Categories
398

COVID-19: Ontario closing all non-essential businesses | Power & Politics

Well, we aren’t going to listen, we’re just going out. Well, I’m sorry! The rules in Florida is not the rules here in Ontario down on the US. It is spreading rapidly right across their country. I can’t repeat that enough: go directly home and stay in your house, but take it right now, as you have to self isolate for 14 days.

Bottom line full stop, no negotiating no store no running to the gas station. Your self isolating simple as that welcome back I’m Bashi, Capello’s host of power and politics and you’re reading a CBC News special on the corona virus pandemic that was Ontario premier, dug for a bit earlier today. A stern message echoed by political leaders across the country stay home and self, isolate, especially to those who’ve returned from a trip outside the country.

Ontario has just become the latest province to order all non-essential businesses closed as governments try and slow the spread of Kovan 19. That measure will take effect tomorrow. Just before midnight a bit earlier. I spoke to Christine Elliott, Ontario’s Minister of Health hi, Minister Elliott, thanks so much for making time for us really appreciate it pleasure. Thank you. Today. The premier announced Minister, that your government is ordering all non-essential businesses to close.

Can you tell us what counts as non-essential? Well, I can speak in a general sense. There will be a specific list that will be available tomorrow to the public, but, generally speaking, it is anything that is going to. First of all, keep our health workers continuing to be able to go to work, the people that are doing the lab testing and so on, and then we need to keep the supply chain open for Ontarians to be able to buy food at their lowest local grocery Store to get the medications that they need at their pharmacies and so on.

So we want to make sure that we, when we come forward with this list, we are making it available and possible for Ontarians to be able to get the essential things that they need. But for everyone else we’re asking them to please stay home. Please do not go out unless you absolutely need to. Please recognize the social distancing, it’s very, very important to keep everyone safe. What drove this decision, Minister? Is there a sense in your government that perhaps people are not heating, those warnings? Those asks that that you have made of them to the degree that they need to be well? We know that the vast majority of Ontarians do understand the need to follow these rules, but we have seen an increase of 78 cases between yesterday and today, we’re now at five hundred and three cases in Ontario.

So it shows us that there is still more that needs to be done and so we’re asking as well anyone who is returning from travel, particularly snowbirds, coming from the United States, to please a self isolate immediately upon your return to Canada. Please do not go to your local grocery store or Costco or Walmart, or a tea place else. Please go home immediately and then arrange with family to to drop food off at your door or order in food or, if you don’t have anyone to help you with that.

Please contact your public health department and they can help arrange food to be delivered to you. But it is really really important for the protection of everyone that this be maintained. If you do, though, Minister believes that the vast majority of Ontarians are already heating, this advice – why do you feel like this is necessary? Because there still are situations that we are hearing about, where people aren’t self isolating immediately upon their return to Canada, or they are continuing to gather in groups of 50 people or more.

At this point, we are looking at people being in very small groups. Even if you go outside, please just go out with one or two people, your partner members of your family, just because the social distancing is so important. We want to contain you to do whatever we can to prevent the spread of kovat 19. How will this be enforced Minister? Well we’re asking people to do this voluntarily? We know that there just aren’t enough enforcement agents out there to to follow this up, although there will be police that will be doing community monitoring and so on, but we’re really relying on the people of Ontario to to voluntarily follow this.

We are all in this together and it’s going to take all of us to to get out of this. So we need to all recognize that we have a role to play, that we have a responsibility to our families, but to each other to to follow all of these rules. Does that mean that if the rules are not followed, people will not face any kind of penalty? Well, there will there will, of course, be penalties in terms of fines and so on, but I think the more important thing is just for the health of everyone that we want to be able to make sure that people will self isolate.

We want to make sure that our health facilities are not overwhelmed by increases in numbers of people with kovat 19. So, of course, there will be penalties, but we are really asking people to please voluntarily follow the rules. We heard, minister from the federal government, the Prime Minister earlier today, in which he said the Emergencies Act. Invoking the emergencies act at a federal level is not off the table.

What is the position of your government where that’s concerned, so that if there are these questions about whether something needs to be voluntary or not, or whether people need to be inside or working or not, that those are instead define more clearly by the federal government and People who don’t follow those rules will face punishment. Where does your government stand on the federal government? Invoking that act well, we’re all working together, both municipally provincially and federally? I I’ve been in regular contact with Federal Minister of Health Minister haidu, and so we understand that the federal government has these significant powers that we want to work with them.

If they feel that it’s necessary, then of course we will follow the rules. But right now we are working very collegially, cooperatively and I think that’s really important for all of the people of both Ontario and Canada to know that that we are all working together to protect the health and safety of Ontarians and Canadians generally. I appreciate that Minister, but do you think that there is that it is the time for the federal government to invoke that act? I certainly can I’m not going to tell the federal government what to do.

What we are doing right now is in the best interest of voluntary ins, that what that’s what the premier has spoken about today, that’s what I’m directing my attention to and, as a matter of fact, I am having a conversation later today with the the federal minister And my provincial and territorial counterparts, so we all need to work together to make sure that we we protect the health of everyone and just before I let you go Minister, a final question on preparedness or on basically the health aspect of all of this.

Your government last weekend you promised that you would be able to process the province would be able to process 5,000 tests per day. When will that be happening by well, we have increased the number of tests that we are able to do. Provincially from 2,000 to 3,000 were over 3,000 per day now. I anticipate that within the next number of days a few short days, we will be able to process 5,000 and we are looking at increasing capacity beyond that.

We do have a plan in place to do that and we are working through that every day we are speaking about that at our command table on a daily basis. We had a conversation about that this morning. The plan is working and we are steadily increasing the volumes so just to be clear for our viewers, because I know many of them in Ontario are reading. You expect there to be the processing of 5,000 tests in the next few days and then you fact that processing capacity to increase beyond that as well.

Yes, absolutely, and we know that there is a backlog in terms of cases being tested right now we anticipate being able to get rid of the backlog very shortly and then get up to 5,000 cases and then be able to test a more would you say that Would happen by the end of this week we should be able to be up to 5,000 cases by the end of this week. Yes, all right, I’m going to leave it there, Minister Eliot really appreciate your time.

Thank you very much about she. I, on Vashon Capello’s host of power in politics, see more of our show by subscribing to the CBC news, blog or click the link for another article.


Are you looking for content for your blog? See… Content is king!

 

Categories
398

11th Democratic Debate Breakdown | Bernie Sanders vs Joe Biden | QT Politics

This is a rather ambiguous question, given the place we now find ourselves in the Democratic primary race for the 2020 election. Typically, I have distinguished winners and losers based on this question, who improved their odds but as I’ll discuss in this article.

That question is somewhat insufficient to create a substantive breakdown of this debate. After all, at this point in the race, the goals of both Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders ought to have evolved beyond simply winning the Democratic primary. So I’ll also address this question: who did what they needed to do? Finally, I’ll evaluate the relative performances of both candidates outside of the context of the primary race to address this more basic question, who had a better debate performance after all, winning or losing a debate can mean different things depending on how exactly you answer this question.

