Out Of Touch Senate Dems Reject ‘Trick’ Medicare For All Amendment

Read More At:

Support The Show On Patreon:

Here's Our Amazon Link:

Follow Kyle on Twitter:

Like the show on Facebook:

Clip from The Kyle Kulinski Show, which airs live on Blog Talk Radio and Secular Talk Radio Monday – Friday 11:00 AM – 12:30 PM Eastern time zone.

Listen to the Live Show or On Demand archive at:

Check out our website – and become a member – at:

Out Of Touch Senate Dems Reject 'Trick' Medicare For All Amendment

65 thoughts on “Out Of Touch Senate Dems Reject ‘Trick’ Medicare For All Amendment

  1. I wish I was old enough to run. The time is so prime to actually get past the super PACs and well known names. It’s time to get things done and do right for the American people and recreate the Democratic party as a liberal party that focuses on issues and wants to actually get things done rather than sitting on their asses.

    • Generation Political I’m running when I’m old enough. Seeing the direction we’re heading, I doubt we’ll have made the progress with the policies I plan on running.

    • GP, this amendment was a total sham. I came across this yesterday and even went to Daine’s twitter. He got a lot of backlash from people because they too recognized it for what it was. Hell, even Bernie recognized it as a sham. Vox did an article on this. Kyle is way off on this one.

  2. Igor dropped the good brain on the floor, as a result we have this Frankenstein neoliberal center right article.

    • GP, this amendment was a total sham. I came across this yesterday and even went to Daine’s twitter. He got a lot of backlash from people because they too recognized it for what it was. Hell, even Bernie recognized it as a sham. Vox did an article on this. Kyle is way off on this one.

  3. The reason it was a trick is because it wouldn’t have passed and the GOP could have used it in ads to say “democrats wanted to pass a singlepayer bill without knowing what’s in it.” And any democratic splits between yeas and nay would have also been used by the GOP to say “look even their own party is split on the issue.” TLDR; the bill wouldn’t have passed and it would have made it harder to pass single payer down the line.

    • “lol the Democrats wanted to pass this popular bill” is a giant self own. That’s what Kyle was talking about. Republicans “mocking” Democrats over supporting single payer would’ve been GOOD, because it’s….wait for it..POPULAR! The bill was the old HR 676 but apparently it can only be voted for if it’s not proposed by a Republican -_-
      Harder to pass down the line? Republicans had 70,000 votes to repeal Obamacare but wimpy Democrats can only handle one vote apparently.
      Of course it wouldn’t have passed, everyone knows that but that’s not the point. It was a chance to let Republicans shoot themselves in the foot. Obviously the party has a massive split. You don’t need a 12 dimensional chess move to get people to realise that.

    • But the Democrats do not (yet) have any kind of unified position like this – and the Republicans are well aware of it. It simply was a transparent effort to short-circuit the opinion forming process that currently takes place within the Democratic party in order to force and exploit any splits.

    • you’re naive if you think they’re all of a sudden figuring things out. They know what the right thing to do is but they always purposely did the wrong thing

    • They’re not figuring out their individual positions on anything, but it still takes an enormous amount of coordination until everybody gets the memo and agrees on a consistent comms strategy.

    • Bernie said he voted present and told all the others to vote present because the republicans wouldn’t vote yes. If they would vote yes he would of voted yes.

  4. The trick was that voting for an amendment to a Obamacare repeal would have made Bernie look like he was “against Obamacare”, which Hillary also tried to attack him on (“You want to repeal Obamacare to do single-payer”). Also, obviously the amendment wouldn’t have passed anyway

    But you’re right, if they had presented it as “Well, Trump says he wants to work with us on healthcare, we voted for an amendment to fix Obamacare with them – which is Medicare-For-All. Well, they didn’t want that amendment, so now it’s on them that millions of people still don’t have healthcare”.

