Yet another Bernie hit piece from the Times is as unexpected as yet another Democratic presidential defeat to the most incompetent, dangerous politician in American history.
23
I don't know about the columnist, but the headline writer ought to win a prize.
5
Hmmmm....with a headline like that, I wonder what biases NYT employs....(sarcasm)
22
The Republicans have done a fantastic job of putting the fear of God into the people of the United States about anything that even has as much of a whiff of the S-word. And for decades now they have held the Democratic Party and many of its supporters hostage, using their fear-mongering tactic as their weapon of choice. It is high time that the Democrats to deweaponize the Republican Party. As Mayor Pete put it last night, no matter what the Democrats say or do, or don't say or don't do, the S-cudgel will forever be held over their heads. Therefore, they might as well own the S-mantle and take their message to the nation: unafraid, unabashed, unbridled, unbossed, and unbought. Only in this way will they be able to eventually realize their agenda. Yes, it may take years, but is being held captive preferable to fighting for what one truly believes in?
17
Your analysis is slightly more sophisticated than 4th grader. Nice job including the Hickenlooper imitating Bernie deep thoughts.
21
This opinion piece is about as relevant as Jim Delaney's candidacy. Way to go Frank!
17
“I don’t understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of *writing a column in the NYTimes* just to talk about what we really can’t do and shouldn’t fight for.”
31
Biden will entertain any legislation coming out of Congress. So even if his own disposition is moderate, he won't reject anything more progressive. Especially if it's related to the military or healthcare. So don't be so down on Biden because he comes across moderate.
He's no idiot; he knows what it takes to beat Trump!
5
Ugh. I'm so tired of reading about your naysaying ideas. If single payer healthcare we're so crazy, why dies every other industrialized, first-world country have it? Seriously, you may as well be 100 years old because you have little imagination and hour for the future.
32
Brenie/Warren.... about 35% in polls
Moderates all tolled......about 10%
Whose marooned?
I love Bernie, but for the sake of the "revolution" he needs to bow out and help Liz.!
I suspect Uncle Joe will limp tonight...
Perhaps Kamala is the slightly more palatable than the purests for the general.....kind of fortified updated Obama..
And progress...
4
Not surprisingly, the comments here are much more thoughtful and on point than Bruni's column. The tireless efforts by the NYT to discredit Sanders continue apace. Yes, this may look like actual journalism next to the mindless, regurgitated ideology of CNN and MSNBC. But don't kid yourself. You want to know what really guarantees a Trump victory in 2020? The NYT, WashPost, and the aforementioned networks. Look in the mirror.
22
Wasn’t Hillary also a “fighter?”
2
I guess that nyt readers and liberals in general do not understand that the US is a center/right country Not a center/left one, and absolutely not a progressive one!
7
Piffle, Frank. We need real change.
19
Bruni's hostility toward Sanders is beginning to get pathological and his attacks, which generally focus on Sanders's gesticulations and loud voice (and wishing that he would "disappear") are starting to smell anti-Semitic.
18
I'm worried, sad, sleepless. Will vote Mickey Mouse if leftist nominated.
2
Frank Bruni and the NYT’s are still out of touch. Have they learned nothing from 2016? Our current healthcare works for the elite, not everyone else. Moving cities? Health insurance is gone. Lose a spouse? Health Insurance is gone. Take another job? Health insurance? Gone. Oh, and it was terrible insurance to begin with. Expensive and it only really protects you when you’re very, very sick. We already nominated a tepid liberal candidate. How did SHE do?
Josh
18
The NYT, the mouthpiece of the Democratic elites and corporate interests, is getting very worried again about Bernie Sanders. He clearly came across as the strongest and Biden is sinking, but this newspaper would have you believe otherwise. I remember how the NYT was a Clinton campaign conduit that predicted disaster if Sanders was nominated even though polls showed he could beat Trump handily. We know how that turned out. Now the NYT is searching for a Clinton clone. The Democratic elites and honchos would rather have Trump re-elected than nominate Sanders.
18
Was interesting until he decided to smear Sanders. He was just as good as Warren. NYT just can't hide their disdain for him. He is the most progressive and will win as a populist leftist.
14
Wishing that you would go away blind to see Bernie had great night maybe a special interest has a investment on you
5
Just when you thought the "Grey Lady" was utterly irrelevant, She winks an eye
3
Frank,
I think you may have a future at Fox & Friends.
23
Oh please, Frank. Somebody's got to be a leader. That does not mean standing up and declaring before God and Everyone what you won't/can't do.
To give you the benefit of the doubt I will assume you did not write the awful headline to go with your oh so lame column.
11
You're the one on fantasy island, Frank. The electorate has changed, but you folks at the
Times haven't.
18
I think the Democratic Party needs to move as far left as possible. There should have been even more talk about paying blacks for Jim Crow, not just slavery. We need to turn this country upside down and inside out as soon as possible!
8
It is notable that the NYT has become FOX light in the midst of the latest Democratic Candidate Debate follow-up public-centered discussions, with the preponderance of NYT columnists using their journalistic platforms to hammer progressive Democrats. Rupert Murdoch, Moscow Mitch, and Putin bedfellow Trump are smiling—as is Joe Biden.
13
Frank, I'm afraid you, of all people, have drunk the corporate kool-aid.
9
“If you are watching at home and you are a Republican member of Congress,” he said, “consider the fact that when the sun sets on your career, and they are writing your story, ...."
Too bad that you missed the irony in Buttigieg's "soliloquy."
These days, whenever a Dem candidate looks stirringly into the camera to intone the latest moral lecture as to Trump,
I'm often struck by how that tone and lecture can instantly be turned back on the Dems.
For example, as Jews around the globe are under rising physical attack on a scale unheard of since before WWII, and under attack sometimes by "progressives" as in Jeremy Corbyn's U.K. Labor Party, could not a Republican look into the camera and intone the same warning against the Dem House leadership which tolerates anti-Semitism and anti-Israel hatred within its ranks?
Or could not a GOP candidate intone the same message as every Dem candidate feels the need to kiss Al Sharpton's ring for "street cred," while Sharpton's anti-Semitism once was condemned by the House?
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/flashback-gop-house-member-joe-scarborough-introduced-resolution-condemning-al-sharpton
But its OK now. Joe Scarborough made up with the reverend Al. And the Dems understand that a little bit of anti-Semitism is not necessarily a bad thing if you're looking for votes among swing voters while keeping the often anti-Jew left wing "galvanized."
For Dems, "I have met the enemy, and he is me."
2
This columnist seems blind to the reality that every advanced economy in the world has the social and economic benefits he considers ridiculously radical. He needs to leave America and see Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea.
11
Frank Bruni, you are a fool to attack Warren on health care when you SHOULD be attacking her on slavery reparations. THAT is the losing issue. I'm suspicious of the fact that none of the "moderates" pointed out that countries with universal health coverage still have private plans for those who want them. The point is that EVERYONE is covered by the national plan so that no one loses health care because of inability to pay or falling through corporate loopholes.
4
So the corporate media wants to try this again with the progressives? What will your pretty little country look like with two or three more supreme court seats filled by Trump?
8
Great to get the perspective from the Upper west side about what people inbetween the coasts want.
8
Someone must be moderating this comments section. All of the posts are so well reasoned, polite, open to opposing views, and grammatically correct! Where are the liberals and conservative throwing empty firebombs and death threats at one another. Did I just not scroll down far enough? In any case, thank you everyone. I can feel my mind stretching and have not had to run for a cookie.
6
Frank, you got the perfect nema for your article. I think that the people who had to fight for their medical benfits won't like the idea of freebies for the recent folks on our shore who have just arrived and should go through a path like the rest of us have had to go. The term fantasy fits the bill!
2
The election is 14 months away for heaven's sake. Will everyone just chill...none of what anyone says now REALLY matters. Moderates...progressives...trump could decide to see if he really could kill someone in times square in the next few months. Or make a pact with North Korea. Or tear up any remaining trade or international agreements. Or decide he doesn't need congress at all, tear up the new budget agreement and provide the new tax break Ted Cruz wants. Pull up your big girl and boy pants and calm down...we are in uncharted waters so just go with the flow and hope it isn't down the drain.
1
I'm done with moderates. It's time to fight fire with fire.
11
There's a difference between "big dreams" and "fantasies". Any plans President Warren might send to Congress will have to go back and forth through both chambers and arrive back on her desk for signature much changed from the original. That's where the "fight hard" part comes in.
The Democrats are talking about affordable health insurance for all Americans. Medicare-for-all doesn't sit well with voters in red and purple states, and I doubt it's the hill Senator Warren wants to die on, so to speak.
By February, it will be a lot easier for Warren to pivot back to the Democratic center of gravity than it will be for Trump to pivot away from his fascist, racist demagoguery.
2
Just what the Republicans ordered up-another Presidential candidate from Taxachussetts. Warren can follow in the illustrious footsteps of Michael Dukakis, Paul Tsongas, John F. Kerry, Mitt Romney and the liberal lion of the Senate, Edward Moore Kennedy. Trump would feast on Elizabeth Warren. She has a five year plan for everything and lacks the sense that god gave geese. You go girl!!
5
The comments of late regarding the Democratic direction and candidates are seriously bumming me out.
If ever there was someone who deserved to be defeated, someone that decency, ethics, justice, and morality demanded should be tossed on the garbage heap of history, it is this monstrous buffoon Trump.
But I really fear the Dems are going to diminish and destroy each other, and strengthen the madman.
If the Dems keep it up, as impossible as it seemed once the facts were out in the Mueller report, Trump will get re-elected.
Wake up. Remember how impossible it seemed that Trump could win the nomination? That he could beat Hillary?
4
We are all very fortunate that you aren't empowered to choose the Democratic nominee. Hopefully you will vote for Elizabeth Warren when she faces off against the menace that is Donald Trump. For now it would be best if you just go back to caressing your worry beads and let the Democrats handle the candidate selection process.
4
Reparations may be politically unpopular but the idea of acknowledging the legacy of slavery is long overdue. Funny how no one questions inheriting money and land but the idea of inheriting poverty is not as easily accepted. I would encourage people to look at their family stories, how far back does home ownership go? How much equity was earned? What schools did your parents and your grandparents go to? Racism is an issue that has underlined our society for 400 years, it is time to start talking about it openly. If you think that this is white guilt then I dare say that you are part of the problem.
5
"Medicare for All" may be a fantasy in the U.S., but Elizabeth Warren is for real. She'll win if she becomes the Democratic nominee for a very simple reason. "It's the economy, stupid," as the saying goes. She understands the challenges that middle-income people face in a way that Hillary and even Obama didn't. The world is the toughest place it's ever been for a variety of reasons. The middle class has shrunk dramatically... wages and benefits for the middle group are stagnant, the ability to get ahead is limited, labor force participation is lower, corporations are not the enemy, but they are hoarding money... Warren gets it.
5
McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis....
That's what Warren and Sanders represent. Pure as snow true socialist believers and political losers of the highest order.
Barack Obama could never be elected President in today's Democratic party. Obama is a moderate standing shoulder to shoulder with Delaney, Hickenlooper, Klobuchar, Biden and Bullock.
I repeat again what all the polls say.....we Democrat voters first and foremost want Trump removed from office.
Warren and Sanders put that in jeopardy.
2
Mr Bruni's warns that US voters will reject Senator Sanders' platform of reform, restitution and repair. How many voters really want a just society? he seems to ask. He might have been more persuasive if I hadn't seen the latest polls:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-6250.html
6
Ah, that would be "marooned on Fantasy Island with the rest of the Western World" right? I mean, only weirdo countries and the US lack Medicare for All and such, right?
Methinks the only marooned here are American conservato-centrists political pithecanthropi, and they are marooned in some late 18th century English proto industrial mental la la land.
10
No one in the West will vote for the New Englanders, Bernie and Warren. It is possible to really like them both and just hope they go away.
Amy Klobuchar picked up points in my estimation, but she is so short and earnest.
And I decided I could actually vote for Mayor Pete...speaking of short.
I expect Kamala Harris to smoke them all tonight.
The 20 dwarfs vs. Snow White: not a great outlook for 2020.
Free healthcare for everyone even illegals, free college for everyone, open borders, reparations for slavery? I think these candidates need to visit the swing states when it comes to winning an election, it is venturing into absurdity. The only logical explanation to me is that these candidates are spewing this stuff to win the nomination, but will walk back most of this socialist rhetoric. But Trump will pounce on the flip flop and not drop it at all.
4
Never underestimate the ability of Democrats to shoot themselves in the foot. They haven't a strategic or tactical bone in their body.
Disappointed in Warren. She's fallen into the trap of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, and lost sight of the fragility of the American voter in these times of economic, social and climatic insecurity and attendant tribalism, fearmongering and manipulated hatred.
Somewhere between Warren's dynamic vision and Klobuchar's hesitant pragmatism is the sweet spot. What we need is wise and strong vision. The progressives are not being wise and strategic, but are recklessly indulging in unnecessary rhetoric and issues. For some reason hesitant to alienate PC verbal warriors, they are failing - failing - to build bridges to the undecideds, middles and independents, which you lose at your peril.
It doesn't have to be black or white (I didn't mean that racially, but it applies), left or right, weak or might. For a while Warren was getting transcendently attractive to middle-of-the-roaders and even moderate conservatives. What happened?
There must be more care taken when bandying about "free college," "Medicare for all," "decriminalize the border," and "healthcare for immigrants." We are a big enough nation to do good things in all those areas, but we don't get there at all if we unnecessarily alienate vulnerable and easily fearmongered voters. We don't get there at all.
Get your act together, Democrats. It's a knife fight, not kumbaya.
1
Wow, another media voice telling us to be afraid and stay in an defensive crouch lest we offend some heartland voters! So short sighted and unimaginative! That's what we've been doing and it's not exactly been a winning strategy, has it?
12
Frank Bruni, you are one of my fave opinion writers, but the title of this article makes me kind of sick to my stomach. I think it's irresponsible. We need real change in this country. There are a million reasons Hillary Clinton didn't win the election but probably the biggest one is that people in this country are sick and tired of a corporate run America. Elizabeth Warren is earnest and honest and has some good ideas to bring to the negotiating table, but headlines like these aren't going to give her a chance. Most of the time, I love your pithy remarks, but not this time. I would be more than proud to call Elizabeth Warren our first female president and comments like this don't give her a chance. The NYT has been so moderate the past several years, that I'm beginning to think of unsubscribing to my cherished Sunday Times out of protest.
11
Yet another hit piece on serious progressive candidates by mainstream (corporate) media. These 2 have had targets since they bucked the establishment democratic norm and campaigned on REAL CHANGE. They killed it lastnight, no way to deny they owned it last night.
10
Wow, Mr. Bruni, I'm usually a fan of your columns, but this one was not worthy of you.
Let's break it down.
Q: Why do Republicans cheat in elections? Why do they engage in radical gerrymandering, voter suppression, data manipulation, and Moscow Mitch's latest attempts to block even the guarantee of free and fair elections with paper trails?
A: Because Republican polices are not popular with the American people.
Therefore, it's time for Democrats to STOP offering Republican-Lite, and offer actual progressive policies. Even Republican voters like Medicare For All when they learn the actual details, rather than corporate Democratic smear versions of Medicare for All. I know, because I talk to voters when I go door to door.
Reporting to you from a red state in the deindustrialized Midwest . . . Democrats: GO PROGRESSIVE and WIN.
12
These two may have similar views but I am impressed with Elizabeth Warren's command of the issues and her intelligence and exuberance. Conversely, Bernie comes off as a grumpy old man.
My god - it really is McGoverm, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry all over again. The only thing that could spare us another 4 years of Trump is if Obama agrees to Biden's VP - and that will never happen. Goodbye NATO, Hello Putin. 4 More years of the Manchurian President. I doubt the US can afford 4 more years of this. No way to get the corrupting influence of money out of politics or to mainstream either party. Putin must be overjoyed.
Watch Senator Michael Bennet tomorrow.
He's such a great choice........under the radar.
1
Great article, Frank. I agree with all of it. You’re spot-on!
Fantasy Island is a spot on analogy. As a lifelong Democrat and union member I will NOT be voting for Warren or Sanders. If the party wants to win, there needs to be a candidate with common sense, something lacking in both of these candidates. Frankly most of the candidates have been out of the job market too long to know how to solve any of the country's ills.
6
risky? no. the moderates are the risk. appeasing the independents on the fence of voting for the worst president in history or whoever the democrats march out - no.
if you dont get the base going and give people what they want (most people support universal healthcare / single payer) they wont turn out. i dont want to hold my nose for biden or any other bought out candidate.
8
M4A is ONE TYPE of universal coverage. It is NOT the only type—and the fact that almost all self-styled progressives treat the two as synonyms probably tells you very disturbing things about their practical ability to get the thing done.
2
"Fantasy Island," with all its big bold ideas about healthcare and public education, is actually several very large islands. Countries and continents, actually. Europe, Canada, most of Asia and Latin America.
More than ideas, they're places where universal healthcare and free public education really work, however imperfectly. And they're infinitely more cost-effective.
In point of fact, "fantasy island" is the United States, where one with the temerity to look abroad for sound solutions to grave problems is treated as a wild-eyed radical.
13
Beyond my usual eye-rolls at how little progressives know about European health insurance systems, I also have some rather bad news about university educations.
https://www.sel.cam.ac.uk/ughandbook/finance/summary-undergraduate-fees-charges/
Admission is by competitve examination and competetion, by the way. Pretty sure they don’t do affirmative action.
3
What's wrong with this country that it would be a "fantasy" to make sure that its citizens have decent healthcare, like in most other developed democracies?
At least Warren and Sanders have a vision to improve things in this country. Let those supposed "moderates" join the Republican Party and challenge Trump there.
10
Medicare for all will accelerate a movement towards a further haves and have nots in healthcare. The rich will move towards and all cash system and the best docs and technology will move with them. The rest of us will be stuck with a government run system where we have no input. Scary!
3
The Progressives are correct that Medicare for all would be cheaper and more reliable than the current system. The moderates are right that many or most people are fearful of changing their current insurance and would rather have a public option than "Medicare for All."
But both Progressives and Moderates do not take into account the ferocious resistance of the insurance industry to any change in their profitable status quo. Moderates who deride a hypothetical Medicare for All as unrealistic need to acknowledge that the public option has been shown to be unrealistic.
The public option was cut from the ACA at its behest. The industry still fights it tooth and nail.
https://slate.com/business/2019/05/an-insurer-just-squashed-the-effort-to-create-a-public-option-in-connecticut.html
Both sides need to get together on a legislative agenda for 2021; an agenda which would be immune to Republican litigation and difficult for the insurance industry to shoot down.
There are a lot of bright, knowledgeable people on both sides. They can come up with excellent ideas for the next session of Congress.
Here are a few of mine:
Lower age for Medicare eligibility from 65 to 62.
Coverage for treatment of life threatening illnesses like cancer and heart disease not otherwise covered by private insurance or other public programs.
Federalization of MedicAid.
Loan forgiveness for health care providers in pediatrics and primary care and / or practicing in underserved areas.
4
The Democratic party is two parties. At least. As they struggle to stay one party, we end up with Donald Trump. Or worse. Yes, there could be worse. We need more than two parties because that's the reality of what we do have. Time to branch off, build coalitions, and welcome third, fourth, and fifth parties fully into American politics. And while I'm not sure if I should be saying party's or parties I feel good about this comment.
This article assumes the only candidate Democrats should vote for is someone that can beat Trump and that can only be a moderate. Politics may be a game of chess, but it's not worth winning if you abandon everything worthing playing for in the first place.
4
Frank Bruni claimed "not one Democrat who flipped a district from red to blue did so by running on the kind of agenda that Sanders and Warren are pushing now. It’s a powerful argument against either Sanders or Warren."
No. Frank Bruni is wrong in this claim. Every poll shows a large majority of Americans in favor of the kind of agenda that Sanders and Warren advocate. Healthcare not tied to your job, jobs for all who want to work, action on climate change, and reasonable taxes on the uber-wealthy are national issues. All politics is local, and dems running to flip a red state will emphasize local issues. Candidates for president rightly advocate popular and much needed systemic improvements, just Warren and Sanders are doing.
13
I admire modernists like Warren and Sanders who think that we can provide for US citizens the same level of government services that other developed countries do. If not, it's time to drop the 'other'.
7
I still don't understand why anyone thinks that, given a choice, any Republican would vote for "almost a Republican" over an actual Republican. I also don't understand why Democrats wouldn't vote for an actual Democrat over "almost a Republican.'. I'll take the actual Democrat please.
13
Frank, please do your homework on the existing models for national health insurance. If we have government health insurance (public option or Medicare for Some) and "choice" (ability to keep or get a private insurance plan), the government program will end up with most of the high-user, high-cost enrollees. So, duh, there is a reason for the single-payer model and the ACA individual mandate. The way out of it is to throw a bone to the insurance companies and let them manage (i.e. cut checks) for Medicare for All, and offer add-on insurance like Medicare Supplement policies. Of course the insurance companies' business volumes, profits, and stocks will plummet but it solves the political problem and solves part of the current high-cost problem. And the lefties have yet to figure out that so-called Medicare for All doesn't have to use more taxpayer dollars. There would be a huge across-the-board savings from dumping the middlemen and controlling drug prices, so that premiums for the below-65-year-old enrollees could be set to cover estimated future costs, and the ACA and Medicaid budgets can continue to be used to subsidize people who can't afford market rate premiums. Hey, Frank, how about researching that?
9
Astonishing how few are prepared to imagine a truly better world and must always cut dreams down to capitalism's scant measure.
15
I'm finding it hard to take this article seriously because its author claims to have been impressed by Mayor Pete while at the same time cutting down Sanders and Warren for their proposals to change a broken system. Did you even listen to Mayor Pete? He said the system is broken and until the system is changed (get rid of the Electoral College, Constitutional amendment to deal with Citizens United), we'll keep talking about the same non-solutions we've talked about forever. Impressive for sure, but Bruni missed it by a mile.
7
Finally a column that makes sense. Lots giving the win to these two.
Does any of the supporters understand that both Warren and Sanders talk empty flashy words?
First, medicare for all will not pass in congress, not even if we have more dems.
Second, they are pushing a policy that would make millions of Americans without the choice of keeping their insurance. I am one. I do not trade my insurance for a Medicare for all. Sorry.
I am a senior and I still work to pay for my insurance.
Then, free tuition for all. Seriously, for Jeff Bezos too?
Invest in K-12 so poor kids can even make it to apply for college!
3
As usual I found most of the folk on stage Talking Heads. Then Mayor Pete spoke talking about getting things done. He impressed me before with his clarity and the ability to get things done by working with the other side. I am looking forward to what will happen with Ms Harris and Mr Booker who I admire from other things than these debates.
My dream team would be Mayor Pete and either Ms Harris and or Mr Booker. But then I believe that those who can speak what they see are extremely valuable to the advancement of a country I do love and very much want to be successful in what we say we stand for. I keep watching and I do see hope...But I have been wrong in the past, recent and otherwise.
Just an old white man's opinion for whatever that's worth.
1
Health insurance provided by an employer is only as good as the prospects of you keeping your job. Having been through several job loses because companies merged, then merged the companies workforces into 1 and redundant employees as we were called fired. No employer insurance is provided for those terminated. Sure folk are happy with their employer insurance until they no longer have it. Sure we have a great economy at the moment, however who knows when it will end and layoffs begin. Over the next 10 years millions of people are going to lose jobs because of new disrupter technologies, i.e. prediction of 330,000 truck drivers losing jobs when self driving trucks replace truck drivers, and those folk will not have employer provided health insurance anymore. Americans need a public option so they can buy into a health insurance plan at a reasonable cost. The ACA provides that option and should be improved as Mr. Biden suggests.
3
Relative to other developed nations, economic injustice in America is grotesque. It's the elephant in the room... social injustice is more like a wombat. Focusing on the wombat just makes the elephant get larger and larger. This pleases those who protect their wealth and privileged access to it. Despite pretenses, Democrats protect the wealthy as much or more than do Republicans these days. If all Americans had equivalent, excellent educations Democrats would actually suffer, financially, more than Republicans. The academic/professional class are the aristocrats of the day. (Managing social systems, technology and intellectual property determines prosperity more than do the returns of industry, manufacturing, natural resource exploitation, etc..) Economic opportunity in America depends on democrats sharing their control of it and their access to education with the working poor.
2
One of these candidates is supposed to go up against Trump? They have given him so much ammunition against them that Trump probably can't believe it's going to be so easy. Just for starters, I think healthcare for current citizens of the United States should be a major priority over free healthcare for illegal immigrants. Decriminalizing people coming over our borders illegally makes me wonder why we would even need borders. Invite them all in and give them everything for free! The Democrats better wake up before it's too late.
4
Boooooooo. The media is against Bernie, why? Because people like Frank Bruni rub shoulders with the moderate sociopaths who only serve themselves + they like the way it is now and have no interest in rocking the boat. We need real change and the only two candidates that believe in this change is Bernie and to a lesser degree, Warren. NYT should treat them fairly & equally and not jump on the media bandwagon trying to stop Sanders and now seemingly Warren.
8
@James The media is against Bernie because they think the socialist label will lose the swing states. Trump will label him a communist, connect him with AOC and Omar, who poll terribly in the swing states.
Like it or not, the economy under Trump is booming so it would be tough for a progressive to win swing states saying voters' lives will be financially better by going Socialist. In 2016 I believe a socialist like Bernie had a chance with an economic campaign platform because wages were stagnant. I dont think that is the case anymore.
4
@Not 99pct Nothing has changed in that 2016 was conducive to a populist candidate, as it will be in 2020. The red-baiting will happen but its effect is overblown.
Mayor Buttigieg, can you honestly say with a straight face that democratic members of Congress don't put party over the country? Even worse, they pit one group of Americans (or wanna be Americans) against the other; selecting arbitrary winners and losers based on political expediency.
4
Spot on commentary. This dreamlike "panem et circenses' from the Democrats, particularly Warren and Sanders, is indeed a guarantee of more years of Trump and his goons
4
The whole point of staking your positions wide of center and making the argument for them is so that you can drag the argument back toward the center and then settle there. If you start near the center, you're going to be dragged over to the wrong side.
That's what Republicans have been doing for years...dragging the tug-of-war on issues over to their side of the line. That's why we saw the Heritage Foundation proposing the ACA, Mitt Romney put it into action in Massachsetts, and then Democrats adopting a Republican policy as their own while Republicans pulled the chains again.
Delaney is not ambitious. None of these moderates are. They've already given up half the farm, and will settle on terms that the Republicans will give them. No more. We're done with that, and here you are arguing that we have to be practical. Let me ask you...how has being practical worked for Democrats? Republicans are winning because they don't care about hypocrisy or practicality.
No toggle toward the center for Warren you say? Let me ask you, do you remember Candidate Obama? Remember how he argued against the mandate in the ACA, and Hillary Clinton hammered away at him that he was not being realistic.
Remember what happened next? He stopped saying he wasn't going to endorse the mandate and he put in the mandate. Warren will do the same. She will realize that there is always going to be a place for private health insurance and she will back down on that.
2
Frank,I am not clear as to why you believe ,Government sponsored health care wont be palatable to Americans. How can it work all over the world and not in America.
I am personally willing to give it a shot.Taking early retirement from a well paying job last September, I left with an awesome pension but no health care coverage.
So biting the bullet we decided to try a HMO, it was a disaster, traveling on the West Coast this winter basically left us without insurance as we were out side of our covered area . If we were sick we went to an ER. We may as well have had no insurance.
Upon our return back East we again decided to bite the different bullet and pay more for what we had when I was working. For 2 adults and 2 small children we pay 2400 dollars a month, that is with a subsidy from my ex employee BTW,
We are paying all this money for Insurance that we need at some time, or may not need ever . Why would a sane person want to keep this. Its literally just making Insurance Companies rich.
I am 100% in favor of everyone being covered by a Government plan, Frankly I would rather pay the Government that 2400 dollars in taxes, than a for profit Insurance Company.
Although I am quite sure we would not be paying anything like 2400 dollars monthly in taxes for a Government plan coverage.
Whatever we pay I am fine in the knowing that our taxes are helping cover other Americans .
7
@Brit....Suppose you began with something that might actually pass, like making a Medicare option available in direct competition with for profit healthcare insurance. Since Medicare has a much lower administrative cost it could provide the same healthcare coverage for less. Over time individuals and companies would figure this out and you would in effect have Medicare for all without all the drama.
1
@W.A. Spitzer That appears to be Mayor Petes plan. The only issue is that we will all need to contribute to a Government plan, including anyone who might choose to keep their private insurance . Furthermore since health insurance will be off the table union contracts will now focus solely on work practices and wages .
I believe it is all or nothing, I am not afraid. I have lived under socialized health care and know it works 'very well actually'. Americans should try it they will love it .Its certainly better tahn paying into a system to make 100billion profit for Insurance Companies on a yearly basis.
1
Warren and Sanders are the only two on the stage who have been fighting for real change for most if not all of their professional life. The others have to come up with something different they can call their own. Something preferably the insurance companies will be happy with.
