But the "gut feeling" people get, the "instinctive connection" is never about policy; it's about demeanor, image, personality; and also whatever prejudice voters bring to the table.
Trump is master of the content-free image, of the empty but compelling (to some) suit. Someone with a moderate, measured demeanor (like Biden) will never beat him. An older man who can be caricatured as the "angry socialist uncle" doesn't stand a chance. A professor, in an anti-intellectual country? Forget it. A gay man, no matter how bright? The country isn't ready for it (though I am).
We need someone who can go for the jugular; who during the campaign will show no respect for Trump; who will call him the names he deserves. And who supports the more broadly palatable versions of progressive policies, as a first step, to startsthe conversation on difficult choices. Moderately progressive in policy, with a no holds barred aggressive demeanor--maybe Harris can pull it off.
82
Interesting trend in the Times.
It appears that Dom centrists, who lean right, are unwanted in these pages.
This piece today was sort of an impromptu psychological comfort session, in which Tom Friedman is dispatched to soothe, explain, and soft-pedal his comments on how to defeat Trump.
The answers on how to defeat Trump are obvious.
That Friedman is bright out to "answer" the obvious shows how extreme the Party has become.
One theme running through the "questions" dealt with by Friedman is the plaintive cry of a child as in "why?" Why must I wait? You could play that song by Cat Stevens, "Father & Son," and have spared us Mr. Friedman's bromides.
This does not bode well for 2020.
23
THANKS! for not sharing Trump's opinion about the editorial.
26
Friedman, ardent lover of vulture capitalism, gives advice to Democrats much like the Iliad's Greeks bearing gifts for the Trojans. Same principle.
43
A Praetorian Guard solution is desperately needed.
3
The "secret ingredient in their sauce"? That's easy--HATE.
48
Economic issues not being properly addressed by either party animated many Trump voters and put in the WH. Sadly, the picture hasn’t changed. Inflation keeps diminishing the power of salaries for all, but specially for working families Minimum wage is the road to chronic penury. So, Thomas Friedman and many like him are saying don’t talk about these issues, it’s too radical, too socialist. Perhaps running as Sec. Clinton -“it’s my turn”- will do it this time for VP Biden? Unlikely. They all know it, but, yet again, sadly, like friedman, David Brooks ( who fatuously uses Plato and Aristotle to fill his column) , William Kristol (got us into Iraq and now wants us in Iran) and many others, talk from both sides of their mouth: denouncing Trump and “advising” how to defeat him, while really working for his. re-election.
That we haven’t seen the press act like the Washington Post did during the Nixon period is because the press is conflicted with editors and journalist with narrow interests. It’s clear that Trump is corrupt; so, as Jon Stewart said to Congress, “ do your job”!
30
It is genius: Donald Trump has forged a deep, gut-level connection with millions of people who refuse to see him for what he is: a failed businessman (spectacularly so, as it turns out) who speaks in vulgar terms about women, creates racist conspiracy theories, divides people through hatred and has turned soft (read fat). He is vain; just look at his orange wig that always keeps it shape. This is a deeply flawed man with an exceedingly low IQ who just happens to lead the country. Only in America.
105
Republicans' slick pushing of SELFISHNESS & INSULTS is destroying America. They deserve to be destroyed in the ballot box. Vote!
49
When the group of 4 brown women are called "Far-Left" for caring and wanting better for their constituents, I know America is past far gone and a mediocre place. The only progress we have ever made was what? Women voting? I see nothing beyond that. Ain't like we get great pay and time off and benefits and social scenes. Nope. America is one mediocre billionaire's gambling paradise - coast to coast.
82
Andrew Yang is running a campaign, Not Right, Not Left, Forward, that seeks to unite people. Yang addresses the problem that helped Trump get elected: job losses...see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhArPPmHjCs.
Yang is not just the UBI candidate, he has over a hundred policy proposals. Go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhArPPmHjCs and scroll down to explore our platform. People who take the time to research him become part of the Yang Gang, including old, young, Libertarians, Republicans, Trump voters, progressives, and moderate Democrats. Mr. Friedman, you are welcome to join us!
7
Friedman nails the problem nicely:
"Friedman: I think Karen makes a good point. You know what I would have done in response to Trump’s racist attack on the four Democratic congresswomen? I would not have put a censure motion up for a vote in the House (which turned into a circus and more fodder for Trump). I would have announced a plan to register one million more Democratic voters in swing districts and states and created an all-night telethon where people could call in or email in donations to pay for that registration drive. Maybe even enlist a few celebrities to answer the phones.
Don’t get angry; get even! Don’t play into Trump’s hands. Tell him: 'Thank you Donald, we just registered one million more voters on the back of your racism. Have a nice day, you knucklehead.'’’
55
The president also responds to things that Alex Jones says. I wouldn't get all giddy about it NYT's.
11
“If the Democrats don’t find the right message in the critical swing states, they can kiss 2020 goodbye,” wrote Karen J. in Ohio. " Friedman then agrees.
THINK what this means ... she suggests that the Democrats should not worry about their real agenda, the one they will try to implement, when considering the election. The consider only the "message".
I can think of few things as damning as that, except, maybe outright disrespect for the law (e.g. of immigration), or actually wanting "from each according to his abilities, to each according to [something quite different]" a la Marx.
And they want both.
They should tout their actual agenda to the public! Trump did for his ... and won.
They should tout theirs, and therefore lose.
5
This is the first time I’ve had a chance to read trump’s pathetic yuck in response to Mr. Friedman’s column. By now we should all know that the more trump mocks someone’s appearance or IQ, etc., it is a sure sign of how insignificant trump knows he is in comparison to that very person’s abilities. The more insults he viciously tosses, the more fear he has of being exposed as the fraud he is. Thanks, Tom, for not taking his childish bait.
There is so much analyzing and feelings of our personal wants that we’ve lost sight of the only thing that matters. To use the currently overused word, it is a binary choice. Democrats in their hate of hypocrisy want a candidate to spell out exactly everything they’ll ever do if elected. Can’t we trust our own instincts that whomever the Democratic candidate is, will be such an amazing difference from the angst of the past four years of hell. By making them spell out all our individual whims, we are sentencing them to lose in purple states where, like it or not, we need to embrace, largely due to the electoral college.
I can’t ever remember in all my years that the tired expression about this being the most important election of our lives finally rings true. Progressives, moderates, independents, and wise republicans, please for our country’s sake and your own, don’t make this election anything but binary. It’s trump or the democratic candidate, even if they don’t embrace your personal wish test. Winning is everything this time.
42
This is all so meta.
12
So, now we have a piece that is essentially covering the comments on a previous piece? And there are comments on the article about the comments. I did find it confusing at first, then a tad humorous, but I wonder if this is a good way to spend my Saturday morning?
18
Man, I sure hope brains magically materialize in heads of the voters in the <10 states that actually matter.
23
As a progressive American, I'm amazed to find myself having to agree with the Twit-in-Chief on this one: our so-called moderates are "weak and pathetic." Their underlying message to Americans who work for a living is "Don't be so foolish as to expect us to upend the arrangement whereby 0.01% of Americans are permitted to hoard the vast majority of the wealth produced by human endeavor."
Meanwhile, this past week, while the Times and its counterparts on the TeeVee were getting us all worked up over the "squad," so-called moderate Democrats in Congress blocked the passage of a bill to Allow Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices. This despite the fact that more than 80% of Americans polled approve of the idea allowing Medicare to negotiate such prices.
If you're not at least a hundred millionaire, and you allow tsk-tskers like Mr. Friedman (who unmask themselves with the use of terms like "pie in the sky") to convince you whom to vote for, then you have no one but yourself to blame for your Taxation without Representation.
Why wasn't it "pie in the sky" to commit the United States to a war of choice in Iraq without asking "How are we going to pay for it?"
26
The real Mod Squad: Sen. Elizabeth Warren & Vice President Joe Biden
5
Thomas Friedman for President!
7
Why are you giving Trump space? The Times is part of the problem.
11
I actually got sick to my stomach reading this article. Friedman, who is a nice guy and is somewhat liberal is also frequently on both sides of an issue (doesn’t believe in “free” college because no one values free, yet is advocating for free preschool, because....? You either believe in free education or you don’t, at any level), also doesn’t understand gerrymandering, or that the Earth isn’t flat. If this educated, “informed”, longtime NYT columnist isn’t understanding of the issues here, we are doomed. Ugh
13
Trump needs a Twitter nanny.
11
There is a large cohort of angry millennials out there who understand nothing about representative government. How could they when Republicans have spent more than 30 years unraveling it? The kids feel shafted as a result and they’re not wrong. For it to change, however, they should go down to the precinct level and work to restore our system from the grassroots up. President Obama understands this. What counts toward meaningful change is a Congress and State legislatures that support it. Any Democrat presidential candidate is better than T. Political effort means more than heady protests and mouthing off on Twitter. It is tedious and necessary. It requires dedication and tolerance. It is not glamorous and it doesn’t give you dopamine hits unless you stick with it.
18
I wonder what would happen if the Republicans ran someone against Trump in the primaries? Someone moderate, intelligent, ethical, honorable, respectful, courageous, decent and who actually had the best interests of his (yes, his) country at heart? Someone who could stand up to the childish name-calling that Trump would lob at him? Someone who didn't have a long history of racism, misogyny, scandals, bankruptcies and cheating his employees or groping his female coworkers? Someone who wasn't a religious nut or blatantly narcissistic opportunist? Or has Trump ruined the GOP so much that the choice is between him and nothing?
13
One man one vote and Hillary would have been President. Get over all these silly arguments, get rid of the electoral college and be a real democracy. Trump would have to appeal to the majority then not an outdated system.
36
"Why is it the left’s job to keep in step with the status quo in order to unite the party?"
Job? It is everyone's — *everyone's* — responsibility to try to improve the world and if at all possible, avoid catastrophe. At the moment we're teetering on the edge. Democrats need to immediately stop criticizing each other and instead focus on the positive changes they plan to make. As Ben Franklin once said, we need to all hang together or we'll all hang separately.
15
To paraphrase Winston Churchill, "first you have to get elected."
I learned this the hard way after campaigning for George mcCovern. Has it been too long ago to forget how the Dems managed to loose to the man who spilled needless blood and treasury in Vietnam? McGovern lost not so much for his progressive ideas but for the perception that he was not patriotic. Thank you Jane Fonda. That is a distinction that gets lost.
5
Our nation is transfixed by the president's use of his "bully pulpit" (a Twitter account, which he basically uses as a bull horn at all hours, 24/7, to blare out his instant-reaction views).
Trump is truly an ("evil") genius in his grasp of The Media, and of time-honored methods of rhetorical combat. His personal "narrowcasts" (a technical media term) certainly advance his goals, but as civil conversation, they're far, far out of bounds (a technical golfing term).
I appreciated Tom Friedman's alarmist column: It's just what every right-thinking American should hear and contemplate, and we need blaring alarms as preliminary to action.
Mr. Trump did not deserve the office he occupies, and the term he is completing. He has disgraced that office, and one of the most scandalous things is that a very sizeable minority of U.S. voters agree with him, enjoy his shredding of norms of civility, and are prepared to enthusiastically vote for him again.
For those who see the disintegration of polite and respectful conversation as a disturbing spectre haunting America, now is the time to say "Enough!" and resolve to send this pretender packing, and to restore honor and integrity to the White House and to the nation.
15
“Politics in a democracy is not about whose turn it is. It is often not even about what is fair. It is about what you can get a majority of people to vote in favor of.”
If that’s all that politics in a democracy is about then I want something else. Sounds like a setup for fascism to take over. That’s happened before.
8
All this makes me think the electoral college is a horrible thing that needs to be disposed of. Why should a handful of people from just a few rust-belt states have the power to overrule the will of the entire population? It's insane!
23
I've read comments on NYT and WaPo. For those that scoff at OMG free college or OMG universal health care I suggest they read the information here:
https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/11-countries-with-universal-healthcare-and-free-college-381996/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_universal_health_care
Are we becoming a third world country? On the other hand, it appears as if corporations (especially fossil fuel corporations) are running the country.
USA --- it's up to the individual, period. No help period.
I want universal healthcare.
I want free college ... this is investing in our youth and our country.
We are trailing behind most countries.
23
Trump won by being the shiny new object, and bellowing absurdities louder than anyone else. He is somewhat tarnished now, and everyone knows that he is a racist, misogynist and xenophobe with a gigantic ego. Democrats will have to beat Trump by the sheer power of their appeal to democracy, fairness, decent government. Trump's government is totally corrupt, greedy, and inept. This indecency needs to be shouted from the rooftops. We may have plans for healthcare, college tuition, etc, but what Democrats need is a loud, vigorous defense of our sadly besmirched democratic ideals.
9
Why isn't the electoral college vs other election methods even discussed and debated in our news media? Serious consequences. What will happen in 2020?
This threatens our democracy, along with voter suppression, gerrymandering by party, and financing of elections by corporate wealthy mega donors, whose interests must be catered to.
Wikipedia on campaign advertising says that many countries ban paid campaign ads on their media, to protect their political discussion from being dominated by special interests. These ads are our biggest expense. They need billionaire financing. They swamp our voters.
John Dean told Nixon that there was a cancer on the presidency. America is infected with the disease of big money politics weakening its political system.
Only a strong antibiotic can cure it---repeal of Citizens United, to remove the blockage to all reforms we need. Voter majorities favor repeal, as it would get rid of the destructive virus which takes power away from citizens and tranfers it to dominant donors. They've set norms of left/right/center, and made both parties vie for their money. We the People are left out.
American mega donors get all the benefits of power/wealth that might come with a dictatorship, but still operate with elections and a free press. Quite a nifty coup.
NYT: "Fewer than 400 families are responsible for almost half the money raised in the 2016 presidential campaign."
Any comment Tom Friedman?
13
All well and fine, however, the 900 elephant in the room is the utter and base corruption that is the Republican Party. Sure, Trump is a trash heap, but he was elected (and now preponderantly supported) by Republicans on the take from the extremely wealthy and corporate America. McConnell is one of the most corrupted politicians in recent history. Clowns like Jim Jordan are simply a manifestation of the froth of corruption that possesses the DC culture of greed and avarice. Focus on all of this and get elected Democrats...to paraphrase...It's the Republicans stupid.
15
Getting called derogatory names by Trump has become a badge of honor. This 4th grader trying to taunt another during recess is indicative of someone trapped in a child's brain.
6
It’s crazy, isn’t it..the Republicans are busy instituting a fanatical fringe ultra right wing government headed by a lying, bigoted racist misogynist autocrat but the Dems are supposed to offer milquetoast candidates so some ignorant ultra right wing voter is not insulted by someone wanted to improve America for ALL Americans. SAD.
22
The liberal/progressive media collaboration has wildly failed. Friedman says its his job to put out negative stories on the President. The problem is that story after story after story has been proven false. No collusion, no obstruction, no campaign finance violation, no interference in security clearances, not incapacitated (remember those stories in Winter 2017), and so on and so on. Beyond the false stories you promote, there is also a well worn trail of stories the media has buried or dismissed out of hand - the origin of the investigation, the Hillary Clinton email obstruction of justice (she deleted 30,000 emails after getting a subpoena), photos of Obama and Farrakhan, Clinton's links to Weinstein and Epstein, Strzok, McCabe and Page etc. So keep writing negative stories - your credibility is shot. Now you know why your stories have zero effect and Trump is at record approval among Republicans. No President has take and survived the level of hit jobs Trump has. He deserves a lot of credit.
5
Democrats have to start “branding” . Why don’t they start describing things like Republicans. Every other word out their mouth: Democrats are socialists. I see Republicans as “communism lovers”. And why don’t they bring up the massive debt they created from the tax cut for billionaires. Income redistribution by any other name.
Democrats need to be as cut-throat as the Republicans.
14
Friedman for President! You are the only person I have read in the NYT so far who really seems to get it. That Trump dislikes you is just value added.
6
Donald J. Trump, a weak and pathetic sort of guy, writes fact-free tweets in between rounds of his favorite game, golf, when he should be running the executive branch of the federal government rather than looting it for the personal gain of himself and his family.
Unlike the esteemed Mr. Friedman, I am not obligated to be respectful.
16
While the Republicans have abandoned a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine....
...they seem to be wanting a two-state solution for the USA.
WHY?
They do not want to be a minority in the US.
They are officcally having a collective panic attack about the coming shape of America.
There are no 'changing economic conditions' here to warrant racial hatred. Not that there ever was.
They are not fooling anyone this time.
A vote for Trump now, is a vote for plain bigotry.
14
“He doesn’t read at all. I’m not overstating things here,” said Timothy L. O’Brien, who wrote “TrumpNation: The Art of Being the Donald.” This is from a November 2018 NYTimes article.
I doubt Trump actually read it. I bet one of his sycophants summarized it for him in as few words as possible.
11
Sorry, but something about this feels a bit unfair. First, a lot of the criticism of Friedman's column wasn't just of the "when is it going to be my turn" variety, and yet, these are the kinds of comments you choose to have him respond to. Instead, they were challenges to the validity of the same 'conventional wisdom' that has led to the Democratic party to push a neoliberal agenda at the expense of its constituents. Second, you then have Friedman respond --as if he were the arbiter of common sense truth, once again-- when the principal charge is that he is the ideological guardian of a flawed status quo. It is time for this paper to recognize that your readers are actually skeptical about his claims to pragmatic, common sense, political analysis. it is status-quo ideology pure and simple. ENUF!
302
Tom missed other issues why Trump will win. I hear a lot from white voters. They are sick of progressives continuing to thrash them as “white” privilege. They are sick of being demonized for all the ills among blacks. They are sick to have to apologize for their ancestors. They are sick of being called deplorables. They are sick that their kids can’t get into elite schools to accommodate lower performing students. All these issues touch white voters’ heart. Identity politics of the liberals hurt us and we saw that in 2016 while liberals keep blaming on misogyny. Misogyny that 67% of non-college educated women voted for Trump? Wake up or Dems lose me as well.
16
One things for certain, though he may've had much to say about undesirable words, he certainly didn't read the column.
3
Supporters of bullies are mental and emotional cowards. They cling without rationally considering the circumstances.
6
Make America Great, abolish the electoral college!!!!! I'm sick of being in the majority ruled by the minority. Trump was right about one thing, the system is rigged in favor of Republicans!!!
15
This op-ed and Mr. Friedman's op-ed and so many of the comments miss the point entirely. We are intelligent enough get to the root cause of the Trump presidency.
Trump may not be the stable genius he claims to be, but he is savvy enough to understand the role of the media in politics, the attention span of the great majority of voters, and the corrosive effects of conservative, Republican media "reforms" that have transformed the media into reality TV. The bottom line is that we no longer have a media that functions to help voters to understand the issues. The media has been divided into a Fox - Sinclair - Talk Radio segment that supports Conservative, Republican politics and a mainstream media that pretends to continue the tradition of responsible, non-partisan journalism.
The result is that when voters watch Fox they get a continuous stream of Republican propaganda. When they watch the mainstream media that get a newscast that features soundbites interspersed with shots of an anchor that quickly switches to the weather forecast or a feel good, local story.
Trump proclaimed that he could suck the oxygen out of the room and he did just that. With one outrageous statement or lie after another he gave the conservative, Republican segment of the media fuel to support propaganda broadcasts and insured that the mainstream media would repeat his outrageous statements and lies without criticism.
If you like the state of our politics, thank a journalist.
292
It is time that the four foolish inexperienced and naive young congresswomen folded their tents and kept quiet in the hopes that Trump will eventually forget them. They have bit off way more than they can chew. They started the Trump hassle but he will finish it and persecute the Democratic Party. They have damaged the Democratic Party chances for the presidency and I am ashamed of them. Why haven’t they listened to Pelosi? They have behaved childishly taking on a foe they cannot control.
11
Nothing will change until you get rid of McConnell and the “Freedom” Caucus and Tea Party.
And even then, you have a multi-generational stacked judicial system.
And worse!
The economy tanks during the Democrat’s presidency.
And that nuisance climate changing, at an ever-escalating rate,
And from that emergencies Trump 2.0
2
In his mega-tweet, President Trump called Mr. Friedman a phony. He was right.
A few years ago, I went to a book signing by Mr. Friedman and an academic type with whom Friedman had co-authored a book. Friedman was energetic and entertaining in his segment. After the presentation, many books were purchased and a line formed for his and the other author's signature.
Pleasantries are typically exchanged with authors by autograph seekers, but they are kept brief to keep the line moving, and the same was true with this event. Friedman could not have been more discourteous. This sparkling raconteur from just a few minutes earlier was curt and cold, unfriendly, and, well, just rude.
But that doesn't make him a phony.
What makes him a phony was how he perked up when I had a conversation with the co-author who has a relationship with a person close to me. All of a sudden, Friedman was Joe Friendly.
As a moderate Democrat, I don't agree with Trump on most issues, but as far as I can tell, he was right about Friedman.
5
To the reader who asked "what is the secret sauce" that lets Republicans persuade people to vote against their self-interest. That's easy. Racism. It's been true at least since Richard Nixon co-opted George Wallace's voters in 1972.
13
In the name of engaging the public, Friedman gets an extra column to bolster his arguments. That's pretty easy when you can cherry pick the comments that you want to respond to. One example of this engineering: his opposition to free college. Many folks have made the obvious point that it's only public schools, ie. state universities that should offer free tuition. Rich people like Friedman can still send their kids to private schools. Those comments are omitted. Actual rational arguments from the left are being ignored and Tom is part of that campaign.
7
Prior to the 2016 races to be their parties candidates the polls stated that the vast majority of the People did not want another Bush or Clinton. After raising more money than anyone else Jeb imploded & that implosion cleared the way for Trump
The Ds rigged their system for the Clinton machine & we were told it was Hillary's turn - how did that turn out? Of course all of those beholden to Clinton Inc told the Ds that Hillary could just ignore or brush off all of the problems clouding her candidacy including her desire to be really really rich & be treated as royalty; which she would get from being the Wall St candidate
My take is that most people have an immediate concern about the opioid & meth scourges ravaging the country for which there are too few resources; veterans being denied timely care & rapidly increasing income inequality with the cost of housing in many places a leading indicator. If that isn't enough, the Rs still say we have to cut Social Security & Medicare. Over 50% of the People don't have sufficient funds to pay for a $300 car repair or other emergency
So how can anyone in their right mind believe that promising benefits to anyone who can make it to the border is a winning formula? There is 1 and only 1 formula that will win in 2020 & that is sound answers for the threats to the finances & livings of the great majority of the voters. Reality requires that the Ds perform triage & that is to take care of the voters
4
Jerry Schulz, Milwaukee writes, "Hillary Clinton, who never really talked about economic issues..." That is 100% false. Not only did she talk about economic issues, but she wrote about them. Some of what she wrote is still on line. Go to
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues
The media just did not cover policy. It was all about the political horse race and 2 improperly marked, improperly classified and inconsequential eMails.
And folks like Jerry were too lazy to look up what she said.
If we have media coverage in 2020 like we had in 2016, and the electorate cannot take some responsibility to find out what the candidates are proposing, we will have another debacle.
7
Can't Trump ever logically dispute someone argument and not just call names? What is he, grade-schooler?
3
It is still 16 months to the election. And let's stop making excuses for the cowardly bully in chief and finding ways to blame victims and Democrats.
To a Republican, not even a pedophile or rapist, and certainly not vote cheaters or racist killers and torturers, is as bad as a Democrat.
Working together to solve problems: if that's socialist, count me in.
Meanwhile, the climate is heating up, and we're all in trouble. Time to take that seriously, instead of the looting "capitalist" economy that steadily increases billionaires' earnings at the expense of their workers and the environment.
Toxic waste, both real and metaphorical, is serious. It's way past time for compromise with lies and looting.
11
"... people don’t value things that are free." Take a deep breath... What did that cost you? Maybe people who 'don't value things that are free' should rethink their values?
3
The House & Senate Democrats & Presidential candidates need FRESH IDEAS. I don't understand how wasting time & energy on censure votes changes anything. Stop with the traditional response. This massive voter registration idea from Mr. Friedman must be picked up by the DNC or state Democratic parties! Use Trump, McConnell, Paul, Graham, all their actions to charge up the voters who won't stand for this anymore.
That mass movement should make Trump shake in his booties & perhaps it's something that will make him think twice before words tumble out of his mouth, or before fingers dance with Twitter. Show immediate voter response to these racist, divisive actions, not wait for fall 2020.
1
Trump's nasty little insertion here is the most memorable and TF's "respect for the office" comment in speaking with him seems badly strained considering the context.
1
Reparations are overdue for African Americans. I will vote for any candidate who supports reparations. And I won't be deterred by overprivileged white men who fail upward in their careers.
Yes, I pay taxes and my mortgage, work two jobs, care for a parent, and raised two children to independent adulthood with my husband.
The US OWES African Americans for the free labor of their enslaved ancestors, for using the tax dollars of our grandparents to subsidize Social Security when blacks were excluded, all-white religious schools, and mortgages, and for the continued disinvestment and redlining of black communities. PAY UP, America.
5
With the rise of the radical right, the Republicans have succeeded in shifting the public perception of left vs right. By GOP standards, Richard Nixon’s proposed comprehensive insurance plan would be unpatriotic socialism and Dwight Eisenhower’s prescient warning about the military industrial complex would be the ravings of a communist lunatic.
8
“The "gut connection" between Trump and his supporters is based on racism. Period. “
Intellectually lazy and inflammatory
The gut connection is that illegal immigration is an economic threat.
Middle class jobs have disappeared
Illegals come in and take jobs for less money no benefits
Hard to understand?
4
Congratulations, Tom on your intriguing dialogue with your readers. Its something that is badly missing in newspaper columnist op-eds. Spinning the facts in behalf of some agenda, be it a conservative, moderate, or a progressive one, appears, alas, to be the norm. Its often so blatant that these op-eds can be tiresome reading. The confirmation bias is pervasive in many op-ed columns: the tendency to have a selective preference for information that confirms ones beliefs, and the omission, ignoring , or failing to give due weight to information that appears at variance with ones beliefs. I would be an avid reader of Times' op-eds if there was critical dialogue between columnists; right now, op-ed columnists are largely immune from criticism, which unfortunately promotes facile dogmatism. Columnist are in their bubble chambers delivering their sometimes flimsy ex cathedra pronouncemenst. Without criticism, ideology unconstrained by all of the available facts tends to be ascendant; criticism can, though, potentially expose a op-ed columnist's godlike pose as being just another terribly blinkered view of reality!
As a person who was involved in George McGovern's disastrous Presidential bid in 1972, one lesson was indelibly underscored in my mind: what I sincerely believed was best for the country wasn't at all shared by the electorate. This observation can appear trite until you have watched the recent Democratic Presidential debates, and some of the Times op-eds afterward.
2
Set aside the 2020 election.
President Trump is making a complete mockery out of the separation of powers, as is afforded by the Constitution of the United States. Upon the conclusion of Robert Mueller’s testimony next Wednesday, and prior to the full House of Representatives adjourning for their August recess, I call on another up or down vote on the House floor, to include at least 10 instances of Obstruction of Justice in a new Articles of Impeachment vs Donald J. Trump, President of the United States. The ensuing evidence has already been fully outlined in the two volumes of the Mueller Report. It is complete and undisputed. There may be additional charges, since the President has also obstructed authorized subpoena’s issued by Congress, after the release of the Mueller Report. There is no need for further delay until Congress returns in September.
Stand up for America and do your duty, you swore to uphold.
Restore the confidence that no one, especially this lawless president, is above the rule of law in the United States of America. The whole truth would now be exposed in the official record for public consumption. Let it be on the Republican majority U.S. Senate on how they will proceed with a trial.
The time is upon us. We are counting on all of you to get this done. If there ever was an instance to hold a President of the United States accountable, this is it! If not now, When?
Thank you.
4
We’ve been here before, people. Ralph Nader refused to bend and ran claiming to be the alternative to two Republicans, Gore and Bush. Which is how we got Bush. Which is how we got 911. Which is how we got war with no exit strategy and ISIS. Also how we failed to do anything about saving our dying planet. Who is in charge matters. Sticking by unwinnable principles can cost global stability and human lives. Thanks a lot Ralphie, and thanks a lot to all the new Ralphies. Sarah Silverman said it best. You guys are being ridiculous.
2
We are in very dangerous times not only because of a wannabe tyrant in the White house, but because we are facing a climate crisis the will seriously test our ability to live in an organized manner, if at all, on this planet called Earth. Incremental or moderate responses to deal with it would be woefully inadequate. Also, we are the only developed country on the planet that does not provide universal health coverage for its citizens. So, yes, it is time for a Medicare for All plan so that Americans can have their health care needs met without having to go bankrupt. Corporate Neoliberal Democrats and their Republican Lite policies and spineless leadership need to step aside. I thought Friedman's oped was pathetic.
