Maddow on Women’s Healthcare

This analysis makes a lot of sense when compared to other data. In the poorest states (which of course includes the Southern states such as South Carolina), the rich vote Republican and the poor vote Democrat. Rich people in poor states don’t care about the poor. The politicians in these states do whatever they can to disenfranchise the poor and to fear-monger towards the electorate because otherwise they’d never get elected.

6 thoughts on “Maddow on Women’s Healthcare

  1. Sad to say, Maddow has become a Clinton bot. She spent a lot of time attacking Sanders during the Primary.

    Oh, and a sad example of healthcare outcomes in Canada vs the US:

    • I’ve been disappointed by how many people supported and defended Clinton. She represents everything that is wrong with US politics: big money ties, cronyism, corporatism, war hawk military adventurism, tough-on-crime policies, privatized prisons, etc. Too many Americans, specifically those in the middle-to-upper classes, aren’t serious about dealing with our problems.

      As for the NYT article, it is entirely unsurprising. Many such comparisons could be made. Eventually, all of this is going to sink in. It is nice to know that the general public already understands much of this. Most Americans wanted left-wing healthcare reform, either single payer or public option. Most Americans also understand climate change:

      “In every congressional district, a majority of adults supports limiting carbon dioxide emissions from existing coal-fired power plants. But many Republicans in Congress (and some Democrats) agree with President Trump, who this week may move to kill an Obama administration plan that would have scaled back the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.

      “Nationally, about seven in 10 Americans support regulating carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants — and 75 percent support regulating CO2 as a pollutant more generally. But lawmakers are unlikely to change direction soon.”

        • The article said that the coastal areas in the South that experience direct hits by many hurricanes is seeing more talk about global warming. The article makes that point also about the areas of Texas that have experienced more climate-related problems. But it’s probably true that most people in the South have yet noticed major changes. It will require multiple major natural catastrophes.

        • If you look at the map though, green means less talk versus the national average – that means that the Deep South is very much below the US average.

          The Great Plains though seem to be talking about it a lot, probably due to drought fears. The Northeast and West Coast, especially in the cities talk about it too – probably because of sea level rising fears. Interestingly, one of the areas least impacted, Bernie Sander’s home of Burlington Vermont is also dark purple.

          • I suppose it is only a very slim coastal region in the South that notices hurricanes to any great degree. When I lived in Columbia SC, it was a little ways from the coast and hurricanes were simply windy storms. People that far in aren’t going to live in fear of hurricanes until they get far far worse. Give it enough time and present inland areas might be the new coastline.

            States in farm country have economies that are dependent on stable climates. Farmers and those with related work can’t afford to be ignorant. Simply living in a farm state makes one very aware of weather patterns. I’ve never farmed in my life or lived on a farm, but I kept thinking all winter that we weren’t getting enough precipitation for the farmers.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s