What does winning look like thanks, first and foremost, goes out to all the patrons who keep this work alive. Big shout out to my newest supporters, William Foster. She brings the rain Justin Barris dog boat 333 Matt Wong Ishmael woody Ethan Colton Namath James noonim, giovanni hernandez, bad art, collective SD, eli, doing comic 6:16 charlotte townsend mike leblanc trey Sullivant logan Belknap, ethan griffith, jacob kite, nate, Maddox and Sagi Logan good nature.

Lord Jackson, John Paul Shawn, Loney, Willem Bowman, but Abadi venden and Kendall love. All of you guys signed up within just the last three weeks. I’Ve picked up a lot of new patrons recently, so thank you so much these articles do get to monetize fairly regularly. So the patronage really makes a difference every now and then on patreon. I do try to get up early releases and a little additional content, but really the only rewards I give to patrons is the occasional shout-out and the ability to message me directly, but bottom line.

The more support I get on patreon the more time I’m able to dedicate to making these articles. So I really do appreciate the support it means the world to me. If you’re thinking about joining these everyday heroes, you can head on over to patreon comm slash question time anyway, let’s talk about who won the 11th democratic debate, focusing first on the question who improved their odds, as I spoke about in my predictions, article, a win as I’Ve defined it for previous debate break down articles would be extremely difficult for Bernie to secure in this debate.

Generally speaking, I’ve considered it to be a win when a candidate improves the likeliness of their campaign. Success in various debates relatively obscure candidates like Amy Klobuchar, Andrew yang and Tulsi Gabbard, delivered performances that I thought might push their campaigns in to mid-level contention. Mid-Level contenders, like Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren and P Budaj in various debates, gave performances that I thought might push them into top tier contention.

Well, with just two serious candidates left, there are no tears anymore. The race is Biden versus Bernie, so we must reform the question, but winning to be something like did their performance make a primary victory. Look more plausible, but even that is a rather difficult threshold for Bernie to pass at the time of this recording by them leads the race with one thousand one hundred and eighty delegates to Bernie Sanders 885.

According to RCP Biden has 56 percent of Democratic voters supporting him to Sanders. 35 538 gives Biden more than a 99 percent chance of securing the nomination. Given all this, it would seem strange to say that Bernie won the debate by improving his odds from 0.1 percent. To one point, one percent, or dropping Biden’s from 99 to 98 percent in the context of the full race Biden’s already essentially locked it down to secure a win in this debate when it comes to actually becoming a plausible contender for winning the Democratic primary race.

There really was nothing Sanders could do. Sanders could only win on this measure if Biden did something to severely damaged his own campaign, so victory or defeat hinged entirely on whether Biden embarrassed himself so utterly so dramatically that it would have the potential to destroy his campaign. That very clearly did not happen. Biden didn’t pledge allegiance to Vladimir Putin. He didn’t accidentally announce that he has a disqualifying medical condition.

He didn’t froth at the mouth and yell bigoted things which, by the way, is not disqualifying in a Republican primary. He didn’t physically assault. Bernie Sanders or the moderators he didn’t say that his first act as president would be to suspend the Constitution. You get the idea winning in terms of seriously improving his campaigns. Vitality was essentially a shoo-in for Biden and next to impossible for Bernie Sanders.

It didn’t happen. Biden is still overwhelmingly likely to be the next Democratic nominee. I know it’s annoying for Sanders supporters to hear this. I know you were angry when I said that this was the case in my predictions article, but it just happens to be the truth. I wish it wasn’t. I prefer Bernie if your state hasn’t voted yet, and you want to vote for Bernie by all means. Do so, but we’re not likely to see him become the nominee and this debate didn’t change that, of course, this shallow level of analysis is not itself enough to count as a breakdown of this debate, to know that Biden still winning by very strong odds.

We wouldn’t even have to read the debate. We just have to scan the headlines to confirm that at no point did bite and tear his shirt off and begin making ape noises a la Alex Jones, I’m the weirdo, because I’m sitting in the tree winning the Democratic nomination, is also a rather trivial goal for Biden’S campaign at this point, it’s also an implausible target for Bernie to hit now that Biden’s lead is so close to insurmountable.

Both campaigns ought to be looking at the next stage of the 2020 election and each have their own separate targets to hit. Regarding that, this brings us to our next question: who did what they needed to do when it comes to this question? It’S not a one or the other situation, while it is impossible for both Bernie and Biden to improve their odds of winning the Democratic primary. Their goals for the next phase could be met by both candidates at the same time, or not met by either or met by one, but not the other.

I spoke about what these goals ought to be for each candidate again in my predictions article for this debate, but I’ll reiterate them briefly here for Biden. The goal is uniting the Democratic Party. It doesn’t do him any good to win the Democratic nomination only to lose the general election to Donald Trump, while he secured above 50 % of Democratic support in the primary race. That’S simply not enough to beat Trump to do that.

He needs to unite the party. He needs to assure Sanders supporters that he’ll look out for them, not just his more moderate backers and he needs to win them over without losing the support of his current constituency. So let me say especially to the young voters, who have been inspired by senator Sanders. I hear you I know what’s at stake, I know what we have to do. Our goal is a campaign and my goal as a candidate for president is to unify this party and then to unify the nation for Sanders.

The goal is to secure concessions, move Biden to accept more progressive policy, get him to promise cabinet positions to progressive politicians, basically, on accomplishing these goals, Bernie secure to win if Biden looks like he’s. Shifting towards the left Biden, secure to win, looks like the left will shift toward him conveniently both of these things begin to be addressed in a section of the debate in which Biden is asked about policies he’s recently adopted Vice President Biden yesterday, you endorsed an Elizabeth Warren plan that would undo key parts of the bankruptcy law you helped pass in 2005.

A few hours ago, you announced support for making public college tuition free for families who make less than a hundred and twenty five thousand dollars a year. Something senator Sanders has supported what changed. Indeed, both of these things indicate a leftward shift for Joe Biden and both represent Biden’s effort to win over the progressive wing of the party, notably, of course, when it comes to tuition.

Free college. Biden’S position is still not as far to the left as Bernie’s as a statement from Sanders campaign argues. It’S great that Joe Biden is now supporting a position that was in the Democratic platform four years ago. Now we have to go much further. We need to make all public universities, colleges and trade schools tuition free for everyone, like our high schools, our we need to cancel all student debt and we can fund it with a small tax on Wall Street speculation.

Two things number one: let’s talk about the bankruptcy bill, the bankruptcy bill was passing overwhelmingly and I improved. I had a choice. It was going to pass and a Republican president Republican Congress, and I offered two amendments to make sure that people under $ 50,000 would not be affected, and women and children would go to the front of the line on alimony and support payments. I did not like the bill, I did not support the bill and I made it clear to the industry.