After all insurance companies are happy to finance politicians that are likely to help them. They loose sight of the fact the purpose of healthcare is not to provide business for insurance companies. Rather it is to provide cost effective healthcare to all our citizens. If insurance companies can do that, then they should show it. So far they fail by 22 million people. Given we pay far more for worse outcomes than any other first world country they clearly fail at being cost effective! There is a lot they could have done to be more cost effective. If their time to exist has not run out it is very close.
2
@duncan..."Warren and Sanders are the only two on the stage who have been fighting for real change for most if not all of their professional life."...Perhaps you could tell us what Sanders has accomplished in this life long effort.
2
What most people, including reporters and columnists, seem to miss is that the task of the candidate is not only to fit into the existing assumed majority, but to persuade people to come over to his/her positions. The people who think only a "moderate" with no big program can beat Trump are giving up already on what we need as much as we need to get rid of the stuffed doll in the White House: we need to change direction drastically away from handouts to billionaire "persons" (both kinds) and towards the "general welfare" of the many Americans who are in distress in various ways.
2
@Thomas Zaslavsky
Nicely said.
One of the problems is the candidates answered the questions posed to them by CNN, which were terrible. They seemed designed to make the moderators appear "tough" and encourage fighting between the candidates.
Healthcare is clearly at the top of almost all of the candidates' priorities. But decriminalizing border crossings probably isn't even a top-ten agenda item for any of them. They should talk about what matters- healthcare, the climate crisis, and jobs.
A successful pivot for any of these candidates would have been to answer what they want to do for American workers when asked about illegal immigration. To talk about how they are going to build jobs while building a sustainable, green infrastructure in this country.
Warren came closest to that.
1
Mr Bruni wishes Bernie would go away. So do Exxon, Pfizer and the executives at every Blue Cross/Blue Shield!
6
And we all thought Trump was on his own fantasy island, too. Bernie and Warren are brave and right. Get on board.
9
More likely the conservative candidates were "marooned".
Unchecked Capitalism fosters life nasty, brutish, and short.
Compassionate Democracy encourages life worth living.
3
These debates are all somewhat exaggerations, and caricatures - each person playing to a certain type . I mean, I really wonder, is there that much difference between Warren and Klobuchar and what will become of that difference when tempered by reality we can't say. But I think Warren is not dumb or naive and I have confidence that she would adapt as needed to get things done for America. We are mostly watching a differentaition of style. But it does seem a shame to me that big ideas and proposals for significant change are so ridiculed. Is there no imagination.
2
Good opinion piece. Problem for Sanders and Warren is they cant tac toward center for the general election. Of course Trump didn’t either...
2
I'm not in favor of canceling people's adequate work-dependent health insurance, but Warren is right: a campaign based on not asking for much improvement, or on cooperating with the Republicans, is a losing campaign or, if it wins, a losing strategy.
4
I think towing the line that perfectly reasonable plans that have already been implemented in other countries are “fantasies” and “dreams” is a failing attempt at psy-ops by those that would loose a little money should those plans be implemented in the US.
It’s worked before but I think this time people have had it.
3
What concerns me about Sanders and Warren is, if either is elected, they will spend enormous amounts of time and political capital trying to make good on M4A but won't be able to get it through Congress and the insurance lobby, even with a Democratic majority. Meanwhile, other more urgent programs (on infrastructure, climate change, etc. ) won't get done. As Obama's presidency showed, there is not infinite bandwidth for reform, and priorities matter.
3
So, you want the private insurance companies to continue making billions in profit and dictate who lives and who dies? Wonder if people who think or write like this to bark for the wealthy are given enough money to cover a lifetime of costs for at least their loved ones.
2
@ak
If you have enough resources then the costs of healthcare are not important. It's those of us who are "Middle Class or Lower Middle Class" that healthcare can destroy financial and otherwise. And Yes I speak from years of experience.
1
The world where we pretend that the current system is working - a democracy controlled by the very rich, one which profits by addicting the population, one which pays twice what others pay for medical care and still leaves people to die - well let us hope this world the corporate centrists created will one day be a horrible historic memory; a memory of those who refused to take responsibility for their times.
2
I love you Frank, but check your own position. From a cushy seat at the NYT, getting rid of Trump and getting some incremental change may be fine. But in Michigan and elsewhere we see the Country having gone way wrong in may ways and we think we need to fight to change it despite the odds against it. The continued reign of the rich oligarchs will destroy us, so what alternative do we have except to fight back, even if we fail
4
Once again Frank, I expected more of you. Warren is completely right about Democrats like you mouthing Republican talking points. Perhaps its too early for you to consider the possibility than she and Mayor Pete, like any front runner would modify their perspective to widen their appeal. Trying to make them small as you do here is exactly what the Republicans want. Trump does not want to run against them so he needs all your help to get them out of the way. He would absolutely flatten Biden. So there you have it.
4
Last I checked, Canada and Britain were real places.
5
I always vote, and the last time I voted for a Republican was 1976. I hate Trump, but I will never vote for Warren or Sanders. There are millions like me who will never go for their left-wing pipe dreams.
1
I used to really admire Liz, but the more I see...
Warren will likely turn off ppl with her hyperbole and exaggerations. You can wax eloquent and effective about inequities and the need for change to help the non wealthy and stop favoring the wealthy, and still stick to the truth.
Case in point: She thundered last night how the top 1% get everything while "the rest get dirt." Red hyperbole flag! I am definitely not in the 1%, am comfortably middle class - not upper, but really just fine - and sorry, Liz, I really don't feel I "get dirt." I'm sure many others below the top 1% feel like I do. Why speak in such an obviously inflated & unrealistic manner?
I believe we need far greater fairness, we need change, esp on healthcare (a disgrace) and taxes, unionizing, better wages, but "get dirt" sounds like dirt poor. Look at the huge number of impoverished people globally to see what "get dirt" is really like. The cararavan migrants (most of whom are economic migrants, let's face it) arent walking all those miles to get here just to "get dirt."
Also, she was dishonest in her non response to Tapper's twice-asked question if the middle class would get taxed more under a Medicare for All plan, which Bernie has correctly said would be the case. But Warren sidestepped his 2nd attempt, saying the wealthy would pay more & the non wealthy would save money.
Ok, but will they get taxed more, Liz? Crickets. Tapper should've gone for a 3rd try, but it shouldn't have been necessary.
2
This is a terrific column for the beauty and humor of how well it's written. I happen to think Bruni is probably correct though, that Warren and Sanders are on risky terrain--Warren the more so based on her desire not only to decriminalize border jumpers, but to INCREASE legal immigration.
Our population has grown by 80 million since 1990. That's four New York State equivalents. More than half of that is from mass immigration. ***Too much*** immigration propelled Trump into the White House. I raised this issue with Warren soon after Trump was elected, and she said she was inclined to agree with me.
I like everything else Warren stands for (even if these views are not popular outside of our state). But too much immigration is bad for the environment--both in the US and globally due to an increase in emissions when people move from developing countries to the US. And the oversupply of cheap labor takes jobs from American workers and depresses their wages.
We need to reduce immigration, by at least half, as the late Barbara Jordan recommended when she ran a commission on immigration reform under Pres. Clinton.
2
Unless the DNC elects a true progressive who is credibly promising profound structural reform of the US economy and society, Trump will win reelection. Hillary redux will not wash. The people who are resisting this message are effectively supporting Trump, and it's the duty of all of us who understand this to make the point undeniably self-evident by the time of the Iowa caucus. Shame on Bruni!
2
Strange that Bruni's highest praise is for Buttigieg, who managed to say practically nothing of substance, and continues to try to avoid policy pronouncements other than three that are truly fantastical -- constitutional amendments to abolish the electoral college and overrule Citizens United, and packing the supreme court. On anything else, he just wants to impress with his brainpower without actually staking out positions. He is pure, unalloyed ambition, with far too little experience. Yet Bruni gives him nothing but praise, while criticizing Warren and Sanders for proposing big policy ideas. Thanks, but no thanks, Frank.
1
"she’s wrong — wrong that enough general-election voters will choose a candidate who aims to take away options when it comes to medical insurance"
Could have been written by Trump himself. Absurd. Warren or bust!
4
Seriously? Marooned together on fantasy island? They are marooned together with pretty much the rest of the developed world. Most of their“radical” policies...universal health care, free or cheap higher education, etc....are standard policies in countless other countries of the world because they work. Why isn’t anyone saying this?
5
Brunei drank the Koolaid of the pharmaceutical crony capitalist ruling class. I guess EVERY OTHER MAJOR COUNTRY that has universal coverage is wrong, even though those other countries' residents love their health care. Mouthpieces for corporate greed should realize how evil their rhetoric is, and how these lies about public health care cause harm and unnecessary death and impoverishment.
2
Mr. Bruni, you really aren't helping. Take a page from Senator Warren and "fight, fight, fight!" Stop letting the Republican Party set the Democratic agenda by default. I am gay, like you. Find strength and courage from the examples set forth by those who struggled for our unalienable slice of the rights pie. They have enabled us to lead lives of dignity and did not and have not shirked.
In this election season the Democrats only duty is to fight. Take heart from Senator Warren's admonition, “Democrats win when we figure out what is right and we get out there and fight for it. I am not afraid. And for Democrats to win, you can’t be afraid either.” Don't you be the one on the island, Mr. Bruni.
2
I can't believe I'm reading this from Frank Bruni. It's the Frank Bruni, Joe Biden and those other moderates who are marooned together on fantasy island or under a large rock. The truth is that poor, lower middle class, and less educated whites who want and need government provided social safety nets and programs. But they have been propagandized into believing that their plight is caused by people of colors and immigrants. Trump knows and understands this. That's why he is playing the race card and stoking fear and resentment. Only big, bold policies like those of Warren's and Sander's can bring the poor, rural, less educated whites back to the Democratic Party.
2
All this commentary viz a viz moderate vs progressive is an attempt at an inspirational win. Does anybody think, given the political forces and the money in play that medicare for all will arrive unblemished?
GET REAL PEOPLE--IT"S LIKE ACHIEVING THE GOAL OF CIVIL RIGHTS AND AN END TO RACISM. WE'RE NOT THERE AND WON'T BE FOR YEARS TO COME!
If we're lucky and we get a Democratic president, just getting a public option extended to all Americans will be like pulling teeth against Republican opposition in the senate not to mention all the red state governors and legislatures that will throw up every sort of impediment.
The changes we seek in our society are decades if not generations in the making. This will be really hard.
By all means keep your ideals front and center but to get anything implemented you need expertise in sausage-making political craftsmanship. In a legislative compromise everyone's ideals gets tarnished but at the end of it we're incrementally better off.
As momma said, half a loaf is better than no loaf at all.
2
this is the pre-primary to the primaries, which are a pre-campaign to the actual campaign for president. i have no problem at all with bold claims and stark contrasts at this early stage.
we seem to have two candidates committed to actual change, and 18 or so (the number keeps changing) committed to being noncommittal about change -- unless its committing to promises that don't promise any commitment. and who are all these white male republicans running as democrats?
the president proposes; congress disposes. always has. so the real problem with mr. bruni's agita is this: what is he afraid of? obama said he'd bring comity to washington, bush said he'd make conservatism compassionate -- and those were outlandish, silly, pie in the sky promises. did you carp then? if not, why carp at warren and sanders now?
of course i get it. you fear trump like a zombie. you want to win the election at any cost. you think of politics as chess moves against your opponent. i think sanders is a feckless inspirational speaker, but warren thinks of politics as educating the people and demanding factual explanations from opponents.
candidates get elected for there personalities, their demeanor, their promises. why not for once elect a president who understands change is necessary and is willing to talk about it?
2
If you give America a choice between Republicans and Democrats who act like timid Republicans, they'll vote for Republicans. They see no advantage in voting for a moderate Democratic candidate. The DNC needs a smart and energetic progressive not a milktoast Republican.
3
Frank, there was a time when African-Americans achieving humanity and equality under the law (in legally binding words, at least) was a fantasy.
There was a time when women achieving the right to vote and economic independence - they couldn’t take out a mortgage on their own or a credit card until the 70s - was a fantasy.
There was a time when gay men and women were second-class citizens in every way imaginable, and granting them the same freedoms and rights were deemed a fantasy.
Frank, I am so disappointed in you.
There was a time when African-Americans achieving humanity and equality under the law (in legally binding words, at least) was a fantasy.
There was a time when women achieving the right to vote and economic independence - they couldn’t take out a mortgage on their own or a credit card until the 70s - was a fantasy.
There was a time when gay men and women were second-class citizens in every way imaginable, and granting them the same freedoms and rights were deemed a fantasy.
Shame on you for kowtowing. Shame on you for appeasing. Shame on you for depriving the rest of us and yourself out of fear.
I am so disappointed in your kowtowing, your appeasing, your willingness to deprive the rest of us and yourself out of fear.
We are moving onward and upward. I invite you join us.
6
Mr. Bruni,
July 1, 1968. When Canada introduced a broad public affordable reasonable healthy caring system.
We didn't and we mandated it but also didn't implement the metric system either. No way forward so says youse.
We know why and how, but can't seem to progress at our peril. It's was not a fantasy to go to the moon. We can do what we need and dream to do.
Mr. Bruni, you are a naysayer. No, never ever, no hope and no vision. You are part of the problem we face and struggle to overcome. We can and should aspire to be stronger and better and wiser.
Mr. B, You have a voice and you are not using it for good. Go away and then come back after reflection. Be helpful and not a hindrance.
5
The fundamental question Democrats need to answer is whether they want to run against either a very flawed system or a very flawed President.
Running against The System is best done by picking a highly progressive candidate. Unfortunately this type of candidate is less likely to siphon votes away from Trump
Running against Trump is best done by a more moderate candidate which allows independents and wavering Republicans a viable centrist alternative. However, if elected, this candidate is unlikely to change The System.
Those who support a more radical Progressive should bear one thing in mind, if Trump gets re-elected not only will The System not change for the better, it is likely to get worse.
2
@Frank Bruni, please just look at the destruction Trump and his enablers in Congress have done to our courts, deficit, trade, international relations and pretty much any topic you care to choose. They had big bold ideas to do that.
But now you complain and/or deride Bernie and Warren for taking a similar strategy to correct the Trumpian damage and make structural changes so a future Trump does not go down the same destructive path.
Incrementalists on the other hand are fearful of major changes, they propose almost invisible changes when the country is ripe for major changes. Biden is the standard bearer for that model followed by the rest of the candidates.
4
I had a lot more respect for Elizabeth Warren as a deep thinker before she wedded herself to Sander's style Medicare-for-All scheme. Improve the ACA (Obamacare) through a public option and better subsidies to support the individual mandate and you may be able to eliminate private health insurance for the majority of Americans within a generation, perhaps as little as 10 years. In contrast, threaten to take away employer-based health insurance from American voters who either like their insurance or are afraid of change, and you've given Trump a pathway to victory. Senator Warren should understand that big ideas are fine, but let these be imbued with a pragmatism that will attract broad support rather than drive voters away. Sadly, the hubris of some progressives is as unrealistic and appalling as that seen among Republicans.
3
Warren and Sanders Marooned on Fantasy Island? Really? It is a fantasy to want to provide health care options for all? A fantasy to want to make big changes to our economic system in order to help the middle and lower classes? A fantasy to argue for humane treatment of immigrants? Bruni, it is time to get out of Manhattan and see how the rest of us live. Like Don Quixote, I'd prefer to live in the land of fantasy than in the reality of where our country is today: Fantasist for President 2020.
6
Why did midwestern voters who voted for Obama in 2008 vote for Trump in 2016? We need real change not timid "moderate" do nothings!
135
@dee cee Based on my anecdotal conversations in the Midwest, they voted for Trump because he pounded home the message of more jobs, higher wages. Obama did not do much for them in that department and Hillary never talked about it. Dem nominees today know they probably can't beat Trump on the economy message, so they are harping on where he legitimately failed with repeal and replace Obamacare by attacking healthcare, hence the whole 'free healthcare' message by Dems today.
7
@dee cee By real change to you mean the realization of a progressive agenda because that is certainly not what Obama achieved in over 8 years (partly due to Republican intransigence but also due to Obama's own centrism.)
11
@dee cee If this election is about kitchen table issues jobs & uniting this country there's no way the Dems lose. If it's about reparations, immigration, & AOC there's no way we win. Democrats are moving to the far left & that's will be a huge problem in 2020. Progressives want to dismantle border enforcement agencies, eliminate criminal sanctions for illegal immigrants. This is the only issue that would compel independent swing voters to hold their nose & vote for Trump. I've had it with the leftist fanatics who keep trying to push the Democrats off the cliff or into a circular firing squad. Amazing that after losing to Trump by alienating working-class voters, we're scrounging for issues that will alienate them even more. Free healthcare for illegal immigrants? You're kidding? The more benefits we give, the more will try to get here. It's an impossible equation. The excessive amount of attention to this can backfire miserably, with Trump being reelected & it not being the result of Russian interference. If we lose this election blame it on leftist zealots pushing no-win issues like this. The biggest question implied but not answered in this article is can Democratic moderates & progressives co-exist in the same party. I would say absolutely not. The voters we need to win back the country have different values. There's no way to bridge the gap. If any of the far-left candidates are the nominees in 2020 we will lose decisively. We have to steer a course towards the center.
25
People are mad at that 3 trillion tax cut for rich,. So, Warren's tax on them to help others, has broad appeal
1
If union negotiators didn't have to give up everything else in order to get decent healthcare for their members, they could negotiate for better pay, pensions, job security, and improved working conditions.
Of course they are worried that what they have obtained for their members at great cost might lose its value. However, there is so much more they can do with their skills if they don't have to waste them on defending healthcare.
3
The moderate slot has already been taken by Biden. The only effect of moderates in this debate was to help Bidens position as a moderate.
This line by Warren receiving accolades from the left “I don’t understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of running for president of the United States just to talk about what we really can’t do...”
I know this line was supposed to mean we need aspirational leaders, but it is poorly communicated, it can also mean why would anyone talk about impractical at best and impossible at worst solutions instead of real solutions for real problems.
1
About health insurance in other Western countries. Germany in this case. We currently pay 331 euros per month for our health insurance. It's deducted from my husband's salary, so if you want to call it a "tax," I suppose it is. This amount is matched by my husband's employer. The contribution is figured according to income; we pay in at the highest rate. There is no deductible, and our sons, still in university/ training, are also fully covered. For about the last ten years, folks here have also been paying into a fund that goes to financing care for the elderly. This means that an additional 69 euros is deducted from my husband's salary and again, matched by his employer.
So does this mean that everything is hunky-dory here and everyone's in agreement? No--health insurance is something that needs constant attention, constant evaluation, constant cost controlling. What everyone DOES agree on, though, is that universal healthcare is necessary for the nation and a basic right. What the rest of the world doesn't understand is why Americans struggle with this fundamental concept. There are a number of ways to work out the details.
9
Moderate dems are just republican light. They offer nothing to help change the many years of inequality and middle class stagnation. I used to be an independent and then a moderate democrat and I've come to the conclusion that if you want real change you need to really think outside of the box. Why are all other countries in the world far surpassing the US in everything? Quality of life, healthcare, infrastructure? Because they are much more left leaning and progressive than we are.
Something that really irked me that Amy Klobuchar said, is that she cannot understand why rich kids under the progressive plan would be able to have the option of a free college education. Well, Amy, their parents would be paying more taxes, so they are in fact paying into the program. If they would rather send their kids to expensive high schools and colleges than they can certainly do that. This is the same thing folks used to say about free high school and free elementary school. COME ON DEMS!!!
2
I love Warren's intellect and ability to distill big ideas down to great talking points, plus her seemingly genuine passion about leveling the playing field for middle and lower income Americans. I think she is very presidential...decisive, bold, and a natural leader. But I think Mr. Bruni is right, that her position on health care will not fly; people just don't want to give up private insurance if they have a good plan. All the talk of taking on corporate America probably also makes people nervous in terms of economic implications though I would trust her to take this on. But I am afraid she is going to be the next McGovern. A good man who meant business about ending a horrific war that had touched families everywhere by 1972. Running against a corrupt, lying POTUS who was very unpopular. And as we know, the people reelected Nixon anyway, by a landslide. I don't know if Warren can adjust her positions and get real. I hope she can. But frankly with all the criticism today of her and Sanders, it might be too late.
4
The huge disappointment in last night's debate? The performance of CNN moderators. They are fully into Trump-style flash and dash, driving for conflicts and drama rather than letting candidates discuss things (what's with all the interruptions, Tapper?)
I hope that network does better tonight.
6
The problem is Frank, with Greenland now melting a pace we've never seen in our lifetimes, and corporations like Amazon... I repeat AMAZON, not paying ANY federal taxes, SHE IS RIGHT.
The time for half-talk and half-measures is over. If we don't go big now, there won't be a country, an economy, or a world left to save.
I no longer think this is hyperbole, it's just the raw naked truth and Warren has the energy, the brains, and the chops to get the big structural change done.
6
Bruni you have it all wrong. There are two sides to the Medical industry, the care-giving and the insurance/billing industry. The care-giving in the US with their outstanding physicians, nurses and staff are among the best in the industrialised world. I speak from personal experience having undergone care at various places throughout the world at different stages in my career.
The insurance/billing industry needs to be fixed by dismantling the current oligarchy favoring a few insurance companies. There are different ways to approach this, but a single-payer system that can make health records available, with the appropriate privacy restrictions, to innovative insurance providers on a level-playing field, coupled with the public option always on offer, will ultimately result in the best possible choices for US residents.
6
Well, so many others have already commented so probably no one will see this one.
1. Yes we need everyone to have medical coverage but that can be accomplished right away with a public option for those not covered by their employers plans. A public option is the best way to go, many other countries get to universal coverage with a mix of public and private.
2. Free tuition for everyone? How about free Community College and then means tested free tuition for four year public colleges. Free tuition for those with less than 100K in income. Everything free is never going to happen,
3. Pay off everyone's loan- Oh. please. The problem is the interest and fees that make it impossible to ever pay off the loans. Cap the interest and fees. Set up reasonable payment plans and forgive only after 15 years of payments. Cap the amount of loans and restrict the high pay and bloat of useless administrators at the colleges and universities.
4. Open borders? That is crazy. We need a real Immigration plan. The problem is that all laws have to go through the house and senate. I live 30 miles to the border- No way on open borders. A real immigration plan with guest workers and a path to citizenship yes. But we need to know who lives here. I am a very liberal person but I pay taxes to support the San Diego Unified School District. We are probably the largest single district on the border and we can not survive completely open borders.
6
Bruni and Trump, marooned together in the glass half empty.
5
Donald Trump, the country and the world are depending on you to do something so heinous that a majority of Americans will vote for radical changes.
The fact that other countries have better systems and policies does not make the proposed changes any less dramatic. And don't expect voters to make elaborate calculations that the candadates won't be able to actually accomplish their plans.
It's all up to you, Mr. President.
The real problem with Medicare for all as things now stand is that it lacks public support, and likely will continue to lack public support through November 2020 and beyond. This is why the solution, the obvious solution, is Medicare for those who want it. Why this isn't being discussed more is really quite puzzling. Trump and his cronies will pound away on the idea that the Dems are taking something away from folks, that bureaucrats in DC are telling families how to take care of their healthcare. There is a reason why none of the Congressional winners last year talked about healthcare reform but NOT about Medicare for all.
Another thing that folks should remember is the challenges and glitches that accompanied the implementation of the ACA. There has been no discussion of how this would play out with either Medicare for All or with For Those Who Want It. There will certainly be problems with either scenario, but the implementation of Medicare for All from the outset will certainly be far more challenging than if it was implemented after Medicare for All was put in place.
The imperative of beating Trump should make it obvious that Medicare is not a winning issue in 2020.
4
@Lee You can't make Medicare-for-all optional. The math will never work. If it was optional, all the healthy and young folks will find private insurance alternatives that are cheaper while the only folks left on Medicare for premium support are the sick and expensive. Private primary health insurance and the ACA cannot exist with Medicare-for-all. The only private insurance that can survive is supplemental policies. The ACA is basically your approach with a very minor tax penalty for staying uninsured and it's pretty much a failure while Medicare is required for everyone over 65. We tried it your way and it failed. It's time to do it the right way.
2
@FrankM
Several candidates support this option, and I have not seen any analysis that suggests that it is viable.
Frank Bruni is marooned on a fantasy island with much of the TV cable news media. Not very risky, but cozy.
Their luxurious island gives them excellent health insurance and salaries. It is far away from the mainland of average citizens.
Most citizens live on Reality Mainland America. This is where people fight to keep their heads above water. They try to survive in their jobs, and pay for the most expensive and profitable health care in the world. Try to give their kids training and education they need to survive, without being exploited --to use a nice word--financially.
The main media's usual theme is to avoid this reality, not report it. In fact, they use distraction almost like Trump does.
When do we ever get reports on how dozens of nations pay for HC for all, and low cost eduction?
When do we ever hear about the millions of our jobs our elected officials let be sent out of the country, while the profits pile up, then to be put toward election donations?
The media avoid challenges to the moneyed powerful in our politics, who then can legally set definition of left and center, thus limit lawmaking for their gain, our loss. Then a Trump creature swims up from the swamp depths. He was beckoned.
If the media ever challenged this norm, they'd be called left liberal progressive radical socialists. That's what our politics calls people who expect elected govt to represent the people's interests and well being. A true denial of our founding credo.
9
National Health care is 70 years over due in this country. The idea that Sanders and Warren are too far left is absurd.
13
"They raised the right questions about it and poked the right holes in it, prompting Warren to complain repeatedly that they were playing into Republicans’ hands by appropriating Republican talking points."
My inference from Warren's remark about talking points (and I only remember ONE such remark) was that it was a response to Delaney's use of the phrase "free stuff." That is indeed a repub talking point: Google it and note all the right-wing and libertarian websites that fling it about derisively. I'm a Frank Bruni fan, but to my recollection Warren did not make that statement in response to the substantive comments of others, and certainly didn't make it "repeatedly."
5
I consider myself a progressive but I am very happy with Medicare and my employer based supplemental insurance to cover what Medicare doesn’t. I will not vote for any candidate who wants to eliminate that. We are supposed to be an inclusive party. That means inviting those who want to be covered by Medicare to do so. But it does not mean forcing me to give up my private insurance. That is subtraction, not addition.
6
Medicare is Medicare. Can you explain how you’d be giving up your private insurance? Instead of paying for supplement maybe you’d pay into the system.
"While Democrats picked up 40 seats in the House in the 2018 midterms, not one Democrat who flipped a district from red to blue did so by running on the kind of agenda that Sanders and Warren are pushing now. It’s a crucial point and a powerful argument against either Sanders or Warren as the Democratic nominee. But neither of the two of them ever directly addressed or specifically rebutted it."
--- This is a major problem for the Democrats. Common sense is being drowned out by unrealistic demagoguery.
9
the two oldest candiates here, the ones who've been around the longest and seen the most, agree that it's time to go for big-time changes. Maybe that in itself should tell us something.
Terrific photo, by the way.
6
@fischkopp,
.
only tells us agism
.
I do not believe that the delivery of health care and preventive care should be sold on the market place s for profit products as there is a profound conflict of interests between serving patients/subscribers and shareholders/investors. Now it is true that in many other advanced nations the delivery of health care and preventive care includes for profit organizations but they are strictly regulated. For those who currently like their private insurer I would ask if they have ever filed a claim for that is the moment you know if you can or cannot trust your insurer. I have had Medicare for many years and can tell anyone that it is an excellent service that has never failed me.
5
I do not understand why universal healthcare is a radical concept. Every 'developed nation' has it but us. It's radical that the pharma and insurance companies are making extraordinary profits, we have the most expensive healthcare on the planet and mainstream Democrats are ok with that. THAT is truly radical.
8
@Risa Swanson
1. The countries with universal health care do not have to spend much on defense because they know we will defend them, if attacked. We could spend less on defense, if they understood that they would have to do more to defend themselves.
2. The countries with universal health care put it into place when they had relatively homogenous populations - most of whom were educated and earned middle class incomes. Their health systems were not designed to care for large numbers of poorly educated people who earn little and pay little in taxes.
Here in the United States, we have millions of unauthorized immigrants with no more than a grade school education who pay little in taxes. (The PEW Trust estimated we had about 10.7 million illegal immigrants in 2016. Researchers at Yale and M.I.T. said the more likely number was 22.1 million.)
If we want to provide universal health care, we should look to Canada’s immigration system. It has relatively few illegal immigrants and it reserves most of its legal slots for those who have special knowledge or a skill to benefit the Canadian economy, who are fluent in English and/or French, and who could easily assimilate. These immigrants pay hefty taxes that help underwrite the health care system.
2
@Risa Swanson,
.
No, I doubt even Blue Dog Dems let alone mainstream Dems are ok w/ the often-criminal profiteering of Big Pharma & Ins, and Big Medicine in general :
.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/business/merck-agrees-to-pay-950-million-in-vioxx-case.html?scp=1&sq=&st=nyt nov 2011
.
