She will get edged by Trump.
Hillary 2.0
Unbridled ego and w/o clue what middle America values, desires & perceives.
39
Amy Klobuchar's performance last night appears to be getting strong reviews and resonating with a lot of voters.
You wouldn't know it, though, by reading the NYT and WaPo, who seem to be busy slavishly carrying Elizabeth Warren's water.
54
After the past 3 years of lies, incompetence, grifting, corruption and just rank stupidity by the current administration, I see at least a flicker of light at the end of the tunnel of hate if Warren is elected.
56
I guess Frank Bruni does not like her Elizabeth Warren
"... She showed how canny she can be. How cunning ..."
"... You could call that deceptive. But you could also call it disciplined. I shook my head as I watched it ..."
10
Castro's cheap shot at Biden speak volumes about the challenger's character and deperation.
33
Not a word about the #6th in poll candidate, Andrew Yang?
He is too dumb, too outsider to your taste? I know, establishment doesn't like Yang.
Maybe Yang is the Trump version of Democrats in 2020, a long shot who pull it off where it counts.
18
I am done with Juan Castro. He's off my list. He's nasty in a Trumpian sort of way.
51
One little thing about Elizabeth Warren, which you will not find easily, certainly not in NYT. Not long ago, in one of her rallies, she talked about the black unarmed person who “was murdered” by the policeman in the infamously famous incident in Ferguson, five years ago. Maybe somebody still remembers the results of the inquiry, which showed that the (white) cop was actually assaulted, and the “victim” tried to grab his gun.
Why would anybody vote for a candidate who shamelessly spreads racially charged lies ?
27
Mr. Bruni reads like "once upon a time" wishful thinking instead of reality.
5
She is more and more out of touch with normal people with every big story about her. Even if the economy was as awful as Obama's, she'd never win a real race with Tump.
22
I’m glad someone liked what they saw last night... Unfortunately, I did not.
The dearth of charisma of anyone of these slick oily talking-heads doesn’t setoff a five-fire alarm in your dreams then you are probably dead to this world.
12
I saw the debate and thought that Bernie was the stand out.
I guess for NYT, Warren is the New Hillary. See how that works out for you.
To be blunt - she's a humanities professor that pretended to be native American - the bully from Queens is going to destroy her, the way Tusli destroyed Harris.
23
Frank, really disappointed with regard to your opinion of Liz Warren. If you meant somehow to compliment her, it’s quite lost in all the snark. Not usually your style.
21
Warren reminds me too much of Trump: a name calling, hateful bully. Her schitck clearly plays to her loyal base just as Trump's does, but if it comes down to a contest between those two, I'm likely to hold my nose and vote for the devil I know.
12
Elizabeth Warren clearly has a more facile mind than Joe Biden. And she seems to be an authentic "happy warrior." But rather than go with the smart qualified woman, the Dems. will nominate the person they think will be the safe choice-the old geezer who posits record players are a fix for cultural disadvantages among some African American children! God help us all as the battle of the two rambling grandpas unfolds.
36
If I was Elizabeth Warren, I'd think long and hard about Beto O'Rourke for Vice President after that crack he made about assault weapons.
I'd also think about abandoning pant suits in favor of dresses.
7
being honest here,
pick a leader before the others start to drag you down
even farther.
kamala harris looked like she was rolling the chaos lines
last night, and that probably isn't what you guys need
for leadership.. jtm
The ticket: Biden (solid, experienced) / Klobuchar (solid, Midwest)
20
“Performance-wise, she’s pulling away from Sanders. He shouts and then shouts louder. She’s hardly quiet, but she has grown better and better at layering in personal anecdotes and dabs of humor, which he has never been any good at.”
And yet Senator Warren can't “layer in” an explanation for her 25 year long registration as a Republican.
It matters that Sanders doesn't have to explain away 25 years of his adult life.
Did Warren go the Central America to protest an illegal war against Nicaragua in the 1980s? Sanders and many actual liberals sure did.
We've also seen what trusting Harvard Law with the presidency did. Right, Warren is a better candidate than Hillary Clinton, as was Obama, but Trump would likely beat Warren were she the nominee in 2020. Albeit not as easily as Trump would beat Biden.
Submitted Sept 13th 3:03 PM eastern
10
She has my vote for the top of the ticket. For the bottom is it Buttigeig or Booker?
19
Anyone want to listen to Bernie the kvetch yell at us for four years?
22
Julian Castro's verbal assault on Biden remind me of father's classic retort from "The New Immigrants" when asked "Are we lost?" "Shut up" he [father] explained.
5
I'm with Ed Rendell as far as calling out Warren's hypocrisy in regards to big money. Read his Washington Post bit about her from Wednesday this week. He nails it. She is a fraud.
14
Sanders is by-far the deepest thinker on the stage yet, looking at the NYT rankers, they only cite shallow personality style issues that they don't like. It's just emblematic of where the American mindset is (and will always be)... duped by the presentation and not the substance.
24
The call for civility in politics is really infringement of free speech and submission to the status quo. On that subject, I have to share this with you: Michael Hiltzik's column in today's L.A. Times...
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-09-12/hiltzik-justice-gorsuch-civility
2
Who can win blue collar middle America? Biden-Klobuchar.
14
Elizabeth Warren is saddled with the greatest detriment possible for a candidate among a large number of voters. Worse than dishonesty. Worse than lack of morality. Worse than ignorance. Worse than lack of experience. Worse than ill intentions and obvious corruption. She is a woman.
One only need to hear the comments regarding to being "shrill", "screeching", "preachy" (same as leveled HRC) to understand.
34
Slick is a pejorative word I wonder if it wasn’t a woman if Mr Bruni would have said a well thought out strategy
13
I have followed Joe Biden for decades. He has one senior moment and people go off the rails. Has anyone listened to Trump? The man is a liar. At this point I will take any Democrat but Joe has the experience having been VP under Obama. I am 71 and lives through several presidents. Obama was one of the good ones. People forget that the Republicans got together and said they would not allow any of Obama's accomplishments. Traitors each and all. Party over country, Republicans? I haven't forgotten. You will never get my vote or that of my 91 year old mother. Cut off your own noses to spite your face. Deplorable, indeed.
32
Castro is done.
He was crude, condescending and to be honest... obnoxious.
Biden and Warren it is.
Can they please join ranks?
The rest, buzzing fireflies, butterflies, dragonflies... fly off they all will, very soon. Amusing to talk about at the moment but apart from Biden and Warren I can't recall a single sentence from any except...
Harris's "you can go back to watching fox news now." to Trump.
Castro's belligerent going-after tone at Biden where he sounded more disrespectful than anything.
13
A “slick” man is “polished”. A “cunning” man is “strategic”. A “canny” man is “smart”.
Ms Warren is polished, strategic and smart, Mr. Bruni.
She also has one very important thing in common with all of her fellow candidates in the Democratic Party. None of them are pathological liars. So I pick Ms Warren, but would, if I could, vote for any of them.
32
Why are you toeing this line of Klobuchar and corporatists et. al that a public health care system is undoable here? You’re well travelled and know better.
The health insurance company made 20 billion in profit last year. That’s a 20 billion margin of error the government can work within with a “Medicare for all” type of plan. Canada, UK, Germany - pick your system but none are dystopias.
How much UNH stock do you own?
25
Dear Frank, you're nuts! She will lose 40 states. Of all the Dem candidates i wouldn't vote for it would be her and Bernie. You'd have to drag me by my ear lobe to vote for either one.....unless there is just no choice. Neither can win. The public hates their idea's overwhelmingly. Ick.
11
She's not deceptive. She's not slick.
Overall costs will go down on Medicare for All, full stop. You dumb hacks want to crow about "taxes going up" as if, let's say a 1% increase on taxes will compare to an unexpected medical bill that insurance won't cover which sends you into bankruptcy. We Americans spend way more on healthcare per capita than any other country in the world and a lot of people still aren't covered even with ACA.
Warren is rightly not handing you an attack point. She understands you'll run with it. It isn't slick; it's smart. (Unlike the journos who can't help but press this point as if they didn't understand the overall math.)
33
"Cunning"? "Sly"? Enough of this already.
17
We need to evaluate the theater stage where ONE Dem candidate and the nasty Donny Trump are going at each other and Trump's trashy mouth say just about anything to draw attention to himself. And judge if the Dem will crush Donny flat. They he or she will get my vote.
7
It's not slick Bruni. It is simple. If your paying 2X for private insurance now, you will have X deducted from you paycheck under Medicare for All, a single payer system like Canada's.
Per Business Insider "Healthcare per capita in 2017:
1. United States — $10,209
12. Canada — $4,826"
Biden may be deceived or deceitful when he says people will pay more for healthcare under a single payer system. What is your excuse Bruni?
29
"She’ll be in this thing until the end."
Please tell us, Mr Bruni: HOW will it end?
1
If a kangaroo can defeat Trump, I'll vote for that kangaroo.
It's that simple. It's that obvious. It's that vital.
Vote.
28
Frank Bruni conveys his strong thoughts that”Elizabeth will be the one”!Bruni has given a lot of weight to the accepted intelligence&academic strength of Warren.Warren is smart,speaks well&knows her facts.Plus”She has a plan for everything”.More than all these known assets of Warren,what came out during the last debate was that she refused to be predictable&attack Biden.Warren resisted the temptation as she was aware that she is known for being aggressive&get that stressed during the debates will harm her.
Warren has committed voters.But there are a lot of anti-Warren voters&she should not help make a”Stop Warren”campaign. By not becoming aggressive,Warren was tactical by letting others take the”aggressive” label.For Warren it was enough that she did not lose&she knows she has a long ways to go.What is happening to Kamala Harris was that high expectations are not being met.Warren is crafting a strategy to grow slowly&mop up disappointed voters from other candidates.Unlike Joe Biden, Warren can’t afford gaffes or fights.Biden has been on the national stage so long that he has developed a”Teflon skin”.But Warren has been attacked by Trump&many weak points are at the surface.Victory for Warren may come if she soldiers on without making too many mistakes.I don’t agree with Bruni that she answered well on Afghanistan.The danger for Warren is not her style,but her words.She invokes extremism&her words are watched.Warren needs better nuanced words& operation-that she yet to exhibit!
1
“You could call that deceptive. You could also call it disciplined. I shook my head but tipped my hat. She’ll be in this thing until the end.”
So did Sanders – and Hillary. Then the Hillary- Sanders Syndrome kicked in with the voters (“I hate Hillary- I won’t vote”) – my fear is that this will happen again.
Democrats should be focused on dethroning Trump. They proclaim they are but they are not – they are driven by egos. Look at Pelosi, an experienced, seasoned politician walking out at a press conference.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/pelosi-walks-out-on-press-im-done-talking-about-impeachment .
What is the take-away from such behavior for voters?
IMHO –a Biden/ Warren ticket would be a real winner: Warren fans will be assured that she will run for president the next time around and most probably will win. (USA will be ready for a female President)
The centrists within the Democrats will also be assured that left wing”squads” will be kept on a comfortable leash and progressive policies will be implemented gradually until a good “digestion process” is done. Yes, information, new or old, is - believe it or not -like food.
10
This is the chance of the dreamable in our lifetime. Ignore it and you will lose the election to the Republican nightmare.
4
All of them are better than what we have. The problem is that they don’t place the Democratic program in historical context. It is not revolutionary. It is not new. It is FDR’s New Bill of Rights:
https://youtu.be/3EZ5bx9AyI4
This should be played at the convention. It should be the platform. It places their programs firmly in our history and what it means to be American. It’s foolishness to question how goals can be paid. It is foolishness to compromise before doing. That is why congress exists. To work out the details. First decide on the goal. These joint press conferences (they are not debates) are bad enough without reporters trying to stay in the shallow end of the pool. It’s time for them to dive into the R W Apple end of the pool.
7
Ah yes. A new mommy for the columnist to affix the apron strings to. The sixth I believe, including GrandMaMa in 2016 and Pete the Mayor just last month! Yes it does indeed tale a village.
1
It's amazing how low the bar is for Biden - as noted by several, including the NYT panel. he had periods of incoherence but because he had enough "I'm still awake" moments the mainstream media thinks he did ok. No normal democrat who saw his rambling "record player" response to a question about reparations can walk away not thinking exactly what Castro was implying.
11
Warren is clearly the one to send into battle against Trump.
He should be very worried, she will distroy him.
11
What Kobuchar one liner was so good? She uttered this original gem....A house divided cannot stand. So what? So don't criticize? Maybe it's exactly some 'division' that we need to save our democracy.
A house in lock step with powerful corporate mega donors who call the shots in our politics, not representing We the People---that's what cannot stand.
A cautious, donor-dependent, moderate centrist Democratic party---that's what cannot stand.
Is that too radical for the USA today?
13
On the issues she cares about Warren is the best. She is clear and foreful. She is also divisive and what are her foreign policy views?
1
She's unelectable. Welcome to 4 more years of Trump
9
Most of the media wants to forget Warren’s recent tweet that it the was anniversary of “Michael Brown’s murder”. A statement earning the maximum Pinocchios from the Washington Post and believed only by fanatics ignoring the facts or politicians pandering for votes.
It’s safe to say the Republicans won’t forget and will hold it up to argue Warren is simply another Hillary who will say or do anything, including slandering a cop, to win.
btw, Kampala Harris sent nearly the identical false claim.
13
F
Fern
Home | Pending Approval
I don't see any evidence that Warren is "slick", as this column opines. She's bright and she retains facts and knows how to use them. It's insulting that somebody would characterize that as "slick", "canny", or "cunning". I would prefer that if Bruni has some other candidate he wants to push on us, he would just come right out and say it rather than unfairly try to tear that candidate's most threatening opponent to bits.
4
Please, Democrats, please nominate Warren. Trump will win in a landslide.
8
Are the power players going to give her the keys to the Oval Office?
I doubt it unless she starts backtracking.
Has Wall Street paid her off yet? And please, don't tell me she can't be bought. This is America.
Is her lefty & anti-capitalist rhetoric just a ruse to win the Primary?
"If you really want the White House you're going to have to ditch that crazy anti-capitalist talk."
Can we trust her to do the right thing?
I keep forgetting that she serves on the Armed Services Committee and that she traveled to Afganastan with John McCain. What's the chronology? What came first that trip or McCain's famous thumbs down on repealing the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare? Is there a story there?
3
A modern-day warrior
Mean, mean stride
Today's Tom Sawyer
Mean, mean pride
Though her mind is not for rent
Don't put her down as arrogant
Her reserve a quiet defense
Riding out the day's events
The river
What you say about her company
Is what you say about society
Catch the mist
Catch the myth
Catch the mystery
Catch the drift
The world is, the world is
Love and life are deep
Maybe as her skies are wide
Today's Tom Sawyer, she gets high on you
And the space she invades, she gets by on you
No, her mind is not for rent
To any god or government
Always hopeful, yet discontent
She knows changes aren't permanent
But change is
And what you say about her company
Is what you say about society
Catch the witness
Catch the wit
Catch the spirit
Catch the spit
The world is, the world is
Love and life are deep
Maybe as her eyes are wide
Exit the warrior
Today's Tom Sawyer
She gets high on you
And the energy you trade
She gets right on to
The friction of the day
lyrics by Neil Peart / Paul Philip Woods
2
Frank, I never thought I'd see you writing comedy. Good one.
2
What, exactly, is "slick" about Warren's take on Afghanistan?
Is it that she is a woman?
As for Biden, did anybody else notice that George Stephanopoulos was taking sides, and used his questions to stake out his own positions? Shameless!
6
Women are better than men in looking out for those who don’t have power or privilege. And Warren is the best of that lot .
13
The irony is always better than the fantasy. The first woman to become president will be a republican. And all of a sudden, breaking the glass ceiling will mean nothing.
2
I didn't watch the debate. But what I really want to know is: who if anyone discussed the Supreme Court?
4
I an rooting for Liz Warren and Medicare for All may be down the road but the Democratic Platform should be modified as suggested by Mayor Pete --- MEDICARE FOR ALL WHO WANT IT. Eventually everybody will but no one likes having something that they like taken away. Those that want Medicare can sigh up and those who no longer want to pay for their private insurance or it is taken away of a job is lost, can sign up for Medicare and coverage starts right away. Basically it is the public option. Eventually the dreamable become a done deal.
14
When all is said and done, Elizabeth Warren will be the most intelligent, calm and collected person to receive that phone call at 3am.
11
Biden is yesterday’s candidate. His mentation is foggy, disorganized, often incoherent, and Trump will be able to eviscerate him in debate. His political baggage includes voting for Dubya’s invasion of Iraq, the most egregious American geostrategic blunder of modern times. We cannot afford to let Biden bear the reins of power. He is unfit to serve.
5
GREAT DEBATE! now, let's prune our billionaires with a draconian wealth tax haircut, and then we can afford the single payer, government-option, universal-coverage MEDICARE FOR ALL!
7
My mom always said 'It's better to shoot for the moon and hit the fence, then to shoot for the fence and hit the ground'.
I think my mom would have liked Elizabeth Warren.
22
I find Ms. Warren to be scatter brained and she gave no new arguments last night. Same talk washed over. Her cleverness at not answering questions rubs me the wrong way. Seems she avoids honest answers and wants to please only herself. Typical Politician. And her taxation plan for the rich is too limited in scope to really make a difference. Seems to me she just tries to say whatever she thinks she wants to hear. I see no inspiration from her for things to be different. I think her flying her hands all over and poking her head up seem an attempt to make her seem still active and able though age 70 already. She never looks at the camera and never really looks at people. If I had to hear one more time about her brothers who were in the Military. Big deal. The Military service is still voluntary and people serve for the paycheck and no other reason. If they could get a real job, they would not be on the government dole. Warren is a phony baloney and should not even be a Senator. I am tired of the screaming from her and Sanders. I dont want to be yelled at all the time. Ridiculous. I would rather have Trump. At least I know what I have with him and what I am up against.
5
"Formidable stride", in NYT-speak:
-- "she showed how cunning (go ahead, look it up) she can be".
-- "she spoke of her lifelong passion for education without giving the slightest hint of how much her positions on some education-related issues had changed"
-- " but she never grew flustered and never succumbed, instead stressing repeatedly that in terms of people’s reduced health care costs, they’d be ahead of the game. You could call that deceptive".
-- "... and she was evasive".
This is dangerously close to an endorsement of "politics as usual". We all deserve something better.
3
I have followed politics avidly for over 50 years. I truly believe that Elizabeth Warren is the most impressive candidate for President to run in the primaries for either party in my entire lifetime.
She is brilliant, genuine, thoughtful, conscientious, philosophically coherent, focused, and unflappable. She is the only candidate in this race who has gained consistently in the polls for the last several months. She is the preferred candidate among those most politically engaged. The more people get to know her, the more her support grows.
The thought of a debate between Trump and Warren makes me laugh. The contrast between her presidential message of a detailed plan to improve our lives and his childish, racist, sexist, Islamophobic, anti-immigrant rants will be a spectacle unparalleled in modern political history.
Elizabeth Warren is destined to make her place in American history. She showed again last night why.
29
Mr. Bruni: "Idealism puts you in play. Slipperiness gets you the prize."
What a cynical pronouncement.
I, and many voters, don't respond to that.
9
Nothing against Biden, but he is showing clear signs of mental decline. He makes Trump look positively young and vital. Loyal Democrats will turn out to vote for him, but waverers and the unmobilized will not.
Warren is sharp, charismatic, and engaging. She has what it takes to beat Trump.
14
I'm a white Democrat and I have a few observations from last night's debate: 1. I've never felt more guilty for being white then when watching those ship of fools on that stage. 2. The stench of Democrat pandering smells like defeat.
3. Julian Castro seems small and mean.
4. The whole format with hooping and hollering from the audience turns what should be a sober discussion of of ideas into a Jerry Springer show.
5. Open borders and decriminalizing illegal immigration will cost Democrats the election.
10
If the U.S. wasn't so retrograde stuck in the theocrat 1980s and misogynist up to its eyeballs, the best 2020 ticket and most effective executive branch leadership for the nation would be Warren/Klobuchar.
13
Elizabeth Warren is Betty Crocker: wholesome, pragmatic, with a recipe for everything. "I can fix that" Let's get cooking.
12
One can certainly expect that as a law professor at Harvard Senator Warren, dealing with classrooms full of intellectually demanding, acutely probing students, she has come to be very, very “good on her feet”. Our Fake President has much to fear from the savy, searing, and erudite lips of this tough candidate.
10
Warren/Booker, Harris as AG, Biden as Sec of State, Beto as chief of Homeland Security, Klobuchar as Sec of Education, Bernie as Sec of Labor, Mayor Pete as press secretary...etc.
Trump versus the democratic dream team.
10
I've tried and can't think of a major program that was widely derided at the time as "socialism" (Social Security, Medicare, Obamacare) that Americans now overwhelmingly reject and want to dispense with. Why do we fail to learn from this pattern? Cleary Obamacare did not solve the problem of healthcare in this country or the issue would not still be on the frontburner, yet there is such timidity -- from a country that imagines itself bold and innovative -- about anything other than tinkering around the edges. I'd love to know why Americans seemingly uniquely recoil anytime the label "socialism" is slapped on something, only to then not want to go back once a program is actually enacted and takes hold. The only thing I can think of is that America is uniquely captive to all the corporate money sloshing throughout and corrupting our political system, and that as a people we have a poor grasp of our own political history. I'm certain that if we had started out with European-style healthcare, there is no way we'd vote to privatize it. Just look at how far George Bush got with his plan to privatize Social Security.
18
I am conservative Never Trump Republican. I won't vote for Trump, but I probably won't vote for the Democratic nominee either and will cast a vote for the best third-party candidate. This gives me a certain objectivity. Warren has proven a good candidate, but I have a sense that the liberal elites have decided for her and are not interested in anything that strays from the narrative. During the debate, she seemed evasive and largely a non-factor to me. I thought the best performance was by Klobuchar, but all the opinion leaders say about her is that it does not matter. Mayor Pete has had three solid debate performances in a row--same thing, doesn't matter. Beto finally had a good night. Booker clearly has charisma. I think Biden did well, especially in the early rounds. Bernie was charming in 2016, but that was in contrast to Clinton. With the larger field, he's just the obnoxious uncle yelling at you. Neither Warren or Sanders had a bad night, but I saw nothing impressive from either of them. I thought the only two people who clearly had a bad night were Castro and Harris. Both of them come across as smarmy and condescending. Castro adds mean-spiritedness to that. Harris is so canned and patently obvious in her straining to be "authentic." If the Democrats had any sense they would be giving Klobachar, Buttegieg, or Booker a second look.
17
Elizabeth is on target. Strong, logical, personable, real ... though she could loosen up a tad with some humor. On the other hand, we must realize, as hard as it is, that Biden’s current cognitive issues show he is not up for the job. His performance at the end of the debate clearly shows he was confused and his delivery was off. It’s not just my opinion; it is clearly supported by those with more knowledge than I. We cannot afford a candidate who’s not at the top of his game.
13
Mrs. Warren is our best hope to prevail against the Republicans.
Let's face it, nothing will get done unless we can overcome the GOP's firm refusal to govern with anything but NO. Even with Trump doing their dirty work for them, McConnell still will not let anything reach the floor. Whether we have another 6 years with MM or not, this strategy of total obstruction will not change, and will get worse with a Dem in the WH.
Warren has the strength to jump in and roll up her sleeves, the experience of playing chess with the devil, the conviction of doing what's right for Americans, the knowledge to run rings around anyone, and the cunning to turn the game around and force the other side to show its hand. We need someone who will play hardball and win, and while these qualities are not the ones to emphasize in a general election, they are first and foremost in selecting our candidate in this primary.
If we don't have, it makes no difference who is elected.
20
Let's all keep in mind that winning the senate may be harder than beating the donald. The Democratic field has a lot of talented and creative thinkers, who as lawmakers in a future majority party, with moscow mitch out of the way, can shine more then in the current senate. We must encourage and fully support those that are not senators now, to run in their home states and win.
17
@Richard Tandlich
It's really funny to see these supposedly convinced progressives signing in to sound so sure but STILL can't IMAGINE actually using the ususal capitalization for any political opponent. Eighth grade was really that tough?
2
Do you mean adhering to mainly lower case, as in Trump's Twitters?
5
It appears that the main reservation many commenters have to Elizabeth Warren is one of electability. This argument is premised on those responders believing that they somehow know the minds of their fellow citizens.
My sister made that argument to me back in January when I told her that I was all in for Warren and then asked this question, "Listen what each has to say and then ask yourself who you would choose based on their vision, history and ability to communicate it? Then tell me why you believe you are more able to support those qualities than any other voter?"
She's all in for Elizabeth.
15
The democrats cannot afford to nominate a woman. Trump will make fun of her, and everyone will laugh at the jokes. Then a woman will sound harsh when she criticizes. So it has to be Biden.
2
Perhaps not every woman will laugh at Trump's 'jokes'.
10
@Inveterate
As you worry about who is nominated--because Trump might make fun of and laugh at that person--it's important to remember that Trump is also "inveterate"--he's an inveterate bully. No matter who the Democratic nominee is, whether a man or a woman, the Donald will mock and try to intimidate that candidate, because the Donald can't help being what he is. And the supporters at his rallies will laugh and chant along with whatever he tells them to.
Therefore, I say that Democratic voters should not allow the wannabe dictator to dictate who gets to run against him. We should decide on our own who we want to run the country instead of stewing about how our Bully-in-Chief will react--and then we should stick with that candidate. Maybe the rest of the citizenry will finally see our president for the callow, little junior high bully he's always been.
13
"He (Bernie) still favors the word 'oligarchic,' as if saying it for the zillionth time will finally make it roll off the tongue."
Great sentence, Mr. Bruni!
3
With apologies to Reggie Jackson, Senator Harris seems to be reminding us anew with each passing day that while she may have been MVP for the month of July, she will not be Ms. October.
6
Principles. Confidence. Clear commitment to integrity in government. Leveling the playing field and a commitment to transparency. We need EW. I don't care who is VP.
27
@JDH. She’s as likable as Hillary.
2
Elizabeth Warren didn’t win the debate last night in fact none of them really broke the surface of the campaign. This election feels like it is slipping away already. The real story is are the Democrats going to be able to create a viable new vision with a united sense of passion during these next four years of a Trump Presidency.
3
Well I think "deceptive" is trying to highlight and problematise a potential "middle-class tax increase" when the "middle-class" will nevertheless be financially better-off. And while I've communicated here that I don't think instituting a "Medicare For All" system is necessary or likely the best policy for the US to adopt to provide universal health care, Frank is yet another critic of the idea who "forgets" to mention the disadvantages of retaining the present system of private insurance being provided by employers: it's effectively a tax on businesses (and it's regressive, hurting smaller employers more), it disincentivises employees from changing employers (perhaps to a higher paying position), and it discourages workers from becoming small business owners themselves - all of which hurts the American economy.
17
Klobuchar's lines, as quoted, sounded like lines Hillary Clinton would have delivered. They're not bad, but they sound focus-group-tested and rehearsed. In prior debates, she has come across as very smart and far more spontaneous.
1
At this point in 2007, who would have thought Barack Obama would win the Democratic nomination and then the general election? What we should do now is support the candidate who stands for the policies and dreams we believe are best for America. Elizabeth Warren comes the closed for me. I do wish she would temper her health care proposal and support a Medicare option. Let people keep their private insurance if they wish, but make Medicare available to them. And also give employers and unions the opportunity to switch their employee insurance programs over to the Medicare option, perhaps adjusting it in some ways so that the switch is seamless, coverage is as good or better, and costs to employees are the same or less.
11
Warren does "...what Trump did with such effectiveness: identifying a class of villains on whom all of the country’s problems can be blamed." And that might be her ultimate weapon.
Unfortunately, scapegoating works, almost every time. It not only worked for Trump, but for Modi in India, for Duterte in he Philippines, and Orban in Hungary, not to mention hundreds, if not thousands, of other examples throughout history.
Fortunately, she is scapegoating the right target for good ends. While it's not nice to personally attack CEO's, corporations' relentless accumulation of wealth and the political power that goes along with it over the last 40 years has in fact distorted our economy and democracy to the point where neither function properly.
If resentment sells, let's harness that human foible to achieve something good for a change.
19
Sen. Warren not answering the question will taxes go up was wise, and correct on her part. That's a gotcha question looking for a headline. Sen. Warren is correct in looking at my net pay. When I look at my gross to net I see deductions for taxes, other benefits, and HEALTH INSURANCE. When I go to the doctor, ER, etc. I may pay a deductible. What my employer pays for my health insurance is why wages have gone up so slowly in recent years. Under Medicare for All many people could see their net pay go up and medical payments go down. My total expenses for health care may go down. Businesses will be more profitable. In the competitive market for labor wages may go up.