I didn’t like the bill. Fine, his characterization of his previous non support for the bankruptcy bill is a little deceptive. Abc News describes. The bill is something that he and Warren, famously sparred over in the past CNN confirms this and described Biden as a leading advocate of the bill. According to the intercept Biden pushed for years to ram the bill through voting for some version of it at least four times between 1998 and 2005, often against the majority of Democrats and even inserting its language into a 2000 Foreign Relations bill and Biden did the opposite Of what he claims on the amendments, the record makes clear that, as Senator Biden used Klout to push for the law’s passage and to defeat amendments to shield servicemembers women and children from its harsh treatment, Adam Levitin, a bankruptcy law, professor at Georgetown Law, wrote in January When votes were taken, middle-class Joe was no friend to the middle class.

When Sanders got a chance, he mentioned something that the moderators had not. That Biden did more than help pass a bankruptcy bill. Joe. Why memories Kirk you helped write that penguin seat belt sander sent but Biden retorted, I did not Biden, had in fact helped draft day 2000 version of the bill that was pocket vetoed by President Bill Clinton. Now all of this is to say more than just that Biden as being a little shady about his record.

The fact is, he supported this law in the past and is shifting to the left and undoing it in particular, he’s shifting toward Bernie’s position as well as Bernie noted during the debate. You said Joe got. A majority for people in the Senate voted for it you’re right overwhelming you drove the whelmingly well, I voted against it in the house and I was right. This encapsulate smutch of Bernie’s response to Biden’s recent leftward shift.

Biden is now coming around on the issues, but for Bernie leadership is about supporting the right thing before it’s popular and I’m glad that Joe is on board. But what leadership is about is going forward when it’s not popular, when it’s an idea that you get criticized for so I’m proud of that fact, and I’m proud of my leadership on many issues, Joe it since the campaign has come around like talked about raising that Minimum wage 15 bucks an hour four years ago, Joe so did I and I went out at $ 15, an hour 15 dollars an hour in New York City go cup to the governor.

I will quote the god not aware all right. I am not aware of. Should be aware, look Biden is essentially correct on this. He wasn’t necessarily supporting a $ 15 federal minimum wage, which was Sanders position, but he did support a $ 15 minimum wage in the state of New York. As far back as September of 2015, which is actually much more than four years ago, your member, that’s America. It was you know: gay marriage today is considered a little bit differently than it was 25 years ago.

I remember that vote. It was a very hard vote. I voted against the Defense of Marriage Act. You voted for it. I voted a since the bankruptcy bill. You voted for it. I voted against the war in Iraq, which was also a tough vote. You voted for. I voted against the sastras trade agreements like NAFTA and PNTR with China, which cost this country over 4 million good-paying jobs. You voted for it. I voted against the Hyde Amendment, which denies low-income women the right to get an abortion.

You have consistently voted for it. I don’t know what your position is on it today, but you have consistently voted for it. In other words, all that I’m saying here we can argue about the merits of the bill. It takes courage, sometimes to vote. Do the right thing now, fortunately, for our discussion here Biden was then directly asked by Jake Tapper how he plans on winning over Sanders supporters. If he secures the Democratic nomination, how will you appeal to supporters of senator Sanders when you do disagree on so many issues, but in this dejected response to this is pretty funny he’s making it hard for me right now.

I was trying to give him credit for some things. He might take the credit for things he wants to do. That is pretty much. What we’re witnessing Biden is offering a couple of small concessions to the left and Bernie’s, not exactly welcoming him with open arms. Considering just how much Bernie was able to get Clinton in the Democratic Party to shift to the left in 2016, it’s not surprising that to token policy shifts isn’t enough for Sanders this time around, it’s probably the right strategy for Bernie to push for more.

At this point, I’m surprised Biden is surprised that this isn’t enough anyway, Biden’s response continues here. Look I think that I wan na make it clear if Bernie’s a nominee. I will not only support him. I will campaign for him and I believe the people who support me will do the same thing, because the existential threat to the United States of America is Donald Trump. Two critical errors Biden makes here first saying that he’ll support Bernie, if he wins now, is too little too late.

He should have made that clear when Bernie was in the lead, when Bernie was winning Biden didn’t even say that the candidate with the most pledged delegates should win the convention. So it’s pretty hard for him to win over Bernie supporters by saying now that Bernie’s losing all support him if he wins by the way. Of course, Bernie also pledged during this debate that he’d support Joe if he wins, but he already made that pledge before Joe.

Even entered the race by promising to support whoever the Democratic, not he happens, to be the other critical air for Biden here is saying that Donald Trump is the big threat to the United States. Look, I don’t like Trump. I want him to lose the general election. I think all Democrats and progressive independents feel the same way, but when you describe Trump as the big threat, it undermines all the other problems facing America, as Andrew yang often pointed out during this election Trump is a symptom, not the cause of all our problems, arguing That Trump is the essential threat, makes Biden’s campaign, look like a campaign to go back to normal, which is not going to be effective for winning over progressives populist.

Young people and Biden actually repeated this theme multiple times throughout the debate, indicating that he and Bernie fundamentally agreed because they both wanted to get rid of Trump. An idea Sanders firmly rejected senator Sanders and I both agree. We need medical health care should be a right, not a privilege. We both agree. We have to give deal with student debt, we both agree. We have to deal with education and access to education.

We both agree that we deal. We have a new green deal to deal with the existential threat that faces humanity. We disagree on the detail of how we do it, but we don’t disagree on the principle. It’S just not true. Biden’S version of the public option is one of the more conservative out there. It doesn’t even automatically enroll people who lose their private health care. Bernie’S Medicare for all plan is a substantially progressive, single-payer health care system, one that even covers things like prescription, medication, dental and eyeglasses.

All things not even covered by Canada’s health care system in terms of the environment Biden’s green New Deal is the same as the version Bernie supports in name only Senate resolution 59 calls for the u.S. To hit net zero emissions in ten years, a full two decades Before the special report on climate change of 2018 claims, the entire world must be at that level. In other words, the green New Deal that Bernie supports means leading the world in terms of hitting emissions targets.

Biden calls for the u.S. To reach Net Zero emissions by 2050. Thus, his goal is for the country to meet the bare minimum target just in time to join the rest of the world. Should it continue to exist at that time, so yeah their policies are different, as Bernie pointed out, but details make a difference. Bernie and Biden. Actually clashed extensively on climate change with Bernie, insisting that Biden’s plans did not go far enough and Biden essentially arguing that there’s no big difference to be seen.

Oh, we are talking about the absolute need and I want to hear Joe’s position on this. This is not a middle of the ground thing. This is not building a few more solar panels or a few more wind turbine. What this is about is transforming our energy system as quickly as we human we can away from fossil fuel. It is insane that we continue to have fracking in America. It is absurd that we give tens of billions of dollars a year in tax breaks and subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.