4
You realise the revolution being suggested merely involves increasing the socialising of the health insurance industry.
That is a MILD revolution.
A moderate redistribution of wealth should not involve hatred.
The truth - some white people in the US on't want to be a minorty, and like Robert E Lee want to break up the country.
4
Mr. Friedman is playing a slippery game, since apparently he benefitted from free University education, according to one of the comments.
College was excellent, and it was free;or inexpensive and available to anyone who wanted to go to school until the early 70's. Don't let anybody tell you different. They are lying!
The poor quality, and abandonment, of healthcare, and of public education over the last forty years is causal of widespread desperation today.
Also we to put something in perspective. AI is a tool. AI is no substitute for the imagination and spirit we need now.
We have corporate intrusion, pushing aside our institutions of democracy. We have "privatization" of the public commons, including our legislature, Courts, the justice system, and election fraud to thank for a national disaster of greed and corruption of the spirit of this country.
But the worst disaster of all is the mean spirited attitude and lies about what is doable and possible, with urgency and god given leadership, and speed... for all of our futures.
Bernie Sanders tells the truth. His accomplishments over the last five years are extraordinary. I'm for Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, for president, and VP. God bless them! They are unbeatable.
.....and God Bless Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the squad. If they were men I'd feel the same way and so should you.
2
Democrats are lining it up to make a clear choice: the abyss you know (Trump) vs the abyss you don't (single payer, no borders, unclear reparations paying, pro-busing, ...). Even with whatever the Democrats give me, I will choose the abyss I don't know. At least we may get back the country that world will look up to.
2
The most oxymoronic phrase in the English language: "Donald Trump's genius."
And Friedman just used it.
10
Friedman, a long time pro GOP columnist, says in 2019 that we should 'EVENTUALLY' get a public option in health care? Generations after HC for all is a norm in other nations? Surely his own health insurance is excellent, right now. How long is eventually? Years? Never--for We the People?
Is TF shocked that most voters reject high profit HC, and demand it as a human right? In many nations, even their conservatives support that right.
He anxioudly uses the term- 'Extreme ideas of the left'. Is he afraid of defining extreme and left in our unbalanced, warped politics?
So instead of the criminal now in the WH, to use a kind term, many GOP would be relieved to elect a more normal example of their tribe. What will that accomplish?
Then the conditions plaguing the country could be swept under the rug for another few years. But later another swamp creature would rise to the surface to grab power.
See the pattern? Pretty obvious.
One of Trump's greatest harms is to make cautious, centrist Dems look great to susceptible voters, compared to the atrocious Trump. This is how he warps our standards, and distorts what elected govt owes to its citizens.
The GOP pulls rightward. Then we get the moralizing zeal of TF and other GOP columnists, adept at rationalizing.
We need better than 'better than Trump'. But we have to wait, and keep asking our candidates—pretty please, when will we get some representation for our taxation?
9
Is President Trump the rubber and Thomas "the Chin" Friendman the glue?
3
"Thomas “the Chin” Friedman, a weak and pathetic sort of guy, "
I can remember a time when a President of the USA would never have used such crude insults. That would be any time before Trump was elected.
9
Obviously Trump is going low praise on the NYT, because in his tweet he didn't label it the "failing" NYT.
4
Donald Trump is a "race-baiting xenophobic bigot," said GOP Sen. Graham.
9
Republican secret sauce to winning is SLICK SMEAR PROPAGANDA.
7
Make America Great Again: Dump Trump
10
Amusing: The person who occupies the white house tweets "Thomas "the Chin" Friedman, a weak and pathetic sort of guy, writes columns for the New York Times in between rounds of his favorite game, golf."
With the exception of "writes columns for the New York Times",
trump has accurately described himself. (Substitute "orange hair" or "bone spurs" for "the chin").
8
"Friedman: I have a lot of respect for Bernie Sanders. **I would not vote for him**, but I think he is smart, sincere and has his heart in the right place."
I think this says it all about Friedman. He'd rather have Donald Trump than universal health care.
10
I voted for Trump in 2016. The only Democrat I would vote for in 2020 is Biden. If any other Democrat candidate is the nominee, I will vote Trump again.
113
@CJ Why?
110
CJ -- pretty open-minded there, eh?
77
@CJ
Really? Have you paid attention to every candidate? There are several moderate candidates, Michael Bennet from Colorado for example. Why only Biden?
123
As I see it, in terms of electoral math, there are just not enough Progressives to win, so I, as a pragmatic Progressive, do the best I can in that situation: work to elect Progressives at the local and state level, and to Congress. I usually support more than one candidate before the convention, and then, vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is in the general. If we had elected Hillary, would we be talking about the very real possibility of overturning Roe v. Wade? Would we have pulled out of the Paris Agreement? Would she be calling American Citizens who are also sitting US Congresswomen, hateful, or Un-American because they disagreed with her? Would we be further away from healthcare for all than we are right now? Would we be sucking up to North Korea? Would we be still in the Iran deal? And on and on. I get the 'both sides are the same' argument, but this time, with Trump at the helm, they REALLY AREN'T the same, and I am afraid for our Republic.
7
The only thing that matters for the future of our country is for all the various subsets of "non Trump" voters to unite behind the concept that our differences pale in comparison with the threat slouching towards four more years and we will fight like hell to support who ever is chosen by the Democrats to defeat the current occupant of the White House. Have your debates about your goals. Just remember they are "sound and fury signifying nothing" if we lose the election.
4
The only thing that matters right now is that Democrats WIN. No win, no opportunities for change, and four more years of this man who will lead the US down the toilet cheered on by his fans and cronies.
Go back and binge-watch The West Wing if you need to be reminded that if you don't win, you can't do much of anything. For those tired of a moderate approach, four years of moderation will still be a hell of a lot better than what's going on now as we lurch towards our own version of autocracy. It may give a lot of people the chance to calm down and think through all these proposals, and debate them (not in this ridiculous "debate" format we are seeing). Government through thoughtfulness and deliberation, not grabbing soundbites.
Democracy - those who get the most votes (generally) govern. Right now how do the Democrats get the most votes, that is the ONLY question.
5
Columnists and observers keep asking "Why doesn't the Democratic Party present a unified message? Surely this is necessary to secure election of a Democratic President.'
I've been observing the (mal)functioning of the Democratic Party for over 50 years. The very inclusiveness of Democrats makes it impossible to draft a single, clear message.
Only in when the Candidate for President is selected by the 'gang that couldn't shoot straight' will there be a reasonably coherent message. By then it is often too late.
Running HRC against DJT at a time when the country was shifting sharply to the right, was idealogically sensible, and politically suicide.
You wanna win or you wanna be ideologically correct? Alas, by definition there is NO central control in the Democratic Party that can make that decision and execute it.
1
I have a problem is with the phrase in the heading: "Donald Trump, and Other Readers". I doubt very much that Trump actually *read* Mr. Friedman's column, or that he *reads* the Times or follows any other serious journalism. Presumably either someone told him about it, or there was a tweet about it. Or perhaps it was mentioned on Fox. Otherwise, how would it have come to his attention? How, for that matter, does anything? He seems to react to nothing other than what he sees on Twitter or Fox. Or sometimes CNN, when they say something critical about him or his administration.
4
What did the house pass today? What was everyone, aside from Bernie, against in 2016? The right should be afraid of a militant left that is forming in the coming generations. The young, educated are turning socialist and a hard left is rising.
BTW, this country isnt center anything. Germany...England are centrist. America is hard right. Has been for 40 years.
8
Tom, I've long been an admirer. Now, you seem to have lost your nerve. We can't let racists and evil people like Trump and McConnell dictate our platform.
We need to present a proactive plan for the future, one that reflects our values, not theirs.
That's why I'll be voting for Elizabeth Warren.
You should, too.
8
Hey dude, does the 1.5 trillion dollar tax scam for the rich constitute giving something away for free? I guess it is only when regular people receive the benefit of government action is it considered welfare.
9
“What I worry about from the first Democratic debates was that by so many candidates offering so many free things to so many people — some of them not even American citizens — the gut message being conveyed by the party was that it’s for open borders and for taking care of people who just walked into our country illegally, more than taking care of our fellow Americans, like veterans who are badly in need of improved health services.”
Flat Earth Tom Friedman is too smart to mindlessly swallow Republicant tropes hook, line and sinker, but here he does just that.
Free stuff? You mean like two of the three largest public universities, the University of California and the City University of New York, both being tuition free at the same time that Friedman was in college? As for, heaven forfend, free health care *for people who aren’t even citizens,* IT ALREADY EXISTS! Emergency rooms can not turn away the sick or injured, regardless of citizenship status or ability to pay. And hospitals simply pass along those costs to those of us who ARE insured.
Frankly, Friedman sounds like just another Never Trump Republican who hates the messenger, but not the message.
4
An indication that Trump's bully pulpit lying and mischaracterizing is working is this: "the gut message being conveyed by the party was that it’s for open borders and for taking care of people who just walked into our country illegally, "
That is not the gut message but a characterization similar to the slandering of the "Fab Four" (call them) congresswomen that are not white. That vote represents the mischaracterization Republicans are getting away with. Democrats had better fight that, clarify loudly and incessantly, educate, reason, these and other Republican messaging and branding: "socialists" "communists".
That is where the battle lies first.
Democrats can and should talk on the offense about the shameful behavior, the promotion of division, the corruption, the lying, the misogyny and racism, the fomenting of an immigration crisis at our border, defying Congress's subpoenas while claiming full cooperation, failures, mishandling, of foreign policy ( Iran), the trade war, the court's imbalance and what that means, the decline of US standing in the world.
4
Perhaps some reporter will call Tom's attention to the observation that he is addressing symptoms but not causes.
This view is an insiders view (mass delegate to state conventions on multiple occasions) .
The reason that you find the Democratic party being so skewed at the leadership level is because of quotas. 50% of the slots must be filled by women, 50% men and then you have special consideration given to race, etc.
The reality is that there are not enough women and minority members who are interested in the role, so that the most angry and strident members of those groups fill the reserved slots - When they show up at Dem meetings they are almost guaranteed a voting seat. They show up because their anger and bitterness drives them.
Most men and women I know are reasonable. They don't have it in for the other sex. On the other hand, there are a percentage of women who really don't like white men. These are the women who are gaining power because of quotas. The same is true for minority groups.
I am not disparaging any group, their are brilliant people of all genders and creeds and races. And ordinary people have much to offer as well. But right now within the Dem party, it is the loudest and biggest haters who are given a preference.
Dem's brag about having 100 women representatives - but where is the wisdom to go with it. Rep's only 10.
The quota process snowballs; the result an irrational white man hating party.
2
Why don't you run for President in 2020, Mr. Friedman? I agree with your perspective and love your ideas - you'd have my vote!
3
Friedman is a corporate spokesman and his writing in essence in support of this class. He is not progressive by any mean although occasionally he pretends to be. He should use his column to contrast the White Nationalism and Trump illiberal policies versus risk of the electing left leaning democrats. The former and with another Trump 4 years will result in long term erosion of democracy, rule of law, and triumph of tribalism and xenophobia while the risk the latter is at worst a failed experiment which likely to be corrected with one or two election cycles.
2
I’ve never said this before either privately or publicly.
After leaving America 16 years ago over the Iraq war, I now view the United States as being on a tragic downward path that will continue after Trump is gone.
Trump has given Americans permission to behave in the most vile racist manner toward their fellow citizens. Once this is unleashed it can’t be easily corrected.
America is beyond redemption for any thoughtful and democratic individual.
I will never return to my native land!
471
The two party system is a trap for every single American voter and everyone loses except the corporations that are behind promoting the two party system.
9
Friedman’s best advice is buried near the end of his responses. When the democrats respond to his tactics they are playing HIS game. His strategy may be evil but he is always two steps ahead with its purpose. If all they do is react, they’ll continue to unravel and he’ll successfully have splintered any hope of a cohesive message and painted them into a corner with enough of the voters who are on the margins for them to lose. In short, if they keep playing in his playbook (clumsily so because you can’t beat evil straight on), they’ll surely ‘snatch defeat from the jaws of victory ‘ that should be available in 2020.
As Friedman says, They need to take charge of their own destiny. Tap into the repulsion and sign up voters. More than that, develop a strategic playbook of their own - to win the various ‘target’ constituents- and execute against that with excellence. Think through this like a business strategy not a popularity contest where your feelings get hurt and so you respond. Otherwise Democrats will not only lose but global democracy will lose, perhaps irreparably forever. Just what Bannon set out to do before he joined the chief provocateur who would become masterful at creating the destruction of democracy we’re witnessing in real time.
11
So a column by Mr. Friedman warning Democrats that far left ideas could cost them the election, elicits an attack on him by Trump. Sounds like Mr. Friedman's column "hit a nerve". Could Trump perhaps be worried that moving closer to the center in policies might interfere with his re-election strategy of portraying the Democratic nominee as a "socialist"? Personally, I have no problem with the word, but I fear other voters might. One more indication that we need to be smart in choosing a candidate who can garner enough votes to win.
12
I've said it before and I'll say it again. If you tell people you want to abolish private health insurance in favor of M4A you'll lose votes. If you tell people they can keep their private insurance but add a public option for those who want it, private insurance will eventually shrink to a mere shadow of its former self. Given a choice of offering their employees company-paid private health insurance or a taxpayer-paid public option, I guarantee you most firms will opt for the latter. Individuals rich enough to keep their private insurance or supplement their M4A with a private policy can of course do so, as many Medicare enrollees now do. Furthermore, the cost of drugs and medical procedures will go down since the public option will enable the government to negotiate prices with providers.
13
My gut tells me the country’s in trouble. It tells me the root problem is deeply cultural, something along the lines of “The business of America is business.”
We’ve morphed from valuing initiative and hard work to valuing money, mega bucks, however it’s gotten. Want to be a US Senator?—Gotta have, or raise, or have and raise, a bloody fortune. Everything’s about money. We’re becoming a nation of people who will do anything for money, anything for the sake of our own material well-being.
I’m very sympathetic to candidates who critique the system. The system has been, and is being, corrupted by special interests. Sickeningly, both major political parties are among the corrupting special interests, and, thus, each of them is a huge part of the corruption that has us by the. . . am I allowed to say gonads?) The first of them that admits it will definitely get my vote.
14
"‘This is still a center-right, center-left country’" -- I think the center left is Sanders, Warren, and the "squad." In Europe or Scandinavia, Sanders and Warren would be mainstream liberals. The country is right of center and lurching more right every day.
9
I hate trump. Hate him. I held my nose and voted for Hillary, even though I was living in a state that I knew she would win. Now I live in a critical state. But I will not vote for Biden. Our country needs dramatic changes, not an elderly man clinging to his experience as if it is relevant. It’s not far left to recognize that our country spends more on its military than the next seven added together, yet we can’t protect ourselves against Russian interference in our election. It’s not far left to recognize that we spend double the percentage of our gdp on healthcare than the average for developed countries and millions of Americans can’t get any. It’s not far left to recognize that red states receive more federal dollars than they contribute, yet lag national gdp per capita in double digits with the gap still growing. It’s not far left to recognize that a person who says “I like what trump does, but not what he says” is actually saying the opposite.
Enough.
20
It comes down to getting out the votes, especially in the swing states. And it's not just Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. It's Florida, North Carolina, Kansas (!), Virginia, Texas, Arizona, Colorado, Ohio, and Nevada at a minimum. 93 million people eligible to vote didn't vote for either party in 2016, 30 million more than voted for Trump, 27 million more than voted for Clinton.
The main Republican strategy is voter suppression and getting non-Republicans to STAY HOME! That's where the Democratic Party needs to take the fight, not to run as "Republican-Lite".
Since the Blue Dogs betrayed everything the Dems stand for back in 1981, going with Reagan's tax cuts, the DNC has been AFRAID to really stand for Democratic values--when it counts. Ask Allison Grimes or Susan Nunn how their senatorial candidacies worked out for THEM running as "GOP-Lite" Dems in 2014! They both lost WINNABLE races!
Everyone talks about how Black Women are the key, and I agree: Without them, the Dems cannot win. Ask Doug Jones in Alabama!
But it's also the Hispanics, who need to understand that there is an existential threat to ALL of Hispanic heritage, even though Trump is playing the "illegal immigrant" card--it's every single person with a Brown skin and Central or South American heritage. When Trump says "Send them back" and he's talking ALL non-White Americans--not just the undocumented. After the "illegals" are gone, the legal and native-born POC will be next.
Be Afraid.
13
Democrats need to be politically astute and less purist to win the election. Win the election, then push for the big changes. We need to engage people who are not decidedly for Trump. There are very few of those, even readers of the NYT who are for giving free health care to illegal immigrants. That was the number one blunder in the debates, along with the number two, giving illegals a slap on the wrist for entering the country, that will lose us the election. The Democratic candidates should correct NOW what they have said about this very important issue. They should denounce illegal immigration and clarify that although people should be treated humanely they should not enter the country illegally, they should not receive services that citizens themselves cannot afford. Only this action will save Democrats from losing the next election.
8
For the first time in my life I feel as if this upcoming election is about Good versus Evil, not Left versus Right, or Moderates versus Progressive.
Especially after Trump’s tweet regarding the squad and the caging of innocent immigrant children
Trump and the Republicans do not even come across as thinking humans anymore.
If the Democrats can narrow their focus to the three most important issues for now they should win in 2020. Those issues are the false economic picture, well paying jobs through Infrastructure programs and Health Care.
When it comes to Immigration it is not the #1 problem in the Country. so do not let Trump define the debate.
There is one more true issue. WAR.
Trump and his Administration should be stopped by the Congress in his march towards another World war.
We do not want or need to send more of our young people off to die because of a foolish and corrupt Trump and his cronies Pompeo and Bolton
12
Democrats can get rid of Trump by changing one policy, and they will lose if they don't change that one policy - no more illegal immigrants. Trumps allure for the independents/hold your nose Democrats who vote for him is largely the immigration issue. Take that away from him and all those voters will jump at the chance to dump him.
Americans don't hate immigrants. They hate law breakers and line jumpers. They will be satisfied to await a solution for those already in the country if they are convinced that the Democrats seriously want to control the borders. Otherwise, Trump wins.
15
Trump doesn't hate the "Squad" - he loves them! They are going to get him reelected. So, with his tweets he puts them front and center in the media and the national discussion which still continues. The more he can portray the Democrats as the party of the Squad the better his chances of winning. (While I don't agree this some of their positions, I find the Squad to be honorable and sincere. Trump's attack on them was disgusting, but I am convinced there is a method to his gutter politics even if he can't articulate it.)
6
With people like Friedman taking up Trump troll reasons to disavow progressives, we don't even need to consider the opposition party's platform it has been coopted into our own. I'm really tired of Progressive ideas being slammed by people who cower in fear of the Right and Trump Republicans. Time to get a backbone and explain to the American people WHO is responsible for the mess our healthcare is in and HOW they are going to make it worse if they get elected again and HOW the Progressives actually have the answers to fix those problems. People who pit one group against another are WRONG. We don't need that in the Democratic party so STOP IT.
3
The party whose leader adores Russia, North Korea and Saudi Arabia while disrespecting and dismaying European nations and Canada is NOT center-right. It is far-right.
The party whose leader calls for the dismantling of First Amendment press freedoms is NOT center-right. It is far-right.
Stop worrying about how to put yet another pro-business, pro tax-cuts, pro-lobbyists-as-usual, neutered Democrat in office, Tom Friedman. Stop worrying about whether FIXING the 40 year decline and destruction of America's middle and working class is "socialism." Start worrying instead about the fascism now running the Republican Party. We do need a revolution, just to get us back from the extreme right-wing precipice to the middle.
7
Americans don't vote. That is the problem. Lowest democratic participation in all the industrialized world. As well as highest violent crime and highest incarceration rate.
The problem is democracy. And that is why the conservatives keep saying that they don't want a democracy. That the USA are a Republic and not a democracy.They obviously don't know what these 2 words mean = the same thing. The "public thing " or " power to the people " ( democracy ). They even think that republic is less democratic, it is the contrary philosophically thinking.
Both are French words imported into the english language in the 17th century. Republique and Democratie.
3
Friedman re censure vote: "I would have announced a plan to register one million more Democratic voters in swing districts"
Walk and chew gum.
2
Trump is certainly bound to his supporters by anti-immigration and racist views.
It is crucial to remember though that racism is a SET OF IDEAS not a finite group of people. People become racists, people also leave racism behind.
There is still time in this election.
What are the reasons so many Americans have so obviously come to embrace racism and a racist anti-immigrant policy in 2019? Donald Trump is USING that set of ideas, but he did not generate them. The ideas were there, and he won his first election on them. He is stoking them still, and hopes to ride them to a second term.
If we understand WHY people embrace these ideas, we can at least move toward concrete actions that will shake free the ironclad hold such ideas have on such wide numbers of our electorate.
Then Donald Trump loses.
Bigly.
2
I suggest all columnists should be required to engage the commenters as Mr. Friedman has and that the resulting discussion be presented as has been done in this article. Very informative and enlightening. I frequently feel comments are lost in the ether. A way to vent with no real benefit beyond that.
The back and forth between author and commenter broadens everyone's mind and allows the author a chance to express his ideas from the perspective of his readers, enhancing communication.
This bidirectional mode of journalism in the electronic age should not be abandoned as a happy accident, but adopted as a new model. I can see great potential in engaging readers in more than an argument amongst themselves.
4
Voters must send Trump and the GOP back where they came from---to their previous careers before they took office---to prevent more harm to the nation. And to make our TV news watchable and tolerable again.
Do this by an election or impeachment or both.
Does Trump understand the vocabulary of UK's Ambassador Kim Darroch? He said "Trump WON'T become substantially more normal; less dysfunctional; less unpredictable; less faction riven; less diplomatically clumsy and inept.”
It's obvious Trump is compulsive to keep fulfilling the dictatorial impulse. His blatant credo ---he's superior, powerful, dominating. As he gets more resistance, he escalates and intensifies.
America needs a restraining order against Trump's abuse of the nation.
It will worsen towards 2020, with threats everywhere. As the campaign pushes his buttons, he'll show more symptoms of his IPHA syndrome---irrational, paranoid, hostile, aggressive.
'You ain't seen noth'in yet!'
Some cautious Dems try to appeal to voters who might tolerate Trump, even if not rabid fans. Thus the standards of our politics spiral downwards. As the GOP clings to him, will Trump do more damage to our democracy than we can even realize now?
3
Quite plainly, some of America cannot stomach socialism because it is unsocialised to the outside world.
Not even outside US borders, even unsocialised WITHIN its borders.
There is no common thread between some communities.
They see each other as the enemy.
Not easy to say, but quite plain to see.
America will not remain one country for much longer.
2
What would be the point of winning if we end up back in the place that brought us Trump?
That's what you're advocating. Another decade of Republican-lite Democrats.
I'm a raging, bloody Liberal. You must admit there hasn't been a Liberal in a significant American office in half a century.
Instead of sympathizing with the working class of Republicanville, why don't you set their minds straight?
When we talk about single payer (and, please, single payer not the God-awful half-step that would be Medicare for All) we're talking about helping those benighted folks out.
If they're not sending half their paychecks to Aetna or somebody, maybe they could afford a house.
When we talk about equal pay for women, we're talking about fair pay for men, too. Not the abomination that is our $7+ minimum wage, designed to keep workers poor, desperate, and quiet.
Instead of letting Republicans go loopy with rage that somebody else is getting stuff, you could point out that all these greedy "others" want is what they already have: respect, security, health, an education, and to be left alone.
If you find (as I suspect) yourself choking on messages like that, you could point out that our financial sector, courts, taxing authorities are all specifically designed to funnel money to the rich.
They must love them some Trump, to keep handing over big hunks of their income.
We could do something different. Make this better for the people who could really use it.
3
The first democratic debate was a nightmare. The second one is now looking like a lottery drawing. In 2016 the Republicans gave us a clown car full of candidates and the biggest clown won because of the bickering. Trump, with his many failings, stays on message, he's mean and aggressive. Meanwhile the Democratic clown car, tries to out 'woke' one another with a bunch of ideas culled from a clan of newbie freshman Congresswomen who represent liberal areas and are outside of what most Democrats think or want. AOC's ideas are grand and unpaid for, like retrofitting every building in the country. Has she ever owned an apartment and had to pay for a plumber? Ilhan Omar is very carefully stirring the pot. The 'Squad' has somehow captured this election as their own and is leading us down a path that could very well see another 4 years of Trump. And media is helping them, including this paper.
5
whether folks think with their brains or guts, ignorance will rule their conclusions. And the central point is, no one thinks of themselves as ignorant. They are their own all knowing center of the universe, which leaves little room for change and enlightenment. So if you have been brought up in this nation, which constantly, I mean constantly reduces education budgets. If below average is average. How can a nation strive? How can people as a whole make intelligent decisions. This is why trump is president and will continue as president in the next election. The below average voter never made it to average.
whether folks think with their brains or guts, ignorance will rule their conclusions. And the central point is, no one thinks of themselves as ignorant. They are their own all knowing center of the universe, which leaves little room for change and enlightenment. So if you have been brought up in this nation, which constantly, I mean constantly reduces education budgets. If below average is average. How can a nation strive? How can people as a whole make intelligent decisions. This is why trump is president and will continue as president in the next election. The below average voter never made it to average.
The late Justice Stevens was appointed to SCOTUS as a moderate conservative but became a liberal beacon. He said that he didn’t change, the court did. So to with the country, which has been dragged rightward by Republicans since St. Ronald of Reagan. The “leftist” ideas espoused now by liberals are the centrist ones that actually made America great. Undermining them has been the cause of our downhill slide.
PS, I like and mostly agree with Tom Friedman’s original article, but this self-congratulatory follow-up seems extraneous. The point was made. Enough talk; it’s time to take action before it’s too late. Something must change after Mueller II and Debate II or the US as we know it is toast.
2
Bargain. Take the most extreme ideas and work a little to the center. Find useful solutions between the extremes. Don't just deny them.
3
Here's a thought... Why aren't more republicans running against Trump in the primary. Come on I know you all want to, let's get a field of 20 or 30 of you, a moderate republican could attract a lot of people. When Trump attacks you all ask for his tax returns. The time is now, let's get it done.
2
I’ve said this before, but I’m really getting tired of five or six states with a population of a little more than the county I live in being responsible for electing the people that will run (or ruin) my life for the next four years. One person, one vote. Eliminate the Electoral College, now.
5
Mr. Friedman, surely you understand that allowing undocumented immigrants access to healthcare is necessary for American health because infectious diseases don't distinguish between American citizens & others? I don't want people with active measles or tuberculosis, let alone Ebola, coughing on me in the street - all people in our physical space need access to healthcare. It's a relatively tiny number of people we're talking about, so cost is immaterial, but the gains in health protection for the rest of us are important.
9
I consider myself a supporter of a relatively far left agenda. I'm a white male, 65 and a public school teacher. Straight voting for Democrats through the decades.
Trump is winning now and will win again in 2020. I've watched the Democrats, like the New York Mets, for decades form circle firing squads with the expected results. The Democrats are doing it again now, and I suspect that it's already too late for them to recover.
Bumbling baseball I can handle. Watching this stampede of Democrats crush our hopes for 2020 and far beyond is heartbreaking. There will be no more waiting for next season after that.
2
When is the Democratic party going to realize that they are just as responsible for losing the election to Trump as anyone else? Put forth a viable candidate, not someone supremely "unlikable" and downright mean-appearing and sometimes acting as Hilary Clinton, and the voters will turn out. Don't get me wrong; I voted for her, but I surely did not want to. But still, even if it's Biden, I'll vote Blue again, whoever who. But I know many people who wrote in Jill or Bernie, and the party is responsible for that too.
8
@Molly O'Day
Jill and Bernie are responsible for that.
In '68, the left couldn't bring themselves to vote for Humphrey. They figured they'd teach the country a lesson by getting Nixon elected and everyone would see the light.
In '80, the left couldn't bring themselves to vote for Gore. Same story.
In '16, the left couldn't bring itself to vote for Hillary. I had a guy stop me on the street after the election to talk about some environmental organization. When I asked whether he voted for Hillary, he said "no, but she wouldn't have saved the environment either."
Look at the very first comment to this article (Abigail49) and its the same story: if Trump is re-elected, things will be so bad we'll finally get our "revolution."
It's not the Democratic party that's the problem. There was nothing wrong with Humphrey or Gore. And while I cannot say that about Hillary, she was a saint compared to Trump and might have made a pretty good president.
5
What so many commenters here (& Democratic presidential candidates, it seems) are lacking is common sense.
Independents & many Democrats aren't going to support taking away their private health insurance if they like it.
They're not going to support open borders or providing illegal immigrants with healthcare, etc. before legal immigrants & all citizens have been provided those things.
They're not going to support reparations for slavery since they weren't alive during slavery.