Merck plead guilty criminally and paid $321 million for illegally introducing Vioxx into interstate commerce.
.
Merck also is paying $426 million to the federal government and $202 million to state Medicaid agencies.
.
Those payments will settle civil claims that its illegal marketing caused doctors to prescribe and bill the government for Vioxx they otherwise would not have prescribed.
.
Also in 2007, Merck agreed to pay $4.85 billion
.
to settle 27,000 lawsuits by people who had claimed they or their relatives had suffered injury or death after taking the drug
.
We tackle healthcare, not because it is easy, but because it is hard. All the issues facing us, such as climate change, are hard. That's what governing is about. Solving our problems, not keeping the status quo alive because that's safe, even if it isn't actually working.
5
Even though I have loved Frank Bruni's columns for years, he has officially lost me. People have already commented on the problem with calling Liz Warren "Fantasy Island." I am losing hope when someone such as yourself can't behind such incredible brains and initiative. Thanks ahead of time for not helping Warren get the nomination and the presidency. Or maybe she will win and you will have to explain to your criticism to your descendants.
3
The kind of "Great-Society" thinking of the 1960s went up in smoke with the Vietnam War. Now the attitude is the government should just fund Medicare, and the military, and that's about it. In the meantime the deficit looms, as spending spirals ever higher anyway.
1
Mr. Bruni miscounts again. That island is actually mighty crowded as also marooned on it is the majority of American citizens who favor liberal/progressive policies, not just the politicos who espouse them. Now, if only that majority of eligible voters can make it to shore and actually get to VOTE. There is the fundamental factor in our recent history of election "winners" essentially by default of non-majority voters. As in 2018, keep turning that trend around for the common good.
2
Consider this Frank. When you lose your job, What is the first or second thought that hits you. It is what in the world am I going to do for health insurance for me and my family. And it is the most scary. (better now with the ACA but still the most scary). That is what millions of people go through each and every time they lose a job. Insurance tied to a company goes away and leaves you at risk for everything else. This is really what Warren, Bernie and Democrats are trying to fix. Republicans don't even care. Which side are you on?
9
Why, Frank Bruni, do you think moderation is the key to winning? Every single study of folks who didn't vote in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin showed that it was the BASE of the Democratic party that didn't show up to the polls to vote for the moderate candidate. So why would they show up in 2020? Perhaps instead of thinking conventionally, you should do some critical thinking and realize that things have changed, and people don't want someone who dishonestly can "toggle toward the center".
4
"She’s sharp. She’s stirring. I also think she’s wrong — wrong that enough general-election voters will choose a candidate who aims to take away options when it comes to medical insurance, wrong that enough of them want a government at bitter war with all of corporate America, wrong that enough of them would be comfortable with the scope of federal spending that she proposes."
So 63 million Americans voted for Donald Trump because they were afraid Hillary Clinton would bring down the status quo? You still don't get it, you're still in the bubble.
The insurance options are overpriced and ineffective and people who have insurance are still being bankrupted by medical bills. Corporate America is keeping wages low, decreasing quality of life for workers, and raising the costs of living. Federal spending is never an issue when it comes to bailing out banks or giving tax breaks to billionaires, so why should it be an issue when it comes to bailing out the middle class? Please wake up before Trump gets another 4 years.
8
@Daniel,
.
Factor into your analyses Hillary's 2.8 MILLION vote margin over DT.
He was voted into the Pres by ab 305 Electors of the Electoral College
.
The fundamental problem is a lack of full communication in politics and the body politic's capability to handle full communication.
Free college and Medicare for All are honorable objectives. But the candidates who indulge in simplistic rhetorical slogans calling for them lose their credibility with voters anxious - and made anxious - about the fine print. It's counter to Warren's strengths not to lay out how we get there fairly and securely. Going to Medicare for All too quickly would be horribly disruptive to healthcare, people's lives and the economy. HOW do we get there, Elizabeth?
Free college does not jibe with our nation's tax structure. If the wealthy were taxed properly and fairly - in some cases taxed at all - their children should have free college just like anyone else, but with their extremely favored tax treatment today, adding free college is a further subsidy of inequality, and unaffordable to the nation. Under our current tax structure, debt-free college is the way to go.
Good policy requires patience with nuance and detail. That is an Achilles Heel of the Democrats, who generally want to govern competently and fairly. (It's no problem for Republicans, who don't care a whit and thrive on ineffective and unfair government.) But the voter has no patience - as Ronald Reagan accurately opined, "If you have to explain, you lose." He knew as much as anyone that voters respond with the gut, and most strongly to fear. He was a master at fearmongering. As is Trump.
8
wow. the democratic candidates are so removed from normal people that they do not have a chance to get elected. lets be clear 3 of the "front running candidates" bernie, warren and mayor pete get wiped out running against president trump. the ones with a chance are joe biden and kamala. try focusing on economic growth, improving education, and domestic and national security and you may wind up with a winning platform. btw at this point shrieking away that trump is racist does not get you any new voters.
the way this is rolling get ready for president trump to serenade you with another acceptance speech in 2020.
2
We ran a moderate last time and people stayed home. The democratic party is led by "moderates" who enjoy the status quo while millions go broke paying for worthless medical coverage and near worthless medical care. It is time for a change!
7
Im a Trump voter but IF, IF i were to vote democrat it would be for Delaney. He is someone that i feel could get bipartisian support for policies voted into law that both the left and right can agree on. Sanders and Warren are extremists and it shows by their appeal to the tiny alt-left base they are catering to.
6
Neither Bernie nor Warren have accomplished anything in the Senate. It has the feel of Bernie vs Hillary again. Good that others are running for the Democratic nomination. The Democrat Party needs to win the presidential election. Fantasizing about giving the undocumented free health coverage is not the answer. Pandering about reparations is not a winning issue.
Mr. Bruni's point is well taken. Let's applaud Bernie and Warren and then nominate someone who can win.
5
I am not crazy about some of Warren’s proposals, to put it mildly, but on the whole I think she would make an excellent, transformative president. As a candidate she has, in spades, what Americans (at least claim to) want: authenticity, passion, a long-proven desire to make their lives better.
She also is jaw-droppingly smart, which makes me wonder why she has failed to come up with an answer for the most predictable
GOP gotcha question of the night and all eternity: “But regarding M4A, won’t middle-class Americans pay higher taxes?”
Watch her dodge Chris Matthews on that one, repeatedly. She knows the moment she says “Yes, middle-class Americans’ taxes will rise a little, but what they now pay for medical premiums, co-pay, deductibles, etc. will plummet,” a thousand GOP attack ads will launch: That segment minus everything after the word “rise” will run 24/7 from now to Nov. 2020. And she will have ZERO chance of beating DJT.
Or she could consider the public option, a tax in all but name, yet one that Americans can freely choose. And once they discover that purchasing a product from an entity with 5-10% overhead (Medicare) vs one with 15-20% overhead (the privates), not to mention the endless paperwork, surprise five-figure bills for that out-of-network anesthesiologist, and hours on the phone fighting with customer “service”), they will come to love that “tax.”
Is it too late for Warren to embrace a public-option approach to M4A?
7
@Marty
Democrats taking away Americans' choice to make bone-head mistakes I find to be one of their most common and destructive gaffs.
Yes, most of the time, they are right, and do know better, and time usually proves that.
But time and time again, they go with the approach "we are going to make you do this because it is better", which is ALWAYS going to be met with resistance.
Warren needs to embrace the public option approach, because no one is going to elect someone who "forces" them to change their ways. We need to elect someone who will make people WANT to change you ways, as you mentioned in your comment.
3
Trump won with the Apprentice.
There is no reason why Elizabeth Warren can't win with "Fantasy Island." I trust her not to be marooned there. She has always been and will always be resourcful.
She's a smart, problem solving, practical brilliant woman.
That must be very difficult for old-fashioned right wing Bruni to digrest - a sassy smart woman without a lot of respect for conventional blather and neo-conservatism.
Conservatism gave us Donald Trump. We need some fresh air, fresh faces, and fresh ideas. Liz Warren will deliver. She's never lost an election.
Joe Biden has lost both of the times he previous ran for president. We cannot go back to this loser. The only reason he ever won was because Obasma chose him as a running mate. Obama/Joe left the country open to take-over by a dictatorial Russian puppet. As soon as Democratic voters really think about that, I thing Joe will fall pretty fast in the polls. I don't think he will bring in the new voters in the midwest, Florida, and Pennsylvania who will win the electoral college for Democrats.
Liz and Pete have the potential to win. In my view, Joe cannot win - there is no path for him.
Russian Intelligence and right wing con artists like Karl Rove and Donald Trump will demonize Pete and Liz. (I'm not suggesting one be the VP candidate - the VP candidate needs to be chosen by the nominee). But one of them is the best bet for a better future for America.
This is the time for people who can fire up young people.
2
"I cannot believe Nixon won the election. I do not know a single person who voted for him."
A silly urban legend I know but none the less defining of many of the people who post here.
3
Your opinion is flawed. You don’t start negotiating with a compromise. No healthcare will be created without congress. The starting position should be a universal, government system. Then you find out the concerns, where the votes are and what is possible. Giving that all away before you start will weaken whatever we end up with as a system. Warren (and Sanders) have programs that will need to pass Congress and their current form is a proposal and a place to start.
5
I was just doing a search of the govt budget and it is far more frightening than anything Warren brought up. The amount budgeted for defense is up to $1 trillion when you include stuff like State Dept stuff and Homeland Security.
It was barely half that amount back in the Obama administration and that was before Trump's tax cuts reduced revenue to the government because Republicans believe in "free stuff".
Something is wacky in the way information is transmitted to the American people. There is something to be said for the accusation that CNN's questioners at the debate are all about Republican talking points, not reality.
Folk, the corporate tax is down to just over $200b and defense is $1,000 billion ( 1 trillion). Once you apply the entire corporate tax to defense, there is still $800b to be paid for by 150m or so taxpayers. That's about $5000 which will pay for a good medical insurance policy. It's more than half of all government spending after you take out social security, medicare and Medicaid.
In 2008 Bush exclaimed that Wall Street is drunk as the economy lay in ruins about us in the biggest economic setback since the great depression. Trump, McConnell & Co are headed down that same road while CNN parrots republican talking points for them and the Pentagon goes on a spending bender.
2
Sound bites like Medicare for all and fantasyland are not doing justice to the incredible complexity of our country’s healthcare system. I have been a physician for over 30 years and have read the in-depth analyses of healthcare delivery in the New England Journal of Medicine for at least 10 years when the ACA was being developed. I support a measured, evidence-based and expert facilitated transition to a broader national insurance plan. There will continue to be commercial health insurance for citizens who want the platinum coverage.
8
Medicare-for-all will never work with the current system. You can't have the government essentially paying premiums to private insurers. The government has to BE the insurer to negotiate the fees they will pay. That is why it is vehemently opposed by the current entrenched participants. However, that doesn't mean there can't be supplemental private insurance - any country that has national health care also allows people to pay extra for coverage for private rooms, shorter wait times etc.
If you think your taxes will go up to pay for it, they might; they probably will.But I doubt I will pay an extra $16,000 per year which is what I pay for my 50% of the premiums through my employer. And this is no 'cadillac' plan - I have $6,500 out-of-pocket deductible (each, $15,000 family) should hospitalization be required.
I don't understand why employers are not jumping up and down for this - it would save them a fortune.
6
Frank Bruni is living in a fantasy world. Japan, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the EU, Great Britain - are all operating the system that Bruni calls a fantasy. And they’ve been operating it for decades successfully. It hasn’t collapsed as right wingers in America always claim it will. It’s still working. Bruni just lies.
7
@DSD All those countries have a high VAT tax, and it isn't 'free', especially not for undocumented migrants.
You should read up on what Australia does to migrants. They stick them on an island offshore where they remain in limbo until their asylum hearing is heard, which is never.
4
@Not 99pct
Misleading.
First the USA doesn't have a VAT, we do state taxes, so you can't compare that.
Furthermore Most states that are desirable to live in have a sales tax rate of around 15-18% which is only slightly lower than the UK/EU VAT of 20%
@Justaguy The most populous states (NY and CA) both have sales tax rates below 10%. State tax should be eliminated and a large federal VAT tax added, given state Medicaid plans would be eliminated if we have a universal federal healthcare plan. A huge windfall to state budgets. NY spent 30bn in Medicaid, while it collected only 13bn in sales tax.
"It was a canned soliloquy, sure, but that made it no less necessary."
Necessary for the Republican lawmakers he's ostensibly addressing? No, they think he's wrong, they think the important thing to stand up to now is the far left, not Donald Trump. So the canned soliloquy was really just silly posturing.
1
Assume the Republicans retain control of the Senate in 2020.
Do you really believe the progressive agenda proposed by Warren, Sanders or any progressive candidate would become law?
Obama couldn’t even get his Supreme Court nominee through a committee hearing.
The President proposes. The legislature disposes. Unless the Democrats retain the House and gain control of the Senate, reparations is not the only proposal that goes nowhere. Also, even if the Senate is controlled by Democrats, it won’t be a rubber stamp on the WH’ s proposals. Temper concern for a progressive Democratic ticket with these factors in mind.
1
Reading all these comments and replies, makes me more certain than ever that the Democrats have fully assembled the circular firing squad which President Obama so wisely warned against.
Everyone is getting locked and loaded to take down the candidates which are unacceptable to them, and not vote if they don't get the candidate they want.
Dig and you can find things you don't like about anyone – including yourself folks.
I have a terrible felling that the Democrats are going to self destruct and self destroy.
And all of those Independents and evolved humans revolted by Trump, who could have come to the Dems, will either not take part in the election, or hold their nose and suppress their gag reflex and vote for the sociopathic monster in the office now.
Absolutely nothing is more important than Taking down Trump. Second take down Moscow Mitch
Anything less, is to abet in the total overthrow of our democracy to Autocracy and outright dictatorship. And don't bank on Trump only staying for a second term, just because the constitution says so.
Vote, and vote for the Democratic nominee and get over not getting every thing you want.
Trump is the gravest danger out there.
The future of our nation is at stake, and we must WIN first.
9
"Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, Or what's a heaven for?" Robert Browning
Our government is built on the idea that we will compromise, thus it would be foolish in the extreme to ask for that which you know you can get when you know that in a compromise you have to give something up.
I have also noticed the NYT is once again weighting the titles and subjects in its articles, not yet in favor or a particular candidate but definitely against reforming our society back to what the republicans destroyed under reagan.
3
Elizabeth Warren is the Presidential candidate I finally get the chance to vote for.
She is right on the problem with our capitalistic society. It has enslaved the middle class.
We have a healthcare system that soaks up money and bankrupts the sick. It doesn’t matter whether your insured. The policies protect the insurance company.
Fantasy! Tell me, how do you describe where we are at now- the world of alternate facts!
Choosing Donald Trump to be President is as morally repugnant as excusing the Ruler from Saudi Arabia for his killing of a journalist because Saudi Arabia buys military hardware from us.
Do I need to tell you about how a college education is enslaving our youth?
4
Frank Bruni perfectly encapsulates the NYT conservatism about anything economic while being tolerant towards minorities, gay people, and women. Wrong on the former, correct on the latter. Bruni also mimics his colleague writers'/editors' visceral hatred of Bernie Sanders, knowing he could actually do something than instead of preserving the status quo, which elites and Establishment outlets like the Times (which does some very good investigative reporting) loathe. Bruni's disingenuous claim that people would lose health insurance options with a single-payer system is counterfactual---people could keep their same doctors and would be covered for everything and everyone would be covered, instead of millions uninsured or dying because they don't have insurance (Bruni doesn't seem to be uncomfortable with that fact because he probably has very good health insurance himself). And he whines how Sanders and Warren just want to "fight, fight, fight." Oh, how vulgar. Ensconced safely in his bubble, he is oblivious to the populism and disenchantment with the political class because wages have been stagnant for years and local economies have been decimated. This columnist---God knows why he has a platform with so little to offer---may be a perfectly good person in real life, just completely out of touch with the reality of most Americans.
5
@Jay
Your analysis is excellent. I see the same things. All the NYT's neoliberal columnists--Krugman, Egan, and Bruni--share the same traits. First, their venom for Bernie Sanders is remarkable. Once election season rolls around, I can reliably count on their fangs to show. Second is their consistent hostility to any meaningful change in the distribution of wealth in this society. Of course, that hostility is simply the other side of their primary loyalty to the extreme economic elite.
The last trait they share is the apparent inability to see how the neoliberal policies they espouse did so much damage to so many people that it resulted in Trump. It didn't have to, but it did.
2
For years, Frank Bruni has been peddling the same neoliberal thought that saddled us with Clinton in 2016. After still not understanding the Trumpian backlash, he's obviously too caught up in his own smug complacency to understand why so many others are looking for far more than Clinton 2.0.
2
A Progressive Dreamland Vapor is home to Warren and Sanders.
1
This is one of the best columns you've written.
3
It surprised and saddened me to read this Opinion by Bruni about last night's debate. It was, I thought, a review written by a grumpy, weary and very tired person. Is it that Bruni doesn't think that Biden has the stuff to inspire most voters to believe him the best candidate to beat Trump. Perhaps if any of the moderates last night had measured up to Burni's standards, his Opinion would not have been so dreary. Bruni wrote a funeral dirge for two of the strongest progressive, democratic candidates, so far. My review of Bruni's review was that it was premature in its judgement, lacking a sense of what the USA needs now, resistant to change and backward looking
Elegantly written, Mr Bruni. Thank you.
1
Frank, you hit this one out of the ballpark.
I and my husband made it to one hour and then, disgusted, turned the debate off.
Bernie, with his bulging veins, his windmill arms, and Warren, with her barely restrained fury, her index finger jabbing my face everytime she made some impassioned point, disgusted us.
America was disgusted with these two, interrupting, shouting, yelling and cutting anyone off who disagreed with them.
They are Trump's biggest helpers to get re-elected. They are Dukakis and all the other Dem losers rolled into one.
They are cheered on by their sycophantic followers, the leftie fundamentalist PC, my way or the highway crowd.
I have no use for Biden. I think that the only adult on that stage was Pete Buttigieg. But I would gladly vote for Biden over these miscreants.
5
@simon sez
Warren will get the nomination and surprise everyone with a victory in November, 2020!
1
I'm overjoyed that Warren rejects the socialist label in favor of capitalism, especially given that the self-proclaimed democratic socialist in the race doesn't actually advocate for socialism more than he does a social democracy. I am hesitant of her desire to eliminate private health insurance, as I don't see it resonating across numerous archetypes of Americans, but she was the better, more poised debater versus an overly animated (and angry) Sanders. I hope that her performance goes lengths in ending this "electability" debate and that the people who genuinely support her ideas are more unabashed and confident in their support. She is right about many things, but especially that we cannot win by being afraid, and that seeking the presidency is pointless if we're conceding on the biggest issues.
1
But the Trump/Republicans are not marooned on any island with fantasies- they just lie. Tax cut that cost an estimated $2.3 TRILLION dollars which all went to corporations and billionaires - the working poor and middle class not so much. In fact not at all.Trump promise of health insurance cheaper better cover everything. Not so much just the age old Republican repeal of Obamacare. Just to throw in for good measure the Trump/Republicans made sure for - profit colleges and pay day lenders got the protection they need from the working poor. Americans will take being marooned on Fantasy Island with Sanders and Warren's plans any day. Both understand what it is like to pay for health insurance for a family of 4 with a deductible of $5K - back breaking. It will take bold answers to help most Americans and the risk is well worth it.
2
Social Democrats or Democratic Socialists, use either one but be sure to consider the Democratic part. Denigrating those who are social democrats as somehow the same as soviet Russia is absolutely moronic. Look at Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Germany, Canada and you see a strong social democratic influence with governments that hold elections and leave office if the people decide on another flavour. Social Democracy offers more freedom and more liberty than the stranglehold of corporate government USA.
3
Obviously , Mr Bruni - you are in the elite who have excellent medical insurance who can afford to travel to Greece and get on Medical Trials. That`s a fantasy and dream for most of us - even those with employer backed medical insurance who usually have high co-pays and no dental, eye or ear insurance.
Your language was the language of the naysayers who fought FDR on Social Security and the Republican naysayers who fought LBJ on Medicare.
I am so tired of listening to you Centrists who keep this wealthy nation from sharing the wealth.
Keep it up and the Racist, Misogynist, Xenophobic Crook in the White House won`t need to lie his way through 2020.
More of the same incrementalism - we do not need or want.
This country needs to radically change.
Oh, forget it. Let`s keep doing the same old - same old.. The Earth is burning and she will get rid of all this nonsense in her own way. CLIMATE CHANGE is the real TERRORISM - the rest is distracting nonsense which is enabling the wealthy 1 % to destroy our republic.
Go BERNIE! Go ELIZABETH!
3
Anyone afraid of the "dizzier dimensions of the Green New Deal" is not really serious about prioritizing the salvation of a livable planet.
2
The difference between Warren/Sanders and the rest of the candidates is that those two have listened to the angriest, loudest 20% of America and have a plan that draws applause from that demographic. The other candidates, especially the governors and mayors, seem to have listened to all of America.
2
Message to Bernie: I liked your ideas better but donated/voted for Hillary because I thought she was more "electable." I will never make that mistake again. I owe you a vote.
Message to Warren: After I became unemployed, I couldn't donate money to those in need so I started donating my blood. I am going to donate what money I can to your campaign.
Everyone else: Support them or you're be supporting more of the same. We need big changes.
2
I think Mr. Bruni is underestimating the disappointment voters have with all of it: GOP madness, status quo Democrats. If you start the analysis with the idea that these things are too expansive or expensive that is because you have resigned yourself to the idea that the condition of the ultra-rich is just "the way things are". Every policy problem except our deeply ingrained racism grows directly from that condition before anything else. If you can't vote for reforming that what are you actually voting for besides more of the same in a more polite packaging?
2
It seems to me that having a public (medicare) option will suffice to end private insurance. That being said everybody knows this and the insurance companies would find some senator to Filibuster. After all from their standpoint they face bankruptcy if the public option succeeds as it had in virtually all of the industrialized world. Private inefficient and unnecessary insurance is one of the costs of corruption in U.S. government.
4
Frank Bruni, Conservative.
"Corporate America" is at war with *us*, in case you haven't noticed.
Anybody who thinks the USA is going to successfully navigate through the greatest confluence of crises in human history by doing a whole lot of nothing is insane, and not merely living in a fantasy world.
It is the congenital political insanity that never looks beyond the current electoral horizon.
It can't see the down-slope of the line drawn from Reagan-GW Bush to Trump, each a greater evil than their predecessor. Bruni's cherished "Corporate America" has been waging an *offensive* war on us.
It can't see that some on the left are in this for the long run, and not just the next election. The conservative Democrats won't nominate either Sanders or Warren anyway - unless the conservatives plan to "McGovern" them (1972) and thereby actively work for the reelection of the Trump crime family. Perhaps Bruni is warming up to reelect Trump?
If instead the conservatives decide to run with one of their own, but lose again because they take Trump as a politically serious person, the left will survive 4 more years of the Trump crime family, if The Family can hang in there that long. But the Democratic Party as two-time loser to Tony Soprano? Survival then in doubt...
The Democrats are nowhere, zero, without the progressive vote. And if Trump loses but refuses to leave, who do you think will be on the streets to save your bacon? That's the truth and you all know it.
9
@Matt Oh, please. It's the "progressive vote" (or, more accurately, non-vote) that gave us Trump in the first place. And before that, W. And long before that, Nixon.
Some of have lived long enough to see the "progressive vote" for what it is: a ransom note.
Affordable health care needs immediate implementation. People's health needs can't wait for "gradual", small incremental healthcare improvements. American companies need to be freed from health costs. Reactionaries/republicans (so called tea party meanies) of course will scream "socialism", dangerous taxes, just as Repubs did when FDR gave us Social Security and LBJ Medicare. These same mean spirited souls will eventually fight to keep their Medicare when they need it. They just don't want other Americans to have this right. To choose excessive military spending over people's health is extremist and not "moderate" no matter how many times so called "main stream" media describe it as such. "Moderates" gave us 45!
6
The more debates I watch, the more money I send to Mayor Pete.
3
Open borders, eliminating private health insurance, health insurance to undocumented migrants? Do you know how many union workers in the swing states have cushy private health plans? And you want them to go on a government plan? It's like the Dems are trying to lose.
4
@Not 99pct can you imagine the increased buying power if people are paid the actual cost of insurance and only have a 10% increase in taxes. I wonder the impact on our economy. There are supplemental policies available that would help the for profit insurance industries. I currently pay 20,000/ year to continue my coverage for my husband and I. I knew that when I retired but wonder what I could do with even 25% of that money. By the way this does not include deductibles and co pays. I also have a problem with those who choose not to have insurance and receive care at the ER that I pay for with my premiums. WE CAN DO BETTER.
1
@Not 99pct
Everything you have referred to as fact is fantasy.
The only "cushy" health plans are those the lawmakers who laugh at you while eating caviar you paid for, buy with your money.
@kah Under Warren and Sanders there would be no private supplemental plan. Their plan is to eliminate private insurance companies altogether and have everyone on the government plan, ie Medicare. I'm not sure why your premiums are so high, it implies over $800 / month which is more than double what my parents pay and they are in their 70s. There is huge debate as to what free healthcare for everyone would cost, some estimates are in the trillions. But let's take your 10% raise as truth. My total tax rate (state, local, federal) would be over 50%. I will vote that down every time.
Those who call themselves "moderate" and "pragmatists" should have the guts to admit that at its core, they are Republican: they protect neoliberal big business above all else. If they don't like to say they are Republican it is because it will be perceived as distasteful at their cocktail parties. The NYT has published today two editorials in favor of such "moderation". I really hope tomorrow they show a more nuanced and diverse landscape of opinion.
2
@Mariana Oh, stop. You really see no difference between moderate Democrats and Republicans? Really? And then you say you want a "more nuanced and diverse landscape of opinions"? I think not.
3
Just for perspective, Ms Warren and Mr Sanders would be considered “centrist” in most other western countries. Nothing that they propose is that radical except in America.
8
@D. Knight
Well, you know, they ARE running for president in America, not one of those "other western countries."
3
@RS, Oh, I understand that, I just wanted to give some perspective as to how far to the right both parties have drifted. But it’s your country, eh?
For shame!
After years of policy disasters and Congressional Do-Nothingism from both parties (the “robber baron destroyers,” and the “rational but timids”) I expect far better than the same old tired cliches.
NONE of the Progressive ideas for healthcare are fantasies or unrealistic! They are BUSINESS AS USUAL in most of the rest of the civilized world - where healthcare costs consumers and the government FAR LESS than they do in the US.
It’s “More For Less” for everyone else, but the hopelessly drowning US!
it’s far past time to ask: Why can’t we have what everyone else has?
They have three things we lack:
1) They don’t carry the political burden of ensuring that the profits of healthcare and insurance companies come before all other stakeholders’ needs.
2) Their politicians have at least some commitment to the people - the needs of the many over the ridiculously few.
3) Their citizens know better, and demand better - and are not as easily fooled by false narratives about how hard healthcare is.
Here in the US, the healthcare profiteering lobby is so pervasive, and the belief that no other way is possible, supersedes everything else - to the point that no other message come through, or is even entertained.
ENOUGH! All we know how to do is to listen to the same messages that lead us to the same old failures. It’s time to let some truth and reality in. It starts by admitting WHO is keeping the system broken... and WHY.
12
Bruni just doesn't get the fact that most Americans (except Trump supporters) thirst for progressive change. Warren and Sanders stand for progress toward a better future. Republicans (and that includes Trump) thirst for an imaginary past. Future or past?
7
I'll be this crude so you don't have to: Yes, this is a society of citizens with certain mutual obligations, but the government doesn't own us. All the proposed giveaways, and the killing of some industries, shouldn't be mistaken for benevolence and humanitarianism: It's people-sculpting at the point of a governmental gun. This is why, when it goes too far, the Republicans can say "socialism" and be accurate about its negative aspects, and why someone like Trump can win.
2
@Fred So continue killing people because of insurance, pollution etc open your eyes and see that the world is a big place and we are being left behind. We need to be leaders not followers. Go Blue
2
I am more than a little tired of hearing people say that the Democrats can't nominate someone that I like because other people won't vote for them. But then insisting that I vote for whomever the Democrats nominate.
Why vote for someone who won't address the problems we have?
2
At this point, I think the answer is obvious.
2
It is way past time for those of us who support Medicare for All to start explaining the realities of exactly what private insurance costs and what it doesn’t deliver. Does private insurance pay for medical research and innovation? No. Does it offer a nationwide network of doctors and hospitals? No. Medicare does. Does it make it easy to complete paperwork? No. Medicare does. Does it operate with a 2% administrative overhead? No, it’s about 17%. Medicare does. Where do you think all that extra money goes? Does it have an annual deductible of less than $200? No. Medicare does. Ask your parents and grandparents if they are happy with their Medicare coverage. The overwhelming majority are. Does private insurance pay their CEOs salaries in the 7-figure range? Yes. Medicare doesn’t. Does private insurance mean our health outcomes are better than other countries? No. They’re worse. If your choice is a nationwide network with free choice of doctors and hospitals, a <$200 annual deductible and premiums less than under private insurance that would follow you wherever you worked until you retired OR private insurance at premium rates escalating faster than inflation, 4-digit deductibles, a limited network of doctors and hospitals and the threat of disappearing if you change/lose your job, why would any sane person choose our current system? Come on, Dems, get it together and hire a decent PR person to make this understandable. It should be a no-brainer.