This has got to end and in now, if we love our kids and future generations, the price tag for your climate plan is about 1.7 trillion dollars. That’S about 14 trillion dollars less than senator Sanders wants to spend on this. Is your plan ambitious enough to tackle this crisis? Yes, it is ambitious enough to tackle the crisis, because what you go to Joe Biden calm, I lay out the first 13 things I would do immediately upon being elected.

I would immediately rejoin the Paris climate Accord, which I helped put together. I would call the 100 nations over a hundred nations, but the hundred major polluters to the United States in the first hundred days to up the ante and make it clear that, in fact, we would in fact, if they didn’t there’d, be a price to pay. And lastly, I would be right now, organizing the hemisphere and the world to provide 20 billion dollars for the Amazon for Brazil no longer to burn the Amazon.

So they could have forests and no no longer forests. But they could have farming saying all well and good. But nowhere near enough, I mean you mentioned. We started this debate talking about a war like situation in terms of the coronavirus, and we said we have to act accordingly. You said it before right. I said it. We have to act dramatically boldly if we’re going to save lives in this country and around the world.

I look at climate change in exactly the same way. It’S not a question of re-entering the Paris of court. That’S fine! Who cares not a big deal? What Joe was saying goes nowhere near enough: it’s not a question of money. Let me give me a minute here: let’s we have time to talk about this: no more subsidies for fossil fuel industry, no more drilling on federal lands, no more drilling, including offshore, no ability for the oil industry to continue to drill period and number one Biden’s plan.

Does not, as he seems to suggest in the debate, give oil companies no more ability to drill it. Just stops. The issuing of new permits for drilling on public lands and waters places limits on methane pollution for new and existing oil and gas operations and bans of oil companies from operating new drilling sites in the Arctic. Thank you look. Obviously the Paris Accord is is useful, but it doesn’t go anywhere.

If you laughter Joe, then you’re missing the point here. This is an existential crisis. Bingo, who are you you talk about? You know I’m talking about stopping fracking as soon as we possibly can. I’M talking about telling the fossil fuel industry that they are going to stop destroying this planet, no ifs, buts and maybes about it. I’M talking about so why to try it well, I’m not sure your proposal does it.

We’Ve got to take on the fossil fuel industry. Your plan does not do that. My plan takes down the fossil for the industry and it unites the world. You just got finished saying: what’s he going to do he’s going to bring these countries together, make it clear to them. I’M saying we bring them together, make them live up to the commitments. If they don’t live up to the commitments they pay a financial price for it.

You know, you’re talking about making countries around the world fulfill their commitments. Those commitments are not enough. What this moment is about Joe, is that the scientists are telling us they underestimated the severity of the crisis. They were wrong. The problem is more severe. You cannot continue, as I understand Joe believes, to continue fracking correct me if I am wrong not wrong. In the extensive climate change plan biden has on his website.

Nowhere does the word fracking even appear at any rate, I think we’ve seen enough of the debate already to analyze whether Bernie and Biden are hitting their goals when it comes to Biden. His goal should be to win over Bernie supporters. What he’s offered so far are basically these four points. I’Ve changed my mind on that bankruptcy bill, but I know it’s never actually wrong. I’Ll go half the way on tuition, free public colleges.

I agree with Bernie on health care and climate change. As long as you ignore the details and most crucially of all, I’m not Donald Trump and that’s what really matters. I expect that this is not enough to win over progresses. I’M sure there will be a lot of progressives who will vote to just vote out. Donald Trump, but Biden really hasn’t done much to welcome them into the full progressives, will likely be quite frustrated that he’s pretending his policies aren’t all that different from Bernie’s and pretending that the few concessions that he is made don’t actually represent.

A change for him is likewise frustrated in terms of winning over progressives Biden. I think failed in his mission now, if Bernie’s goal was to shift Biden to the left, we really didn’t see that happen during this debate. Either sure Biden came to the table with a couple of small concessions, but at no point was there any sense. That Biden would consider accepting one of Bernie’s positions. Indeed, in several places he repeatedly refused to acknowledge that a difference even exists on climate change.

Biden was firm that his plan did enough on health care. The number one issue for Democrats Biden likewise refused to compromise. Instead, he continued to argue against Medicare for all in this debate. Bernie talks about. Excuse me the senator talks about his Medicare for all. He still hasn’t told you: how is he going to ever get it passed? He hasn’t told you how in fact there’s any possibility that happening.

He hadn’t told you how much it’s going to cost. You hadn’t tell you how it’s going to apply. It doesn’t kick in for four years, even after it passes, given that he’s not likely to change his mind on what he said last week to lawrence O’Donnell, that even if Congress passed a medicare-for-all bill as president, he would veto it, or at least that’s what he Seemed to say his campaign has denied this, and his statement was actually kind of complicated lawrence.

O’Donnell asked. Let’S flash forward, you are president Bernie Sanders is still active in the Senate. He manages to get Medicare for all through the Senate in some compromised version. The Elizabeth Warren version or other version Nancy Pelosi gets a version of it through the House of Representatives. It comes to your desk. Do you veto? It Biden responded. I would veto anything that delays providing the security and the certainty of health care being available now, if they got that through by some miracle – and there was an epiphany that occurred and some miracle occurred that said: okay, it passed, then you got to look at the Costs I want to know how do they find the thirty five trillion dollars? What is that doing? Is it going to significantly raise taxes on the middle class which it will what’s going to happen? It sounds to me, like Biden, is saying he would veto it, but also that he’s having trouble expressing himself clearly at any rate, from what we’ve seen so far.

It seems clear that Bernie’s failed to push Biden into granting concessions to progressives and Biden’s failed to position himself such that the full base of the Democratic Party will be excited enough to go vote for him in the general election. It also seems clear that when it comes to winning the actual arguments and getting facts right, Bernie’s overall doing better than Biden at least so far, this brings us to our next big question about winning this debate, who had a better debate performance.

This is perhaps the cleanest way of evaluating a debate who debated better, whose arguments were more effective, logical and based on accurate premises who had better stage presence whose rhetoric was more elegant. Who is more persuasive when it came to the more subtle art of poise and stage presence? Both candidates had some issues while discussing the present pandemic, Bernie went on for a rather long time, accidentally referring to the virus as Ebola.

The Ebola crisis, in my view, exposes the dysfunctionality of our healthcare system and how fully prepared we are, despite how much money that we spend and the Ebola crisis is also, I think, exposing the cruelty and the unjustness of our economy. Today we have more income and wealth inequality in America today than any time in a hundred years, and what that means that, in the midst of this crisis, you know, if you’re, a multimillionaire, no one’s happy about this crisis, you’re going to get through it you’re going To get everything you need you’re, not worried about health care.