They're not going to support free college for the children of rich people.
However, many will support universal coverage through a public option or other improvement to the ACA.
They will support citizenship for Dreamers, & comprehensive immigrant policy reform (& treating the conditions in the countries from which these migrants are fleeing if we fess up to how our government has contributed to those conditions).
They will support jobs programs to fix infrastructure in rural America as well as the inner cities, & safeguarding that everyone has the right to vote. They will support a confession of the pervasive racism following the Civil War & that equal opportunity needs to be guaranteed to people of color, as well as to women & LGBTQ.
They will support oversight of higher ed costs & increase in financial aid to college students on a need basis.
And they will support reasonable measures to deal with the Climate Crisis, Iran, & more equitable distribution of wealth by reforming the tax code.
32
Excellent summary. Not much support for a far left platform. But a lot of support for a mainstream Democratic platform.
6
@JediProf excellent summary. Many Independents want desperately to vote against Trump, but will not support the progressive agenda on display in the debates. And the Democrats need these Independents to vote not just for their Presidential candidate, but down the ticket to win the Senate. Warren or Sanders might be able to dislodge Trump due to the majority’s pure loathing of the man, but that is likely to result in split tickets in the purple states, and incumbent Republican senators retaining their seats. Winning the Presidency without winning the Senate will be an exercise in futility, and will not deliver any of the reforms needed to undo the damage Trump is inflicting on the country.
3
The "register voters" as a get even .... yes, yes, yes!
I agree that the debates are a time to show a better -- possible -- way. Health care: there are numerous examples of universal health care, many like Germany's, offer private possibilities IN CONJUNCTION WITH universal health care.
The US has always seen education as the great pathway to moving upward. College doesn't have to be free, but it doesn't have to bankrupt our parents.
Trump is bankrupting our country. The GOP tax plan, any way you look at it, was a rich man/corp gimmee that directly benefits him, McConnell et al. And, it's promised benefits have not materialized, only the increasing debt and lack of money for infrastructure, etc.
The military: exactly why do we have active forces in 70% of the world's countries? Our Congress doesn't even know where we are. And how can we have a president who singlehandedly threatens war or can take us to it w/o Congress? Right now we are promising/threatening war in Venezuela, N. Korea, Iran and helping Saudi Arabia more in Yemen (MBS's private war, but then he's Kushner's bestie and the UAE has dropped out.)
Where is our Senate? Oh right, they are busy voting to pay back their (out of state) donors.
3
Susan @ Maine: Not only Germany, but Australia, has private health insurance in conjunction with universal. It has had this system for nearly 45 years!
Security for all walks of life. We feel, and are, healthier both physically and mentally, because there's little animosity. We do not begrudge helping the less fortunate. In addition, all private insurance companies are national, and not connected to one' s employers. We can change jobs every month if we wanted to, and still retain our private coverage. The individual chooses . Australians actually enjoy stronger economic individualism , i.e., choice independent from an employer's decison. How can the US achieve this? Maybe by starting to compare buying health insurance to buying a car, or paying for college. Would Americans let their employers decide what kind of car they could buy, or where their kids went to college? I don't think so! Why should they accept that health insurance should be any different?Build up an understanding of true free markets. That lack of awareness, that clinging to a myth of market freedom, is stifling.
1
The left insists on a purity test that requires signing on to ideas such as free college and Medicare for all which simply will not fly with enough voters to get elected. We lost the last election because leftist voters either voted third party for candidates that had zero chance or they did not vote because Bernie was not the candidate. The same thing will happen again if we fail to field a moderate candidate. It seems the left would rather let tRump be re-elected rather that face reality. We must have a moderate candidate who can move a progressive agenda forward and accept that something like a Bernie revolution is simply not going to happen.
3
Mr. Friedman, I’m a big fan of your articles. One point concerns me, though, and that is your (and others’) description of Republican or Trump voting attitudes as “gut decisions.” It is probably correct (given what we know from recent social scientific research) that people “hear with their stomach.” However, I’m wondering if this is a prudent (or moral, for that matter) strategy to enter into public discussion. I believe that there are deep rifts in U.S. society, and I’m a maybe naive believer in bridge-building through rational dialogue if conducted in a manner of mutual benevolence. When someone disagrees with me, I try to remain benevolent towards them: It’s about an attitude of respecting another’s dignity. I don’t see this attitude a whole lot. HRC certainly didn’t practice it when she spoke of the “basket of deplorables”. And characterizing one political side as gut-driven is, in a certain light, also disrespectful and not helpful. I’m as left as it gets, but I’ve debated with fellow progressives who were equally gut-driven: they were emotionally attached to their beliefs often without much rational ability to justify them or readiness to seem the challenged in the marketplace of ideas. They were gut-driven and their voting principles were their human needs. We’re all, to a certain extent, rational animals. We all deserve some level of respect. Let’s start to talk and listen in ways that reflects that.
1
The news in all its forms focuses on issues and controversies as it should. However, when will we - as citizens - find the what. What do we agree about?
Do we agree we need to take care of the environment so future generations of humans as well as the flora and fauna will have this planet and its wonders to live out life?
Do we agree our children should have the solid public education they need to live in an ever more complex world?
Do we agree teachers should earn a salary commensurate with their training AND so they can focus their complete energy and attention on their young charges?
Do we agree the social safety net of Social Security and Medicare for our seniors should be made and kept solvent?
Do we agree we are a country based upon the rule of law and we should continue to strive for it to be applied equally without consideration of race, creed or social status?
Do we agree voters should choose their representatives in districts where no outcome is predetermined by its outlines?
Do we agree that people should have access to health care where they receive the care they need and the providers of that care are fairly compensated?
Do we agree we are descendants of immigrants who came seeking a better life AND that diversity has made a richer, stronger nation?
Do we agree we need leaders to unite us in common cause for the public good rather than work to pit us against our fellows?
Maybe if we can find common ground on the what, we can move on to how we do it.
4
It's interesting to debate party ideology but at the end of the day whoever governs must actually govern.
That means they must provide the average American with the basic functions of what we expect from government. And that's not happening now and it didn't happen under the Obama administration.
Obama's signature "successes" were the passage of a GOP health care plan designed to enrich private insurance companies. Saving Wall Street with massive bailouts but offering little to 28 million who lost their homes. He set aside public land but also increased drilling rights on other sites. And he vastly increased the government surveillance system while prosecuting whistle blowers who tried to warn against its abuses.
Trump accomplishments include the sale of every regulatory agency to private business. So we now allow cancer causing agents in our food. He's made our air and water dirtier. He's started a trade war with China, a meaningless detente with Russia and a near war with Iran. He's taken whatever prestige the presidency once had and totally trashed it. And he increased an already wasteful pentagon budget by 85 billion dollars.
This isn't to say there aren't real differences between the Democrats and the GOP. But most are differences in form rather than substance.
Both parties serve finance capital first and foremost and simply argue over methods. Neither really governs in the interests of the American people. And we the people are trapped in a this dystopian system.
There can be no discussion over crafting the best government policy of any kind, healthcare, immigration, education or the environment until Trump is defeated.
That should be the central message of anyone who wins the Democratic Presidential nomination. We cannot exist as a nation so long as our government is being run for the enrichment of the President's family and campaign donors and merely as an exercise whose ongoing mission it is to satisfy a man's ego.
The Democratic debates ought to participate in the debates as earnest job audition that excludes attacks or critiques of one another. Baiting by the moderators into attacking other candidates ought to be answered the same way by all candidates : "I am not here to define my Democratic colleagues' positions. I trust the voters to decide on their own whether to support theirs or my own positions and candidacy and qualifications for office. I won't participate in Reality TV, either tonight or when I run against Mr. Trump."
1
I think Friedman and Rhode Island governor are right to focus on how to grow the economic pie. This has been the differentiator for America. Those who argue for a Scandinavian tax system do not even understand it. The middle class in USA would have to pay far more in income taxes than they do today to mimic Denmark and Sweden and to afford what was promised on the debate stage. The Nordic countries learned long ago the math of only super high taxes on the wealthy does not work to fund those programs.
1
Common sense says the World’s richest nation can easily afford to eliminate poverty, provide health care for all, provide free higher education for all, demand a living minimum wage, even combat climate change. Many nations do all of the above. Their richest citizens, generally, agree that paying higher taxes is worth the trade off for better quality of life for all. And, their ethos is not to throw government money into their military—the safest nation is probably the happiest one.
2
Mr. Friedman writes: "free college. I think that is a terrible idea. First, people don’t value things that are free. I think everyone should pay something ..."
Is Mr. Friedman implying that we should do away with free universal K-12 education? Or should we continue to provide free education for our neighbors' children, regardless of whether we have children of our own?
Even if those receiving free education (at whatever level of schooling) don't value that free service, I do. I want an educated society, a society that is consequently more productive, more creative, less prone to crime.
Mr. Friedman also writes: "I want taxes raised to fund more pre-K education for more American kids." So free education is okay after all, at least for some people at some level. Why stop there, if students can benefit from a college education?
Mr. Friedman puts up a straw man: "why should my kids not pay when I can afford it and should be made to pay?" He answered this question himself: taxes.
He can afford it, he should pay more in taxes to fund it. Those who cannot afford it can pay less in taxes. We already do that for K-12. We should do that for pre-K and for college as well. As the right thing to do, as the fair way to fund something that benefits us all.
5
I don’t think Mr Friedman meant to imply stopping K-12 free education ( which judging by my school taxes is not so free). However I believe in a baby steps approach that might be more palatable to many. First look at expanding the concept to Community colleges or maybe to all state schools for the first 2 years. Why? In my opinion those are crucial post high school formative years that prepare you for the next step. If you can’t cut it you are out, just like any other “job”. If you do well there you can then apply for loans/ grants/ scholarships to go anywhere but now you are on your own but at much less cost to you. Also you have to qualify initially for it, it’s not just given to you free just cause. Would also expand concept to BOCES type programs. We need trade people more then ever and they are immediately employable.
Regarding free health care for immigrants which seems to be a hot issue. Consider any emergency care as a given while they await citizen status. Should they not qualify for citizenship it is a non issue. Should they qualify consider basic
Pain/ infection control until achieve full citizenship. After that when they have achieved full citizenship they are now treated like anyone else but the road to that has to be worked out. The sticking point is defining the road.
1
Let’s just make two countries and be done with it. The right can rule and believe what they want. Same for the left. Then we can see who prospers and who fails. In the end we will see we actually need each other, like it or not.
3
"I get a sinking feeling when Democrats come out in favor of single-payer health care, reparations for blacks, decriminalizing illegal immigration, wiping out student loans and more" and say essentially nothing about the military industrial complex and the huge industrial lobbying machine behind it that prevents these worthy ideas from being considered because of lack of resources. The democratic candidates are focusing on issues that do not really matter in the big picture. And I am a person of color from a despised minority.
Democrats aren't proposing free health care for immigrants to the exclusion of citizens. They are proposing health care for everyone. Because you don't want your child contracting antibiotic resistant diseases from someone who has no access to healthcare, whether they are a citizen or not. If you get sick while traveling in Europe, you get affordable treatment, no questions asked. It's merely humane. But the debates ask simplistic questions, with insufficient time for nuanced replies.
4
Agree. Debates leave no time for nuance. Basic care I.e. pain/ infection and emergency care as a humanitarian gesture to anyone regardless of status. The give “them” everything” mind set that was implied and seized upon immediately as a talking point has to be dispelled. It all has to be much better defined and clarified in my mind.
1
'You know what I would have done in response to Trump’s racist attack on the four Democratic congresswomen? I would not have put a censure motion up for a vote in the House (which turned into a circus and more fodder for Trump). I would have announced a plan to register one million more Democratic voters in swing districts and states and created an all-night telethon where people could call in or email in donations to pay for that registration drive. Maybe even enlist a few celebrities to answer the phones.
Don’t get angry; get even! Don’t play into Trump’s hands. Tell him: "Thank you Donald, we just registered one million more voters on the back of your racism. Have a nice day, you knucklehead." '
I have my disagreements from time to time with Mr Friedman and I didn't love every word of his column, but the above idea is splendid.
And he's right that we HAVE to defeat Trump. That is priority numbers one through a thousand. To do that, Democrats need to avoid their habitual circular firing squad and recognise that poll after poll after poll has shown for years (if not decades) that most Americans agree more with our core principles of economic fairness and opportunity -- and, yes, universal health care -- than they do the greed and fear based 'policies' of the GOP.
But threaten to take away their option to keep paying too much money for inferior health care to a company that is laughing all the way to the bank, and we'll lose.
Again.
1
Thomas Friedman, you are the third columnist or OpEd author I can think of who has replied to comment writers, and I thank you for that. The other two are David Reich leading genome researcher and Carl Zimmer a favorite Times columnist who often writes about genome research.
And now you. I provide a context for commenting on your efforts.
David Reich was challenged as concerned at least one position he took. In that he seemed to be saying that dividing Americans into "races" as done by the Census Bureau is still justifiable because to some extent genome research supports doing so (to see the exact situation visit his reply on March 31). Readers challenged him and changed his mind so he told us Americans to understand that the census bureau "races" are social constructions having nothing to do with science.
Carl Zimmer replied to each of us who commented recently and did so individually. His replies were models of thoughtfulness and accuracy.
The contrast between them and you is gigantic. You seem unable to even discuss a single idea and seem not to be very well informed about these ideas.
You come back with phrases like "free things", "pie in the sky" and more.
Universal Health Care is not pie in the sky, most 21st century countries have it.
Free college is not pie in the sky, many 21st century countries including the one I write from have it.
You seem lost in the 19th or early 20th century.
Strange.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
5
I don't trust you Thomas Friedman. You're too wedded to the status quo which favors big business. You pushed for the Iraq war and we face another crisis point right now with Iran.
I trust Bernie Sanders. He is anti-war except in defense of our country, and he champions the common people.
I realize that immigrants have become a talking point on the right, but they fill jobs that you and I can't imagine doing. If they were "sent back," there would be a great whoosh and your business friends would be out of business. So let's agree that we need the immigrants legal and illegal who are here doing their jobs. We depend on them, so let's give them a little respect.
As for winning over Trump votes in the important states, I say there's still time. Bernie and his message haven't gone away. Elizabeth Warren is making headway, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her Green New Deal are looking better every day the temperature hits 100.
5
Regarding the comment from Jerry Schulz, Milwaukee included in the article: Trump won in 2016 with 46.1% of the popular vote, not 48%.
3
Nobody commented on the title of the article. "Trump's Going to Get Re-elected, Isn't He?" If the Democratic party keeps pushing the issues the Mr. Friedman mentioned in his article, the answer is "Yes".
"David, Dodgeville, Wis.: Why must we Democrats always settle for “Republican Lite?” Why must Republicans always dominate the political conversation, even when they are in the minority?"
Because the white male notion of what's "normal". It's the default setting as to who we are and what we need to be about is privileged in this country. So those who fought/fight for civil rights, gay rights, women's rights were/are always told "be patient"..."some of us are not ready yet"..."you're moving too fast".
3
At this point we are seriously considering moving to another country. Trump is making it very uncomfortable for non believers in the homelands of his followers . Yea very much French Revolution sort of shape our government is taking. A whole lot of blood was shed to get where France is now. I'd rather opt out and watch from a very safe distance.
2
Mr. Friedman writes that politics is about a gaining a majority. Yet this country refuses to see Exhibit A of why that premise is a lie. The Electoral College is a sham that must go. In no other election, in no other nation, would a candidate who lost by 3 million votes be declared the winner. How may more times does this have to happen before we rid ourselves of this instrument of fraud? Of course, the first time a Republican wins the popular vote and not the Electoral College, then the oligarchy will move to get this mess cleaned up.
3
It has been clear for some time that Trump will win. It is not what he says but the message that matters. The message against Hillary Clinton was that she wanted to tell you how to behave and how to think: she would regard you as deplorable. Every time the press or the Democrats criticize him or point out his lies it just reinforced the message that they were carping controlling overbearing elites who want to make you behave like them. It does not matter that the criticisms were right. In a way it played to people’s insecurities. He will do it again. As Boris Johnson said when caught out lying when he was a journalist: you are missing the underlying truth. Of course that ‘truth’ was a lie as well but the Democrats have not learnt the lesson. The perfect is the enemy of the good. Mr Friedman nailed it as he often does.
The 4 inexperienced congresswomen have made trouble for the Democratic Party by hassling Trump personally.
Although I agree with them I cannot forgive them for the thoughtless problems they have caused the party. It is time they shut up and hope this blows over (unlikely now that Trump has them in his grip).
1
Trump won the 2016 election the day he spoke out against illegal immigration. The Democrats lost the 2020 election when they all raised their hands supporting free health care for illegal immigrants.
It really is that simple.
2
The sick reality of this country is it is minority rule, and getting worse, as long as we have an electoral college. And trying to end that only opens the door to more crimes the Federalists and Dark Money want to achieve.
When Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts is now considered the swing vote, we can’t look to them any longer for justice.
It comes down to we have only a little more than a year to accomplish the following:
1. Register Democrats in swing states and get them to the polls
2. Have poll watchers and other groups exposing voter suppression
3. Support Dan Coats and his department desperately trying to secure our elections - write your senators and representatives
4. Get the message out “Anyone But Trump” by succinct messaging exposing his lies about health care and the economy
2
We are governed by a minority, just like the founders intended. Dump the Electoral College and the oligarchs’ worst nightmare will become a reality: one person, one vote.
4
The most "moderate" candidate, Joe Biden, raised his hand when asked if he agreed that illegal immigrants should be provided free healthcare. He can't walk that back.
2
Lets hypothetically hope the Congressional Republicans message to Trump, via Vice President Mike Pence, was to knock it off, or they would take into consideration the Mueller Report evidence, and weigh in his coming Impeachment. It appeared to have worked for 24 hours and the president attempted to clean it up, then the ever vindictive Donald J. Trump flip-flop on his flip-flop.
There was a time when such mental instability would get you blackballed and disqualified from ever holding high office. Donald J. Trump is certainly no elder statesman, and we are lesser of a nation because of it.
1
We must say why the current healthcare system is a bad and then say why we can do better. Don't believe me. Here is what our current system of socialized medicine is called, Go To The Hospital. That's right. I you responsible insured person fall down and break your leg, What do you do? Go To The Hospital. If an uninsured broke homeless motorcyclist breaks his leg, where do the EMTs take him? They Go To The Hospital. The hospital treats both you and the motorcyclist. Your insurer pays your bill, the motorcyclist skips out. However, the treatment the motorcyclist received is not free. The doctors, nurses, interns and everyone else expects to get paid for treating the motorcyclist. So where do hospitals get the money to treat the motorcyclist? They get it from you. They include in the hospital's overhead the cost of treating indigents. You have been, are now and will in the future pay the costs of treating deadbeat sick and injured people. So why would the hospitals accept and treat people they know cannot pay? It is a federal law that they must treat everyone regardless of ability to pay. Socialized medicine in the US is an unfunded mandate the Federal government foists on hospitals. Hence you pay (through your insurance) for the indigent. Furthermore, hospitals double bill for indigent care by billing both your insurer and the indigent. So socialized medicine in the US heals poor people physically, destroys them financially and you end up paying anyway.
Dems need to focus on good jobs because our country will further devolve without a sharp reduction in income and wealth inequality.
Relatedly, they need to focus on affordable good health care, post-secondary education for all who want some form of education or training beyond H.S. and pre-K-12 for every child.
They need to focus on Growing the Dem party at State and Local levels, which they have been irresponsibly bad at - Characteristically so, and to Register more voters and Vote this time around. Many facts and theories abound about why they lost the presidency but least mentioned by the commentariat is the Failure to Vote in 2016.
Do those several things. Or else we will continue to drift toward a Failing Democracy in the direction of autocracy, plutocracy, oligarchy and perhaps fascism.
1
Obama took away my union negotiated health plan as it was considered a Cadillac plan. The company screamed blue murder about additional taxes and instituted monthly payments with outrageous co-pays that have only increased year on year. The Cadillac tax has since been sidelined, yet our members are still on the hook. Obama's head fake cost us dearly, and now the 'progressive' wing of the Democratic party comes along to ask for more sacrifice for all kinds of social programs. Programs that include illegal immigrants. Our union is now full of MAGA activists. Is it any wonder?
2
Reading through the various opinions on health care, can anyone explain why almost every country in the world can afford state-funded health care but the US can’t? Or should the question actually be: why do politicians have such a difficult time selling universal healthcare to the US voters?
5
I agree with Stan that the Democrats should "campaign around him (Trump)". The country is exhausted by Trump and will be happy to vote for a serious, adult, smart, and oh yeah, likable candidate. Someone with their hair on fire from the left will not offer the needed respite, and whoever the Democrats are able to elect will - with a likely divided Congress - get about the same things accomplished as any other, no matter what they promise in the primaries. What the Democrats should campaign on is being the party of the future - not a MAGA past - and our rejoining and leading the world in facing it. We don't need a great debater who will somehow put him in his place on stage - ignore him and speak like a self confident adult not distracted by the child. I'm for Amy Klobuchar who I think best exemplifies this ability and would beat him handily.
Amy Klobuchar is the least radical and most electable of the Democrats
The comment that only Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Florida matter is disturbing to me and and points out why the Electoral College is so bad. Why should only those states matter over the rest of us? All of our votes should matter equally. This is exactly why Trump won in spite of losing the popular vote by 3 million votes. My fear is that the gerrymandering the GOP has forced on us gives them an advantage before the election even begins.
6
I agree, and it has been echoed in several comments...money belies all. Therefore, there need to be politicians who understand and talk about how money can be utilized where everyone benefits but no one feels like we are punishing success ( because there is also that manifest destiny aspect of America Most seem to forget about ).
First, a VAT tax. Second, legalization of certain drugs and collect the taxes on them. Third, a monopoly tax. All of this should go toward one agenda, half to pay down the national debt, half to fund healthcare and education and reduce taxes. VAT defined simply as, any purchase over 500 bucks gets taxed an additional 2% federally. This protects working class who don’t make those kinds of purchases. The wealthy who do would still retain their choice to spend so much. Therefore that 50 million yacht you hear about is not hated, it is now celebrated because of how much money everyone knows was paid into the system.
Drug tax...it’s obviously working for those states that have done it.
Monopoly tax. Why bust up a company when everyone can make money from their success.
Let’s get smart about money, not curse it pretend it’s not all about that.
And absolutely do not give anything away for free, especially college. It always goes under appreciated.
2
I'm a reliable Democratic voter in a reliably Democrat-supporting state on the federal level. The DNC has shown no interest in me in many years. At one point, I received a fund-raising letter, masked as a survey soliciting my input, that was so out of sync with my concerns (it was all about Trump) that I neither answered the survey nor contributed. Another member of my household is registered as an independent and receives frequent attention from organizations and individuals seeking her support. If I change my party affiliationi to independent, will I matter to the DNC again?
2
I have two ways of voting. Best candidate vs. lesser of evils. In the Democratic primary, the best candidate will be the one that can beat "trump'. That will not be Sanders or Harris. The give-away twins have no appeal to those of us work, save, and pay.
1
Friedman still dismisses with no evidence ideas like universal healthcare and free college tuition with his made up rationales based on guessing those ideas wont work. He loves to quote ideas from so many others in his articles, why won’t he look at the decades of success other democracies have had with these ideas? Other democracies that are less wealthy than the US but are demonstrably healthier and happier due to their progressive policies. It seems a peculiarly American affliction to refuse to learn anything from the rest of the world.
2
It was gotcha journalism when candidates were asked to raise their hands if they wanted to "get rid" of private insurance. The question ignored the fact that, whatever their personal feelings might be, the process for making laws in this nation almost insures that abolishing private insurance will be evolutionary.
That's also true for "open borders," "free" education, making the tax system more progressive and the many other "progressive" ideas. It's important to me that the Democratic candidate be willing to fight for liberty and justice for all. For too long too much has been conceded to Republican ideology.
2
What is interesting to me is how few critiques of progressive policy are actually included in the comments and even in the article itself. Instead we get a bunch of hand wringing over optics and how scary these women ( who aren’t even running for president) will be to some imaginary voter.
I think that is because their actual policies are much more popular than the centrists who love the status quo want to admit. Medicare for all would be hugely beneficial to the American public. The green new deal is the only democratic plan that comes close to taking the necessary steps to fight climate change, and student loan forgiveness would be a huge boon to the economy ( which TF keeps saying is the most important thing).
These are popular policies that would make America a better country. The democrats could campaign on them and win, but instead the centrists seem to think the only way forward is try for another Kerry or Clinton type candidate.
3
A lot of this is pure straight line thinking. Few people remember or can imagine when we did things differently. FDR wasn’t afraid to try things and he tried a lot. We remember the successes but conveniently forget the failures because there were a lot of successes. That was a time when we accepted that change was all around us. Today change is back with a vengeance because we’ve been a static society since Reagan. We need to do things differently today but not with a wrecking ball which is all Trump can offer and too many unthinking voters support. We need to embrace the reality that yesterday’s solutions don’t work any more. We need to take a dynamic look at reinvesting in the citizen over the corporation, investing in infrastructure and environment AND seriously involving the free market. Many, many of our problems stem from oligopolies preventing the free market from working. Let Medicare compete with private insurance and watch how healthcare improves; let renewables compete fairly with fossil fuels and see how things change. Message around desired results instead of getting into the weeds of policy.
4
The problem is that our parties have become too close on issues of economics. There isn't a substantial reason for voters to consider their own pocketbooks and they will vote with their guts. So the answer is not staying in the middle. Move far to the left and show voters a real difference in the parties and I believe people will vote for their pocketbooks.
1
When Savannah Guthrie asked the candidates in the first debate to raise their hand if their healthcare plan would cover undocumented immigrants, and all those hands went up, I felt my stomach lurch.
Trump reacted on Twitter, calling it "the end of that race."
I believe all people on this planet should have access to healthcare but that goal should be pursued methodically after the election and as an international initiative.
I believe people like Bernie Sanders because he appears to be honest about his ideas by default. He may be wrong about some things and he appears to come up short on details, but he is genuine.
I believe that if the democratic candidates cannot bring their base to a place where they are willing to recognize the realities of governing this country in this time of real danger, we, center progressives, will be locked in the wilderness for the foreseeable future.
And that future will be white hot and barely livable for all but the one percent and their designated survivors.
3
Five years ago, I worked with woman in her late 20's at a non-profit where I was working at the time. A scheduled luncheon had been cancelled due to low RSVP. I was shocked to see my colleague start crying when she found out about the cancellation. The reason for her distress: She was overwhelmed by her student loan payments, and had been counting on that luncheon for her primary meal of the day. She told me that her monthly student loan payments cost more than her rent. (And no, she did not have a luxury apartment, cable tv, expensive phone plan or car payment. She bought her clothes at thrift stores and took the bus.) While I question the feasibility of "free" college, an education shouldn't be so expensive that people who want to pursue a degree are forced to take out loans to pay for tuition and books. There has to be a better way.
8
In past elections, when the country was less divided, primaries swung to the extremes and then moderated to the middle for the general election. No more in the era of trump as Americans in the middle are a larger slice than before. CNN and other news outlets are thriving due to trump, meaning more and more are keenly tuned to policy, earlier. My Democratic friends will do better to moderate NOW, to wit: 1) do not use the term Medicare for all, Medicare is a strongly stigmatized word for poor medical care (which is wrong, I know first hand as it is a fine system), in fact, say you can keep private insurance, most Americans have that and want to keep it (skip promises of Medicare for all will get better as many are gun shy from promises not kept during ACA rollout), 2) No free college, rich can pay, rather, beef up need based aid, 3) Illegal immigration should remain criminal, overhaul the system in some fair way is the path to success (no body wants open borders which is what this mantra implies), 4) jobs jobs jobs, transition and retraining plans for Americans for 21st century economies. 5) Then, and only then, after these are well and repeatedly spoken be anti-trump, court AOC and Bernie's youth to help support these steps, one of many to come for the left. These are imperatives for a successful primary AND general election.
2
Bravo to Tom Friedman, whose columns I generally take issue with, for again presenting a cogent, insightful and politically astute road map to the democratic party leadership. The most important observation he made in these notes to my mind was the following:
"I am convinced that this is still a center-right, center-left country. "
He is right, 110%. The internet and the "ethos" is conveys is as far from reality as could possibly be. Nancy Pelosi said so some weeks ago when she outlined how infinitesimally small is national support for the ideas offered up by the "squad."
Maybe now that Ms. Friedman has spoken, they will take his words to heart. I for one am not holding my breath.
6
I’m center left, my husband is center right; we had no one to vote for in the last presidential election and each wrote in the names of moderate politicians we respect. We’ll do so again in 2020, more than likely.