The real debate should be about cost to people not will taxes go up. The real debate should be about is Medicare for All the best way to reduce costs and insure everyone, not will taxes go up.
"Will taxes go up?" is a red herring.
25
Our next president
America should not choose our president because of skin color or because they are correct, politically.
Political correctness is not a sign of intelligence or courage
Choose them only because they can handle this difficult job
After listening to the people who are most talked about and have the ability to handle the job as president. i come up with the following names Elizabeth Warren,Cory Booker,Pete Buttigieg,Stacy Abrams(of Georgia)
These people have the brain power and the ability to keep us safe, healthy and out of war which has nothing to do with the hue,tint or pigmentation of their skin.
If i waned to spend an interesting evening with someone, i'd pick Joe Biden because he's a regular fella who overcame many personal challenges in life.
In addition, he can share stories about his time with Barack Obama, my favorite president.
7
She will not be president. I say this not because I don't have faith in her - but because I have zero faith in the American electorate.
3
Let's not forget that Warren beat Obama, too.
Obama wanted to sideline her, refusing to make her head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that she did so much to bring about.
Warren saw what Obama did -- so she ran for Senate.
She's got skills.
14
@Reasonable Guy Obama did not refuse to make her head of CFB; he understood that she could not be confirmed.
3
If the Democratic case against Trump is that he is a scary volatile personality, please don't vote for a Democrat in the primaries who even a much more scary and volatile personality than Trump.
That is not likely to work to defeat Trump for most voters.
Who would that be?
Warren, Bernie, Harris.
2
I'm diggin' Kamala Harris. Maybe she'll be a center-left version of Margaret Thatcher!
1
As a foreigner, but one very interested in US politics, I find the what to me is the fear of Bernie Sanders strange. In many anglo countries, a government run health insurance scheme funded by a taxation levy, is supported almost universally by what the US media calls liberals and conservatives. There are a few nutty outliers, but in an insignificant minority. The facts are out there, in countries in many ways similar to the US, ie Australia, Canada and New Zealand. The policy has been road tested. If the word ‘socialist’ scars you, that’s strange also. There is a long history in the US of propaganda against anything that can be labeled ‘socialist’. The queasiness about the issue may be a residue from over a century of relentless propaganda.None of the counties I have listed are in any sense socialist. But they do value and have a social safety net.
28
@Hugh Garner The propagandizing of socialism, has been used as a scare tactic for a long time in the US. It is being trotted out again by our right wing media and Republican candidates, including Trump. Unfortunately, it still works when directed at those who make their decisions based on fears as opposed to issues.
12
Did you know Germany taxes broadcast television-viewing? Not sure exactly how it works, but Germany has such a thing. Would you like that? I saw the federal and state Gov't does get its money through the service provider, so maybe it's a wash. But I don't believe the Germans like it because broadcast TV doesn't involve infrastructure.
1
@Rick Way back to the 1040’s , perhaps earlier, the Australian Broardcasting Commission, issued radio licenses, and late TV licenses. They ceased this a few decades ago, but the government does grant money to the commission, which is independent, like I assume the BBC. The licenses were quite low. There are no advertisements on the ABC. So, no, I don’t mind paying a bit for a great service. And neither should you. Imagine a choice, no ads, great competition for the echo chamber fox’s and CNN. There are myriad commercial stations if one like’s that. The sad thing about PBS is it relies a lot on private donations, and is detested by conservatives. From year to year there is the question will it survive.
4
The talking point that Medicare for All will require a middle class tax hike is frustrating because it relies on the Republican trope that "tax" is a bad word. People currently pay premiums (or their employers do) to pay for their health insurance. If that money is instead diverted to pay for Medicare-for-All is it a tax hike? Technically it is, but Warren's argument is that the amount paid in will be lower than what the average person current pays (through their pay-check or through their existing lower salary as a result of their company adjusting their wages lower to cover the cost of the premiums).
It's misleading to use Republican talking points and call it a tax hike without telling the truth that it would swap where that money is going. The fact that half the Democrats up there use the Republican framing of taxes and their roll in our community and society is disappointing. I won't vote for Democrats who are pretending they don't know, or who are too daft to realize that Medicare for all who want it by default means companies will drop their private health plans, and so we had better plan for life with minimal private health insurance anyway if we want to cover every single person in America.
9
@AW writes "...Warren's argument is that the amount paid in will be lower than what the average person current pays..." "Warren's" argument has been Bernie Sanders' argument at least since the 2016 election.
If people don't like Bernie Sanders because they disagree with his positions, fine, But it seems like mostly people complain about how he expresses himself e.g., Bruni's swipe about "oligarchic"). Really? We don't like him because of the way he talks and gestures?
Do Democrats approve of the military-industrial complex? Are they enamored of the prison-industiral complex? Sanders is the only candidate who routinely rails against those entrenched powers. That ought to count for something, regardless of how he says it.
6
Elizabeth Warren will make a great President; she will also make mincemeat of Trump on a debate stage.
21
Yes, Warren does her thing slickly, but it irritates me. I see it as condescension, and, from my reading, that style got under the hackles of many in the Obama administration, as well as Obama himself. We do not need a wonk who carries righteousness over the edge.
And "identifying a class of villains on whom all of the country’s problems can be blamed" applies to Sanders as well, of course. Haven't we had enough of that already? I fear that the media in general eats that sort of thing up, but is it good for the country.
Harris is sharp but she appears to be playing to her own mirror of a celebrity prosecutor. No,thanks.
And Joe Biden? We hardly ever hear about his deep connections with the corporate world-why is that?
I like Pete, but he has a lot of work to do, getting beyond his plans. Instead of scolding his peers last night, he could have offered a better way, but he did not. That was the kind of situation that calls for a grander vision that we all can relate to - whites, seniors, unemployed Blacks, disregarded Hispanics, women, and the young.
Barack Obama had that gift. I would like to see it again.
8
Warren can’t forever evade how
Medicare for all will be funded. If it’s by raising taxes, for example, how is that going to impact people on social security already-is she going to exempt them or come up with a senior citizen deduction? Details matter and evading a direct question is going to make people increasingly nervous the longer she persists!
4
Nobody talked about the effects of Warren’s attack on the retirement plans of the 55 y/o and already retired people 401K and IRA’s by trashing out the corporation boards. Please refer to the Wall Street Journal analysis of her plans to redo the economic basis of America.
1
I've followed Elizabeth Warren for years. I truly believe she is the one we've been waiting for. I will work for her tirelessly.
31
Warren could not answer Biden’s questions about health care. What about the fact that health care is part of our compensation at work. We will pay taxes for universal health care on top of that, possibly for insurance we won’t like as well. How will she pay for the program that costs trillions? And what, exactly, is wrong with Obamacare with a public option for those who elect it—exactly as Obama originally proposed. If people sign up for it we will, in effect, have single payer. Biden won that part of the debate, because Warren and Sanders lacked answers. I’m willing to pay more taxes for a single payer option so that everyone has health care, but I do not want to lose the health care that I like that is part of my compensation. And I am a Massachusetts liberal. Who voted for Warren. Who contributed to her campaign. If she can’t bring me along, I fear there are many more people who feel the health care being proposed is too much too quickly—a shock to an enormous health care system. I’d vote for literally anyone instead of Trump, but I do not want to lose my health care. People like Obamacare. They like a public option. Democrats, beware.
11
would it have really been that difficult for beto to add the qualifier that he wanted to come for their AR15's, not their rifles? that he wanted to come for their weapons of war, not their rifles used for the hunting of game? it would have been so easy,
5
@bill d But no one would believe him. I'm glad Beto said this but it has no chance of happening and he has no chance of being nominated. And now he probably has no chance to become Senator from Texas ...
3
I'm a Warren fan but her position on Healthcare will bring her trouble. Those that want to choose their doctors because of insecurity of quality health care will spoil the apples. As a Veteran she was spot on you cannot fix a country broken system. They have to make their own fight against their own bullies who control the government. Intervention in foreign affairs should be a threat to the world and united with others to burden the fight. Let's fight the good fight Global Warming.
10
Biden was a solid VP for Obama. I nominate him for that job again. If you support Biden/Warren, maybe you should consider Warren/Biden.
383
@Ed
No. Just, no. If the president is around 70, we need a VP no older than 60. Seriously.
22
@Ed
Warren/Buttigeg 2020.
A platform with a future.
88
The bankruptcy of neoliberalism and triangulation has been apparent since the fiscal crisis of 2008, and especially since the 2010 mid-term elections. Obama, a good but not great president, missed the opportunity to use his rhetorical gifts to elaborate a full-throated progressive agenda. Elizabeth Warren has effectively advocated a realistic progressive platform, one that will both mobilize her "base" and appeal to "swing" voters. I put these words in quotation marks to emphasize that they are not static quantities, but are mutable. I believe Warren has what it takes to both expand the size of the so-called base and the size of the swing votership. The sooner the other candidates and the party establishment rally around her, the better.
20
More than any other reason Trump must be defeated...the Supreme Court balance for years to come.
9
Unstoppable until she runs into reality. She's already shot herself in the foot with a lot of non-Democrats. Trump and the GOP will take that to the bank.
5
After last night, Amy Klobuchar should unveil two new campaign slogans: "Think Small" and "No, We Can't". Does anyone think that she will inspire a single new voter to turn out?
10
This columns confusing. What do you mean Frank? ... "most progressive proposals — Medicare for All, backed by Warren and Sanders — existed in the realm not of the doable but of the dream-able, and that they weren’t going to fix needy Americans’ lives anytime soon."
Doable vs dream-able? Get real.
HC for all, under various good systems, has been working with full support for generations already-- in the real world, in dozens of other democracies, that are also capitalist!
Have you ever heard tell about any of this, Frank? Check it out on line. It's easy, in the age of the computer.
So just who lives in a 'dream world'? America, and its cautious, moderate, centrist, big money dependent politicians----AND the media columnists of the same type, who support them. Who mischaracterize policy because the phony charge of 'left wing' seems to be the worst thing that can be said of anyone.
Frank, you seem to like Warren--so talk about her HC proposals. Compare pro/con with working systems abroad. Isn't that what a free press in a democracy is all about? I thought.
Let's get REAL.
8
@Meredith
Universal/single payer exists in just 2 countries on the planet: Taiwan and Canada, both of which have homogenous, well-educated and well-employed taxpaying populations of less than 35 million.
At a bloated 330 million, where half pay no taxes, the U.S. is the 3rd most populated nation on the planet and shares none of the other desirable traits those 2 countries are blessed with. Every other nation has a private/public buffet like the U.S. They do better because they are have fewer people but tax rates up to 60% and with most adults paying into that system.
1
Warren is smart, but she does not have the populist fervor of Bernie Sanders. In fact, she is simply using his ideas, but explaining them in an academic way. While this is fine to elite liberals, this will not help in the general election. Sanders is the only politician that actually wants workers to have power.
5
Although I prefer the medicare for those who want it option with a likely gradual movement toward single payer (with possible private supplements); Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are fundamentally correct in making the key point that the overall costs to consumers would probably go down. Everyone focuses on how taxes will go up, which is likely, but that would be more than offset by the savings elsewhere, if done correctly. So it is not only correct, but extremely important that Warren and Sanders make this point - it is NOT evasiveness. My concern is not whether single payer would ultimately be better, but rather how we get there from our current system without disruption or alarming too many people.
11
It doesn't matter which candidate wins the Democratic nomination and hopefully goes on to win the general election. And it is truly irrelevant what policies and pie-in-the-sky promises any one of them is proposing right now. Presidents have very limited ability to pass legislation. It is up to the Congress, especially the Senate with its requirement of 60 votes, to pass anything of any consequence.
No presidential candidate does even half of what he promised during his campaign. Does anyone remember the promises Obama made during his first presidential campaign? Or Trump's 'beautiful wall' that Mexico was going to pay for? It is all nonsense, best ignored.
Don't ask a candidate only what he is going to do if elected. Ask him how he is going to do it.
6
I think it's important to remember the context going into the 2016 presidential election: 1) backlash against first black president, 2) predictable conservative resurgence after 8 years of democrat in White House , 3) first female major party nominee, 4) that nominee was married to a former president and had faced decades of mud slinging, 5) growing unrest with inequality, globalism, internet woes, etc, 6) democratic primary perceived as unfair. HRC had a lot to overcome and she was not able to clear the bar. "She was a woman" is only part of the story. Our current president has supporters but he has encouraged in our country feelings of uncertainty, ugliness and unrest that I hope my fellow citizens will reject. I like many of the democratic candidates and I'd be happy to support Warren. She is smart, savvy, strategic and most of all an emotionally well-adjusted, compassionate adult ready to tackle pressing problems. Just the medicine for what ails us.
24
@Emma I'll add a few things that changed during Obama's second term that may have altered the course of 2016.
1. Rise of ISIS.
2. Huge Syrian refugee crisis and massive migrations to Europe from the middle east and africa.
3. Black lives matter movement with African Americans standing up against police brutality, including skirmishes with riot police (even if not their fault).
4. Supreme court ruling on the legality of gay marriage.
2
With Biden, it's not age, it's his character---he's always been a manipulator going way back, for what he sees as political advantage. He was known as 'Mr. MBNA'.
He's not too attuned to reality. He's lost the nomination twice already.
Yet so many voters are taken in and trust him, no matter his record and phony personality.
Just like with Trump---it's his obvious character---yet his fans cling to him.
4
I understand your take on Warren, Frank, and I won't be disappointed if she ends up the nominee. But I suspect Kamala Harris and Beto O'Rourke are the candidates best suited to withstand the the rocky to November 2020 and the rigors of two terms in the White House.
She is the real deal. I hope we nominate her.
25
Honestly I don't understand why polling puts Biden as the front runner. I could not be more underwhelmed.
All Trump has is inconsistency, his bully persona and a 500 word vocabulary.
Any of the nine candidates remaining could put forth their ideas and policy proposals more succinctly than our current president and half his staff.
Change is difficult, and republicans have done their very best work in making “taxes” a word that should not be said, let alone promoted for use. Taxes are what makes everything work.
Make government work for the people. The house and senate need a shake-up. But eyes need to remain on the one area that is working and that is the judicial push for judges that will do everything to support one agenda over another.
Judges should not get life-time appointments, that time has passed.
13
Warren may be smooth in these Democratic debates, but Trump is going to have a field day with "Pocahantas" and her left-leaning policies if she gets to the general election. It's going to be sad to watch.
5
@Michael
When she let The Donald get away with nicknaming her Pocahontas, she did more than just badly damage her future ability to stand up to him. She also let him slander the name of an important -- to both Native Americans and Colonizers -- historical figure. Why didn't she use the opportunity to publicly school The Donald (who was almost certainly clueless, except for knowing the name, probably from the Disney-fied account of her life) about who Pocahontas really was and why her life mattered ? Instead Warren engaged The Donald in tweet storms. That told me a lot about her personality.
(And she always wanted to be a Teacher ! But definitely missed her moment for presenting that lesson).
3
These so called left leaning policies poll very well ... on climate change, guns, health care ... for which Republicans have no plan whatsoever except repeal the ACA and turn it all over again to big pharma and insurance companies.
Warren, and Sanders for that matter, think the real radicals are those protecting the greatest wealth gap in American history ... three individuals have more wealth than the bottom half of Americans. Talk about a radical system!!
I laugh at those who say candidates with the message that we need to fix a system tipped dangerously to the rich are crazy and out of touch. The crazy thing was thinking a phony billionaire with multiple bankruptcies and malignant narcissism was ever going to help the little guy.
5
Her campaign launched a contest: the winner gets to have a beer with Elizabeth Warren. Good old, Rust Belt, Rosie the Riveter Elizabeth Warren, the same woman who has no chance of exciting blue collar whites or a large enough contingent of African American voters to beat Trump. She belongs in a lecture hall, not in a campaign for the Oval Office. The voters aren’t political science majors at Columbia.
She would make a great mayor for Cambridge, Mass.
8
She truly is the best candidate we have. The right mix of thoughtfulness with everyday man/woman appeal to pull it through to the end. I just hope enough Americans throughout rural America can learn to get past their preconceived notions about what it is to be a Democrat, and vote for her as a person, not as a candidate of a specific party. Guess we shall see if there's enough sanity to do that in 2020.
10
Warren was a high school debate champion in Oklahoma and was awarded a debate scholarship to George Washington University at age 16. It should come as no surprise to anyone that she is sharp on her feet.
10
Instead of saying that Warren can't win, try really hard to think up a few ways than Warren can win and spread that around instead. The alternative is that dire. The US is in crisis, and just like a recession, you don't see it until you've been standing in it.
22
Those of us on Medicare pay for it. It's not free. We also have the option to pay for additional coverage through private companies. The people who have private insurance through their employers or unions should be able to keep it if they choose to. The cost of their coverage comes from somewhere....generally deductions from their paychecks and lower salaries. We don't necessarily need the government to support our health costs but it should offer a competitive alternative that will force the private insurance industry to lower their costs and to give up some of the obscene profits they make by charging high deductibles and refusing procedures they deem to expensive. If they don't compete with or offer more value then a public option, the market place will answer the issue. I bet that even corporations and unions will eventually opt in.
I am a small business owner who pays for employee health benefits. I would be willing to pay in to a simplified system and if we save money, be willing to pay more in salaries.
This isn't socialism ........it's smart business.
24
Does the president often “debate”? Ever debate?
The process of selection is, in my view, flawed because the underlying assumption is that a debate is a significant criterion to measure the potential of one’s ability to make a good chief exec.
Watching them raise their hands to get a 45 second sound bite in to better another candidate is embarrassing.
I’d vote for anyone on that stage and many democrats who didn't make the cut (is this the NFL?) over45. Not because of debating points; they’re all smart, informed, many are possessed with a sense of humor and are self-effacing. They are decent, candid, appear honest. And...they are patriots. Compare and contrast with 45.
15
@Regards, LC. How did you decide they are decent and patriots?
1
If Bernie Sanders is not on the ticket , I’m voting for trump again, just like in 2016 all over again .
2
I gather you’ve been happy with the current administration, then. If you are pleased enough with the occupant of the White House to vote for him again, why not just say that? Bernie Sanders is your private red herring.
18
Warren and Sanders are the closet thing we have to politicos unwilling to accept our headlong spiral into worsening economic inequality. A tiny minority control our important economic decisions and everyone else has to live with the results. The faux populism of 45 that took over the republican party should finally show us how dangerous it is to continue to ignore this problem. It seems the closer a progressive gets to implementing efforts to give back to the middle and working class, the stronger the push back from so called moderate voices in the NYTimes and the WaPo. Let's give the solutions offered forth by Sanders and Warren a chance.
21
Warren is on the right track, but she's too focused on "corruption", IMO. The system INHERENTLY favors those with capital and favors large production scales. Even if there was zero corruption from white-collar businessmen and investors (very easy targets to vilify) the working class would STILL greatly suffer from the "advance" of globalization.
The next debate needs to address this and the candidates need to come clean on where they stand. If we decide that small scales of agriculture, industry and commerce are important to our nation (for any number of reasons) then we need to REGULATE large-scale commercial operations, multinational corporations, etc. in order to prevent them from overwhelming small-scale businesses - and this will invariably lead to a degree of protectionism. The criminal and immoral activities of the upper 1% are Red Herrings dragged now before us by the establishment. The much greater problem in America are the STANDARD business and financial practices of the upper 10%, left unregulated.
4
Watching last night's debate, my thoughts turned to boxing. I came to the conclusion that Elizabeth Warren in all her smoothness reminded me of Sugar Ray Robinson. He floated around the ring; took punches but mostly gave them. He was the doctor of the sweet science who could throw a short and sleep inducing left hook with geometric precision. Elizabeth Warren's campaign and her debate performances seem calculated to gain her the nomination on points if not by knockout. Wait till she goes toe to toe with Trump. The ref may have to stop it.
6
I agree that Elizabeth Warren is running a good campaign, but Amy Klobuchar is the best Democratic candidate and the only one running that I would consider voting for.
8
@Sophie so if it isn't Klobuchar you'd prefer not to vote at all and let our nation suffer under Trump for another term? That makes no sense.
7
@Sophie
Amy for America ! She can bring in the Independents and Sane Republicans. Too bad the Powers that Be are so intent on marginalizing her candidacy because it is a threat to the Biden Boondoggle. There was one comment today denigrating her, the poster was from Ukraine. Have to wonder who he is working for ? And why the whole Biden / Ukraine connection is a taboo topic ?
2
Warren has been my first choice since the beginning, and, although I quite like Pete and Booker, Warren remains my first choice. I think she has more passion and and heart than anyone else running. She is left of me, but I realize -- as everyone, should, I hope -- that her extreme polices will not get through Congress before they become enacted, but I also believe that it is better to not start at a point of compromise. I do wish, however, that she would ease up on bashing corporations. I don't know anyone in this country who doesn't aspire, and capitalism is at the heart of the American Dream. Not all capitalism is bad. It is corruption that is bad, but Warren too often throw the baby out with the bathwater. Ease up, please, and the nomination is yours to win, Miss Warren.
10
I have Kaiser Permanente as my health provider. It is a benefit of my employment and I love Kaiser's system and the professionals who take care of me.
But Kaiser recently announced that they paid tens of millions of dollars for "naming rights" for a sports-related venue under the guise of "advertising". Guess whose premiums are paying for that.
This is why we need to end the addiction to private health insurance and offer a government backed system to We the People.
If you want affordable health care you cannot let wealthy executives play with your hard earned dollars. Dollars that should be paying for health services instead of funding rich athletes and billionaire team owners.
35
@Byron Kaiser Permanente is a non-profit entity.
I think Warren (who I strongly favor for the Democratic nomination, and the presidency) should be more honest. It's simple, or at least I think it's simple. Yes, there is going to be a tax increase for most Americans to cover Medicare For All (or as much of that as we can enact; I'm not persuaded that private health insurance is going away even if Bernie or Warren wins the White House). But Warren's proposal is that this annual tax is going to be far less than what the average person is now paying for health insurance. This is the European model. The net result is more money in the pockets of most Americans, and absolutely no chance of bankruptcy. I think that she would win more votes if she were to speak more plainly about this. Yes, it's a tax raise. No, it won't cost you any more; on the contrary, it will save you money every year because you won't be paying a lot of money to the private insurers. And if God forbid you or a family member get cancer or Alzheimer's, it won't cost you everything you have. But she cannot lie about this, and I would hope that she wouldn't even be sneaky about this.
7
@David Derbes At this point, I suspect no one can actually prove that an individual would pay less under MFA. On its face, it looks true. Get rid of the middleman and shareholder profits, and how can we lose? But that requires a lot of assumptions. Even the author of the study upon whom Sanders relied in his 2016 campaign questions Sanders’ conclusions.
4
The question of whether middle class taxes will increase under universal healthcare is deceptive. Warren wasn't evasive at all. I don't think of her as cagey. In fact, what I like about her is that she, without hesitation, points to the truth and doesn't shy from earnestness. She consistently said that if you look at the costs people are paying now and compare that to the cost of increased taxes, the middle class will do better. Personally, I like Pete Buttigieg's slower approach, but I didn't see anything slick in Warren's argument either.
11
What am I missing about Warren? I was excited about her the first time I heard her speak, but she sounds like a professor. Since then, all I’ve heard is the same dribble - wanted to be a teacher since 2nd grade, corruption, the poor people. She just seems so limited in her talking points and expertise.
90
@Cjohn
Wait, so it is a problem that she started out telling the truth and is still saying the same thing? She did want to be a teacher. Corruption is a problem in politics. Poverty and how people end up being poor is a problem. Her expertise is in how the economics of this society works on all levels of the ladder. She is on the Armed Services Committee. She is from Oklahoma.
Expert in international relations? Probably not, but almost no one who gets elected president is. As long as they use the resources of the state department, that is OK.
What other expertise are you looking for?
285
@Cjohn Limited in her expertise? She clearly has the greatest breadth and depth of policy expertise in the field.
239
@Cjohn So the challenge you have with her is she's thoughtful, educated, and wants to make the country a better place for everyone? You want someone more entertaining? We have that right now. And look at the disastrous and dangerous mess we're in on a daily basis.
293
Slick? Cunning? Canny? Maybe, but her greatest asset is that she is smarter than anyone else on the debate stage by miles, and she has proven her commitment to economic equity through years of hard and effective work on economic and consumer issues. Why should I believe that any of the rest care, I mean really personally care, about the costs of health care and education. Warren is personally *offended* by these issues and has had her teeth in them for over a decade. Some voters may be suckers for slick and cunning, but what we deserve is someone with brains and know-how.
1213
@tony zito You are right that Warren's intelligence and insight are profound. But you neglect Mayor Pete, who also has both an astounding mind and grasp of the issues.
99
Mayor Pete, is a Bush Era Republican at Best. I’m from Indiana.
27
@tony zito. Bravo for calling Bruni out for describing Senator Warren as Slick, Cunning, and Canny. [Note: In addition to those descriptors, in his closing paragraph he couldn’t decide if she was “deceptive” or “disciplined.”] It was painful to read what felt to me like a hit job by a columnist I have heretofore respected. Your excellent description of Senator Warren helped take the sting out of Bruni’s choice of words, and I am grateful to you for that. But for the life of me I cannot understand what motivated him to write them.
93
Stop wingeing about a "middle class tax increase". We just filed our middle class Australian Tax returns. The annual cost tacked on for the national heath insurance was about what most US employer sponsored health cover deducts from 1-2 month's of your paycheck combined with what your employer picks up for the other half. Add that to the roughly US $300/mo for our family's Private Cover. Both are incredibly efficient and don't waste my time. I have NEVER spent hours on the phone on hold then begging either of them to cover anything. None of this 2 month's salary before they'll pay a dime. A trip to the ER costs zip. Inpatient and outpatient prices are posted. We know in advance what everything costs. We're ALL in the network. I never worry if I'm safe eating in a restaurant where the pay is so low that the cook can't afford to see a doctor. If you like your health cover now, you're going to love it when your fellow citizens like theirs too.
25
Very good, Mr Bruni. But Warren will stumble when she is forced to publicly and transparently face the astronomical costs of all of her proposals
6
Repubs fear nothing because they stand for nothing, except acquiring more wealth and power and disenfranchising working families. So, if they lose an election, they will find a way to cheat the system of the benefits, and then work day and night to rig the next election.
Dems fear losing. Think of the Atlanta Falcons playing it safe in the second half. The repubs chop block; the Dems run the ball between the guard and the tackle every play.
Are we to believe that, after observing the morally cancerous president taking down this country brick by brick through petulant, childish attacks, everyone who voted for him in 2016 will opt to vote the same way because Elizabeth Warren is the Dem nominee? Wouldn't that merely validate the notion that this country is toast? So, is it?
8
Warren's pandering opportunism is positively Trumpian. Or Clintonian, if you prefer (Bill, not Hillary, in case you missed the 90s). I'd call her act entertaining, but the stakes are too high for it to entertain this voter.
Harris has been an empty suit from day one - it's just more evident now.
Sanders can't get over the hump, no matter how much noise he makes.
Biden will continue to appeal to Democrats in flyover country. He and Warren, barring disqualifying events, will still be battling at the convention, and that will be entertaining. Dreams of a Biden-Warren ticket, anyone?
2
I think that Warren should go back to what she often claims was her first love, i.e., teaching grade two children. Please, Elizabeth, do the world a favor and return to your first love.
6
I come to praise Castro, not to bury him.
Castro spoke plainly (crudely) what everyone’s dancing around: Biden is not mentally sharp to be President.
That Biden’s logic is flawed is not the issue. It’s that he’s too old to learn new things. He says “I get it”. He doesn’t. He’s stuck in his worldview of the 70s. He says he gets that he’s not to touch women without their consent. Then he jokes about it - proving he doesn’t get it. He says he gets the challenges of racism. Then he blames African American families for their failures and in not using “record players”.
There is racism and sexism in his outdated worldview and people aren’t willing to call him out on it.
Castro did what the other candidates are talking about privately. Booker voiced concerns about Biden. Listen to what he said and it’s clear that all the other candidates are worried that Biden doesn’t have it.
How is what Castro did different from what Marty did in Boston calling out the Catholic Church (movie Spotlight).
Someone’s got to call out a sacred cow. It’s crude and disgusting (as appalling ad I’m sure it was to the Catholics when their beloved church was called into disrepute).
But, Castro was right. As the recording proves. In closing ranks behind the front runner all media pointer fingers at Castro for being incorrect.
He wasn’t. They were negligent.
7
Trump will crucify her on her lie about her native American heritage. She has no chance of turning a single Trump voter over to the democrats. IMHO and YMMV. Even if she hits back about Trump University, Trump Bankruptcy and draft dodging, his base do not care.
Rgrds-Ross
6
@Ross Salinger
And if Warren, who did prove her distant indian ancestry, wants to take on Trump over family, she can ding him on lying that his NY-born father emigrated from Germany.