Half of our people are living paycheck to paycheck. We got people who are struggling, working, two or three jobs to put food on the table. What is going to happen to them? So the lesson to be learned is: we have got to move aggressively right now to address the economic crisis as a result of Ebola as a result, keep talking about a bowl. You got a bowl over my head here. Right now, biting himself had made multiple references to Ebola and h1n1, although it didn’t seem to me like he was mislabeling the current pandemic with those references at any rate he began discussing this current pandemic, while coughing and speaking in a rather scratchy voice.

First of all, my heart goes out to those who have already lost someone, or those who are suffering from the virus and dry cough is, of course, a symptom related to this flu-like virus and Biden and Sanders both have combated issues about their advanced age. In terms of projecting youthful vigor, both candidates seem to have come up a little short based on these admittedly trivial problems with their performances.

Far more important to a presidential debate is projecting a general level of strength and passion and at various points in this debate, both candidates – I think, accomplish this well enough. My state is three feet above sea level. I don’t need a lecture on what’s going to happen about rising seas. I know what happens I readed the whole Delmarva Peninsula, just like it is in South Carolina and arrest, something I know a little bit about.

I wrote the first climate change bill that was in the Congress was PolitiFact’s. It was a game-changer, I’m the guy who came along and said with Dick Lugar that we’re going to trade, we’ll forgive your debt. If you don’t cut down your farm, I’ve been way ahead of this curve. This idea that all of a sudden bernie found this out is amazing to me how in God’s name does it happen that we end up with 87 million people who are uninsured or underinsured, and there are people are reading this program tonight and say I’m not feeling Well, should I go to the doctor, but I can’t afford to go to the doctor.

What happens if I am sick? It’S going to cost thousands of dollars for treatment who’s going to feed my kids. We are the only major country on earth not to guarantee health care to all people, we’re spending so much money, and yet we are not even prepared for this pandemic. How come we don’t have enough doctors, how come hospitals and rural areas are shutting down? How come people can’t afford to get the prescription drugs they need because we have a bunch of crooks, we’re running the pharmaceutical industry, ripping us off every single day and I’ll.

Tell you something right now: in the midst of this epidemic, you’ve got people in the pharmaceutical industry are saying: oh wow, what an opportunity to make a fortune eloquence is also an important quality for a president, and, while Biden didn’t have any major issues here, as in Previous debates, it was clear he fumbled over his words bit and lost his train of thought every now and then a problem not exhibited by Sanders when it comes to basing arguments on false premises, buttons seem to be more guilty of this than was Sanders.

He was generally correct about the $ 15 minimum wage support, which Sanders said he wasn’t sure about, but he also made a number of factual errors when it came to Sanders record. He claimed that Sanders voted against the auto bailout. Sanders did vote against tarp, which bailed out the banks and a portion of that money eventually did make its way to automakers, but he also voted for the 14 billion dollar.

Auto rescue plan in December of 2008 Pheidon continued to claim in this debate that his vote to authorize the use of force in Iraq was a mistake and, based purely on the assumption that the measure would just be used to get inspectors in. The implication is that he ever actually was in favor of the Iraq war. That’S not the case in a speech in Delaware in 2003 Biden said. Let everyone here be absolutely clear.

I supported the resolution to go to war. I am NOT opposed to war to remove weapons of mass destruction from Iraq. I am NOT opposed to war to remove Saddam from those weapons if it comes to that part of ITINs. Claim of why he was misled is that he trusted George Bush, who, according to Biden, made a promise not to go to war Bush denies ever making such a promise Biden claimed that Sanders is backed by nine super PACs, while Sanders does have the backing of a Number of progressive groups, including nine that are part of the people power for Bernie coalition.

These are not super PACs. Most are political nonprofits Biden, on the other hand, does enjoy the support of Democratic super PACs. There are more things that bite and lied about, but I’ll get into those later. For the sake of balance, I tried to dig up some false statements from Bernie in this debate, but it was actually difficult to find clear examples. Sanders claimed that at least 30,000 and up to 60,000 people died due to inadequate health care.

This is generally supported by a study in The Lancet medical journal, but the figure is actually 68,000. According to that study, other experts have cast doubts on those figures, though, as the study relied on some data from a paper from 2009 before the ACA came into existence, which would have changed those figures. The fact check from the New York Times also argues that Sanders inflated, the degree to which he and former President Barack Obama were united in opposition to an immigration bill in 2000, while both did vote as Sanders claimed against the bill.

Obama also voted to end. The debate and take a final vote on the whole bill three times, while on that procedural vote around the bill, Sanders voted in the opposite direction. That same fact, check also claimed that Sanders point about Biden’s. Multiple attempts to cut Social Security was true, but lacks contacts. The New York Times pointed out that, while Biden did praise and vote for several measures that would cut Social Security.

He has also vowed to protect the program at other times, including in the Senate, in a 2012 vice presidential debate and in his current campaign, where he has proposed expanding the program not to get off to into a tangent here. But as the intercept points out, Bernie’s characterization of Biden’s fight against Social Security does appear to have some serious validity. In 1984, though, Biden co-sponsored an amendment to freeze military and domestic spending for a year, which included some built-in adjustments for Social Security benefits tantamount to cutting the program.

In a 1995 speech, Biden was more explicit. He bragged about advocating for cuts to Social Security, I’m up for re-election this year and I’m going to remind everybody what I did at home, which is going to cost me politically Biden said removing his glasses. What I argued if we should freeze federal spending, I meant Social Security as well. I meant Medicare and Medicaid. I meant veterans Bennet. I meant every single, solitary thing in the government and I not only tried it once I tried it twice.

I tried it a third time and I tried it a fourth time, as Vice President Biden worked to help negotiate the bowl Simpsons Commission’s balanced budget efforts. After it disbanded Biden brought on its director, Bruce Reid, as his chief of staff and the next Obama era. Push for a balanced budget, including Social Security cuts, was even known as the Biden Committee Reid is now a senior policy advisor with Biden’s presidential campaign.

Again, there’s no denial by the New York Times. That Biden did several times promote the idea of cutting Social Security. They just point out that he’s also argued for the exact opposite. I don’t think that actually undercuts Sanders claim that Biden repeatedly boasted about pushing for cuts to the program. On balance, when you look at the fact checking it’s pretty clear, that Biden was considerably less honest than was Sanders during this debate, and that’s God account against him most important of all and is perhaps the quality of the arguments presented.

Now we could go through every second of this debate to break this down, but that seems like an overly exhaustive exercise, so instead, let’s highlight a few represented of disputes of note1, fairly even exchange. I think between Biden and Bernie was over. The idea of a political revolution. Biden made his case for smaller change. Rather effectively. We have problems we have to solve now now, what’s a revolution going to do, disrupt everything in the meantime, we want a revolution.

Let’S act now pass the Biden health care plan, which takes Obama care, restores all the cuts made to it subsidized it further. We can do that now. I can get that passed. I can get that done in my. If I’m president United States, America, that will be a fundamental change and it happens now, I can tell you from experience being a significant consumer of health care with my son as my family, all the things we’ve gone through.

