnist thought he was in his claims?

[BainsBane]

12. Firstly, my initial post was about what I considered disengenous

and unbelievable. I didn't use the word liar. I said I don't trust politicians who make unrealistic promises, particularly when they know they can't keep them. Sanders comments from 2010 indicate that he does in fact know it's not possible, yet that doesn't stop him from running a campaign on the issue.

The fact checkers determine if candidates are truthful, and you can see at politifact that Sanders and Clinton have roughly equal ratings in that regard. The assumption that he is inherently more honest than Clinton is not supported by evidence. The value of fact checking sites is they seek to be impartial, whereas you and I can go back and forth all day about whether or not something is true or false.

One clearly false claim was during the first debate when he insisted he hadn't voted to give immunity to gun corporations. http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/13/politics/democratic-debate-fact-check/
Clearly he did and has now decided to--kinda sorta--reverse his position on that. Other statements from that same debate were rated false.

Additionally, some of the links from politifact--like the poverty rate--show clearly counterfactual statements. The poverty rate is not, according to census data, at an all time high. So why would he even say that?
The only explanation I can think of is that he is thinking of the poverty rate for white men rather than all Americans; framing the issue that way is itself problematic.

[JudyM]

5. +1. No question. Nt

[Live and Learn]

6. If you don't already know the answer to that question, you haven't been paying attention.

My guess is that you do know and your op is simply an attempt to misrepresent Sanders just like Hillary does.

[LexVegas]

9. Sign. Have to burn the house down to rebuild it. Pragmatism is for the weak and basketweavers. nt