4
Amazingly easy to spend other people’s money. You have such a vulnerable President but the Democrats, and especially Warren, seem to be taking the Oprah strategy - you get a new car and you get your loans paid off and you get free this and that. But nothing in this world is free. Labor is mobile. See the brain drain from high tax states to low tax states......
Come up with reasonable, not pie in the sky ideas, and maybe you can win.
4
The brain drain is the other way around. This is why the high tax states are financing the low tax states.
7
Your memory is short. Warren can't win in the general. Trump will call her Pocahontas for months. She created the I-am-Native-American scandal all by herself. She benefited many times from pretending to be a minority. She cannot win in the general election. She cannot win in the general election. She cannot win in the general election.
10
@Edith It is not true that she benefited from "pretending to be a minority." The Boston Globe did an exhaustive report: "In the most exhaustive review undertaken of Elizabeth Warren’s professional history, the Globe found clear evidence, in documents and interviews, that her claim to Native American ethnicity was never considered by the Harvard Law faculty, which voted resoundingly to hire her, or by those who hired her to four prior positions at other law schools. At every step of her remarkable rise in the legal profession, the people responsible for hiring her saw her as a white woman.
The Globe examined hundreds of documents, many of them never before available, and reached out to all 52 of the law professors who are still living and were eligible to be in that Pound Hall room at Harvard Law School. Some are Warren’s allies. Others are not. Thirty-one agreed to talk to the Globe — including the law professor who was, at the time, in charge of recruiting minority faculty. Most said they were unaware of her claims to Native American heritage and all but one of the 31 said those claims were not discussed as part of her hire. One professor told the Globe he is unsure whether her heritage came up, but is certain that, if it did, it had no bearing on his vote on Warren’s appointment." https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2018/09/01/did-claiming-native-american-heritage-actually-help-elizabeth-warren-get-ahead-but-complicated/wUZZcrKKEOUv5Spnb7IO0K/story.html
2
@Edith
Yawn. Trump will have a nickname for any candidate. Her Native American issue? Big deal.
3
She is right full Medicare no private will cost less eventually. However people want a choice even if private plans stink.
Why? Because competition is good and the government is not trusted by many for good reason. One presidents may whack it. Two with no competition there may be no quality. Three each will compete to make other better.
Warren change your tune I like you
2
Just as Warren did with the adoption of Jay Inslee's climate change plans (and btw made this Inslee fan like her just that much more) my prediction is come the convention, if she is in the running for the nomination, she'll still hold the Medicare for all vision, and at the same time very graceful adopt as the pathway to that vision, Pete Buttigieg's "Medicare for all who want it" plan. And in that she'll be able to have it both ways. As well, she might bring Pete on board as her VP or a presumptive member of her cabinet -- maybe Health and Human Services and in charge of all this?
As Frank writes, she canny and she knows how to hold her vision but adjust her approach as necessary and wise.
6
After Slick Willie the last thing we need is Slick Lizzie.
5
Elizabeth Warren is just Hillary Version 2.0 in so many ways. Like Hillary, she advanced on her husband’s coattails. Her JD is from Rutgers – Newark, ranked 61st nationwide by US News. With that CV, how did she ever get herself onto the Harvard Law School faculty? She didn’t. Her husband (JD Yale) got there first.
Her repeated bungling of her supposed Native American heritage shows poor judgement at the level of Hillary’s “deplorables” comment. That move surely lost votes while gaining none. Worse, Warren allowed Trump to get under her skin. Image what will happen should she be his only opponent.
Her far-left policies are guaranteed to turn off the voters who matter most – centrist swing voters. She’ll push them into Trump’s hands.
With the economy in the best shape in 50 years, she’s starting in the hole and thus has less of a chance than Hillary.
7
I agree Warren will likely get the Dem nod. Question is, who will she tap as her running mate? Castro?
69
@Michael
Corey Booker. I firmly believe we need a person of color, preferably one with Congressional experience, on the ticket. I have nothing against Castro, and would welcome a Latinx VP. Booker however seems to me the superior, more appealing, more experienced, and perhaps smarter candidate. If the nation would go for it (and this is doubtful), I'd love to see Stacey Abrams as VP to Warren. If Biden gets the nomination, I hope he considers Abrams or Warren.
80
@Michael Kamala Harris. For all the reasons David states, and because she is a woman. And she is also super smart and experienced.
15
@Michael I thought Warren/Buttigieg was the winning ticket until last night. Now I'm Warren/Yang.
I totally agree with Warren; people don't like their private health insurance companies, they like what health insurance does. Having had way too much experience dealing with both the private and public health care system I can say without a doubt that the private companies are much worse on both paperwork and claims approval. This administrative run-around is expensive, too. It takes a lot of staff in both the doctors offices and the insurance companies to play this profit gambling game. It needs to go.
Yang won me over with his comment about small and medium business getting easier if there is medicare for all. I've started companies and I whole-heartedly agree. If Warren puts her VP Yang in charge of the strategic change from private to public health insurance I could see it working. Remember when Clinton put Gore in charge of reinventing the government? That worked. Warren will want something similar, and Yang is the guy. Of all of them, he seems to understand the issues that will pop up.
As for Mayor Pete, I had a very bad reaction to his statement on health insurance. His "Let the people decide" approach is an invitation for the private health insurance industry to go to war. If you think Trump's gaslighting is bad you haven't seen what professionals can do. Oh, and we'll get to pay for their services too.
50
If slick is ignoring the question of whether she'll raise taxes on the middle class to pay for a 32 trillion dollar health plan, or whether she lied to get ahead in life by lying about her heritage, then ok she is slick
3
Warren seems much more clear-headed than Biden.
Biden will get flummoxed when debating Trump. This is because his candidacy is based on "it's my time," rather than solid committed-to-memory planning.
Warren views Trump as I might view a gnat. She knows she is leagues ahead of him about actual policy, where he only knows how to excite his base with epithets denigrating anything that gets is his way. He will throw out "pocahontas" until his throat turns red, but she is ready for it and will shut him down.
I think if people tune in for a Warren/Trump debate they might be very pleasantly surprised about Warren.
14
Slick, canny, cunning, evasive, deceptive. I've been reading Frank Bruni for years and I never thought I'd see this kind of writing from him. It sounds more like Maureen Dowd. It could also be used to describe many other candidates.
I say this even though I hope Warren will not be the nominee and even though the candidate I like best is Amy Klobuchar, for the reasons that Bruni gave.
7
@west-of-the-river
If you like Amy, please support her candidacy so that she stays in the race long enough for name recognition ! I thought she was stellar last night and unhappily surprised to see almost no discussion of her participation. Sad.
4
You could call deceptive Warren's refusal to let Stephanopoulos's network-anchor obligatory-obsessive attempt to imply that currently the middle class gets healthcare insurance for free--or that the middle class considers taxes the only expense that implicates their financial bottom lines.
Or instead you could question why high-profile TV network anchors like Stephenopoulos, Jake Tapper & whoever it was at the second debate (Chuck Todd?) who pursued this in that way make such an effort to suggest to the public that that their taxes will go up and their current healthcare costs, including premiums, will continue on.
In other words, you call what Stephanopoulos did deceptive, and what Warren did corrective to his attempt at deception.
Hey, I do!
11
She's great. But she will never be president. Therefore, she is a distraction. As are 8 of the other people on stage last night.
I sometimes wonder if Russia is paying them to pretend to run for president just to distract us.Hmmm...
1
well, shouldn't we be more concerned about the next cambridge analytics hacking the elections?
6
I cringe every time Warren says multinational corporations.
4
pretty much anyone with a pulse could beat trump. any of the democrats could. i choose warren.
4
Dreamable: "I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the Earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish."
President John F. Kennedy, May 25, 1961.
Doable: "Commander Neil Armstrong and lunar module pilot Buzz Aldrin formed the American crew that landed the Apollo Lunar Module Eagle on July 20, 1969, at 20:17 UTC. Armstrong became the first person to step onto the lunar surface six hours and 39 minutes later on July 21 at 02:56 UTC; Aldrin joined him 19 minutes later." - Wikipedia
Dreamable: "And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." ...
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
I have a dream today!
Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Aug. 25, 1963
Dreamable: Medicare for All.
Doable: Post-January 20, 2021.
5
Take a deep breath everyone.
Until voters actually begin voting in state primaries.. and results are seen.. none of these debate performances really matter.
Oh.. they make great fodder for filling the news cycles for a few days.. and give Trump a pile of pinatas to whack at.. but that is about it.
Remember... where presidential races are concerned.. it is not uncommon for a low polling underdog (pre-primaries) to build momentum early in the primary season and end up winning the nomination. This happens regularly inside both parties.. so I encourage everyone to relax and take this all in stride for now.
7
Trump will eat Biden for lunch, it's pretty clear that Biden is starting to roll downhill mentally and that being witty now takes effort for him. I hate to say that, for I love Biden, but Trump and the GOP will turn him inside-out before he can crack a smile.
Warren, on the other hand will demolish Trump with grace, wit and skill, and leave him cut to ribbons, sliced and diced to the bone and in a neat pile like so much meat on a deli scale.
Like someone else mentioned, I would pay good money to see Warren debate Trump, I know I'm not the only one.
1202
@Birbal
These debates are show business, nothing. In the Midwest, where presidential elections are decided, Joe Biden is very popular. When he wins we have a Dem Pres, Dem Cabinet, Dem Justices, is that not enough. Warren loses the Midwest.
23
@bhs
That is not enough. The same corporate policies, middle way in the Climate Change fight, prefer to do nothing about healthcare are not enough. So simple.
If you go to center, republicans will pull you to the right. IF you go full left, they can pull you only to the center.
78
@Birbal
Trump won't debate the nominee, period. Just like he won't release his tax returns. Take it to the bank.
73
Warren clearly distinguishes herself as a respectable and authentic candidate to be nominated by Democrats for the presidency. Sanders probably would serve the nation best by persisting with his unique voice for justice and inclusivity in the Senate. The “socialism” of Warren will surely have to be tempered if she becomes president. And she is politically capable and mature enough to adjust appropriately for the sake of the nation. (In that regard, having been a public school teacher probably serves her, if not us, well). As for Biden: he’s just not an exciting candidate who ... and, given his history, not because of age ... doesn’t present well as an inspiring leader. Bidden’s appeal presently is on the better parts of his past, including his relationship with President Obama; but the nation is in a new and challenging time ... maybe for the good, paradoxically, deriving from the disastrous effects and demeaning presence of Trump. As for the worth of these so-called “debates:” How valuable they really are for discerning an individual’s ability to be in act the president, is not evident to me, because running for office is far different than serving it.
5
Warren is the most qualified for these times, there can be no doubt. Her experience, legal erudition, consummate preparation, passion for the average person, and courage to stand up to corporations are all admirable and needed.
Yes, I think she can beat Trump. However, while I want her brand of change I also worry that a good percentage of the populace still in the throes of the Trump ethos and norms will ignite some sort of civil war during a Warren presidency.
In the alternative to destructive domestic strife and bloodshed, I feel an economic Depression would be preferable. In that way, an FDR-type change agent like Warren will have a mandate to rebuild the country to face inequality, deindustrialization, climate change, and a grossly ineffective healthcare system.
I admire the arc of Elizabeth Warren's life. A tough upbringing in Oklahoma, erstwhile Republican, law school professor, Senator. I have no trouble with any woman being my president, but I particularly like Elizabeth Warren because of her character.
She was a tough but fair law school professor - the best kind. And Katie Porter's work, Warren's law student and a great Congresswoman from California, speaks volumes.
14
Warren is our best candidate, hands down.
Best in terms of electability.
Best in terms of accomplishing something worthwhile once elected.
9
I don't watch the debates. I'm going to vote for Elizabeth Warren for all of the reasons articulated in these comments very well.
Electing Elizabeth Warren or any other Democratic candidate will not lead to any changes to our health care system at all. First, we would have to elect a Dem majority to the Senate. Then the House, the Senate and the White House will start the process of debating and drafting exactly what kind of changes will be made - call it what you want, a public option, Medicare for All, an improved ACA - we'll see what they come up with if and when we get that far. It's pretty useless for the candidates to debate the issue. They should be working to sell to the American public the concept of some kind of comprehensive health care plan that provides the medical care needed to each and every American.
7
Excellent. Well said. And even if the Senate flips there will not be a working majority to pass any kind of Medicare for All. Sounds nice. Let’s now focus on more realistic legislation like infrastructure. Even comprehensive immigration reform is more realistic than Medicare for All at this time.
2
I'm 66 years old and have always voted for the candidate who best looks to serve the needs of the entire country. Look around: health care failing; environment being destroyed; wealth inequality increasing. Our politics have not caught up to these times. There are more instances of almost Revelation-type things happening to this country, to this world, but I think the point is obvious. The moderate candidate propose things that are, at best, half measures. The world's condition requires measures that are way more expansive than anything we've heard before. Senator Warren has taken up that mantle, which is what you see in her debate performances and policy proposals. Warren is not too liberal; moderates need to adjust their policies to current conditions.
1172
@Maron A. Fenico
Wow! Spoken with level-headed wisdom and insight.
76
The more expansive measures stand no chance of passing even if the Senate flips. What is needed for 2021-2023 is fixing, repairing, assessing and undoing four years of damage Trump has done to the country including our international relations
29
@Maron A. Fenico
Warren is however, largely unproven in terms of actual abilities to fill an administrative role like the Presidency.
For that matter... ALL of the candidates are unproven in this regard.
Warren provides great populist messaging.. and build populist enthusiasm... but that may not actually translate to winning a presidential election... even against the crazy person currently sitting in the White House.
And NO.. I am not pro Biden and pining for Biden to win.. so don't go there.
9
Elizabeth Warren has the fortitude and ability to give it right back to Trump, while laying out her case to be president. Biden and Sanders do not possess these skill sets.
12
Warren has plans for every contingency and is obviously well prepared. But a president does not need to have detailed plans. A president appoints experts who do the detailed planning. The president rallies the country to his/her narrative. Sanders does that. Sanders brings passion to his narrative, and makes sure people understand where they fit into the big story. In contrast to Sanders, Warren is lacks charisma, and exudes professorial expertise, not political leadership.
Elizabeth Warren is a very strong candidate and a good politician. She would be a strong candidate for President or Vice-president.
But anyone who is nominated will have to face the republican onslaught. The republicans and Fox, Rush, Coulter, and company will have the smears and propaganda running 24/7. One of the few things that The Donald is good at is using his jabs and taunts to intimidate and unnerve the opposition candidate.
I feel that in the 2016 election many democratic voters had doubts about Ms. Clinton because of the taunts and smears from the republican propaganda barrage. Plus she had been under almost continuous investigation for about 20 years.
Many democrats particularly women were influenced by the propaganda war and some decided to stay home.
So whoever the democrats nominate needs to be ready for the propaganda war; the democratic voters need to be prepared to not get intimidate and thrown off track and talked into not voting.
7
Senator Warren is smart, articulate and focused on issues that matter to most Americans. She is the best choice for President and I hope that the Democratic Party realizes this!
6
“Slipperiness gets you the prize.“ Really?
If being slicker than a trout is what it takes, Democrats ought to rethink their priorities.
Micro processing micro aggressions will lead to dysfunction in society and defeat in elections. Both bad options in these precarious times.
The candidates once again failed to unite against Trump. We need Pail Reveres , not angels dancing on pins.
1
Something about Warren's roots are not brought up enough. She inherited no wealth. She came from a working class family and she remembers what that means. Further, she is proud of those roots.
In these debates someone needs to force her to explain just how she plans on paying for it and saying she is going to be Robin Hood, take from the rich and give to the poor, is not good enough. She might as well get the practice now. If the Democrats on stage don't force her to address this, the Republicans in the general election surely will.
She is clearly the front runner. Biden is not going to make it. Sanders is looked at as a socialist and that is still a bad label to be tagged with in this country. She also has an age advantage over Sanders.
We need to find a place for Buttigieg in Washington. He is exceptionally bright as is his future.
9
Let’s be honest (if not too nice): Mayor Pete has a brilliant future ahead of him no matter how this election turns out. So, too, does Booker, and I’ll bet Yang, and to a lesser extent, Castro and Beto.
At the other end of the spectrum, Biden, Bernie and possibly some of the others have no apparent future - for them, this is the future and they will either win nomination or their game will be over.
Warren is someplace in the middle: she’s a very strong contender now but if she doesn’t get the nomination she will probably live to fight another day.
Harris looks to me like rather a long shot, but she’s showed she’s tough, committed, and most importantly, she has vaulted in national recognition which may be her strongest showing this outing and she will be poised for the future if she should be named AG in the next administration.
All told, I would be happy and proud with any one of the 10 Democrats debating last night compared to a continuation of the Trump-Pence nightmare. I favor some over others, of course, but basically what we saw was an embarrassment of riches on the Democratic side.
2
She did answer the question on the cost of Medicare for all on middle income groups. She repeatedly stated that the overall health cost goes down on middle class. If people want to define tax and cost on the families as different, then they are wrong. They both cut from the same cloth.
6
Elizabeth Warren is not "slick." She has self-discipline, clarity, and stays on message.
More important, Elizabeth Warren is not mean. She doesn't want to be mean and she doesn't need to be. She will wipe the floor with Donald Trump by just being herself.
13
As a life long Republican who despises Trump I find Warren has some of his odious qualities. She knows no wrong. No one is wiser and corporate America is responsible for almost all of our ills. Her policies while much better formulated lack fiscal credibility. I fear her election would send the stock market and economy spiraling and result in a boomerang four years later of something radical again. For the first time in my life I seriously fear for America if Trump or Warren carries the mantle the next four years
3
@Jon I hear a lot of fear from life-long Republicans. I've always heard a lot of fear from life-long Republicans. What I haven't seen is any of that fear materializing into real-world problems.
Remember when Obama struck fear into life-long Republicans? How they were convinced that he would crash the economy? Or wipe out health care? Or get us into a war, or take us out of a war?
Did any of that happen? No.
2
We are facing a lot of of major problems.
Education system in disarray, institutionalized racism, gerrymandering political as well as social, gun issues, money in politics, infrastructure, research and development, interminable wars, marching toward having no allies, income inequality, and others just as important and all of this neatly wrapped in the bow of climate change.
Using an analogy to characterize her vision, Elizabeth Warren gives me the impression that she is the only one who, not only sees all of the trees, but also has a sense of the layout of the forest and the ability to bring it back to be a viable ecosystem.
No one, including EW, would be able to fix everything in 4 years or even 8. Our only salvation would be if her followers would continue on the same path.
The next 20 years are crucial and too many deadly mistakes can be made.
Without trying to sound dramatic, the future of mankind is at stake. Basic Research & Development and a sure and calm hand at the helm will see us through!
7
Medicare for all will never happen. Period. Aside from the low level popularity of the proposal and the impossibilty of getting it through the senate, even with a Democratic majority, the finances do not pencil out without signifcant tax increases, which Warren never talks about (It is a problem even with elmination of deductables and co-pays). If the states of Vermont and Massachusetts can't pass it, what makes them think they can get it through Congress?
The American people have already been traumatized by the adjustment to Obamacare, I doubt they are ready for another tramatic makeover. The end result of "Single Payer": A republican senate (assuming that Warren had any coatails) and
But this goes to the heart of the problem with the Democratic activist. Rather then listening (big problem with activist) to what most people want and coming up with a system that gets what I think they want -and what most Americans want (Universal coverage at an affordable price), they assume they know better. Very Tea Party...
They should be talking about the Dutch and German systems which offer universal health care with private plans that equals or exceeds that of the single payers systems of Britain and Canada. These systems are much more compatable with the system we have now and with the philosophy of most Americans. It is also more likely to produce less backlash in congressional elections 2 years later.
2
Unfortunately, both the public and the politicians conflate the cost and price of our medical system. Cost is the aggregate of income that hospitals, doctors, insurance companies, drug companies require to operate. Price is how we pay for it. We have a crazy patch quilt system drawing funds from patients, employers and government. And wildly different prices for the same services. My $6 prescription and $200 medical procedure under Medicare may be free for one under Medicaid and may cost 10x as much for one with employer insurance and much more for one without any insurance. The price of insurance is all over the map: Medicare A/B/D, employer plans, and ACA all have vastly different prices.
The revenues from all these pricing schemes, including employer and government underwriting, m-u-s-t equal the aggregate cost of the system.
The candidates are talking primarily about shifting how we will pay for medical services. This doesn’t reduce the system cost. The most seductive promise is that the ultra-rich will pay for everyone’s medical services through wealth or stock transaction taxes. But what is not being addressed in any meaningful way is how to reduce the aggregate cost of our medical system. Candidates need to touch the third rail with plans to reduce medical and administrative salaries, force other countries to share drug development costs, reduce the elaborateness of offices and hospitals, and streamline paperwork. Cut costs and prices will be less of a crisis.
2
All the costs you call out are certainly real... but so is the system that adds the cost of all indigent/uninsured/dead beat and plain old dead to everyone else’s cost (actually, price). But ALL the discussion about healthcare in America is actually about money, insurance, who pays and how much, and barely ever seems to touch on actual healthcare, goals,methods, or outcomes. PS, when America decides to embark on an international military adventure, nobody ever seems to worry about how we will pay for it, if it can be done cheaper, if we can withhold it, or if we can soak someone else for the cost - we just plunge ahead. It’s past time for someone in addition to Bernie to say it is not true we cannot afford universal healthcare; what Americans cannot afford is to continue to do without it.
1
@Ralph You have nailed the distinction between the Medicare-for-all camp and the Medicare-for-many camp.
Sanders, Warren, and the other Medicare-for-all folks want to get rid of the crazy patchwork of prices and negotiations to save costs. Doing so will eliminate the private health industry that exists to manage those inefficiencies.
Biden and the others think that by providing an alternative to the private insurers the pressure to reform health care will go away. It will not, for all the reasons you cite.
Every other developed country has a system in place to reduce the price of delivering health care results. We are the only country in the world that allows private corporations to set prices to maximize profits.
In many markets this works, because prices are visible and buyers can make informed choices. Health care is not one of those markets. It resembles other emergency services, which is why it is best serviced by a socialized, government run system like the police department, the fire department, and on a national level, the military.
Frank, I adore Elizabeth Warren - but Mayor Pete has it right when it comes to the Medicare issue.
And Biden was correct last night when he asserted that, if unburdened of the cost of paying for their employees health care, many companies will refuse to pass along those savings to their employees in the way of a pay increase.
Getting from our current system to "Medicare for all" is going to be a tortured process.
It's certainly do-able, but not over four years, and not over the next four years.
The surest route to "Medicare for all" will involve implementation of Mayor Pete's "Medicare for all who want it" in 2021. 70% of Americans would likely support that type of plan.
If Democrats attempt to force the issue in the next Congress, with only 13% of Americans currently on board with the concept of a complete Federal takeover funded by higher taxes, then President Warren loses the House of Representatives (and Senate, assuming we even take it back) in 2022 - and all control of her future legislative agenda.
Elizabeth has the best ideas in this campaign, and the passion, integrity, and intellect required to restore the promise of America. It would be a shame to see her sacrifice all of those other ideas in a Pyrrhic legislative victory that the GOP would surely seek to undermine the moment that they retook the House and Senate.
The next Democratic President needs to be enough of a political realist that they prevent this from happening.
4
Every response to every question on that stage was calculated. The whole thing is drama.
I don't know if it is "slick" to answer questions in your own terms.
3
Elizabeth Warren, If you can't tell me how much it is going to cost I can't vote for you, period.
Deceptive? Yes, and that means I can't trust you. At least have the guts to stand behind your plan and provide details. If it is so great what are you afraid of? Maybe it isn't going to save the money you say it will?
3
@ElmoP
I doubt very much that the cost of going from private healthcare to universal health care, here in Canada, was known beforehand. But we did it anyway and now we all have it. It's part of our social contract with each other.
If you bash every candidate, Trump wins.
12
I am still waiting to see a candidate worth voting for... Promises to raise my taxes, take my guns away, and redistribute my hard earned dollars are not winning my vote.
I'm intriged. What do we like about our lives and what would we want to change? As for your guns, do you lock them up? What do you pay for your health insurance? Do you drive everywhere by car or do you have a short commute to your job on a clean, comfortable,
high speed train? Americans need to talk more about their specific experiences so that policy makers can design the best policies that will help improve their lives.
4
@BBB What I would like to see changes is less government intrusion into my life. Yes, my guns are kept under lock and ammunition stored locked separately. I do drive everywhere and have a very short commute. My specific experience for policy makers is to be left alone free of government infringements. To be taxed less as I receive NO government monies, to be free to pursue my own financial destiny. I grow tired of subsidizing individuals not working and colluding corporate entities. This would improve my life.
@Mystery Lits Do you drive on roads? Do you expect the fire department to come if you call 911? Do you breath clean air, and drink clean water? Do you listen to weather reports? Do you use the GPS feature on your phone? Do you enjoy the fact that your phone is interoperable with other phone networks? Do you enjoy the fact that the cashier at the store can read, write, and make change? Do you appreciate the fact that there are no Mad Max like bands of murderous thugs roaming the countryside?
I could go on, but you know what I am saying. Your beef is with the social safety nets. I get that, but think of what your life would be like without all these government services. I hear libertarians dream of a government-free world, but never people dreaming of life in a failed state like Somaila.
I'm proud to pay my taxes. Life is good here.
3
I'll ask just ONE QUESTION as Biden asked and tens of millions of hard working Americans CONTINUE TO ASK:
"How will Warren pay for all she is promising?"
2
@EdwardKJellytoes She can dodge the question for only so long... but the truth of the matter is that it will be taken from middle class earnings in the form of higher taxes.
1
Things perhaps will change, but as of now, it looks like it's a race between Warren and Biden. As a Democrat (like about 37% of Americans), I like Warren, and can imagine that she could be a good president. I have friends though, who are Independents (42% of Americans), and some who are Republicans (24% of Americans). The Democratic candidate will need voters from all three groups, because all Democrats, unfortunately, won't vote. My Independent and Republican friends, mostly see Warren as too liberal, but some like Biden, and believe he would be a good alternative to Trump. I believe Biden as a candidate, would receive votes from all three groups, whereas Warren, would mostly just receive votes from Democrats. I cannot imagine another day, yet another four years with Trump in the White House. As likable as Warren is, I see her as too risky. I'm not willing to gamble this time, so as of now, Biden has my support.
4
@CM
How can anyone consider themselves an "independent" after three years of Trump chaos and Republican complicity?
6
Is it possible that the 2020 election will prove to be a moment when voters want safe, steady and a "comfy" personality after an erratic, loose cannon that we now have?
If so, Biden might well be the one! Back up with a younger VP. Several good choices there!
Reforming the ACA and slowly letting the voters decide if they want to go fully for Medicare would be a change but gradual one.
Think back to the Carter win after Nixon.
3
@JB. Carter was a disaster. We all remember the Iran hostages and gas lines.
2
@Jackson
LOL.
The gas lines came about in 1973 (Nixon's 2nd term) and were part and parcel of the rampant inflationary recession that began under Nixon in late 1969/early 1970, lasting till 1985.
Carter got slammed with the mideast Iran hostage crisis that by happenstance landed on him instead of his predecessor Gerald Ford.
1
Both Warren and Sanders could easily answer the "gotcha" questions about Medicare for All. Q: "How're gonna pay for it?" A: "The same way we have paid for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and continuing those ill-begotten and endless wars that won't do a thing to make Americans safer at home." Q: "Aren't you going to take away people's private insurance?" A: "You mean that private insurance their employers pick for them and change without their consent and it disappears when they lose their jobs?"
24
@abigail49 ...and which tens of millions of people have indicated in polls that they're happy with. A perfect tone-deaf illustration of why neither of those Democrats will ever be elected president.
4
@Carl Yaffe Tone deaf, you think? I well remember being in my 50s in the naughties (00's) with my house paid off and no debts of any sort but feeling that I had to cling desperately to my job just to keep my medical coverage. And I was (and am) a person with no health problems! I was ready to try something more independent and more interesting work-wise but I simply felt that I could not because I needed to keep that health care tether with the corporate job I had outgrown.
5
By their documented track records, both Senator Elizabeth Warren and Mayor Pete Buttigieg seem committed to the principles that "We the People" means all of us and Public Service is defined by pursuit of the six objectives of governance specified in the Preamble to the Constitution.
They exhibit the character and passion for stewardship, the incisive intellect to defeat deceptions and chart the course corrections we so desperately need.
Together, they could offer 16 years of guidance for the generations to follow and return to "securing the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."
(That means our kids... whom we are currently failing.)
9
@Kirk Bready. Lizzie has never had a piece of legislation passed, so exactly what has she done for the people?
1
@Jackson
Warren has sponsored and co-sponsored roughly 10 to 20 bills per year since her election in 2012.