8
@Andrea Wittchen
8-figure range, Andrea.
In contrast, the head of the Department of Health and Human Services earns a fourth quartile 6-figure salary.
Only someone who chooses to ignore what’s already successful in the rest of the developed world would call these policies fantasy island.
8
Call me a cynic, but I don’t believe anymore that elections are about policies. Here in Canada, our Prime Minister won the last election because he looked good, he was young and he represented renewal. His ideas (if he had any, except well-meaning platitudes) didn’t matter much. In 2016, Trump won because he was an excellent demagogue and he was facing a weak adversary who made too many mistakes and was despised by too many electors.
In the end, it doesn’t really matter if the Democratic nominee is progressive or moderate. Just get someone with charisma and a killer instinct. No more Mr. Nice Guy (or Mrs. Nice Lady).
3
The entire civilized world considers single payer health care, or some version of it, to be entirely normal. Here it's a fantasy. Who's got this wrong? The US or the rest of the world? The answer is clear, it's the US and we have Mitch McConnell and his ilk to blame.
11
"Medicare-for-All-Who-Want-It"
If it's the public's option to join Medicare, the insurance companies will immediately market to the young and healthy in the population bare-bones, dirt-cheap, not-worth-the-paper-they're-written-on policies with low premiums/lifetime maximums and sky high deductibles/co-pays.
This would drain the younger, healthier people from the insurance pool, leave them up the creek with horrible healthcare insurance, and drive prices up for everyone else. This is how insurance works. If you have one pool for everyone and all pay in, it's cheaper for everyone over their lifetimes.
When you're young you get "overcharged" because you're far less likely to use it. As you age your out of pocket costs don't rise significantly but your usage sure will (trust me, at my age I know all to well).
Please consider the unintended consequences of MFAWWI before you choose. There's a *VERY* good reason every other modern country has some form of universal coverage. Remember, we're a distant outlier to the rest of the first-world countries and pay *MUCH* more than any and all of them.
5
@ReciprocalHokie
News Flash: The younger people are already screwed on their work health plans. Bernie did a good job of making a point of this.
"Kids" today get way more "overcharged" than you did at your age. On top of the premiums, most other "kids" like myself pay so much in yearly deductibles (I'm $7,000 a year myself), we never even get to use our benefits. Myself? I got maybe $2400 dollars back of the $24,000 out of pocket In expenses I paid last year, on top of my $300 dollar a month premiums.
I would happily pay a much higher premium to join Medicare for all if I didn't have deductibles and co-payments. What are you worried about exactly?
2
I guess his dream would be Hillary Clinton vs Jeb Bush - status quo. That’s the problem: Americans want change. Middle of the road candidates offer nothing. How do you tell voters struggling to make ends meet, worried about healthcare, immigration etc. that you are advocating for status quo and expect to win?
2
"I also think she’s wrong — wrong that enough general-election voters will choose a candidate who aims to take away options when it comes to medical insurance"
So-called "moderates" should look past the fear-mongering (MFA "starts by wiping out private insurance"? What an agenda-free, substantive take!) and realize how terrible their options are in our broken system. I have been fortunate enough, for most of the last 20 years, to enjoy both relatively good health and the kind of employer-provided insurance that passes for "really good" health care in this country. I am trying to think if I ever felt I had options, and I'm coming up blank. You take what they give you, and you hope. Who are these people who think they have "options" worth clinging to? What about people who want the "option" to leave their jobs to retire early, or start a business?
All of the problems supposedly associated with single-payer - long wait times, confusing bureaucracy, overworked doctors, disappearing local hospitals - are getting worse and worse in this country, while nearly every other country has successfully implemented national health care, covering virtually everyone at costs far lower than what Americans pay.
4
@Miranda B
I'm one of those people who have options worth clinging to. I have employer-paid health insurance with a choice of two options. One: Healthnet completely paid by the employer with $15 co-pay dr's visits, $10 medications, no lab costs, no fee xrays, etc. no extra cost to see specialist, you get the picture. The other option Kaiser pay the difference of the cheaper plan which is $80, same benefits. No, I don't want to change.
1
It's hard to believe, but it seems that Mr. Bruni has gone a bit soft, with his steady institutional paycheck. Yes, Sanders yells and waves his arms a bit much. But Bruni and most of the moderates do not follow the young people who have had it with a corporate status quo. That doesn't mean they want to cave business; they want business to abide by rules of the road. They've been given citizen status but answer to fewer rules than the average citizen. And it means they want to force corporations to stop making climate change worse, and help pay for addressing the problem that helped them accumulate wild profits.
Please stop feeding the fear of real progress. If huge corps pay their fair share and we stop endless wars, there is money for education and health care. It's not complicated or radical.
3
Frank Bruni, I just love the way you write!
2
Trump won in moderate voting states and would do so again if the dems put up Warren as she would be hammered by the GOP and Trump who has the biggest loudest megaphone in the world and no shame. Trump will lie about everything he will have the cyber support of Putin and FOX STATE TV attacking 24/7 repeating unfounded charges. The midwest state voters would be likely to vote for an improved Obama type presidency without the crazed tweets of a self obsessed egomaniac liar. Biden albeit boring is an improvement over the chaos president who trades in fear and hate by race baiting. Trump lied and conspired while in office to protect himself while forcing top security clearances to his son in law who used it to cash in with billion $ loans from the Middle East. Trump's agency head are corrupt like Trump and with a new democrat president they will be removed and replaced with qualified folks not lackeys as Trump required for the job.
1
The adjacent article, "Winners and Losers of the Democratic Debate", is composed of the Times so-called "experts." Best I can tell, Sarah Vowell is the only one considering the relationship of the ratings-hoped-for smackdown to the real world of voters who are actually up for grabs. The rest, in this instance at least, are naught but TV show reviewers lost in the world of the twitterati and punditocracy.
1
Any Democrat who would vote for Trump to protect their private insurance because they think other folk should continue to suffer in the current health-care regime should be ashamed of themselves.
6
So many comments ignorant of reality.
- Canada does not have open borders. They use a merit system.
- our health care system is so messed up no one should be talking about giving free healthcare to illegal immigrants.
- paying off several hundred billion dollars of student loans is a fantasy.
5
Democrats have nothing to fear but fear itself.
1
We need to see how Biden does tonight. Ironically, Buttigieg, the youngest of the pack sort of strikes me as the most "Biden like" of the group.
3
@Mark Browning Is that a compliment or an insult ?
The centrists are at it again and Bruni is their man. In two columns by Bruni (7/31 and 7/21) he wishes that Trump and Sanders just "go away." Is this naive, wishful "centricity" thinking? They're shocked by and don't want to hear Trump and his racist, xenophobia and misogynistic white base. They don't socialize with them and their sensibilities are disturbed by them. They prefer them to be quiet and unseen. But, equally, they're also disturbed by bold, young, progressive, multiracial women speaking up! Bruni and his moderates are at it again with same old, tired, bankrupt centrist argument: we must be disciplined and choose the lesser of two evils!
1
Bruni nails it. Nominate Sander or Warren and they will get crushed.
3
Republicans have it easier. Their agenda is simply to give as much as possible to business and the wealthy while convincing the common (mostly white) man that they are on his side. Not as difficult as it might sound, since all you have to do is praise the common man and provide him someone to look down on. Appeal to his pride, so that if he is NOT doing so well, it must be his fault, or maybe the fault of those liberals who want to give his stuff to the slackers. Also -- divide. Always divide, because you are far outnumbered.
1
@chairmanj
You forgot the fact that Republicans are "pro-life." This tired old lie is part of the their now decades-long scam.
Frank Bruni,
"Marooned together"?
You ought to be ashamed of yourself, especially as a staunch supporter of the LGBT community, many of which DID used to live on a "fantasy island".
1
This is not news. It is obvious.
3
Moderation, by definition, implies compromise & slow change. Moderates do not fix extreme problems because they are afraid to rock the boat too much. We need significant, radical changes to critical problems in every area of society. An Al Gore, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, or Joe Biden will merely twiddle around the loose edges of problems, trying to neaten the already unraveling system. For anybody who doubts the wisdom of employing radical changes, I answer with three letters: FDR
2
The Democrats should be focused on winning in 2010 period and Pie in the sky ideas of Sanders and Warren are not going to do it. They both want to give away the store. Free this and free that and soaking the rich are non starters. America allows everyone to make money and if you are selling an idea negative points unsell your story. Be positive.
Buttigieg is electric. He talks sense, makes rational points and can cut an adversary to pieces by speaking softly. He will win folks with his reasoned solutions.
Delaney made sense but he is running for Treasury Secretary. Bullock for EPA, Williamson for chief speechwriter. Beto, is best you go back to Texas now and run for the senate.
1
The NY Times bias in the post debate opinion piece selection should not be surprising. This publication is every bit as much part of the "establishment" paradigm.
It is clear that the establishment wants to believe they can continue vacuming up money from U.S. citizens and playing their utterly irresponsible and completely environmentally and morally blind game with the people and the future of the planet.
They are scared of having a level playing field and they have no concept of ethics. That is why a corporation can never be a real citizen.
In any advanced nation healthcare is a right. Only in the swamp that the United States has become and even more than every under Trump is there such utter hubris and a lack of the ethical and moral leadership.
It is time for a real change and not a one party system in which no matter who is in power, those with the greatest concentration of wealth and income always have everything and the overwhelming majority of our fellow Americans are living in near desperation.
I say this to those who still believe in the promise of America: "Dream Big or go home" and I also say "fight for what is right no matter what because if you aim low you'll hit the dirt and if you aim for the middle ground, you'll be lucky just to survive."
Our planet and our species is at the point of no return. It is time to aim as high as possible to clear the wall directly ahead.
4
And Bruni didn’t even touch on IMMIGRATION! Odd omission considering how hot the issue is. Dems MUST be challenged on their unwillingness to deal with it humanely, but also REALISTICALLY & fairly, taking into account needs and resources regarding legal immigrants & citizens! Warren’s and Bernie’s immigration stances- decriminalization & free health care for undocumented - will sink them with the larger public and will not even be embraced by nearly as many Dems as is DACA.
Also, Warren did not live up to her own constant demands for transparency when Tapper tried, for the 2nd time, to have her simply directly state if her Med for All plan would necessitate raising taxes on the middle class. She just restated her prior non answer that the wealthy would pay and middle class would “save” money. Tapper should have noted her evasion & pressed her a 3rd time. Should note, Bernie was honest about the necessity of a tax hike to middle class, WHILE also saying they’d save money without insurance companies in healthcare mix.
2
Frank,
Your fear of voters' response to real courage of convictions is distresssing. It ill suits you.
What both Warren and Sanders offer is a candidate who can (as further debates will hopefully clarify, at least as to which of them is best at this key quality) turn a general election campaign into a full-fledged, non-sound-bite elucidation for the American people of the real rationale and a real "hope and change" path toward transformation from this toxic awful brew that we now suffocate under.
We absolutely must get money out of politics - and, while only Williamson made it explicit (Bullock supposedly has it as his key argument yet he didn't elaborate), it's Sanders and Warren who are modeling the path out of the corruption of lobbyist money in campaigns by refusing to indulge. That makes them the most credible advocates for the American people (by Williamson's own prescription ) to believe in as champions of ending said corruption. Bullock's prescription is inadequate; instead, as Williamson noted, we need a constitutional amendment for full public financing of elections.
And the scare tactics about socialism (as Buttigieg noted) will face Democrats even with the most moderate (i.e., tepid, ho hum, "safe") of candidates, so let's not repeat the insanity of yet again hoping 'safe' is the path to success when American voters are craving courage of convictions. The case is makeable that providing health and education for all is in everyone's best interest.
4
Frank writes "no credible toggle toward the center for her, no ready bridge to a messier but potentially bigger mainland. What bold real estate. What risky terrain, too."
any more risky than nominating someone like Hillary Clinton ??
1
The result of the 2016 election is all the proof we need is that a moderate candidate cannot beat Trump. Democrats need to GO BIG or go home.
5
I really can't stand that we are debating two years before the election. What we really need is a law that candidates can only run for only 8 weeks and make all the money public. The whole country should vote on the same day so we don't have to waste all of this money just to have a primary candidate.
I live in Oregon, one of the last states to vote so I really don't get to have much say anyway but it doesn't matter who wins the primary there is no way I would ever vote for the destruction of the middle class and racist policies that the republican keep pushing.
I am not really into a fascist authoritarian regime in America and a vote for any republican really means a vote for trump's corruption as they don't believe in holding trump accountable for his many crimes.
1
Easy to see both sides in this "debate", but the one that this old liberal gravitates to is the Warren candidacy. Of course there are elements of her policy proposals that are untenable; reparations, open borders, but it is silly to think America would immediately go down that road with a progressive's election. There is the one man wrecking ball of Moscow Mitch, a flood of special interest money, and an increasingly conservative Supreme Court to consider. But it would be a welcome change to see a fierce (but thoughtful) First Lady speak truth to power. Time to see some equity re-established in our society. Time to see an intelligent, fearless woman take the helm. And what entertainment to see her stand up to a name calling coward like DJT!
1
"I also think she’s wrong — wrong that enough general-election voters will choose a candidate who aims to take away options when it comes to medical insurance, "...
No Mr.Bruni, i think you are wrong.
The options what a lot of people now have is either they keep a job that they don't like or can't do just so that they can have that Med Ins that they like or find a Med Ins plan that they can't afford.
A Medicare for All or A PubLic Option at least will lay down a baseline in terms of health care availabiliy, costs and affordability for private ins cos.
3
Wonderful for Canada! Wonderful for Denmark! Wonderful for the UK!
But let’s get real — the USA is nothing like these countries and never will be. Our democracy is a disaster because of who we are and what we value. Let’s be honest for once and admit that a lot of our fellow Americans have not just lost their minds, but they are motivated mainly by selfishness and ignorant world views. Let’s not give the President too much credit. Donald Trump didn’t break America. Republican voters did. And, they will vote to re-elect Trump at the same numbers or higher.
We are the nation where parents prioritize guns over their own children’s lives, where pro-lifers are the definition of single-issue voters, where five old men think Citizens United is a victory for democracy, and so forth. There is absolutely NO CHANCE of our coming together to build a social safety net that compares with our more sane contemporaries.
Contrary to Democratic orthodoxy, our fight is not against big money, dark money, corporations, and billionaires. These are red herrings (not to say they aren’t totally evil).
How to win is not a mystery. We just need more votes than them. Knock on doors canvassing. Make cold calls at a phone bank. Do the work necessary to change a mind and get that voter to the polls. Our enemy is apathy. Our enemy is complacency. When there are voters to win over, votes that will beat Trump in 2020, our actions become our fate.
10
@C.S.
I wish you weren’t right, but you are. I have run out of excuses for many of the people in this country. The reality is a pretty ugly one.
5
I am 70 years old, have been a Democrat all of my life, and my generation has voted in every election since we were 21, and we know from experience that nothing is free, including Medicare for all. The poor who pay no taxes would have to pay 20% of their income, middle class 37+%, and the wealthy 45+percent. We start by keeping insurance choices and if Medicare for all is popular, it will become a reality in due time.
Regarding free education, in 2011, Texas A&M began to offer free tuition to students with family incomes of $60,000 or less. This year, the University of Texas began to offer free tuition to students with family incomes of $65,000 or less. The maximum income cap can increase but this is how we start working on free college.
Sorry, but I am 100% on Frank's side--this is not the election to go far left. Our first priority is to defeat Trump and we will need every Independent and moderate Republican we can get to win. Unless we keep the House, win back the majority in the Senate, and win the presidency, we may not have a democracy with 4 more years of Trump. We will be taking an unnecessary risk if Warren or Sanders are the Democratic nominee. Trump doesn't have a Christian, moral or ethical bone in his body and he will use every plan they have against them. I am not willing to take that chance in 2020 and hope and pray that a moderate is selected as the Democratic nominee.
6
I find it interesting that so many Americans list single payer health care, decriminalization of border crossings and lowering student debt as unworkable fantasies. In most other industrialized nations, and many poorer countries, these are considered normal. A fantasy is politicians telling us we can't have them.
6
Bernie opened by saying he had just visited Windsor Ont. to buy insulin at 10 per cent of the cost charged in the US.
Canadians live longer, happier, healthier lives than Americans thanks to national health insurance.
Americans are at the bottom of wealthy countries in terms of health care and outcomes. You pay the most for the worst results. In Canada, medicare administration costs are three per cent of gdp; in the US it's 30 per cent.
Americans die needlessly so the health kleptocrats can feast on the corpses.
10
This whole column uses personality and interpersonal 'drama' to distort policy debates we need to clarify. Here, the NYT op ed page is imitating cable TV 24/7 news hype.
Bruni dodges that health care for all is common, centrist, policy in DOZENS of other capitalist democracies---for generations in the 20th century. Medical bankruptcy is unknown. It's not all single payer, but uses govt regulation of insurance premiums and drug prices.
Same with low cost or free college tuition--even for medical school. That's one reason doctors don't have to exploit patients for money to pay off huge tuition loans. Ripple effects down the line.
But keep that dark in American politics!
CNBC article:
"This is the real reason most Americans file for bankruptcy"
Feb 11 2019
KEY POINTS
"Two-thirds of people who file for bankruptcy cite medical issues as a key contributor to their financial downfall.
While the high cost of health care has historically been a trigger for bankruptcy filings, the research shows that the Affordable Care Act has not improved things.
What most people don't realize, according to one researcher, is that their health insurance may not be enough to protect them."
Frank Bruni and other columnists don't want to be seen in the progressive category. That way they maintain their influence and prestige, and don't get marginalized. They want to be seen as identifying with the successful, not the needy.
That's what this column is all about.
4
Of course CNN is peddling a narrative that supports milk-toast candidates like Delaney or block while slamming Warren and Sanders as fantasy and out of touch with mainstream American voters whatever that means... This is because CNN is part of the very corporate culture that Warren for example wants to overhaul and change for the benefit of most of regular Americans. Not only that, CNN also benefits from the current state of hyper partisan conflict or in politics which helps them sell their news. So expecting a site like CNN or a news company like CNN to support Warren and Sanders in an honest way which is to say that have policies that benefit the majority of Americans and the majority of Americans now support would be misguided because CNN doesn't want change they are benefiting from the current state of affairs the tire fire it is or not l...
We would all benefit hugely by having Senator Warren become our next president she is the most detailed and well-prepared candidate out of any running and possibly one of the most detailed and well-prepared candidates I've seen run in my lifetime I hope I get the chance to vote for her for president in 2020.
3
@a.ec
I hope that you get the chance to vote for Liz Warren too ! It would be a landslide victory for Donald Trump, should she become the nominee.
This lady doesn't appeal to anyone except the liberal progressives on both coasts. Same for Bernie Sanders.
The haves are afraid of them....
How are these "fantasies" when most or all of the other OECD countries have had them for decades? When looking at the rest of the world, *these* are the compromise, centrist positions that are way, WAY more practical and efficient than our current (insane) systems.
2
Warren's rejoinder that people do not run for President to talk about what they cannot do was a nice soundbite but misunderstands the issue. The reason why "fantasy island" policies are unlikely to be implemented is not based on a failure of will by moderates, but because the majority of Americans do not support them. When moderates talk about what can be realistically done, they are talking about trying to craft policy based on the wishes of most Americans, as opposed to ramming policies down their throats that most do not support. The far left, like the far right, prefer minority rule based on the purity of their ideological convictions. Moderates do not lack will. They come from the vantage point that Americans are sick of the winning party trying to legislate minority positions advanced by the extreme wing. Most Americans have a more balanced outlook. Why are politicians who want to rule the entire country, and not just one pole or the other, then bad-mouthed for being balanced in their approach?
1
Fantasy Island is where George McGovern and his supporters lived. They were so fired up they lost sight of the fact that their aims were not shared by a large part of the population. The rest is history. Let's not repeat it.
2
The only fantasy here is that of the moderates who think that at a crucial time in history, when our own survival may be at stake, they can take the slow boat to everywhere. Enough. Do you really think voting for DT again is better than voting for people who are proposing that we all get out of the box we've been in and see things in a different perspective? If DT wins again because the public has been convinced by the timid that democrats are unrealistic, then the U.S. deserves another four years of chaos, racial division and the economic collapse which is sure to happen because of taxes and revenue shrink even more as the rich get richer. Count me in with the fantasy marooned group because at least we will have tried a different vision and can hold our heads up because we did not vote for the darkness that is the White House under the truly despicable.
1
Everyone in pundit land seems convinced that only a moderate Democrat can beat Donald Trump. I'm not sure that is true. The 2016 election was between a reliable establishment figure and a wacky anti-establishment one, and look who won. I keep coming back to something a cousin of mine said during the 2016 primary season-that he would vote for Bernie or Trump,but not for Hillary or anyone named Bush. If the status quo ante Trump was good for you, you probably just want a return to decency and competence. But for most Americans in this age of income inequality, life wasn't so great then and isn't now. Most families only have $400 in the bank to ward off catastrophe. I think we can afford to have decency and competence along with an understanding of what ails America. What I am sure of is that any of the candidates on that stage last night, or in tonight's debate, would make a better president than Trump. While I favor Warren now, I'll vote for anyone not named Trump come November 2020.
3
[Disclaimer: Canada is not the best model of single-payer primarily because of a much lower GDP per capita than the US. We can pick better models to follow.]
In a poll, the Toronto Star asked readers who was the most admired Canadian. The answer was a surprise. It wasn't Pierre Trudeau or Wayne Gretsky, but Tommy Douglas, who was Premier of Saskatchewan until 1961. Why Douglas? He introduced single-payer government-managed, tax-funded insurance to Saskatchewan. It was so popular & well-received that it spread into a "Medicare for All" system for the entire country. Many falsehoods have been spread about Canada's system, particularly by Americans & especially by conservatives. It is true that other single-payers exceed Canada's level of care, but it is still ranked above the US (in last place in the advanced world). Wait times are long for non-critical operations & treatment (though overall, Canadian wait times are equal to Americans). Anything important or critical is bumped to the top of the list & treated immediately. It is true, as critics claimed, that many Canadian doctors moved to the US in the 1990s. But it is also true that this migration reversed in the 2000s & there is a reverse migration of US doctors moving to Canada to avoid the ugly for-profit bureaucracy in the US. BTW, Canadian doctors, though paid by the government are in private practice, while most American doctors work for practices owned by healthcare systems. No doctor is "out of network" in Canada.
5
It is very clear that when it comes to health care in America and its solutions, the only ones NOT living on a "Fantasy Island" are Sanders, Warren and of course, the rest of the industrialized "civilized " world.
6
Hi Frank! I think you are wrong about this one. Before Hillary et al bamboozled Bernie out the door in the last primary, he had really captured hearts and minds of a lot of those folks who eventually decided to vote for Trump. Progressivism and new ideas can really motivate and fire people up. I'd say it's not so scary, and especially if Warren gets specific, as she well can, and explains how single payer is beneficial in many, many ways. People who hate their jobs for example, but stay there and die for forty years, because they need insurance, won't have to live like that. And young people, usually the innovators and starters in society, will have more opportunity to follow their dreams if they aren't wedded to a boring job with safe insurance. They are so many, many benefits to single payer. The debates have been a bit crowded for deeper explanations.
Marianne Williamson is also right that people yearn for candidates who have decency and ethics. It barely matters which Dem runs against Trump, people who aren't Republicans will work so darn hard up and down the lanes and byways of the country to help defeat him, I don't even think that if Putin cloned himself ten times he could tip this election.
1
Last I checked, Congress or The Senate introduces bills. The President does not. As such, whether or not a President puts forth a particular plan for health insurance is only relevant because it shows what they'd like to see.
It's strange reading Bruni and other pundits dismiss Sanders and Warren for putting out bold ideas without giving much consideration to them.
Their criticism seems to boil down to, 'wow, that's a big idea, there must be something wrong with it.'
I see no effort by Bruni to understand the ideas, put them in context, read the supporting documents (Warren has put out lots of plans) and then weigh in on them. It seems like he's putting style above substance. There's too much emphasis on that already.
2
I have great frustration with the losing M4A policies of Sanders and Warren. In order to implement a socialized medical plan in the US we would need to address the cost of medical care FIRST. Neither Warren nor Sanders speak to the fact that many of the factors that drive up the US cost of care will not change just because insurance would no longer be involved. Right now US clinics and hospitals rely on higher payments from insurance and the uninsured to make up for being underpaid for their Medicare/caid patients. If they had to subsist with only those payments we would see a large % close. Even now our Medicare Part A trust fund is due to go bankrupt by 2030 yet they are talking about phasing the entire country onto this plan within 4 years? And they won't speak about how it will affect US tax payers? This is bad. Before anything like this is considered they need to address the cost of Rx drugs and they need to put controls on for profit clinics and for profit insurance companies (yes, there is insurance and medical care that are in business for profit, with shareholders that make medical decisions based on the dividends that they will provide. This is wrong). If they just phase out insurance, medical facilities would still have the same bills and salaries to pay and we would have our provider networks crash. All with these Medicare for Everyone plans but especially Warren and Sanders are uneducated and misguided and are leading Americans down a dangerous road.
2
The analysis is exactly backwards. The only way to get a handle on costs is to regulate in the manner of a utility.
2
@Susie
You also have to consider the overpriced medical equipment and insane costs it takes for hospitals to be HIPAA compliant
I've been impressed by Buttegieg all along, though ware of the nation's readiness to elect a gay person. Last night, though, it was Hickenlooper who made more sense, pointing out that distasteful as it may be, we have to maintain a military presence in places like Taliban to prevent the terrorists from reestablishing themselves in power, where Mayor Pete said let's bring all the troops home.
1
We have about 12 years to act to avoid climate disaster. We are already in the midst of mass extinctions. Children are dying in US custody and we are forcibly removing babies from the arms of asylum seekers. People are dying because they can't afford their insulin and 3 people own as much wealth as the bottom 160 million.
Right. This is definitely no time for bold, courageous policies. Lets play it safe and go Republican-lite.
3
@Kathryn Neel. That 12 years has no basis in reality. You’ve been listening to AOC too long. By the way, insulin has nothing to do with climate change.
1
@Kathryn Neel Honest question, how do you get China to agree to any sort of climate change policies? Any sort of climate change initiative will fail unless China participates.
@Jackson
I love how conservatives will say hard evidence has no basis in reality because it is too complex for them to understand. They don't even have the capacity for an actual rebuttal so they have to resort to flat-out denial. But, will also gladly accept bold face lies if it fits their prefered narrative.
Take a deep breath, think for a minute, and ask (remind?) yourselves "What got Trump elected?" Do you see anything comparable ~ whether or not you can stomach it ~ from the Democrat candidates? Face it: So far it isn't obvious to enough (any?) "swing" voters that this country is on an incredibly shaky fiscal foundation (that's federal deficits and debt "for those of you in Rio Linda") managed by a sociopath in the Oval Office with the overwhelming aid of a Moscow Mule as Senate president.
@Edgar Numrich. Such derangement should be treated. But labeling Trump a sociopath certainly sets you up for a libel suit.
1
In the majority of the Western world, Sanders and Warren's plans would be considered moderate, so please define "fantasy." Perhaps the writer thinks that Canada is a made-up country. Perhaps he was watching on mute with subtitles as well, since he seemed to miss the roaring applause that Sanders roused when he raised his hands in response to Hickenlooper. The writer describes this exchange as infantile, but in reality, it illustrated Sanders' influence and the insignificance of every moderate candidate on stage besides Buttigieg.
4
yeah...but ....where will all the Canadians go who can afford to come here and pay for MRIs because they do not want to wait a year on a waiting list in Canada?
4
@Hank
Nobody in Canada who needs an MRI waits for them.
If you need one you get one. If you want one, you wait, which only makes sense.
That's like asking where would Americans go to buy drugs or get medical treatment if Canada outlawed that.
Americans come to Canada for the same reason Canadians go to America, for specialized services that aren't available in their home country.
@Rod Sheridan
According to a recent report (June 25, 2019) published by the Conference Board of Canada excessive waiting (beyond 30 days) for MRI and CT examinations cost the economy $3.54 billion in 2018. In addition, these wait times keep over 380,000 Canadians from work resulting in a loss of $430 million in tax revenue annually.
1
@Hank
Except per your same data, based on the number of MRIs done in Canada vs the USA a year, when compared to population, 1-2% more canadians get MRIs than people in the us do (2 Million MRIs vs 30 Million people in Canada : 30 Million MRIs vs 315 Million People in the USA)
Thanks again, Frank, for your wisdom and for your wit that makes me snort with laughter in these terrifying times. But, Frank, why are you dismissing Gov. Bullock? Yeah, he's a Johnny-come-lately, but he speaks sense and he has a track record of getting elected and doing good things in Montana, home of my blockhead cousins. Give the man another look.