What people want is hope, and they need it now, not four years from now, but Bernie too made a strong case on this subject, arguing that broader changes are needed to deal with a widely corrupt political system. Why is it that over the last forty five years, despite the huge increases in productivity and technology, the average worker today is not making a nickel more in real loans? Why is it that over the last 30 years, the richest 1 % I’ve seen a 21 trillion dollar increase in their wealth? Bottom half of America, 900 billion dollar decline in their wealth, and it comes down to something Jake.

We don’t talk about the power structure in America, who has the power and I’ll tell you why it’s the power? It’S the people who contribute money. The billionaire’s will contribute money to political campaigns. Those people have the power and if you want to make real changes in this country, if you want to create an economy that works for all, not just a few, you know what you need. You need to take on Wall Street.

You need to take on the drug companies and the insurance companies and the fossil fuel industry. You don’t take campaign contributions from them. You take them on and create an economy that works for. All Biden makes a strong point in response here touting his own path. Support for campaign finance reform. You want to do that. Do what I proposed over 30 years ago, federally fund all elections, no private contributions in election process.

If you want to do that join me. Join me, my constitutional amendment that I’ve been proposing Biden’s not making this up he’s fought for public funding of elections since the early days of his political career back 1974. Just two years after he was first elected to the Senate Biden told The Washingtonian. I’Ve ended up spending over $ 300,000 to get elected. I believe that public financing of federal election campaigns is the only thing that will ensure good candidates and save the two-party system.

It is the most degrading thing in the world to go out with your hat in your hand and beg for money, but that’s what you have to do if you haven’t got your own resources Biden, also continued the fight decades later teaming up with John Kerry and Bill Bradley to attempt to create a system of public funding for congressional candidates and in 1997 he was a co-sponsor of the clean money. Clean Elections Act still Bernie was fairly effective in rebuffing Biden’s history on this, pointing to the hypocrisy of his using super PACs.

Now it’s good that you had an idea 30 years ago. I don’t want to join you. Why don’t you join me? Why don’t you get rid of the super PAC that you have right now, which is running very ugly, negative ads about me, but laughter? That’S just the truth and I’ve got two other super PACs running ads against us. Won’T you just say right now, go on television and say hey, you know what I think in the past Joe.

If I’m not mistaken, you condemned super PACs, they’re correct you get rid of the nine super PACs you have. I don’t have an ID sub, I don’t have any size, mommy, listen! Oh yeah! You go ahead. Let’S go come on. Give me a break, as I noted earlier Biden is indeed using super PACs, while Bernie is not at the same time, Biden was able to undermine Bernie’s point about money and politics in terms of this primary race, noting that overall, he had raised less than Bernie and Still managed to secure strong wins on Super Tuesday, Brian look in the last Super Tuesday and before that, Bernie outspent me two three four five six to one and I still want I didn’t, have any money and I still want.

Of course, this does ignore the fact that, while buying it himself was outspent by Bernie, he also very likely benefited from the spending of candidates like butta, judge and Klobuchar, who dropped out to endorse Biden just prior to Super Tuesday. It also ignores any advantage. Biden might have enjoyed in terms of more favorable coverage in the mainstream media. This whole conversation about political revolution versus improving the system was, in my view, rather balanced, but probably lean slightly in favor of Joe Biden.

Bernie was able to diminish impact of Biden’s long history of supporting campaign finance reform, but that history is real and, in my view, valid Bernie also had little to say about Biden being able to beat him despite having less money, even though counter arguments are obviously possible. I just pointed out to myself similar themes to this conversation occurred earlier in the debate when Bernie and Biden clashed over issues surrounding the pandemic and Medicare for all.

Well, the two largely agreed that Trump was not handling the emergency well and on a number of measures that needed to be urgently taken to deal with the current crisis. They disagreed on the relationship between the crisis and single-payer health care. Bernie argued that Medicare for all would reduce the damage done by the disease. Biden disagreed: it is not working in Italy right now and they have a single-payer system.

This seems to be a bit of a straw. Man argument. No one is saying that a single-payer system prevents pandemics from occurring. The question is whether having a single-payer system improves a country’s ability to deal with one and Italy’s current infection rate is not itself sufficient data to draw a conclusion. Here’S House Anders took on this challenge. First of all, the dysfunctionality of the current health care system is obviously apparent.

As I said earlier, there are people who hesitate go to the doctor you’re going to have the maze of regulations. Well, if this is my income, but that’s my income, can I get it? Can I not get it clearly, we are not preparing Trump only exacerbates the crisis in terms of Medicare for all, despite what the Vice President is saying, what the experts tell us is that one of the reasons that we are unprepared and have been unprepared is we Don’T have a system, we got thousands of private insurance plans.

That is not a system that is prepared to provide health care to all people. Sanders is largely correct here, as executive vice president for health policy at the Kaiser Institute, Larry Leavitt tweeted, addressing coronavirus with tens of millions of people without health insurance or with inadequate insurance, will be a uniquely American challenge among developed countries not having an existing universal system.

In place, in other words, means that organizing medical relief efforts is inherently more challenging. What’S more, having a population that is not used to getting free health CAIR could make people more hesitant to seek treatment or testing, even if, for the time being, those things are provided by the government for free Biden didn’t seem to quite understand these points. In his response that has nothing to do when you’re in a national crisis, a national crisis says we’re responding, it’s all free, you don’t have to pay for a thing that has nothing to do with whether or not you have an insurance policy.

This is a crisis. We’Re at war with the virus, so Bernie’s argument is essentially that the system is not used to dealing with a universal issue and people are less likely to seek treatment if they’re not used to getting it for free Biden’s responses. In this case, we would provide it for free that actually misses the point that bernie is making and for that reason, on this particular discussion, I think that Bernie’s argumentation was superior overall.

It was a fairly even conversation, but I think this one leans in favor of Sanders, so we need a tiebreaker. Probably the most lopsided dispute of the evening was a continuation of a conversation started in the last debate about Bernie Sanders calling out authoritarianism while at the same time acknowledging accomplishments made by places like Cuba and China. China is undoubtedly an authoritarian Society.

Okay, but would anybody deny any economist deny that extreme poverty in China today is much less than what it was 40 or 50 years ago? That’S a fact: we condemn authoritarianism, whether it’s in China, Russia, Cuba, anyplace else, but to simply say that nothing’s ever done by any of those administration’s had a positive impact on their people. What I think being correct praising of a Sandinistas, the praising of of Cuba, the praising just now of China.

China is an authoritarian dictatorship. That’S what it is. We have to deal with them because they’re there, but the idea that they in fact have increased the wealth of people in that country. It’S been marginal. The change that’s taking place Bernie is facial reaction. Here is absolutely correct. The idea that China’s economic growth has been marginal is fairly ridiculous. According to World Bank data, in 1990, China’s GDP per capita at purchasing power parity was 988 dollars.

In 2000, that figure had increased to 2,900 36 in 2018. It was 18 thousand two hundred and thirty seven dollars. In other words, GDP per capita grew in eighteen years by more than eighteen fold in the same period, by the same measures, the u.S. Grew from just under twenty four thousand dollars in 1990 to just under sixty three thousand dollars in 2018. That’S a growth of 2.6 times, so China’s growth rate was about seven times greater than that of the United States.

So Biden was pretty off on this one and Bernie pressed Biden on the issue. Did China make progress in ending extreme poverty over the last 50 years? That’S a no that’s like saying Jack, the Ripper. No, it’s not! This is the problem. We can’t talk. I know, there’s a political line. I understand China’s terrible awful, nothing ever good right. I don’t know, but the fact of the matter is China, of course, is an authoritarian slide.

It’S what I just said. It’S a dictatorship! That’S what I just said five minutes ago. You know, I feel Bernie’s frustration here, he’s being attacked for pointing out clear, demonstrably facts. In my view, this is the problem with political correctness in America today the old right-wingers sometimes complain about not being able to call Asians Oriental anymore or having to refer to trans people by their preferred pronouns, but you want to see political correctness run amok.

I think that that’s when someone faces backlashed for pointing to accurate information, at any rate, here’s Biden attempting to square the fact that Bernie and Obama had essentially the same things to say about Cuba and villainized Bernie for making accurate points about Cuba and China. The idea of occasionally saying something nice about a country is one thing. The idea of praising a country that is violating Human Rights around the world is in fact makes our allies wonder.

What’S going on, I would say: that’s a distinction without a difference, but in fact it’s a distinction without a distinction saying something. Nice means exactly the same thing as praising throughout this entire discussion. Biden repeatedly points to China and Cuba and the Soviet Union calling them dictatorships or authoritarian regimes, as if he differs on these things with Berni, but bernie agrees with those characterizations.

He says so repeatedly. Unprompted again, a distinction without a distinction, while this exchange may or may not benefit by it and politically probably helped in Florida. As far as presenting good arguments goes, it’s an utter failure, a disheartening one at that. Overall, when it comes to debate performance itself, I think Bernie had a measurable upper hand. He made fewer factual errors and his arguments were on balance more effective, of course, that doesn’t change the fact that this debate happens within a context of an election when it comes to the Democratic primary race, even though Bernie may have argued better and lied less.

Nothing about his performance can change the dire circumstances that his campaign is currently in Biden was winning before this debate and he continues to lead after him. But of course the primary race also has a context. It seems clear to me that Biden needs to go beyond eking out a win in the Democratic primary race if he expects to beat Trump in November. He needs to prove that he is strong enough to take on Trump and he needs to unify the Democratic Party.

Inspire all Democrats, including young people, Latinos and progressives to vote for him. I don’t think he accomplished that in this debate, bita needs to go beyond criticizing Trump and progressives and give Americans something to vote for, not just something to vote against. In a word, he needs to find a way to make the Democratic Party and himself the answer to this question. What does winning look like?


Promote Your Brand with Allshouse Designs

 

Categories
Politics

Authoritarianism: The political science that explains Trump

I, like people, who weren’t captured. Ok, I hate to tell you. ” The 2016 Republican presidential nominee disregards the norms of adult behavior. He disregards the norms of American democracy. As we know it, it should be heartbreaking to every American. That we have a president who suggests there will be a religious test for anybody that wishes to come to our shores.

His unusual rhetoric at times. So Extreme that political experts and commentators were blindsided by his rise. We better be ready for the fact that he might be leading the republican ticket.” I know you don’t believe that”. How did Donald Trump attract such broad support? Within the Republican party, And what does it mean for the US beyond this election, And it turns out that this is a question that can be answered to a really surprising extent via this niche field of political science, It developed a theory about what’s called authoritarianism.

Authoritarianism not a dictatorship

We are not talking about dictatorships here, Authoritarianism is a term political scientists use for a worldview that values, order and Authority and distrusts outsiders and social change. And when authoritarians feel threatened, they Look for strongman leaders. Leaders who are punitive, who target out-groups and have a simple, forceful leadership style that makes them feel strong. And if You were going to grow that candidate in a lab. You would have Donald Trump.

“I’m, going to bomb the shit out of Them.”, that’s Donald Trump. When you get these terrorists you have to take out their families, they care about their lives. Don’t kid yourself, But they say they don’t care about their lives. You have to take out their families. Authoritarianism is not in an of itself. Necessarily a partisan issue For most of this country. History, authoritarians. Are likely divided between the two parties, But now only one of the parties really appeals.

To them, What happened was the Republican party Started to embrace what it referred to as traditional values and it stood against a Series of major social changes in this country, After initially supporting civil rights, Republicans Began courting southern white voters who opposed racial integration. They turned against the Equal Rights Amendment denounced abortion and later fought against same-sex marriage.

Our nation must enact a Constitutional Amendment to protect marriage in America More recently, foreign threats like terrorism, Have become major political issues with Republicans taking positions that align with authoritarian Fears and preferences 2002 headline Republicans get a bonus from War on Terrorism, So Marc Hetherington and Jonathan Weiler, Two political scientists: They tracked data over several decades and they found that Authoritarian voters were shifting into the Republican Party, So that means that when Authoritarians become scared when they become activated by a particular social change or Issue, the Republican Party can ’ t, ignore them And they are a ready-made constituency.

For a candidate like Donald Trump, Are you going to have a massive deportation force? “You’re, going to have a deportation force, bring back waterboarding and I’d bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding.” Testing people for authoritarianism is a bit Tricky. You can’t just ask people, you know, Are you really freaked out by social change? Do racial differences unsettle you? Do you support strongman leaders? Because Those are very sensitive questions and people won’t necessarily answer them honestly.

So instead political scientists ask people About something more neutral, their parenting preferences, Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have independence or respect For elders, Obedience or self-reliance, These questions seem like they ’re about. Raising children, but really what they ’ re asking people is how much they value order. And authority So when political scientists tested these 4 parenting questions against the behaviors They knew authoritarians exhibited, they found out that the correlation was very close.

It was very predictive, at least for white voters Using this 4-question test. Vox worked with Morning, Consult in February to poll a large sample of likely voters. Our results yielded a few really interesting things. The first one was that yes scoring High on the authoritarianism questions was very predictive of support for Trump A political science PhD student named Matthew, Macwilliams has found similar results.

He’s done 2 polls, both of which found that authoritarianism is not only strongly Predictive of Trump support, but that it seems to do a better job of predicting it than virtually Any other factor We also looked at what authoritarian voters Are afraid of On things like gun, violence or car accidents or prescription drugs? There wasn’t a huge difference between authoritarians and non authoritarians, But when it came to threats associated with people, and particularly foreign people, authoritarians Were much more afraid And we identified policies that authoritarians Were more likely to support So authoritarians were much more likely to say, for instance, that the United States Should use force rather than diplomacy when dealing with countries that threaten our interests? Overseas And they were much more likely to want to sacrifice civil liberties in exchange.