3
Um, she created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for one.
2
We want one person to have the best qualifications and well crafted policies as a candidate but one of the best qualities that a president is expected to bring to the office is not only to be the best and the brightest of the contestants, but to hire the best and the brightest across a range of skills. Warren stood out and she will bring that philosophy back to the White House.
10
Elizabeth Warren has always known how to be strategic. Exhibit A: she successfully spearheaded and established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Who could possibly be against an agency that protects consumers? Well, as it turns out, Trump and the Republicans.
Like anybody who knows what they want and goes after it, she has people who dislike her. She was one of the first to go all out against Trump - and she got under his skin. Who knows what would have happened if Hillary had chosen her for VP. Warren knows how to fight for the Democrats' agenda.
Anyone who thinks she couldn't beat Trump doesn't understand the way the dynamics can change. Just look at how Frank Bruni writes about her now, versus how he wrote about her when she was seemingly failing to gain any traction. Nothing succeeds like success. She can probably explain Trump's financial shenanigans better than any other candidate - her expertise is in bankruptcy, after all.
Elizabeth Warren's entire career has been devoted to understanding middle class and working class economic struggles. She understands them in a way that only somebody who grew up in a financially struggling family can.
We don't need a Democratic president who's better at selling themselves than their agenda.
20
Elizabeth Warren has always known how to be strategic. Exhibit A: she successfully spearheaded and established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Who could possibly be against an agency that protects consumers? Well, as it turns out, Trump and the Republicans.
Like anybody who knows what they want and goes after it, she has people who dislike her. She was one of the first to go all out against Trump - and she got under his skin. Who knows what would have happened if Hillary had chosen her for VP. Warren knows how to fight for the Democrats' agenda.
Anyone who thinks she couldn't beat Trump doesn't understand the way the dynamics can change. Just look at how Frank Bruni writes about her now, versus how he wrote about her when she was seemingly failing to gain any traction. Nothing succeeds like success. She can probably explain Trump's financial shenanigans better than any other candidate - her expertise is in bankruptcy, after all.
Elizabeth Warren's entire career has been devoted to understanding middle class and working class economic struggles. She understands them in a way that only somebody who grew up in a financially struggling family can.
We don't need a Democratic president who's better at selling themselves than their agenda.
2
I believe Elizabeth Warren may be the most knowledgeable candidate and the most articulate. I would love to support her. My fear is that if she is the nominee the big money interests will make sure she is not elected. They have too much at stake for her to gain power.
2
No one talked about Congress. To pass a bill of such magnitude she will need a mandate or a blue wave which demonstrates that this above all is what the country is ready for now. I followed the crafting and final passage of the ACA. It is difficult, very difficult. The ACA passed by one vote, Biden as vice president, cast the deciding vote. There were so many compromises and after it was passed, the tea party gave voice to the objections of those who thought this very moderate bill was "socialist." All in all it took about ten years for ACA to gain wide-spread acceptance, and there are still parts of the country where that is not the case. Whether universal health would be better than what we have now, is up to the voters. I am not sure they are there yet, and with Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders for that matter, I think the Democrats go into the election weaker than if their candidate is more centrist. Remember the goal of this election is to make Trump a one-term president. Moving this far to the left makes that task harder. Despite all the polling showing the top tier of the Democratic candidates beating Trump; it is Biden who is crushing him in the states that will make a difference in the election.
2
Everytime a woman has been on the ticket (either for Pres or VP), the ticket has lost. I don't see this group as breaking that pattern.
It willwork if warren picks a moderate from the rust belt as her running mate.
2
One of the things I have always wondered is if the actors, screenwriters, singers, etc. that support many of the ideas that Warren, Sanders and others promote would be willing to have their payouts scaled to what the others in their professions make similar to the push to have CEO salaries scaled to what line workers make.
For example, the average actor makes somewhere between $20K and $80K per year but the top paid actors are making in the tens of millions each year. Just like line workers in manufacturing and retail there is no guarantee that the work will be there for those lower paid actors but just like CEOs the top paid actors will always get theirs.
Just as the top actors generally had to work their way up, so too have executives in business while the vast majority in those respective industries never get out from their base jobs.
Have yet to hear any of them advocate for cutting what they make in order to raise up the large majority of people who do what they do.
I'm glad Castro's sneering braggadocio has underscored that ageism is a prejudice like any other. At the beginning of the race, even these Opinion pages were alarming casual about batting around that particular prejudice in regard to Biden, while militantly calling out other prejudices that are seen as offending the rest of the population.
3
She should we be surprised that the second most popular candidate out there was hardly mentioned at all in this synopsis? They want us to believe that Elizabeth Warren is the second most popular. In time, their propaganda may make this a reality, allowing them to deny any manipulation. As long as Elizabeth is telling them "revival", despite telling us political "revolution", they will be spinning it her way, shamelessly. Bernie is "what you see is what you get" - and THIS is threatening. A committed and honest reformer is what the public wants and what the establishment fears.
1
Woops. "Should we be surprised...."
Yes, Elizabeth Warren is formidable. Yet I worry she isn't electable. With the fatigue of our country, comfy Biden is the one that would bring voters in to barricade and eject Trump. She presses many of the buttons our country needs, but Warren isn't warranted (sorry!) given the exhaustion, disgust and dire need to remove DT.
After each debate, and in between, I try to figure out what to do with Pete Buttigieg. He is thoughtful, brilliant and young. Make him the VP, the running mate to Joe. Biden would draw the Black voters (currently Pete's stumbling block). Buttigieg would assuage and attract the younger voters who would be disheartened not to have Warren.
Biden could do one term, with the respectful Pete gaining the opportunity and credibility that comes with high level experience. Those four years would allow America to experience Pete Buttigieg. The country could then look forward to having him as president.
6
Slick is a demeaning and inappropriate description of Warren. It's a Fox News style remark that's intention is to diminish. Let's just call her the most qualified, most well spoken and well prepared candidate. She says what has to be said. Let's just call her a breath of fresh air.
17
Warren is the smartest candidate of either party. She's a whip-quick thinker and crafty but has the unique ability to still come off as down to earth...because she is. She has no scandal and simply wants to advance the agenda of decent people. She's the kind of candidate as president I can tune out and not worry things are going astray. I think she will run circles around Trump in any debate or exchange of words. It really just comes down to whether the general public can get past electing a so-so attractive 70-year old women. Shallow but true. My hope is this country makes the smart decision.
9
I don't Warren is slick and evasive. I think she has been coached to do that. I was a Massachusetts resident when Mitt Romney was governor. He was moderate, reasonable and a good governor. As a Presidential candidate he went so far right it was if he had gone through brainwashing or water boarding. The reasons are obvious. Be yourself and you lose. Except for Trump, but Trump, as we know, is...well, we know.
3
My brother-in-law, a curmudgeon with heart, was a Democrat, a Republican, a Libertarian, and in the last election hated Hillary but hated Trump more texted last night that he's for Warren. We are truly living in strange times.
11
"Slick" doesn't count - we know that because Clinton lost.
Clinton was defeated by a crude crook, who had 1/10 the campaign funds that she had, no real organization behind him, and zero relevant experience.
Yes, Elizabeth Warren is the best Hillary impersonator of the lot, but that is a big negative. Trump will certainly beat her.
For anyone who isn't obsessed with the "woman" thing, Biden is the obvious choice.
2
Klochubar comes from the state of United Healthcare, one of the biggest rip-off health insurance companies in the U.S. There are others for sure. No wonder she supports the health insurance industry. She’s wrong that people would lose their insurance under Medicare for All. Everyone would have it. They lose their insurance now when they get reallysick and expensive - then their health insurance dumps them onto the public safety net - Medicare. Medicare for All is definitely doable and not just dreamable in Canada, Taiwan, Germany, France, Norway, Sweden, Finland, England, etc, etc, etc, etc.
Additionally a commenter complained that Medicare for All is confusing to people as the Dems have different versions of it. Well let me simplify it by recommending the opposite of the Dem Medicare for All by creating the Republican bumper sticker “Medicare for NOBODY”!
2
A deeply cynical article with a peral of wisdom: under-promising (aka telling the truth) doesn't win elections.
You know who could sell Medicare For All? Donald Trump. Lying is his forte, and he could make the sale without any plan to implement or pay for it. But I'm not sure anybody else can make that sale.
2
Donald Trump said he wanted to run against Joe Biden. Altho Trump lies constantly, this was one of his sincere "moments," they do leak out from time to time. You want to know why? He's afraid of Elizabeth Warren!
Elizabeth is smarter than Hillary and she is an appealing, pretty much entirely admirable woman. She doesn't have baggage like Hillary. She made good choices in her life, and she clearly has a better narrative and life story. She truly loves we ordinary people, and wants to rebuild the middle class dream for Americans, which is so good for the health individuals and for the nation. She is the real deal, she is what we need, and Trump won't be able to stop it. Yahoo!
7
This is going to come down to a Biden vs Warren primary election. Safe status quo moderate old white guy vs a liberal progressive feminist.
I love her but I’m affected by all the doomsayers saying “she’ll be a gift for Trump!” “She’ll scare off the moderates!” Yes Biden is the safe choice, but this isn’t the 1990s anymore. I fear he’s too safe, too predictable.
Did we forget 2016 so quickly? No one thought Trump would be the nominee let alone beat HRC. Hillary was moderate, safe with name recognition, tied to previous presidencies and pushed the status quo. How did that work out? She didn’t energize turnout and lost the electoral college.
And 2008? Remember when Obama couldn’t win the nomination? Too inexperienced, young, idealistic and black to get elected? He served 2 terms and is now a living legend.
Our last 2 presidents were anomalies because the electorate craves change. Those who energize get turnout and votes. You need both to win. Warren energizes and she smart enough to find a message that wins Midwest voters Trump narrowly gained in 2016, and lost in 2018.
Warren today might not be able to win in an election tomorrow. But Warren as nominee next year with ample media coverage and time to explain her vision and plans could certainly win. And I think history is on her side.
9
Funny how many comments here seem to think Trump will chew up this or that Democrat in the presidential campaign. Trump is nothing but a grand liar and an even more grandiose buffoon. Those who voted for him need to get their heads examined. And that goes for members of the Republican Party too. Perhaps Medicare For All will help get the tests done.
9
@Rajeev, what you say is true, but I think the problem is that those who are for Trump are for him unswervingly, no matter what. He could eat a live baby onstage at a rally and they'd still vote for him. He could burn down their houses before their very eyes and they'd still vote for him. He resonates with them on such a primal level, it supersedes all else. You ever notice how rarely fans of his even bother to discuss WHAT specifically they are drawn to re: his policies? It's all "Build the Wall", "Lock Her Up", "MAGA". It's HIM they want. And it blows my mind.
3
Waren comes across as unlikable. She has about the same amt of charisma as HRC and if you don't recognize that, it's a problem. She also comes across as disingenuous.
And as a scold, you can see her leading temperance marches but we know she likes to pop a bud or two.
But the biggest problem with Warren, one that the left would like to pretend doesn't exist, is her claim as a 30+ year old women to be native American. Americans don't like liars. And this was a bald faced attempt to help her very non noticeable academic career. There is a clear relationship between her claiming to be NA and her sudden meteoric rise from an academic dean at a 2nd tier Law school to a full professorship at Harvard. That simply doesn't happen in academia UNLESS the individual who makes that rise has such remarkable achievements that they have completely revamped an area of knowledge -- or they have something else going for them -- like being female and NA. We know Warren's publication record was weak when she began her ascendance (from UH to UT to Princeton to Harvard) and only became reputable after she got to Harvard and was able to use that credential, as well as coauthoring with other Harvards academic papers.
She can deny, but her biggest achievement at Harvard was being elected senator, not anything noteworthy academically (winning teaching awards means nothing in big time academia).
The left may pretend this is nothing. It ain't. Trump will destroy her on this issue.
4
@Ralphie
Trump has already destroyed her on this issue with his nicknaming. Warren should have stood up to him right then and there and publicly schooled him on who the Real Pocahontas was. She didn't, and it stuck. He will
take her down again, because he knows he can. As someone else said, if Warren is the Dem nominee, we will have won the battle but lost the war. (As an aside,
it's really too bad she wasn't the candidate in 2016, but the Clintons supposedly had that one aced).
Thank you Frank for the modest shout-out to Amy Klobuchar. She is the real threat to Biden if she gains in name recognition, which after this debate she seems to be doing. (Imagine the two of them side by side on stage, Amy would graciously and completely undo Biden's lead). I've been supporting Amy for a while now and will continue to do so. She is credible and warm and has a good sense of humor also, too.
3
@irene While not a dem, can't agree more on Klobuchar. She's the only sane one in the group. She's more of a centrist who may play some lip service to the AOC wing of the party, but she's more centrist and that's the only chance for the dems.
However, she's not particularly charismatic. And whether or not you like Trump or hate him, he's got charisma, knows how to own the stage. Tough challenge for any dem but Amy might be level headed enough to not be bulldozed and maybe score some points.
3
About health insurance, yes there will be income tax raise. But this raise will be lower than the saving of getting rid of private insurance.
A net gain for the middle class.
A net loss for health insurance corporation. Thats why their lobbyists are so freaking out.
9
Um, she wants to take away our family's current health care plan, which we love, and then tax us and other middle class folks for it.
Looks like we're stuck with the insane Donald Trump.
5
@Prof Emeritus NYC
You are darn lucky that you love your plan. I have "great" insurance through my employer. Except that my out of pocket expenses have skyrocketed to the absurd over the last 20 years, as have most peoples. Just how much is this costing you?
4
@Prof Emeritus NYC
Universal health care works for everybody. Just ask the rest of the civilized world.
1
I think Warren will get the nomination. I am even beginning to believe she might eke out a victory against this chaos president. And that would be a disaster. When you listen to a politician as slick as her, don’t listen to her programs. Listen to her rhetoric. The rhetoric is what matters because it discloses the politician’s underlying system of values. Well, Warren’s rhetoric is divisive (“corporations versus families”), demagogic (“it won’t cost you anything because I’ll take it from the rich”), and insincere (“I have brothers in the military” - so what?) The best question in the debate was asked by the excellent Spanish moderator (sorry I forgot his name): how is Sanders’ socialism different from Maduro’s? Sanders responded with his usual lie that European countries are socialist. But the same question should have been directed to Warren: you say you are a capitalist but how is your ideology different from Bernie’s?
2
@Mor, do you really think a Warren presidency would be worse than what we have now? A canned response about siblings in the military or...a lying draft-dodger who mocked the parents of a serviceman slain in the line of duty because they also happened to be Muslim?
"Next in line" nominees don't work (Clinton and Kerry), Biden would be the doing the same thing and expecting a different result.
5
I don't see any evidence that Warren is "slick", as this column opines. She's bright and she retains facts and knows how to use them. It's insulting that somebody would characterize that as "slick", "canny", or "cunning". I would prefer that if Bruni has some other candidate he wants to push on us, he would just come right out and say it rather than try to tear that candidate's opponents to bits.
6
Warren is a smart woman and is a winner any way you look at her. However, it is hard getting out there when the media prefers talking about the boys, especially the old boys. Let's try something different- because what we have been doing is not very effective.
3
As a lifelong democrat I like her but she can't beat Trump.
3
Warren might win the popular vote. She won't win the EC.
1
@sheikyerbouti
EC is not a factor if Warren or any Dem recaptures PA and maybe also either MI or WI.
Good point: He still favors the word “oligarchic,” as if saying it for the zillionth time will finally make it roll off the tongue. She instead talks of “multinational corporations” and their corrupt chief executives, using more concrete images and language.
Please, please, let's have Warren as the Democratic candidate for president.
It will confirm to the rest of the nation that the Democrats are now unrecoverable and unrepentant radical leftists, and will literally guarantee a second term for President Trump.
3
Sorry, Frank, but I see no Electoral College majority for Warren. Less for Bernie. Even less for Harris, Booker, Yang, et.al. The Dems' best shots are Biden, Klobuchar and, maybe, Pete.
6
Yet - she persists.
Of course. Persistence is how a poor Oklahoma girl becomes Professor Senator Warren. Discipline, persistence, hard work and intelligence - all of it ten times more than anyone else ever needed because ten times more is what she has to give. Resistance is futile, by the way.
9
Putin has been heard saying he would vote for any of Trumps opponents, but prefers Warren. He likes her version of how to destroy America better than the others. “She has the quickest plan, the most efficient”.
2
It would be unfortunate for the nation to have a female presidential candidate lose twice in a row.
1
So many commenters mention Warren's "schoolmarmishness" and brains. Would it be better for you if she dressed more stylish, and was smart but didn't let it show?
6
@LFK, spot on. And the same people that take issue with that have no problem with the current occupant's ill-tailored enormous suits and four-foot-long ties. Maybe she should rock a leather bustier and speak in a vocal fry at the next debate.
1
Interestingly, it’s Warren, not Biden, who seems the likely inheritor as representing the audacity of hope.
Biden has entered his Edward Kennedy phase, something he probably swore he would never do.
4
I'll no longer have my private insurance!!!!! That is such an empty argument. My company changes my insurance carrier almost every year. Blue Cross one year, Anthem the next. What do I care, what to I know? So is Klobuchar saying that Medicare would be worse than whatever private company I happen to land on this turn? So she is saying that Medicare is not good and Blue Cross is better? There is a hole in this argument.
Problem with Afghanistan. When you defeat Japan and go in and establish a constitution and leave a military base, you are starting in a place that already is a nation. Believe it or not, this is a small change. When you go into Afghanistan, there is no nation. You are in a place with a revolutionary insurgency supported by the people. You either have to go with that, or leave. It is a completely different situation than territories occupied after WWII. You eliminated AlQueda, that is fine. But the Taliban rule there. You are not going to change that (unless you want to invade Pakistan?).
4
That old expression about condemning with faint praise would be an understatement here. Bruni wants to condemn, and his "praise" is more than faint. Almost every adjective he uses here is duplicitous and intended to harm the candidate. What's worse, a lot of the words ("slippery" and "cunning" come to mind) are lightly veiled ad hominem attacks on Warren's female-ness. When Biden stays on topic and avoids the bait, he's looking more presidential, but when Warren does it, she's starting to look "slick."
5
Elizabeth Warren is the best candidate. But allow me one admittedly shallow comment. She needs to look the part as well. She currently dresses like a middle school teacher. A little work on the image she presents would add weight to the great substance she brings to every discussion.
1
@What’s Next, we currently have a president who wouldn't know a tailor if they jabbed him with a needle. Who wears pumpkin-colored pancake makeup. Whose diet and health regimen is from the 1950s...and it shows. But she needs to... what? I'm not trying to jump on you, but why does this 70-year-old woman need to Vogue it up to be taken seriously?
6
It's a grim but unfortunate reality that the most electable person will unseat the current POTUS & Senator Warren is simply not that person. She is blinded to the fact that more Americans in the states that matter support Trump's demented rhetoric than don't. Her continued appeal to the extreme left is not enough and her proposals smack of pie-in-the-sky to many who do not support her. What is her plan to appeal to that part of the population? As Mr. Bruni points out, she's become "cunning," but by not using her cunning to connect to more centered democrats, she become unelectable. She should use that cunning to appeal to voters who, in 2016, bought in to Trump's clarion call that they were being left behind by the democrats. Also, Mr. Bruni writes, "She framed her misgivings about this particular military engagement in accessible, relatable terms, saying that she would repeatedly ask military leaders “what winning looks like” and “no one can describe it.”" --- that might be relatable to voters already in Warren's corner, but not to many others, who could just as well show her what "losing looks like" --- it's called 9/11.
2
What an infuriating column. Warren is the opposite of “slick.” She is straightforward and genuine. You don’t like her simply because she’s not Biden. The question about raising taxes on the middle class to pay for single payer is a dishonest gotcha question designed to generate a juicy sound bite. Good for Warren for not playing that game. What people pay in increased taxes will be more than offset by not paying premiums and deductibles and copays. That explanation is not all that complicated, but it’s not as sound bite friendly as saying “no new taxes” and “choice! freedom!” and all the other meaningless buzzwords used to defend the status quo. The real pipe dream is that it is preferable or even possible to fix the ACA. It will always be a more expensive, less responsive, overly complicated, second-best alternative to a single-payer system. Most Democrats do not want Biden. The combined support for Warren and Sanders dwarfs the support for Biden. He’s not the people’s favorite, though he is clearly the corporate media’s favorite. Columns like this make that so painfully obvious.
11
Stop the arm waving, it's scaring the pets.
gemme a break. nobody on the stage last night is unstoppable. least of all the school marm from OK.
1
Just what Trump wants. Someone he can label a socialist and beat her like a drum. Four more years is the sad result.
2
Thought experiment: What if Trump loses the primary? He has challengers. Who would we choose if the opponent weren’t Trump. Mull it over.
No one had a standout positive moment. I will vote for any democrat over 45, but Biden is among my least favorite. Liz Warren is brilliant and right about the bottom line money corruption in Washington, who raises a forward looking agenda. Fear of change by many may sabotage what could be a reinvigoration of our Nation under her leadership.
3
@Adele. Private insurance is an integral part of Medicare as it stands now. Medicare itself would not provide the coverage most people want and need. I have not heard any candidate acknowledge that fact. Warren and Sanders simply say Medicare for all would eliminate private insurance. They don’t tell us how they would deal with the negative economic consequences of ending private health insurance abruptly. Pete Buttigieg had, in my opinion, the best approach. Make Medicare available to all, and let people decide if they want it. For me, Medicare works very well as it is. I’m 78 and have some serious health problems. In addition to the Medicare premium, I have a Medadvantage PPO plan that costs me $37 a month. In-network copays for doctor visits are $15. What’s not to like except for high drug costS?
4
I like Elizabeth Warren for all the reasons stated in these comments.
But let’s keep in mind that these debates are precisely her kind of forum. She is a professor who has spent a career speaking and lecturing publicly to her students and answering their tough questions. It shows in her command of the stage and her unflappability. So in a sense she has an inherent advantage over the others candidates.
This simply raises the question whether debates like this - contrived and made for TV - are really the best way we should be choosing a president? Trump thrived and ascended in the 2016 debates for exactly the same reason. His one skill is his ability to command a stage. Now look where we are.
Personally, my key criteria for president is not how someone comes across in these artificial circumstances. Rather, I ask myself which person will best handle the inevitable, unknowable crisis/challenge that will arise during their term? Who will be the best, wisest CEO of the country? It’s hard to discern an answer from these debates.
3
Is Biden really all that electable? I think he will break down into babbling on a stage with Trump. Of all the candidates, he is the only one that I see losing a debate with Trump. [Caveat: if the press asks disingenuous questions about whether universal health care = Cuban-style socialism or other nonsense, any Dem could be in for a long day.] He is in cognitive decline as plain as day.
I can sympathize and empathize and have a kind heart towards him, but he's running for President, so I cannot disregard the problem. And ask any young person about his grandfatherly appeal ... they'll stay home. This needs to be about the future, not record players.
8
Ironically he is the weakest candidate. He is in cognitive decline. The contrast with eight years ago is stark. Trump will make him look pathetic. Warren will make mincemeat out of Trump as will Booker and many others
Couple of points I've observed during nearly 79 years. Politicos can NEVER accomplish all their objectives. Planks are almost always aspirational. Therefore, if you start with "moderate" goals, you will almost certainly achieve sub-moderate results. What Democrats need above all else is a candidate charismatic enough to persuade voters of his/her goals. During the past half century, Democrats have won the presidency ONLY with charismatic dark horse candidates--Bill Clinton and Obama--who inspired large turnout. Perhaps this year is so different that "safe" but dull will win. But history is against that.
6
Continuing to ask if taxes will go up to pay for Medicare for all is disingenuous. The question should be about costs and that's what Warren has rightfully focused on. Currently, everyone pays into Medicare through their payroll taxes. That payment could be matched by employers just like Social Security is. The cost to business would be much less than private insurance premiums are. Unless, of course, the business doesn't provide health insurance.
And there we find one of the biggest flaws in our system, a flaw which the ACA has tried to fix by subsidizing premiums, but doesn't go far enough. We need a public option. Let the insurance companies compete with that.
2
What has struck me about Harris’s “electric moments” has been that they go nowhere. Yes, she was sharp and to the point in the Kavanaugh hearing; but to what end? And apparently she did the same in the first debate —- I wasn’t able to watch it —- but again, so what? These moments seem designed to show she can do them, not for any other purpose. Perhaps this is unfair, after all, what could they accomplish? And yet the satisfied way she sits back after the attack is over suggests that the attack was the whole point. Not electric moments but flashes in the pan.
2
How sad that many voters and much of the media allow these ridiculous "debates" to determine their choice of a candidate.
As a lifelong Republican, I cannot support Donald Trump for President, but neither can I support those Democratic candidates who seem to be the favorites of their party and the media.
Even more sadly, the Democratic candidates most acceptable to me and many other Republicans and Independents are receiving no support from the media or from their own party.
Frank, I have to disagree with you. Elizabeth Warren is not slippery; she is honest. Of everybody on stage, she's the only one who answered the questions posed to her. That includes the one about taxes. Stephanopoulos asked the wrong question, because--as Warren pointed out--it is about the bottom line, not about what the component parts that add up to that bottom line are about. She commands the stage with clarity and directness. That's why she's rising, not because of any deception.
13
Like many who have commented, I support Warren but worry that America will not elect a woman. However, I am feeling a bit more encouraged after going with my reasonably conservative husband to a Warren event. He was not a fan of Warren's, and I dreaded the anticipated snarky comments he would be muttering while at the event. Surprisingly not only were there no snarky comments, there was overwhelming praise. While not in total agreement with her policies, he was impressed with how Warren was able to explain her positions. He also appreciated how she didn't take the bait to bash Trump when asked questions that provided the opportunity to do so. I hope that more people with take the time to learn more about Warren, as well as the other candidates, before making judgments on their chances of being elected.
13
@Coco Balz. Coco, I remember in the Spring of 2008 having to convince an African American colleague at work that Obama could win.
4
It all boils down to the health insurance issue. Warren, who I have grown to respect, would win a national election if she would allow freedom of choice. One size does not fit all and although I admire Scandinavia and Canada, America is not ready for democratic socialism. Why not offer medicare to those who need it. Why not put our energy into monitoring and reforming the private insurance companies?
4
I've been deeply skeptical about Elizabeth Warren - too much the schoolmarm and ready to rap your hands with a ruler; too quick with all the answers; too absolutist on Medicare-for-all. But last night, I warmed to her. She went beyond wonkish to connective. She allowed her modest personal origins to illuminate the incisiveness. And along with Mayor Pete, she actually seemed to be listening to what the others were saying. I'd still like to see her be less rat-tat-tat, and get off her high horse on corporations that give our economy much of its ballast. But last night I thought something I hadn't thought before: she's a more compassionate version of the Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher. Same backbone. And she could actually win this thing.
11
I guess I'm ok with her becoming so "popular" with everyone because I wouldn't mind if she became President because that would mean she had defeated Trump (though I do not believe this will happen) but I have absolutely no desire to vote for her. I don't do Republicans in any way shape or form, former or future, for a very long time now, in this life or the next, but don't mind me, I'm become very intolerant as I age and I'm sure I'm the only person in the country who feels this way.
2
@BSargent
I like Senator Warren. As a former Massachusetts resident, I'm proud that she represents the state of my birth--and former home for many years. She's smart.
I've not examined the polls to see by how much she's beating Mr. Trump. A post here said she would beat President Trump head to head.
But it's still a long way to November, and I'm reminded that Mrs. Clinton looked so strong, only to see her lead slip away before our very eyes on election night, defying one particularly well-regarded pollster's win prediction.
When the Electoral College Comes into play, weird things happen. The Electoral College favors those red states solid for Trump. Senator Warren might pick up a little strength in those red states, but not enough to win. She'd likely do well in the solid blue states, getting an even greater popular vote win than Mrs. Clinton.
But my guess is that Mr. Trump will doggedly hold a possibly slimmer lead in the electoral college, yet will take it none-the-less. He and his advisors know just how to get that EC win. And that's all they need. All his politics is geared to that. For example, if you think he's really going to get gun control, think again. If you think he's really going to stick to a hard line policy on China Trade, think again. And, linked to that, if you think the stock market and the economy in the U.S. are going to conveniently roll over and die just in time for the election, I'd suggest you rethink that too.
3
I give Warren credit for being intelligent and well spoken. But her ideas are way too far left. And make no mistake - as time goes on the "wealth tax" would ensnare many in the "middle class".
And no, she is not "unstoppable", I'd give Trump very good odds at crushing Warren.
2
Right Mr. Bruni. Deceptive may be a harsh a word, but it is absolutely true. As a Senator she knows quite well how many votes would be needed and I assure you not all of her current Democratic colleagues would vote for her plans which would require a middle class tax increase (at least the Vt. socialist shouting "oligarchs" admits that).