1
Yea, like the establishment, Clinton-democrats, have ever solved the structural problems that Liz Warren talks about. I mentioned some of these 6 years ago at a democratic headquarters and was called an idiot before being kicked out. Haven't been back there since.
1
The ducks are lining up - Friedman, Dowd, Bruni, Douthat. The Times has determined that only Joe Biden can save the Republic. I'm sure that his platform of a Smile and a Shoeshine will win Biden the presidency.
4
I thought Hickenlooper, the MD senator and the Governor of Montana were the only adults in the room .. the rest of them just spewed nonsense. Hope one of the children wins the primary to go up against Trump .. its going to be a bloodbath
2
What a lackluster analysis. I am beyond ready for these baby boomer liberals who can't seem to muster up any courage or ideas worth fighting for to pass the torch.
Both Sanders and Warren are brave enough to move beyond political calculation and pandering to the moderate middle in order give people something to believe in and reach toward. Good for them.
7
@STG We all learned our lesson when we voted for McGovern in 1972. He was a true progressive and very well liked, but he lost in a landslide to Nixon. If you haven't been around as long as some of us have, then you have no idea how much further to the right the country has slid compared to 1972. Nixon was a liberal in many ways, when compared to today's Republicans. We are simply being realistic. Let's get Trump out of office and save the revolution for later.
1
@STG
The problem with "Baby Boomer Liberals" is that they are in fact still Boomers, which might be the most selfish generation in the history of this country. Baby Boomers refuse ANYTHING that might require them an iota of critical thinking, effort, or change.
It's almost ironic that Sanders and Warren are from that same generation, the exceptions prove the rule I guess.
1
Mr. Bruni seems like a nice fellow but he really has nothing to say which means he'll be keeping this job for a lot of years.
3
How can the United States of America expect to be a world leader without an educated and healthy workforce - whatever the price?
5
Suggesting we can do the Green deal, eliminate private insurance, forgive college debt, make college free and on and on.....is a laughable fantasy. Are there really educators voters who understand economics who support Elizabeth Warren?
1
@JGHELLER Private Wealth
Sure there are, all other western countries provide better healthcare for all their residents, with better outcomes for less cost than America spends on some of the residents.
Just do a quick internet search on the WHO site about healthcare in other countries.
1
@JGHELLER Private Wealth
I do, but then again I don't find joy in acquiring "private Wealth" I just need enough to get by and do the things I enjoy.
First, a Democrat has to be elected. Policies or none, nothing else matters. No victory and we get 4 more years of Trump. A 6/3 Supreme Court. Elimination of any constraints on business. No environmental policies. Selling off public lands.
It will take an absolutely massive turnout of blacks, young people, and the disaffected. Didn't happen in 16. Trump is supported by maybe 40% of voters but they turn out on election day. I can easily see a repeat with "Bernie or Bust" and "They are all the same anyway" getting us another 4 years.
1
I would love to see Warren as president, because she knows what the problems are in the country, is smart, and cares about average Americans. She's decent and passionate.
But among her very good ideas are two very bad ones - decriminalizing illegal border entry and wiping out private insurance - which are simply deadly to her candidacy. These are unpopular with even the majority of cobalt blue Democrats, and non-starters with the rest of the electorate. If she wins the nomination, Trump will win the White House.
So here's the choice: a boring, moderate Democratic candidate who will thrill us on election night, or a thrilling progressive Democratic candidate who will devastate us on election night.
3
@Livonian I don't understand how she or anyone else thinks a policy of "anyone can come here and all medical coverage will be free" is a good idea. If that were to occur 5 billion people would move to the USA.
1
@Kohl
I agree. It's why she's not going to win the White House. Any Dem who proposes dissolving borders - which she effectively is doing - will guarantee another Trump term.
3
@Kohl
well, it certainly wouldn't cause any of the people from the other western countries to move to the USA, we already have better healthcare for less money.
Trump running for president was risky too, then the fantasy of him becoming POTUS became reality. "Fantasy Island" sounds like a better description of Mar-a-Lago, where Trump can golf on the tax payer dime, and still pretend to be presidential.
In response to some of the commenters mentioning polls showing almost ANY Democrat beating Trump... have we forgotten Hillary won the POPULAR vote but lost the Electoral College? Yes, the popular vote was what the polls showed but Obama played the chess game of the Electoral College and was elected twice. Winning a few people over in the South and Mid-America is needed if we are to get the country back on track.
Some Democrats want to be "right" in terms of what they think is best for the country. However, even if they win the Republicans are not going to roll over and play dead because they understand POWER and will do anything to keep it. Being right does one little good if you have no power to put into action the things you want.
Trump right now is salivating over all the sound bites he will use to frame the Dems as proponents of open borders, socialism, and free stuff to stay in power. And sad to say some people will believe him because they are out trying to earn a living and not keeping up with politics. Trump won some key states like Michigan and Pennsylvania by only a few thousand votes, and it is up to the Dems to win those people back with ideas that don't scare them to death.
This country is at a crossroad and the Dems have to decide if they want to be right and keep wandering or win (get power) and then bring the country around to the ideas they have to make things better.
1
The US states claim to be laboratories of innovation, but in real life they mostly compete with each other to deliver laws to favor selected factions with liberties to enslave.
I find it unexpected, to say the least, that a gay person would stigmatize the public policy of single-payer provided health care in America as a “fantasy “. Wasn’t gay marriage also rejected by a solid majority of the country not that long ago, before it wasn’t? Did Bruni take the same negative position on that issue back in the day?
2
I had been cautiously interested in Senator Warren--before last night's debate.
Warren spoke as though the only people in the U.S. are "progressive" Democrats and that as soon as this group decides on what it wants, it can snap its fingers in unison and pass its every wish. News flash: the UWS is not representative of a USA dinner party.
Warren's insistence displays no awareness of previous elections won by Democrats nationally and previous elections lost. In the aftermath of Trump, some of the country loves him more than ever and some (hopefully a majority) just wants to be rid of his narcissistic self.
This is why Joe Biden continues to poll in the lead, no matter how many arrows get shot at him by other candidates who maintain the self-delusion that by doing so they will raise their <5% popularity to challenge him on some permanent basis.
Add to this the appreciation that blacks feel about Biden being wing-man to the first black President, and it will prove to be a difficult challenge to unseat Biden from the lead. Fortunately, Biden, if not a perfect candidate, maintains the left of center persona that gives the Democrats some chance of enlarging the get-rid-of-Trump crowd. Hopefully, he will stop raising his hand whenever some go-nowhere policy proposal (meaning that it cannot possibly pass in an actual legislative body) gets thrown his way, solidifying his reputation as the experienced adult in the room. As in Trump=child; Biden=adult.
You are not wrong.
Sanders is way too far left to be take serious by any one other than his fans.
But Warren, oh my.
Sorry, but she is still delusional.
Her plans cannot be achieved on cost alone. She favors the illegals over Americans too. She supported the New Green Deal until some one read it to her, then she was against it.
And when both are attacked, both start the name calling, ‘they were playing into Republicans’ hands’, brilliant, calling Democrats who are not as far out to Left field as she is, Republicans.
Meantime both of them are so popular, they cannot convince Democrats to vote for them. Their fans are far from enough to go toe to toe with the entrenched solid red block across the street.
Sorry, but it’s about time to leave stage Left.
2
I can't believe your snotty opinion of Sanders and Warren. They show real leadership while the moderates (who have near zero support) attack them. Enough with all the bickering about the need for moderation from the Democrats. We need real change and leaders who will fight for it.
5
Mr. Bruni, you need to pull multiple shifts at a hospital, make the rounds through the ER, Financial services, the OR, the MedSurg floors, the ICU, Coronary Care, Pediatrics. Then when you finish that business, work at a Free Clinic, then write a column(s) about your experience as it relates to medicine and insurance.
4
@Great Lakes State Much easier to pick up that pen in that comfortable leather chair.
3
The Democrats have now stumbled (or been pushed) into the same delusion that led the GOP to lose two Presidential elections--the idea that if only the true (ie, "zwoke") conservative would get the nomination, then legions of secret hard-right voters would miraculously show up at the polls.
Poor, deluded Democrats. Do they think that after the Trump craziness voters really want someone even more threatening and extreme?
What good is insurance if there is no access?
The candidates most adamant about a simplistic health care solution (bumpersticker politics as it were) entirely ignore the reality out there, namely the lack of sufficient medical resources. An article in the Albuquerque Journal several months back noted that the largest health care plan in the state did not have a single primary care doctor available to take new patients.
Obamacare is good, but by greatly increasing demand while doing essentially nothing to increase supply, it basically upped the "price", i.e. made it harder to gain access. We need candidates to address this complex problem, not just wave a banner with the slogan, "Universal Health Insurance."
1
How are those sour grapes tasting, Frank?
You're someone who will never have to worry about the things normal Americans do have to worry about. A record number of Americans are underwater on their car payments. Millions have no heath insurance. For millions of Americans, a mere $400 expense would require going into debt or even bankruptcy.
So from your privileged perspective, it's probably difficult to understand why so many Americans are worried about college debt, medical care, the infrastructure and so on. People like you give lip service to climate change, but are consistently unwilling to do anything meaningful about it (yes, I'm talking about the Green New Deal), even though scientists have informed us we have a little over a decade before the most destructive consequences of climate change become irreversible.
To any reasonable person, that means that half-measures are no longer sufficient. We need real change, even if that means you might have to pay higher taxes, Frank. Not everyone comes from a rich New England family, can attend boarding school, etc. Try to gaze outside of the confines of your gilded mansion once in a while.
5
I admire the passion my fellow Democrats even though their priorities are totally unrealistic as Mr. Bruni has rightly pointed out. For all the huffing and puffing, no none has yet answered the basis question – how do Senators Warren and Sanders propose to win a national election first and then get their agenda through the Congress? Constitution is not changing – we will still have the electoral college; at least in 2020. Which states they expect to flip? With their agenda, additional states may be in play including Minnesota and Virginia. With a far-left candidate at the helm of the ticket, it is likely that some of the seats in the swing House districts will flip back to the Republicans. Remember the Supreme Court just sanctioned gerrymandering. And in the Senate, most optimistic prognosis is a majority of one or two for Democrats with many members from Purple and Red states who will never support open borders, free tuition and Medicare for all. This is why we need to be realistic and find a more balanced candidate.
It is clear that ultimately only one of the two will remain in the race and that is likely to be Senator Sanders – she is my senator; I respect her and I voted for her. However, there is a vast difference between winning in Massachusetts and winning the national election. If Senator Warren is so confident, why doesn’t she change residence, move to Kentucky and defeat Mitch McConnell? That will be far more consequential.
Fantasy is believing that our current government or economy is working for the average American. People are going bankrupt from medical bills, driving to Canada for their drugs to stay alive, seniors are turning lights off and sitting in the dark to save money, farmers are hanging on by a thread, many schools have 76% of students in the free or reduced lunch programs in the Midwest, many are working 3 jobs to pay rent and buy their prescriptions, and seniors going to food banks. Where has the soul of America gone when it can't take care of it's own?
4
This idea, carefully nurtured by the chattering class, that we "love" our health care is nuts! Moreover, if citizens had the "option" to go public, how long do you think it would be before companies stopped offering private insurance. It is time to get on board, Frank. Or, to use your imagery, it is time to leave the island--Insurance Island.
2
Having lived in different countries and with different cultures , it is very difficult for me to understand why very basic human rights and respective ideas that are rightfully pronounced by some candidates labelled as " progressive " and/or "socialist". If our taxes are not collected for these basic rights, what are they for ? This is not what we deserve as tax payer Americans. It is time to wake up and see what other developed nations are managing tax payers money.
6
@HA "If our taxes are not collected for these basic rights, what are they for ?"
Tax breaks for big corporations. Congress' wages. White House dinners. And the middle class generally paying for basic things like the military and keeping the lights on.
1
Because progressive policies will be labeled socialism, Trump will be re-elected.
We cannot survive more years of Trump.
The US has 350 million people. It is amazing that the Dems could not find a young centrist candidate with guaranteed popular appeal. Mayor Pete is my favorite, but there are too many bigots to assure his victory.
3
The medical-industrial complex operates with the same scare tactics and obfuscation as the tobacco industry did years ago.
I hear all the same moderate talk. We need real change, people with real convictions and willing to put all into the cause. The last thing we need is more Republican light, a one-party system.
2
I normally like what Frank Bruni has to write, but on this one he is wrong. One of the beautiful things about leadership is that it arises to meet a time and a need. One of the reasons the pundit class is the pundit class is that they comment, they don't lead. They always look backwards and review where we've come from, not where we're going. Nearly no-one would have predicted the leadership of both Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt, who took us in bold new directions that looked revolutionary to those who came before them.
Bruni is right that some of these proposals look radical, but then the U.S. has become radically conservative, compared to most of the other advanced democracies in the world, when it comes to disparities of wealth, high health insurance costs, and higher ed debt that is impoverishing our youth even before they get started in life. The rich, very simply, are not paying their share. Warren and Sanders do need to roll their messages up to a larger theme of hope, that we can and will help the common man get ahead, but that doesn't mean we should think big. After all, a majority of the public already wants single-payer insurance. That looks tame compared the more radical changes that are going to be required to stop global warming.
4
These journalists stand for status-quo while majority Americans do not. So they would prefer Donald Trump over any Democratic candidate who is serious about changing the status-quo. Just because these privileged journalists are doing well, the Dow Jones is going well, and the GDP is doing well, does not mean the average Americans working two/three service sector jobs are doing well too!
2
For the supporters of extreme left wing ideology:
Private health expenditure accounts for 30% of health care financing in Canada. So both systems exist.
The Canada Health Act does not cover prescription drugs, home care or long-term care or dental care.
The revolutionists who were screaming at the top of their voice yesterday need to know that the private sector is as impt for America as it is for the world as we have seen the Govt model dismantled in former Soviet bloc and Soviet influenced countries such as India.
2
"... revolutionists who were screaming at the top of their voice yesterday". I guess you can't criticize Trump for exaggeration too much.
2
Mr. Bruni's praise for Mr. Hickenlooper's reference to turning red districts blue is irrelevant to the Presidential debate, or where the country needs to go.
Congress can change every two years. Because of gerrymandering, Republicans have effectively gained the upper hand and nothing is guaranteed about Democrats maintaining control of those red districts for long, regardless of the Presidential candidate.
Purple States are not diehard red Congressional districts. They are called "swing States" for a reason.
Many of the Independent and Democratic voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida became disenchanted with President Obama's performance. They felt betrayed, and had absolutely no desire to support H. Clinton's campaigning as Obama/Bill Clinton part two. Also, just as there was no desire for a Bush dynasty, there was little desire for a Clinton dynasty.
Despite her less than future looking strategy, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote.
The Democratic Party should avoid running Obama Joe Biden, or any Republican light Democrat. The Party needs to look to the future, with passion and policies.
Otherwise they should help finance Mr. Weld's campaign, and convince him to run as an independent, third party candidate in the General.
Finance Weld, and cross their fingers.
1
The liberal Twitterati loves dunking on moderates from the Midwest because, clearly, two career politicians from the most liberal states in America know far better how to win elections in swing states. Vermont tried to institute a single-payer system and it failed because they couldn't figure out how to pay for it. Since there are so many health policy experts in these comments can someone explain that for me? I'm sympathetic to my friends who support health reform - our health system is broken - but single payer is not the best path. Throw in making illegal immigration legal and you've literally handed the election to Trump.
6
@Io: States just undermine each other in this frozen continental relic of slavery. That's why none of them can go it alone in public health care funding, except in the unique case of Massachusetts, where so many health care institutions are concentrated around Boston.
Living outside of the United States is kind of hilarious what American pundits consider left-wing. The medicare-for-all plan is something that even conservatives in other advanced countries would consider mainstream commonsense. Yet much of U.S. media paints it as a crazy leftist fantasy. It's a very parochial outlook that causes millions of Americans to suffer needlessly.
15
The article is true, they dont get elected and these policies magically take place at the wave of a hand. Don't forget that Obama and the Democrats controlled all 3 seats of power for 2 years and still couldn't pass single payer healthcare. Don't forget that Obama was also elected through a massive wave of populism.
They MIGHT be able to get something done about the student loan crisis because of the extreme abuses of the loan service privatization.
If we want real change, we have to re-think our electoral process. Get rid of the electoral college and elect everyone for 4 years, all on the same schedule. 2-4-6 and mid-term "referendums" simply aren't working as a vehicle forward, they're just a means of obstruction and corporate money hoarding (especially in the House where a significant portion of the elections are ran unopposed).
1
Steve Kornacki of NBC News showed polls that said four policies favored by progressives and at least a plurality of Democrats polled negatively in the country:
41% of all voters liked Medicare for all with no private insurance; 54% opposed
27% support decriminalizing border crossings; 66% oppose
33% support providing health care coverage to illegal immigrants; 66% oppose
27% support reparations to Black people for slavery & segregation; 62% oppose.
So, here's my question for progressives: Would you still stick by a candidate with these "big, bold" ideas if it became clear he or she couldn't win Fla., NC, Georgia, Mich., Wis,. and Pa? Or is Donald Trump such an "existential threat" to democracy that you're willing to set aside your pet ideas for now and compromise to make sure he doesn't get reelected?
And please don't say these far-left ideas give a candidate a BETTER chance of winning. There's no data whatsoever to support that.
4
@ProudNewYorker
Here's the better question, Yankee Proud New Yorker:
You clearly stand with trump, a known liar, and a tax cheat.
Which is worse? Trying to improve this nation, as the Democratic Party proposes, or the republican habit of kowtowing to a nihilist?
2
@Paul P. How do I stand with Trump if I'm looking for a candidate who has the best chance to defeat him, not those with far-left views that would cause swing voters in key states to stay home or vote for him? I don't see the logic in your comments, because there isn't any.
2
While I believe healthcare is a right, I do not trust our government to run my healthcare.
Imagine if we had Med4All under Trump the 1st 2 years. He and the GOP absolutely would've banned abortion and birth control pills. Instead they would force women like me to buy a supplemental plan for those things and who knows what else they would've done. For that reason alone, I (sadly prefer to also have a public option along with a Medicare buy in.
Further, the VA is a mess and lobbyists have been pushing to privatize it. Why would Med4All be any different?
With that said, I don't think pushing for Med4All will hurt Warren, but decriminalizing border crossings, and offering healthcare to undocumented immigrants (even though they already go to hospitals and sometimes our tax dollars end up paying) will hurt her and possibly the Dems as a whole.
BUT, the moderates shouldn't say that Med4All will "take away healthcare" (when really it's replacing and doesn't sound nearly as scary) or use words like 'radical' when disagreeing with Warrren and Sanders because they are* giving Trump/GOP the perfect ad to run against Dems and cement the ridiculous idea that the Squad runs the party.
And what if Warren or Sanders end up being the nominee, then what?
1
Guess or risk. Trying to figure out who can beat Trump is like looking into a crystal ball and aiming down the middle has a bad feel. Somewhere in Medicare for all and free higher education is insurance coverage for the uninsured and tuition-free community college - both of which have public value. The uninsured will surely fall into the Medicaid rolls - costing taxpayers far more than affordable insurance premiums. With respect to giving high school grads two years of higher education, am I alone in thinking that what they may learn about their own potential will bear fruit for society down the line?
1
Sanders and Warren are no more radical than FDR was and he was elected again and again and again and again. Following neoliberal ideas has gotten the Democrats nowhere recently. It is past time for a change.
8
These "debates" are designed and intended primarily to boost CNN's ratings. They really are not even close to any type of "debate" that might illuminate a voter. At most, we see a glimpse of styles that might be considered graceful or cranky, easy on the ears or not.
What would be helpful is to have each candidate submit a written, detailed proposal about how she/he would have the federal government improve health insurance and health care in general. These statements should be published, in their entirety, in all the major newspapers.
Let's also have a series of papers about all the other main subjects: economy; environment; international relations; education.
Then, let's hope everyone reads these. I suspect that Buttigieg, Warren, Harris, Bullock and Booker would write the best ones; maybe Biden as well.
2
@Chris I believe the major candidates already do write essays answering questions for various newspaper inserts and websites. I believe the League of Women Voters has or used to have a voter guide. I regularly use voter guides when voting in an election. Also, candidates do publish op-eds, including Elizabeth Warren having a Medium post last week. Of course, these essays are often short and superficial. But they are available already, in addition to the debates.
One would think that the pundits who got it so wrong in insisting that HRC was the reasonable choice over Sanders would have more humility this time around. Not so. They’re all in for Candidate Milquetoast 2020, whoever that might be.
8
Sad about Warren is that a few adjustments and she’d be on her way to the nomination. It is exciting to be driven by some big ideas and I appreciate her distinction between high income and super wealthy, something Kerry and Obama didn’t get. If Warren spent two minutes explaining what it is about capitalism she values, pulled back on healthcare for illegal immigrants and showed willingness to appear on Fox (she doesn’t have to like them, but it shows courage and empathy for the audience), she’d pull away. Oh well...
6
Republicans have no problem with their party and Trump moving to the extreme right but democrats go through these dour bouts of hand-wringing when their party moves to the left - and not even the extreme left. Unfortunately this manufactured crisis is only further perpetuated by the media who cynically dismiss enthusiasm and passion for naiveté. Hence it was refreshing to see an optimistic Elizabeth Warren face-down the crowd of CNN's dark-cloud of "analysts". As she put it: "Left" and "right" (and even "moderate" and "progressive") are only euphemisms for keeping us in separate boxes. Stretching boundaries is the only way to move forward.
2
I am frustrated at seeing Warren and Sanders diluting their advocacy of single-payer health insurance by promoting what appear to be unpopular policies of student loan forgiveness and decriminalization of border crossings. Bruni is just one of many liberals (?) that lump all three positions together as radical, unpopular, and unrealistic. But single-payer is not some pie-in-the-sky idea: it is a proven, workable approach in many industrialized nations. And it is not “free health care.” It should not be conflated with these other issues. Lazy journalists and the news media share the blame for simply lumping them all together, but ultimately, Warren and Sanders are at fault for backing policies that rile many people who might otherwise enthusiastically back them. If only there were a candidate who backed real single-payer, without also carrying the baggage that Warren and Sanders have.
1
The most important thing is defeating Donald Trump. Yes, I'd like single-payer health care, but not so much that I'd risk no health care at all under a second Trump term. That is what last night was about.
1
Funny how this opinion on what's fantasy must appear to the rest of the civilized world in which public healthcare is, and has been for a long time, a given. Disheartens me to see D's (and the media) run from this issue like scared rabbits. With ever rising costs and higher deductibles commonly reaching over $10gs, this insurance people speak of is quickly becoming useful only for catastrophic care and at an extremely steep price. Everyone knows this system cannot last.
7
"I don't understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of running for president of the United States just to talk about what we really can't do and shouldn't fight for." This attitude is a major reason that I support Sen. Warren.
Mr. Bruni, I am just SO TIRED of being told that the things which really need to be done in this country can't be done!
Every other advanced country has some form of universal health coverage, and I believe Warren does have "toggle" room to discuss exactly how that should be achieved. Just how does trying to make our capitalist system work the way it's supposed to...for everyone...equate to a "bitter war with all of corporate America"? As for spending...when it is acknowledged that something is necessary a way will be found to pay for it. The greatest danger may well be in failing to be bold enough in addressing our urgent problems.
10
It is a myth that people love their private health insurance. (Unless, perhaps, they are members of Congress.) Employers hate it, too, because of its skyrocketing expense. We all accept it because it’s better than nothing. The time has come for universal, single payer health care.
13
As a Never Trump Republican supporter of John Kaisich I pretty much agree with Frank. I would like Sanders to stop distracting people and Warren to represent the progressive wing. Besides, he isn't really a Democrat; but then, Trump isn't really a Republican either. On the moderate side, my pick is Klobuchar, although Booker would be a reasonable substitute. Toss in Butegieg for some intelligent commentary and Williamson for some seasoning and we might get somewhere in these debates. Harris polls well, but I think she reeks of overweening ambition, not commitment to the welfare of the people and the country. The rest are promoting themselves while interfering with the job of saving the country.
4
Take a look at the trajectory of healthcare spending as a percentage of GDP for the last 30 years. It demonstrates that there is a total disconnect between demand for healthcare and price.
Thinking that you can prop this system up is living in fantasy land. Thus system will hit a wall. Just a question of when. And when it does, private insurance will implode. So, you’re going to lose it anyway.
The only choice is to try and diffuse the time bomb in an organized manner or just let it go off. Right now, it appears that the moderates are choosing the latter.
6
A democratic candidate that is moderate enough to get votes from republicans who do not like Trump will also most likely cause the minorities and younger voters to be turned off. On the other hand a more liberal candidate may not attract the republican vote, but if he/she brings out the minorities and the young, wouldn't that lead to a better chance that the democrats win both houses of congress? The disaffected republicans may vote for a democratic nominee, but they are unlikely to vote for democrats for the congress.
2
Leadership is risky politics.
Rebuilding a status quo is risky to the future of the republic and to having any chance of salvaging enough of our ecosphere to support any civilization at all.
3
Do you all remember when marriage equality seemed like "fantasy Island" to the Democrats? I certainly remember Bill Clinton's proud passage of the Defense of Marriage Act and the pathetic "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Yet now we have marriage equality in the United States. Should advocates of marriage equality been more quiet, so as not to upset the center right? Should we be supporting Trump's exclusion of transgender members of the military in the hopes of winning over some of his supporters?
What about Biden and Hillary' Clinton's support of the Iraq War? That disaster cost $1.6 trillion and added $7.9 trillion to the debt. That was a war based on a fantasy.
Medicare for All, free public college and the other policies Sanders and Warren advocate are the right thing to do. They are investments which will pay dividends. And if every other developed country can do it, so can we. That's no fantasy.
7
Fantasy Land? As an American who has lived in Canada, Norway, and Germany, I can say there is nothing idealistic about ensuring that every citizen has equal access to adequate food, shelter, education, and healthcare. I will Gladly pay higher taxes to ensure that fellow citizens no longer live with despair and anxiety — and the frequent violence expressed in such despair. But of course this path asks Americans to do something different than simply accumulate wealth for themselves, and that is to live into an ethic of care for others.
13
Warren is brilliant but she could not be a successful president even if the Democrats take back the Senate. Our population is just not that far to the left. At least she admits to being a capitalist. If she were somehow to win the nomination, she would have to change some of her tune when debating Trump.
She should stay in the Senate or perhaps become secretary of the Treasury. Let's hope that Biden and Harris do well tonight. Biden for President, Harris his Vice President and a large number of capable democrats to become part of the Cabinet.
Warren reluctantly claims to be a capitalist, but she hates corporations, Wall Street, big pharma, energy companies, tech companies, successful people, and pretty much any type of business. Exactly what part of capitalism does she embrace?
2
Change her tune? At this point? Wouldn’t that be like the Rolling Stones coming onstage and you expect “Gimme Shelter” but get “Nine to Five”?
I agree that she’s not likely to win. What I disagree with is this notion or acceptance of the notion by so many ppl that a Dem who pounds the table incessantly as PRO big, bold X, PERIOD, or who shoots their hand up in favor of big, bold Y, can then slyly shuffle over to altering that stance as the general election nears without leaving a visible trail of slime in their wake.
A "moderate" means another Obama, a smart, pragmatic progressive who accomplished a lot in term 1 and got beat up a lot in term 2. I will take an Obama and a victory over another 4 years of Trump. If you put up Sanders or Warren, we have four years of DJT.
2
If Sanders or Warren are nominated, start thinking about the future of healthcare, education, women's rights and racial relations during Trump's second four year term.
1
Unbelievable that people are still arguing against major policy changes in 2020. This is a recipe for the further immiseration of the majority of Americans and people around the world, and for giving the election to Donald Trump. We are facing a group of crises that are generational and extremely imminent. I'm sick of mainstream figures arguing that we should just ignore them and continue with business as usual. This is not acceptable. We need visionary thinking and major changes or things are just going to continue to get worse. New York Times, please do better.
8
To respect the so-called 99%, may of whom may not be able to afford pay-TV, perhaps future debates should be moved from CNN to the seemingly less elitist PBS.
These debates are serious and should be viewed by a wider audience. Those that cannot afford pay/cable television should have a right to see and hear all of the candidates. It might encourage more of these folks to register and actually vote.
Inclusion is a good thing.
5
The idea that a moderate could “get more done” or “work better with Congress” than a progressive doesn’t hold water. A moderate Democratic President will get no more done than President Sanders or Warren as long as the Republicans and Mitch McConnell control the Senate.
5
And yet, if you have Warren or Sanders as Dem nom and in position to lead country IF they won, it could well make the Senate drift even further from any chance of turning blue.
This is the Democratic primaries, not the general election. These candidates are competing for the votes of progressives, not moderates. They need to inspire those progressives with aspirational ideas, not focus on safer, less progressive ideals.