    But the thing is, unless a plurality of Dems had voted for that amendment, Bernie would have been (falsely) attacked as being “against Obama’s legacy” if he had voted for the amendment

    • GhostlyJorg The problem is the less engaged part of the Democratic base (roughly 50%) thinks Obama was great, and they’d fall for talking points like “Bernie wants to repeal and replace Obamacare. He wasn’t a Democrat all along, don’t vote for him, he’s against the president you voted for twice!”

      Even if Bernie made the honest case of “Obamacare/Romneycare IS shitty, I tried to make the president get single-payer or at least a public option in 2010 and it was possible, but he didn’t because he’s also a sellout. So that’s why I want to repeal and replace Obamacare with single-payer”, a lot of those disengaged voters wouldn’t even hear that. If they did, many would probably agree, but even so a lot wouldn’t, as they just hear the attack on Obama and become alienated from Bernie

    • This amendment was a total sham. I came across this yesterday when I first heard about it. I even went to Daine’s twitter. He got a lot of backlash from people because they too recognized it for what it was. Hell, even Bernie recognized it as a sham. Vox did an article on this and it was a total sham being used to basically divide the Democrats. I had to stop this video about halfway in. Kyle is way off on this one.

    • Could you explain how it was a sham? The only reason to not vote for it is if it didn’t do what it claimed to do. Otherwise, I don’t see why it wouldn’t be the right thing to vote for it, even if passing it is futile. It seemed like Bernie was using his vote to coerce the others tho, so maybe he was trying to make it so it could be passed. Idk…

    • Check some of the discussions in the comments above. A number of politically sophisticated viewers have peeked behind the procedural curtain and seen a sneaky Republican stunt being concocted. All is not necessarily what it seems at first glance. When Kyle mentioned that Bernie refused to rise to the Republican bait, I knew something underhanded was being attempted.

    • It is a meme that originates from this channel. Since Sargon of Akkad is actually an ancient King and not an original name, you can put any qoute under his name without libeling him, hence the ridicolous quotes you see, that’s basically the memeing behind this. How it started tho, not even I have an idea and I’m a Secular Talk junkie, I have never missed a single video for 3 years.

    • +Aszhara apparently someone named Human Extinction Is the ONLY solution! said that there were 3 different accounts that sarted it, and I was really bored and just spread it throughout Secular Talk videos. Happy others are keeping this meme alive. Praise Kek

  5. Bernie rejected it as well Kyle, on the grounds that it was not a serious attempt at negotiation. Are you being obtuse on purpose about this? Voting yes on the amendment this guy was proposing wasn’t going to lead to anything and even he who proposed it knew that. Sorry, gotta give this one a dislike because your not thinking straight.

    • Ghostly, Bernie voted against it. It was A TRICK. Don’t put it in quotes. I read up and found out about this the day it happened before this story and Kyle is dead wrong on this one. Go to Daines Twitter and take a look at all the backlash he got about trying the trick and what he said about it. It was very clear that not even he believed in it and said that not even the democrats believed in their “socialist ideals”. A senator said this. What an assclown. He had a lot of angry people, even his constituents called him out on this on his Twitter feed. He’ll have a hell of a time getting re-elected. Also, read the Vox article regarding this as well. Kyle right now is so blind in his support for Universal health care and his disdain to the DNC, that he didn’t do his due diligence on this one and really dug deep to find the devil in the details, and just pounced once he heard about it.

    • sprybug@ How ,many times can you guys miss the point? It’s not this vote or any other particular vote, it’s that the Dems *have not* convinced *anyone* they are on the right side in this fight!

    • Ghostly, I dont disagree that the dems have not convinced anyone, but even if they voted yes on this I have to assume they knew it wouldn’t pass anyway so I still wouldn’t be convinced. Yeah we need them to convince us, I just don’t think THIS VOTE would have done it either way they went (except those that voted a straight “no” maybe) The all agreed to not vote for ANY amendment until they knew what bill they were amending. Not breaking rank was the right thing to do here in my opinion.