She has ,as did Sanders in 2016, a devoted cadre.They are as zealous, bless their hearts, as any secular or religious cult. The political Messiah has come and who dares to disagree? Well, some of us who very much want a Democrat in the White House, and as many new Senators as possible, see this candidate as McGovern 2.0. A disaster in the making because the possible is now considered passe' by the Left. We must all go full on Ivy League Ivory Tower by adopting positions easily demonized by the Republicans and not likely ever to become law.
This is about defeating Trump and keeping the House. Work on that, and our country will start to heal. Politics, readers, is the art of the possible.
1
OK, I see she has lots of ideas, but there is a difference and a huge one, between being a policy wonk and being the boss. Can she govern? Is she capable of running the country?
3
@Bruce1253 To your question of Warren being ready to be the boss — this article is a backhanded way of saying yes in part. Discipline and not falling into traps (i.e know yourself, know your enemy) is a crucial leadership quality. Another point in her favor — everyone says her campaign is a well-oiled machine. She is the CEO of that machine. Both aspects are the exact opposite of the wild one-man show we have right now. I'm ready for 4-8 years of calm, competent leadership, and a captain that is ready to steer the American ship of state in a new direction.
3
@Bruce1253
Do you really need to ask this? Right now, we have a President who golfs and cannot be bothered to attend international meetings or fill open Cabinet positions. And that's before we talk about his criminality, immorality and the corruption of his administration.
3
@Gregg54
Yes I really need to ask this. I do not want to exchange a one man show on the right for a one woman show on the left.
We need someone who can help mend our broken nation, who will instill faith in each other and government, back into the American people.
Trump has a lot to answer for, but the next President will have a lot to do in order to get our government working again. So my question was, is Elizabeth Warren capable of doing this?
She may be up, up, up in Democratic polls and even in head-to-head matchups with Trump, but her plan to take away private insurance from 50% of Americans is political suicide. Trump will gleefully point out that the Democrats want to take away your insurance and he'll (for once) be right. The fact that Trump wants to take away the affordable care act and do away with protection for pre-existing conditions is too subtle for the electorate to respond to. Most people who have private insurance want to keep it. Another point lost in the discussion is that Warren's criticism of insurance companies denying care, making certain providers unavailable and torturing physicians with paperwork and complicated approvals applies just as much to Medicare as to private insurance. If anyone doesn't believe that, I invite you to spend a week in my office and you can assist me in filling out a 25 page form to get a motorized wheelchair for someone on Medicare or spending hours on the phone trying to find out why a particular lab test was not covered.
2
Warren was one of about five or six candidates that can credibly answer the why do you think you would make a good President or the why are you running questions. I would suspect that although people may differ on who they are, many people have already come to the conclusion that there at least four that should be voted off the Island if they haven't managed to do after the next debate
I like Warren and Sanders, but I trust Sanders to have the courage, strength and vision to stand up to the Washington Foreign Policy Establishment/Military Industrial Complex and deliver on a demilitarized foreign policy.
Warren is slick, her comments on Afghanistan were good, but mostly she has minimal familiarity with world affairs and foreign policy.
And slick is not a quality I'm looking for in a president.
I'll take Sanders' integrity and gruff angry authenticity any day, over slick.
Foreign policy is rarely talked about, yet it is foreign policy where a president has the most power to act without Congress.
While Sanders' passion for forty years has been working to better the lives of ordinary people, he was always advocating for a demilitarized foreign policy.
Those advising Warren on foreign policy are from the Washington Establishment, boding little change. Sanders, with his knowledge, courage and vision will be able to deliver a demilitarized foreign policy, making the US safer and the world more stable and sustainable
President Bernie Sanders 2020!
A Future To Believe In !
3
This is the problem with our politics...we don't discuss the viability of ideas, only the manner in which they are delivered. Kamala Harris is one of the very few candidates who has the whole enchilada...progressive on social issues yet you can easily see her holding her own across a table from Putin and turning Donald Trump's style against him. It is my hope that someday this is the type of solid politician the people will support.
4
Right on Mr. Bruni.
She exudes intellect along with integrity. That's something most every adult citizen should be looking for in a leader of a great country as ours.
I'm feeling more confident that she's the one who can go toe to toe with the President. She'd likely have him asking for a recess before they got halfway into it.
6
What about the rumor that she has been telling the Democratic establishment that she is not really that progressive. That she would govern more moderately.
3
Elizabeth Warren is too smart to provide a soundbite about higher taxes. She knows it will be used out-of-context by the Republicans.
Republicans will not include information about how the other components of Medicare for All will make the total cost to middle-class Americans much lower than it is now, even after taxes.
1
While I think of myself as fairly progressive, I dare say that the Elizabeth Warren - Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party will likely succeed in the present era. Even if Ms Warren were to become President, her entire first term would be quagmires by Medicare for All. The far left forget that there will be at least 49 Republicans in the senate in 2021, if not more. They are going to use the last lever of power to kill all these socialist programs.
It’s not at all clear that the majority of Americans want Medicare for All, open borders, and the like. Nonetheless, I just don’t see Warren beating Trump for many reasons. One, gender; two, “Pocahontas; three, she lies too especially about how she gets her financing. Unless the markets crash, or we go into a deep recession, or heaven forbid, a calamity occurs on US soil, I do not see a path for any democrat to oust Trump, and I don’t think Warren is any exception.
@Chesapeake
What Democrat is advocating "open borders"? (Provide a citation.)
So many of the candidates are so very good that it would be great if, regardless of who wins, most of the rest end up in the cabinet!
6
Senator Warren's health policy proposals will expand the number of Americans covered, improve care and reduce costs for families. Eliminating private insurance premiums and their vast administrative overhead, offsets any program-related taxes. Sounds like a winner to me, as does Elizabeth Warren!
6
@Sal A. Shuss
No, you cannot advocate making a legal service (private insurance) illegal.
Klobuchar and Booker rose in my estimation as a result of last night's debate.
Her explanation of how she entered politics was compelling.
Her positions are reasonable and are less likely than Warren/Sanders to bring out more Republican voters.
Booker had solid answers for everything. His perspective may not extend to all of American, but I think his VP chances just got better.
Bernie's tendency to give the same answer to any question is beginning to sound like a broken record.
Biden can't seem to finish a sentence or, perhaps, a thought. Some say he's always been like that. It starts to look like aging, though.
Warren's changes in the general election hinge on her positions on immigration and health care. Right now, she leaves the impression of not favoring enforcement of existing immigration laws.
She also seems to be in favor of a massive shift in the way people get health care coverage. This scares people. It makes them think of burdensome paperwork, long waits on hold for representatives who don't help, the possibility of losing their insurance without being able to replace it (because of technical glitches like the one early in Obamacare) and quite possibly having trouble finding a doctor. Remember, doctors are busy now. What would it be like with more people covered with lower copays?
None of those objections mean we should avoid a movement to universal coverage and single payer. But, they indicate that it needs to be done very gradually.
2
Warren continues to improve. Her greatest strength is telling the truth - especially in regards to economic unfairness. It may well be the right time for Warren and her message.
The era when Democrats had to be "centrists" to survive has passed. The pendulum has swung, and Warren is riding it.
Many corporate CEOs know in their hearts the playing field needs to be reformed for the good of the country. They will not initiate these changes. However, they will continue to move their companies forward with some new rules everyone has to play by.
3
Warren made a few interesting points about Afghanistan in later interviews.She pointed out that “terrorism is a global problem which we’re not going to solve by bombing the mountains in that country”.When confronted with 9/11 she added that 15 of the 19 terrorists came from a Saudi Arabia....we’re certainly not bombing them.I’m not sure I’d call these remarks “slick”.My only question about her is whether she can somehow get down to Trump’s level during a debate and I do think she’ll have to go there ...however fleetingly.
1
Bruni is essentially praising Warren for artfully lying. There is no question that "Medicare for All" will require a huge payroll tax on everyone. It's right there in the bill Bernie wrote and Warren supports. Whether any particular taxpayer or family would make out better than they do now depends on the details of their current employer-provided plans, their age and health status. It is incontrovertible that tens of millions of Americans are perfectly satisfied with their existing plans, and many of them would pay more in that payroll tax than they do now. Does anyone seriously believe that Warren could make it through November 2020 without confronting this simply by being "slick," dodging, even lying? Ain't happening.
4
@John Burke
What about Trump's claim that he would end ACA on his first day in office, and replace it with something a lot better? Is this your idea of the truth?
1
@D. Smith @John Burke made no reference whatsoever to Mr. Trump. Your “what about” comment might just make sense if Ms. Warren had secured the Democratic nomination. But at this stage of the game, it’s on Democrats to carefully evaluate the candidates on offer to decide who to nominate. And there’s no doubt that Ms. Warren is dissembling on the cost of her Medicare For All plan, or at least not clearly identifying which Americans will see a net increase in their bill. In my opinion, she’s holding back this information because she knows that the answer will cause a lot of people to be unhappy. She’s also counting on a lot those people to nevertheless vote for her in the general election because they will never vote for Mr. Trump.
That’s good strategy. But it’s also slick and cunning.
@John Burke
Absolutely agree!!
History shows us how all Americans benefited from leaders with political courage.
They like Sen Warren, had big ideas.
FDR wanted health care for all Americans in his original Social Security proposal. It was negotiated away and languishes still.
LBJ fought and fought and fought for Medicare/Medicaid. He fought and fought and fought for the Civil Rights Act.
The GOP frames issues to suit their agenda which is nothing for nobody. The GOP hand wrings and pearl clutches over health care for all and some liberals buy into it....game match GOP.
Big ideas require big work. Let’s not be afraid.
9
Frank Bruni tips his hat at the fact that Elizabeth Warren repeatedly refused to answer directly whether middle class taxes would increase under her plan. We should applaud that?
5
@GP I think Mr. Bruni is tipping his hat at Ms. Warren’s smarts and political skills. But he’s also pointing out that it shows that she’s not Saint Elizabeth, but a politician.
I love Warren's many excellent policies and another thing I love about her is that she didn't attack the other Democratic candidates. I hate it when the Dems attack each other. She seems to know that attacking other Democratic candidates will be bad for all of us.
8
Thank you Frank Bruni for once again summing it up for us and I do not mean just about the debates. Your perspective and finesse with words serve us well. However, I see no candidate for President in any of these swamp dwellers. Biden, Sanders, Klobuchar, Warren, Harris, Booker, Castro, all part of the creatures of Washington. If any of them could have really done something until now, they would have. Especially, Biden, Warren and Sanders who between them have 223 years of living on this earth. All speak as insiders and takers from Corporate America which Warren was at one time. No real solutions so they proffer none. WHY didn't anyone ask Castro what his successes were as Housing Chief under Obama? The answer is a title and no action. Just like Carson. They both know not one thing about what is needed or how to do it. Climate change. Do people realize that for a a tiny look at what is really happening, check out Nevada Energy(NV) and Florida Power and Light FPL) You would think with all the sunshine in these two states that they would be the leaders in this area. They are not because Solar is a threat to these two energy companies who like things just the way they are without the energy and money saving benefits of solar power and so it is very expensive to convert and not worth it for most. I applaud NY which is making the most inroads to change the sources of power delivery. New Yorkers are slow to warm to new ideas except to try the newest restaurant or bakery.
6
@This just in And what - exactly - has Donald Trump done in his 76 years of living on this earth to make your life better as a New Yorker and American?
Trump will love this article, as Warren is his ideal candidate for the democratic opposition. A person who has a checkered background (fraudulently claiming she was American indian) and glaring weaknesses to the electorate in the Midwest (higher marginal income taxes, higher social security taxes, wealth tax, open borders, and eliminating private health insurance). Moreover, she has little support by the African American population, which will be critical in MI, WI, and FL.
I live in the Midwest in a swing state and the bubble the democratic party is in will lead to an electoral loss. I voted for Obama and hrc but if Warren is the candidate, I will switch over to Trump. I like my private health insurance company and not having a wealth tax and having secure borders. Biden shouldn't have to apologize for deporting people here illegally, they did the right thing.
In fact, I was at a dinner party with 4 people who are dems and 1 republican. Of course, the republican is going to vote for trump in 2020. The other 4 said if Biden is the dem candidate, they would vote for him. If Warren is the candidate, 3 are switching over to Trump and 1 would notvote. Small sample but take it for what it is worth from a Michigander.
9
@Satishk
So you think Black people would support Trump? Be realistic.
As @harryc points out in his Times Pick, nominating Warren would be "political suicide" for democrats. As I was telling my wife (who likes Warren a lot), she has 0 chance, literally 0 chance of winning the presidency. There are a few reasons for this, most important of which her style rubs many the wrong way and her plans are way over-reaching for the vast majority of the electorate (and IMO not very well thought-out to boot!). Moreover, Trump will have a field day with the whole Indian heritage thing...
8
@Danny Boy
Do you really think that your analysis of Warren's proposals are superior to her analysis? Maybe the American people will have tired of Trump's "jokes" about Warren's heritage by November 2020.
1
@DSmith. I was sick of it long ago.
1
When I graduated from Law School I practiced Law for about 45 minutes. What are we supposed to infer from this? I like Warren, but when she comes off as elitist, my attention tends to drift. Too much time in Cambridge...NOT PRESIDENTIAL.
4
@jayhavens
The U.S. president should not be elite?
1
@D. Smith If you happen to be like FDR - that's OK, if it's the right given time. Pseudo Elite is just completely distasteful. Sorry, but Warren is now just out for me. I prefer Biden - a proven track record of making things happen for the WHOLE country.
1
@D. Smith
Yes of course we can see how well that has worked out so far. The Bushies, out of touch Protestants who know nothing of struggle. Clinton and Obama,useless as well. Reagan, nah, its only in fading memories he comes out well but he knew nothing. Ford,Nixon, the same. Useless for the majority of Americans. Trickle down economics, union and environment busting. We do not want a Sanders. Warren or Biden. Swampites. Already too influenced by the Corporate power running america. We need a fresh face with fresh ideas, someone who represents the majority of Voters and make no mistake, this election will be a revolution and a sea change for the future so it will be fought tooth and nail. We need Andrew Yang, a real Businessman with real ideas for the future. I want a seat at the Health Insurance table. I want to contribute my ideas.
1
It's been a long time since Elizabeth Warren taught elementary school, but she mentions it often. For the record, I was in the first to sixth grades between 1945 and 1950 - in other words 69 to 74 years ago - and I still vividly remember all six of my teachers, even unto their first names, all of whom were female and all of whom were in their fifties and sixties. I have to admit that, except for her tendency to speak quickly and always at the top of her lungs, Ms. Warren reminds me of ALL of them rolled into one. In a general way, she even looks like a composite of ALL of them.
From my perspective, it might be interesting to have her as our president, for then I could leave this world knowing that I was actually living out my second childhood in real time instead of simply living it over in my head. Well, we clutch at straws, for surely, based on last night's performances by all ten of these candidates, Mr. Trump is virtually assured of a second term. But it would have been fun to be governed by Ms. Shelly-Stapleton-Shafter-Murphy-Halpin-Metzger once more!
3
I agree with other observers who say that a Warren nomination would be the biggest gift to Donald Trump. However "cunning" and "slippery" she may be, she is just not likable.
4
@Joel Sanders
And Trump is likeable?
3
Why is it deceptive to refuse to say whether Medicare for All would require a middle-class tax increase? Warren’s centrist challengers like to point out that Medicare for All will cost $30 trillion over 10 years. But we currently devote 18% of our $21 trillion GDP every year to healthcare. That’s $37.8 trillion over a 10-year period. There is no question that if M4A were implemented in its simplest, straightforward form, it would be more efficient than the patchwork of providers and payers we have today. And every expert believes that in this form, healthcare costs could be reduced by wringing out duplication, waste, and downright fraud and price-gauging in the current system. There are enough variables in the proposals and their implementation to suggest that M4A will not cost more than what we currently spend in aggregate and thus would not need additional tax revenue. Asking her to admit to something that is not a certainty but rather a cynical political suicide is certainly not in her — and more importantly, our — best interest.
4
In regard to Harris you wrote, "I want to root for her but she just won’t let me."
Amen, I wholehearted agree. I wish I could articulate this sentiment as well as you have in your article. I don't know why but I just don't think she genuinely wants to run in this race.
I wish people would stop saying Warren can't win. These same people probably said Trump couldn't win in '16. Warren vs. Trump she'll win in a landslide.
20
@Julia- Unfortunately, I don't think so
Relieved to see a word of -deserved - praise for Klobuchar; and support for the indefatigable Warren. But can the work slick, please, which carries too much baggage from earlier eras -- undeserved. She's not into tricking anyone, she wants to persuade voters that it is possible to make government responsive to the little person.
Agree about Bernie: just shouting louder is not going to gain new supporters, nor has it been useful in promoting legislation. He may speak (scream)for my inner radical, but it isn't the right indoor voice to use to persuade and cajole.
9
I like my health insurance. As a teacher, I had state health insurance from private companies which was affordable and very good. As a retiree, I was able to get a state health benefit private insurance Medicare Advantage plan that is also affordable and very good. I would not want to give it up.
Large organizations and businesses, because of their large pool of workers, are able to bargain with private insurance companies to get good rates and coverage. And most of their workers like their private plans.
Because of the ACA, these plans had to cover pre-conditions which made them even better. If the ACA had been strengthened and a "Medicare for All" type of policy could have been added as an option for those private insurance exchanges, people who did not have good, affordable private insurance could have gotten it. And they still can, if we strengthen and add to the ACA.
Health insurance is NOT free. Medicare, Part A is paid for out of our wages, and we buy supplemental private insurance for Medicare, Part B, to cover expenses not covered by Part A.
For me, at this time, a Biden/Warren Democratic ticket would be ideal.
6
@Peggy Ledbetter
Well, don’t you think others might like Medicare Advantage, too. And wouldn’t it be nice to get younger healthier people in the pool to help pay for your illnesses?
7
@Peggy Ledbetter: I'm an educator, and I have a solid health plan, via a private insurer, thanks to my university employment.
And I am *tired* of the shallow arguments I see repeatedly in columns like this that those of us happy with our private plans must be opposed to single-payer plans. I am 100% for such plans, even if they provide me with health care somewhat less comprehensive than my private plan.
I don't get to freely choose a private plan; my employer picks it. It gets changed frequently, with major changes every 5 yr or so; I have little to know input on these changes. It's ignorant and misleading to say or suggest those with private plans got to pick what they wanted.
My employment is not guaranteed (I'm have untenured research and teaching appointments); I can lose my employment on short notice, and with it, my health care. It is ridiculous to tie coverage to an employer.
Finally, even if I had a secure position, I would happily sacrifice quality or cost for my coverage so that others could enjoy coverage (including my relatives and friends!).
The only chance Biden has of getting my support is if he changes his mind about this issue. Warren and Sanders are on the right track. And even if it's not possible, we will only move in that direction if we start out asking for more than the other side wants to deliver.
2
I like every single Democratic candidate in the debate. They all have good ideas and I trust each of them to do what is right for the country when they are elected especially if Democrats have a majority in both houses of Congress. However, the real issue is not whether we have a woman candidate or an African American or Latino candidate. The real issue is who can defeat the current occupant in the White House. I was terribly afraid in 2016. I like Clinton but I knew she had a lot of baggage and many did not like her. What happened? People did not go to the polls and vote. I like Warren but she has too many plans which Trump will lie about and label her a socialist. Even if this is untrue, he will say it so many times, people will believe him and we will lose moderate Republicans and independents. We must win this election. We can't allow Trump to have a second term. Please, please voters. Do the right thing. Select the candidate who can attract moderates and independents. We need them as never before.
4
We need EVERY democrats in the red states to come out and vote in 2020! We need everyone to vote for the party that is looking out for the greater good!
There's implied support in Bruni's article of Klobuchar's statement that 149 million Americans will no longer be able to have their current insurance, and that in her opinion that would be a bad idea. The article, like Klobuchar, fails to expound on precisely why that would be a "bad idea". I don't think Klobuchar has sworn off corporate support of her campaign in the same way that some others have, and it wouldn't hurt to point that out. In fact, I think that should be front and center in the next round of politicking.
3
@Fern
From Amy Klobuchar's website, front and center next to her donation link:
"We aren't taking any corporate PAC or federal lobbyist money. This is a campaign powered by you."
2
Why is this piece more about the candidates‘ performance than their policies?
7
@Naomi Because, for better or worse, that is what some voters base their choices on.
Tulsi Gabbard, sorely missed. She, certainly would have brought more to the debate then the lower echelon of candidates. Real military experiance and anti-interventionist message. Cory Booker, got in by taking in more money from Pharma than anyone else in Congress. What were they thinking?
7
Sorry Frank but apparently you didn't get the memo. If people pay less for Medicare than they do with private insurance premiums (presumably an employer pays them less to cover the corporate cost), deductibles, co-pays, prescription drugs and out of service providers then perhaps they are being "taxed" less. Why doesn't the media get this.
5
After a while the debate seemed like a Cabinet meeting. I see Warren as the President, and then the others as Secretaries. It would be a great team, but I don't know if all the egos could go there. As for the people that are worried about Medicare for all. I would just say No President has a magic wand and your private health insurance will not be going a way any time soon, but once you and your employer get a look at the saving in cost it will be a land slide. That aside there were many good choices. Any of them is better than what we have got.
4
Trying to game things by selecting the candidate most likely to beat Trump is a losing strategy. The Republicans who backed Trump did so not because they thought he could win the 2016 election but because they thought he was the right guy for the job. The Democrats need to pick the right person for President and then doing everything possible to get that person elected.
2
@Connie S.
Not to be guilty of circular reasoning here, but the right person for president IS the one who can beat Trump. That's priority number one. Nothing else matters.
Not long ago Liz vehemently argued the right wing case, just as vehemently as she now argues the left wing case.
Not long ago she was collecting money from big donors, then she once again flipped on a dime.
Extremely volatile truly scary personality, not likely to win a majority of the electoral college.
7
@David - "Extremely volatile truly scary personality, not likely to win a majority of the electoral college."
Wait are you saying "this time" since an extremely volatile truly scary personality DID win a majority of the electoral college in 2016!
In a recent article on the "extremely volatile truly scary personality" of the very stable genius in the Oval Office his supporters were saying that changing positions as new information came to light was a sign of strength.
Now it is volatile. With this group whatever is expedient is what will be said.
3
Because she knew that it was wrong and switched! The current guy in the office is continuing to take money everyday! He doesn’t think it’s wrong! And you are shaming her for having a conscious?
2
@David Not long ago? I think at least 25 to 30 years ago.
3
And that means that 149 million Americans will no longer be able to have their current insurance. That’s in four years. I don’t think that’s a bold idea, I think it’s a bad idea.”
This line by Klobuchar doesn't really make sense to me. 149 million people would have a different form of insurance than they have now. I don't believe all these people's insurance cover everything, but health care for all means everyone is covered the same. The more wealthy Americans may have extensive coverage, but those who can't afford higher premiums, might not be covered for particular illnesses. Treat everyone as an equal.
6
@zorroplata And how many of these people are gong to have their insurance downgraded by their employers, or lose it altogether if they lose their job? More candidates need to point out that this employer provided insurance is on tenuous ground, and is becoming more expensive with less coverage all the time.
4
@Lizmill You are missing the point. Everyone will be covered. In Canada, that means you are covered for everything. Transplants, eye surgery, broken arms, everything. Your employer could still cover dental, eyeglasses, prescriptions etc. They will not be on the hook for your medical because the employees are covered, just like everyone else.
All these progressive candidates are practicing deceptive advertising. Their plans will never see the light of day because McConnell will likely continue to control the Senate. And even if democrats manage to eke out a victory in the Senate, there is still the 60 vote filibuster to overcome. These candidates are wasting time and are only providing ammunition to the Republicans that they can simply replay, no matter who is the nominee, and not spend a dime on campaign advertising.
8
I was put off by those who proclaimed that, by supporting single payer, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders were not trusting Americans to make a choice. Certainly, we should be able to choose providers, which private health insurers restrict, but the anti-single payer contingent hasn't explained why having to choose from among a myriad of private plans with different premiums, deductibles, co-pays, and provider networks is so desirable. While I appreciate the fact that the ACA gave me health insurance when I had none, choosing a private insurance plan from more than twenty alternatives was exhausting. I don't feel confident that I chose the best plan for me, because it was just too complicated. I would prefer a well-run single payer system that allows me free choice of provider. Sen. Warren could make more of a case that single-payer would be so much less stressful.
8
Trump will hold up a picture of Warren's Texas Bar application which in her own handwriting she wrote she was "American Indian" and we a are cooked. Even by her own story that she was told that way back in her ancestry there was american Indian blood that dose not make her american Indian to best describe her on a state application. I am Italian, both my parents born in Italy, but we know that 4 generations back on my Father's side there is Chinese ancestor a great great great grandfather. I would not claim I am Chinese on an application. These are deal breakers that the candidate wants of course to forget and we let them forget, but the other side won't. Watch and see.
13
That’s only one point that they can make a case out of. The guy in the office now is somehow better? He lies about everything everyday!
2
@DJ And of course there is nothing questionable in Donald' past.
2
@Bob Guthrie Trump is impervious to pretty much any attack. The Republican field tried to discredit him, and the Democrats have thrown pretty much everything they have at him since he was elected. It hasn’t dented his support at all. His opponent won’t have the same Teflon coating.
1
I am an anti-Trump pro Biden Republican. I believe that says it all. There may be a lot like me or not, I’m not sure. However, I’m pretty sure that there are no pro Warren Republicans
15
To @tennvol30736 - sounds like you're on the wrong Avantage plan. Mine: $0 premium per month, and in my state that includes dental. $5 co-pay to see my PCP, $40 for a specialist - and I have the same docs I had under employer insurance. $10 co-pay *total* for all standard lab tests done at the same time. $15 for x-rays, ditto. My medication: $0. Free membership to the gym of my choice.
Double knee surgery with a top surgeon at the best hospital in the state? Three days stay (had my own suite) - total cost for *everything*: $750!
A year ago needed hiatal hernia surgery. Specialized surgeon (teaches it at Harvard Medical) only operates at an out of state hospital. Fully covered, same number of hospital days, same total cost as knees.
I've never been denied coverage, not once for anything. Your state may not offer the same great Advantage plans as mine - which is why we need Medicare for All. With everyone covered, all states will have the same great plans. People won't look back. Except maybe to say "why did we wait so long?"
9
Excellent post, except Medicare Advantage uses PRIVATE insurance. You know...the guys St. Bernie wants to run out of business?
I'll take professorial, compassion/empathy, intelligence and savvy anyday. Warren was clearly in control and put on notice that she is no lightweight.
7
@Juan Morales
That was Klobuchar, too, in spades. Except for the professorial part, which we don't need against T.
1
I love and admire her passion, but the voters will stop her because of her policies. You can't cancel student loan debt for some and not for others and you definitely can't afford to pay everyone's school loans in perpetuity. As someone who takes pride in having worked hard to pay off my debt, I resent seeing millions of others get their's paid for free. I also pre-resent for those who don't have current debt to be erased, but will have to apply for a student loan that will NOT be erased. And I think, no I KNOW, you can't tell millions of Americans with private insurance that you never better than they do and so you're not going to give them a choice. Again, I admire her passion and her intellect. But if she's the nominee, WE WILL LOSE.
12
Why is it that people think this way? “I had it hard so I want everyone to have it the hard way just like I did, including my kids.” People still have to pay for rooms and boards. They will still need to work hard to live while going to school. I would love to have my kids going to school without worrying about debts but still having to work hard to pay for rooms and boards. I had 2 student loans! I worked hard to pay it off and no, I don’t want others to work hard to pay off debts. I rather want them to work hard so that they can be what they want to be, and able to have a better world! Build a better country!
4
Wow, Frank. If one read only your column, we wouldn't know Bernie Sanders was even running. This is why so many of us feel that the media controls the outcome. Surely you could have said something illuminating.
3
Warren is right about Afghanistan. I've never understood the importance, geopolitical or otherwise, of Afghanistan to the U.S., other than as a means of providing endless welfare to the "military-industrial complex." Let Russia, China and India fight amongst themselves to manage whatever problems Afghanistan presents. Vietnam, which currently is ranked as the U.S.'s 14th largest trading partner, demonstrates the significance of losing an unwinnable war.
6
@Carl May I help? Afghanistan has little of intrinsic value.
When the Russian and British Empires existed, those in charge of each feared the other would use Afghanistan as a base for subverting native populations in adjacent regions, especially in the context of a war in Europe. Thus, St. Petersburg and London expended great amounts of blood and treasure to control the Amir of Afghanistan, whose writ rarely ran far beyond Kabul's city limits.
Now, Afghanistan affords leverage vis-a-vis Iran and Pakistan only.