2
I'm all in on universal healthcare, but decriminalizing illegal border crossings is a terrible idea. Those arriving at our borders seeking amnesty deserve expeditious application of our amnesty laws, rather than encouragement to make the dangerous journey across deserts, rivers, and mountains. We need many, many more judges to hear these cases, which should be the first order of business. As a society should welcome people fleeing violence in other parts of the world into our country through the front door rather than locking them up or sending them around back and pretending they don't exist.
1
The debates offer a closer look at the candidates personality type, temperaments, effective communication styles and emotional intelligence when asked a question. Trump got elected because far too many of us are attracted to the personalty traits of narcissists and their power that they yield on TV, twitter, YouTube, the boardroom or battlefield. When they say outlandish things we perceive power and strength. Good communicators on the other hand can calm us during chaos tragedy and rile us to action during wartime and economic depression. Warren, De Blasio, and Bernie have strong personalities and can effectively communicate and intelligently lead millions as they have in their states of Mass, New York and Vermont. These "Moderates" are flat and none of these will win because we can hardly remember them. They won't even budge the Trump campaign "persuadables" in swing states as Cambridge Analytic quizzes sought out and Trump will reign again.
The moderates please the corporate powers and they will do nothing once elected ,keeping the 1% rich and happy as they will maintain the status quo. Many debate questions are not defined as civil liberties and should be IE the right to education, and the right to health care and will require a strong unyielding approach to get them moved forward. Democrats need an intelligent candidate with affirmative communication style to propose strong platforms and implement them. A moderate candidate or platform will not heal America.
2
Sanders' and Warren's proposals are seen by moderates as "far left fantasies" largely because so many supposedly center/left commentators like Mr. Bruni repeatedly frame them as such.
Free public (not private) colleges? That used to be the norm. Universal health care was proposed by FDR nearly 75 years ago. Those proposals have been successfully implemented in all of Europe.
If, instead of merely tacking labels onto them, center/left writers across the country like Mr. Bruni used their time, energy and intelligence to explain what these proposals actually entail and made the effort to show what the history these ideas are in our country, how they are implemented in other countries, etc., perhaps fewer middle Americans would be so afraid of them or believe they were radical and/or unrealistic at all.
10
Unfortunately America keeps looking for a Messiah for president in the context of a constitution and political system designed to thwart messiahs. What we need, really, is an able executive whose heart is in the right place and who has a history of successfully achieving progressive ends through adroit politicking. That would be Hickenlooper. Alas as his low keyed behavior in the debate demonstrates, he makes no claim to messiah-hood; his claim is just to competence.
1
Am I the only one who is appalled by the current primary system? We let easily led mobs choose the candidates and then wonder why they are inimical to the interests of the country. The electoral college as originally conceived (electors not bound to a party, but free to vote for the most qualified candidate) seems more rational, and the old "smoke filled rooms" a close second.
1
It was true Fantasy Island time last night. The other eight on stage knew Warren and Sanders were off in an area where the general population does not want to go, and won't allow these two the opportunity to go as president. But the activists in the Dem Party have enabled this, whether it can be dialed back in time is the question. It might be Mondade, Dukakis et al over again in 2020, even against one Donald J Trump.
1
Absolutely correct. As an attorney that grew up in the Midwest and has served thousands of clients both in the East and in Colorado, I think that Bernie and Elizabeth's ideas are far too extreme for the mainstream of the country. We are talking about independent voters that last time went with DT because they thought they could not trust Hillary because of a few emails. How do you think Bernie or Elizabeth will be portrayed in Republican ads? As far left lunatics that will destroy the country. Sorry, but that is the truth. The Republican party uses fear as its #1 motivating factor, and they will argue that voters can TRUST Trump, because he is working for them, etc.
We need a very calm, focussed, smart, non-extreme candidate to make Trump look like the narcissistic nut that he is. Now isn't the time for a "revolution". Now is the time to win the electoral vote.
1
This exemplifies the poor communication skills of Democrats. Why are you so willing to let Republicans frame the party? What’s so wrong with being a liberal? Republicans have so effectively moved the definition of a moderate stance so far to the right the county has forgotten its liberal past.
2
A man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?
--Robert Browning
6
the wave will be my voters like my sons aged 22, 20 and 18 who aear are voting Bernie like all their friends. My 14 year old daughter knows no other candidate. Bernie is the most trusted American politician. He speaks to people's pain and anxieties and inspires because he's passionate and principled. No one under 30 is interested in policy wonks or moderates and they don't remember Biden Me, I'll vote . Bernie 2020 because the #1 insurer denied my inpatient rehab in 2005. post severe brain injury. I made all my recovery on Medicare starting 2007, 2 years post ruptured brain aneurysm and 2 of my kids will be graduating medical school by 2024. Bernie 2020.
4
Trump and the Republicans will paint any moderate Democrat as a left winger who wants open borders and will take away health care, whether by single payer or ACA. The Dems best hope is to nominate a progressive that will motivate progressive voters to get out and vote.
3
The private insurance many people like, or at least put up with because it is familiar and usually can be fooled or tricked into paying at least something, is way too expensive, and the continued existence of our health insurers, their jobs and dividends, depends on keeping it that way.
Getting rid of private insurance would throw many people out of work (and steal much of their value from many investments). As long as government can be prevented from taking effective measures to deal with such unemployment, people will fight to preserve their current jobs and career paths. In other words, private insurance, like much of the military-industrial complex, is a make-work program.
Democrats do not talk about this because any discussion not thickly coated with euphemisms would lead to very damaging sound bites that would be endlessly replayed by opponents.
Another topic no one talks about is that with the advent of Medicare for all, corporations would find themselves awash in the money they spent on employee health care. If they continued to give this money to their employees, but as cash rather than health benefits, the employees could well afford higher taxes. If the money continued to pay for health care, taxes would not need to be raised on the middle class. If the money went to increase dividends and stock prices, then raising taxes on these would eliminate the need for tax hikes on individuals.
1
Wrong, but then I can't remember the last time you were right. Bernie is a left populist, Warren is heading there. The people are not ready for either one of them, but give it six months or so, they will be.
3
I think it is a mistake to think we know what Medicare for All would look like. Yes Sanders wrote a Medicare for All bill but in Congress final legislation often looks very different then the original bills. To pass Sanders' bill would likely involve all kinds of changes to get enough votes. Often big changes are made in the final hours before voting. We will only know what Medicare for All is when the legislation is actually voted on. It could be quite different from what Bernie envisions.
2
@Bob Thank you. I agree. We do have to remember this is a preliminary debate and all views will be aired but what actually happens is another story. Although in theory, I am opposed to medicare for all as it's being presented. And if they cannot present it better in a more nuanced way it would be a tremendous blow to this country.
1
Democrats that continue to believe that supporting a Republican light /Center Democrat candidate will experience the same defeat Hillary experienced in the next election. There's a reason why Bernie Sanders got 41% of the vote in the previous election.. If he had gone against Trump he would have defeated him easily.. all of the polls showed him having much more support against Trump vs. Hillary.. Voters who would have otherwise have voted for Bernie Sanders ended up voting for Trump because he was the only other "Change Candidate" available. Bottom line...Democrats need a passionate candidate that exhibits empathy to beat Trump.. Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders are the only ones that stand a chance..
4
There is serious research and fairly compelling evidence that the reality in the American electorate is that so-called "swing voters" are largely mythical creatures, and that elections are largely won or lost because of each party's success (or failure) in motivating voters historically leaning towards that party to turn out and vote.
Hillary Clinton demonstrated the political perils of stay-the-course positioning--from a policy perspective, she offered what was basically a third term of Obama centrism--the uneven outcomes and contradictory metrics of the then seven-year old recovery from the Great Recession diminished the political appeal of "four more years" in the electorate--and animated the spirits of those looking for a different direction.
Trump capitalized on those spirits by offering a different direction--albeit backwards towards a magical and almost entirely mythical past that did not exist back in the day, and will not in the future.
Trump won because the brand of hokum he peddled inspired Republican leaning voters to turn out.
Every politician would be wise to remember one of Mark Twain's most perceptive observations:
"I'm all in favor of progress. It's change that I don't like."
2
I do not agree with the “fantasy island” label applied to Elizabeth Warren. Her plans and ideas are basic common-sense policies that are in widespread use throughout the civilized world - notably in Germany, in the Scandinavian countries, in Japan and in other European democracies.
None of these countries fits the definition of either “fantasy land” or “communist hellhole”: the sad truth is that America has moved so far to the right that now even basic policies aimed at rebalancing the enormous inequality appear as “socialist” to most people. Biden is a decent bloke but he will do very little to address the massive social imbalance that exists today in America. Warren gets my vote.
4
@Andy Do these countries have open borders? This is what the fantasy land is - socialism with open borders.
Hmm. It's now risky and radical to suggest Americans have universal healthcare which is easily enjoyed by the rest of the world. Or taxing the rich. How radical. We obviously learned nothing from the Hillary episode. A moderate won't win. Mark my words.
5
Decriminalized Borders isn't that loopy. Sessions employed the "zero tolerance" policy -anyone who can be charged under Section 1325 should be charged with a misdemeanor. It was written by Sen Coleman Livingston Blease from SC--a white supremacist---Congress made “improper entry by alien” a crime in 1929 – in effect amping border regulations into the "on acid" status. This "zero tolerance" makes children in cages happen. Decriminalization is to rebuke dehumanization-it doesn't mean what it sounds like......................
1
I realize that we so backward because of lobbyists and dark money in this country politics, so I wonder if any other countries have similar problems, I doubt it.
3
What an offensive headline. Those of us with high medical costs don't consider Elizabeth Warren & Bernie Sanders to be on Fantasy Island. It's Mr. Bruni who appears to be
out of touch.
7
She personifies the democrat party "fight" "fight" "fight" instead of "negotiate".
2
A more basic question for me is, don’t these men and women know the national anthem?
Mr. Ryan seemed to stand at attention with hands at his side. A few were moving their lips, most at a loss for words or the protocol.
By third grade this senior citizen could stand at attention and sing it thoroughly - off tune, but thoroughly. The nuns made sure of the basics. And knowing the national anthem is a basic.
What I love about Warren and Bernie is they aren't promising what they are championing. They are fighting for it. And that is what I want from the next president of the USA. I want a president who will fight for systemic change because this country so desperately needs it. I don't expect a Warren or Sanders president to automatically provide single payer healthcare for me. But I do expect both of them to champion it! And never stop championing it! You work with Congress and keep pecking away at it until you finally achieve it. It's a long drawn out battle but you fight, fight, fight, and never stop fighting!
4
Thank you for the funniest - and sharp - line of the day:
". . . John Hickenlooper. . . participated in the night’s most entertaining exchange, when he mocked Sanders(’s) grand plans by saying that they won’t come to pass just because Sanders wishes for them or throws his arms up in the air. Sanders does wave his arms a lot, or, rather, flaps them, so much so that you wonder at times if he’s trying to make a point or take flight. . . Hickenlooper imitated him. Then Sanders imitated Hickenlooper. Then Hickenlooper imitated Sanders again. And for a few seconds, they looked like participants not in a presidential debate but in a calisthenics class."
Funny!
Last night Elizabeth Warren explained quite succinctly what's wrong with this point of view. Why run for president if you propose to do nothing substantive?
4
I'm afraid will not lead to the goal, which is to defeat Trump. Why can't we have a party of inclusion?
2
Consider these facts:
The NRA completely controls Congress when it comes to gun safety laws.
Purdue Pharma's Sackler family made billions of dollars in profits and dumped all the costs onto taxpayers. Ditto Wal-Mart, Big Oil.
Facebook will pay a $5 billion fine, but has to change exactly nothing in their rapacious business practices. Russia, go ahead and run those targeted ads all you please. To Facebook in the long run $5 billion is chump change.
Trump has put a coal industry lobbyist in charge of the EPA.
The thing Sanders and Warren both realize is that corporations are in charge now, more powerful than our government. They realize we need a government that can balance out corporate power to protect the ordinary 99.9% of Americans, before our Republic is lost.
It's something we all need to understand: bold is necessary.
5
Don't make it Bernie, people. Just don't. Old socialists have nothing to offer but losing propositions. Take one look at the failed socialist countries that couldn't wait to get away from that experiment when the Soviet Union fell. I remember it well, I'm old enough. Socialists keep everybody poor, except for a few party bigwigs that do really well. I don't want them, not now, not ever, and don't give me Bernie. I'll take the lunatic we have, before I'd vote for that old socialist, who, by the way, hasn't gotten anything done in all his years in the Senate.
2
The USSR was Communist, not Democratic Socialist. Its a vaaaaast difference. For example: Communists were against private property, Democratic Socialists have no problem with it. The USSR was authoritarian, Democratic Socialists are democratic.
3
If you are happy with:
1.Your $5000 deductible insurance policy that costs several thousands of dollars per year.
2. Handing over 20% of every insurance premium dollar to line the pockets of wall street investors and paying CEO’s 20 million dollars annually.
3. Having some insurance company bureaucrat dictate whether your doctor’s recommended treatment is covered.
4. Thinking pharmaceutical companies deserve the highest profit margin of ANY business (17-20%).
5. Not having dental, vision or hearing covered.
Then by all means, keep your private insurance and don’t support Medicare for All which transitions our health care system from the greed and profit driven mess that it is today, to one that actually provides universal coverage.
And please recognize that the disingenuous talking point that Medicare for All will “eliminate your health insurance” is being promulgated by those monied interests and the politicians they have bought because they are scared that their gravy train will end. Did you know that health insurance companies spent 158 million dollars and Big Pharma spent over 200 million dollars on lobbying last year? They want their monies’ worth and will keep spending these health care dollars on the so-called “moderate” candidates instead of on actual health care. Please keep this in mind when you are ready to cast your vote.
7
Special interests! Special interests! Very rich and very special, special interests! America - t’is of special thee, dearly beloved special interests. We roll out the white carpet for special interests, and bow down before special interests. Government bought and paid for by special interests. This opinion piece bought and paid for by special interests.
2
One aspect of Fantasy Island is that it seems to ignore the continued role of a bloated defense budget in preparing for fantasy wars (F-35, anyone?) while draining resources that should go to healthcare of our people. This used to be a Democratic message. Why have Dems decided to be silent?
2
Calling the Green New Deal “dizziness” shows an abject lack of empathy for our young people. God save my granddaughter from such Trump-like pundits such as Bruni.
2
You're 100% right. There is no way we can get healthcare for all people like other industrialized nations. We aren't capable of doing while we have a Republican President and Senate majority whose priority has been dismantling institutions, taxing the middle and lower classes and further enriching the very top earners and corporations.
Now we may not get to that mountain in 2020 or even 2024 but if we don't set our sights on the mountain top we'll never get there. Just remember also right now people don't get turned away at hospitals & the cost is being picked up by the country in various ways. Oddly the for profit insurance companies are still raking it in. I think the goal is not to change the health care we get as much as it is to eliminate the enormous profit of the middleman & pharma. Where's the "beautiful and it's going to be better and cheaper" Trump health plan he promised. Last I looked they've been busy dismantling health care for the country along with everything else. This administration is corrupt & self serving and anyone that supports them is foolish to do so. On one hand you have a false "fear" that your insurance will be taken away and on the other you have a corrupt Republican govt hell bent on and successfully taking away your insurance, keeping prices high & now singing the song "we can't afford all these entitlements"..... The choice is clearly not moderation.
3
So once again pundits decide for the rest of us who is presidential material and who isn't. You'd think after Trump's election they'd take a back seat and let everyone learn more about what's being proposed.
Sadly, long ago our political spectrum was shrunk — with the media largely to blame for echoing right-wing politicians — to its current shriveled line-up of left of center to far-Right. It's pathetic to call Elizabeth Warren's platform 'wrong,' rather than delve into what it could mean for the country, but that's what happens when you trash only one end of the range of political ideas.
Mr. Bruni could, for instance, look into how a national health system works in all the European countries. Last year in England a relative suffered serious illnesses, including severe burns and was hospitalized for nearly 5 months — free. 13 months later he's still getting free treatment as an outpatient. Because he's a senior his drugs are always free (as far as I know prescription drugs are around $7 for everyone else). Yes you pay taxes for healthcare, but nowhere near what you have to pay for our ludicrous and cruel profit-driven system. And everyone agrees Medicare is well-run and works, so it's only through spreading falsehoods that we haven't long ago adopted Medicare for all.
4
To the editor. You mentioned that they were polling well. You didn't seem to understand the meaning of that. If more people agree with their policies, then that's who gets elected because of , you know, democracy. If you don't like the policies that we the people vote for, maybe the other party is where you belong.
Compared to the rest of the world, were are so far right that democrats look like moderate republicans and republicans look like extremists to the rest of the world. So you taking a moderate left position is actually firmly in the right if we're being honest. If you think the popular candidates shouldn't win then perhaps democracy is not for you either. To sum up. You are 100% wrong and are just another one of those moderates who balk at actual liberal ideas.
3
Whether you think Medicare for All is the right thing and private insurance is evil a simple fact remains that no candidate has brought up thus far. And that is Medicare is not unlimited in providing health benefits. Many people who are medicare age go to doctors and their claims are rejected, just as with private health care plans. Presently, acupuncture is denied, as are many procedures not absolutely 'standard' at this time. And if some day everyone is on medicare, do you honestly believe there will not be more and more restrictions and denials for certain procedures as the government decides it is losing too much money and people rail against paying more taxes? As for the Canadian system- it can take over 6 months simply to get an MRI. And you cannot go directly to a specialist such as an orthopedist, which means you must wait another 3-6 months between seeing general doctor and then the specialist. If surgery is needed add another 6 months to this calendar. My Canadian friend in British Colombia just went through this timetable.
The United States cannot afford universal healthcare as all other industrialized nations manage to provide, but funding endless wars that accomplish nothing but death and destruction is acceptable?
4
I would just observe that in almost every major election across the developed world over the 5+ years that the conventional wisdom about "electability" and how radical voters are willing to be was absolutely wrong. Across the globe the leaders of almost every country is a political upstart/outsider. Every election the radical party does better than any of the pundits can imagine. Yet despite Brexit, Trump, the Lega party, AOC; we still have pundits telling us that Biden is going to be our next President and Elizabeth Warren, of all parties and people who have gotten elected recently, is too elected. Respectfully, I think the person living in Fantasy Island is you.
3
Having been a resident of Vermont for 30 years, I remember 2011 when the progs rammed a single payer healthcare proposal through the legislature. It was great on paper but, in the end, a state with a $2.3B revenue stream couldn't support a program which would have added $2.7B to the state budget, as well as hefty payroll and employer taxes. Governor Shumlin trashed the plan three weeks after the general election because it would have blown up the state budget.
The progressive branch of the democratic party need to understand most of their proposed ideas are the stuff of fiscal dreams, and to continue pushing these policies will give us four more years of Donald the Menace.
Give us a candidate who can defeat Trump, that should be your only priority.
5
Several comments here have suggested that we now have Trump because Democrats chose a moderate last time. They overlook the factors that led to Hillary Clinton’s defeat. First of all, voters were skeptical due to years of Republican led attacks and baseless investigations. That could have been overcome but for James Comey’s gratuitous moralizing and interference with the election. Then there was the Russian interference encouraged by the Trump campaign. How did the Russians know to target Florida, Michigan, Ohio andPennsylvania? They knew, because the Trump campaign shared polling data with them.
Moderation wasn’t what defeated Hillary Clinton, and it won’t defeat a moderate candidate against Trump in 2020. I really like Elizabeth Warren, but I wish she would be more more realistic about what she actually could accomplish. Congress plays a part in how government runs, and they would shut down many of her proposals that turn off moderates. On the other hand where are the moderates who understand that fact?
4
Couldn't agree w. you more Mr. Bruni. Taking health care away from people is not a winning ticket. In another time/place I'd support Bernie--but replacing private insurance w. medicare for all is ridiculous. Other countries have public/private options. I think we can figure this out. And personally I could not stand listening to Bernie hyperventilate about everything but I do appreciate what catalyst he has been. I actually think Elizabeth Warren is more moderate than she sometimes appears.
2
As much as people may like their big ideas, they will be nothing but ideas if they are rejected by undecideds. And then we keep the most dangerous president to ever hold the office.
Pragmatism isn't a bad thing. First the U.S. must win the election, then we can make bigger changes.
4
Frank lives on well off moderate Island, where even though he may find Trump crass and racist, he's basically just fine and his life is no different under Trump. So why rock the boat?
5
Exactly.
Bruni, should come live my life for a year or two. Bracing adventures await him, here in the storied land of the Blue-collar worker!
So... going for the center is going to work just like it did last time, right?
6
So the only way to defeat Trump is by electing a moderate Democrat? It's almost as if these people don't realize that we tried that before. It happened in 2016. And Hilary Clinton lost!!! So I guess if we just try again a second time maybe it will work out better. SMH
1
Hillary Clinton came with a huge amount of baggage. A large swath of the population had hated her intensely since the early 90s, and her opinions on policy were never going to change that. Then she neglected to campaign in places like Wisconsin and... here we are. Moderation what not what did her in.
The health scam industry is a cancer on society.
Pay up ! Your money or your life, or your house.
2
Let’s drop the nonsense and get one thing straight...Delaney is NOT a “moderate”. He is a Republican posing as a democrat.
It’s time to stand up and be counted in the fight for our future or be left in the dustbin of history.
2
"So they did, portraying Sanders and Warren as fantasists peddling policies — single-payer health care, the decriminalization of illegal border crossings, the elimination of all or most college debt — that were poorly conceived pipe dreams and, worse yet, recipes for President Trump’s re-election."
Poorly conceived pipe dreams in the US. Reality in Europe. Sad!
No, Frank; the two front runners are front runners for a very good reason, and the corporate media and their handlers are doing everything in their power to frame them as extremists. Good luck with that.
4
They're not the 2 front runners. Biden is still the front runner.
A "moderate" president means 8 more years of nothing getting done. At the end of it you'll have candidates who will make Bernie look like Mary Poppins.
237
Unless the Democrats take the Senate, nothing will get done no matter who's president.
29
@r a: Come on, man. What is getting done right now in Congress or anywhere in our government? A moderate Democratic president has the best chance of breaking through the frozen positions of the parties and actually achieving success in a number of areas where there should be bipartisan support: infrastructure, foreign policy, improving Obamacare, prescription drugs, immigration revision, etc.
We already know that Trump can't do it. He has made so many enemies of the Dems that they will never compromise with him. Our best chance of moving the country forward is with a moderate Dem president. And don't tell me that McConnell will stonewall any Democratic president. Not so, if the Dems are willing to compromise with him on some issues. Let's go back to the way it was when no one got everything he/she wanted but did get some of the things they wanted. It's called compromise and the purists in both parties will be outraged but this is the only way that a democracy can function.
25
@Susan - I think that well planned rhetoric in the general election has the potential to sway public opinion to the point that the senate would not have a choice but to act.
If the dems can win by a landslide, which I think is possible with Andrew Yang, then I think that they can push some policy through congress regardless of it's makeup.
I'm feeling a little weird about bringing Yang up so much but I really think he has the best chance of healing this nation.
6
Warren and Sanders speak for the 99%; whereas the so-called "moderates" are the equivalent of prostitutes who are only loyal to their wealthy johns. One cannot serve two masters.
9
Frank,
Brilliant insight, effectively conveyed, and enthusiastically received, as usual!
2
I love all of this column!!! Everything!!! Thank you, Frank. Warren and Sanders continue to ignore that the 2018 midterms won the House in moderate swing districts. Liberals continue to ignore that Obama won election in 2008 in part by winning INDIANA and OMAHA. He didn't galvanize otherwise-complacent liberals in Philadelphia to win. He won over moderates. And once he was in office, he made incremental progressive strides. He may not have gotten everything liberals (myself included) have on their dream list. But he got X% of something, which is better than the 0% of nothing Warren and Sanders will get by losing the general to begin with.
4
Like millions of Americans, I have health insurance through my employer. After the passage of the misnamed ACA, my contributions to my plan rose upward of 16%. The yearly cost of my monthly deductions for basic insurance, which provides minimal dental and no eyecare coverage, is between $3,000 and $4,000 per year. That amount, of course, does not include deductibles and co-pays, which have risen considerably (something that does not appear to be covered by the mainstream media, such as the Times) and covers less and less. Do the corporate "moderators" (read "gate-keepers") of the debates really believe that taxes on the middle class would rise to this level to enable Medicare for all? If the mainstream press were not in thrall to the insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry (something Senator Sanders alluded to last night), then it would do a comparative analysis of costs. It cut the candidates off before they were able to do so. What is it the media doesn't want us to know, e.g., by asking loaded, biased questions, like "Do you support raising taxes to pay for Medicare for all?"
2
I would sure like one of these pundits to define what exactly is it that people "like" about their private health insurance. Is it because they like getting denied insurance if their illness messes up the corporation's profitability plans? Is it because they like lining shareholder and executive pockets with up to 20% of their premiums and paying for corporate advertising and marketing to sell them more? Is it because the insurance corporation defines which doctors are in their network and folks just plain like it when their doctor is cut from the network? Is it because if they change jobs they like losing their employer's insurance and have to switch to another employer's insurance? Are they thrilled and like it when their employer doesn't offer healthcare insurance at all?
C'mon pundits, tell us exactly why people "like" their private healthcare insurance. Maybe it all boils down to fear of change.
6
Medicare for all is a great idea, but only as a way of providing insurance for people left out of the current system. It would be far simpler and more fair than the ACA exchange plans. The key is letting people keep what they have if they are happy with it. In time, people will likely find that Medicare would provide a much less expensive option than continuing with private insurance and would be free to make that choice. Forcing them to make that choice now would be suicidal for the Democrats.
4
I'm a lifelong, 79-year old, progressive Democrat who concluded that all those on the debate stage in Round 1 of Debate 2 could be described, as Yeats said, " The best lack all conviction [according to Sen. Warren and many commentators], while the worst/ [like Warren and Sanders] Are full of passionate intensity" with "big ideas" that also are a "big bust." "Medicare for All" was successfully shown to be a tough sell even for moderate (and that's the majority) of Democrats as was decriminalizing border violations. Ironically, the most grounded person on the stage was Marianne Willaimson who successfully landed her psychic inner space love ship to point out the "mere anarchy" that Trump has "loosed upon the world" and local state Republicans have loosed upon Flint with their tainted politics and tainted water. There was too much wonky talk, as Williamson noted, and too little reality of the darkness facing the nation. Other than Williamson, only Pete Buttigieg pointed to it, but didn't take it further into why it matters.
The winners in grounded social reality of "Real Issues, Real Problems"--Marianne Williamson, Pete Buttigieg, and John Delaney.
The Losers: all the rest (Bullock, Hickenlooper, Klobuchar, O'Rourke, Ryan, Sanders, and Warren)
1
Medicare for All is a great idea, provided all doctors, nurses, health professionals, drug companies and hospitals all sign on to work for free. Without that, get ready to see your taxes skyrocket.
4
You do know that Medicare is funded by taxes and people on Medicare pay premiums, right? Money is exchanging hands for Medicare patients. It’s not “free.”
1
I’m all for addressing health care and making it better. Also for immigration reform and doing something meaningful to reign in gun violence. All issues the republicans have sold out what small souls they may have had to obstruct and defeat. However, I won’t vote for anyone who refuses to put climate change front and center; let alone even mention it.
What is truly absurd and depressing is the endless hand-wringing and lip-pursing that erupts at even considering that perhaps our obscenely wealthy nation could afford to do better for the great majority of its citizens. “Moderate” and “pragmatic” are code words for “business as usual”, and basically leave us on the disastrous path we’ve been on since at least the dark days of Reagan.
Each and every year we pour $780 billion into the insatiable maw of the military war machine. Think of that, think how much we could accomplish if even one third of that money was directed into other public services; schools, libraries, public health care, infrastructure repair, etc. No, they can’t all be funded completely, but they could be improved greatly with that money, OUR money.
Our perverse need to dominate and exploit every resource in the world requires a well-fed death machine. That is America’s core now, and has been for most of our history. Not until we face that reality and have the courage to change it will we achieve any substantive progress in the quality of life for most citizens.
6
The elimination of private healthcare would require the American people to place their complete trust in the federal government. Americans' trust in the government has been pitifully low since Watergate, and nothing that has happened over the past decade has given them any reason to feel otherwise (link below). There's also something ironic about the argument for universal healthcare relying on how other western countries have already successfully implemented it, when none of these countries have decided to also outlaw private insurance.
Nevertheless, I have trouble taking any politician proposing new welfare programs seriously if they aren't willingly to thoroughly discuss removing our forces from other countries in tandem. Aside from doing right by our service members--and enacting something that most Americans are in favor of--we simply cannot afford these changes without making drastic changes to our foreign policy. Taxing the wealthy is not enough to raise the necessary funds. Sanders and Warren pay lip service to this reality with small sound-bits about ending the wars abroad, but they're going to need to elaborate much further before I'm wiling to believe them.
https://www.people-press.org/2019/04/11/public-trust-in-government-1958-2019/
1
After last night's debate I am convinced we are due for another four years of Trump. The things being said by Warren and Sanders are just chasing away votes. None of the grandiose things being promised by Warren can come to fruition if she cannot first and foremost beat Trump and with the direction she is going, she is throwing away the vast disaffected middle of the political spectrum.
