 So, one of my main issues with night two of the Democratic Party debate was that Kamala Harris was essentially being framed as the standard bearer for Medicare for All. But that's actually inaccurate because she no longer supports true Medicare for All. She explicitly moved away from it by proposing a bill that is a pseudo Medicare for All bill that maintains a really large role for private insurance companies, which defeats the purpose of single payer because the goal of moving towards a Medicare for All type system is to eliminate that for-profit motive that leads to patients not getting the care that they need because profit is prioritized. But one of the ways that Kamala Harris tries to legitimize her policy is she says, look, the former HHS secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, says that my plan is great. Now, what is Kamala not telling you? So part of her pseudo Medicare for All bill relies heavily on Medicare Advantage. Now Kathleen Sebelius, for those of you who don't know, works for the Medicare Advantage industry. There's profit to be made here. Now if you don't know what Medicare Advantage is, basically when you turn 65 you get Medicare, but there are still gaps in your coverage that require you to purchase supplemental care. So you buy Medicare Advantage. This isn't something that seniors probably like doing, it's just a necessity. But the goal with Medicare for All is we close those gaps and prove Medicare and then we expand it to everyone. But the impression that I get from Kamala is that she doesn't want to close those gaps, but she still wants to expand Medicare to everyone and then just have Medicare Advantage companies fill in the holes, which is unacceptable. And leaving in the profit motive is really the worst part. And repping someone, using them to legitimize your bill, who is part of the industry, is even more egregious. And I was hoping somebody on the debate stage would call her out for this. Tulsi Gapper did. And she explained exactly why the profit motive must be removed. The reality is right now we don't have a health care system. We have a sick care system and there are far too many people in this country who are sick and unable to get the care that they need because they cannot afford it. So the core of this problem is the fact that big insurance companies and big pharmaceutical companies who've been profiting off the backs of sick people have had to see the table writing this legislation. Now Kamala Harris just talked about Kathleen Sebelius who helped write her bill. This just pointed to the fatal flaw in her proposal. Sebelius works for Medicare Advantage, private insurance company who will stand to profit under her plan. If we're seeking to really reform our health care system, we've got to shut out big insurance and big pharma out of the drafting process so they cannot continue to profit off the backs of the sick people in this country who are searching and in desperate need of care. So when Tulsi Gapper made that point, I literally like collapsed. It was that great because Kamala couldn't really respond to that. She had no idea how to respond to that criticism because she probably didn't anticipate that someone would call her out for that. And she said, well look, Sebelius didn't write my bill, right, but she's praising it and you apparently talked to her about it when you were drafting it, so maybe she didn't directly write it, but you're touting a bill that an industry insider likes. So she is such a disingenuous bad faith actor. She wants to have her cake and eat it too. She wants to shield herself from criticism of Medicare for All that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren received at last night's debate because there's always this criticism, oh, well you want to take away private insurance, which is a bullshit criticism. And what you should do if you truly support Medicare for All is push back against that and say, no, we are not taking away anything. We are offering more than what these for-profit companies are offering. But what did Kamala do? She thought that she'd have it both ways and be smart and say, you know, here's my plan that addresses all of your criticisms. It accommodates the people who want to keep their private insurance. But unfortunately for her, that didn't work out too well on the debate stage because centrists just pretended like she still supported real Medicare for All, but then all she did by proposing this watered down version of Medicare for All was piss off progressives. She got attacked by Kirsten Gillibrand, right? She got attacked by Bill de Blasio, I believe indirectly, and then Tulsi Gabbard just exposed the most gigantic flaw. She called it a fatal flaw with her bill. So not a good luck. This was not a great day for Kamala Harris. I think that she was hoping, you know, lightning would strike twice and she'd have a phenomenal performance. But it didn't happen. And it was largely due to moments like this where Tulsi Gabbard, you know, did a great job at exposing Kamala Harris.