Outsiders do not grasp that Afghans do not want efficient government. Afghans are loyal to their tribe and clan. A central government - even at provincial level - is a source of robbery at best, and murder at worst.
Thus, any Afghan government's writ usually fades a few miles from the Kabul City limits.
The U.S. never should have invaded Afghanistan, for the simple reason that unless one is willing to kill many millions, Afghanistan cannot be conquered. Holding Kabul, Herat, or Kandahar brings no control over anything else.
Afghanistan is the polar opposite of France: if you hold Paris, you have France.
Thus, if it were deemed necessary to annihilate al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, any Afghan locales wherein al-Qaeda was based needed to be bombed into rubble, sparing no one and nothing in such places.
All, who have invaded Afghanistan - since Nader Shah in the mid-1700s - have failed to make their writ run beyond the three cities named, and that not very reliably.
2
I didn't think she was slick. Not at all. Or maybe it was imagining Donald Trump adjust his three-foot tie for his second inauguration that distracted me.
McGovern 2.0.
7
"But I was most struck by how she refused to say whether Medicare for All would require a middle-class tax increase. One of the debate’s moderators, George Stephanopoulos, asked her, and then Biden pressed her, but she never grew flustered and never succumbed, instead stressing over and over that in terms of people’s reduced health care costs, they’d be ahead of the game."
I wasn't struck. She's not being honest.
9
In the real America, sure.
But we do not have the real America. Instead we have the America created by Dick Cheney, including Consumers United, a SC owned by the Federalist Society, a near-intractable GOP electoral majority, and an red state media with unchallenged mandate.
In this America, it matters that Sen Warren is the most liberal Democrat from our most liberal state.
Besides, this will not be a policy kind of election. It is entirely about the Democrats' ability to nominate someone who, in the vast stretches of the country between the Coasts, is identified as a Regular Person. (Bizarre but true, we now have such a person in the White House.)
Let's redress our deep-running horror at this fact another time. Now it's time to protect the democracy itself or we will not have one.
4
Will the news outlets please, PLEASE stop covering this as a horse race, and do what they are supposed to do, which is analyze the policies and track records of the candidates?
We are so uninformed where it counts, which is the substance of what these people bring to the table.
Example: Instead of focusing on "higher taxes with Medicare for All", how about looking at the total cost picture that says taxes go up by X amount but your old costs of 2X from the insurance companies goes away? It's like saying that eating out less will make your grocery bill go up, but never mentioning the fact that eating out is four times as expensive for the same amount of food.
11
To mis-characterize Bernie as merely shouting is plain wrong. I'm personally very tired of the one-sided criticism Bernie faces all the time, when in actuality he's actually trying to effect real change, not some quasi-half-baked reform agenda.
4
Like Frank Bruni wanting to like Harris, I want to like Warren. I do like much of what she says, but two things trouble me. I'm wary of any candidate that advocates complete withdrawal from Afghanistan. I was in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1972 and so when the U.S. had just begun turning the war effort over to South Vietnam troops, and had withdrawn U.S. ground troops. In the summer of '72 South Vietnam defeated the North at Quang Tri with the aid of American air power and navy artillery. In 1973 we withdrew air and navy support, and in 1974 we withdrew funds, in 1975 South Vietnam was defeated. The strategic blunder was repeated when Obama withdrew from Iraq, only to reintroduce troops after ISIS gained control of a large part of the country. A minimal U.S. presence in Afghanistan is necessary to support it's government and prevent the Taliban from regaining control. The second issue that bothers me and is seldom mentioned is her proposal for the government to manufacture prescription drugs. Otherwise I love her message.
2
Warren is certainly one of my favorites. In comparison to Sanders, she just looks smarter. She seems to have much of what Sanders lacks, e.g., pragmatism.
All the same, the moderators let her off the hook in one regard. She has positioned herself at times as something of a Sanders minion. That to my mind is problematic.
Sanders focused on economic progressivism but pretty much said nothing substantial about social progressivism. We need both. Without the latter, we lose our souls.
In 2016 not a single credible economist believed Sanders could do what he was promising. Has his platform changed at all, other than his $30 trillion climate plan?
Klobuchar did make traction with me. Whether or not we vote for a candidate who promises Medicare for all, the odds of that happening any time soon, under present political circumstances, are indistinguishable from zero.
Yep, Sanders shouts. In other words, he doesn't debate at all. Which is to say he possesses none of that negotiation and compromise from which our democracy is built.
Moreover, our democracy does best when its chief executive has an iota of humility and realizes that he/she doesn't always have the answer.
3
@Robert None of these candidates can do basic math, so each is unfit for any public office.
At end-2017, there were about 411,000,000 firearms in the U.S., more than one for each of the then- 325,000,000 U.S. residents, including infants, who usually own little. (See U.S. Dept of Justice, "Firearms Commerce in the United States", 2000 and 2019; military-owned firearms excluded).
Things so abundant and concealable cannot be controlled. That's what foredoomed Prohibition, the nationwide ban on alcoholic drinks (1919-33).
Then, as now, the ingredients for home-brew could be bought in any grocery store. In some regions, distilling alcohol ("moonshine", "white lightning") was a tradition older than is this Republic. Prohibition made some "moonshiners" wealthy. Those, who backed Prohibition, were impenetrably stupid. They bequeathed to us well-organized criminal cartels, still a plague on the land.
Further, since 1980, the number of firearms in the U.S. has doubled, but the murder rate has halved. In 1980, the murder rate was 10.2 per 100,000 residents (Dept. of Justice, "Homicide Trends in the United States, 1980-2008", p.2). In 2017, the homicide rate was 5.2 per 100,000 residents (FBI, "Crime in the United States", 2017. Table 1). If firearms drove the incidence of criminality, the murder rate should have doubled. It didn't. The murder rate halved.
These candidates' incapacity to grasp these data show they are unfit to hold any public office.
@Jay E. Simkin
Thanks for your reply. I think we should be looking at all firearm mortalities, not just murders. In 2013 that rate was about 10 per 100,000. Now it is over 12 per 100,000. There is a strong correlation between gun ownership rates and several of the principal categories of firearm mortalities, especially suicides with firearms, and the murder of women and their children by their partners with firearms.
1
Applying the adjective "slick" to Elizabeth Warren is to imply she is dishonest or duplicitous. She and Bernie are, in fact, the two most honest candidates for the Democratic nomination.
12
Not happy with Mr. Bruni's phrase about Elizabeth Warren: "slipperiness gets you the prize". By most definitions re behavior, slippery has a negative connotation: "to be devious, scheming, and untrustworthy". This is hardly a neutral definition of Elizabeth Warren, who is most certainly not devious nor scheming nor untrustworthy. What's his point?
Mrs. Warren is an outstanding candidate whose intelligence very obviously exceeds that of most politicians--especially the angry person occupying the White House. We need someone of her skill and understanding to start to undo the havoc wreaked by this president.
12
Regarding Medicare for All, the correct answer is it will end up in "reduced health care costs". Stop the myopic question of whether it will raise or lower "taxes" as the measure by which to make any decision. What really counts is yearly out-of-pocket expenses, net costs, which is what Warren and Bernie address. Their plan lowers costs on the middle class. It is the media's job to explicate and make this clear and point out how looking only at taxes obfuscates the bottom line.
4
Democrats should focus on the electorate. In the last congressional elections the Democrats flipped 40 seats. Of those only two were progressives. That should speak volumes to us all. Here in the Midwest there are many (specially farmers) that are unhappy with Trump's shenanigans but I don't believe they will vote for anybody that they identify as a socialist.
4
I align far better with Biden's policies and I will support him whole-heartedly if he is the nominee; however, Elizabeth Warren is my first choice for the nomination.
I trust her as a leader and I like her as a person.
I disagree with her on plenty, but I trust her to make the right decisions when it comes to leading the country out of the mess that it's currently in.
10
I don't know why Warren doesn't instantly concede the obvious -- that Medicare for All would mean a major tax increase, not just for the rich but for the (vanishing) middle class. Quite probably, the resulting savings on insurance costs and on other societal costs would be a strong net gain.
But pretending that taxing the famous "one percent" could handle the entire cost of MFA is dishonest and self-defeating.
4
I agree with Bruni's assessments of every one of the candidates.
However I am left oddly and distinctly uncomfortable with his use of the words "slippery" and "slick" to describe Warren.
I am not one to leap to accusations of misogyny, especially in politics. I am a proponent of getting out of the kitchen if one can't take the heat.
However those words do not describe her performance or her personna, and I doubt they would have been applied to a male. I don't mind criticism of her. I do object to double standards. Being deft and quick on your feet, controlling the narrative and the terms of the debate- that is not "slippery."
13
I don’t understand how the richest nation that has ever existed on the face of this earth cannot provide access to health care to all its citizens. Every other industrialized country, and many non-industrial countries guarantees access to health care services to its people.
I remember watching a program on PBS about how health care was delivered in a muddy field by volunteers in West Virginia to uninsured people who had not seen a doctor in year. The next day I saw a documentary about how health care was delivered to remote areas of Thailand. Comparatively, the Thais were better served and their American counterparts in West Virginia.
11
@Jack Shultz Some of the industrialized countries can afford guaranteed health care access because: (a) for most of the post-World War II era, they have not had to spend much on defense, because the U.S. spent heavily to build the capacity to protect itself and many others; (b) health care is rationed in other places, so "general access" is limited - some treatments are simply not offered to those "up in years", etc.
The U.S. defense subsidy made sense, as countries ruined in World War II rebuilt. Once that was done, the subsidies should have been phased-out. But that wasn't done, so Germans became used to four weeks or more of vacation, when Americans were lucky to get three weeks and most got only two weeks.
In short, what exists overseas should be experienced first-hand before conclusions are based on it.
I admire Elizabeth Warren but she is too far to the left - not where the country is. And she has to be more honest about her past working life. She said that she was a teacher, then went to law school and then back to teaching. She was also a Republican and a successful attorney who represented a breast implant company who was being sued by women suffering because of that company's breast implants. She said that she tried to be fair to the women. I doubt that.
I prefer Amy Klobuchar and Senator Bennet - who unfortunately didn't qualify for this debate.
7
I was born in the late 1980s, and missed the social upheaval of the 1960s. I believe the election of Ms. Warren would parallel the magnitude of both of these eras in some ways. One thing is for sure: the social change that is needed in this country cannot be achieved by more right-centrism both parties have been selling us.
The slim Overton window in the United States has shifted little over my lifetime, if not further to the right. The idea of corporate exceptionalism has gone unchecked. It has decimated Americana to an almost unrecognizable degree; Walmart leaving town can be a predictor of if that town dies. A common theme: What good are more available jobs if none can pay the rent? If I lose my job what happens to my healthcare? To many working Americans it's clear that something is amiss.
The election of Ms. Warren would cement the beginning of a new era, the foundation being the 2018 election. I believe that our local and state elections have already begun to shift the Overton window to include the issues folks are facing right now.
Overall, we could all benefit from Ms. Warren's practical and rational approach as president. As millennials are having families of their own, the future would be brighter under a Warren presidency. I wish her the best.
13
@Tony The overton window has shifted little in your lifetime--and moved right? Are you serious?
For democrats, abortion in the 1990s was "safe, legal, and rare". Now the democrat candidates are hard to nail down on exactly how extreme the position is--with abortion for any reason into the last few months of the term, or even up until birth, even "keeping the child comfortable etc etc"--Ralph Northam
What was the 1990s democrat stance on gay marriage? What was Obama's stance during the 2008 election? Hillary's? California of all places voted down redefining marriage in 2008, and a judge overturned that proposition.
In the 1990s and into the 2010s, what was the democrat position on transgender athletes/bathrooms/transitioning minor children using hormones?
What was the democrat stance on illegal immigration in the 1990s and into the 2010s? There are speeches from Bill Clinton and Obama that circulate on right-leaning websites that show exactly what their thoughts were. Now you have every democrat candidate who wants to make it nothing more than a parking ticket for coming across the border illegally.
In the 1990s and into the 2010s, what was the democrat stance on confiscation of certain firearms from the law abiding? In 2019, two democrat candidates for president have been open for that.
How has anything moved to the right? Republican platform hasn't changed on much of anything in 25 years. Guns? Abortion? Gay marriage? No change.
This is THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION in the history of our country (at least in my lifetime). If our country's majority believes we can suffer going further backwards (and sideways and sewer-wards), we are so obviously going to lose more than our already lost soul and moral compass. So long as profiteering is put ahead of human justice and concerns, we will continue to see our individual powers evaporate, along with our clean air, water and minds. Warren (and Sanders) have developed viable concepts of a democratic, socially just and humanitarian future for our country, and it's about time....
6
So, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are characterized as being (implied negative) "far left" because they insist upon pointing out the core corruption of unregulated wealth-hording that is destroying both people and planet. Isn't that better characterized as being transparent?
13
@Waabananang
For some strange reason, a considerable number of Americans are still in denial about what is happening to the country and the dangers before them, yet, they STILL believe that the moderate/pragmatic/slow moving outdated policies and mentality of the past will suffice. Clearly, in this group of candidates, the only ones that recognize the changes that have to be made to turn the "American Ship" in the right direction are Sanders and Warren, NOT the same bunch of corporate/establishment hacks who are beholden to their donors and not their constituents.
In this case hope and optimism will not be enough, it has to be clear and concise action put forward by leaders who believe in and are committed to those policies, anything else is not an option.
6
@AACNY it does still seem preferable for a government based upon organizing principles such as “provide for the general welfare” and “for Ourselves and our Posterity” to be attending to the rules and projects that effect all our lives. As opposed to the hugely expanded influence of privatized corporate interests that seem unduly interested in providing yachts for themselves and a devastated ecosystem for Posterity.
I find that replacing the word “regulations” with “protections” helps to clarify the actual stakes of functional government oversight.
Elizabeth Warren is the most Genuine Politician of the bunch. Warren could attract the voters that went for Trump because they saw him as 'Real' when he offends.
Warren has been consistent in her messaging and came thru with the creation of the Consumer Protection Agency under Obama while you get the nagging feeling that Sanders is mostly ineffective as a leader given his years in the Senate with no memorable accomplishment for the working guy.
If Warren asked me for advice I would just tell her to keep her powder drive until she is in a position to shoot.
8
China certainly is in her court. Do not doubt for a moment that they will work hard in her behalf.
2
I have felt from the beginning that Warren is the one to watch. Alas, I neither care for her nor trust her. She's slippery and opportunistic -- in short, a typical Democratic Party politician. I don't think Warren will fare any better against Trump than Clinton. Trump would love running a vicious, misogynist and crude campaign against her . . . and likely squeak a second term. All this begs a question: Where are the decent candidates? Geriatrics, no bodies, career opportunists. No touch of genius, leadership or charisma in the bunch. As Mr Trump would say: SAD.
3
The problem I have with these debates is that they put pressure on the candidates to boast and swagger. They start sounding like Trump. Even Warren said she would immediately remove troops from Afghanistan. How about saying it is complicated, and she would ask advice from her generals, and leave it open. Sounded dictatorial if you ask me. Bernie meanwhile has apparently gone berserk. He acts like Statler or Waldorf of the muppets, only without the humor. Castro apparently has decided that being a jerk has its appeals. Harris now sounds like a muted bugs bunny. I am waiting for her to at point say: That's all folks! in that increasingly nasally voice.
God help us! Who will be left that can beat Trump!
2
"You could call that deceptive." Deceptive?
Surely Mr. Bruni you understand that the question is deceptive and Prof. Warren is giving the truthful answer.
"Oh no, my taxes are going up by $8000! Gasp! Run!"
Except I won't need to pay the $15,000 medical insurance bill for my family. Get it? It's not that hard for people to understand if having people understand, rather than frightening them, is your goal. She's not going to play the game - she hit upon the perfect answer: what counts is your overall out of pocket costs. And she'll be saying that till the cows come home in response to the next million gotcha questions about health care. No matter how frustrated the media hacks get in repeating them. Because they will never learn. The people will get the idea.
11
@Bob I don’t think it’s that simple. The reason Ms. Warren won’t actually talk about costs except in the broadest generalities is almost certainly because a number of people who consider themselves middle class will likely see a net increase in their total expenditures. My back of the envelope guess is that any family making more than $100,000 will see an increase in their total expenditures. I know many people will argue that $100k isn’t middle class, but I also think that threshold will ensnare a lot of suburbia. Total expenditures may be unchanged, but that doesn’t mean that there won’t be winners and losers.
I was excited by Barack Obama and contributed to both of his Presidential campaigns. He won. I was lukewarm about Hillary Clinton but also contributed to her 2016 campaign. She lost. I have loved Elizabeth Warren ever since I watched one of her talks well before she announced her run for the Senate. I am excited by her now as a Presidential candidate. She has learned important lessons while on the campaign trail. This is crucial; it is NOT "slick." Never again will she take the bait from Trump.
All of these people--including Frank--wetting their knickers over the worry that people like Peter Wehner and David Brooks won't vote for Elizabeth Warren blithely forget the actual Democrats who'll lose interest and just sit at home if they're subjected yet again to a lukewarm candidate such as Biden. Both candidates have an equal likelihood of winning or losing against Trump.
I choose to vote FOR something rather than AGAINST something. I choose to vote for Warren.
10
@Flaminia
Being from California your vote will be as crucial as mine.
I'm conflicted. On the one hand I think if Elizabeth Warren is not electable, then America deserves 4 more years of Trump.
On the other, should we float a candidate for the ugly America it is today rather than the one we'd like it to be?
That ugly America with its racism, sexism, anti-intellectualism etc.
I'm not sure I'm willing to really face the latter.
4
I agree with your analysis, Frank, and those who think a woman like Warren wouldn't be strong enough to beat Trump aren't looking at the scope of her history or strategy, not strateegery.
3
" Castro’s pointing it out to them wasn’t illuminating. It was just plain crude."
And if Biden can't handle a bit of rudeness and crudeness from Castro, how will he manage the master of rude and crude - Trump?
3
Sorry Frank,
I don't watch these debates.
It's a complete disservice to the electorate and entirely a boon for the networks. Money, money, money. That is all the matters not substance.
It's another reality tv series (in a daily running of them) that Americans should not watch.
American voters need to wake up and be better informed.
Do the hard work and research who these candidates are and what they stand for and how they would impact lives and communities.
You can't discern and make intelligent and informed decisions by watching reality tv.
It's toxic and unproductive.
I've lived on 3 continents and traveled the world and I can assure that our electoral process is a laughing stock.
I don't care who the NYT or anyone else thinks won the debate.
It's your opinion, that's all. It's meaningless.
I care about policy, character, competence, dignity and a whole host of other attributes I want to see in a President.
Any of the Democratic candidates are miles better than him.
And Democratic voters, most specifically Bernie Bros better put their petty tribal and childish instincts aside when he loses and vote for the eventual nominee. We know what the alternative is.
As far as I am concerned it's the old binary choice in the end.
If it's the current occupant in the White House versus even a cadaver.
Simple, I check the cadaver's box.
2
Since Elizabeth Warren is only polling
about 10 percent with African-American voters
she would have an almost impossible chance
of beating Trump. Biden remains the one
most likely to beat Trump.
4
@Tom Celandine
True, about the polling, but why is she polling so low among AA voters? She has no history of voting for legislation that marginalized or harmed AAs, and she has been a consumer advocate for years, and she wants to make all of the kitchen table issues better for everyone. So, what is the systemic problem? Why wouldn't AA voters trust her?
1
Go with Warren for president.
Hilary won the popular vote showing a woman can win.
trump would be demolished in a debate with Warren.
Doubtful he'd even debate her.
It would be a big mistake if he did.
She'd destroy him.
5
@J. Prufrock
I would like to hear a side discussion between Donald and Elizabeth about Alfred J Prufrock. Trump would however be an expert in the Hollow Men; since he surrounds himself with them.
1
I see so many comments that equate electability with winning over moderate, middle-aged white men. Has anyone talked to anybody under 30 about Joe Biden? They’re less excited about him than they were about Hillary Clinton. Democrats can’t blow this chance by nominating somebody who’s going to alienate younger voters.
6
Warren is going to scare away moderates with her soak the rich rhetoric. She will unfortunately scare away people who are uncomfortable voting for a woman (they're not good people but they're voters) and she is vulnerable to being destroyed by the GOP for her incredibly stupid DNA test. She may seem like the next great explainer but nothing explains her tone deafness on that one. She's from Oklahoma, great -- don't see her spending a lot of time there. She comes off much more Harvard than Okie and while that's fine with me, it's not a plus. The Dems won't have a problem carrying Massachusetts, so why would they need her? If she gets nominated, the Dems will deserve exactly what they get which is at BEST the WH without the Senate and no mandate.
3
I don't want a single penny of my health care money going to useless health execs. Please take away my private health insurance.
7
l will make this brief, if Elizabeth Warren is the Deomcratic nominee Trump will win, this is a center-right country, period stop!
3
Warren is imminently more knowledgeable than any of the other Democratic candidates. She should be the leader of the pack. However, she is not a moderate, a big lick against her for me. Her demeanor is ok. Can she handle the president in a debate? Probably better than Clinton did. The rest of the Democrats are uninteresting except for Buttigieg.
1
I'm starting to dream of a Warren/Buttigieg ticket.
Trump would duck any debates with Warren, and if Pence is still the Veep, then Buttigieg could go toe-to-toe with him on God, religion, and scripture; and Buttigieg would win.
7
From what I heard last night I feel that Julian Castro is not a good man. He's an opportunist, who will take cheap shots. Not a leader I would follow.
2
I was not impressed at all with Biden. He can run as Obama's heir all he wants but I don't see him as capable. I enjoyed Andrew Yang's answers. I liked seeing Elizabeth Warren excited and more than happy to share her ideas with us. I appreciated Beta O'Rourke's outburst about guns. And Bernie Sanders has a lot to contribute. In fact some of these people wouldn't stand a chance if it hadn't been for him in 2016.
Every one of the candidates ducked questions. There were plenty of self serving answers given. But I think that the conversation is still moving and that attention is, at long last, being focused on we, the citizens. How long that will last is anyone's guess.
Yet there is one last hurdle to jump and I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned: we cannot vote back the same GOP senators and representatives if we want a Democrat in the White House to succeed or the country to change for the better. This sort of split has led to the logjams we've had. McConnell is more of an obstacle than Reid was because McConnell has no interest in working across the aisle no matter who wins.
Whatever happens and whoever wins the Democratic nomination it's important to pay attention to the House and Senate races as well in 2020.
9/13/2019 11:57am first submit
1
Senator Warren has my vote. She's the perfect antidote for Trump's incompetence.
3
How about you refer to Warren as SMART, ARTICULATE etc instead of 'slick'.
She isn't selling used cars.
4
Lizzy Warren, if nominated would govern with intelligence and grace similar to Germany's Angela Merkel. God knows the country
could benefit greatly with that sort of leadership.
4
In the end, we will get the president and government we deserve.
To everyone saying Oh my god, if it's not Biden, Trump is going to win: does that mean that if EW or anyone besides Biden is the nominee, then you're going to vote for Trump? Or third party? Or stay at home?
2
I understand that the NYT is sold to Biden, just as it was sold to Clinton in 2016, when not a single columnist endorsed Bernie Sanders, who would have beaten Donald Trump.
Elizabeth Warren is so much better than all the other candidates (any of whom would be an enormous relief after Trump) that she is virtually in a class by herself. She is the most intelligent, the most knowledgeable and the most articulate unless you are looking for zingy one-liners, as Mr. Bruni obviously is.
Warren does not need to attack her fellow candidates and she does not; she just states her position (and if necessary restates it in another way, and another) with details to back it, and often with a light touch. She is the one, along with Bernie, who cares the most about helping the middle class and ordinary Americans.
Warren shares Bernie's concerns but expresses them better. She will restore the American honor Trump has destroyed.
I'm glad to see that so many of your readers understand that, though unfortunately Bruni does not.
2
Yes. Let's bring decency back to democracy, and more importantly back to the White House.
1
As a tentative Warren supporter, I hadn't thought of her as cunning, but maybe she was. I was wondering about her relative silence early in the debate, and I think now that it was calculated, while she let the others go at it.
You can't compete with trump in insults without debasing yourself, which is just what he wants; but he's as cunning as they come and, of all those on the stage in Houston, Senator Warren is the one who can out-cunning him.
11:30 EDT, 9/13
2
"CASTRO: Are you forgetting what you said two minutes ago? Are you forgetting already what you said just two minutes ago? I can’t believe that you said two minutes ago that they had to buy in and now you’re saying they don’t have to buy in. You’re forgetting that."
Ageism is the last acceptable "ism" in America. After last night, I wouldn't vote for Julian Castro for dog catcher.
2
and yet...if we had only listened to his shouting then maybe we wouldn't still be in Afghanistan and Iraq and Syria and all that now...
Trying to denigrate personality, the famous Ad Hominem, is one of the least expensive sophistry tricks of the trade.
How about the weight of ideas in the "debate" scale here.
2
Re the “irregularity” of Clinton using her own email setup while she was Secretary of State - shocking, eh?
But last I heard, hackers had got into the White House, the State Dept, and a number of other government email systems - but not the system Hillary set up and used while Secretary of State.
2
It’s becoming increasingly clear that Warren is our candidate.
5
She would not be able to displace Donald Trump! Only Joe Biden can do that!
5
@Shenonymous
Yep, just like Hillary did and Biden is "cut from the same cloth".
Warren reminds me of the librarian who shushes you for talking in the library.
5
Bruni, no doubt, prefers the type of answer where candidates are asked to raise their hands to assent or reject a question framed by a usually preening moderator.
Warren won't play that game.
4
Frank is simply channeling the leadership ticket that he wants as opposed to the one that is actually forming and can win.
Just because a candidate agrees with your core beliefs does not make "her" a winner before the first noise emanates from the stage.
2
Who can beat trump? And although the answer should be any functioning adult, we know what happened in 2016. We cannot afford a repeat. Let's support the eventual Democratic candidate. The survival of our nation is at stake.
2
Yes, you hit it on the head about Warren being cagey about not explaining how her policies would be paid for. Although she does have plans.....the wealth tax, repealing the last tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations....but she's smart enough to know that harping on that will just result in "but the Senate!" arguments.
1
During the mortgage meltdown my job was crunching numbers on mortgage lending in a research setting. Hands on the data, we could see how lenders were selling bad loans down the river, marketing high cost mortgages to minorities, and then doing it all again on the refis.
The country needed a bottom-up solution that saved the homeowners and our neighborhoods — funding was so convoluted you sometimes couldn’t even figure out who actually owned a particular mortgage! But our government gave relief to the lenders who caused the crisis instead of the homeowners, and we crashed.
Two politicians actually understood what was happening and what needed to be done to make sure it didn’t happen again: Barney Frank and Elizabeth Warren. They didn’t prevail then, but they did have workable strategies based on reality.
Warren would be a capable, smart, empathetic leader. Her campaign has momentum, and she has the ability to connect with voters, especially in the Midwest. She’s looking everyday more like a winner.
7
I wish Warren and the other Democratic candidates would spend more time addressing the foreign attacks on our voting system which every respected national security expert is shouting to the world, as well as gerrymandering. We are under cyber-attack, likely worse than in 2015 - 2016. How can we have faith in the integrity of our voting system in 2020? Doesn't that trump any other concern?
2
"Idealism puts you in play. Slipperiness gets you the prize."
Political quotables... to the nth.
4
Bruni,
Do you have to say Warren instead of Sanders, because you're embarrassed that you undermined Bernie in 2016?
What has changed? Sanders and Warren are soulmates, joined at the hip, as I wrote on one of your columns when you were promoting Hillary. You went for Hillary then—why aren't you going for Biden now?
Or does it have to be a female, in your calculus.
4
Canny? Cunning? Slippery? Anyone want to guess which candidate Mr. Bruni doesn't like?
6
The democrat party is in disarray and at war with itself. Biden wins. Hands down. Warren and the rest of the socialists are just plain scary.
3
Am I wrong, but is there a big dose of misogyny here?
6
Oh, Elizabeth Warren is "slick," and "cunning?" As I recall, you didn't like Hillary too much, either. Maybe she was too shrill for you.
6
What a shallow analysis of the debate and the candidates for a veteran journalist!
It is almost worthy of People's magazine.
Why can't you tell us what distinguished the candidates in essence, in content rather than form? The latter is not as important as the former and without it is only good for a tabloid. The Times should have had a better OpEd on an important debate where a lot was discussed.
1
Bruni,
Do you have to say Warren instead of Sanders, because you're embarrassed that you undermined Bernie in 2016?
What has changed? Sanders and Warren are soulmates, joined at the hip, as I wrote on one of your columns when you were promoting Hillary. You went for Hillary the—why aren't you going for Biden now?
Or does it have to be a female, in your calculus.
1
I see the knives are out for Warren - this whole piece is a classic example of “damning with faint praise”, starting out by calling her “slick”. That’s the nicest thing you can say about her?
Praising her for her ability to be evasive? Give me a break.
Burying her point about Medicare by failing to mention her argument - higher taxes are a bargain because it will be cheaper than what we are now paying with our current system - really Mr. Bruni?
Once more the Times demonstrates that it can be counted on to keep the country from going too far left - even as we descend into fascism.
6
All f these editorials — especially the one about winners and losers — are so clearly polluted by who the columnists and contributors are supporting that they are no better than getting opinions from people in line at the supermarket checkout. A bit of cogent analysis would go much further than the cheerleading for each columnists favorite.
3
"Moderate" = Republican Lite
2
@Cassandra Progressive = Socialist Lite
1
Frank, Frank, Frank,
What a populist you are. You write McCain no less. Look into the fire on the USS Forrestal.. I wonder which frat boy caused that.
Will be Biden/Warren
3
Another day, another full throated, impassionate love letter to Warren from the NYT.
Just be honest and come out for her.
Stop pretending you care for any other candidate.
Besides, Trump would love her as the candidate, he would spent months laughing about it, and win in a landslide.
2
Told you so. It’s Warren AND Harris, in that order. Both Brainy, and one with extra special sass. Trumps worst nightmare.
@Phyliss Dalmatian Or his dream ticket.
2
"Cunning...canny...slipperiness...evasive...deceptive," (and more). I just can't imagine reading these adjectives applied to a man who'd just delivered such a masterful debate performance against nine rivals, and schooling her interlocutors to boot. But when thrown at Elizabeth Warren it's all too familiar. Memo to the NYT (my paid home page for 20 years!) and Mr. Bruni: stop giving the impression that your genuinely esteemed pages are an arm of "JOE 2020." & PS Thanks for being there. G
6
No drama O'Warren?
Frank, why don't you guys in the reporting game do some investigation, instead of just repeating talking points from republicans?
Go out and find some one who loves his private insurance, that isn't Kaiser. People love being insured; if they get sick or injured they might get taken care of. Provided their provider agrees to cover the costs. And they seldom do. All of them anyway.
Why don't you research whether the amount we will pay in taxes for Medicare for All might not be less than what we pay for in private premiums.
We don't have Medicare for All because we tried it and found it lacking; we don't have it because the insurance/industrial complex doesn't want it and the politicians they own are doing their bidding.
The 4th Estate gave the carnival show full coverage in 2016, issues and reality be damned, and the Nation teeters on the brink of Civil War. Now I might grant that a Civil War would be great for ratings and clicks, but in reality it would be a very bad idea.
You guys need to remember that in a fascist state reporters are generally out of work. And in prison.
2
He economic plan for corporations is an updated syncretism of the Russian soviets and Italian Corporate Syndicates from the 1920's, closer to the latter. Facism without the jackboots. Anti-fa will provide the black uniforms. We will starve.
Damning with faint praise.
Frank, you and the rest of the media coddling Biden won't bode well for him if he in fact wins the nomination. Castro's comments may have been searing, but it's no match for what Trump would unleash on Biden.
Look, maybe it's not age - Biden has always had a rambling manner of speaking - but when asked about race last night, he gave a bumbling answer that talked about record players and Venezuela. If this would have been Sanders, the media would be having a field day. Instead, I keep hearing today that Biden was one of the 'winners.'
Pundits long ago anointed Biden as the most electable nominee-in-waiting, but considering his baggage (i.e., race, women) and watching the debates, Biden seems like one of the riskiest candidates in the Democratic field.
3
Biden cannot string together a coherent sentence, much less tenable policy ideas. His biggest play seems to be mentioning Obama (who I notice has not endorsed him, has not even come close to doing so). The only reason he leads in the polls is that most people are not paying attention yet and remember him as a likable enough guy who seemed middle-of-the-road enough not to scare the horses or energize the Republican base. Once he has to respond in the moment or debate Trump, he will commit gaffe after gaffe. He is NOT the most electable Democratic candidate and the Democrats will be making a huge mistake if they nominate him.
3
It never ceases to amaze me that when the discussion of universal/medicare for all is discussed, why is it that so many Americans cannot seem to grasp this simplest of ideas? Every other developed country in the world has some form of universal healthcare and they have had it for decades because it is less costly, ALL of their citizens are covered and they have better overall outcomes than the U.S.!
Also WHY is it that so many Americans when fed misinformation, scare tactics and bogus information about costs,(and that includes Joe Biden and other corporate/establishment types) they can't grasp the fact that those that criticize the concept are under the control of corporate donors whose ultimate agenda is to maintain the "status quo", NOT make the necessary common sense changes that will benefit ALL of the citizenry.
There is a reason why Americans have been haggling about what to do about healthcare since Harry Truman was President without resolution. It is called MONEY and LOBBYING, the healthcare industry is now NUMBER ONE in D. C. and they are very good at it.
2
I will happily support any of the Democrats if they are the party’s nominee. Of course Sanders is not a real member of the party and I would stay home rather than vote for him. Still bitter about 2016 and the fact that Bernie supporters stayed home or, even worse, a handful crossed over to vote for Trump.
1
"canny," "cunning," and "slipperiness"–Bruni's adjectives for Warren reveal so much about his conscious biases.
The NYT's desperate quest to prove neutrality (a desire not shared by the rightist platforms whose ratings are their envy) by front-loading the opinion pages with centrists and conservatives bears poisoned fruit.
As a pulmonary and critical care physician, I have to say that Elizabeth Warren is right, and Amy Klobuchar is wrong about the private health insurers. Amy does not understand the fundamental change that has occurred recently.
Over the last five years their attitude has changed completely. Their behavior suggests that they answer to no one. They deny tests. They deny life-saving treatments now without medical discretion but plenty of profit-motivated discretion. To supervise that industry, it would take billions to pay for an adequate watch-dog group. Can we afford that? No, no one can. Hence, get rid of them.
3
Of the candidates, Warren, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Sanders, each seem, feel and sound qualified to run for and be president, so far. Howe-ver, I cannot vote for a person who would forgive college loans and even make going to college free. (Although the details of this plan are not apparent.)
Just like the opioid crisis, some responsibility has to belong to the person taking the drugs and the person wanting the education. Government is not ‘Father/Mother’. So, I must vote accordingly.
1
@Alice Broughton agree 100% (and that from someone voting Democrat for decades (not that I would vote for what's-his-name either, of course)...although I would agree with many pragmatic, practical, common sense progressive ideas, the two proposals you mention are way too much (as are "free" childcare, government paid parental leave, reparations payments, etc,)...
1
I had my hopes set on Kamala Harris as I thought she would have the toughness and audacity to face a Republican Senate and still get things done through maximally interpreting executive power.
But Kamala is not as eloquent and confident as I hoped and she gets stuck in anecdotes about herself instead of hammering on policies America desperately need to restore sanity and community.
The US should have its first female president and I changed my support to Warren. If she can't be elected, then America deserves the pollution, religious zealotry, cronyism and randomness of 4 more Trump years.
I, for one, will be moving back to Europe if that happens.
1
Sleepy Kamala was not on her game at all...
"You could call that deceptive."
No, you couldn't, not if you don't want to be deceptive yourself. Answering the 'tax increase' question with a simple 'yes' would in fact be misleading. Even starting with a 'yes, but' would be political malpractice, since so many people would stop listening after the first part.
Reframing her answer to focus on the total burden and cost to the middle class, which would be the same or less, was exactly the right approach. It's an accurate answer to what is (or should be) actually being asked, which is will the *total* amount the middle class pays go up. It's just that burden will be paid for through taxes instead of through contributions to private insurance premiums and other costs such as copays and deductibles - which honestly, so long as your take home amount stays at least the same, who cares?
"One of the debate’s moderators, George Stephanopoulos, asked her, and then Biden pressed her, but she never grew flustered and never succumbed, instead stressing over and over that in terms of people’s reduced health care costs, they’d be ahead of the game. You could call that deceptive. " No it is Stephanopoulis who is being deceptive. He is trying to get Warren to make a statement which can be quoted out of context to make it look like Medicare For All will cost people money, when it will actually save people money. Warren is smart enough to not give him that quote.
5
Frank, I think you miss the point about Amy Klobuchar.
She is interested in the POLITICS of winning in 2020, not focusing as much on the POLICIES that are driving the ideologues on the left.
In order to institute POLICIES you have to WIN POLITICALLY first.
Klobuchar gets that. The ideologues would rather be “right” than win.
So will the left be proud of their purity when Trump takes office again in Jan. 2021?
Let’s win for once by playing practical politics.
1
Yes. We love Elizabeth Warren. She’s articulate and really sees things from the perspective of the common citizen, not the billionaires club.
But the Democrats have a long way to go. Many people in the handful of states that matter most for the electoral college will never vote democratic, even if its in their own interest, because of the abortion issue.
1
As a freelancer who pays for my own health insurance, I could care hang-all about a middle-class tax increase. No one gets specific about numbers on the critics' side either.
If health providers have to accept the rates set by Medicare, I'm fairly confident I'll be paying less in taxes for my Medicare for All plan than I am out of pocket for my Blue Cross plan - $610/month in California for a silver plan for a single healthy 50 year old female. It still cost me an additional $600 in co-pays for a minor sports injury this summer. How frightening is the thought of a serious illness with this expensive, yet stingy, health insurance? I can't even describe it, but I'm sure you can find several people in a homeless shelter who can, because they've been bankrupted by health care costs.
Also, I'm tired of the "Elizabeth Warren can't beat Trump" misogyny. Based on what poll? It's so depressing that we have so little faith that men in this country can tolerate a female leader - although it sure looks that way. Maybe she can get a Sarah Palin costume and start saying "You betcha." Could she win then?
6
@ann You are absolutely right. What Sen. Warren recognizes along with a substantial body of experience is that private health insurance is irredeemable. A pulmonary physician above commented that was his experience that a health insurance company often denies coverage even if it would save a life. To answer those who like their employer health insurance, arrange committees and arbitrators to facilitate worker compensation in lieu of private insurance. One of the candidates should have brought forth this alternative rather than cow tow to insurance companies.
I love Warren, and I'd love to have her on the ticket as VP. To run for the presidency? It's an unfair viewpoint, but it would be too soon for another woman. People vote with simplistic notions, and just seeing "female" associated with HRC would be very unfortunate. Remember, it's not just the coasts but also across the country, keeping a "50 state" strategy along with recognition of "identity politics." Both, which is exactly what Sanders announced when he declared he was running.
1
Certainly Senator Warren did well in this last debate. Yet as with previous debates, the moderators set the tone. While perhaps this set of journalists were more concise in their questioning, the weight of the issues was set by the news media, not the public.
Which simply means that as Ms. Warren is clearly the most talented communicator, we have yet to find out what moves folks the most. And the question about “paying” for healthcare still hasn’t been explained so the majority of voters can understand it. “Medicare for all” has a nice ring to it, but the reality of that idea is that yes, it will cost us all to have it. But in the long term, it will cost us less as a whole and provide the security of having healthcare without breaking the bank.
Lastly, none of these proposals happens without legislation. And as we see now, nothing happens in the Senate without Senator Grouchy allowing bills to come before that body. And last night they touched on the filibuster rule; while it’s a valuable tool for the minority, it’s a deal-killer for any change when a super-majority of 60 votes is required for passing most legislation.
1
There are a lot of comments here that basically say, "If Warren wins the nomination, we'll be handing the election to Trump." But these comments offer virtually no evidence. It's very aggravating to see this attitude, not so much because I disagree with it, but more because there is literally nothing to support it yet people go on believing it. When Kerry got the nod, we were playing it "safe" and acknowledged it, as we were with Clinton. In both of those cases, we got uninspiring and problematic candidates who lost. In the case of Obama, when we picked an energetic but "risky" candidate, we won. The track record is pretty darn clear. Why can't people see this. I swear it's like looking at horses with blinders on.
4
@Jeremiah Crotser
If they don’t make room for Bernie, they’ll lose.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/24/opinion/global-recession.html
W in the Middle
NY State
Jan. 24
.....
Elizabeth Warren just made the most insightful proposal on US taxation I can recall...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/24/us/politics/wealth-tax-democrats.html
The idea – like an assault weapon ban – isn’t new...
But somehow, it never gets past the talking stage...
...
Having made her proposal, she should go talk to the fifty or so Americans worth more than $10B, and get their thinking on how something like this should work...
For example – some folks might choose to take out what is effectively a reverse-mortgage...
I don’t know...Nor – since I’m not one of the fifty – will I presume to know...
Am dead serious, Senator...
...
Your proposal is an outstanding start – now get in there and do some horse-trading to get it over the goal line...
And – while you’re at it – figure out a practical way to tax revenue for some businesses, instead of profit...
Any state that can spell “sales tax” has...
......................
PS
For some time, have been viewing Warren the same way I view Trump...
Take the sensible stuff literally, and the nonsensical stuff metaphorically...
PPS
The biggest and most repeated gaffe out there is Bernie’s “Medicare for All”...
Ask him about “Medicare for Vermont” at the next scrum...
1
Kudos again to Sen. Warren. Brains and brawn and a sense of humor is the exact opposite of the clod now residing in the White House.
3
I think Elizabeth Warren is terrific! Enough, already, with old white guys -- cranky or folksy or, in the case of the current occupant of the White House, evil. And FYI, Elizabeth may be near in age to them, but she is 10 times as alive as any of them. She's actually 10 times as alive as anyone else that was on the stage or asking the questions! And watching her control her later interview with the ohh-so-annoying interrupter Chris Matthews...she was adroit, poised, clear and rose high above his boorish tactics. Bravo, Elizabeth Warren!
3
In the 2018 election in MA the Republican Governor Charlie Baker was far more popular than Sen. Warren. https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/11/10/baker-warren-popular-mass-voters-midterm-elections-2018. If Sen. Warren is the Dem. candidate, she would be resigning her Senate seat and Gov. Baker would probably appoint a Republican to fill out her term. If she loses the presidency the Senate will be more Republican.
1
Stop picking at the details - Trump has to go. Trump has to go. Trump has to go. Trump has to go. Trump has to go. Trump has to go. Get it?
2
Senator Warren is already a better president than both 45 AND Hillary...
“Slick?” What a peculiar description, especially in regard to whether she could be elected. Is that the best you could do?
1
We NEED a woman as President. One as smart and experienced as Ms. Warren would be ESPECIALLY welcome after the debacle of the Trump/Neo-Con/Fascist years.
1
Castro is now dead to me. Not only crude but disgusting. As with Harris, is this how you want to win? Julian, you can leave now.
4
My informal polling says Democrats are tired of old white men, and will vote for Elizabeth.
1
Listen folks just because she is also a blonde woman does not make Elizabeth Warren another Hillary Clinton. They are nowhere near alike. Warren is not Hillary No.2! It is foolish and ignorant to keep perpetuating this misconception.
3
This is an obvious attempt at damning with faint praise. If you have a favorite candidate (which you pretty obviously do), then come out and say it at the front and explain that you are trying to knock one of the others down to help yours.
Your not so well-disguised hit job is a bit too slick.
If Warren wins, we lose.
Biden 2020!
4
Elizabeth Warren has a “seat” on the Armed Services Committee, Frank, not a “perch.” She’s not a bird. Yes, there is something “slippery” going on in your column. It’s called sexist, demeaning language.
4
Our National deficit just exceeded a trillion dollars and you think she’s slick. Promising free health care and eliminating student loan debt isn’t slick; it’s stupid. The Democrats are no better than the Republicans. We can’t afford what they’re are promising. And even Sanders and Warren are not being honest. They always dodge the question on taxes for the middle class. All of my four children had debt as well as my wife and I to put them through college. Two went on to law school. Suck it up and pay your bills like many before you. It’s called accountability.
1
Warren can't win PA, OH, FL, and MI.
1
Wow, Mr. Bruni! Are you showing your chauvinistic side! Not only is Elizabeth Warren not poetic or passionate about her ideas but she is also, "canny" and "cunning" "evasive " and slippery... not smart and thoughtful like the other men on the stage. You, like some men in the world, see smart women as a threat and describe their aggressive words and actions in negative terms. Shame on you!
4
We cannot have a moderate, the young people who voted Green and Libertarian last time will leave we need all to vote tRump out. Fear cannot rule change.
2
Elizabeth Warren has what Hillary Clinton lacked, and that is charisma. Either you have it or you do not. Elizabeth Warren has it coupled with intelligence and knowledge (Hillary certainly did not lack these attributes). She could take Trump on in a debate and defeat him (he is no match for her intelligence and depth of knowledge) and I believe she could beat him in 2020.
I respect Joe Biden, but Trump would eat his lunch in a debate, and make no mistake, Trump will pick up on the cruel jabs about Biden's memory hurled at Biden by Castro. Trump absolutely revels in cruelty. Castro has already planted the seed of doubt in peoples' minds about Biden's ability to lead this country, and Trump will nurture the growth of that seed.
I think Elizabeth Warren needs to explain how her vision of Medicare for All would work in an understandable way - especially how it would be paid for, and I hope she would be open to compromise as her campaign progresses. Being open to compromise does not mean you do so at the expense of your ethics. Medicare for All is the hoped for ideal, but shoring up the ACA right now would be a better choice, while working toward that ideal.
I have no idea how all this is going to shake out in the end. It is a long way until the election, and so much can happen, but right now, if the election were tomorrow, Elizabeth Warren would have my vote, with hopefully Pete Buttigieg as her running mate. I know, I know, but I am not giving up on this country.
4
"Pete Buttigieg’s beautifully shaped final answer put hers, delivered just a few minutes earlier, almost immediately out of my mind." ... if you're a man, that is.
Unstoppable until the general election that is. She is already -- and perhaps fatally -- wounded by Trump. His Pochantas slur, while racist itself, was meant to appeal not to racism per se but to label Warren a phony, a charge that resonated not only with Trump's voters (who suspect northeastern elites -- like former Harvard Law professors -- are not without opportunism in their embrace of minorities); it also resonated with Warren herself. Nor was this the first time a charge of opportunism and cynicism had been laid at her feet. Those who remember her opposition to the appointment of Antonio Weiss to Treasury, for example, might also recall Obama's comment when he had to withdraw the nomination. "Well," he opined, " you have to remember that Elizabeth is a politician." Coming from our former President, that was the equivalent of a two-week Twitter storm. "Cynic, opportunist, phony, POLITICIAN." That was the meaning of "Pochantas" and the worry that led to the infamous DNA test. That meaning will not be lost on Trump in the general election. To him it cannot help but look like a weakness, and once he spies one, he does not relent. Just ask Rubio, Cruz, and Jeb Bush. Or Elizabeth Warren in December 2020.
2
Readers appear to be in the same bubble they were in with HRC. This candidate is not electable by the most important nominal and electoral voters: moderates (of both parties), swing and independents. The DNC is unfortunately being led by a former "Clintonista" who is rather out of touch with the country, has no business, industrial, international or military experience or sensibility. Moreover, as the GOP Chair woman smartly observed last night, the Democratic party has swung completely far left, embracing socialism, complete government intervention and an abandonment of national security. If viewers didn't find the "debate" not only hilarious but rather pathetic in its triviality, then 2020 is lost to them. Welcome back, President Trump. With any of those candidates, Trump is going to win by a landslide margin. Tulsi Gabbard was the best hope, but she was shunned because she is too smart, too poised, too attractive, too experienced and too pragmatic. Down, down, down, with the DNC chairman.
Actually Tom Perez was Obama’s Secretary of Labor with a long, long track record of working for progressive causes going at least as far back as Kennedy, not to mention his various degrees in international relations and sudhlike.
There’s this thingy called Wikipedia now, you know.
2
I prefer a candidate who is NOT evasive. Pete Buttigieg and Beto O'Rourke answered every question directly. the others did not, at least consistently. I am a "vote blue, no matter who" though I hope I won't have to vote for Warren. Outside of her slickness, her behavior during the Obama Administration was abominable. She caused more problems then solutions and we don't need more people like that in Washington as far as I'm concerned.
3
Ugly little column from Frank Bruni. He implies that Warren's politics is the product of a devious, conniving, underhanded mind while he himself dwells on the candidates' sentimental sides or their presentations: O'Rourke was poignant, Klobuchar and Booker had funny jokes, Sanders shouts. The superficiality of his observations tells me that he sees Warren as a threat; a threat to what, I don't know. True, she is dodging the uncomfortable tax increase that her Medicare for All plan will require. But that is the exception. No other candidate has so many viable proposals laid out in such specific detail. I don't personally agree with them all. To my mind, Warren is too left. That might cost her the election, but many of her proposals - comprehensive child care, increases in social security benefits, bankruptcy reform - will, if enacted, solve big problems in the lives of the working class voters who back Donald Trump and that might win her the presidency. And she is the only candidate to have shown the personal wherewithal to go toe to toe with Donald Trump without hesitating or backing down. She is either the best or the worst candidate we could choose. I think she will win the nomination and I will be happy about it.
7
@Nick Yes! There is something very ugly about this column.
1
Hillary Clinton was always described as a super intelligent, super well- prepared policy wonk who would roll right over Trump. What makes Warren any more likely to succeed in doing so? Trump didn't utter any coherent strategy on policy issues and in the end, he didn't have to; he just faked it and succeeded in bamboozling millions of Americans to elect him anyway.
4
@HP
Very simple. Clinton was the "annointed one" of a party that ignored what was going on in the rest of country, especially in the swing states of Michigan,Ohio and Wisconsin when Bernie Sanders won 2 of the 3 states in the primary. That should have been a warning sign, yet, they did not pay attention.
Clinton was also part of the long running Washington Corporate/Political/Media Establishment that more and more of the electorate were learning to despise.
Warren and Sanders do not have that baggage. and Trump has now got a record, and other than handing out the pre-ordained TRILLION AND A HALF dollar tax cut to corporations and the wealthy, massive chaos and creating ever widening divisions in the country, his record is one of accomplishing basically nothing, enriching himself and telling "just a few lies" along the way.
Or you could call it neither deceptive or evasive and simply call it what it is...The most sensible idea. If health costs are less expensive after a tax is paid then what is deceptive? The fact that she wouldn't say a tax is involved in the process?
I suppose she might be trying to avoid it because of the shallow abilities of the general public to grasp such a simple concept. They can get behind a talking point...TAXES!...NO TAXES!
The problem in this country is the entrenchment of voters in BOTH parties. Republicans don't care if an idea works or not and will drive right off a cliff just to stay with their party. Democrats are just too afraid of what Republicans think and won't take bold steps towards real change.
Warrens health care idea involves a tax or taxes but because health care costs will drop dramatically the American citizen will save money after everything is said and done.And yet, millions of Republicans will hear this and turn right around and say? NO TAXES! OH NO! NOT ME!
Democrats will then watch said Republicans and cower as they hide apologetically behind the talk of baby steps and increments.
4
I still think that Warren is the best. She like all of the others keep espousing the same diatribes. However, she needs to stop reiterating the same things about her family, and incorporate new lines.
And finally, Medicare for all is not feasible, and will never be able to achieve legislative reality. That is her soft spot.
4
@Quandry
Then start electing those in both the Senate and Congress that will make it a reality!
Slick? What an odd way to describe Warren's response to the question about Afghanistan. I would have just left it at wise, informed, personal, effective, genuine and smart.
7
It is said that those who voted Donald in wanted him to shake the place up. He's done that in spades. He's shaken things so much that our government is a shambles. We need the next POTUS to be ready to put things back together, stronger and better than before. We need a POTUS who understands that returning to the pre-2016 status quo is not the goal--that same old, same old got us where we are today. The "checks and balances" we naively assumed would prevent a lunatic or tyrant from reaching the Oval Office and turning every department upside down failed spectacularly. The unwritten rules we thought would reign in the most egregious impulses and deceitful behavior in our elected representatives obviously need to be spelled out and enforced. And the rebuilt government must be accountable to--and focused on--the bottom 90% of the country. Elizabeth Warren is poised to do this, reclaiming the true meaning of the phrase "Citizens United."
3
Biden/Bullock would win a landslide. Warren would break the glass ceiling only to get cut by the falling shards of glass. She is not what the nation needs. We need stability after four years of idiocy and Trump.
2
Biden is simply too confused and glitchy to do the job of President, to say nothing of weakness on policy. I'll obviously vote for him if he gets the nom, but Warren or Sanders are what this mess of a country needs now.
3
I really liked Biden's tie. I think he'd make a great president. But, Warren's hair was beautifully coiffed. She could certainly beat Trump. However, there is Harris, who spoke DIRECTLY TO TRUMP!! What a courageous president she would make!!
They're all great performers so I'd vote for any of them but I like Buttigieg best. He's gay, married, young and, best of all, is the mayor of South Bend. I LOVE Notre Dame football.
2
Sorry, much as I like Warren's ideas, I find her exhausting to watch. The hand waving, the lack of any modulation, hate to say hysterical, but that's really how her persona comes off to me. Not a good match to rid ourselves of the guy currently occupying the White House.
3
I am starting to feel forlorn. Warren is dynamic, but her history of trading on her thin Native American heritage was dishonest, and that will hang on her like an albatross. Moreover, Trump will incessantly label her Pocahontas, however demeaning that is, because Trumpers are bigots.
Joe Biden has had some serious mental lapses and foot in mouth syndrome. Bernie Sanders come across as a deranged elderly man, and moreover, Trumpers will not vote for someone other than a white Christian-heritage man.
The other candidates have some verve, but are young and not well tested.
It will be a bumpy election.
1
There may well be enough white, well-to-do, mostly college- educated liberals to win the Democratic nomination. There are not enough to win the General Election. See, 1972 and 1984.
We lost 49 states both times, for those unfamiliar with American history.
3
The funniest part of the establishment's recent discovery of Warren-love is that there's a 95% chance she's happily playing y'all, pivoting off Sanders-hatred while knowing, as Sanders does, that if you get Warren, you get at least 80% of Sanders.
Of course the establishment types know this; the number one priority is to mitigate the problem by elevating Warren, getting rid of Trump...and turning on Warren with knives sharpened.
There is no chance on earth Warren doesn't get this.
Main problem. She can’t beat Trump. And she’s be awful for the economy. She doesn’t get it.
2
For all those hand wringers worrying about Warren losing to Trump "cause she is too far left": nah. Don't forget we have another year to witness Trump's slide into complete madness and whomever the Democratic candidate is will be our next president. Warren would be a fantastic president and start to turn the good ship USA away from the nasty rocks of complete corporate oligarchy- she will save us.
2
With a Biden/Warren ticket we get both - the do-able and dream-able. What's not to like?
3
I am a lifelong Republican. I watched the Democratic Party debates and found Warren to be authentic, intelligent and charismatic.
She has poise, is likely better informed on policy than any candidate in modern history and her folksy, honest nature is both admirable and undeniable.
And should she be the Democratic Party nominee, she will lose to Trump in a 1984 style landslide.
Warren lacks the foreign policy experience required for America to elect its first female president. Hillary Clinton had experience is spades; but her inauthentic persona and outright arrogance made her so distasteful that she lost an election the media virtually handed her. Her election was inevitable, they wrote/said daily.
The Democratic Party missed its chance to claim the historic honor of being the party of the first female president by failing Tulsi Gabbard. A war veteran and a moderate, she would have bested Trump in America’s heartland. A place where Warren’s socialism will not resonate.
Finally, off topic, Julian Castro is an embarrassingly pathetic man, who must send a hand written apology to Biden for 1) ageism; and 2) lying about the former VP’s plan.
3
I like Biden/Warren. Biden for electability, Warren for ideas once the ticket is elected.
4
Unfortunately, personal integrity, ability to debate, think, spell, articulate, etc. do not mean much within our political system. Examples: Reagan, Clinton, GW Bush, Trump...
But admire away if you must.
3
With all due respect I think Biden indeed appears to be a bit senile with his ideas and overall habitus. Bernie is old too but at least his ideas are still fresh and relevant.
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." Bertrand Russell
Couldn't help but think of the above quote after reading the article.
3
Elizabeth Warren strikes most people as a determined, fast talking, know-it-all bossy woman; men don't like that and, surprisingly, neither do women. She has so many detailed positions on so many things that nobody can even keep up with them; her candidacy is a kind of policy white paper snow job.
1
@Ronald B. Duke Is that why she keeps rising in the polls?
2
Truth be told, Warren is a Caucasian who promulgated a family myth regarding some ancient connection to Native American ancestry in order to take unfair advantage of an affirmative action program to get into college; thereby displacing an authentic minority applicant.
She did the same as an adult in applying for a position in a corporate law firm during a period of heightened sensitivity on the part of corporate America to hire minorities. Again, in this action she took the place of an actual minority applicant for that position.
Yes, Trump is a liar, but Ms. Warren is as well.
Besides this deep character flaw she is unelectable due to her bizarre take on how the country would pay for her pipe-dream giveaways.
