• WoodScientist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Realistically, if we’re ever going to get real healthcare reform, it will have to come from a Republican. Trump probably isn’t the man to do it, but Republicans at this time in history are the party of change. Democrats don’t support any change. I wonder at this point if people with progressive issues on healthcare should start running as Republicans.

    • d00phy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I would agree, but for different reasons. The GOP is unapologetically obstructionist when the Dems are power. Conversely, Dems are more likely to compromise. Now, if a moderate Dem can quietly work with a moderate Rep, or at least one that agrees health care reform is a priority, some kind of reform could happen. Private insurance isn’t going anywhere, though. There’s just too much money involved for a politician from either side to threaten those profits! The old excuse: “But what about the economy!?”

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      We got healthcare reform (nowhere near enough but we got some) under Obama, so I think it would have been possible under Harris as well.

      • toast@retrolemmy.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        59 minutes ago

        I agree that we got change under Obama, but I wouldn’t call it any more than that. Softening the edges of the existing system just enough to gut any real push toward change isn’t reform; it’s entrenchment fundamentally different systems like universal healthcare wasn’t reform; it was entrenchment.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Well then you didn’t have any pre-existing conditions.

          I did.

          That was huge for me and millions of other people. A game-changer.

  • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago
    • Mainstream news: “Murder will not lead to any change”
    • Also mainstream news: “Let’s suddenly talk more about that problem in one week than we’ve ever talked about it in the past 20 years”
  • LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    And many of them voted for the guy who said he had “concepts of a plan” to maybe fix it, if it can be done better. So them being unhappy about it doesn’t mean much when we are about to get a government that is actively hostile to improving any kind of health care for anyone ever.

    • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Trump is objectively worse than Kamala. But don’t fool yourself. There is no real difference between the two on healthcare. Neither had any real plans to make any real reform. Biden has a trifecta, and he didn’t do shit. Kamala explicitly ran as Biden 2.0.

      • Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Of course there’s a difference. Among others vaccines might soon be banned. Think also about women’s healthcare (abortion etc.). But yeah, if you are thinking about systemic positive change she likely would not have done much.

    • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Yeah, Dems really have a lot of work to do to earn back the trust of most Americans.

      Literally no one I know believes anything they say (or I say about them) or at best they’ll think it’s all performative (which they’re mostly right about). Most folks just don’t really care about news/politics and live normal American lives and feel the struggle. It’s mind blowing to me that our messaging was about how great the economy is and how much better is. Literal insane shit to most working class people.

      Instead of saying the economy is great, they should use another word for what they mean, which is specifically like the rate of inflation/cost of very specific things or like a very specific unemployment rate. Whereas when regular people hear economy, they think of more abstract things like money in their pocket/savings, the cost of groceries, their ability to plan for the future based on stable finances, or even the increasing APR on the credit cards they owe (something we choose to ignore but many struggle with) - none of that shit is great, it’s literally worse than ever. lol

    • Lord Wiggle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      You should add to it that he claimed he will have a plan within a week or so, for the past 8 years, while antivax RFK Jr. will be health minister next month.

      If you don’t like it, why vote to empower the rich and mega corps at the cost of the other 99% of the population?

    • Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Yes clearly, but bizarrely during the campaign season voters did not list healthcare among there primary concerns, caring more about immigration and the economy.

      • randompasta@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 minutes ago

        That’s what Republicans told them to be afraid of. Never mind the economy recovering. Slowly, yes, but it has been recovering. Immigration is mostly about exceptionalism and racism.