Diversity is the reality of the country, and diversity is way more than color, gender, sexual orientation etc. The tribalists, the Trumpsters, and Progressives miss this reality in their political pronouncements. They ignore the expanded idea of diversity which includes regional, economic, geographic, educational, and cultural differences. They focus on their base and their pathway to power. Politics is mostly about power and less about service to a country.
3
Keep focused. We have to defeat Trump. We need to candidate who is best able to win back the Rust Belt states. At this time, that appears to be Joe Biden.
5
Does Trump really believe he "turned the economy around"? Can he and his supporters be publicly disabused of this fantasy?
4
@tony
Consider that much of the gross in Trump's GDP has occurred by opening the taps on fossil fuels. By building out even more fossil infrastructure that will, if we are to really have any hope of meeting future emissions targets, have to be become stranded assets. So, much of what Trump has grown (and Obama turned the green lights to) will in the end have been huge wastes of resources and great opportunity costs. Trump's up is our future down.
2
Thomas Friedman makes, as always, convincing, logical arguments. The problem is what is not said. How well did sticking to the center right work out for GOP candidates in 2016? For the Democrats in 2016? How well did logic work in attracting voters?
Trump is not playing according to the traditional Downsian theory of democracy in which candidates stake out issue positions designed to appeal to a majority of voters. He is, instead, inciting fear while appealing to feelings of victimization. Trump's tools are not serious policy analysis and logic but lies and emotions.
On serious issues from immigration to health care, it does not really matter what the position of the Democratic candidate is, Trump's position will be to scare people with a dystopian misrepresentation of that position rather than to develop an actual position of his own.
So, the real question is how to get a sufficiently large majority of American people to focus on something other than horror show? Given the extent of gerrymandering and the slant of the Electoral College toward the states that make up Trump's base, it will take much more than a simple majority to win in 2020.
5
Sorry, but this is not a center-right, center-left country. It is a nearly-center-right, extreme-right country. Compared to any other developed nation on the planet, we're to the right. Even after Burlosconi had his way with Italy, we're to the right of that country. Name another supposedly centrist country that comes close to our right-handed policies. You can't.
Our inexorable shift to the right has stripped the middle class. The Democrats are fully complicit, and that is why they have demoralized and lost their base. More of the same will be... well... more of the same.
13
Mrs. Pelosi and I believe that many millions of Trump’s supporters are blank cartridges who can’t be trusted to come inside from out in the rain.
Mrs. Pelosi and I believe that if Trump is ever impeached, his
supporters will go on a rampage, the likes of which has never been seen before.
Mrs. Pelosi and I believe that even if Trump is defeated in the 2020 election, he and his supporters are likely to go on a rampage, the likes of which has never been seen before.
What AOC needs to be brought around to understand is that Mrs. Pelosi and I are very afraid of what’s coming next and prefer to keep piling up the evidence against Trump one day at a time until it is as high as an elephant’s eye and can no longer be denied by the likes of Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham.
10
@A. Stanton
The only problem with your argument is that the "evidence" to which you refer does not exist. Make sure you have your television on the day after tomorrow, when Mr. Mueller makes that crystal clear.
you believe that the facts will matter. the question Friedman asks is , what if they dont? ie... his "gut" argument
If growing the pie is not truly decoupled from growing carbon dioxide emissions then what will electing a moderate to grow the pie have achieved?
When all the costs of growth are added up what we are faced with is a future of diminishing returns. Grow the pie and shrink it. Grow the pie and burn it.
Small steps toward the politically feasible, gigantic losses for mankind. Progress is just another word.
4
Donald Trump seems to confuse criticism with hatred. It’s not hateful to call out problems with local, state, or federal policies whenever and wherever they manifest; to do so is a hallmark of an informed and engaged citizen. Nor is it hateful to criticize another country with whom we have an alliance. But he thinks otherwise.
I can’t help but wonder if Trump’s confusion on this point is also at the root of his failed marriages. We assume that he’s merely indulging his obvious preference for younger women. But what if he’s actually ending his marriages when his partners criticize him, or when he becomes aware of problems, all because, in his mind, love is incompatible with criticism?
2
We seem to be talking a lot about citizens vs. non-citizens. There’s some nuance that we are missing with these distinctions. Millions of people are living in the US as legal residents but not citizens. Legal residents (green card holders) can’t vote but they are otherwise entitled to all the same rights and privileges of citizens (this is one reason why asking a citizenship question on the the census is problematic). The distinction we need to be making is undocumented vs. residents and citizens.
4
I'm currently re-reading 1984. It occurs to me that conservatives (including neoliberals like Friedman) have led us fully in the direction of "Doublethink".
To wit:
Liberals are blamed for having done nothing to help the working classes for 40+ years. However, when they formulate policy ideas to do so, i.e. higher taxes on multimillionaires and using those taxes to pay for "free" stuff like guaranteed access to higher education and healthcare, shoring up Social Security, etc., they are slammed for being too radical . Orwell is rolling over in his grave!
10
"I'm a progressive. When is it my turn?"
Who says you get a turn? A majority in this country will never be in favor of open borders or abolishing private health care. I'm not a big Friedman fan by any means, but his column was right on the money. If Democrats run a campaign based on far left ideas, they will probably succeed in handing Trump another term. The one area where Democrats could get away with going hard left is taxes on the rich. And perhaps one could add more regulation of the financial and high tech industries. But if they push for open borders, reparations, and single payer, they will lose the election.
11
Friedman was exactly right in his opening observations, to which I would add something he gave only glancing attention.
Don’t forgive all student debt. That rewards and encourages those who irresponsibly run up as much debt as possible, and punishes those who act like grownups and work to avoid as much debt as possible. That’s the exact opposite of what we should be telling our kids to do.
6
@Franco51
Seriously. Who do you know that runs up as much debt as possible? Why would one take that approach on any loan much less a student loan?and people do many things that are the exact opposite of what we should tell our kids to do.
1
I want to scream sometimes when I read these think pieces. This election isn’t about party unity or single payer or the Green Deal. Let’s not put the cart before the horse. The point is not so much to appeal to Democratic voters in a primary, it’s to give GOP moderates, women and independents a palatable alternative to the Twitter in Chief. The racist and Mueller and emoluments just generate airtime on CNN and noise. I have yet to see a reason why any GOP voter will move away from the head of their party. Dems voted for Trump in 2016- virtually no GOP voter picked HRC. If anything the GOP views have hardened. His voters are his voters, even the conflicted ones. There isn’t one single viable candidate who has put out a real plan that his voters like so much they will leave Trump. It’s all tough talk about when they become President what they will do. Focus on the gestation now or your victory will never arrive in 2020.
2
The repeatedly-invoked trope that anyone with progressive ideas can't complain about the right-leaning bias of our system because they can't win at the ballot box is misleading.
Trump did not win the popular vote. He won only because the relic of slavery called the Electoral College gives undue weight to rural voters and undervalues urban voters. And that's not even taking into account Russian interference.
The presidency and the Senate are pillars of rule by a political minority. That's perhaps what the framers wanted, so that slavery would not be threatened by the populous north. But it's a system far out of step with what our country needs now and it has led to the inauguration of a man who is not only unqualified for the White House but who is also and plainly the most corrupt man ever to hold the office.
The problem with the Democrats, for a long time, has been timidity and an unwillingness to propose or fight for anything substantially courageous. But the problems this country faces can no longer be solved by wishy-washy centrism that only encourages the Republican Party to move farther and farther to the right.
The Democrats need to recapture and advocate the New Deal-style, unapologetic pro-worker approach of the past, spiced up with an essential focus on strong environmental protections, free trade policies that hold other nations accountable for economic justice and sustainable production, universal health care, and much-improved access to education.
11
With our antiquated Electoral College Trump most certainly can be re-elected. Millions and millions of democratic votes from blue states are negated by handfuls in red states.
We should use the millions of dollars earmarked for the campaigns to instead fund folks to move to and vote in red states.
3
I'm sure that I'm not the only outsider in Canada or Western Europe that views your Federal GOP & Democratic Party as anomalies & anachronisms in a large, modern liberal democracy.
In the current context, each exists only as a vacuous institution to oppose the other for control of the Legislative & Executive Branches of your Federal Government. The real struggles exist within each Party as individuals or factions single-mindedly contends to
(a) impose their agenda or personality cult & subordinate all other factions & voices, &
(b) attempt under the aegis of the Party to win power Federally.
Insofar as the 2 Parties function as just described, narrow factions or charismatic demagogues powered by large pools of money & public recognition amassed over many years too often acquire a hammerlock on power within their Party & the Country & others are overshadowed to an extent that is unhealthy in a democracy. Alternatively, is a faction or individual is not the take-all winner, deadlock ensues & the business of Government largely drifts in suspended animation for 2, 4 or more years.
Wouldn't a larger proportion of the electorate become engaged, a wider array of interests & programs receive a serious public airing & a greater opportunity for constructive compromise & innovation exist if your 2 Party system transformed into a 3 to 5 Party system; each Party standing for a more clearly defined set of interests & values than is now the case for the GOP or Democratic Party.
1
It is continuously astonishing that the richest country in the world is holding back massive potential, by seeing higher education primarily as business instead of as opportunity, potential, progress, and raising standards in one. Even developing countries offer inexpensive/free tertiary education to raise their level (that doesn't exclude private universities, anywhere).
And, if, as Karen (in the dialogue with Friedman above) fears, some students change courses, so what? My best students were those who took a year or two longer than average, or switched or added courses. They are more rounded and mature.
Same thing for health care - it should not be a luxury, affordable only for the rich. Humans fall sick, have accidents etc. regardless of wealth. Traditionally, joint families took care of the sick and aged - now responsibility has shifted to society.
Yes, I do believe universal health care must free itself from the tentacles of Big Pharma, to reduce costs. This does not mean a return to herbal medicine or the laying of hands. It would rather mean non-profits and governments tapping existing research at universities and scientists at private labs, to finance production and commercialisation of drugs and equipment that Big Pharma routinely kills off because they are not profitable enough, or address conditions prevalent in poorer countries!
It would also mean moving away from industrialised junk food by disincentives/rewards, that only government can effect.
11
Hey! I went to college when it was free (Cal Berkeley, 1973), and I am truly grateful. I don't buy that people won't value free admission. College isn’t K-12, where children are required to attend. Who would pursue a college degree just because it's free?
7
@Fran Gardner - @Fran Gardner - You took the words out of my mouth - UCLA, 1976. The most valuable possessions of my entire life were those 'free' degrees the citizens of the Golden State decided were the best way to make California prosper. I may have earned those degrees but California gave me the opportunity to do it and I thank them every day.
6
"growing the pie"
Tom, this is a small planet with finite resources.
We need to better use the resources that pie of yours represents. And then we need to share that pie fairly.
And then we need to make sure that the resources going into the pie do not contribute to climate change.
Constantly growing the pie is the Tom Friedman/Chamber of Commerce solution at a time when there are no affordable homes for many citizens, the infrastructure is lousy, as is
much K-12 education.
Families need parental leave, quality free/affordable child care and early childhood education...
Growing the pie will not change anything unless priorities are changed.
Even with changed priorities, growing that pie of Tom's would likely contribute to climate change.
Sometime there will be a courageous leader who will tell us that we can have a wonderful life while using less resources, and we can have a thriving society if we learn to share...
before we destroy the future.
13
@Lucy Cooke In fact, "growing the pie" is practically the cause of most of our current breakdowns. It is time not only to share fairly what we have, and to heal what we destroyed, but to also shrink the pie and move from a society of consumption to one of preservation, justice and reverence of nature.
12
@Lucy Cooke, maybe your comment contains the seeds of a solution. Maybe a new New Deal might grow the economic pie by putting Federal funds toward neglected infrastructure and K12 schools and low-cost housing. Nothing shows our values more strongly than how we allocate our money. Dems could talk up the economic multiplier effect and contrast it with Saint Ronnie's trickle down theory. Maybe the people who are tired of getting trickled on by the job creators paying wages so stingy that the employees qualify for SNAP might vote in their own best interest if the benefit is tangible. I think it's still the economy that wins hearts and minds and votes but maybe we don't have to lay waste to the planet to grow the economy.
Sounds like youre advocating civil war in the name of climate change.... Not entirely sure that will be very green
One of the easiest and most effective ways of communicating fundamentals is extremely close attention to the words every person uses, even in their own head while thinking. That is why, for many years now, I always regard so-called (would-be) "Republicans" as actually Anti-publican, and never use the "official" name of that party, because it is anti-factual in its core meaning. By the same token, but for vastly fewer public policy reasons, as a Truly Radical Centrist, I also always regard the so-called (would-be) "Democrats" as actually so often actually the opposite: Anti-democrats. And even more generally, other habitual words used in politics are also frequently anti-factual: no wonder public discourse is essentially composed of rubbish. For instance, why does "the media" and public use the word conservative to describe positions which are actually reactionary? Can't handle the truth (or the heat that comes with it)?
1
It is OK to mock a man's chin because he disagrees with how you do your job...a very public job?
I have read Mr Friedman for many years and, frankly, disagree with his glib simplistic explanations of complex issues more often than not. And, I've said so in the commenters section of this paper. But, it has never occurred to me to disrespect him or his appearance.
One thing I do agree with Mr Friedman about--in the most simplistic way--is that DonaldTrump is not qualified to hold public office--at least not in America.
Character counts. ...or it doesn't. It is that simple.
Bravo, Mr Friedman, for standing up to this poor excuse of a public figure.
The kindest, most polite, thing I can say about D Trump is that he is an embarrassment. Because of what he says, not because of how he looks.
5
Mr Friedman's response makes me think he doesn't care much for what he calls disadvantaged minorities. He, much like his fellow columnist David Brooks, is all about meritocracy. I would point out that Donald Trump is for "merit-based" immigration. The center has become the right. The right has become the center. Maybe the white guys will win again. I hope not.
3
TO CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRACTS:
god forbid democracy should deliver a moderate redistribution of wealth that results in creating wellness and health amongst the people, which in turn creates more able-bodied workers to pay more taxes and make said country a more prosperous inclusive place.
The nerve!
16
Public funding for nearly free college educations providing mine half a century ago. That funding has been withdrawn, now.
Medicare is funded by everyone to pay for the elderly not for everyone. It’s not designed to serve people through their whole lives, and quite likely it just cannot do so. Another system will have to be created, from scratch. The cost and resources that will be used is not known.
The means we have to replace our carbon gases generating energy systems and technologies are not separate from those systems and technologies. While those changes are made, people have to live with whatever technologies are making that possible. A crash program will generate and release into the atmosphere vastly greater amounts of carbon gases, a big long exhale of this that will take decades to retrieve and store in solid material. But the resources needed, including capital, are not going to be available to achieve the goals in the desired time.
Funding this with taxes that require raising taxes requires gaining the support of a super majority of the people. They must be convinced that doing so is necessary. They are not, yet.
3
Several times in these threads Mr Friedman and commenters refer to 'illegal immigrants'. This characterization not only ignores the fact that even those formally accused of a committing a crime must to be considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, it amounts to a flat capitulation to Trump's wholly inaccurate and twisted framing of the situation.
3
The overriding imperative in this election is pragmatism. Which candidates can defeat Trump? Then, of those, which candidate holds views that best match your policy positions? This isn't a time to insist on well intentioned but far left policies that will repel centrist voters in the general election. This is a time to win. Losing in 2020 would be catastrophic.
2
It important for the democrats to say two things, one is, the public option healthcare, democrats need to stay on message that single payer, isn’t for immigrants, the republicans are hitching their wagons to immigration, so anything they can say, hey so,w immigrant is getting this on my dime. Republicans, are all for tax payers paying subsidies to soybean farmers, for a tariff war he started, or receiving FEMA payments. Tax payers pay billions every single year to people living in republican controlled states, to rebuild homes better than they were before they were flooded, or flattened. Their logic is, no immigrant would apply for FEMA or programs like that, unlike healthcare. While they may be socialist (although they would never admit it) they are entitled to them, they will also tell you, they pay taxes too, and that they are “entitled” to FEMA money. And don’t even get me started on the federal flood insurance program, another tax payer funded program, that provides flood insurance at far lower rates than say Farmers would charge to people that live in flood prone areas, a majority of claims from red states (I looked). Yet, that is also socialism, but it’s socialism where an illegal immigrant won’t benefit. At least in the Republican mind, I know their thinking defies logic.
But the democrats needs to explain that none of these programs are free, that tax payers should be willing to pay at tax, if a person chooses to opt-out, they would get beck at the end of the year.
2
@jediprof,
It’s nice that you have so much insight as to what people want, and since most of these ideas are just that ideas, most will never get traction. But at least they have ideas, unlike the Republican Party, who’s only policy is how much money can they shovel upward.
4
Free college, or heavily subsidized. We used to have it. In the 1970’s I went to college first two years essentially free- the local city college, paying $5.00 per class plus books. Cost me about $100 per semester. Then college at $2,000 per year plus room and boar, another 2,000. I worked 20 hours a week and summers and paid for the whole thing . But this was when people believed subsidized college was worthwhile to grow the economy. Dit it? I got a great technical job and have had no trouble getting jobs and moving up ever since. I have paid back that subsidy is spades overs the decades. Society made a good investment. These days Republicans hate the idea of subsidizing anyone because they hate the idea of giving up any of their money, even for a public good. They even hate public parks! So, it is possible and a good th8 g to do.. we just need to get rid of all the crotchety old Republicans and become civilized.
8
Best Friedman column ever. This Midwest based life long Dem voter and election judge agrees. Kitchen table issues, for EveryWoman, in four key states.
2
Friedman was not center right or center left when he eagerly supported the run-up to the disastrous invasion of Iraq. He was 100% behind the far right neo-cons who lied the country into an unjustified, unnecessary and illegal war. And what did he say when no weapons of mass destruction were found after years of American occupation? He insisted that in his "gut" he still feels it was right to go after Saddam Hussein.
Now he warns the Democrats not to be too idealistic in their plans for the country. He wants the cautious, compromising, triangulating middle to take us into battle against the hard right fanatics that have seized control of the Republican Party.
3
In addition to a nice dose of sociopathy, the Republican Senate embodies Oppositional-Defiant Disorder: Their greatest energy is to act opposite to Democratic energy. Maybe Biden, being most bland, would incur the least wrath from these children and would be the most effective.
2
@Fred They would oppose everything Biden did because he's a Democrat. The Republicans simply sabotage everything a Democrat tries to do so there's no reason to find a right-wing Democrat to suit them.
1
There are precious few passionate defenders of the middle ground. Please keep speaking for us, Mr. Friedman.
3
Friedman seeks the achievable best available solutions to reducing injustice and increasing the well being of all that can last. Such solutions do not fit into sound bytes, and they cannot be achieved if the resources are too limited to allow to be accomplished.
Nobody seems to acknowledge that our federal government is unable to pay for the services which it provides without borrowing money. The growth is not providing revenues that can keep up with the deficits so the debt is increasing. To implement all of the new programs advocated by the left accounts for no increasing funding to enable them to start nor to sustain them, except by taxing the rich and corporations, without proof that that is either possible or sufficient. Most people have not been sold on these programs. They may not support raising taxes to fund them. Yet, these candidates are running on them.
1
Another column about American politics and the elections without the word "climate" appearing once. June was the hottest month ever recorded. Over the last couple of weeks Alaska shattered temperature records and most of the state was covered with smoke from forest fires. etc. etc.
Yet this discussion isn't much different from what we'd have been saying in 1980. That's just not good enough.
5
@writeon1
July, as well, hottest on record to date.
1
Scence? The president denies it so it must not exist. Scientists along with the Generals, experienced advisers, and well anyone who speaks do not know lore than this president who believes he is smarter than all of them and the SILENT GOP CONGRESS AGREE. NYT... make them talk.
1
Friedman wrote a good column, and as one of the "swing" voters I agree with much of what he says. But he left one thing out. The "squad" and many other so-called progressives simply seem to have no love or respect for the United States. They seem utterly disgusted with it. Unfortunately, in my opinion, this sort of message is not going to play with the majority of Americans who will be voting in the next election. Those voters on the whole love this country. When I voted for Clinton (twice) and for Gore, I felt as if these were people who loved America, and who wanted what was best for America. I felt these were people who wished to preserve America. Now we have Congresswomen who sound as if they are willing to destroy America, who sound opposed to the very idea of America. So in addition to Friedman's other very good points about how to win voters back to the Democrats, I think the Democrats have to reconnect with their own patriotism -- with their own love of country. Trump has taken patriotism hostage, rebranded it, and the Democrats have to stop letting him do that. Not by pushing patriotism away and almost implying that it's racist to be a patriot, not by seeing only evil in this country's history, but by embracing the good in that history as well, by embracing patriotism and imbuing it with Democratic values. JFK did it, Lyndon Johnson did it, and Bill Clinton managed to do it I think. The Dems need such a candidate right now.
If progressive (ie supposedly to the left of moderates) ideas are not put forward than obviously they will never happen. Politics is the art of the possible but what is not presented is by default impossible. Take those supposedly radical left ideas:
1) Free colleges. That does not mean completely free, just no tuition, students still have to eat and sleep somewhere. Many countries have public universities with minimal fees. Public education up to high school is free (not really, it is supported by taxes, but that makes it possible for people of modest means to get educated). What is so radical of extending that four more years and use state taxes to support them? Private higher education will never be free.
2) Medicare for all: Medicare does not abolish private insurance, all extensions (B,supplemental, drugs, dental) are provided by private insurance, some profit and some non-profit. Those promoting it should not gloss over that fact.
3) Aggressive plans to address climate change: It is a fact that unless much more drastic action is taken we are heading for major economic upheavals in the not so distant future.
4) Taxing wealth: middle class wealth is already taxed by property taxes and are a paying a much higher percentage of their wealth than is being proposed for very wealthy people. Without such a tax income inequality will continue to grow (see Picketty).
These so-called radical ideas are only radical because many people say so, but not in fact.
9
I love the idea that Americans need only VOTE to change things, but consider that 33% of all Americans are represented by 8 Senators, while 1% of all Americans are represented by 10 Senators.
A system originally designed to prevent the tyranny of the majority has become a system that enables the tyranny of the minority.
Voting en masse does not overcome the Constitutional problem outlined above. If it did, Donald Trump would still be Tweeting his racist screed while acting corruptly, but he would not be doing it as POTUS.
3
Friedman's piece, and most comments, adopt the viewsay that we must choose either pro-growth, business friendly centrist policies of Clinton/Obama that weaponized income inequality, or everything for free policies of those wacky Socialists. Pass! I think there is a solid majority in the country waiting to be tapped by some savvy politician who offers sensible policies that don't fall into the tired old progressive/centrist/Republican pigeon holes. What would this look like? A fair and progressive taxation system that politely asks the wealthy who have benefited so much from the country to contribute something back to educating the next generation, training them and their parents for the jobs that will keep them in clover, and keeping them healthy from cradle to grave without having to sell organs. A government that invests in a modern infrastructure and takes practical steps to address the most pressing threats from global warming. A fair immigration system that honors American values to provide refuge for the neediest while recognizing the limits of social largesse, and links immigration with a foreign policy built on a Marshall plan like understanding that fostering stability in other countries coincides with our own self-interest. No tariffs/trade wars, no hugging foreign dictators, no cold-war like entanglements in messy local conflicts where our interests are not at stake. The pol. who presents this package gets to skip the weary debate and win by a landslide.
9
Progressives are always for those who are economically the worst off. This seemed popular during the the 1960s and 1970s but lost steam when Reagan came to power. Democratsno longer seemed to be able to win the presidency. Bill Clinton changed that by offering to help the middle class not the poor. He targeted his message to people like suburban soccer moms. The argument the progressives are making is that the Democrats can still win the presidency by focusing on helping the poor such as workers making minimum wage. The center-left fears this is a sure way to lose and wants to continue more or less in the path set by Bill Clinton. Democratic voters have to decide which side is correct.
The GOP racism and xenophobia bypass the slower, reflective brain and go directly to the gut-level anxieties of economic uncertainty and cultural/status displacement. Internal divisions have always burdened Democrats, because they are a more inclusive and less authoritarian, disciplinary party; this is the downside of tolerance within a party engaged in "war without bloodshed." I'm not sure which is more discouraging: the inability of lefties to realize how self-defeating is their rhetoric, that empowers Trump's narrative, or the sustained inability of the party leadership to make clear the linkage between tax-funded programs and general opportunity. But they are working uphill against the simplicity of false GOP narratives, which require at least a few minutes of reflection to penetrate.
2
Healthcare is a human right and not a privilege. Healthcare should be offered to all who need it, migrants and visitors as well as citizens. I had an experience in England in 1970. I suffered extreme GI discomfort and could not sit nor stand without experiencing sharp abdominal pains. I stayed overnight at a small town hospital and learned I had to change my diet. When I got home I saw my GP and received more similar instruction. I left the hospital and there was no bill to pay. The attitude of the doctors and nurses was they provided medical care to humanity.
3
I can't understand why anyone would think a free college education would be considered "worthless," as one commenter said.
My father was born in Wisconsin when the early 20th Century Progressive Movement made it possible for a desperately poor farm kid like him to get a college education. His service in World War II gave him GI Bill benefits that paid for a master's degree, and had he not had a bunch of kids coming along, he'd have gotten past ABD to get his doctorate.
He never paid a penny of tuition for his own education, but he paid a lot of tuition for us kids. He and my mother were able to send four of their five kids to college, resulting in a total of four bachelors degrees, two master's and a doctorate.
All of us have paid far more in taxes than if my father had not had that opportunity to get a free college education and was stuck on a Depression Era farm. Investing in people pays off in the long run.
12
Yep, I too when to nearly free city college for two years the heavily subsidized college for two years and have had a 40 years career during which I have paid loads of taxes easily paid back the price of of college and more. Education of any type is the best investment that a society can make. Those who think not are just clueless and have been brainwashed by ultra right wing entertainers.
3
What is with the idea that people don’t value what is “free”? Nothing is free, its just that some of it is not paid on an individual basis. I got a great k-12 education in public schools, enjoy local parks, am happy not to pay tolls on local roads, am grateful that I will not be billed if I call 911. So why not college tuition?
12
@Lawyermom: Honestly, a college education is not for everyone.
Truth is an advanced degree beyond high school is really only needed by 20% of the population.
A great alternative is a two-year community college associates degree.
So proposing to offer another taxpayer-supported freebie just won't do in the minds of most voters.
And as others have said, if offered FREE there is no incentive that it's a real benefit with value.
@bobj
It doesn't mean just anyone could get a four-year college degree, it would mean that those qualified to attend wouldn't graduate with an immense amount of debt as they do now. We end up paying for that, when students default, the government pays the bank that provided the loans. A two-year degree would be available to those who qualify as well.
There is still an incentive to get a degree because it means you can get into a better-paying career. That in turn results in greater tax revenue.
6
Rift, but other types of education can be subsidized as well. Maybe say post-secondary education. Trade schools or whatever.
3
I'm so tired of people being scared of "socialism" and it being painted as something evil. Social security is socialism. Tricare (healthcare for the military and their dependents) is socialism. Public education is socialism. Police, fire, EMT, and other public safety are socialism. If your city or town plows your roads in the winter, that's socialism. If your elderly parents participate in meals on wheels or other services for the elderly, that's socialism. All of these programs are targeted by the GOP for elimination because they'd rather see people starve or die in the streets.
You know what else is socialism? The huge tax cut that Trump and his GOP enablers permanently gifted to the uber wealthy and to corporations. No one screams about that, nor do they fuss and refuse to vote for it, saying that the costs must be offset or that it will cost too much. That huge tax cut is socialism for the very wealthy and corporations--courtesy of the working poor and middle class. You're not seeing any benefit of your tax dollars, but the wealthy are reaping the benefits of your donations.
We could insure everyone in this country, but our elected officials would rather give ever more to those who already have the most than give the working people even a scintilla more. If there was enough money for the huge tax cut, there is enough money for other programs. What is lacking is political will, and the ability to explain how the programs will benefit ordinary folks.
27
@marybeth
Yes, but it's a matter of branding and perception. Unfortunately, the term socialism has a negative connotation that is difficult to erase. So, dems have to think of other terms to describe their ideas and programs.
6
Progressives ask when is it their turn. I ask what have progressives done to change local and state politics to reflect progressive ideals?
You don't get to one step your way to the white house and frankly, any one president can't do what you say you want unless they first have the majority in congress.
Your work is local first. Make your village, town, city a shining example of progressive values envied by those who now hold a differing point of view of what life should be about.
Now, that would be success!
8
What have republicans done to improve the lives or health of the citizens of this country.
1
The major question is what do the majority of voters really want. The answer can be found in examining the results of the 2018 midterm elections where moderate Democrats were able to pull off victories in districts that had previously been Republican.
Also, the answer can be found in the consistent early polling of Joe Biden, who led by a wide margin even before he announced he was running for President.
I think these things show that most people want someone who is decent and not too extreme who can restore normalcy to our country. Everything else can happen only if Trump is defeated and if he isn’t, nothing the progressives want will ever happen. It really is that simple.
8
The disparity of incomes and opportunities for all in our Nation are fading daily. This current administration does not wish to serve all, rather their personal selfish interests. There are a number of decent worthwhile bills passed in the House that McConnell won't even allow discussion on. His first job is to legislate not obstruct. Let's follow the duties enumerated in our Constitution for the Congress, Executive, and Judicial branches. It's sad the 45's supporters do not realize he is doing nothing for most of them.
6
Neither side is doing anything. The left wants to let all the illegals come in, which will drive down wages even more. The right wants them here too. Cheap labor., no insurance if any kind, no vacations, no retirement. The left also wants to give them free medical. I don't get free medical. You don't get free medical. Why should illegal aliens get free medical, just for a possible vote? Maybe if, and that's a big if, if they ever get medical insurance or some programs to help legal citizens get a reasonable price for their medical coverage (and we're nowhere NEAR that right now), we could consider helping the illegals, but giving it to them for free? NO.
I don't understand why you can't see that Trump is being pushed by the media to be David vs Goliath! I'm a Democrat turned by Trump into a republican by his business man style and his message about Americans and jobs first. He has only gained in popularity despite what you and the rest of the media say. You think that the democrats gain in the house was because people are against Trump. No its because alot of people did not vote. But for president they will. We have seen the identity politics, and the crazy idea's proposed by the left that just turn away blue collar guy's like me. A independent union worker. I don't know anyone I work with that doesn't feel for the migration coming here. But it's unacceptable for our elected officials to go to Mexico and help them break our laws. Absolutely unacceptable. You people will see the numbers that Trump can do in 2020. Watch. Popular vote and all. There are so many people who seen the media complain about Russia and race, rather than jobs and growing economy. You seen the ratings fall like the voters for democrats. After Mueller report. It's gonna be spectacular seeing the screaming identity loving victims on their knees like that famous video of the screaming derangement syndrome girl at his inauguration.
3
Frankly I’m glad that your a republican, but those people at the border are asylum seekers, and this country has asylum laws. People are free to come to the border and turn themselves in to border patrol, and ask for asylum. You have your head in the sand if you think that that immigrants are the sole cause of stagnant wages, there just aren’t enough of them to push wages down. You buy into the Republican trope, because you don’t want to believe that you’ve been duped, they need their monsters so that you don’t wake up one day and see that they are solely responsible for state of this country.
By the way, it’s a fact, illegal immigrants pay taxes, at all levels, in the counties, cities, and states that they live in, in the BILLIONS of dollars. Yet, they will never benefit from any program they’ve paid into, like Social Security. But that doesn’t fit the narrative, one more fact, an OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of Americans are for legal immigration, which means, following your logic of some uprising of republican voters that will vote for Trump just based on immigration. There wouldn’t be enough Republican voters to elect Trump if that’s what he’s banking on.
And one other thing, what’s happening at the border, is true, it isn’t a hoax, it isn’t fake, it very real. And regardless, those people followed the asylum laws, they weren’t rounded up, they aren’t illegal. If there isn’t enough infrastructure to adjudicate asylum requests, that’s the CURRENT ADMINISTRATIONS PROBLEM.
4
It’s sad that you value and enjoy the distress of others so much. It’s quite a common trait among the trumpists, though.
1
It will take everyone who knows Trump is destroying the America that has been fought for over hundreds of years in less than 3-- and that his MAGA vision will not improve upon the constitution that he knows so little about and violates with impunity (as well as labor, human rights laws and general respectable adult manners). We will all have to vote for the democratic nominee even if we have to hold our nose like some republicans may have done for Trump in 2016. In the interim, the freedom of expression and respect we should have for different points of view should not be treated as though the lack of knowledge and thought that Trump assigns to them when he "tweets" about what democrats are doing of not (while lying about that about 90% of the time). Let Trump be Trump and keep stepping in it. Those of us who are conscious of what Trump is doing and have a conscience to uphold the moral decency of our nation-- have an obligation to raise our voices, protest, express our dissent and in general help hold our communities (that Trump wants to disturb, disrupt and damage to the worst degree he can) together because we are accountable. Trump is not accountable and does not want to be. We are not fighting so much as we are confounded by the circumstances and depth of stupifying assault all things democratic are undergoing with this rogue administration. We need to outsmart Trump, which is not hard to do. The media needs to monitor its complicity. Its time to be clearly focused.
2
Any and all things that the Democrats would like to do to create a more level playing field, from healthcare and education to income equality and immigration, is/will be met by the Republicans with one word: socialism. They have been playing this game with great success for decades, knowing that Democratic politicians will run for the hills on hearing the "S-word". But what if Democrats actually fully embraced this mantle? What if they spoke in one voice and preached with fervor how "American-style socialism"--not Cuban/Russian/Chinese socialism, but socialism "Made in the U.S.A"--could work? The United States has always been at the forefront of things, many of which have been the envy of the world: music, science, technology, sports. Americans are masters of (re)invention; we don't just copy "stuff", we take it and make it so much better. What stops us from doing that with socialism? It's time for the Democrats to straighten their spines and tell the Republicans, "Bring it on. It may take us a generation or two to sell our message to the citizens of this nation, but we will no longer be deterred by your bogey man, After all, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."
2
Then the democrats need to point out that soybean subsidies are socialism, so is FEMA, or the federal flood insurance program, so is Medicare, social security, so is disability, and statistically there are more people in red states collecting some form of government money, disability payments, social security, food stamps, cash payments, the list goes on.
3
People seem to forget that candidates seeking a nomination are pitching a message to their party. After the conventions, the rhetoric would usually move more to the center because it was addressed to voters in general. This is, however, what had changed in 2016 after the conventions. The message in 2016 was simply, vote for me, not because of my great platform, but because the other candidate is evil. That mistake must not be repeated.
2
Mr. Friedman, thank you for opening up a genuine conversation and reflecting on the dialogue. For me, it is discouraging to hear from some that a handful of midwestern states will determine the 2020 election. California is the 6th largest economy in the world, and yet we are underrepresented politically in our own country. Vermont and California have the same number of senators. And then, the electoral college determines the President instead of the popular vote. This has to change.
4
"What I worry about from the first Democratic debates was that by so many candidates offering so many free things to so many people — some of them not even American citizens — the gut message being conveyed by the party was that it’s for open borders and for taking care of people who just walked into our country illegally, more than taking care of our fellow Americans, like veterans who are badly in need of improved health services."
Interesting. Mr. Friedman obviously heard completely different things than I and my friends did during the first debate. As a group--ranging in age from mid-50s to mid-70s--we were all excited by the quality of the candidates and of the ideas they were putting forth. Did that mean that we agreed with everything that was said? Of course not. But it meant that we were listening to realy ideas for the most part and not Democrats running scared about standing up to Republican nonsense.
I don't know what debate Mr. Friedman was listening to.
12
@Annie
The one that actually occurred. Free college. Free health services with no co-pay. Open borders. Banning additional health coverage if people want it.
Friedman reasonably fears that Trump will clobber any Democratic nominee who runs on such a platform. Moderate versions of all of those things are good ideas. But not many folks were proposing moderate versions.
12
Funny thing I didn’t hear one person at those debates utter one word about open borders, that people like you, and republicans, and Fox News that repeats that lie over and over. The democrats and republicans don’t want to fund a wall, that’s right, the republicans before the midterms did not add, the 5 billion Trump requested for his beloved wall. So when the democrats won the midterms, the democrats didn’t add the 5 billion either, 20 billion isn’t enough, and it won’t stop asylum seekers, that’s who is currently being held at the border.
Wait, am I understanding MrFriedman correctly, he would not vote for Bernie Sanders if he were the nominee? Really? Would you vote for Trump or not vote at all? I’m just floored with all that is at stake should Trump get re-elected. And as for free college tuition, it would be a vast improvement despite its many faults some of which you astutely point out than where are are now and have been for way too long. Some liberals have more skin in the game and may not wish to sacrifice some of their economic benefits and that’s understandable. I think climate change makes capitalism a dying economic model whether we like it or not. Progressives I believe are more willing for the degree and direction of change that we need to survive into the next century. My 3 cents...
9
If my laptop were not so expensive I would throw it across the room.
Please, Thomas Friedman--and a million other people---stop exaggerating the downside to "free college" and/or the cancellation (to whatever degree) of student debt.
Contrary to what TF is saying, nobody would be able to stay in college forever while starting/stopping whenever they feel like it and thus soaking the long-suffering taxpayers (a group to which, I might point out, those students themselves belong). There are already models for "free college" at the state level. There are indeed rules regarding time-to-degree, GPA, means testing (sometimes based on Pell eligibility), etc. This varies by state/CC system, but there is no place where a complete free-for-all is the default setting.
By the way--the ACTUAL graduation statistics for CC students enrolled within the current model is the grim set of numbers that we should be talking about. Have a google and see how few will ever earn a degree of any kind. Would those numbers improve if said students knew they only got a "free" shot within certain parameters? It's worth a try.
I do agree with Friedman regarding student debt discharge via some voluntary program of public service. This would be a win on many fronts: the community gets something, the (perhaps) out-of-work debtor gets to feel that he's of some use, the taxpayer isn't just giving the money away, and of course the former debtor starts contributing to the economy again.
9
"Politics in a democracy is not about whose turn it is."
This, coming from a self-described moderate, after Al Gore, John Kerry and Hillary Clinton. It seems to me that so-called moderates are the ones wearing blinders.
4
When I was a kid, if I was even as remotely disrespectful to others as Trump is, my mom would have sent me to my room and made me apologize to those I had offended.
ALL Americans wish Trump had been raised, less as an entitled-spoiled 1%, and better parented. You never heard Bush or Obama disrespectful of others while president. They were raised to be respectful...simply as that.
13
The one thing you ignore and which gives Trump a tremendous advantage ---an unfair advantage---is that Trump tells lies all the time, makes up stories of his accomplishments, and takes credit for things that others have done. And he does this all the time. Worse of all is that his base tends to believe him, as the lies are reaffirmed by Fox News and some of his radio supporters which are the only sources they follow. They do not read the complex, more thoughtful, harder to understand media (such as this paper) and also believe Trump that the careful media is "Fake".
22
@Shimr
I agree. Trump followers are not thinkers. They want simple solutions to complex problems, problems that Trump isn’t able to comprehend, much less deal with. All Trumpsters understand are slogans. If you can’t make a four-word slogan out of it, it won’t fly for them, or Fox.
I think that Trump voters were tired of having someone smart in the White House, so they voted for someone like themselves.
5
"Why can’t moderates recognize passion and integrity when they see it and unite behind a courageous movement?"
We're not saying AOC and others aren't courageous and don;t have integrity.
We're saying their ideas are not electable in 2020.
5
@Chris Manjaro - None of the individuals you note are running for President. Why not consider the ideas of those who are?
3
If the dems cannot take back the Senate, or at least even the numbers, it will not matter one whit who the (Democratic ?) president is. McConnell will close the Senate, block any and all initiatives put forward. It will be a repeat of the Obama years.
The country will slide further into the realm of a 3rd world nation.
8
And, if there was universal health care (which not all—or, I think, even most Democrats advocate*), I suppose illegal immigrants could avail themselves of it. I doubt they would though, for fear of being caught and deported.
*i think restored, revised (based on experience, not hostility) ACA with public option is most popular with Democrats.
1
@JamieBaldwin
I’m pretty moderate. I did not want ACA at all in 2008/9. Almost voted for McCain in 2012, Palin was his downfall. I do not want revised ACA unless the government negotiates pharmaceutical & hospital stay prices. This will be the only way the current insurance market stays viable. We might as not have insurance for basic care at all right now as high as the premiums are. We are paying thousands just to get catastrophic coverage. We all have $3000 to $5000 deductibles. Even those of us with employer sponsored plans...(thanks to the Cadillac provision which was planned to be repealed this week.)
1
@SDemocrat
Your preference is for what you had pre-ACA? Maybe it was better for you. I think millions and millions of people’s situations improved with ACA, and it served as a mechanism for bringing costs down. Not just those who went from uninsured to insured either. Step in the right direction. Cadillac Repeal is a step away from cost control.
2
D'd better get better focused or the R's will run all over us. An absurd # of candidates for POTUS to start with and promises galore. If we don't win the Senate and keep the House it is all for naught.
My favorite has been Warren but I question her judgement when she says she "plans to do away with Health Ins Companies" in favor of Medicare for All. That has the potential of disrupting the entire US health care system. No one in their right mind would vote for that. That appears to be Bernie's position as well.
Biden, on the other hand, correctly plans to shore up the ACA and add a Public option. That may be the winning call as we are all concerned about health care. Young people on modest incomes can have decent coverage if they apply for ACA coverage. Personal experience confirms this.
On other issues for Biden I don't really have a clue except he proposes to mend our intl relations. A Biden/Warren ticket may just be the strongest chance of success if Warren can come around on the ACA.
4
Mr. Friedman,
Thank you so much for facilitating this conversation, especially the clarity of your explanation about the "gut connection."
Each time a federal department created to protect an area of American life (from the EPA to HHS, through Education and beyond) is turned against its very purpose, each time the president commits a (literally) fascist act or promotes fascist ideas, it makes many of us increasingly desperate, and now that fear is making us turn on each other.
The party that has stood for equality and has proudly united diverse constituencies now is seeing those constituencies attack each other, and we're losing sight of the unity and purpose that is far greater than the differences.
As difficult as it is, if we could avoid spending energy on every extreme word and action of DT and Co and adopt the strategy of becoming an implacable, undeterred force, united in defeating not only him but also feckless congresspeople, we could steamroller them.
The idea of the fundraiser is an excellent example. But this approach means that Dem voters and congresspeople would have to sacrifice ego-satisfying infighting and the demonizing of Dem candidates.
Finally, the news media absolutely have to stop spending so much ink/time on sensationalizing and exaggerating "debate moments," engaging in "if this, then that, and maybe . . ."., and generally preferring sensationalism over seriousness in this most serious of endeavors.
1
"Politics in a democracy...is about what you can get a majority of people to vote in favor of."
As a center-left moderate Democrat, I have repeatedly tried to make this point in discussions with my progressive younger brother. His rebuttal is that America is not really a democracy, because a majority of citizens vote for Democratic candidates (Hillary Clinton, for example) and progressive policies, but Republicans still end up winning a majority of the seats in government (including the White House) and thus end up controlling the policy agenda.
In other words, my brother believes that U.S. citizens are living under minority rule, and we are not a true democracy.
What say you?
1
@Htb
He’s correct.
Proportional representation would solve that.
1
Who has advocated free health care for illegal immigrants?
Maybe, in a sense, they have it since those in detention presumably receive treatment if they’re ill. It would be inhumane to do otherwise.
Maybe someone in the debate pointed out that universal health insurance would be cheaper than the present system of for-profit health insurance, and people are extrapolating from that that Democrats want to provide illegal immigrants with health insurance.
I think it’s a pretty big distortion to say Democrats advocate free health insurance for illegal immigrants.
Speaking of illegal immigration, Trump’s signature issue, has he solved the problem or even dealt with it effectively? No, because he doesn’t care about it and is only using it to rile people up.
5
@jamiebaldwin The question was pretty clear:
"Savannah Guthrie asked the candidates to raise their hand if their healthcare plan would cover undocumented immigrants".
THEIR healthcare plan(s) will include US citizens and illegal immigrants. Whether the same level of coverage will be provided is unclear. It doesn't matter. Trump will destroy any of those candidates who raised a hand to this. It's almost made it too easy for the Republicans.
1
@Spanky
Thanks. I remember that. I think those advocating universal coverage have to acknowledge that illegal immigrants would be eligible. Unlikely illegals would sign up. Also, unfair to suggest that providing health care to illegal immigrants is the goal of universal coverage.
As it is, we provide health care to anyone who walks in an emergency room—as we should. Hospitals left holding the bag? That’s a better system?
2
Has anyone demanded that the colleges first reduce their heinous tuition costs, and second begin to return portions of the student debt based on the need of the graduates who are now saddled with debt because the colleges have been fleecing their students.
Colleges and universities have become the ultimate capitalists, taking an ever increasing amount of our citizens limited resources.
I am not against higher education at all. It just seems as if some of my fellow, yet further left progressives are essentially demanding a kind of corporate welfare for colleges and universities. If we are going to be upset about handouts to corporations, we should be furious at the capitalist raiders running our colleges and universities.
4
".... Hillary Clinton, who never really talked about economic issues " Every time I read something like this the hair stands up on my neck. Seriously?? Go back and watch the debates, read her website. She had plenty to say about economic issues, including those in the rust and coal belts - more than any current Dem candidate except Warren. When I hear people talk about why the didn't vote for her it's like they never listened, or it's because "they just didn't like her."
18
@Koho
Completely agree to this sad fact.
With about 20 years of GOP cuts and bruises (with media's blessing) they were told they shouldn't like her.
Hate to bring up Ayn Rand but Secretary Clinton's situation is a perfect example of a phrase Rand used about modern art - "argument by intimidation".
In politics, a classic case of that expression is the much maligned Hillary R. Clinton.
Yes, the hair stands on the back of my neck too and I always stand up for her. I wish I had the opportunity to vote for her this time and I believe she would win despite the shrill lamentations of certain folk.
5
@Koho
Or is it that they had a gut feeling that she just wasn't being sincere.
Tom Friedman is exactly correct this time. The Democrats need will lose the 2020 election unless they nominate a compassionate, decent human being that is not angry and brings us all together. I nominate Oprah Winfrey: she can win in a landslide and make America Decent Again.
4
Tom,
Tuition free college is not free. It is paid for through taxes on everyone.
My father went to CCNY in the late 1940s. He had to take an exam to be accepted, that was it. He was literally the first in his family to attend college and he got to attend one of the best institutions of the time. Otherwise there would have been no way that son of desperately poor, uneducated immigrants would have been able to get a college education.
I have relatives in Scandinavia who don’t pay tuition to attend college; in fact, they receive stipends to assist with living costs. They take their education seriously and get seriously good educations.
Tuition free education at public institutions only works when society at large decides that education for all is a societal benefit worthy of the expense. The US apparently hasn’t reached that point.
9
It’s about messaging and scaring people. And the Republicans have always been better than the Democrats at both.
9
Columns like Friedman's remind me how far we are from the thinking in JFK's famous charge: "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country." Nowhere does Friedman even hint at this kind of connection between politics and meaningful civic engagement. If we want to win, according to Friedman, we have to appeal to the baseness of people's desire to survive. But isn't this very condition--the bare life that we're all so concerned with eking out--a symptom of a bigger problem, a problem that needs to be addressed? Friedman's argument isn't nihilistic because it advocates incremental change, it's nihilistic because it abandons the very possibility of meaningful civic engagement.
6
One example. It is interesting that people think free college is a radical idea and you shouldn't give things away. But free public education was a radical idea and America's embrace of it was one of the reasons that America became so successful. Public education gave Americans the skills they needed to do the jobs that were extant. Now an associate degree or college degree are needed for the jobs that presently exist. Free public higher education is merely a long-overdue update of an old and successful policy. But my baby-boom generation is too cheap to pay for the future or to pay back for the previous generation's investments in us, our infrastructure, etc. Most of the people who complain about other people getting things for free, do not recognize how much they have gotten for free. People think that they deserve the benefits that they get, but the benefits that others get make them free-loaders.
11
Free college worked when serious students studied hard and standards were high.
Getting a gentleman's C at a college that taxpayers support is different from lazy social bucks going on their daddies' dollars.
Seems to me that Friedman is right when he suggests that American's tend to vote with their gut. The gut of this moderate says that advocating hugely expensive government freebies (Sanders like) or advocating all things (lots and lots of things) that liberals like to hear (Warren like) will not, in the end, do well against Trump's manipulative tactics.
This approach was a successful one for FDR, but the only gut people were thinking about then was the one that wondered where the next meal would be coming from. Different world.
The one and only goal for Democrats this time around should be to DEFEAT TRUMP. Pie in the sky isn't going to do it. We need a hard nosed pragmatist (Harris like) to jump in with claws bared and mercilessly go in after trump from every direction possible.
4
Honestly, I don’t know what he means by pro-growth. The overall growth happens as money is constantly injected into the economy by building houses, LNG gas factories, airplanes, iPads, etc. Almost every major project is against money that is borrowed from the bank, but that the bank gets from the Federal Reserve that creates it in the form of credit. The assets value of exiting property increases as well. There is nothing but constant growth and a constantly growing pie. The World Bank estimated the wealth of world, the GDP alone, will quadruple between 2010 and 2050. Quadruple. The pie might not be split it evenly but it isn’t stagnant. It’s not a pie. It’s an ever inflating ballon that won’t pop.
3
I agree pretty strongly with Mr. Friedman, but what I really endorse is the way the NYT has allowed this discussion to continue. It feels almost like being in a conversation on a barstool, pale ale in hand, waiting for my favorite server at BJs here in California to deliver my lunch. Thanks folks. Let's keep the dialog going.
13
Isn’t it great to be able to just have an adult and respectful political conversation?
1
Patience, the debates between the most likely Democratic candidates have not even begun. What is going on now is some contrived attempt for TV coverage by the DNC.
Trump will not be running against HRC. He is unpredictable excepting his insecurities, racism, misogyny and lack of knowledge. Who knows what stupidities he may create between now and November 2020?
HRC lost WI a state she did not deign to visit by the margin of votes cast for Stein. That will not happen in 2020. Everyone now knows what Trump is like.
Democrats did well in WI in 2018 that was a referendum on Trump.
Friedman seems like a nice fellow that would be fun to play golf with but he is no savant.
Just ask him why he backed the invasion of Iraq and see if you get a straight answer like 'I was wrong'.
2
Can someone tell Linda from New Jersey that, unless she's a billionaire, knows she'll have healthcare not matter what, can insure her grandkids from climate disasters (air, water, food!), her vote for any GOP candidate in any election is a vote against her own self interest. No GOP legislature or White House has improved the environment, jobs, or the economy. She can look this up. Tax breaks for billionaires, credits for millionaires, deregulation for polluters and gamblers are what a GOP vote buys.
8
The issue is this: what are the qualities we should look for in the next President. INTEGRITY, INTELLECT, EDUCATION, UNSELFISHNESS, COMPASSION, STRENGTH, JUDGMENT.
Promises, plans matter not unless there is a fine person occupying the Oval Office.
3
“People don’t appreciate things that are free.”
Right on, Thomas!
People don’t appreciate police and fire protection, public schools, safe roads and bridges, a military to protect us...
Wait, they do like those things?
And they aren’t any more free than “free college?”
I must be missing something. I’m glad that Friedman is so sure. He must be wiser than I.
6
2 elephants in the room
3.5 % of US GDP is spent on the military
Twice as high as Canada, Germany, Scandinavia countries
“Free” college , health care etc is obtainable under current tax structure if we backed down to the same levels of military spending as other Western democracies
Any comment from the Democrats or Republicans on this?
Crickets
2nd elephant
In 2050 how many people do you want living in the US?
Crickets
5
What is at the heart of the situation is the abysmal failure of the “center-right” economic policy of the last 40 years. The middle class has suffered and shrunk, i.e. the working class is falling out of the middle class, and the millennial generation is in dire straits. Establishment Democrats who tried to play along with the Reaganomics trend, and Republicans, who in the face of their abysmal failure have resorted to abject demagoguery and gone completely dirty, exposing themselves as the party of the aristocracy, offer no new solutions. Only Progressive Democrats offer anything at all that is different from the status quo, to the malaise that has stricken the middle class since Reaganomics began. The first thing Donald Trump did in 2016 was explode the entire Republican economic doctrine, looking like another Bernie. Hillary wore Walls Street and the free trade agreements around her neck like an albatross. It was, unfortunately for Trump's hood-winked working class followers, all a ruse. It is only a matter of time before people realize that immigrant hating and austerity policies are not helping anything. It is inevitable that the ideas of the Progressive Democrats will get tried, because there is nothing else, and the pain will increase and increase. The longer the aristocracy delays its comeuppance...well...the harder they will fall.
2
I fantasize, at times of speaking with Trump. Decorum and civility prevent me from writing anything more. Yes, just once.
3
Here's a useful comparison of US for-profit health care and the rest of the world, the UK in particular. Even on Fox, if you ask them, people want universal health care.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSL3z55cT_c
Meanwhile, employers are finding ways in the new gig economy with the new low wages and removal of worker protection regulations, to get rid of the expense of providing health care. If you're rich or have old-fashioned health insurance, please don't sneer at the rest.
2
Well, we know what happens when those in the Democratic party can no longer wait for the "revolution". We saw that in 2016. Fully ten percent of Bernie voters went for Trump then. https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/545812242/1-in-10-sanders-primary-voters-ended-up-supporting-trump-survey-finds Thousands more voted third party, and thousands more stayed at home.
And from the looks of this early primary season, it is likely that many Democratic voters will make the same catastrophic choice they did in 2016, when they told us that there was no difference between Hillary and Trump.
I'm a fairly left-wing liberal. I'm supporting Liz Warren in the primaries. But unlike many Bernie Bros, I will vote for the Democrat who gains the nomination. I won't have the temper tantrum they did because their prom king didn't get elected.
But no one is addressing the real reason for the division. Most Bernie Bros are white males, and for their own lives, there really was no difference between Hillary and Trump. They knew their own lives would be unchanged under a Trump presidency. So when they claimed they were voting their "conscience" by not supporting Hillary, what they were actually doing was exercising their selfish tantrums.
The harm that has come to women and minorities -- that any sane person could foresee before the 2016 election -- apparently wasn't on their "conscience."
The takeway? The far left Democratic voters need to understand that it is not all about them.
9
Some voters that are people of color or women support Sanders. Some support Warren. Some have no allegience but like Medicare for All, an end to student debt and other progressive ideas that can make a difference in their lives. Some people of color, like me, voted for Hilary reluctantly because they didn’t see much upside to her centrist status quo policies and/or they remembered how racist some of her supporters were when she ran against Obama. You are over simplifying a complex group in my opinion.
I’m also not sure how I feel about the sentiment that I see here and in other social media — usually written by white voters — that people of color have more to lose than they do. Doesn’t exactly fill me with hope.
1
This is my sentiment exactly, Democrats are doing their best at the moment to re-elect Trump. I will never vote Trump even if the Democrat says they will double my taxes to pay for illegal alien services and reparations, but many people won't. The far left needs to understand this - it is not about Republicans dominating the conversation, it is about what people want to hear. Republicans did not start dominating the conversation through big bold ideas, but painstakingly working the machinery of state power, judges, and other levers. So, Ms AOC get in line, help flip a few legislatures, reduce some of the gerrymandering issue, pass a few laws that skew us away from reorrsebtstional democracy. When you accomplish this stand up and say "now let's do something more radical".
Democrats can't even get a minority that they should have locked up to vote overwhelmingly for them (Latinos). If they can't do that with policies Taylor made for them, then why do they think that they can get middle America.
3
The comments that the NYT has included in the "conversation" with Friedman are priceless but not for their obvious meaning but for their sub-text. The reference of one (apparent) moderate to the need for the young progressive women to prove themselves in "the marketplace of ideas", and of another who says that ideas will rise or fall according to their "merit" shows me more clearly than ever before that those who want fundamental and, yes, radical change need to deal with the plodding, lumpen elements in their own party first.
These plodders are imprisoned in an ideological cage, best described by the great British political theorist Stuart Hall as "the mental frameworks – the languages, the concepts, imagery of thought, systems of representation – which social groups deploy in order to make sense of and render intelligible the way society works.” I now see that progressives have their work cut out for them.
3
To follow up on the point that the Democratic Party has lost its New Deal, democratic bearings, I ask, does your statement that you would not vote for Bernie Sanders mean that you would prefer Trump? You seem to have been pushed over the rightward cliff...
1
Forgive me for being slightly OT, but for TRUMP, the golfer-in-chief, to castigate FRIEDMAN for playing golf is surreal.
It's bizarre for Trump to try to deflect - in this case onto Friedman - Trump's OWN sin: Trump's disgraceful waste of taxpayer money for his zillion golf outings.
Remember when Trump swore he'd be too busy governing to play golf?
Trump's base has as selective a memory as Trump himself has. Yet if Trump actually were a used-car salesman from whom any of his voters had bought a lemon of a car, Trump would've been run out of town on a rail ages ago. Yet, somehow, inexplicably, scamming people on a national level seems admirable to Trump's base.
5
@L that's funny! The Democrats don't remember saying that illegal immigrants are hurting this country. Obama sent back more than Bush. But now they love the immigration so much they forget the actual Americans that put them in office. Funny how that works.
The Republicans use their own media stalwarts to phrase the argument as "them versus us", the "them" always being those who defend the "other". If you listen to Fox news all the Democrats care about is open borders, free medical for the undocumented while working people pay and struggle, and transgender bathrooms. And how do Democrats counter this? By acting like a deer in the headlights, letting the media attention fall on those few Democrats who call for open borders, free medical for the undocumented and transgender bathrooms. Until the Democrats recognize the responsibility they have to Americans as a major party to improve their messaging, they will lose.
4
Our democracy is collapsing under the weight of a madman who is looking to become a dictator. This is not the time to discuss anything but how to keep this from happening.
All other issues, climate change, health care, race relations are directly affected by whether or not Trump wins re-election in what may prove the last free election in our lifetimes.
3
@Sparky calm down sparky. TRUMP WILL NEVER BE A DICTATOR. But if democrats don't get their message straight. Stop lobbying racist label. Take back the positive messages for workers, and actually care about the people who put them in office. Stop the side show of identity politics and orange man bad, and get us the health care reform, infrastructure, jobs back from China, and keep us out of the wars. Then do the other after the election. If you don't stop the attacks and negative political theater, people will keep voting for the one who cares about their issues. People who worry about Pro nouns and socialism will lose every time.
I nominate Friedman for president. Come on Tom! Sound, rational thinking. A balm to my very weary soul.
The current dem candidates are off-the-charts crazy with their ideas. It’s kind of mind boggling this is the group currently being considered.
Have we learned anything these past 4 years?
5
Mr. Friedman. I certainly hope you would vote for
Bernie Sanders if he is the Democratic nominee. Surely you do not mean you would vote for Trump over Sanders,
1
Mr Friedman,
I read your article and posted a comment citing your pessimism. If you are worried about his reelection, you ought to recognize expressing fear of this president makes him feel more powerful. I believe the time is right for bold progressive thinking. Many are suffering needlessly in this rich country and the ones we hired to work on fixing that seem don’t care and in some cases are the cause.
We gain nothing by replacing them with the status quo.
You mention people turning against progressive Democrats who want to take away their private health insurance, which they like. That is not exactly how it is being proposed. I’m am now on Medicare and a good supplemental plan and can tell you, you are wrong in your framing of that argument. I had private health insurance from employment and there is little perceptible difference transitioning from one to the other. It’s healthcare people like, not health insurance.
Finally, here’s something we should all be concerned about regarding private health insurance. It can be found at ProPublica.
The Big Story
THU. JUL 18, 2019
Reporter Marshall Allen has been investigating the confounding way we pay for healthcare for over a year. Today, we published his latest piece, Health Insurers Make It Easy for Scammers to Steal Millions. Who Pays? You, which Marshall calls one of the wildest stories he’s ever reported.
2
Friedman says, about free college, “Third, why should my kids not pay when I can afford it and should be made to pay?”
Here’s the answer: because education is best regarded as a right, like air, water, and medical care.
You should pay if you can afford it, and that is called “taxes.”
3
@Anglican
Okay. Not everybody can afford much. There are lots of people struggling to feed their families and pay their mortgage or rent. There is any easy fix for out of control tuition. End the government promise to re-pay banks for defaulted loans. Instead return to a federal loan in a given amount. Many schools would cut tuition to get the students with that loan.
@Anglican What are you talking about in regards to taxes? I didn't have the privilege of a college education, yet my property taxes are sky-high. I pay investment taxes, income taxes, sales taxes, auto taxes, state taxes, etc. It's never ending. If you want an education, pay for it yourself. After your 'education', maybe then you can share in the pain that is middle America's tax burden.
1
Ask "Mr. Lifelong Learning" Friedman what the "jobs of tomorrow" are, or even where we should be allocating our resources now to prepare for them. I guarantee you he has no answer and neither do the corporate wunderkinds he worships. The idea is to place the entire onus on the worker so that when they invariably fail, its their fault and theirs alone.
These men share great common ground as American Boomers who take themselves too seriously.
Why is public health insurance considered such a 'radical' 'socialist' idea when, as Bernie notes, every other major capitalist country provides it?
We were one vote away from at least offering a Public Option but "Traitor Joe" Lieberman torpedoed it on behalf of CT's insurance industry backer's profits: https://www.thedailybeast.com/traitor-joe
How much blood is on Lieberman's hands, how many deaths & bankruptcies due to lack of health insurance across the USA, especially in the 'radical' redstates that refused to expand Medicaid?
Seems the truly 'radical' position is to deny care under the myth that it's 'socialist' to do so, when the real reason is corporate insurance industry profits.
5
It all comes down to whether that comment was appropriate for Trump to say to any US citizen. If he would be okay saying it to an American Jew, then I stand corrected. However, my guess is if Omar had said this to a Jew, republicans would call it anti-semitism. If this is true, then they should all do some soul searching. She said nothing as bad as this.
1
To Grandtheatrics,
I have been voting against Republicans for coming on thirty years precisely because they went way too far right for my tastes. I vote with Democrats, almost automatically for exactly the reasons you state, but in truth even the moderate Dems are left of my political views. I stand for personal responsibility. A neighbor of mine just finally won his SS disability claim after years of fighting, when in my maybe not so humble opinion, his major disability is his inability to stay away from his demon alcohol. Before winning his claim he has been working with his brother, rehabbing mobile homes which I am guessing he will continue, but being paid under the table. I am not against helping those that can not help themselves, I worked in Child Protection for almost 20 years, but I do believe if substance abuse is a major factor in a disability case there needs to be a limit on the length of time benefits can be collected. No progress toward fixing the problem, benefits shut off, just the way the SS laws say it should happen. No matter, with Repubs absolutely stone cold crazy against Democracy, I will vote Democratic, but foist Bernie on me, a lot of my fellow centrists will vote Republican, no matter that he is the devil incarnate.
1
The sanctimonious moral purity of progressives is galling. They seem completely unwilling to debate the normative assumptions behind their policy proposals. To them everything is obvious, and, well, if it isn't obvious to you, you are in the way.
4
@TMS
Well if you raise taxes on the rich to the tune of $400 billion per year via income and wealth taxes, and cut defense by $100 billion/year, you can fund a lot of things like college for all, universal pre-K, expansion of the ACA to all, etc.
Contrast that with $350 billion/year in additional spending and tax cuts under Trump, with no means of paying for it.
Happy to debate.
3
The best ideas here are "don't get mad, get even", "register voters", and "propose programs that voters can get behind." A large majority of voters already love or hate Donald Trump and won't change their views on that between now and the election. So don't campaign against Donald Trump, campaign around him. Just do that.
1184
@Stan Sutton
Your post makes a lot of sense, but I disagree with part of it. A number of the Obama voters who voted for Trump are from areas of the country that were left behind during Obama's eight years. They were angry at the status quo, wanted change, and voted for Trump.
But guess what? Trump hasn't done one single thing to make their situations better. His tax cut was for corporations and the wealthy, and he's appointed a bunch of anti-abortion judges, but he has forgotten the people he called the forgotten Americans. Those voters will once again be up for grabs.
Trump has a record to defend, and it's a bad one.
126
@Stan Sutton
Yep.
Let’s campaign to win back the center. Don’t ignore the rust belt. Don’t insult working people. That’s a good start. If we do that, we win.
And if your favorite is not the nominee, don’t sulk. Don’t stay home. Don’t vote third party.
160
What on earth is the purpose of running a column in which Tom agrees with those who agree with him, and disagrees with those who disagree with him? What nonsense. And no, politics are not fair, and they are not about getting a turn, and they are not even about voting with politicians with whom we agree. Right now, they are about money, and they is at the heart of the progressive agenda. Every Democrat and every voter should want to get corporate interests and billionaire donations out of politics.
715
@Megan Cifarelli
The purpose as far as I can tell is to reinforce to "progressives" -- who may not have got it from his first column -- that they are effectively undermining the appeal of the democratic party with their rage and with it, all chances for defeating Mr. Trump in 2020.
35
@Megan Cifarelli
Sure, getting money out of politics is a great idea. But it will become a dot in Trump's rear view mirror if he's reelected. It is not now a gut issue that Friedman describes. Both hands on the wheel!
21
@Megan Cifarelli. I rather enjoyed Tom's to and fro with readers, and would also enjoy seeing it with Charles, Michelle and others.
Re your comment, if the Dems don't win in 2020 then there is no point in concerning yourself with getting money out of politics (a sentiment I agree with). Probably ever.
47
Friedman's statement that "free college . . . is a terrible idea" because "people don’t value things that are free" reflects ignorance of the history of (virtually) free education at the branches of what is now the City University of New York. He also seems not to understand how advanced education is actually experienced by those who seek it. Two generations of my family -- my parents (in the 1930s) and my brother and I and our wives (in the 1960s) -- attended Brooklyn College, paying only a nominal registration fee. In my case, the experience was transformative: after a poor high school experience, BC gave me my calling and my career (check me on wikipedia to see how that turned out). People who want and need an education value it very highly for what it is, and what it gives them. Getting it should cost them what it cost me: four years of hard work, bus fare, and the price of my textbooks.
7
@Richard Slotkin
Agree, why would college paid by our income and payroll taxes be any different from high school paid by our state income or property taxes? College would be no different from any other mandatory program; if you qualify you get the money or benefit. A good paying job is all the motive most need to get a good college education, if only it's in reach.
The answer to the question is so so simple.
Tell the moderates what they are going to get from your plan? Tell the working class why what you are doing benefits them because it's certainly going to cost them. Tell them why helping LGBTQ people does something for them. Stop talking to the fringes and talk to everyone.
I can't believe we're at a point where the Democratic party is so blind they don't get the simplest equation in the world:
What do I get out of all of this?
431
@mj You are right, "what do I get" is the simplest equation in the world. But it was Lincoln who said we should go beyond that, and summon "the better angels of our nature" and it was JFK who said "ask what you can do for your country." These are the presidents we remember. The "what do I get" folks? Not so much. Let's call to the decency in our fellow Americans, not just the self-interest. If that's all that's left, it's over anyway.
76
@mj
The working class gets no insurance premiums or co-pays, in exchange for higher taxes. The wealthy don't want that, working class people do want it.
55
Well cheaper healthcare and an actual attempt to fight global warming for starters.
40
I agree with Mr. Friedman on his remarks here. I feel he is a well grounded moderate as I think most moderates (left and right) tend to be. The all or none approach to policy as promoted by the extreme right and extreme left is self defeating as it is self limiting. Finding the right candidate falls to what Friedman is saying, feeding the gut of the people. Someone who can get to the bowels of the people. Here in Appalachia, people want jobs and clean environment. We are tired of being abused by the vicious cycle of: jobs in extraction industries that provide limited health insurance which is needed to care for our people who are sickened by the pollution, poison, and destruction of our mountains created by the very industries that provide us these jobs. So a candidate who speaks more about jobs through developing and expanding new green tech and energy (along with greener practices) will inspire many here. No more, jobs or health. We want jobs AND health.
4
Something stinks here when media pundits, the DNC and pollsters keep telling us that the, now mainstream, ideas of equality in healthcare, in pay, in justice, in taxes, in saving our environment, in our very political system - are all too radical, too far-left to win. When it started to be reported than many thought that Bernie could have beaten Trump in 2016 (though Sanders was not the "chosen" nominee) - I had to ask where are the Democratic candidate decisions coming from? WHO is it that says mainstream ideas can't win in America because they're "too far-left?" There is something in this so-called 'winning' centrist formula that stinks of influence. It's not a matter of 'getting a turn' - it's a matter of the majority of American people asking and never receiving - for over 25 years - and then getting Trump. Trump, who is increasingly shutting down opportunities and freedoms that made people mad and desperate enough to vote for him in the first place.
Desperation does not make a vote sensible, only desperate. Maybe this is a story the NYT should follow up on.
439
@PC Also, the so-called winning centrist strategy inevitably slides us to the right. We've been doing this since Bill Clinton, if not longer. The end result is a flow of wealth from the many to the few... Same as it ever was. It's just that in a functioning modern society, there's some effort to mitigate.
This so-called centrist notion is a fairy tale, and I wish our pundit class would stop already. If you compare the US to the rest of the developed world, we are hopelessly extreme on the right. Even Boris Johnson would be tossed in the dustbin if he promoted our mainstream policies.
67
@PC The majority of Americans you speak of simply do not vote in the primaries. Primary voters are simply more left leaning. If the majority of general election voters would vote in the primaries - problem solved.
20
@PC Have you stopped to think that a majority is not in favor of the so called “progressive” ideas espoused by these democratic candidates and Bernie. Why do you think they are? Because of polls that are questionable at best (interviewing 5000 people will never really tell you what 3 or 300 million think). Election results? It is ridiculous to think Bernie would have won the election; he didn’t win the primary nor did he even come that close...Yes, Clinton did get more of the popular vote; but there are lots of explanations why that happens and a reasonable fair person wouldn’t say it’s because a majority OF THE COUNTRY feels one way or the other; only a majority of the electorate. Some progressive ideas are great, most of the recent ones are terrible. Free college? Do you see how our secondary schools struggle for tax funding? Open Borders (I know, dems don’t want open borders!)? Illegal immigration is the same thing. It is never, ever ok to enter a country without permission and then refuse to leave when asked, that should be something we can all agree on. If you want asylum then follow the rules, you may not get it, but you’re not entitled to it, we would be giving a gift in providing it which we should do, but only to a reasonable extent. I hear Gavin Newsom going on about the housing crisis and tens of thousands on the coast living on the streets. Americans may be invested in solving this problem but not if it means providing housing to anyone in the world who shows up.
33
The "gut connection" between Trump and his supporters is based on racism. Period. And no amount of rational discourse, moderation, or anything else is going to break it because it is not rational or based on any understanding of the details of policy. The carping about radical leftists is just rationalization to cover the racism.
How do you think we are going to register a million new voters? With the same old tired rhetoric that has turned off half the electorate for the last 40+ years? With the same old tired moderate candidates who promise to make things better but don't deliver?
People don't value things that are free? No one values their elementary and secondary school education? No one values the fact that the fire department comes as soon as you call them? And you don't even have to display the little plaque on your house to show that you paid the fire department, in advance. This argument is capitalist nonsense.
And what is so outrageous about undocumented people being able to access health care when they need it? There are roughly 10 million undocumented people here. Do you really want them walking around with infectious diseases because they have no access to health care? It's not as if Dems are saying give them access to health care and deny it to everyone else. Health care is a human right and everyone should have access to it. For free. Of course we pay for this free stuff with our taxes. But, believe it or not, almost all undocumented people pay taxes.
862
@John
One of the problems is that healthcare for many americans(including myself) is unaffordable right now. In NY State if you make less then 24,998 you have affordable coverage and if your very wealthy the cost is affordable. I can understand how people might object to the concept of a new undocumented immigrant getting affordable coverage while they’ve struggle to pay high premiums, co-insurance etc. I keep the faith that we can improve the system for all but some people may not make that leap and be willing to vote dem as a result.
50
@John
You are missing the point of the critics. They are upset that someone is proposing to provide coverage to 10 million aliens while 44 million people are without health insurance coverage. Does that seem like a good plan to you? A plan that leaves 34 million US citizens behind? Don't interpret the criticism as a denial of coverage to anyone.
78
@Bob
The point is we can do it all if we wanted to. That is the point.
78
Another bad idea is forgiving college loans, but there is a good alternative not so far removed. Reset the interest rates on those loans to zero, or perhaps to the fed funds rate which has been about 2%. There could be some retroactivity included, where what has been paid in interest gets reclassified as repayment of principal, thereby reducing the amount owed.
It ought to be an easy argument to make that students improving themselves ought not be paying higher interest rates than bankers do.
2
The problem can be simply stated. When global climate change gives us a clock of doom cranked to a shorter and shorter time frame day by day. When the economic canyon between the richer and the poorer grows deeper and deeper with the same suddenness, we are going to be either the authors of revolution or its victim. The common wisdom, the safe choice, the incremental will not destroy us. They will simply be made irrelevant in the course of time. And that time is now.
1
Mr. Friedman,
What gives you the impression we are a center-left, center-right nation? According to the Pew Research Center ( https://www.people-press.org/interactives/political-polarization-1994-2017/ ) we have been collectively pulling away from the center, both left and right, at least since 1994. Their numbers for 2018 and 2019 aren't in yet, but I highly doubt that trend has reversed itself in recent years.
Again according to Pew the push to the right has been concentrated the silent and boomer generation, while millennials are far more liberal, and remaining so as they age ( https://www.people-press.org/2018/03/01/the-generation-gap-in-american-politics/ ). Generation Z is also heavily gravitating to the left ( https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2019/01/17/generation-z-looks-a-lot-like-millennials-on-key-social-and-political-issues/ ).
Unless conservatives somehow increase their appeal to younger generations, they're living on borrowed time, and any attempt to tack to the center by any party is just a delaying tactic. The new Americans that will soon flood the voting booths once again are making a break with the past, whether you like it or not, and anyone on the other side of the dividing line is going to be swept away by the tide.
1
Given the overwhelming response to this column, how about a lot more of these from all the NYT op-ed columnists between now and the election next year? If we can't participate as audience members at nationally televised debates or town halls, this virtual forum is the next best thing.
7
What frustrates me is the simplistic all or nothing lens we Americans wear at election time. Don’t want to give up your private health insurance? Then discard all the progressive ideas. Don’t want to foot the bill for free college for all? Then stick with Trump. We’re acting as though politicians can immediately deliver everything they promise. Ideas are important, philosophical direction is important. For Mr. Friedman to say, flat-out, that he is appalled by the idea of offering so many “free” things to so many people is a terrific example of simplistic thinking — the idea isn’t that such things come without cost, it’s that we will use our tax revenues to pay for essentials like health care and education so that we will equalize opportunity. Progressive Dems don’t want to tear the house down, they want to remodel it.
725
Well then, if American businessmen (aside from insurance companies) were using their business sense they would understand the advantage to themselves that would come from socializing health costs.
42
@P&L - But the federal government is not a business for two simple reasons:
1. Thru the FED the federal government can create as much money as it needs out of thin air. Can your business do that?
2. We need money to conduct commerce and for banks to use as reserves for loans. As the economy grows, we need more and more money.
Only the federal government can supply us with the money. And it does so by spending more than it takes back with taxes. Does your business have to supply money to the country?
16
@Jay Beeson I know it is frustrating, but it is actually incredibly simple: It is all about the Economy. And to make it even simpler it is all about the money. When you don't know what it is about? It is about money. America (USA) is a business.
111
There is too much academic theory here. Yes, people think with their guts and don't do a lot of analysis.
This discussion takes too much from the debates and forced controversies between moderates and strong progressives. Discussion topics swayed to the progressive side because that was where the strident arguments were. Let's wait until the primaries in red states.
How about poor folks gut reaction to the "tax cut for the middle class" that never showed up. Lies. Or "the health care plan that was bigger, better, cheaper and for more people" that never showed up and Reps are in the process of making the ACA unconstitutional. More lies.
And there is the argument that the misleading -- fake news -- "unemployment" statistic means that there are more well paid jobs. The people know better. The permanently unemployed are growing in numbers. The people who work three jobs (is that three jobs in the statistic?) to make ends meet are growing. Those people know whether the Trump Administration is actually bringing in more well paying jobs or not. "But the stock market is going up." For the rich folks. And inflation is not rising and wages are not even keeping up with inflation, which means that the new jobs are low paying jobs.
Those people know, in their guts, who to vote for. Moreover, if we stay mid-stream 1980's moderate we'll not get any millennials to vote. That young vote is the weapon Democrats may wield against the electoral college imbalance.
3
The Democratic revolution?
Conservatives, look at that tweet (as the bare minimum, and solely because its on this page; you can find far, far worse), and tell me exactly which party needs the internal revolution? THAT is the man you want as your figurehead, the person running our country, and the absolute best you can do?
You have got to be kidding me.
171
We need to take the focus off Trumps odious supporters and put it on the Democrats. We have over 20 candidates some of whom are excellent who want to be our nominee. I have yet to see a pool where Trump beats any of the top 7 to 10 . The bottom line is there are more Registered Democrats than Republicans, we are equally if not more fired up than Trumps supporters .
Why you ask, because that last thing we want to happen in November 2020 is to have him elected another 4 years. le page from the Republican playbook, and that is be loyal to ech other and especially the Party Leadership .
Infighting is never a good look, it makes you look like you are a hot mess. So Dems get it together . Time for the Circus to leave town
The one thing Democrats need to do is take a sing
85
My fellow liberals are missing the most important point. Much of America dislikes us; on a personal level. And with good reason. We've been lecturing them about their supposed moral failings and their intellectual deficit for years. It's gotten so bad that we're even harassing them about the pronouns they use.
We maintain implacable positions on topics that are begging for compromise. We cry "Science!" but refuse to examine the evidence, relying instead on what used to be referred to, derisively, as "received wisdom".
And so, many voters will just not vote for us. It's not ideological, it's personal. We're just too obnoxious.
262
@laurence You hit the nail on the head. I'm a moderate Democrat from liberal San Francisco, and the Pronouns Police alone are enough to make me want to scream and abandon the liberals for all time. Add to that the Dems' cowardly, tone-deaf approach to Immigration and "The Squad" (and so many others) labeling anyone who disagrees with them a "racist", and I'm quickly becoming alienated and disgusted by ALL of it. So I can only imagine how crazy this makes "much of America" — because I get it! And that is why I get Trump's appeal. For people of a certain age, it feels like our society has gone completely mad. I don't say, "Make America Great Again". I say, "Make America RATIONAL Again."
102
@laurence
Exactly. It is nearly impossible to overstate how overbearing, self-righteous, smug and culturally bullying liberals, especially the social justice commissars, have been. And this is going back many years prior to the rise of Trump.
The culture wars have been in full swing for generations, but the left has been winning with the bullhorn it has. That is what gave us Trump, and what gives him rocket fuel. It's why he's constantly baiting the left, to energize his base.
48
@laurence The idea that we're any more obnoxious than the hordes of evangelicals who are only too happy to impose their religious views on everyone else by force, and lecture us all about how evil and immoral we are for not following God's Law is beyond laughable.
This is the same kind of disingenuous deception that we always see, where liberals are held to a certain standard of behavior that is completely thrown out the window when it comes time to judge the behavior of conservatives.
Yes, there are some issues where democrats are implacable in the face of compromise, but the reason for that is because you can't negotiate with people who refuse to negotiate in good faith. Every attempt to compromise with conservatives results in conservatives moving the goal posts and claiming that the compromise was in fact a liberal victory, and therefore we must move even further to the right in all future discussions. It's a ploy, and you're buying into it wholesale.
128
Why weren't pictures of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders included in this piece? Why is it that in the media left wing, progressive thinking is suddenly epitomized by these four women. Their ideas are no more radical on balance than Elisabeth's and Bernie's. This has all the smell of sexism and condescension.
208
Age discrimination, that’s why
10
The Economist (July th, 2019) ran an article summarizing the hypothetical projections for the 2016 election, if the US had a law compelling eligible voters to vote. The result was Clinton 337 electoral college votes to Trump's 201. Most of the big swing states went from red to blue. The hard core red states stayed red, and likewise the non-competitive blue states stayed blue. The message is that the main battle is over getting out the vote (for either party) in the swing states. Trump does very well at energizing his base to vote.
8
It was a very thought-provoking column and deserved the attention. It's up to the media to explain solutions that fit our problems, and centrist incrementalism lost in 2016. Democrats need bold plans to cut through the noise and motivate their base.
Our current status quo in healthcare is the radical outlier, with 30 million uninsured and with costs 30-40% higher than Europe with comparable results. For scale, if we had European costs, instead of $18,000 for premiums for a family of four they would be about $12,000. That's $6,000 in your pocket every year, about 10x the value of the Trump tax cuts.
And it's far from uncharted territory; Europe handles it just fine. There is no reason to "fund" it, as the prices will be forced down helping the budget deficit. You and your corporation will pay $12,000 in taxes instead of $18,000+ in premiums, if handled correctly.
ACA (basically the Republican plan of the 1990's) may cover millions, but it won't do much about costs.
Trump's base thrives on illegal immigration, no doubt about it. But it's mainly a symbolic issue when Trump isn't creating a crisis at the border. If it's in your top ten issues for reasons other than protecting those at the border, you have some serious soul-searching to do.
We have 11 million illegals roughly in a country of 325 million. It simply isn't that big a deal. Democrats have to get back to the Obama baseline as soon as possible and get this subject out of the news.
3
"I have always considered myself a pro-growth Democrat" ... in other words, Republican-lite.
Mr. Friedman, I respect your views. But as your column of the other day revealed, your favored approach is one in which leaders focus on increasing tax incentives to the "job creators." Well, those "job creators" have enjoyed a decades-long windfall and look what that's gotten the U.S. Wage stagnation, unprecedented income inequality, crumbling infrastructure, and more horrific, self-inflicted wounds. There are many of us who say "enough!" And the candidates speaking for us are progressives.
A couple more things:
You once proclaimed "the world is flat." Forgive me if that alone leaves me skeptical as to your prognostication skills.
Also, you say, "I have a lot of respect for Bernie Sanders. I would not vote for him." That perhaps is the most disturbing of all admissions. Two years into the disaster that is the current presidency, and you would prefer six more years of the Trump debacle over Bernie Sanders???
There are no words.
11
clearly he meant he wouldn’t vote for him in the primary; and, “the world is flat” was not meant literally.
1
@gus
I was referring to Friedman’s broader thesis on globalization, which has largely been disproven.
@Ann
The Bernie Sanders statement caught my eye, too. Essentially by saying in his column, "I respect Sanders but wouldn't vote for him," he's saying "I don't respect Trump but would vote for him (if Sanders becomes the nominee)."
Okaaaay. Perhaps Trump was right in calling Friedman "a weak and pathetic sort of guy..."
The public at large "coached" by politicians and the media now believe in center left of center, center right etc and that only left of center and right of center policies will have the majority of the support among the voters.
If that is set in stone then Warren and Sanders should be as marginal as Libertarian and Green Party candidates. That does not seem to be the case.
The reason why they get a lot of traction is they speak to the policies and ideas that working and middle class people across all political beliefs want. For example Republican voters from poorer families want a living wage, affordable housing and want healthcare. This is not just for Democratic voters.
But that message gets clouded by the relentless push by politicians and passively supported by the media talking heads, active in the case of the Fox folk. They want to divide people into classes so they can be better controlled.
2
Politics are not marketing. It seems that Americans always think in mercantile terms.
Politics are about choices for the future, not how to fix the present . That is what political debate is about.
It is not about a deal.
Once one strips away the obfuscating verbiage Mr. Friedman's position is that we shouldn't fight for what we need because we probably won't get it, and we'll just make things worse instead. So instead we should just accept whatever the least enlightened or politically reactionary amongst us think we can afford because that's being "realistic". This line of thought is circular and self-fulfilling. It's also ahistorical. We've gotten the rights and benefits we have because we collectively fought and bled for them, not because we "settled" for what our "betters", the "experts", thought we should have. It's always better to fight for what you want and not get it than to settle for what you don't want and get it. And by fighting and losing this time we make it far more likely we will fight and win next time. People change because they learn from past struggles, as long as someone who remembers them can convey the knowledge of the past to new generations. Never, ever, let guys like Thomas Friedman tell you what people "want".
9
@john riehle
Friedman’s is a centrist position. Your’s is more radical. Neither position is right or wrong.
What you are advocating is not a center-right center-left country, but a center-right (you) far-right country.
The majority in this country and this (Democratic) party support truly center-left candidates (like Sanders, Warren and Harris) and center-left ideas (like Medicare for all).
Biden is only leading in the polls because the progressive vote is split between these three candidates and a few others, while he is currently the only Republican running as a Democrat. The New Republic aptly named his policy positions today:
"Dream small, America."
4
I don't understand the claim about "250 million Americans" having "private health insurance." According the official Census stats, only about two thirds of the Americans who have health insurance have private insurance. I've seen lower estimates when state plans are included. It was even lower before the ACA, because Obamacare plans are counted as private insurance (because ACA did not include a "public option").
4
Friedman is right that the Democrats need to talk about growing the pie, and not just redistributing it. Although redistribution involves restoring some semblance of fairness between haves and have nots, people will view talk about free college tuition, reparations and social welfare benefits for illegal immigrants as threats, driving them right to Trump.
So I am surprised, that while Friedman talks about growing the pie, he fails to talk about our trade relationship with China, about which he has written in the past. Most recently, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/21/opinion/china-trump-trade.html.
We are in asymmetric economic warfare with China. The Republicans don't care because anything that depresses U.S. wages and favors capital is good. The last two Democratic presidents didn't care because they were too busy trying to demonstrate how they could think outside of the box.
But our lopsided trade relationship with China has hollowed out US manufacturing. American workers understand what has happened but, inexplicably, the Democratic Party has ceded this issue to Trump. Elizabeth Warren recognized the problem when she visited China in 2018,https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-warren/senator-warren-in-beijing-says-u-s-is-waking-up-to-chinese-abuses-idUSKCN1H80X2, but nothing since.
The Dems must figure out how to take this issue back because it is first and foremost a worker protection issue, and if the Dems cannot own worker protection, they own nothing.
7
Great point!!@Yellow Dog Dem
Mr. Friedman: You are frequently the voice of reason in a storm of opinions. Politics is conflict and compromise. It doesn’t have to be either/or. If a Democrat emerges with a platform that appeals to the majority of Americans, Democrats, Republicans and Independents will converge. Right now, many of us would settle for stability, respectful dialogue and leadership. That is completely missing from this POTUS. Economic growth that benefits all, diplomacy that recognizes the complexity of international relations and efforts to reduce our national debt would seem to be a galvanizing idea. Thanks for your work.
3
Friedman: "free college. I think that is a terrible idea. First, people don’t value things that are free"
High School is free, are you saying that Americans don't value High Schools? I'd say that High Schools are not only valued, but sit at the center of many communities. What is it that makes the next level of education so different?
Ask anybody who received a full scholarship to a University if they value their education.
5
Not the same thing. H.S. is mandatory in this country and college is optional.
3
@Yep Meagn
H.S. Is not mandatory. Staying in school until a particular age is.
It is difficult for me to comprehend offering higher education to people without be subjected to the burden of crushing student debt would be a bad thing.
Like health care, higher education needs to be affordable.
1
I am a life-long Democratic voter (I'm 71). I was a conscientious objector, willing to go to prison for my beliefs.
And then I read, over and over, comments like these:
"the squad are strong new congresswomen defending the values of their districts and of anyone with a shred of humanity in this country"
And I want to vote Trump. He doesn't dismiss my life-long attempts to make things better like the progressives do.
Progressives tell us we are "Republican-lite" just because there are still problems in this country. Well, they should make a science fiction show on Netflix depicting what life would be like in this country if it hadn't been for us liberals who are now being told we are the problem, that we are Wall Street Corporate NIMBY's.
The progressives tell me I am just like Trump. Who should I vote for?
36
@Travelers, You should probably vote for whomever your conscience tells you to. But I have to say I find your story to be a bit fishy. I too am a lifelong Democratic voter (age 66) and a liberal (Keynesian on economics). But I don't hear the progressives telling me I am like Trump in any way. Trump is illiberal and caters to the far right--the antithesis of those values liberals in my lifetime have stood for. Rather, Trump stands with Nixon and Agnew, not JFK and RFK. In my lifetime, the Democratic party has often accomodated those with views ranging from liberal to conservative (e.g. Johnson on the war, Clinton on welfare). Honestly, this time is probably more like 1972 than any other election I have voted in. Did you even consider voting for Nixon that year? Then it beats me how a liberal Democrat votes for Trump -- progressives or no.
10
@Bill B
Just the fact that you find my story to be a "bit fishy" actually proves my point.
Read comments in the NYT, and you will see that liberals like me are called, repeatedly, "Republican lite," and that we who voted for Clinton did so because we are Wall Street Corporate shills.
Why did enough Sanders voters stay home, vote for Trump, or vote 3rd party that it was enough to turn the election? Data prove this, yet the story is always that Clinton didn't campaign hard enough in a couple of states. Clinton, who had to battle Comey, Trump, stupid email stuff, stupid Benghazi stuff, ridiculous Wall Street stuff, also had to battle the progressives, and it got us Trump.
We are dissed by the party we used to be affiliated with. Trump doesn't diss us. The progressives do.
The progressives don't just put forth different policies. Instead, they, and their followers, state (STATE!) that anyone who doesn't agree with them is part of the problem, just like Trump is.
2
Those mean women hurt you feelings so now you are forced to vote for Trump?
3
Remember George McGovern. No matter where we are with our emotions and our well-argued righteous opinions, we need to remember that we live in a real world. Let's push for the best we can get without losing, but no further.
18
@Mike, 1972 was the first time I voted in a national election. We were excited to have an opportunity to vote for a progressive liberal candidate. But it was folly. And it still resonates strongly with me today. The day after the election we were faced with four more years of Richard Nixon. That was bad enough. But four more years of Trump... Need I say more?
17
@Mike I remember McGovern. I remember one of his slogans/ads: McGovern-Eagleton 100%.
When the press accused Eagleton of mental health issues and McGovern quickly dumped him I remember thinking that McGovern had little personal integrity.
I also remember McGovern supporters touting his brave new policy proposals (such as what is now called a Universal Basic Income). Nixon had already proposed one- as a Negative Income Tax- and an experiment had actually been started to see if it worked as expected.
I hope that a Democrat with integrity will get the nomination- for that matter a Republican with integrity too.
1
@Bill B
But...you didn’t get four more years of Nixon...the impeachment wheels were turning and he did not want to be the first president to be thrown out of office.
Mr. Friedman,
I want to say again how relevant and accurate your article was and I hope it will be helpful in making the Democrats look at themselves.
I am a liberal and I have thought, for years, who I would vote for if that candidate chose to run. ...But now, that candidate is running and I'm not so sure and I'm now incredibly disappointed and in shopping mode again.
I cannot believe some of the issues the Dems, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, have chosen to embrace. They are currying their progressive base much like trump does with his, but, unlike with the GOP, it will not have the same results. Democrats and independents will splinter and run helter skelter to the Republican party or to their armchair on election day.
14
We are all hearing loud and clear that many Democratic voters want more progressive change. But whether we like it or not, it is more than likely going to come down to a choice between four more years of Trump or four-to-eight years of a centrist Democrat. Which will you choose?
9
College can't be free because people don't value things that are free? Education is free all the way through high school. Since that's no longer enough, why shouldn't it be free through college?
That argument doesn't hold water.
15
You pay local taxes to support k-12 school. It isn’t free
23
@Tom H It's very true that public education isn't free, but the point isn't then to convince people to stop paying for public education through their taxes and allow education to be privatized because "people don't value what is free". The point is to make the case for expanding public education through progressive taxation because people value equal access to education for all. The same goes for universal health care. Every step forward for equality has required prolonged social struggle. If ordinary working folks are not willing to fight for what they need they will get nothing from the wealthy who reap the benefits of our economic system at public expense because they control the political system.
3
The free college would obviously be paid for by taxes too.
1
Maybe some of us read about how the left split in the 1930's, which allowed a minority right to seize control here and there.
Maybe some of us are more concerned with hitting a single than with swinging for a home run (radical change) and risk striking out.
Maybe some of us fear Trump, then Pence, then God knows what; are willing to forge a grand alliance with all against Donald- meaning accommodation and not ideological purity.
We need a political barricade or we are doomed.
10
Just a thought, no matter the issues, what's right or wrong (we've been there already) what matters is how to get people to change.
One way to change people is in a crisis. (2008 anyone?)
Or, accustom people to something new. No matter what people think of health care, immigrants, freer college; do people want to change or stay the same?
Donald Trump won because he resonated with a deep well of dissatisfaction among those who perceive themselves to be either the have nots or about to be. This dissatisfaction is not going away and is present in many others although expressed differently and in more modulated and socially acceptable ways. The discussion needs to recognize that 'business as usual' will no longer suffice. Time to evolve, look for similarities rather than differences, collaboration.
14
@S. Brown he didn't win - - but we will find out about that later in time . . .
1
@S. Brown: How do you find similarities with people who still insist that Obama is a Muslim from Kenya, that are quick to spread the word that Rep. Ilhan Omar is married to her brother (I believe this started with Trump), that Michelle Obama is really a man, etc.?
Mr. Friedman's willingness to engage his readers is an excellent gesture. It points up the importance of dialogue; the exchange of ideas. I do share the general concern that the Democratic Party will fissure along ideologic lines, but if both sides, Progressive and Liberal/Moderate, can set aside personalities, we can reach a consensus and enter the 2020 strongly.
10
It is up to the majority of citizens eligible to vote and who support those so-called "leftist," "unaffordable," "progressive" policies to get out and VOTE. There is the key to this issue, not the non-majority of people so afraid of those things but who do go out and vote. It would seem obvious, but I guess not. It's that voting non-majority who have been the ones to vote against their own interests, conned by the Republicans' siren songs. May there be a turnaround in this trend, as in 2018, to end a long line of "winners" essentially by default of a non-majority vote.
3
Sometimes these labels get in the way of progress. I think perhaps Mr. Friedman is not fully taking into account the general malaise and dissatisfaction that is now affecting American lives.
What are some of the big issues that affect the vast majority of Americans? In truth, they are the issues which only "progressives" speak to with any credibility. They include:
1. Health care and health coverage for everyone
2. Gargantuan wealth for a few and very little for many
3. Unequal educational opportunities depending on where you grow up
4. Enormous. ENORMOUS student debt.
5. Out of control military expenditures.
6. Higher taxes for the middle class and negligible taxes for the very rich.
7. Literally crumbling infrastructure.
8. Military style guns and concealed guns
9. Dog-whistle racism and divisiveness by the president and his enablers.
Republican answers to each and everyone of these problems is to lower taxes on the wealthy, build a wall, "lock her up", and "go home to where you came from". They are the EXTREME right wing.
In truth these "progressives" are quite close to the middle-of-the-road. And without their policies America's best days are behind us.
118
@Gary A. Agree with most of your comments, which re about priorities, but comment on taxes is not correct. The top 50% pay 97% of federal income tax. So bottom 50% oay almost nothing 3%. The top 1% pay about 35% of total and The top 1400 taxpayers pay 3% of total, equal to bottom half. Yes, everyone pays SS and Medicare taxes, about 8% of income, but our system already taxes heavily at top. If we want to pay for all the things mentioned, it means reprioritization and much higher taxation on middle as well as upper incomes.
4
Mr. Friedman says: "And I would like to see some kind of program for reducing student debt, maybe in return for some national service."
Can I therefore assume that he would also favor requiring national service from students whose parents were able to pay the full load for college? If not, he is implying that national service should only be performed by students who come from middle class and poor households.
26
@DL
Some programs exist now, such as Americorp. Some debt relief is for graduates who borrowed money for school. Having a national service for all is a good idea in my opinion. I assume expanding it is what he is talking about. The current programs are small and very difficult to get into. I would like to see a requirement for national service to include options such as military, teaching, medical service, national park service, etc. People from other parts of the country don't mix anymore. Link is:
https://www.nationalservice.gov/programs/americorps
6
Thank you Mr. Friedman and the NYT for starting an enlightening conversation. We really have to wait and see what happens with the next Democratic debates, and who ends up in the primary. The re-election of Trump would be horrible but we can't be paralyzed by that fear. We have to get over the Hollywood idea of the ideal candidate. I loved and admired President Obama but I didn't didn't agree with all of his ideas. He did represent the values I believe in. If we allow personality to get in the way of common sense and values, we all will lose. We have an amazing slate to choose from. Lets put our continual bouts of angst away and get behind the best person we believe will win.
Go help register people to vote. Get busy and work for your state and local candidates too. Remember, "All politics is local."
11
People vote their gut is right. That's why the policies matter less than the candidate. If that person can resonate with voters, they can be moderate or far-left and it won't matter. Trump will brand any Democratic candidate as socialist, and accuse us of wanting open borders, etc. regardless of the actual platform. Find the candidate that voters like the most, and that person will win, regardless of where they fall on a continuum.
5
A while back I posted a comment that the Dems need to focus on the issues instead of reacting to Trump's nastiness.
That is not what is happening and Will Rogers still said it best....
"I'm not a member of an organized political party, I'm a Democrat."
And please Dems, STOP saying something is going to be free...there is no such thing as a free lunch.
18
@glennmr
Will Rogers could be very clever but, I fear, today, he would be a Republican.
As far as "there is no free lunch", you're right and the GOP and the 1% are going to have to pay for all the free lunches they've been getting over so many decades.
2
The independents and few moderate Republicans left that I know all say they would vote for Biden, even those who supported Trump in 2016. Although I will vote for whoever runs against Trump, I think a Biden/Harris ticket has the best chance of success in flyover country.
3
' I have a lot of respect for Bernie Sanders. I would not vote for him, but I think he is smart, sincere and has his heart in the right place.'
Really? You believe that if you were facing a ballot with Bernie and Donald, you'd vote for Donald?
Or perhaps it was some other scenario you were contemplating.
21
Come on. He means in the primary.
1
@bill
I suspect Friedman meant in the primary.
1
In 2008, Iceland’s bank system collapsed, and the country was bankrupt, thanks to the shenanigans of the Independence and Progressive Parties, whose outstanding characteristics are corruption and nepotism. In the 2013 elections, voters had a choice of the conservative Independence and Progressive Parties and 10 liberal parties (actually 15, but 5 decided not to run). Guess who won the election? In 2016, voters again had a choice of the conservative Independence and Progressive Parties and 10 liberal parties. Guess who won that election?
5
@Íris Lee
Iceland has a population of less than 350,000. The US has just under 350 million. Iceland's population is culturally and ethnically homogeneous. The US is a blend of many cultures and ethnic backgrounds. The two nations simply don't work for comparison purposes.
3
Tom, you say it’s “nobody’s turn...only the majority”; but that hasn’t been the case for almost two decades now. On issue after issue (guns, taxes, healthcare, campaign reform, to name just a few) our Congress, and frequently our Presidents (incl Obama) have responded to and advanced the interests of a conservative and/or corporate minority, at the expense of the will of the majority. Perhaps that’s why there is a rising frustration about letting the “center-right” continue to frame the debate. Furthermore, the younger voters I have informally canvassed are seeking an authentic, unapologetic dedication to restoration of social and economic justice; and not some purely strategic positioning defined, once again, in reaction to whatever moves the right wing is making. They want a new Teddy Roosevelt; and I suspect they will be as disenchanted (and thus absent at the voting booth) as they were with Hillary’s oh so careful, endlessly focus-tested, colorless campaign. Sometimes, offense is the best defense...and the Democrats are long overdue in that department.
58
Yes! We have been under minority rule in this country for a long time by conservatives who have been exploiting their advantage in our most undemocratic institutions-- the Senate, the Electoral College, campaign finance, and so on. If you look at polling, the majority of people in this country, regardless of party want very many things the Democrats are fighting for by overwhelming numbers, but because of this unfair structral imbalance of power we don't get these things no matter how much support they have among people.
5
Politics is about winning.
The Electoral College and the Senate are won state-by -state.
14
@turbot
Yes! It's the Electoral College, folks. NOTHING.ELSE.MATTERS.
1
Many people conflate centrists and corporations/the 1%. They aren't the same thing. The former are apolitical since they support only their own interests. The latter are, by definition, in the political middle, between the extreme left and the extreme right.
Centrists get a bad name because they take contributions from corporations and the 1% but in the post-Citizens United and media-driven world elections are expensive. You can't do anything to change this if you don't get elected and you won't get elected if you drive contributions (and voters) toward the Republican party.
4
I have a couple more points to add. First, Kamala Harris did not attack Joe Biden. She voiced sincere, legitimate concern about his record on busing. In response he accused her of misrepresenting his stance on busing. But the truth is, as reported in the Times on June 28, that “in reality, Mr. Biden was a leading opponent of busing in the Senate during the 1970s and 1980s, and his opposition went beyond the federal government’s role in the practice.”
Second, the criminalization of illegal entry does not decrease the flow of desperate people. But it does benefit the private prison industry that profits from the incarceration of migrants. Friedman should direct his criticism at an administration that puts children in horrendous conditions behind barbed wire rather than at the candidates who are trying to change an inhumane and broken system.
17
@Barbara
1) No one thinks Joe Biden is a racist. Harris's comments fell flat for a lot of people - even those not voting for him.
2) Criminalization of illegal entry may not decrease the flow of people, but, it is another tool that can be used when a situation warrants. Kind of like going after Mafia for tax evasion when nothing else will stick.
The term border security means just that and depends upon having the ability to police and process disparate people who show up at our borders and our airports.
6
the AOC gang of 4 are not true socialists. they dont seem to be advocating government ownership of the means of production and control over the distribution of wealth. but by calling themselves democratic socialists they have laid open the democratic party to charges of being socialist. never the less their politics is so far to the left of where the majority of voters are in this country that any candidate that models their policy proposals after what they advocate will be soundly defeated at the polls.
9
Tom, I cannot believe you actually said "What I worry about from the first Democratic debates was that by so many candidates offering so many free things to so many people ."
Really, none of the candidates assumed that anything was free including Bernie Sanders. They know there are no free lunches, things need to be paid for. The candidates that spoke of free tuition or nearly free tuition spoke of paying for that free tuition with taxes on the wealthy or a combination of the wealthier who can afford to pay for their child's tuition and tax supported subsides for those that cannot.
As to no student valuing "free college" the Europeans don't seem to have a problem with it. They graduate millions of students. Tom you are sounding like FOX lite or Republican lite, but definitely not a progressive.
A true progressive is constantly searching for the "something better " and a way to make it happen. Elizabeth Warren has a plan for you.
147
Mr. Friedman, Are you serious that you would not vote for Bernie Sanders? So if the candidates are Sanders and Trump, how will you cast your vote? Politics often requires swallowing hard and compromising. (A point Biden likes to make.) So what would you do? Honestly, I was sort of with you until I read that statement, and it threw me.
Do you think a moderate will lead the way to substantially address income inequity, health care insurance availability and cost, the environment, racism, immigration? Or will the country stay more status quo with some small improvements?
I'm worried that Trump will be re-elected. I'm also worried that if we manage to elect a moderate Democrat, many people will give a big sigh of relief and again ignore some major issues in the country. If that's where we land, then in four more years the Trump era could continue.
51
@Junella Macrae If you read the rest of the paragraph where Mr. Friedman said he would not vote for Bernie Sanders, then you also saw where he said, " I don’t agree with a lot of his proposals, but if he can get a majority behind them I will do my best to get the most out of his ideas and cushion the worst.."
3
I believe that Mr. Friedman has made it abundantly clear that his basic position is "Anyone but Trump" which is as it should be.
2
As a concerned neighbour who has been watching all the hand wringing re the Dems; I remind you that they are conducting a democratic process which is more than one can say for the lock-step Republicans who have their man, if not their soul. The Dems are currently providing America with ideas and open discussion and people this. There is only one party discussing its soul at the moment. Hear them out, weigh their arguments, participate in the primaries, and then accept the decision and "vote blue no matter who".
Mr. Friedman, respectfully I urge you about your wording here.. re you would not vote for ... Maybe who you would RATHER not vote for instead? The world is watching, (and burning I might add), and the goal is a new president, and with any luck, a new senate.
77
@CB
I believe Mr. Friedman meant he would not choose Sen. Sanders in the primary only.
11
@Blanche White Noted - Good Point...
2
@CB From a fellow Canadian, thank you. Well said.
1
I predict democrats will timorously nominate Joe B, who has the wits and stamina for possibly one term, during which he will carefully walk the new middle...which is pretty far right of FDR. The common wisdom will be that we must work in tiny increments towards what so many people want (and what so many in European social democracies already have,) lest we scare away “moderate” democrats.
Nothing will change except the rhetoric. Our govt will still be in thrall to big business.
21
I'm an Independent voter and I believe, that for me, Tom Friedman has assessed my mood accurately. Trump must be voted out but critical thinkers like me are not going to pay through the nose to advance a prohibitively expensive Democratic Party agenda. If my taxes are going to soar and my safety be at stake, forget about Medicare for all, a guaranteed income for all, open borders, "reparations", on the other hand, I'm for steady improvement in health care, infrastructure, better education for all. The Democrats must remember and admit that extremely expensive programs are going to be paid for by taxpayers, not some tooth fairy.
50
@R. Anderson Your taxes are going to soar because of Trump. Cutting taxes for the rich, tax cuts for industry, undoing decades of regulations for industry and the ballooning of the deficit will raise your taxes.
57
@Donald Forbes and R. Anderson
Both of you are right and if the democrats had stated their case better, those like R. Anderson would not be feeling so mystified right now.
This is why Mr. Friedman's article, which was exactly right on so many points, is very relevant and so much appreciated by a lot of us with deep concerns.
13
@R. Anderson From one Anderson to another...remember R. Anderson.....YOU are one of the 'ALL'. You are going to need one of those services one day....and if you think DT is going to give it to you...think again..unless, of course, your as rich or richer than he is. Remember, what he's doing now is NOT for the people of the US, but for his EGO, his family, and the Trump name.........by any means necessary.
I want the candidates to say:
"I will work with Congress to fix our
unfair tax system/health care/college cost/immigration system/environment/climate change/etc.
The values and goals I will bring to table are________".
I will also represent you, the best people in the world, as the best possible person I can be.
13
@exhausted by it all This is exactly what candidates have been saying for as long as I can remember and that's a long time. And what have they done? Not much. That's why our voting turnout is barely 50% at best. The other half of the electorate wants to hear something different.
5
@John
No, what the dems are saying is I want universal healthcare that looks like this, and I want free tuition for these kinds of students at these kinds of schools, and I want to abolish ICE and protect the borders and be kind to refugee's, and I want to enact..... These are all great starting points for a negotiation, but they are the club that republicans use to beat us.
What the republicans do (to my great frustration) is to say simply less (yes, or lie). How often did trump and the others, say "I am going to fix healthcare" without a single follow-up question of "HOW?". What the dems do is then provide the HOW to show how they are better, but then the voters just vote for the guy who said the things that they can remember.
While I love what Warren is doing - it will change the course of this country- it will also keep her in the Senate.
If we want to win, we need to keep it simple (or make it simple for the general). Maybe Warren will survive because her general election slogan is simple and generic enough that even voters that don't pay attention can remember it.
6
I am a traditional moderate Republican, not the garbage the GOP is now spewing.
Traditional moderate Republicans helped unions, believed in efficiency and gentle regulation of businesses, protected science and the environment, believed in treating all people equally, and yes, lower taxes, less loopholes, more fairness, an immigration policy that makes sense (not the current one), caring for those in poverty and giving all an opportunity to share the American dream (the democratic party is seeping in here, and that's good). Be creative!
No handouts - if you want one, make a contribution to the nation or community.
I think that's the gut that wins the Presidency and bringing a positive charismatic message that we are here for each other.
If we don't agree, we hammer it out, see what works, and if it does not, change it.
Quit talking and more doing - discuss and pass laws, not table them. Forget power, it's about embracing change and the Country, for the Country.
41
Thank you! I’m a moderate Democrat and I agree with you completely - especially the part about working together to find common ground and act in the interest of the people. Politicians need one term limits to stop them from trying to win elections while not getting anything done. Maybe a one term limit will get them to focus on the work at hand.
19
@froneputt
When did the GOP "help unions" in your lifetime? Reagan began the assassination of unions when he knifed Patco, which had endorsed him after he promised to support them, in the back. The GOP has been giving handouts to big business since long before that. Loopholes are their methodology. The traditional Republican you remember is a myth; you were duped into thinking their slavish support of the bosses was actually a benefit to workers. That was a lie. For the last 20 years they have been the party, not of limited government, but of non-governance. They currently bring nothing to the table of the American worker.
11
@froneputt No GOP is carrying those items anywhere anymore. Seems they needed to free up shelf space for redesigned offerings, and GOP customer service can't confirm whether they'll ever bring back the traditional line...
So at this point, no choice but to shop elsewhere, I guess. That or go into business making the old stuff. There has to be a decent market of people who miss the old stuff, right?
5
I decided to leave Friedman's article alone but I think I've communicated what I thought of it in comments on several others in the past week.
Basically I fault Thomas for thinking the Democratic Party should be HOW THE REPUBLICAN PARTY SHOULD BE. That's not its job. Such thinking has contributed to the decline of democracy in the American republic in recent decades and led to the election of Donald J Trump. More of the same may lead to Trump's re-election, and if not, to someone worse than Trump becoming the Republican nominee and the POTUS in 2024. Needless to say that would be truly disastrous for the United States and the world. Trump's just a wannabe, an amateur.
Americans need to be shocked and healed by the demonstrated efficacy of a genuinely progressive presidential administration. I like Tom and I know he's won three Pulitzers, but I also believe he's very misguided. That he says he wouldn't vote for Bernie Sanders - "What? Even against Donald Trump?" - tells everyone all they need to know about him and his prognostications I think. It seems to me he'd rather risk being wrong again that admit to himself that he's been very wrong for a long time.
29
@GRW - I am sure Tom meant in the Democratic Primaries, I agree with him, Bernie has good ideas but he has not been able to push any of his ideas thru congress, he seems unable to compromise.
18
@GRW In the same paragraph where Mr. Friedman said he wouldn't vote for Bernie Sanders (and I do believe he meant in the primaries), he then went on to say "I don’t agree with a lot of his proposals, but if he can get a majority behind them I will do my best to get the most out of his ideas and cushion the worst."
2
@GRW I suspect you are confusing Mr. Friedman with Bret Stephens, another NYT columnist. It was he, not Friedman, who said he would never vote for Bernie Sanders, even in a race against Trump. Mr. Stephens however is life-long conservative and a Republican, so I would not find the revelation all that shocking. (As one of the few remaining anti-Trump Republicans, Mr. Stephens, in my humble opinion, deserves a small medal for not voting FOR Trump, even if he stays home, in that hypothetical Trump-Sanders race).
I may be wrong - perhaps Mr. Friedman has also pledged not to vote for Bernie elsewhere and I'm simply not aware of it... But somehow I doubt it. Which further makes it more difficult for me to seriously take anything else in your comment, sorry.
1
Speaking of the title of the article - "Can the Democratic Revolution Wait?" - one of the members of the "squad", rep. Pressley (of whose district I am a constituent) chose the words "Change Can't Wait" as her campaign slogan. Catchy and popular as it is among progressives, it pains me to point out that it is simply not true. In reality, positive change, often for the people who need it most, end up having to wait - at times for a very long time. We know many such instances throughout history. One grim example is how the millions of recently emancipated African-Americans in the South had to wait for almost another century to attain basic civil rights after the failure of the Reconstruction. What's worse, they experienced a dramatic change for the worst, when many of the rights and freedoms they had briefly enjoyed in the years immediately after the Civil War were taken away from them. We all know that in some forms this can happen again. (The recent gutting of the Voting Rights Act by the supreme court is a "good" example).
If Trump gets re-elected and, consequently, if trumpism takes permanent hold in this country, things will sure change for the worse for the already vulnerable populations. Not allowing this to happen should be the focus of every conversation for the Democrats. Unfortunately, as much as rep. Pressley's ideas may be appealing to liberals, some of them (e.g. "Abolish ICE") are almost certainly helping Trump get re-elected.
Don't hate the messenger.
37
as long as the Democrats continue to combine such tax proposals with plans to spend the proceeds on various social programs like free college tuition. However, a plan to raise taxes on those with assets above $50 million and/or incomes above $10 million and use all of the proceeds to reduce the taxes on everyone else might have a much higher probability of being enacted.
It is hard to envision the Democrats being politically savvy or ideologically flexible enough to embrace a policy of directly shifting the tax burden away from the middle class and onto the rich. Rather than using the proceeds of taxes on the rich for spending programs. The Democrats have generally been deluded in their belief that the current level of taxes on the middle class is politically sustainable. In Hilary Clinton's speech announcing her candidacy, she said that the middle class pays too much taxes. She never mentioned a middle class tax cut again. Presumably due to pressure from Sanders, who pushed her to the left, which severely hurt her chances in the general election.
Most Democrat politicians are not aware that, by far, the best thing government could do for most middle-class households would be to lower their taxes. Thus, in many cases, middle-class voters have been willing to grasp at any chance they think could lower their tax burden, and thus support candidates who promise them a tax cut, no matter how odious the candidates might be otherwise..."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4266831
4
@Lance Brofman - If we cut Daddy Warbuck's
taxes, he does not need to spend the money; he uses it for financial speculation.
If we cut poor Joe's taxes, he spends the money on stuff-- food, house paint, etc.etc. This promotes production of food, etc.
Even better if we pay Joe to fix a bridge, the money still gets into the economy, AND we get the bridge fixed.
197
Have the non-moderates forgotten we live in a democracy? Specifically, that no major changes are made without the support of the majority?
How anyone, right or left, not realize they are anti-American when they want policy enacted by bypassing the Constitutional process of elected representatives voting on legislation?
Yes, I know about gerrymandering, etc. Perversions like that will not be cleaned up until we elect Democratic candidates to replace GOP office-holders in DC and the states. Only then can we begin working toward the progressive agenda I ache for with every fiber of my being.
18
@Alex
If the majority ruled here, neither Trump nor GWB would ever have been president. So spare me your defense of majority rule.
2
No way. The Republican Party has veered further right since Reagan, and especially so since Obama took office in 2009.
Why should the Democrats remain in the center when polls show people are not excited by corporate centrism anymore, and a key reason why Hillary lost the EC.
The Republican Party belongs to Trump now and they dare not say a word against him. Why can't the Democratic Party do the same for Progressives like Warren and Sanders, since they galvanize voters? Obviously we know the Dem's 1% supporters are not happy with these candidates, but they are partly why Trump won in the first place.
9
"free college. I think that is a terrible idea. First, people don’t value things that are free. I think everyone should pay something, otherwise they will just stop and start courses for years."
There is already a fairly effective system being used that solves this problem. My GI Bill gave me basically 8 semesters worth of tuition and fees, which ran concurrently with 36 months of stipends to cover rent and living expenses. I could use it all at once, or one semester at a time, taking breaks in between.
11
@crankyoldman
"There is already a fairly effective system being used that solves this problem." - If you're a veteran.
Most of our population are not veterans, so how is that an effective system overall?
5
@crankyoldman - Yes, but it wasn't Free! You earned it by signing up for military duty. That's exactly what Tom wants, 2 years of public service for help with college. I think it's a great idea, the draft ought to apply to all, men, women, etc. When you graduate high school you can sign up for military duty or help in public works such as health care, housing, etc. This would help make every person feel a responsibility to help fellow Americans.
27
@WhatConditionMyConditionIsIn I meant it could be used as a model for whatever program is implemented, not that everyone would necessarily get the same level of assistance that veterans get.
4
Thanks for printing the feedback from Mr. Friedman and featuring some of the comments from his column. I read it when it was published earlier this week, and thought it one of the smartest and most thoughtful piece I've read in a long time. It's nice to hear what other people thought, and to get Mr. Friedman's reactions.
23
@Joy - Agreed, we need more of this in columns.
3
One more time: we Democrats have to win before we can do ANYTHING. We’re playing for big stakes here: the future of democracy in this country, and probably for the future of the entire world.
If you want a highly progressive agenda, that’s fine. If a middle-of-the-road, moderate Democrat wins in 2020, you’ll have a chance at those things, eventually. If Trump wins, you will have NO chance at a progressive agenda, EVER. After the damage Trump has already done, I shudder to think of how much he could destroy if he has four more years.
So grow up. Forget about being sea-green incorruptible and purely progressive, for now. Pick the presidential candidate who has the best chance of winning. Because in 2020, winning isn’t the most important thing, it’s the ONLY thing.
200
@Constance Warner - But how do you tell who has the best chance of winning? Did the polls tell us that the last time?
9
@Len Charlap - I think they did, but we weren't listening, everyone said it was "Hillary's turn". Look, no one has a "turn" in a democracy, you have to earn the majority of votes in states that matter in the Electoral College. Hillary had very high negatives in most polling and Bernie gave her a tough race, even with the bias the Democratic primary gave her. She also ran an "Anti-Trump" campaign which only served as a foil for him to hit back, so every time she attacked he gained more press coverage. We must pick someone with a vision and a plan who will never mention the name Trump.
11
@Constance Warner, amen and amen! Please, let's give ourselves and our dear country a chance by just getting one of ours into the Oval Office, then we can begin working on particulars. If we don't, literally only God knows what we could be facing, and what our world could be facing. LET'S JUST WIN.
20
The visceral connection politicians make with voters is not to be underestimated. This is the take-home point of Mr Friedman's column and follow up.
Trump has done this with a substantial group which is to be expected. He is a professional salesman and con-man.
No democrat has yet done this as yet. Hard to do when you are in a group of 25 and everyone keeps asking for policy specifics which promote division.
The republicans have figured out that to win everyone needs to get on the train. There really aren't any moderate republicans anymore. Their train aims hard right.
The democrats still are largely divided into moderates and progressives, and neither side wants to get on the other's train. President Obama got progressives on his train because of who he was and moderates because of what he said and how he said it. There are a few candidates who could conceivably duplicate this: Harris, Klobuchar, Booker, Buttigieg.
Connection matters, language matters. "Revolution" isn't going to win anything.
22
@Victor
Agree with your post except that Harris is not a moderate. She is an opportunist.
The racial insult she hurled at Biden was so contrived and nothing but a political ploy. I lost all respect for her, then, and I began to believe the other things I had read about her career. ...Like how she dropped the strong abuse case against the Catholic Church in California and pretty much ignored the victims , etc.
If we were unlucky enough for her to win the primary, I would vote for her in the general but would definitely be holding my nose.
2
The U.S. healthcare system is the most inefficient one among OECD countries in that it is the most expensive and has the poorest outcomes. In April the Times reported that last year Americans “borrowed an estimated $88 billion” to pay for health care. In many cases despite being insured. Private insurance companies are in the business to make a profit not to provide the best health care. For someone with the financial resources to seek the best care and pay out of pocket, this is not a problem but for many people it is. While I am happy with my employer based health insurance, I would rather have a universal not-for-profit health care system that covers everyone. I am glad to see several of the Democratic contenders in support of Medicare for All. And according to an October 2018 Pew report, an increasing number of Americans agree . So I would argue that nominating someone who is not in support of Medicare for All, would ensure the re-elction of the “racist, divisive, climate-change-denying, woman-abusing jerk.”
30
The primary agent of decay in the American political system is the same one that has turned our corporations against the American people: the industry of management.
How many people do you know who actually make or repair tangible objects for a living? Not that many, I'll guess. It's far more likely that your neighbor is a healthcare administrator, or works in marketing, or consulting, or insurance, or some other industry that is an appendage to a very small number of people who actually make things, repair things, or grow food. Management industries are necessary, but over the last 40 years they have become massively bloated, parasitic appendages that are desperate to keep themselves alive. They can only do this by showing a profit, and because they can't actually make things, they make their profit by creating forms, by cryptic manipulations of finances that have no physical, useful form, by creating more and more guidelines that require their continued employment to enforce.
Politics is the same. Our elected officials achieve much less than they used to, and their primary objective has shifted to protecting their own employment - actual public service is a secondary priority. And so they trade in illusions of indignation and foolish idealism, not because they believe in it, but because they want to bring home a paycheck.
28
@Voltron, Excellent points and so true. Most well paying jobs involve creating and tracking some metric. Become proficient in Pivot Tables and you too can become a school administrator on the local level tracking metrics and passing them onto the state level bureaucrat who summarizes the metrics. Sure you need to do some of it but in todays world, there are way too many doing this. I see it in my job, layers and layers of people tracking metrics but no one knows what they mean. The original purpose of the business is lost in collecting data.
2
Climate change won’t wait for moderate solutions. The planet is on its way to becoming uninhabitable for human beings and any number of other unfortunate creatures.
122
@JM, moderates are going to have to move toward progressive on that. Time is running out.
4
Winning over white women who are moderate will not be easy when you plan to take away their employer or husbands employer provided health care.However, only one lie this time ,"you can keep your doctor".No need to claim you can keep your insurance.Reparations is not a big favorite among white moderate women, nor illegal immigration nor paying off others student debt.Were we to agree to the latter ie forgive student debt I believe it should at least only apply to people who in fact graduated.
6
The Democrats, of which I am a life-long member, need to get the sequence right.
FIRST, unseat the donald, and his senate posse in 2020. SECOND, undo all of the harmful "executive orders", and legislation put in place by these people(?).
THEN we (the PROGRESSIVES) can focus on making America into the country it is reported to be.
139
@John Paul Esposito - But maybe the way to do ONE is to do THREE First.
8
@John Paul Esposito
I've been hearing some variation on this argument my entire life. There is always something "strategic" and "practical" that must be done before real change. But THEN never comes.
6
Exactly
No, it cannot wait. The Revolution is at least 30 years overdue.
12
@Gone Coastal
And if Trump gets elected, the "revolution" will have to wait even longer. The longer he is in office, the more there will be to undo. It's bad enough as it is.
I am in favor of all of what is called "far left" policies. I just know that it won't happen overnight, that it will be done incrementally. Yes, it's slower and takes longer than any of us want, but unfortunately, realism.
2
The left keeps gaining incrementally like putting a frog in a pot of cold water and bringing the water to a boil. As a conservative I know that it cannot be stopped but we are trying to at least slow it down. When the pot boils it will be too late.
1
@Ricardoh
And why are you trying to slow progress down? How do conservatives justify their morally bankrupt beliefs?
1
@Ricardoh - Yes, when the pot boils the country will be like Denmark with happy people. It will be un American to have brown people happy.
1
Sorry for posting again, but I’d also like to say that, as someone who’s politics fall to the left, I felt like Tom Friedman’s editorial was very condescending, especially the whole riff on “revolution.” If he truly wishes to provide respect for everyone he engages with in debate, I suggest he does some self-reflection about how his words come off. Progressives vote too, and some of us even live in swing states!
29
@John
It wasn't condescending at all, it was the truth.
"Revolution" can't win. It will not draw independent voters, and it will certainly not draw R's that are on the fence. Baby steps are needed. First take back our government, then strive towards more progressive goals. If we lose 2020, it's all gone, and we may never have another chance to get it back.
8
@WhatConditionMyConditionIsIn
I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s “the truth,” but the way you phrase it in your comment is much better than how Friedman framed it. It’s one thing to lay out your arguments concisely (as you did), another thing entirely to ridicule ideas that people on the left have devoted a lot of mental energy towards, regardless of how popular these ideas end up being in a general election (as Friedman does).
So if Bernie Sanders were the Democratic nominee, what would Mr. Friendman do? Not cast a vote for president? Vote third party? Write in a candidate? Vote for Trump? Already the commentary around the democratic primary has shifted from "vote blue no matter who" and "no purity tests" (perhaps in an assumption that Biden would be chosen) to suggestions that some democratic candidates just couldn't be voted for in the general because moderate democrats don't like some of their policy positions.
9
@Laurabat Please reread that paragraph, where he ALSO said, " I don’t agree with a lot of his proposals, but if he can get a majority behind them I will do my best to get the most out of his ideas and cushion the worst."
1
“The Squad” needs to stay out of the limelight and do their jobs. (Plenty of representatives manage to do this so being in the limelight is not synonymous with being a representative.)
Yes, Trump would have found someone to pick on at his rallies without them. But they are adding ammunition to the hatred, pouring gasoline on Trump’s existing flames.
The fight for the future of the country will be hard enough but it will be hopeless if they continue in their current vein.
18
@NY MD I honestly think that the only reason “the squad” is in the limelight so frequently is because their messaging is picked up and broadcast by critical right-wing media outlets. Virtually every other member of Congress tweets - should they also give up this platform in an effort to “stay out of the limelight”?
13
that would be a good thing for them to do. they're too inexperienced. Congress people need to have a solid knowledge of American political history before they start picking their fights and the media needs to be more circumspect before it jumps on their bandwagon
6
@John
No, they don't have to give up their platforms at all. They have to stop being "bomb throwers" as what they are doing is giving Trump ammunitiion and solidifying the Trump base.
(sorry to use so many warlike words)
They need to learn how to be more strategic and how to use language that will advance their cause without inflaming others. They must learn from more experienced legislators. I want them to succeed, but what they are doing now is not helping them OR the Democratic party.
3
"Others worried that focusing on divisive issues like single-payer health care..."
In poll after poll, single payer gets the support of a majority of the public - but the desires of the public never materialize.
Single payer is "divisive", simply because the public wants it, but the wealthy few don't.
695
@Ed Watters
So true, but the public wanted Hillary, AKA not Trump, by almost 3,000,000 votes, and here we are.
Single payer would be easier to swallow if the Dems made in an option, rather than sounding like an imperative.
47
@Ed Watters I am sorry, but this is simply not true. The "majority of the public" respond "yes" when the poll question is simply "Do you support Medicare for all?" - most people apparently answer it in the positive, assuming that the meaning of the question is "Do you support giving Medicare to everybody who wants it?". In the polls where it is explained to the participants that Bernie Sanders', and many other leading Dem. candidates' "Medicare for All" plan actually involves eliminating private insurance completely and taking the existing private insurance plans from everybody who has them now, and then replacing it with "Medicare For All, And Nothing Except Medicare For Anyone" - then no, the support of the "majority of the public" evaporates and most of the respondents answer "No".
34
@Leonid Andreev - First of all I would like to see a reference for that poll.
Bu also if you are going to add negative info to the question, it would be fair to add "and the bottom line cost of health care would go way down."
41
I’ve always believed the problem is the electorate. Considering what has transpired the last two and half years, the level of engagement among Americans has been disheartening. For all the gains Democrats made in the last election, what has occurred since the presidential election would require more than just mean tweets. Remember all the town halls and the Tea Party movement during the Obamacare days? Imagine Trump was a Democrat, we would see the same a thousand times louder. Imagine a Democrat have been elected with the help of a foreign country – Russia no less. If that were the case, I envision Mitch McConnell on the floor of the Senate uttering these words:
“All lifetime presidential appointments should be put on hold until the cloud of illegitimacy is lifted from this administration”
A simple message that the GOP would repeat over and over again – with the help of Fox, of course.
Democrats want to play McConnell-type politics, are tired of middle of the road Democrats and want a revolution; yet, their voters show a level of apathy that’s incompatible with those goals.
25
Tom, if a moderate Democratic candidate is indeed the only candidate that can be elected, what exactly should this candidate’s plan be afterwards to ensure the Republican Party never nominates a candidate like Trump again, and to solve the systemic problems that led to the Republican Party nominating Trump in the first place and subsequently basing their entire collective identity around him? This didn’t happen in a vacuum.
13
Tom Friedman is exactly correct here, point by point. He explains it better than I can.
21
@Observer
The same way Tom Friedman was right when he was promoting the invasion of Iraq as a way of teaching the Arabs a lesson, and the wonders of free trade agreements with no labor or environmental protections, no job retraining, no balancing of winners (corporate America) and losers (working people)?
So sure -- let him choose the next Democratic candidate. It's not as if he was wrong in 2016.
105
I'm just waiting for "The Squad" (Gang of Four, AOC's Cadre) to throw their support behind the Democratic Nominee for President. If the candidate has any sense at all, he or she will beg "The Squad" to never mention his or her name in public. This is a trainwreck. These 4 are a Christmas present in July.
82
@P&L
Are they a "trainwreck" because they are women of color in a position of power?
32
@P&L Very true. The country needs measured, practical reforms, not an embrace of fringe ideas such as abolishing ICE, reparations, etc., which play well in only very blue areas.
14
@Aaron Dome
No.
They make too many rookie errors.
11
Since America is not and was never meant to be a democracy there will not be any democratic revolution.
America is and always has been a very peculiar kind of republic. A divided limited different power constitutional republic of united states where the people are the nominal ultimate sovereign over their elected and selected hired help.
But the Founding Fathers originally intended that only white Anglo-Saxon Protestant men who owned property were divinely naturally created equal persons with certain unalienable rights. And the only representative that even that select few could directly vote for was their representative in the Article I House.
Amending the Constitution gave voters the right to directly elect their two Senators. But every state from a half a million people in Wyoming to 39.5 million Calfornians have the same number of Senators. And the Electoral College majority picks President's with individual votes cast in one state not mattering nor counting in any other state. While the Electoral College President nominates federal judges for life with the advice and consent of the Senate.
Thom Friedmans piece ignores that real truth
11
Trump is atrocious and he needs to lose, bigly. But as someone who lives in a swing state, I can report that there is a lot of resentment among Democrats towards “The Squad” who are sucking all of the oxygen from the room and painting the rest of us as Far, Far more Left than we actually are. And it’s clear to us that Donald Trump is PLAYING the progressives by stirring up yet another outrage cycle to keep us talking about divisive identity politics rather than rational health care reform, pre-existing conditions, infrastructure and jobs. You know things that actual VOTERS care about.
Last month, I spoke to a Arizona never-Trump older white Republican male who votes in every single election. He has been a stereotypical GOP voter who is stock-broker and former Air force officer. He refused to vote for either candidate in 2016. I asked him what it would take for him to actively vote for Democrats? His answer? Joe Biden.
Just FYI, Arizona is a swing state. The other swing states we need to win are PA,MI,WI,OH,FL.
For all of the progressives who claim we need to “activate” the base, my answer is this: A million more votes in CA and NY will still give Trump the electoral college.
443
@Annabelle I have no doubt that Joe Biden can get Republican votes with his Republican ideas and make-nice personality.
But most Republicans now are far-right and love Trump.
But meanwhile, many progressive votes will go to third party candidates or stay home, and Trump will surely win a second term. HRC redux.
28
@dr. c.c.
If progressive voters choose to value their vote as some sort of virtue signaling opinion poll, rather than an act with real life consequences, then no amount of Friedman columns will convince them otherwise.
We often ask "Why do the Trumpsters vote against their interest?", when those on the left do the same thing. "Vote for Jill Stein even though doing so will help elect the most anti-environment president ever", makes no sense to me.
67
@Annabelle
NC is up for grabs!!! We did elect a Dem governor and Sen Tillis (R) is on the ballot in 2020. Please please please don't ignore NC's potential to swing.
I would also add please pay attention to Bullock in the debates. He's gov of a red state who has passed bills we dems love in a gov that is 2/3rds GOP. He's being overlooked and it's a HUGE mistake!!!!
36
Agree w Mr Friedman that 2020 Dem nominee, to win, needs voters to trust + respect her/him, and forge gut connection. Media cannot be expected to destroy 45’s connection w his fans, that’s Democrats’ job—but news reporting can and should withhold deference, withhold benefit of the doubt, and report ways in which 45 has failed to deliver on promises to end American Carnage and provide more wonderful health care, drug prices, safety net, pay down national debt, etc. When NYT headline, for example, blares “Cloud Lifted” it’s enabling official lies. Friedman distorted extent of Democratic candidate support for ending private insurance. Do your homework sir, double check before you hit send on exaggerations. That only feeds Fox and 45 ability to frame issues deceitfully.
3
The midterm showed the way: win over white moderate female voters with little on no college and it's in the bag. You don't need the rest. Combine it with robust Democratic turnout by pushing programs that bolster the middle class and families and it's done.
Regarding Free College Tuition; Friedman needs to spend less time on the golf course and more time brushing up on the other industrialized nations that offer free college tuition. They somehow managed to get by just fine despite all those unappreciative freeloaders lazing about in classrooms. Perish the thought! Some of us would rather pay for school books than prison bars.
17
@Garrick - And the other industrialized nations have universal government run health care which is more efficient. They get better care for all of their people and it costs them 40% of what we pay per person.
10
It cannot wait, the forces of far right white nationalism will not wait. The longer they are in power the more structural barriers they are putting in place to ensure they cannot ever be held to account for what they've done and will do.
Forces of moderation and compromise and surrender to the far right are exactly what led to this moment. Moderation failed us in 2000, 2004, and 2010, 2016 and now as we see the moderates slow walking holding Trump to any account whatsoever are surrendering a massive advantage and will of course fumble the ball yet again.
Not because they are concerned with any sort of right wing backlash, but because the demands for Trump to be stopped come from below, from an electorate that is energized for real change. This is what they fear. They will still prosper and keep jobs as lobbyists or consultants even if they are swept out of power by the GOP. If the Left takes any real sort of power it would be the only thing that ends this cycle of the Right rapidly accelerating their agenda in power, and slowly advancing their agenda when they're merely an opposition party.
No more promises of "peace in our time."
8
@Bo
"An electorate that is energized for real change".
The point is, the electorate is not energized for the kind of change that the extremist candidates are promoting. You and your bubble are, but that is not America. Gender and race fixation, open borders, reflexive hostility to the police, free this and free that for everyone...that is not going to win a national election. Plenty of people understand that there are real problems that need to be fixed, but reactionary demagogues won't fix them.
8
Foundations are important. Life is short
.
I say these two things for it humbly seems to me that we need to always try to discuss what we disagree with and then vote still not knowing a lot. I will never vote strategically in order to compromise what I understand through listening is the right thing to do.
If the latter above means I need to vote evolutionary way or a revolutionary way, so be it.
I have worked 24/7 in/through/by activism in human rights, boots on the ground, for over fifty years. I have learned there is "no time like now for change" if it is the right thing to do. Yes, I believe in compromise always for we never know the whole story, but now the compromise is vote for those closest to your dreams for the world is far too fast to do otherwise.
I wonder with these few short words if people will understand ?
I have done a lot in terms of improving human rights. I say this only to add that I could have done more by sometimes saying the rest I will do later for it might be better to do so. Essentially is never is better to wait. To do the right thing is sometimes short term very hard, but in the long term is where it pays off. The most important things we do in life will only fully blossom after we are long gone.
In short, do not fear doing the right thing after listening and learning all you honestly can - no matter if it be or be called evolution or revolution.
8
IT seems that revolution will come from Trump: No more democracy.
21
In what world is the current republican party center-right and not far-right?
1021
@B. L.
And in what world is the Democratic Party ( the leadership, that is) not Republican- lite? It’s been moving in that direction since Bill Clinton’s sell-outs of unions and the poor to win votes. “Triangulation” translates into corporate giveaways, in my book.
89
@B. L.
Apparently in Friedmans but I have always suspected that he was a Republican who wraps himself in a liberal blanket.
49
@B. L. Certainly not this one. The US is center-right, far-right.
25
In my opinion, the next presidential election in the USA is about the survival of the American democracy as non- authoritarian.
As a European social-democrat, of course I can see the merits and the self-evident truth of a very progressive democratic agenda.
But thanks to the bizar American system of electoral college, it's all about the opinions and the mind set of the voters in the 6 or 7 swing states.
New York, San Francisco, Boston: It's not about you this time , it's all about Cleveland, Tampa and Madison.
157
@Albert Koeman Thanks for your thoughts, but you must admit that the USA is not demographically similar to the Netherlands which I read is 80% Dutch. America is truly a melting pot and as such it boils with every nationality in the world. We in this country are going through dramatic changes and we will be in an unruly state for the near future. And, please do not forget that if it were not for us...you would be speaking a different language.
5
@Franklin
Your last sentence was unnecessary and irrelevant to Albert's arguments. The USA saved free Europe (albeit reluctantly, at first) during the World Wars and is mostly responsible for global peace in the Nuclear Age (obviating the need for Canada and other nations to have atomic weapons, I acknowledge gratefully).
I just hope that the USA never gets overly high-and-mighty or jingoistic about these responsibilities, and threaten or blackmail (as Trump is trying to do) friends and allies.
Peace, brothers and sisters.
36
@Albert Koeman
You are correct. Thank you for understanding the very delicate ground upon which our American democracy now stands. Please wish us luck.
13
Mses Harris and Tarchak ask, "Can the Democratic Revolution wait?", to which I respond, "No, and there's no need to wait." The Democrats need to continue throwing down the gauntlet on Trump: with disgust, without leniency -- and with a well-crafted, and well-communicated, plan for reparations.
In next year's presidential race, the principal topics of discourse will probably be health-care, education, and the environment.
However, the principal theme will be TRUST.
Which party can Americans trust to Proactively execute the policies that are most important to Americans' social and economic well-being; in other words, which party can Americans trust to keep its campaign promises about IMPORTANT policies -- not parochial policy agendas like walls and locking up political foes?
The Democrats have a year and a half to hone their excellent platform on the crucial issues that affect ALL Americans. I, for one, trust that the Democrats will deliver. (Heck, compared to the Inept, Dishonest, Exclusionary Republicans, a Democratic Congress and White House could excel with both hands tied behind their backs.)
To win in 2020, then, the Democrats must earn Americans' trust -- while continuing to dismantle Trump's dishonesty and woeful policy record, making eminently clear the harmful effects they've had on our nation.
6
The first debate destroyed any trust I had in the Democrats.
8
@Rich Murphy
Then in what country do you see your views thriving? It's not clearly not Western Europe or Japan, which are far to your left.
So where exactly does your political program deliver prosperity and happiness?
Or is it a neo-liberal fantasy?
10
We have a primary process, and will eventually have a Democratic nominee. That person, no matter who it is, will be a person who has some basic human decency, and on that basis alone should be elected by a landslide. It really is that simple, and no fearmongering by either side will sway me.
74
@Dawn Helene
This argument exhausts me.
I don't want the lowest common denominator. I want a Rock Star.
Then you’re guaranteed to get the lowest common denominator, trump.
3
Thomas, I think your plan to register "one million more Democratic voters in swing districts and states..." is marvelous. And certainly with enough of a "let's get this guy" attitude, is doable. But where the fork in the road for you and me begins is that I think the censure vote was absolutely necessary and certainly no waste of time. You see, this has historical significance, it being the second one only in the last 100 or so years. We can get even, but we must get angry, too. In this case, the two are wedded. We are not descending to Trump's level. Rather we are transcending his innate hate by placing in the history books this evil Trumpian paradigm. We are opening further Pandora's box of racism and bigotry. It's out there for millions of us to witness that not only their leader but also MAGA supporters with their foul chants are enemies of a free and equal democracy.
268
@Kathy Lollock
Agree. The same argument can be used for impeachment.
Increasingly, I think letting Trump run amok is doing more damage than the possibility of losing 20/20.
Perhaps I'm being Pollyanna but I believe when people are shown, through these proceedings, the extent of Trump's malfeasance and, the all too real possibility of traitorous ties to Russia, they would rally round the Democratic party and force the Senate to impeach Trump.
9
@Blanche White
“.Agree. The same argument can be used for impeachment.
Increasingly, I think letting Trump run amok is doing more damage than the possibility of losing 20/20. “
I believe you are both correct. There may be some grand plan to win 2020 that we don’t see, but right now, arguing for waiting looks weak and ineffectual.
5
@Kathy Lollock Swing Left is sponsoring a registration drive in swing states that you can volunteer to write letters for.
1
The "Democratic Revolution" is happening now precisely *because* they keep being told to wait. Slow, incremental progress has been the game plan since the Reagan years, and seeing a distinctly *not* moderate candidate like Trump become president is enough to make you question that they only way to win is to be as inoffensive as possible to as many people as possible.
"Now's not really a good time for us. Can you ask again in 4 years?" is no longer an acceptable response. Moderate solutions are for moderate problems, and that is not what we're facing. It never was. Trump's train-wreck of a presidency is just making more people aware of that fact.
262
@Ryan
If you believe the election was legitimate (I have some serious questions myself) then Trump won because he told the people in the middle what they were going to get if he won. The Dems should give that whirl.
He lied but that's entirely beside the point.
7
@Ryan
Unlike Tom I would rather experience 4 more years of trump than to capitulate to the safe route pablum Tom offers up. At least that way the trump devastation would be complete and maybe Friedman would then see his way to a "Democratic Revolution" rise out of the ashes. The sad thing is that so many would have to suffer needlessly. It reminds me of his support for the Iraq War which he claims he "agonized" over. Just what was the agony for? Hans Blix and his team told the world there were no WMD's. There weren't any. Apparently Friedman didn't get the memo.
16
@Steve I totally agree with you. I still believe if Bernie had been the nominee in 2016 the world would have been spared trump.
7
Now it’s only about winning, the rest is irrelevant. Four more years of Trump mean a 7-2 in the Supreme Court and no advancement in civil rights until at least 2050.
247
@Joseph Thank you.
I have said essentially the same thing in my own comment - but in many more words.
7
@Joseph....yes a more entrenched pro corporate Supreme Court--- just think of the cases that corporate interests will bring for it to decide in their favor, adding to their profits and power over all of us. Step by step.
This dire future must be spelled out for the public by the media, in concrete, real people life terms, describing the effect on real families of different generations.
All our lives will be affected, and our power to influence govt will be even more reduced as our politics fulfills the purpose of Citizens United---the court said any limits on big money in elections is anti 'free speech' per the 1st Amendment.
This has already helped disunite the nation, and muffled the 'free speech' and political influence of the citizen majority.
5
Why is there not more outrage when someone types that only a few states actually matter in the next election? I'm more and more upset at the winner-take-all set-up and disproportionate representation in the electoral college and the Senate. Progessive ideas not only have to win the minds of voters, but must also compete in an extremely biased electoral system which goes a long way toward making allegedly moderate Republican views the norm.
230
@Kathleen Ryan
While I agree, the electoral college was set up to keep these states united. The other side would say I do not want highly populated states (California, etc.) having so much control over our elections. There is no easy solution.
10
@PN Of course the difference between the electoral college and a popular vote winner, to which the "other side" would object, is the problem of "highly populated" states. Presumably highly populated by people who seem more appropriate to give weight to over uninhabited land. But that's just me.....
9
@PN The solution is to stop having first past the post elections so we don't have 2 garbage political parties (one less so). The solution is to have elections actually decided by popular vote so that a vote somewhere isn't worth 100x more than elsewhere. That's the solution, but we all know there are reasons neither of these things will happen.
5
If it's not time for a "political revolution" in 2020, it will be in 2024 if Trump and the Republican Senate majority are re-elected. Maybe things have to get even worse for a majority of "we, the people" to see what's broken beyond patching.
14
@abigail49
How did that work out when the lefties refused to vote for Humphrey? How did that work out when Nader's raiders refused to vote for Gore? How did that work out when Bernie's bros refused to vote for Hillary?
Are you enjoying the revolution yet?
4