    • Actually, voting yes on the amendment would lead to something, passage of the TrumpCare bill. Then, once passed they can take the amendments out. Come 2018 every Republican can run ads saying that Dems voted for the atrocious TrumpCare plan.

  6. Kyle, Please stop forming opinions off a single article, and try to understand the topic fully beforehand. Obviously, if something doesn’t make sense, you’re ill informed.

    • Ariana spot on! thanks for clarifying that. Can’t fault Kyle for being human, no one can be 100% right all the time.

    • Ariana, agreed. It was actually sort of clever since either way the dems voted they could use it against them. Even like minded progressives are split on this so obviously it was an effective strategy (sadly).

    • Ariana Wait wait wait I thought the SAME version of a bill has to pass both houses of Congress before being enacted….?

    • squirrel dude I meant conference not congress, sorry about that. when the bill went to conference they could take the amendment out and GOP would be able to pass the bill since they have majority

  7. The reason that this was a trick was because, if this amendment passed, it would have caused a bill to go to a conference where it could have been made into a Trumpcare bill, plus threatening dumb Dems. The charge to denying this amendment by the way was led by BERNIE SANDERS and supported by JOHN CONYERS. It wasn’t just the corporate Dems who denied it, it was everyone.

    • What? You vote to amend the bill, then you vote on the bill. The conference needs to reconfirm the final bill. What is your point?

    • I think Kyle didn’t had enough time to check through his topic. Lets hope that he makes correction later on.

    • Bernie said he voted present and told all the others to vote present because the republicans wouldn’t vote yes. If they would vote yes he would of voted yes.

    • Again, if the amendment passed, and then the bill passed with Dem support because of MfA amendment, the bill would have gone to conference where the amendment would have been scrapped and TrumpCare would have been on Trump’s desk.

  8. This was just an attempt to troll the Democrats, they didn’t vote yes because the bill itself was fraudulent and had no merit. You really think a Republican Senator is going to write an entire single-payer healthcare bill just to troll them? Sanders wants to introduce his own legislation anyways and it would almost certainly be better written. Hell if they had voted and passed that bill, we could have been given a watered-down single-payer system, for all we know. I know you want a single-payer system, as do I, but it’s important that we get it right.

  9. somehow Kyle thinks that amendment would stay in the bill after reconciliation with the House. In a bill that repeals the Dems signature health legislation.

    • Bernie didn’t make a mistake. Start watching shows that have better grasp on issues.

      To understand the process, watch Sam’s interview with David Dayin on Majority Report.

  10. Kyle, I have to disagree with you. READ THE ACTUAL AMENDMENT ONLINE.

    I’m fairly certain the text is identical to H.R. 676, and I’m fairly confident that there is a rule in the Senate that if someone from a minority party (or an independent) doesn’t vote the same as the majority party, and all the rest are no’s and yes’s, then the amendment CANNOT be brought forth again.

    Sanders has himself done this, so that amendments can be reintroduced later.

    The NO’s won it on that vote, and if none of the Democrats or Sanders had voted “NO” or “present”, then the Senate would never have been able to reintroduce the bill.

    • Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised:

      “”The motion to reconsider may be made only by a member who voted on the prevailing side in the original vote (such as someone who voted “yes” if the motion had passed or voted “no” if the motion was defeated).””

    • What happens of someone new comes into office who never voted either way on it because they werent elected yet. Can they introduce it?

    • GhostlyJorg Correct. Welcome to the American political system, where stupid, archaic rules are considered more valuable than people.

  11. Republicans: Is this what you want? Here it is, come and get it!
    Democrats: W-We’re not progressive, we’re Reek. *Jumps ship

  12. Kyle you fuckstick it was an amendment to a bill, that bill being trumpcare. I don’t need a polisci degree to know having the Dems on record voting for trumpcare is a bad move.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *