If public universities become free under a President Sanders, would that mean colleges like UVA and Michigan would be free for anyone regardless of the state you come from?

Donate and support us on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?c=1785147

Hello, everyone.

Recently, I’ve been wondering exactly this: If public universities become free under a President Sanders, would that mean colleges like UVA and Michigan would be free for anyone regardless of the state you come from?

If you don’t know already, UVA and Michigan are both arguably the top two public universities in the USA. But, would they be made free for anyone regardless of the state under a President Sanders? Or would it be free only for in state students?

Thank you!

submitted by /u/TheAmbitiousPerson
[link] [comments]
SandersForPresident: search results – self:yes

Serious question concerning strategy: Should we encourage Bernie to give away the money from his book sale?

Donate and support us on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?c=1785147

Hi all, I just came to read this text from April by Nathan Robinson in Current Affairs: https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/04/why-bernie-sanders-should-give-his-millions-away

Robinson is one of my favorite socialist writers, who always has something smart to say IMO. In this text he raises an issue I had kind of forgotten about and put to the side: Bernie's millions. Put simply, he thinks that it would be the best choice for Bernie to give away the millions he made on his book, both as a moral choice and as a political strategy:

"Bernie being a millionaire muddies the whole “us against the 1% framing.” Now he’s not one of us, he’s one of them who has allied with us. He’s a “class traitor.” It used to be that Sanders was “the socialist in the millionaires’ club,” a man who could say truthfully to audiences “I do not have millionaire or billionaire friends” and who could joke that “most of the people in this room, unless I’m mistaken, are not millionaires or billionaires.” No longer. Bernie has voluntarily given up a huge advantage. Now he’s the socialist millionaire in the millionaires’ club. It’s far less powerful.

Image matters a lot, and the flipside of the damage that being a millionaire does is the tremendous gain to be had by giving up his wealth. Let’s say Bernie paid off a thousand people’s medical debt. He could use the moment to make a powerful point. He could say:

It is a disgrace that I should be in the position of getting to personally decide whether these people can pay their medical bills. Health care should be a right, not something left to the charity of millionaires. I never asked to be a millionaire. I don’t want to be a millionaire when there are people out there with nothing, and nobody else should want to be either. I could have been part of the millionaire’s club, but I am choosing not to be, because until we have guaranteed a basic standard of living for all, it is obscene that we have millionaires."

After having read this text, I've become convinced that Robinson is right. Particularly at this time, when Bernie doesn't seem to be making any gains in the polls, I think it becomes even more important for Bernie to distinguish himself from the others. On this sub, we know all about his history, his principles etc, which hasn't changed. But for the average voter, I think there are few things which would distinguish him more from the others than actually giving away the money he made on the book sales to pay for people's medical debt.

What do you think?

submitted by /u/Japsenpapsen
[link] [comments]
SandersForPresident: search results – self:yes

Steering the conversation away from where the GOP wants it?

Donate and support us on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?c=1785147

I just got an email about being invited to an anti-racism rally. I responded suggesting that we hold one on a different topic, such as leaving the Middle East or Medicare for All.

On one hand I think those would be good for promoting Sanders since he is so consistent on them, but also I think it's not hard to see Trump was making noise and trying to steer the conversation away from the anti-ACA lawsuits, GOP opposition to expanding Medicaid despite ballot initiatives voting heavily in its favor in a few lighter red states, etc. Also while there is considerable public controversy about putting "illegals" in concentration camps til they die, M4A and leaving the Middle East have overwhelming bipartisan support.

Would you suggest I keep pushing this way with my county Dems (there's a meeting tomorrow)?

submitted by /u/DoubleTFan
[link] [comments]
SandersForPresident: search results – self:yes

The “Hardcore” Bernie this time around is so different from 2016. He isn’t playing. He is in it to win it all!

Donate and support us on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?c=1785147

I really think his team this time around is much better. Faiz Shakir, David Sirota et al, are fighters. He is getting good advice.

Now, when I look back in 2016, Symone D Sanders, and Tad Devine were really bad for Bernie. The exception was Jeff Weaver. He was really all in for Bernie. Not so much the other ones. To them, it was just money. Yeah, Tad Devine produced some good ads but that's it. He made a lot of money out of it.

submitted by /u/BernIdentity2020
[link] [comments]
SandersForPresident: search results – self:yes

Bernie is RIGHT. Medicare for all would save the vast majority of Americans money every single year. The amount you would save from not paying monthly premiums, no co-pays or deductibles would be far more than the new taxes that would fund medicare for all. Never let anyone twist the truth!

Donate and support us on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?c=1785147

The media and the right always like to whine about how you'll have to raise taxes in order to fund medicare for all.

What they do NOT talk about is the fact that the amount of money folks will save from not having to pay monthly premiums, not having to pay co-pays, not having deductibles, etc. is FAR MORE than the tax increase the average American would see in order to fund medicare for all.

For the vast majority of people, medicare for all would save them money, not cost them.

Never let anyone spew lies. #

submitted by /u/relevantlife
[link] [comments]
SandersForPresident: search results – bernie