It is extremely frustrating to watch someone put their idealism ahead of the needs of the country, which is to unseat this horribly incompetent President. For the good of the country Ms. Warren, please repudiate the idea of decriminalizing illegal immigration and then giving them free health care to boot.
3
It's not OK to dream big, for everyone, yet somehow it's OK for the GOP to pass one giant tax cut, for the wealthy, after another.
4
@Paul T I am 'wealthy' based on the Democrats' definition of wealthy. My tax bill went up by thousands.
2
@Not 99pct: And if you’re truly “wealthy” you can afford to pay a few thousand more in taxes. You have benefited from the opportunities afforded by this system, so stop complaining about paying your share. What you should complain about is how that money is spent.
@Pde I pay close to 45% tax and Democrats want me to pay more crying I dont pay my fair share.. Dont tell me I don't pay my fair share. And don't tell me what I can or cannot afford, you know nothing about what obligations I have to family etc. or any other financial obligations. You know nothing about me. All I am doing is refuting the original poster who said the wealthy got all the tax breaks, which is a false statement according to the definition of 'wealthy' Democrats have.
The last time I remember moderates chanting "socialism" and "fairyland," FDR fixed the economy.
7
Warren and Sanders make a fundamental campaigning mistake: they offer complex plans or solutions to what have become intractable problems, and which are vulnerable to opposition attack.
The Republican black ops propaganda machine will relentlessly drive home the threat of a government takeover of health care, and the danger of de-criminalizing illegal entry. In fact, the machine is already at it here in North and South Carolina. TV ads are painting the Democratic Party as reckless, careless and more concerned with immigrants than they are with everyday (white) Americans.
So far, I’ve seen nothing from the Dems. They’ve already ceded the discussion to the Trump regime.
The Democratic Party badly, badly needs a more robust, aggressive, dramatic and emotional message. Decriminalizing illegal entry ain’t it. Neither is Medicare for All. Both of these ideas are already DOA.
2
It is a mystery to me why Medicare for all is the defining issue among Democrats. There is no chance this will be enacted anytime soon with Republican control of the Senate. Even if the Senate becomes narrowly Democrat in the future, it is unlikely that Medicare for all would even pass the House, let alone the Senate. So the Dems are creating this huge divisive issue that has no chance of becoming law and will cost them the White House. Doesn't seem smart to me. I'll vote for whoever the Dem nominee is but making this the touchstone for Dems is likely to result in 4 more years of Trump.
9
Won't appeal to general-election voters? Why, how could anyone touting policy reminiscent of FDR possibly win the presidency?
I mean, it's not like FDR was that popular, am I right? Certainly not enough to have won four terms. To be so popular that new law was written so that someone so popular, some one so populist, someone who's policies were called...dare I utter it...Socialist (the horror!) would never again reign so long and do so much.
Candidates win on bringing the idea of hope and change (I'm pretty sure that was the slogan of one particular candidate). Even Trump touted that with "Make America Great Again." He lied (such a surprise, I know), but still the idea is rooted in a hope to change things from what they were seen as to something "great again."
So forgive me for not feeling enthusiastic about the Democratic candidates who cluck their tongues and tell us all we, the richest, most technologically advanced nation, cannot do something which almost every other industrialized nation in the world already does. That the UK can figure out universal healthcare, but the US cannot. That Germany can figure out a minimum wage that keeps workers out of poverty, but not the US. That Japan can figure out paid maternity leave, but not the US.
If Sanders and Warren are on Fantasy Island, I'm just a mite more interested in figuring out how to build a bridge to join them than I am in standing on our shrinking shoreline with the likes of Delaney.
6
@Matcha: Yes, but the difference is that FDR was a master politician. He would have wiped the floor with anyone on stage last night. I can only smile at the thought of how he’d flay Trump in a debate. Consider his Fireside Chats. A brilliant move, speaking directly to terrified people every week, in their homes, making them feel as if you’re right there, next to them, holding their hands in the darkness. Political genius, charm, astounding intelligence, and a backbone of steel made FDR who he was. None of today’s candidates has that combination.
1
@Pde: I'll give you that. FDR was the whole package. But I'd contend that a Sanders-Warren (or vice versa) ticket would get us pretty close. Warren's got the intelligence and a bit of a flair for playing the political game. Sanders, despite his slouching posture, has that steel backbone, which I think was on display in the debate; maybe a bit of Brooklyn charm, the kind which is abrasive but drips with authenticity (a kind which is not charming to everyone of course!).
Now, if we could bring FDR back, I'd take that deal in a heartbeat. It would be amazing to see a true populist, with grand ideas an actual plan utterly demolish Trump's bumbling (mayhaps fascistic) faux-populism. But sadly, without the magic to do that, I'll still happily support the remake. Not as good as the original, but certainly better than the alternatives.
1
FDR took office almost 90 years ago. America is not the same place it was then.
1
Would you rather have your employer know every detail of the health of you or your family, or the government because it will be one of the two. The old adage says don't make a mess in the place where you live (that's the polite version). Your employer doesn't need to know every little detail about your health and I think the only ones are health care records are private for is us. Privacy concerns alone are enough to transition to Medicare-for-all.
1
What lessons do we take
From the electoral mistake?
Do we need to move left,
Be the warp without weft?
it is tempting to blame the middle.
Then we won last season
What was the reason?
Did purple state gains
Come from purist refrains?
So much depends on this riddle!
4
Very very sadly, the American economy and health care insurance are woven together. If that fabric were to have the health insurance economy removed, it would unravel. Instead, they need to be carefully disentangled. For instance, according to 2017 data, there are 2.6 million employees in the insurance industry. If even one quarter of those were workers in health insurance, than 700,000 people would lose their jobs if we demolished private health insurance. Those would not be people who would vote for a Democrat who promises to destroy their jobs. Other examples were given in the debate - Americans' love of having choices and one of the few sources of remaining power for unions - negotiating health insurance. Warren was right to call out the obscene profiteering committed by health insurance companies. Some provisions in the ACA addressed this. In this county, when it comes to health care, the incremental approach to full coverage is the only one that works politically and economically.
1
I'm very tired of the far-left. I just want to beat Trump.
6
So-called Progressives must really love Trump because they've pressed the self-destruct button.
6
Elizabet Warren has clear, reasoned plans, and makes a lot of sense. It is time for US to step into the 21st century. I hate how the press and media are boicotting her!
8
Why is country so twisted about universal health care? Every other advanced country has a form of it, and it works well has better results than the U.S. and it costs half as much.
I understand why for profit institutions are against it, especially pharma, but why does the average citizen object to it. I suspect if it was guaranteed for only white people we'd have it now.
It's just crazy!!
And we use to have free public universities and colleges and no one had a problem with it except the republicans. Why? Because they did not accept people of color. Once people of color gained entry then they turned to charging and cutting the state support systematically throughout the last 50 years.
Candidate Williamson has some good points about the rot of racism, that is outside the anti vaccination craziness.
5
Bruni is correct. As much as I would like a four-year transition to a single-payer system, our healthcare system is too big a percentage of our GDP to achieve this.
Medicare rates are low enough to put a lot of healthcare providers, from large hospital systems to single practitioners, out of business fairly quickly. There won't be time to adapt to change.
Our biggest problem is that healthcare is too expensive in the US. A single-payer plan can address some of the issues driving the cost of care, but not all of them.
And sorry Liz and Bernie, every corporation and every insurer is not a monster. They're staffed by people whose votes you want, and who are really turned off by the rhetoric. If only "evil corporations" who must answer to boards and shareholders were to blame for everything.
3
Instead of simply telling us your opinion that you favor the moderates, why not actually analyze the issues instead? You seem even to not so subtly ridicule Sanders and Warren. But they are the only candidates who truly understand the structural and systemic problems of our economic, social and political systems and are smart enough and courageous enough to propose real solutions. The moderates say that sure, we have problems, but real solutions can’t work because there is too
much resistance. They are cowards. Our various systems have been corrupted for a very long time, especially our political system. Our economic system, electoral system, educational system, etc. all require radical change. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are both proposing solutions that will work. Stop living in the old mindset and wake up to the realities. We have horrible income inequality and it has just been getting worse in the past four decades. Our political system is totally dysfunctional, proven by what has become of the Republican Party and who is in the White House. Our education system is an embarrassment. The Immigration system is cruel. Our health care system is failing Americans. Etc. etc. So incremental solutions are cowardly. We need boldness. We need to beat back the corporate and billionaire class who favors incremental solutions at best. It is way past time for major change at all levels and in all our economic, social and political systems. Thank you Bernie and Elizabeth.
5
And you are just telling us your opinion now. This IS the opinion section...
I think the focus on the "pie-in-the-sky" aspect of Warren's and Sanders' proposals misses the real root of their popularity: They show a sincere love for the American people, a clear indignation over the wealth gap, and a passion to set things right. If they can overcome the wonky critiques over policy and the ever-alarmist noise of the Right, their ethos and energy may hold a lot of weight for the electorate, as well as their seriousness.
5
Centrists will always find some reason why the Democratic Party should not move in a more progressive direction. They will say progressives can't win. Or that their proposals are too expensive. Or that white voters in "the heartland" or suburbia or swing states won't vote for them. Or that black voters won't vote for them. Or that progressives need to compromise and fall in line behind a "mainstream" candidate. Or that America is a center-right country. Or that President Trump will rip them to shreds. Or that liberalism has failed. Or that corporations will oppose them. Or that big donors will shun them. Centrists claim that progressives can't win, but the truth is this: they don't want them to win.
5
Medicare for all is a lovely idea, if we had only started with it.
But now I have paid for my medicare and Medicare For All means I will pay higher taxes for the insurance I already paid for.
Public Service employees traded good healthcare for wages, and now they would pay higher taxes for the health insurance they are already receiving.
Union Employees and other Private Sector employees negotiated good health care and they too will pay higher taxes for the health insurance they are already receiving.
Sanders suggests that the savings employers will make by no longer providing health insurance will enable them to pay higher wages--just like the recent Corporate taxes did--did they?
1
Personally, I support most of the progressive ideas offered up by Warren and Sanders last night including Medicare for All and free college tuition. I'm sick of the stranglehold runaway capitalism has on our healthcare and educational system. Why can't we have what most of the developed world has? A better and more successful delivery of healthcare with better outcomes, cheaper pharmaceuticals and better education seems to work there, why not here? I'm sick of naysayers like Bruni denouncing progressive ideas when those ideas are exactly what we need.
4
I wish Senators Warren and Sanders would talk about how Medicare for All would impact quality of health care, how it would impact standards of care or clinical care guidelines, will there be tiers of care, etc? That really is most important--whether or not we implement Medicare for All and how we pay for it are the more simplistic discussions. What are we going to get? That's what I would like to know.
My only question is how is it possible for so much of the media to have such powerful amnesia to be able to forget what happened in 2016, when we ran an establishment moderate with no big ideas for change? Have you all learned nothing?
7
When Bruni lionizes the efforts of four angry-middle-aged-white-privileged males to take out progressive candidates, you have to wonder what his agenda is.
These four have been running for months -- and have abjectly failed to connect with voters in IA and NH. So they resorted to racially/ethnically divisive attacks on Sanders and Warren, using Trumpian framing to discuss complex immigration issues. (Hint, if you think health care is a human right, and you think that undocumented immigrants should not get health care, you're saying that these people are less than human).
Shame on these candidates, and Frank Bruni for supporting their racist and xenophobic rhetoric.
3
I'm an ardent Democrat but there's a huge gap between what I'd like to see and what I think we can win with. The progressives look like The Great American giveaway: everyone can come in! free insurance for all! free insurance for illegal immigrants! free college! restitution!! We need to get our heads out of the clouds and work on JOBS, lowering prescription drugs, lowering taxes, increasing taxes on the wealthy, protecting our environment, protecting Roe v Wade, etc. Frankly, for middle America, the interest in immigrants is low. Just like in 2016, when everyone was battling for trans rights. Lost the entire heartland with that right but tone deaf battle. We get whipped into a frenzy by the moderators, so that the debates are all about free health care (last night's) or immigration (the first). The candidates get led along and the entire country is left with the Great American Giveaway. Awful. The candidates have to tune in to what Americans really want or we will get stuck with four more years of corruption from Trump, Moscow Mitch and the rest of the Spineless Republicans. I'm not sure the country can survive that.
1
Warren and Sanders: They're gonna have to find a way to campaign without calling the supporters of all of the other Democrats cowards and Republicans and corporate sellouts. Not true. And needlessly divisive. And doing a great deal of harm.
2
Winning on the ideas is one thing; winning the election against Trump is something else.
2
Is there any risk at all to spending $700 billion a year on un-audited or top secret defense spending? Anything at all problematic with that Frank?
4
"I don’t understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of running for president of the United States just to talk about what we really can’t do and shouldn’t fight for."
If I could have a shot at the answer, could I offer "that little thing called the election?"
Bernie Sanders and his YELLING and his tearing Hillary Clinton apart gave us Trump. Sanders hates everyone but himself; he is self-loathing and wants to take our tax dollars to give to his special interests: people who want free stuff. I am delighted the moderates knocked Sanders and Warren. Both seem like they evolved from the Manson Family.
3
Thank you Mr. Bruni, although I'm afraid you and Maureen Dowd are about to get voted off Fantasy Island.
Your stance on the issues reminds me vividly what made me stop reading NYT in December 2016. Was hoping for a fresher breath with the 2020 upon us, not from you, though. This is not a journal of progressive thought anymore, sadly... Weekend book review and cooking section less conservative, but can't carry the act. I'll try again 2024, maybe.
7
So the NYT's believes Joe Biden "won" the debate by not being there, and Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are living in a "fantasy" world.
Translation - the Oligarchs who control everything (including the NYT's) don't want Warren or Sanders anywhere near the Presidency. Therefore they must be labeled as "fantasy-believers". The Oligarchs do want Biden because, they own him. Therefore Biden is labeled "the winner".
See how easy it is to understand editorial positions.
5
Warren and Sanders talk like they would be King, Queen or some dictator. Anyone who believes that once someone becomes President they will just snap their fingers and everything will change is living in a fantasy. Fight, fight, fight, they say, how about working with people and business, because that's the way things get done. Delaney is telling the truth and understands you need to work with people in a democracy. Talk of free, free, free is going to appeal to many, but nothing is free, someone has to pay for it and if you think the top 1% can't find a way to avoid it, you are being fooled, so it will fall upon everyone else.
2
Last night there was discussion about workers that will loose their jobs if the "Green New Deal" is pushed through. Yet, no one mentioned the number of health insurance company employees that will be impacted by Medicare for all. Somewhere around 2.6 million people work in health insurance. While the delusional Bernie thinks there will no longer be any medical billing, I'm curious as to how providers will be paid under his Medicare for All plan? Right now, the government uses contractors to pay Medicare claims. Who will fight fraud in the system? Right now, it is the health insurance companies. Warren made a big deal about health insurance companies profits, but under the ACA health insurance companies have to be at least 80% of premium dollars in claims. So who is the villian? I think it is greedy hospitals and doctors. I wish I lived in a country where everyone had access to affordable health care, but I sure don't see Medicare for All as the answer.
i always imagined the workers would become government employees...go visit a military base medical clinic or hospital...still plenty of paperwork. the people losing jobs would be the overpaid CEOs.
1
Lets cut the small talk. It's Bernie and Elizabeth in 2020, or Elizabeth and Bernie. Either way, doesn't matter. And together they will win and get back to being Democrats in the mold of FDR. Big ideas. Bold moves. Straight talk.
7
@RB
Bernie and Tulsi is the real winning ticket, IMO.
1
I would argue what’s risky is putting up another “electable” Democrat who’s too afraid to try to present big and bold policies, or to “rock the boat.” That is what sunk Hillary in 2016. Bernie and Warren are true leaders because they’re not afraid to challenge the status quo political orthodoxy that has been in place since 1980. Trump campaigned on a lot of the same ideas (better healthcare plan, promising not to cut Medicare , promising to lower cost of Rx drugs) but has failed to deliver. Bernie beat Hilary in most Trump states in the primaries.
As Mayor Pete said today on Morning Joe, polling shows that most Americans are behind these ideas on a policy level.
A true leader had a vision and moves people and politicians to realize those policies. That is what Bernie and Warren promise. The others have little to offer.
4
"But she makes the case with more freshness than Sanders does." Except she is too shrill. I'm for almost anyone who can beat Trump but sometimes I wonder if Bernie, who I like, considers the millions of middle-class Americans employed by the fossil fuel industry in good-paying jobs. Everyone who works in oil and gas production isn't as wealthy as the Koch Brothers or Harold Hamm. I'm definitely concerned about the effects of climate change but we need a strategy that doesn't wreck the economy.
All this breathless hand wringing over how a Democratic candidate risks losing the election because voters won't accept proposals they consider too far left misses the most essential facts about the 2020 election:
1. Trump isn't even trying to appeal to the center. He is not playing the moderate that he played in 2016. He's playing only to the most racist in his base.
2. And perhaps this is why. The center loathes Trump. The 2018 elections proved this when a significant majority of independents voted for Democrats. And although Democrats lost some high profile races, overall they wiped the floor with Republicans.
Any competent Democrat will defeat Trump. And as for tacking back to the center, all Warren has to do is keep repeating that she's a capitalist, just one who wants that system to work better for the middle class.
2
If Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are "Marooned Together on Fantasy Island", then they are playing fantasy football or fantasy poker with the lives of millions of Americans at stake.
I LOVED hearing various discussions about new and progressive options and plans while in college and still do, but at the end of the day, I fall back into my moderate mindset because that is where my comfort level is.
Presently, the guy in charge frightens me more each week and I wonder what will his next bonehead move be. What I do not want is a Democratic candidate who may have a similar effect. I realize that both Sanders and Warren want what is best for this country and citizens, but I think they may scare off more voters than embrace.
2
Fantasy island? Isn't that a good description of the "exceptional" contemporary United States Frank? The country confidently purported to be "the best in the world" by Republicans and centrist Democrats alike?
Here is the list of the top 27 best rich democracies in the OECD listed by mean wealth per adult: Iceland, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Australia, United States, Belgium, Norway, New Zealand, Canada, Denmark, France, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Sweden, Ireland, Austria, Japan, Italy, Germany, Spain, Israel, South Korea, Finland, Portugal, Greece, Slovenia and Chile.
So it's not the richest, but the US is doing pretty good at #5 on this list right?
But if we switch to consider the median wealth per adult the US drops to #18 on the list - so wealth equality in the US is very low.
And in terms of income equality it's even lower at #26 on the list.
It's the only one that doesn't have free universal health care and legislated paid parental leave.
It's last at #27 in terms of life expectancy.
In terms of child mortality it's at #26.
In terms of incarceration rate it's at #27 and way, way last.
Besides Japan, it's the only one that applies the death penalty.
Despite its 1st Amendment, it's at #24 according to the world press freedom index (#41 of all countries).
And it's ranked only 21st on The Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy Index (#25 of all democracies).
All of this points to Elizabeth and Bernie being the candidates most in touch with reality - doesn't it?
11
@GRW Sorry, the above should say "In terms of incarceration rate it's 1st and way, way worst." You know what I mean.
1
If the Democrats continue to follow the "give-away" plan, they will for sure give away the election.! Moderation is not a dirty word..it is the key to civilized behavior and programs. Affordable health care for all is required and necessary, but
changing from our broken system on a Monday-- to an unrehearsed system of medicare for all by Wednesday is ludicrous. Gradual incremental change sounds rational to me.
BUT what if we have a democrat president and a republican senate? If the public is unsure, it is possible to have a lot of vote splitting. There are very important questions NOT asked.
Obama submitted a name to consider for the supreme court. Does any one remember what happened in the senate, and the consequences?
1
I agree, and the truly thorny issue that gets glossed over here is the terrible optics that occur when private insurance companies get taken over by the government. Imagine, it you will, the millions of stockholders in these companies losing value in their investment when their stock gets bought out, perhaps at fire sale valuations. It will be ugly.
Medicare for all is a bold plan, but not one that can be implemented cleanly and efficiently in one fell swoop. I will take years for it to be enabled, and will provide much pain for a lot of ordinary Americans.
This is not to say something along these lines cannot be accomplished, just that it isn’t going to be clean and easy.
I may not agree with everything these 2 progressives put forward, but I appreciate that they bring bold ideas to pressing issues and set the table for discussion. Warren actually understands the underlying policy and financing issues, while Bernie shrieks and waves his arms with the same lines from his 2016 campaign. Neither may end up with the nomination, but they will push the party to consider bolder visions for big problems....healthcare, college funding, income inequality, etc. That is in sharp contrast with the other side that prefers to simply attach unflattering labels to everything the opposition offers, while putting forth NO solutions to anything.
3
So, Medicare for All will raise my taxes? Perhaps several thousand dollars per year? I am currently paying more than one thousand dollars PER MONTH to a "government"I did not vote for: AETNA..... My employer cast that vote. And am I surprised that CNN and others seem to imply that Medicare for All is some kind of Fantasy Island? No surprise there when I watch the news and am bombarded by Insurance Company and Big Pharma slick advertising for hours on end. Those same companies spend billions of dollars (our premiums and copays) keeping our media giants profitable. No, the only fantasy is the one that says The USA can't afford to move to Medicare for All. The truth is we can no longer afford not to.
17
The Democrats seem not to be willing (or able) to understand what happened in last year's Congressional elections.
What happened is that moderate Democrats flipped districts that had been held by Republicans and that had been carried by Trump in 2016, and overwhelmed hordes of GOP Trumpsters. What did not happen was that left wing Democrats provided any kind of increased representation.
The very loud, attention-seeking gang of 4 women all ran in safe Democratic districts. They contributed nothing to the Democratic victory and, since they are focused on self-aggrandizement, have spent a lot of time attacking other Democrats and so make it more difficult for Democrats to win again ... anywhere.
Warren and Sanders have interesting ideas. But it is not pie-in-the-sky programs that are likely to burst the Trump bubble: it is demonstrable concern for the ordinary problems of ordinary people who struggle to make ends meet, worry about their health, their children's health and education and are scared of the endless rollercoaster ride that politics has become. They seek security and predictability. They are horrified by the treatment of asylum-seekers but are motivated by how safe their kids' schools are and concerns about their own job security.
It is not at the left wing that the Democrats will likely prevail (if they do), but in the center. That is the lesson of 2018. Forget it at your (and our) peril.
3
Democrats can win in 2020 if they lead with economic progressivism, not social progressivism. Drawing attention to our country's PROFOUND economic injustice and the struggles of the working class is a winning approach. Social injustice in our country is real, but compared to other developed nations it is NOT profound. Social justice warfare and political correctness primarily benefits the media and certain political groups. But it seems to come at the expense of true progressive reform and the needs of most Americans.
5
Bruni couldn't be more right about the fact that Big Rock Candy Mountain free stuff at taxpayer expense is hard to sell to America's heartland. Both Coasts, no problem.
But it seems judging by the CNN audience reaction last night that it played well to those with student-debt, the largest group, no question, suffering from self-inflicted abuse that wants taxpayers to rescue them from that self-indulgent excess.
Many should have gone into a trade school directly out of high school and become electricians, welders, AI machine techs, computer techs, or even plumbers and would be making house payments each month instead of student-debt payments.
Oh, well, I suppose, they had fun "studying" whatever it is that burdens them (and for some, their parents) now.
1
Frank you are as out-of-touch as Joe "Touchy-Feely" Biden. Wake up. The worm is turning.
8
It was a frenetic debate last night with moderator Jake Tapper rushing and interrupting the candidates at record speed and giving himself lots of time to ask his long winded questions. It seemed rude and disruptive. It put everyone on the defensive and not at their best. I can't help thinking these debates are a form of cock fights for the public to watch. Getting people charged up for a fight rather than listen and learn is a disservice to us all. Where are the adults in the room? Children would do better.
7
Every other first world country thinks that the American healthcare system is a laughingstock.
None of these nations would take what American “centrists” are offering over what they already have.
All have some form of socialized medicine.
The only people who like our system , or think that only minor adjustments are needed, are rich white men like Mr Bruni whose got healthcare and doesn’t mind watching others die from lack of it.
They gnash their teeth and plead it’s impossible when the rest of the first world shows a different reality. The nightmare pushed by Bruni and the NYT ignores reality, actual reality extends beyond our sorry borders.
The fantasy is that it doesn’t. Americans pay more and with worse outcomes that include death because of Mr Bruni’s Moderate pipe dream. Guess he is on the opiates that define American “medicine “.
5
Oh Frank. From your lack of research skills, to your pouting pessimism, to your constant battering of the side you claim to be on--the Republicans don't need Fox News or Rush or Alex Jones. You're doing a great job all by your little self.
6
Ok, a second shot at the apple (cue W Tell overture)-
This is, uh, "inspired" by reading the Bruni weekly blog a couple minutes ago...
It was good the author admits that polls OF ALL VOTERS routinely show Sanders with a comfortable lead over Trump. Only he and Biden have that, and frankly, for those who just want to beat Trump, what more is there to consider?
But the author goes on to say Warren is a better debater... that is, uh...debatable. The best one line counterpunches were Bernie's last night, the one's like "I won't hold age against" or "you are no Jack Kennedy".
I wrote the damn bill...
I accept Bruni's argument that gender is involved, too. That Dem women are preferring the woman to the man.
The detail (or complexity, or wealth of targets) in the many Warren plans may come back to haunt, particularly on a stage with a man who will make up facts and figures turning the debate into 'no it isn't' 'yes it is' mush.
It is hard to land a punch on a cloud, but everyone knows where it is (the cloud). meta4ically.
Last, MSM heads, intent on shoving Sanders out of center stage, are running the line- all old ideas. Well, I was just reading Chateaubriand, Memoires d'Outre Tombe IV, around p. 598 where he argues that the principles of levelling wealth/income of 1790 France could not work. We hear many of his same points from moderates, realists still.
And that whole debate is really at least 2000 years old, so let's stop talking abut it, eh?
2
Too many Americans still cling to the idea of "Exceptionalism". Child-like, they think freedom means they can do as they please. Government? who needs it. Dignity and respect? not needed in human interactions.
This sounds like a Republican mantra. Democrats remember what goes with freedom - responsibility. Our founding fathers realized that we needed rules if our democracy was to survive. Thomas Jefferson inserted the idea that these rules might need a thoughtful change in an unforeseeable future.
"Fantasy Island"? Are we to give in to mediocracy? Are we incapable of achieving famous dictums? Roosevelt's four freedoms? a shining city on a hill? liberty and justice for all?
Please pay attention. Please help raise our poor voter participation percentage, near 50%
5
Hmm don’t other countries have these things. At least healthcare and reasonably priced college. How have we been sold that these things are impossible? We used to have reasonably priced healthcare and college not so long ago.
8
Frank, someone is on fantasy island but it's you not Senetors Sanders and Warren. It's you. The safe corporate moderate world you embrace is gone. I particularly liked your line the people don't want a: "candidate who aims to take away options when it comes to medical insurance, wrong that enough of them want a government at bitter war with all of corporate America". The rich have options on health care, the rest of us hate the insurance companies and always risk that a serious medical problem will leave us insured but bankrupt. As for corporate America, it's not just the left who remind us that after the fiscal crisis of 2008, we lost our homes and Wall Street got bailed out.
10
What was the GI Bill? A giant fantasy Island which catapulted millions into higher education and greater earnings. It worked and Warren is essentially proposing the same idea for generations of student swamped in debt because of a failed higher education system more interested in bilking students than providing cost effective education.
10
First they ignore you,
then they laugh at you, <--- we are here
then they fight you,
then you win.
--Mahatma Gandhi
8
Are any of these socialists pushing for universal free income? Cause I'm looking to retire early.
@Not 99pct, nope. But they might save social security for you.
5
Frank, you and the ostensibly educated and informed columnists do the gravest disservice to our nation and our world when you pretend (for whom, exactly?) that our $800,000,000,000 military budget and the continued acceleration of the fossil fuel industry are anything other than sheer madness and incomprehensible planetary suicide. $500 billion per year would pay for every liberal pipe dream imaginable and still give us a military stronger than our next 3 rivals combined. You know this.
You don't get to mock the deplorable science deniers and then act all cool, hip, and moderate like the lefties are crazy. Either you believe the scientists or you don't. They are ringing every alarm bell that nothing else really matters. You're smart enough to know that.
But the pundits are still praising the Emperor's new clothes I see. Sad.
5
"These two progressives are in a bold — but awfully risky — place."
Yes, Bruni, but so are we all. The Republican Party is, currently at least, the American version of the Taliban. It must be defeated.
4
Bruni is right this time...
For the far lefties whining here, he is right. What the far lefties dont understand is how bad their policies are.
Medicare for all? Really?