2
Elizabeth Warren is 10x the politician Hillary Clinton was. She can win this thing, easy.
3
The debate showed she’s smart. That’s what will make her unstoppable.
2
Frank Bruni is an excellent writer. His columns are a joy to read for the common sense use of the English language and the clarity of his message.
1
If Democrats show up to vote, Democrats win. Tell me which of the good things Trump has done that you want to continue for 4 more years! Better yet, tell me one good thing Trump has done!
If your "issues" are liberally bent, tell me who you have a better chance of getting to the table with, even if you don't get everything you want right away. Take a lesson from Ted Kennedy.... incrementalism is not such a bad thing. With current administration you have no chance of even getting in the building let alone getting to the table.
Democrats need to vote. My vote at this time is with Warren.
2
America hates women. That is Warren's biggest obstacle. She is head and shoulders above all her opponents. I want the media to stop cramming Biden down our throats. We don't care that the midwest likes him. In fact, that makes me like him, as a candidate, even less, if that is possible.
3
Elizabeth Warren is unelectable!
Warren's (and Sanders') Medicare for All, which makes private health insurance illegal, is absolutely a political loser!
How does such a highly-intelligent woman not see that you can't take private health care away from millions of Americans and then expect them to vote for you?!
She doesn't seem to get support from the Black Community either. In addition, she's promising far too much to way too many people. From student loan forgiveness to free child care. She's guaranteed to lose in 2020!
I LOVE Warren's and Sanders' whistle-blowing on the corporate oligarchy, and I love all of their proposed policies. In an ideal America we'd have everything Warren and Sanders are in favor of doing. But Warren doesn't have a chance if she runs against private health insurance and on all of her ideal policies at once. Warren's Medicare for All plan alone will sink her.
To my mind, the only rational, reasonable candidates on health care are Klobuchar, Buttigieg and Biden. Joe Biden seems to be the only viable candidate that has the enthusiastic support of the Black community, without which no Democrat can win the presidency.
Harris and Booker aren't doing that well in the polls, and I can't figure out what Harris stands for. Neither one gets enough Black voters to win the election.
Getting the Illegitimate One out of office is job one!
Joe Biden can win in 2020! I'm not sure anybody else can.
5
Castro was playing Trump who will use any Biden slip-up to torment and mock him until even the strongest Biden supporter will second guest his ability. I don’t like Biden, don’t like how he uses Obama, don’t like his “come on man I was just a VP” comment from a man who been in Washington for forever, and yes he uses the sympathy card. Warren’s poll numbers along with Sanders meet Joe’s and then you sprinkle in all the other contenders Warren will have the marching feet numbers of an awakening public and will beat Trump. As Etta James once sang with liberties “At last our time has come along” Vote Warren
2
I agree with you on Warren's performance, but i wouldn't characterize it with the pejorative "slick," i would call it heartfelt. I'm sorry but i'm about to unload on bruni for not only his failure, but the failure of so many other white men who are commenting on the debate. Not one of them has raised Biden's response to the question on racism when he first smirked and then said that black people don't know how to raise their own children.
What the heck is wrong with him? He is no longer able to contain his patriarchal, paternalistic outdated, unwanted pats on the head--we'll give you some money and teach you how to raise your children. Why is this not disqualifying for him? Why do no male pundits even mention this offensive, obnoxious racism and misogyny? it's one reason i am so sick of tv and newpapers--you white guys just don't care about the same things i do.
BTW--i am an older white woman who has put up with this neglect of issues i care about all my life, but what you and your cohorts did to Hillary left the country devastated by trump. i am no longer willing to be silent and i will call you out because you are doing it again. Stop it -- get people who can hear what is really being said by these candidates.
6
One would think that the Democratic Party would learn from past mistakes. Except for a couple of mayors, the Pack in this debate are past and present Washington legislative insiders. They have access to money and astute political marketing machines --- just look at your e-mail inbox. Real leadership is found in Democratic governors who have to manage budgets, legislatures and government bureaucracies --- they didn’t make the debate cut, maybe because they have real jobs not positions. Advocating policies outside the mainstream will go nowhere. People just won’t come out to vote for someone that has policies they don’t like or want. Nominating anyone of these ten as the candidate gives a free pass to Trump and his cronies.
1
If Warren gets the nomination, Trump wins in 2020.
End of story.
Warren/Booker. There's the ticket.
5
@rocky rocky
I think you’re right.
Slick? Cunning? Slippery? These are the words you choose to describe a smart, decent, accomplished woman?
I believe I've heard this trope before. It was sexist then and it's sexist now. Mr. Bruni, you can certainly do better than that.
10
The Warren Commission to Reelect the President?
When a man listens to a truly intelligent woman, he calls her "cunning."
9
Slick, prepared with 10 point plans for everything, and bloodless. Senator Warren is like cold oatmeal on a summer day.
1
Too slick for me. I remember her rubbing her hands together when she found out Dulaney is a millionaire. Castro is unwatchable.
She's terrific, but what about the pervasive misogyny she will encounter in the general election? And that the president has already gotten her goat? Seems like a gamble we can't afford.
3
A bumper sticker idea for Warren's campaign. "She Will Persist!" You go girl.
3
"Castro’s pointing it (Could we be talking about Biden`s 76 year old meandering memory) out to them wasn’t illuminating. It was just plain crude." Bruni - GET OVER IT! It`s a so-called debate. Castro was right on. You and the machine cheer on Biden. WHY? He is not presidential, nor articulate... He tries to play both sides of the argument. I`ve had it with him. Bring on the hook and take Biden, Yang, and Klobacher off the stage.
2
Warren Wins in 2020!
1
I can't stand Elizabeth Warren. Like Bernie, every answer boils down to evil corporations raping the american public. Sucking up to teachers is a close second.
Her answers remind me of Trumps in a way. Every problem is caused by a villain.
And although she is an able debater her positions are out of the mainstream. Most americans don't want private health care abolished. Wealth taxes have not worked in other countries. And her climate plan is a joke as it calls for elimination of nuclear power. This will make CO2 emissions go up as Germany is finding out.
2
@Bob Boettcher
Though I might well vote for Warren when the primaries come to my state, your criticisms are acute. Her argument that health insurance companies want to maximize revenue and minimize costs can be made about any business--that's Economics 101. But still, all of her rhetorical and policy shortcomings are trivial compared to Trump's.
1
Slick is not what I want in a President. Sorry.
1
Eye on the prize here: T needs to go. Debate all you want, bicker, taunt, point out flaws in each other if you must, but don't blow the chance to unseat this most incompetent President. And please don't play the wounded schoolyard kid: when it is all over, and the choice has been make, please all join hands and present a united front.
THAT is leadership.
3
I am so tired of the "moderate" Democrats asking how we will pay for national health care. Mr. Biden, who sat by while 9 trillion dollars of *debt* was added to this nation's balance sheet, continually asks this question and then notes a national health care system will cost about 30 billion per year. Let's do the math, Mr. Biden. Using only the debt you piled on (to pay for wars and financial bailouts for Wall Street thieves), the 9 trillion you added would pay for 300 years of a national health care system, assuming no savings by having a single-payer system nor any new taxes on companies who can now pay more taxes because they are no longer getting soaked by private insurance companies and hospitals and doctors.
Trump asked for about 720 billion dollars for the Department of Defense this year. Are we to believe that nobody in DC can find 30 billion a year for health care, even absent savings and any new revenue streams from companies freed from the burden of inefficiently funding health care for their employees?
This country is full of people who cannot understand basic math and politicians who make specious arguments.
I really wish some Democrat pointed this out and hammered on it. But, they don't. And this is why the party, which should rout Trump, has trouble winning anything.
5
Speaking of understanding math, St. Bernie puts the price tag about three or four times higher.
Elizabeth Warren may or may not be unstoppable in her quest to be the Democratic 2020 nominee, but there is one person who almost certainly will stop her from getting in the White House if she is successful. And that is Donald Trump.
That's simply the reality of the Electoral College, and the political complexion of the states that matter most. Hopefully her supporters are not subject to serious bouts of depression.
2
Buttigieg was very eloquent and moving about coming out to face the wolves on the other side ready to maliciously pounce on him. But my favorite line to getting mocked by trump wanting to see how the youngster would make a deal with Xi Jinping he incisively counters the caricature in the WH with "Well, I'd like to see him make a deal with Xi Jinping." The punchline, obviously, is that trump can't make a deal, he can only make a mess.
Nothing wrong with "Medicare for All" WHO CHOSE IT. Warren's mistake is not providing a choice. Her plan would naturally work giving everyone a choice, IF her option turns out to be less expensive, most will "chose" to abandon overpriced inefficient healthcare money skimming plans in droves. Besides, there will always be a private insurers to cater to well-healed individuals who want VIP concierge medicine for frivolous or vain medical procedures that tax payers shouldn't pay for or to fill in coverage gaps that emerge. She should keep her plan but add "choice" to the mix. Taking choice away is a Republican strategy - look at their efforts to take away healthcare leaving everyone with no choice but stay sick, and don't forget voter suppression.
No doubt Castro will wish to forget his gratuitous attack on Biden, and the press will keep reminding him. I expected much better from him.
Bernie should tweak "oligarchic" to "oligarchic socialism" which is what we really have to counter the "socialists" label the trumplicans call us zillions of times.
2
I get why Bernie keeps pushing his 4-year MFA plan-- he's Bernie. But I just don't understand why Warren doesn't try to position herself between Sanders and the health care moderates. Why not offer MFA as a long-term goal and a public option as the bridge to that goal? Keep the vision but avoid the toxic pledge to force people off their current private plans (not to mention the political and operational boondoggle that would inevitably result from an attempt to implement mandatory MFA). Her refusal to slide into the obvious, and smart, position is the only thing preventing me from being fully behind her.
3
What Warren said in answer to the question about Afghanistan is that there is not a military solution to our problems E with Afghanistan, and that because of that, we cannot expect the military to shoulder the entire burden. That is what we have been doing since we invaded. She is right.
3
Trump is more radical than either Sanders or Warren. I don't get how everyone thinks the (supposedly moderate) independents would consider Trump a better choice than Warren. The country leans left, and everyone but the media knows it.
And this business of asking about "tax increases" for Medicare for All is basically a trick question, and Warren correctly pointed out that total healthcare expenses...call them "taxes" or "premiums"...would decline with Medicare for All. Why can't people see that? Why would someone prefer "private insurance", where you pay for healthcare and the insurance company takes a profit off the top, would be better than Medicare, if the coverage is better with Medicare?
7
At the Minnesota State Fair, there was a "bean ballot" feature in the Democratic Farmer Labor (the Minnesota Democratic Party name) exhibit. Each visitor was given a bean to put into a big tube for the candidate of their choice. Elizabeth Warren outpolled everyone by a factor of 400%. It was astonishing. Even native Amy Klobuchar, whom everyone loves in Minnesota, couldn't eclipse her. Clearly she is speaking to Democrats in a meaningful way.
8
Never the LESS,
She persisted.
And she will.
I want someone who will fight for me, and my family.
There are more of us than their are people who, in essence, are powerful oligarchs because they had money to make money.. usually at the expense of others.
Unlike Trump, she knows working class values and working class people. I think she'll take some Trump folks with her on the road to the White House. They voted for Trump out of desperation, wanting change to affect them not just the 1%. They've been largely disappointed, and Trump smells so bad even they are having trouble breathing in the same room.
I just received my bracelet today that says "NEVERTHELESS SHE PERSISTED."
I wear it with pride and hope.
6
Warren has much to recommend her. But. If the Dems say they want to improve the lives of the non-wealthy -- then a recent WSJ op-ed "Warren's Assault on Retiree Wealth" should be taken note of. According to that op-ed, Warren supports changes that could severely impact the modest retirement accounts of middle class Americans. Some change is needed -- but beware of pols who want to dismantle programs. The huge contingent of boomers/retirees in this country built their lives/finances around certain platforms and do not have the option of rebuilding and responding to sweeping changes.
The WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdock—the same guy who owns Fox News. I think that’s all we need to know.
3
@Lena I look at different publications for their points of view. Even pols I don't care for raise valid points.
From what you have thus far experienced on TV or elsewhere, compare Ms Warren with Donald Trump in public appearances and debates and then compare the other Democratic front runners like Biden and Sanders, and by 'comparison' I mean only their outward demeanors and likeability, however you, yourself might define likeability. Then ask yourself who would come out as the most likely candidate to win the 2020 popular vote?
1
Ms. Warren reminds me very much (and sometimes painfully) of a professor of Constitutional History and Law under whom I studied in undergraduate school.
That other "Warren" was sharp as a razor, mentally flexible but tough as granite about a very few foundational beliefs, and one could not slip anything by her. Never was "don't argue with the professor" ever more applicable.
I've made up my mind. I'd follow either Warren almost anywhere, and the check's in the mail.
17
It frightens some people when people like Warren or Sanders speak about their ideas to change and improve healthcare for all Americans.
Especially scary when the people haven't heard any new ideas, or any ideas, for a long time.
The GOP might as well be in a padded cell, or are they? and Trump? Well, he has so many "ideas" it makes his head hurt and few of them could come to fruition.
Except the one that sells out our country to Russia. That's going well.
5
Warren was not being slick. She is just saying that even if Americans pay higher taxes, they will make up for it with reduced health-care costs. I am an American who has been living in France - a country with basic health care coverage - for the past ten years. This includes regular doctor's visits and if you become ill, being able to receive medical care. I have a private health insurance on top of that which costs 200 EUR - and my company pays half. It covers the three members in our family. There are no co-pays or deductibles (a doctor's visit costs 25 EUR if you pay out of pocket as a tourist), a dentist check-up about 25-30). When I talk to my family and friends back in the US and hear all of the health care industry jargon, my head spins.
12
Frank. Agree Warren is slick and second only to Sanders as the Democratic candidate of choice by the GOP.
2
Warren is a good debater. But I don’t think most of her ideas will fly even if we take over the Senate. They are just too drastic. Sorry, this is not the election for pie in the sky. I just want Republicans to eat crow.
1
So many seem to be turned off by Warren's ambition (maybe just her ambition in general) to solve our healthcare crisis. Her plan is bold and shoots for the moon, and leaves her room to negotiate downward toward a public option. She can not by decree wipe out private health insurance, nor wave a wand and forgive college debt; however, if we truly want a more just society, where laws and regulations are applied more fairly, then Warren's ambitious, intelligent, leadership is what we need.
7
Warren said no one likes their healthcare she is wrong. I liked my healthcare and gave up salary increases to keep it. The rollout of the The ACA was a disaster have we forgotten that? Bernie even said once employers are no longer involved they will give workers back pay for the years that sacrificed raises to get keep their healthcare. What planet are Warren and Bernie living on? Warren wants to tax the rich? The same Senate that refused to give Judge Garland a hearing is going to tax their benefactors? Beto saying he would take Guns is going to be fodder for Trump. I hope Warren is stoppable because I fear she would go down in history alongside Gene McCarthy, Walter Mondale and George McGovern. Most people I know who are on Medicare had to buy a supplemental insurance because Medicare only covers 80 percent of the total cost.We better discern Pipe Dreams from Reality before we make Warren the new flavor of the month.
2
@Steve McCain
No, Warren didn’t say no one liked their healthcare. She said people liked their healthcare providers but no one liked their insurance company.
Maybe you do and you want to keep it.
Every year your employer renegotiates with your insurer, coverage changes, copays change, deductibles change. Your employer could change providers, or even decide he’s done with it and hand you $6,000 a year and say your on your own. Or just stop providing any coverage at all.
You could change jobs, and change or lose coverage. You could be fired or downsized and lose your coverage. You could get too sick to work and lose your job and coverage.
Eventually, one or more of these things will happen and you will lose the policy you have now.
You want to keep your health insurance?
Nobody in America gets to keep their health insurance.
Nobody.
1
Ideas and vision are important in normal times, but in these times, the only important issue is who can win Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Iowa and potentially Florida. These are not states that will appreciate Warren's argument's on theoretically lower medical care under a medicare for all scenario. The focus needs to be on the here and now and on these states and of the candidates, only Biden and Klobuchar can win these states and one of them needs to be on the ticket.
2
I can only guess at why Warren didn't answer the question regarding whether the middle class will pay more in taxes for Medicare for All but I imagine it's because anytime you say "taxes" people freak out and miss the whole point of changing how we pay for health care.
People are missing the point on universal health care regardless of what it is called. Yes, people will have to pay a tax but what they won't pay is monthly premiums, copays, deductibles and a percentage of medical costs when they actually get sick.
I purchase my insurance through the ACA because I am retired and not old enough to get Medicare. I pay $1300 a month in premiums. I would gladly continue paying that amount in taxes knowing that the cost for actual medical care would be taken care of or at least, be very minimal.
As for the myth that employee sponsored health insurance is wonderful? Companies change plans or renegotiate coverage every year, premiums, copays and deductibles increase and services are denied. How is that better?
Bottom line, we all deserve access to health services and people should not have to go bankrupt to get them.
9
Nothing really changes until we bend the cost curve. Good luck with that. This is far more complicated than people realize.
The Republicans cannot reelect Trump. Only the Democrats can do that. Unfortunately, their circular firing squad, the only thing they are currently adept at, is heading in that direction.
The 2020 election boils down to Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and, perhaps, one other state. It is irrelevant if another million people vote for the Democrat in California and New York or another million people vote for Trump in Indiana and Alabama.
The voters Democrats need to reach tend toward politicians who they feel can deliver on their immediate interests, not long-term abstractions. What those who want to oust Trump need to do is focus on what's actually relevant to the voters up for grabs, not a fantasy wish list, not what some Democrats think should be relevant to those people. Warren's "plans" may appeal to the (mostly white and college-educated) twitterati and punditocracy, but the people the Democrats need have heard big promises for decades, and they are looking for candidates who will deliver on a limited but realistic agenda, not a candidate who promises utopia with no indication that she or he actually knows how to accomplish anything in the Washington of 2020. That's why Biden is the large polling favorite of Blacks and Hispanics.
Amy Klobuchar would be an excellent choice for Vice-President with Joe Biden. Unlike Warren, she seems to know how to talk to, not at, people. As important, she knows how to listen. To make change, it's Biden in 2020, Klobuchar in 2024.
2
I call it 'dishonest.'
If you cannot even offer a ball-park cost or identify revenue to pay for it, that's a problem.
I recall too well President Obama saying the ACA would be paid for by taxing "millionaires, billionaires, and corporate jet owners," only to find that his 3.6% surcharge hit individuals making more than $250,000.
2
Wait a minute ,,the ACA did not become a tax until Justice Roberts deemed it so ,which was also basically unconstitutional because only congress legislate tax regulation.In addition President Trump has easily corrected this travesty and continues to ,The point is not that the ACA is wrong the pretense is unconstitutional.and the outright falsely representation that that one could keep ones own personal doctors ,the cost would go down or that it was a tax.
1
Trumpists really, really shouldn’t ever breathe a single solitary word about dishonesty. It’s not just that it’s stunningly hypocritical, but that it reminds everybody what Trump’s like.
1
Warren's (and all the Dem candidates) solution in Afghanistan is the same as Trump's: cut and run. I agree we have lost too many lives, and spent too much money, on stabilizing the country. But I would have preferred an answer that considered the Afghans themselves. For the second time in their recent history, we are about to abandon them to another civil war with the Taliban.
Biden's emphatic comment "it's unfixable" supported by his"numerous" trips to the region, was not an expert analysis, but a conclusion formed by insufficent evidence. Highly restricted Congressional visits, a history book, and conversations with generals who never actually live in local communities is not a recipe for insightful policy.
Many said the same things about Bosnia, including Biden, that he said last night. Yet, though not without some serious flaws, the U.S. should be proud of having finally stabilized that country and not lost one American soldier in the process. We can (and should as it is in our interest) use our soft power and influence in collaboration with like-minded allies, to be a force for good in the world.
As we have seen in many contexts incluing Syria (were the refugee crisis destabilzed western Europe and Russia was emboldened to attack our elections) and Afghanistan after the Soviets were driven out and the Taliban came to power in a civil war--when we abdicate the vacumn is filled by others with potential catastrophic consequences.
There is no easy out.
Elizabeth has had my vote for president since 2016.
9
The assumptions used by Trump to sell the 2017 tax cut are clearly seen today as false. The repercussion however of this tax cut are a dramatically increased deficit. Obama was trapped to increase the deficit in order to recover from the 2008 financial crisis he inherited. A crisis arising from a roll back of regulations and the absence of oversight in the Bush administration. Trump has also rolled back regulations and has impaired the economy with his tariff strategy trade war - and the economy will worsen if not resolved. If the democrats win in 2020 they will inherit fiscal adversity, so they must focus not only how to win the election but also how to be successful in the following 4 years as they again would be elected to correct a republican administration fiasco. The democratic candidate must be inclined toward the center, intelligent, and not bat an eye at the barrage of scurrilous commentary by Trump - because Trump's presidency is our dark ages and they must end.
1
If Elizabeth Warren is in 'this "thing' until the end', then we will have four more years of the present occupant of the White House. Of this I'm getting more and more convinced. Once again, we're forgetting that little barrier to a return to normalcy: The Electoral College. The lessons of 2016 seem to have been forgotten.
5
The candidates are all struggling with two conflicting realities. On the one hand, the US fails dramatically versus European countries on several important measures: health care, access to higher education, gun violence and income inequality; the Democrats clearly want to address these issues. On the other hand the US has a dysfunctional constitution that protects gun ownership and facilitates a built in GOP majority through the electoral college, the allocation of two senators per state with no regard to population and a politicized Supreme Court that tolerates widespread gerrymandering.
Until the dysfunction in the political system is addressed, there can be no radical change on the issues Democratic voters want. A President Warren is not going to be able to enact Healthcare for All because a GOP controlled Senate will block her and a GOP Supreme Court will strike it down.
Against this somewhat depressing background is our best hope for Klobuchar’s agenda of incremental change or Biden’s do nothing for four years plan? The US is not going to deal with gun violence while the Second Amendment is in the Constitution, the US is not going to move towards European style Social Democracy while the Senate is a GOP club. Electing a Warren or a Sanders will give us a sugar rush in November 2020 but will lead to four years of disappointment as the GOP block their agenda.
1
Elizabeth Warren actually understands the depths of the problems, can understand the impact of potential solutions, has plenty of ability to help devise solutions based on her depth of understanding and experiences, and most importantly, can communicate effectively about those solutions to the American people. I’d have confidence in her being a great President.
12
Look, presidential campaigns -- especially in the Trump Era -- are aspirational. People want broad strokes and big ideas especially ones that will rein in the corporate oligarchy that put Donald in power in the first place.
Sen. Warren has grand ideas that will never get through even a Democratic Congress without shriveling.
But that is the direction people like... away from rich guys ruining the country.
What's "deceptive" about focusing on the total health care costs for a family instead of just one of the ways for paying for them, i.e. taxes?
If raising my taxes $3,000 a year will give me better health care and eliminate my $5,000 premium I save $2,000 even though my "taxes" have gone up.
Taxes are just part of the cost picture.
I'd like to see all discussions about the cost of medicare for all to include the savings (i.e. reduced premiums and copays) as well as the costs.
6
Medicare for all, meaning everyone has to go on Medicare, may be a good idea, but I think it's one a lot of voters would not support. So the Democrats choosing a candidate who supports it could mean our national nightmare will continue for another four years.
Why wouldn’t most Americans shop Medicare for All? Americans struggle to pay high monthly premiums, high copays, high deductibles and the high cost of drugs. The first thing people worry about when they lose a job is “what’ll I do about health care!”
Even with health insurance, the first thing people think of when diagnosed with cancer “how will I afford treatment”. It happened to me.
1
@Zejee Polls show that most people prefer Medicare as a choice, rather than everyone everyone with private health insurance will have to give it up.
1
Single issue voters elected Donald Trump. Guns, abortion, race, taxes, etc, etc. You name it. Those voters have distorted our electoral process to the point that we have elected a dangerous narcissist as our leader and the most powerful person on earth.
Yet, I am a single issue voter! That issue, special interest money has subverted our democracy and eaten away at its core. Warren gets it. Sanders gets it. Biden seems okay with it.
Yes I am a single issue voter! But that is because all other causes that are dear to me must bow down to the various special interest groups that control our elected government.
I have loved Bernie for several years now. But Elizabeth Warren has something different to go along with their common theme of making government work for the people. Her energy is more positive.
Regardless of who represents the Democratic Party in 2020, first and foremost he/she needs to recognize the seizure of control of our beloved country by special interests. Those special interests know how easy it is to manipulate those single issue voters. (Except when that single issue is to get money out of politics)
2
I wish Biden and Sanders weren't in the hunt, so we could actually get more moderate candidates voices heard. Biden showed his age by rambling something about record players and some kids from Venezuela - but instead of focusing on that, the pundits are reaming Castro for attacking (incorrectly) Biden's memory (I'll bet Castro wishes he had waited until the record player remark...). And Sanders keeps sounding like someone's uncle at the dinner table. But they both have name recognition and history - which keeps them in the low 20's. And soaking up most of the attention and money...
The new faces cannot break through these old guys bases - even though they have great ideas and are more inspiring. (Esp Amy, Booker and Mayor Pete.)
I guess we have to wait for a medical issue for the log jam at the top to be broken.
5
Those who insist on seeing single-payer as a ridiculous idea totally fail to grasp the basic problem with our healthcare. What is truly ridiculous is entrusting our lives to the tender mercies of a number of massive corporations which are NOT in the business of providing people with medical attention. They are in the business of exploiting our need for medical attention to provide themselves and their investors with the greatest amount of money they believe they can wring out of us - and leaving those with no money to be extracted out in the cold. Why do we spend double the amount per capita on healthcare than is spent by any other developed nation while failing to cover to cover millions of our people at all. The "moderate" candidates may complain about "tearing down" the existing system. But when the foundation under your house is constructed on a massive sinkhole, it is time for a new house.
10
And you trust your expensive for profit insurance company to decide what doctor you can or cannot see, what hospital you can or cannot be admitted to, what treatment you can or cannot have?
Politicians do not run Medicare.
4
That also happens in some Medicare plans as well, and no one is addressing the fact that medical care just costs too much. Eighty percent of premiums collected go to actual healthcare.
1
@efazz
Wow! Very well put.
Warren's answer on Afghanistan is exactly what the American people want to hear. We have been there for two decades. We have spent an absolute fortune in money and lives. And we are no closer to any form of victory and we will still be there in another decade unless we get out. Trump promised this but he hasn't delivered. Would this be horrific for the people of Afghanistan? Yes. But there are limits to what we can be expected to sacrifice when there is no solution in sight.
13
At some point Warren will have to come clean: Her health care plan will mean more taxes for the middle class. Sanders admits it. It may be true that costs will go down, but you can count on the Republicans reminding the voters who have health insurance they are happy with that they are paying more taxes so others can get health insurance. Most voters are not that altruistic. It is bad politics -- which is why Obama did not come clean on whether folks could keep the policies they had. I understand the arguments Sanders and Warren are making. But in my judgment Biden and other "moderate" candidates have a more pragmatic and wiser political approach. The Sanders and Warren approach could cost Democrats the election.
4
I don’t know anyone who is happy with their expensive for profit health insurance—and I know a lot of people who don’t have insurance. They can’t afford it.
2
What’s really ‘for profit’ and insanely expensive is the actual cost of healthcare. Many are about to get a real dose of reality.
At some point Warren will paint a clear picture for voters about health care. Basically, would we prefer to pay $600 per month for higher quality coverage or $1000 a month for the status quo? So far, republican dogma about taxes has ruled the day while democrats stick their heads in the sand. If Warren can change the conversation she will win handily.
8
My relatives in Europe pay the same tax rate I pay. They wonder what I get for my taxes. They think US for profit health care is “barbaric”.
I thank God that my granddaughter has dual citizenship and will never have to worry about the cost of health care—or the cost of university education.
Warren is a fighter and has a number of very good ideas. I will vote for her if she is either a candidate for president or Vice President.
11
The debate showed how vulnerable Warren would be for her rigidity on Medicare for all without choice. It's time that she and Bernie, who has absolutely no chance of becoming president, get eliminated from consideration. Biden should probably announce a strong preference for Amy or Cory as VP. Whichever of them agrees to that would get the nod.
2
Why do you think Warren and Bernie have no chance of winning? Don’t you realize that most Americans struggle to pay high monthly premiums, high copays ,high deductibles? And still have to pay if they get sick. I get my prescriptions from Canada at 1/4 the cost. Otherwise I would ration my meds like so many Americans have to. You think people like this?
Also most American families are burdened with high interest student loans. Do you think Americans like this?
Do you think Americans don’t want what citizens of every other first world nation on earth have had for decades?
Why can’t we tax the rich?
1
Warren is, more so every day, the real deal.
She is everything trump is not.
28