For safety “, I want surveillance of certain mosques. Ok, If that is ok, I want surveillance.” It’s a set of priorities that doesn’t. Always align with the Republican establishment. They don’t seem to have that much. Interest in small government – And they definitely don’t – seem particularly interested in shrinking entitlements like Social Security or Medicaid. This theory, doesn’t fully explain the Trump Phenomenon, — researchers will probably study this election for decades, But what it tells us is that he’s benefited from a larger shift in this country, one that goes beyond any One candidate, Trump isn’t just a fluke: He is, not somebody who is just doing well because he had name recognition or was a famous TV star.

My Opinion

The president has a large group of people that believe in him, but not over 50% of the United States of America. They want these things and they ’re, going to be looking for politicians, Who can give it to them? And that means that Donald Trump could be just the first of many Trumps in American politics. How freaking annoying. However, with the economy taking a dive and his failing manage tactics of COVID-19. He may be out as quick as he can in. His daily speeches are annoying and really show how he has a lack of empathy!

Webmasters will help you with your WordPress site. See awesome website management packages at Allshouse Designs
Categories
Food Healthy life style

Top Healthy Foods!

Your body is a temple.

You are what you eat!

— General Belief

In today’s food post I will be writing about some of the healthiest foods. For this list we picked the essential super foods that have shown to significantly improve people’s health and well-being. While there are many things that can be incorporated into a healthy diet, this list focuses on things that can be eaten and are readily accessible to most people.

Avocados

Healthier avocado is rich in oleic acid, which lowers the risk of heart and inflammatory diseases. It also enhances the body’s absorption of carotenoids, essential nutrients, found in leafy greens and red or yellow vegetables, add avocado to a salad, and you actually amplify the nutritional value of virtually everything else in the bowl and don’t be afraid of the avocados high fat content.

It’s what makes it creamy delicious and incredibly nutritious, plus it’s good fat number nine kale, while all leafy greens should be part of a healthy diet, including spinach. It’s kale that packs the greatest punch rich in various essential vitamins, a cup of kale actually matches and sometimes surpasses a cup of milk in terms of calcium content. It’s complex chemical composition can help to fight cancer and can actually repair DNA in damaged cells, sauteed or steamed pureed, or boiled this hearty veg its nutritional content, regardless of preparation.

Spunks is a Healthy Snack!

Check out this great healthy pumpkin seed snack! Order them up on amazon today!

Sweet Potatos

So if you think you don’t like kale, just try preparing it another way: Sweet, potatoes, trumping, even the carrot as a primary source of beta-carotene, the orange fleshed sweet potato, provides a variety of health benefits in one simple to cook easy to eat package. The popular root vegetable helps to balance blood glucose levels, while also raising blood levels of vitamin A essential for maintaining a healthy immune system and eyesight best serve steamed or boiled.

Blue Berries

You can optimize its nutritional benefits by drizzling on a small amount of a healthy fat like olive oil, to enhance your body’s nutrient absorption. Blueberries jam-packed with antioxidants, vitamin C and fiber. This we bury might actually improve memory and slow down or postpone certain cognitive disorders related to aging as fruits go. The blueberry is relatively low in sugar and can help maintain a healthy glycemic level when eaten on a regular basis cheaper and more readily available than the recently lauded goji berry.

The blueberry also maintains its nutritional value when frozen, which means you can reap benefits of this sweet and tangy fruit. All year round number six almonds delicious and versatile. This much-loved nut is actually a seed whose high fat content can satiate a craving while simultaneously improving your overall health almonds are rich in monounsaturated fat, which reduces unhealthy cholesterol levels and lowers the risk of heart disease.

The Almond

A great source of vitamin E, the almond, can help improve overall cardiovascular health and is thought to reduce certain signs of aging want to feel good and maybe even look a little better start snacking on some almonds number five apples. Yes, it’s true an apple a day. Will actually keep the doctor away a good source of vitamin C and soluble fiber Apple’s, improved blood, glucose and cholesterol levels, their antioxidant properties promote the production of collagen, which strengthens veins and capillaries and helps to maintain fresh youthful looking skin a versatile fruit that comes in A variety of types, red, green or gold – this popular snack, has some pretty powerful health benefits.

Salmon

Salmon, rich in b12 vitamin D and with one of the highest concentrations of omega-3 fatty acids of any food wild or organically farmed, is really your best bet when it comes to this fish. Recent studies suggest that eating salmon helped improve cardiovascular functions and might even help to reduce depression and boost learning capabilities, the ultimate brain food when it comes to a healthy diet.

This oily fish is really a no-brainer number three oats. Whole grain. Oats are a great source of soluble fiber and can significantly lower cholesterol, while also preventing heart disease. Some types of breast cancer and colon cancer and sure we know these whole grains might be a little bit boring, but they’re cheap, easy to cook and really really good. For you boost flavor, with a few berries, throw in some almonds and enjoy your body will.

Garlic

Thanks to garlic, a staple ingredient in virtually every type of cooking, an ancient remedy whose medicinal properties stand the test of time. Garlic can improve a meal just as easily as it improves your health, with a variety of antibiotic and anti-inflammatory properties. Garlic boosts your immune system, helps with metabolic functions and has been shown to have certain cancer preventative properties.

The key to keeping its health benefits. Let’s sit after chopping or crushing and never overcook the key to enjoying garlic with friends breath mints before we dig into our number-one healthiest food here are a few honorable mentions number one broccoli eat your greens. Broccoli helps to detoxify the body systems, reduces inflammation and is rich with antioxidants, making it one of the best things you can eat to maintain health and possibly prevent certain types of cancer.

The key to healthy broccoli is preparation. Overcooking not only makes the veg soggy and well gross. It also destroys all nutrient value lightly steaming. It will maintain its texture, flavor and it’s incredibly powerful health benefits. You’ll just have to deal with the taste.

Categories
About Amanda

Meet Amanda

Hello everyone! Welcome to my new blog “Red Alert Food Blog”.

Why this blog?

  • I am Amanda a lover of food and politics. Writing is not my best skill, but I am looking to improve it with this blog
  • Food is key to our well being. It dictates our mood and success of our health. It is very important to understand the value of healthy eating.
  • Politics needs more attention. Today’s politics are really strange and are dictating our children’s future. The lack of empathy from president Trump is just amazing.

Latest Food Post

Latest In Politics

My Healthy Snack Recommendation

Spunks is really the best all natural snack that boost your immune system. Below is a video I found that introduces the owners. It is an old one, but entertaining. Find this awesome shell less pumpkin seed snack on Amazon.com

Amanda LeeRow
Hi! This is me and I love great healthy food that boosts our bodies immune system!