How would this work? Let us see:
1) Half the country has no money (and it is not all because of the big bad corporations. Fact is, many Americans do not know how to save money or function on a daily basis. We live in a very self destructive culture.)
2) The far left wants to flood the country with illegals with no money and give them free health care while the middle class is dying under their rising premiums.
Want to know who will pay for this? The dying American middle class which has been gutted by decades of Democratic/Republican globalist policies.
Want to see a civil war and revolution in this country? Elect a far left Democrat who will ask the dying middle class to pay for all their pipe dreams to reward those who have mismanaged their lives or entered the country illegally.
Want to bring this country to its knees and destroy it? Then ask the middle class to pay for illegal immigrant health care (along with American citizens who have mismanaged their lives) and watch this country descend into madness.
P.S. Most people who want Medicare for all in liberal NYC who I have met are people who do not work hard, squandered all their money and have mismanaged their lives completely and ... they want me to pay for their healthcare along with my own. Good luck with that.
1
Medicare is already one of the largest items in our federal budget, and that is for less than 20% of our population. If all are covered by it, where is the money for it going to come from? We already are in a huge federal debt situation, and that will get much worse if taxes are not raised sky high to cover that foolhardy idea. Who can afford that? Also, Elizabeth, where is the money to cover all the expenses for the masses of illegals you want to come across our southern border unimpeded? Silly, dumb political rants done to get votes, not to help America heal itself. Prepare yourself for 4 more years of hate, greed and lies due to Democrat moronity(so far). What a bunch of losers.
From the heart: thank you, NYT and
thank you, Frank Bruni.
And as Leonard Cohen might add: Hallelujah.
Remember how each time he said that
it was followed by an unvoiced 'anyway'?
1
Let us know when you find "one" person who wants to give up Medicare and pay the "Your Money or Your Life heath scam" insurance honcho's
Talk about Vulture Capitalism ! The health ins racket is at the top
6
Sure. Only a fool would choose a sane health care system over the glorious promise of a Trump second term.
1
Too bad they brought you back on a regular basis. You now fit into the Douthat, Stephens, Brooks category of....Republicans. Do you 4 get stipends from the Koch Bros., Adelson, and big Pharma?
You've just made my selection of Op-Ed reads easier, I'll devote my time to Cohen, Krugman, Collins, Greenhouse, and Goldberg. Maybe you could get a job in Bill Weld's campaign.
Don't dream of something humane for the entire population. Heaven forbid.
2
Right Jack, we are stuck in republicanism. Just can't imagine our way out. Adrift in the roiling Molasses Sea of individual freedom to sink and or rise in greedy self interested chaos.
The deck is stacked, JacK.
Thank you for reminding us that the European Union, with close to 500 million people, the world’s first economy, is Fantasy land. Same thing applies to the entire OECD (minus the US, of course).
2
Democrats are not suffering from Trump derangement syndrome, they are suffering from fear of the ghosts of McGovern, Dukakis, and Humphrey. Every time in the post-World War II period they have chosen an unabashed progressive (with the possible exception of John F. Kennedy), they have been badly beaten. They are absolutely gun-shy. This is understandable, but it makes Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders all the more striking in their insistence that Democrats must do something dramatic to dislodge Trump.
1
@William O. Beeman Kennedy was a war hawk who wanted to increase military spending to close the missile gap. There was only one progressive presidential candidate, McGovern. If you consider Humphrey to be progressive, on which issues did he take the progressive side?
Thank you for this well-written description of last night.
2
Big, bold ideas are what's needed for a country with the enormous structural problems that we have and Elizabeth Warren has them.
Fantasy Island is all this nonsense about the alleged 150 million people who love their private health care. Many of these people have private health insurance policies with super high deductibles meaning most people have only catastrophic polices that offer no real coverage unless they are very sick. My private health insurance deductible was $7000. But now I’m on Medicare and the deductible is approximately $183. And the premiums are a fraction of the cost of the private insurance.
Let’s not be timid status quo thinkers like so many of pundits and columnists. That won’t win in 2020.
Mayor Pete said it best last night: "It's time to stop worrying about what the Republicans will say. It's true that we embrace a far left agenda, they're going to say we're a bunch of crazy socialists. If we embrace a conservative agenda, you know what they're going to do? They're going to say we're a bunch of crazy socialist. Let's stand up for the right policy, go up there and defend it."
People who vote for a candidate they like and trust to try to do the right thing to improve the well being of the majority of the people.
2020 is an opportunity for needed change in this country. The last thing we need is another status quo nominee!
3
Fantasy Island, a particularly dark version of it, is where Trump and his supporters live.
The Democrats have ideas, and Warren and Sanders have some of the most well fleshed out ideas. Warren even has detailed policies for most of her ideas.
And most of these things will make life immensely better for the average American.
Those are the facts. Forget emotions, and forget visceral likes or dislikes. Any of the candidates on stage would be a vast improvement over the destructive and malicious regime we have now. If Americans vote for Trump instead of one of these intelligent, passionate people, they will condemn us all to four more miserable, unstable and disastrous years.
2
I am having difficulty understanding the rationale of the DNC allowing the handful of non-entity candidates (good in their own right, perhaps, but not going to be any sense realistic options) on the same stage with some but not all of the front runners. This is creating the real life circular firing squad where the also ran's are given the appearance of credibility and spend a couple of hours doing the Republican's job of tearing into the leaders. The Dems need to have their leaders on a stage, let the also rans have their own (until they demonstrate they really are legit) and then after one ten person (or six person) debate, have a round of primaries. They really need to get on with getting their strongest spokespersons moving forward, not having to fend of the also rans nipping their heels like a bunch of yipping Chihuahas. This format and ongoing nonsense only aids the Republicans, because the Dems are losing their opportunities to be strong voices in the vacuum created by only Trump talking on the right - and no apparent organization of thought on the Dem side.
2
I'm honestly tired of the schism in the party of exactly *how* to provide universal/ single payer healthcare. In my opinion, and polling consistently bears this out, private insurance shouldn't be 'banned' or 'made illegal'. That's an idiotic idea. When (not if) the government finally gets around to phasing in 'medicare for all', and fully funds it, private insurance will largely go the way of the dinosaurs anyway, with the exception of wealthy subscribers who will want a 'Cadillac' option, and unions who negotiate their own plans directly. An added benefit is that having universal healthcare that most of their subscribers will be flocking to, puts private insurers at a disadvantage in those negotiations.
In fact, most of the other nations that Sanders et. al. point to as examples of the system we should have, actually still have private insurance as an option in their markets.
2
It is hardly news to readers of the New York Times that nobody there wants a progressive candidate to win the nomination. The status quo is the status quo for reason, at all.
2
I'm scared. I'm scared because I live in Ohio and can tell you that the voters needed to carry the Democrats to victory won't be won by a Sanders/Warren nominee.
And I'm tired of being lied to. As it exists today, Medicare already includes Advantage Plans. Those Plans are not private insurance. They are a Medicare option that is administered by private companies. None of the progressive candidates ever told us that their "Medicare For All" plan excluded Advantage Plans but now they want to hoodwink us by saying we can have our private insurance through an Advantage Plan? They are either ignorant or lying.
3
All the talk about progressive agendas and empty suits is nice for Dems, but the bottomline is beating Trump. The divide in the Dems alone will give him another term. Sanders is a broken record and Warren already danced to Trumps baiting. Remember Pocahontas and how she doesn’t really have Native American bloodlines. She caved to his insults and he will have a field day with her if she is the candidate. Neither of these two has a chance if they are the choice. Get someone who can Beat Trump first, then set or reset the agenda Oh yeah, take back the senate too if you really want to accomplish anything.
Get the Democratic Party back together. 20 candidates is a joke and not a very good one. If that can’t or doesn’t happen just pass out the MAGA hats and hold on for another 4 years of eroding what it means to be an American. In other words fellow Democrats, get real get focused get elected
1
Nothing is free. Trying to hide the actual costs of health care behind a wall of red tape is rank idiocy. Any rationally funded public health care plan MUST make its costs visible to the public. This means funding it with a value-added tax on commerce, augmented with additional taxes on items and/or services that are prone to produce injuries or chronic illness. People have to get realistic about what can or can not be done for everyone.
1
I know! Let's nominate a great moderate like Hillary Clinton to face Donald Trump in 2020! That conventional wisdom worked great last time. Please Mr. Bruni talk to some people outside of Manhattan and Beltweay cocktail parties. There are not enough apparatchicks in America to elect a Wall Street Democrat when they can go all the way with Donald Trump.
1
The people wanted change with Obama. They wanted change with Trump. Obama was stopped by the Republicans. Trump? Well we know what the voter got there. Now I think people are ready for real change. Warren will give it. She is so good at explaining policy that people will understand what Medicare for all will look like. And they will love it. Just as those who live in a functioning country love their health care.
Now is the time for change, real change and Warren will bring it.
1
They are on fantasy island. Not that the ideas don't sound great, but there is no way to pay for them, no matter how high you raise taxes on EVERYONE. In Bernie's perfect world of Denmark the average tax rate is 55.8%, plus 8% in social security for a total of 64%. The US already has $22T in Federal debt. Bernie's Medicare for All would cost another $3.3-$4T a year. Right now the Pentagon 'can't find' $1T from budgets that run about $750B a year. So, we lost $1T on $750B, how much will we lose on $4T? Medicare underpays, and is going broke in all it' parts. The difference in getting a Dem elected president vs. DJT is small. HRC lost by 70K votes in 3 states. If the Dems unite, which is to say no Green Party Nader, Stein, Johnson, or write-ins that's easily another million to 3 million votes which at least 70K are in the Upper Midwest, which are essential to winning. Win the Presidency then start working on campaign finance reform - that's essential to a representative democracy. As it is now, Sanders has only passed 3 bills during his 20+ tenure. He may have written the bill, but he sure did not get it passed. And none of his ideas will win over at least some Republicans without whom nothing will change. Like it or not, and there's lots to dislike about the current system's dysfunction, you have to work with what you can afford, not what you can't.
1
The reality of these progressive ideas is that they have essentially no chance of fruition, even if the democrats keep the house and gain the senate. Look no further than the compromises made in the Affordable Care Act which was enacted under a democratically controlled house and senate.
3
Patently obvious that half of these candidate are nothing more than mercenaries for the healthcare industry. Their only purpose is to undermine the Medicare For All agenda and were repeatedly using scare tactics.
This is the reason why we have so many candidates.
They were acting like a tag team to present every possible reason why it cannot be accomplished, and were facilitated by the participation of the CNN panelists.
5
Consider Delaney’s response to the question on climate change. He proposed carbon fee and dividend, something that economists love, voters rejected even in blue Washington State, and Republican legislators fled Oregon when facing a vote on similar policy. And mechanical CO2 extraction, technology that won’t possibly be scaled before we’re cooked. Effective and achievable policy falls closer to the Green New Deal than those two options, and he’s the pragmatic one?
3
Count me in as a Dem that's disappointed in how far left Warren has drifted (Bernie's no surprise). No doubt heath care still needs work... but their approach of throwing out the existing system in one fell swoop for Medicare for all seems extreme and fraught with danger. Complex systems require incremental change... change part of it... see how it performs and then take lessons learned and move forward some more. A good place to start would be to allow 55+ year olds to buy into the Medicare system with higher premiums on a sliding scale as they get closer to 65. That would take the pressure off of Obama Care.
4
The truth is, Mr. Bruni, that as regards climate change at least, no one at all, including the Squad and other supporters of the Green New Deal is proposing anything like enough action. People in a few decades are going to look back on this time in the sort of way that people of later times looked back on politicians and voters of the 1930s. Unfortunately, because most voters and most politicians are scientifically illiterate, it's especially easy to underestimate how bad things will become. So far, the reality is always turning out to be considerably worse than the projections. Sometimes being a "moderate" isn't viable. Of course, the U.S. can't solve climate change itself. China and India have to become realistic, and when will that happen? But we need to do what we can.
2
60% of the country has private health insurance. Their strategy is to tell 60% of voters that they have to switch from private insurance to government health insurance?
That's the winning strategy?
3
@Not 99pct - I'm sorry, you're buying into the republican framing. That's not at all what the reality is.
Whatever Medicare for all doesn't cover, you can bet private insurance companies will offer coverage for. If you, as a citizen covered under Medicare for all wish to waste your money on cosmetic surgery coverage that will be over-priced and only partially cover certain specific services, go right ahead.
I'm betting you wouldn't.
1
@ReciprocalHokie I think you need to read up more on what these candidates are advocating.
Warren wants to eliminate private health insurers and put everyone on universal government healthcare.
@Not 99pct I have private health insurance and I would say thank god for s ome systemazation of this disgusting pr ocess for a government program..Please give me some stability with a government program..I have excellent private health insurance through my employer, but I just retired!! and I have pretty bad pre-existing conditions..I had to fi ght every dollar of coverage with my last surger, receiving many many bills that after I fought them were reduced to zero (how incomprehensible is that, yet how co mmon..)..Private health care is like sleeping with a snake..You never k now when or why it will bite you, but bite you it will. Health care is an unpredictable fact of life and we need to get profitt out of this equation - it is pretty simple logic..Not hard to understand..I don't have a choice when I am sick, and if the for-profits are out there preying on me, it is weighted against me, and the money goes to the administration, not to health..Duh.
3
it appears that the author is writing from a comfortable place - that which most Americans are not feeling and haven't for a while. My view as an independent voter, and small business owner here in California sees our state of affairs much more dire than any "mole" the republican establishment have squeezed into last nights debate - or even the moderate democrats. the u.s. and our world are in crisis - and the more we try so warm and fuzzy talk to mega corporations, the worse the "actual economy" gets. so, i found that Warren and Sanders both showed the most clear eyed vision of where we are at and what's at stake - and also the right solutions. Its no surprise that we will see such tone deaf opinions coming from every publication from here to 2020 as the last gasps of tired failed republican-esque writers find work in this tough economy - i wish you well in the future as you write about the death of the Republican party and how wrong you were. Meanwhile, i will look for more realistic opinions to read from people able to see our current challenges for what they truly are and are brave enough to spell it out in truth.
4
Everything that Warren and Sanders said about healthcare, the health insurance industry, the economic system, and more was completely accurate.
But their are two problems. First, the American electorate is inherently cautious and xenophobic in this sense: they will not accept that America can learn from the experience of other countries on anything, especially health care. And an awful lot of white voters are racists. Second, the election is rigged against the Democrats: the electoral college gerrymandering, voter suppression, Fox news, and Moscow Mitch
So how can the Democrats win and implement good policy: nominate a candidate who seems who runs as a centrist, even a little conservative. After he or she wins, the centrist immediately implements the sensible progressive policies of Warren and Sanders.
Several write-in commentators praised FDR but not mention his tactics. FDR ran a conservative campaign in 1932, promising a balanced budget, and so on. Once he got into office, he launched the programs that saved the country including the very rich. FDR was one of the most devious presidents in history, which is a fancy word for saying that he lied a lot. But he did it to save the country, and because of the nature of the electorate.
Let us not forget that Obama did not run with any promise to do the ACA. Once in office, with help of Nancy Pelosi and some Democratic House members who sacrificed their seats in order to vote for the ACA, he brought in the ACA.
1
Mr. Bruni is stuck on recycling a predictable narrative that ignores the connection between strong, bold, yes perhaps even visionary policies (although universal health care has been part of the American Dream since the New Deal and the U.S. lags behind other countries) and the "bread and butter" concerns of everyday people, including those in "battleground" states.
I urge Mr. Bruni to look behind the "horse race" of candidates and the "labels" of policies and explore the substance of issues like Medicare for All, which addresses the costs, quality, and accessibility of health care.
"Fantasy Island" is where Democrats believe they need to calibrate their policies based on their fear of losing, instead of having the courage of their convictions and making their case to we the people, who are looking for a candidate with bold and practical policies that will make a difference.
4
I think Warren and Buttigieg are right that this election will favor the bold: Americans want passion, patriotism and good ideas.
But the message about universal health care is getting muddled: if Elizabeth Warren believes in the marketplace, that's how they should pitch it: Democrats want a national health plan, but we won't force anyone to leave their private insurance, and will instead rely on the market to win them over.
Meanwhile, I'm waiting to see how Kamala Harris does tonight -- I think she's the brightest star in the presidential race, and would love to see her outshine the sad, shabby charlatan that the Republicans have pinned all their hopes on.
It takes a lot of nerve to believe that tax payer dollars should be used to benefit the actual taxpayers - and not the corporate welfare state - the military industrial complex and the 1%. The sheer nerve of these people. The trough of tax payer dollars is for feeding the connected.
8
If the issue is framed as an insurance problem then Medicare for all has a problem taking away insurance choice. But if it’s framed as a health issue-meaning all ur medical care is paid for-then it’s a winner. Who won’t choose to abandon the uncertainty of partial payment from an insurance company. Who will choose to continue paying premiums for deductible insurance and fight for payment. Medicare works and is recommended by every senior citizen. Isn't that enough of a recommendation? The government runs social security. It works. Corporations steal pensions and go out of business leaving retirees abandoned. Elderly parents on Medicaid have their cars paid by the government. Veterans get care from government run hospitals. And with a 2% wealth tax so many needed and necessary programs to help people will be available including Medicare For All.
3
Thank you, Frank. I'm with you. I feel like I'm living on my OWN fantasy island, wishing my fellow Dems would come to their senses and NOMINATE SOMEONE WHO CAN BEAT DONALD TRUMP!!!! I want progress; I demand health care for all; I want a quality education for all stating in PreK and extending as far as one can go; I've adored Elizabeth Warren passion, fire and intelligence since I first saw her on Jon Stewart's show. But we don't have a chance of even getting close to any of those things if the current President is re-elected. And if we nominate a Democratic candidate who hews to far to the left, we will do just that. YES, progress is needed, but the country will continue to move further toward an oligarchy unless we nominate a candidate who can beat Trump. And, frankly, Elizabeth Warren can't, and certainly Bernie Sanders can't. We need to accept the slow roll of progress, and nominate a candidate who will pick up the folks in the middle. The folks that, as Tim Ryan said, 'take a shower at the end of the day" and want to keep their Union healthcare plan.
2
@btcpdx: Current US politics is strictly bipolar, and riddled with dyslexia. In the real world, politics is a Hilbert Space, with a theoretically unlimited set of dimensions in the mind of each politically-inclined person.
The US needs someone to explain the 21st Century to the public.
1
Frank Bruno where have you gone? You rail at problems of our current state of affairs, and now you take up the republican dog whistle “free stuff” disingenuous statements. Help educate folks on each issue.
Basic gov provided Healthcare for all is done in many countries at a lower cost than here. - and private can offer additional concierge policies. It’s not incompatible. And remind folks that the additional paycheck health cost deducted from their wages is a TAX now. And a healthy population is more productive. And health care costs less if you deal with problems before they get bad. And when people without healthcare go to the hospital and can’t pay, the rest of us already foot the bill - at its most expensive point.
They are not talking about free Harvard tuition for all. Free state college tuition for all would be less that what we already subsidize. See the HBR article.
Frank you have lost me.
9
@APM from PDX
Spot on. Bruni has lost me. I wonder which insurance exec he has drinks with after work ...
2
Colorado has a Senate seat election in 2020. Why isn't Hickenlooper running for it, instead of wasting his (and our) time running for President, an office he can't possibly be the nominee for?
Ditto O'Rourke in Texas in 2020. Didn't he just spend debate time last night telling us how to run a winning Texas campaign? (and ditto the Hickenlooper comment above)
Ditto Bullock in Montana. Same comment as for Hickenlooper.
18
Why is proposing what the rest of the civilized world does for its citizens a fantasy in this country?
10
@Walter Bruckner
Because people in the US do not want to pay increased personal income taxes to pay for those benefits?
Because the real fantasy is that Bernie's upper 1% and Elizabeth's wealth tax will ever be passed into law?
No trying to be offensive or contrary. It's just that some of those other countries have no problem with being viewed as socialist, and paying taxes to get government provided benefits and services, but too many people in the US view even social security as a socialist.
@Walter Bruckner: The US is "under God". No human being is responsible for anything.
1
@Walter Bruckner: Because most of us don't want to be taxed into oblivion to give free stuff to those who have not earned it on their own merits. It's called the American way, in case you didn't know.
Sanders and Warren will continue to tilt at windmills with the usual results. As one of the majority of Americans of all stripes who would prefer to see a president other than Trump in the White House, let's hope the Democrats nominate a more practical and broadly acceptable candidate than either of them.
4
@Al S, I'm thinking Biden/Warren for the win. Don't mistake Harris, who seems Bruno's favorite, for a progressive, btw. Minorities prefer Biden to her, and with perfect cause. Check out the things she did in California as a DA and AG for some shocks. Makes the absolute falsity of her knife job on Biden crystal clear.
2
Re Warren: "if she winds up with the nomination, it will be after planting herself as firmly as possible on an island of purity." The way she is funding her campaign--without accepting corporate money or even holding closed door, large dollar fundraisers--is what gives her the freedom to plant herself on that island. We should be so lucky to elect a POTUS not beholden to corporate or plutocrat money. She could really move us in a progressive direction.
7
First: we do not have a health care "system." what we have is a conglomeration of different ways of getting, or not getting, health care - private insurance, medicare , medicaid, VA, Indian Health Service. And about 10% of the people get nothing. There is nothing "systematic" about it. And the bureaucracy and costs are absurd. Many other civilized countries have done the experiments in many different ways and ALL are have better health outcomes than the US. So, ours is middling, theirs are better. What is the argument against changing ours to an actual "System?" That it is scary to do so? I guess Americans have become wimps.
Second, Border crossing is an age-old issue ,and will NEVER go away. We need immigrants -they are the hardest working people in the country. Because the Repubs have cause this "crisis" by refusing to consider rational immigration laws that would INCREASE immigration to provide new and younger workers. Understanding that it is a civil offense, not a criminal offense is just common sense. They are not criminals. We need them. Lets get them in.
Third, advanced education past high school is highly beneficial to society. It could be anything from technical, "vocational," college, whatever. The key is the longer you educate people the better they do financially. And the better people do, the better the country does. Making it as cheap as possible is pretty much a no-brainer.
7
I don’t think Congressional Republicans are even noble enough to put party above country. In reality they put their own publicly funded jobs over both party and country.
4
@Oliver You really think open borders is good for the country? Dems want the Latin vote.
@Not 99pct. Can’t find any Democratic candidate who is calling for open borders. Let’s talk after any current Republican legislator finds the nerve to question ANY aspect of the indecent conduct that permeates the White House.
I wish wish wish Warren had sought to distance herself from Sanders whose ideas have always been ridiculously impractical. Have any credible economists endorsed Sanders' present set of plans which are no different than the plans he has been pushing for decades and were not endorsed by a single credible economist in 2016? Yes, Warren is sharp and stirring. And my impression of her had been that she was also pragmatic and genuinely wanted to think through how to get there from here. Yes, she knew where she ideally wanted to go but I had believed she would accept incremental steps as a way to get there. Like a public option, which would convince folks to give up their private insurance on their own. Now her collusion with Sanders is making me wonder whether I was mistaken. Surely Warren can still see what is in front of our eyes? Of the 40 seats that the Democrats picked up in the 2018 midterms, not a single one of those victorious candidates ran on the kinds of things that Sanders and Warren were tag-team wrestling with last night. Their accusations that the moderates were cowardly and pushing Republican talking points were cheap, untrue and divisive. Good lord. The Sanders economic plan is identical to what Trump promised and includes such things as Trump's self-destructive tariffs and self-destructive immolation of all of our trade agreements.
3
I think that the general public that watched the debates are attributing all of the ideas presented as a whole. It's hard to separate them except for the DINOs who are too timid to dream and plan big.
Reparations will never fly and never achieve its intentions if it somehow did. What does make sense and will to voters is community development in areas that need support. (That includes Jobs, Healthcare and Education for all). We are arguing about poor cities conditions now while we also have needy rural communities in desperate need.
The following piece of proverbial wisdom is remarkably astute:
"Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime".
That said...I am a woman and I think that all women should be paid reparations for all the unpaid slave work we have done since time immemorial to raise families and keep the home fires burning.
4
Frank Bruni is surely sorry that he can't support Hillary Clinton this time around. Everything he says make her his ideal candidate. Talk about "fantasy island".
The aversion to any "awfully risky place" is what infuriates progressives and defines the Democrats who, despite Blondie, are pretty comfortable with things as they are. And they will keep things as they are until it's too late.
6
I still vividly remember when we first immigrated to Chicago from USSR, driving on a highway and passing by black ghetto area, we were advised to close all window and lock the car.
It was my biggest shock, and in a way small part of my new acquired education about the country I brought my children to grow up.
So, not to talk about reparation in my view would be a dereliction of duty from any democratic candidate.
3
From Politico, on Bernie’s adopted state:
“It is not the right time for Vermont” to pass a single-payer system, (Gov.) Shumlin acknowledged in a public statement ending his signature initiative. He concluded the 11.5 percent payroll assessments on businesses and sliding premiums up to 9.5 percent of individuals’ income “might hurt our economy.”
I’m a Canadian (a ‘frost-back’, as Trump might say) so not overly familiar with US politics but I’m guessing if single-payer won’t fly in Vermont it’ll be a tough sell in Alabama.
6
Good luck dismantling Blue Cross, United Healthcare, Kaiser, and so on. Come on, Elizabeth. The single payer 'option' is the only show in town. You're talking about putting hundreds of thousands if not millions of employees out on the street. Believe it or not, these people are good people. Drop the purity, please!
4
@Tim Bachmann
So we have to put up with the insurance industry's dysfunction to guarantee employment? Are these people incapable of finding other work?
3
@Tim Bachmann, how about they get work in health care and needed infrastructure improvements? We could afford it when we get the immense savings that other nations enjoy when the burden of investors and CEOs and a huge apparatus for siphoning money away from health care is lifted.
4
@RAC Love it. Of course not. The Medicare option would make the private sector more competitive and efficient. It would have a tax financed 800 pound monster competitor to compete with. Gradually, the winner would win out - making best for the insureds. Competition does force innovation. So, probably the private sector goes away, but not overnight. Evolution. Not conflagration.
Lots of talk about who would be the best at debating Trump.
But, also, increasing chatter that Trump will refuse to debate anyone. And, if that's true, there will be no VP debate either.
Maybe that's just craziness.
But, as voters, we should be prepared for that. And, stop ranking the Dem candidates on their potential to beat Trump in a TV debate.
1
Dear Frank Bruni,
Health care costs are the same no mater which system pays for it EXCEPT removing profits will reduce the cost! I'm so sick of reading that this will cost more - adding more people will likely use up some of the money spent on profits now but not more.
WARREN is exactly right and so is SANDERS.
Anyone that does not like the tRump will vote for the other side so this is our chance in a life time to get bold and stop creating fear.
Anything not tRump will likely work unless we are already doomed with so many MAGA BRAIN types and in that case what you wrote will not mater.
5
@stonezen What? If healthcare is free, meaning less and less pay premiums, costs will go up to the taxpayer. Free healthcare for anyone in the US regardless of citizenship status? You are saying costs won't go up? You must be dreaming.
@HONEST ABE, don't kid yourself. Here, and in many places, VA care is a lot better and faster and less expensive by far. Veterans have been fighting the efforts to force them on the private chopping block for quite some time.
2
Robert Kennedy's famous quote should come to mind as a counter to Mr Bruni's opinion. "Some men see things as they are, and ask why. I dream of things that never were, and ask why not."
7
They are going down to defeat, and they are going down based on their own wild promises of free stuff paid for by the evil rich and corporations. You can tax the top 10% at 100% of income and you will never come close to paying the tab for all the stuff that Warren and Sanders want to give away to buy the votes they need to be president.
7
@paul, you clearly have no idea of the wealth at the top--over half the NATION'S wealth.
3
While you make relevant points, I worry that your mission drift has gone to far in criticizing progressives. We still remember Bobby Kennedy's famous words, 'Some men see things as they are and ask why?, I dream things that never were, and ask 'why not?'
~ go Liz!
3
Are you seriously saying that warren and sanders are too extremist when trump is actually president?
6
Poor Warren, she's now lumped right in with Sanders, attached at the hip per her "I'm with Bernie" on Medicare for All.
And, instead of debating the issue, she suggested that those who oppose Socialised medicine are 'spineless,' cowards that are focused on what we can't do, as opposed to cheering on her fantasy island platform of Free Everything for Everybody.
I'm spineless? And focusing on Reality makes me unqualified for choosing the President?
She's painted herself into the wrong corner, making it far easier for a moderate to beat her today, than yesterday.
3
Fantasy island is where people still believe we can be at net-zero carbon emissions by 2040 without a bold/risky plan
6
Based on Warren and Sanders' proposals, I think the next campaign give-away will be free ponies to everyone!
3
The reason people like Sanders and Warren appear radical is because so many Americans are too lazy, ignorant or ill-educated to research how their health policies would benefit everyone. And in the absence of facts, fear takes over. Republicans have done a superb job of convincing my gullible fellow citizens that Bernie and Liz want to 1) take away their current private insurance (regardless of how lousy and expensive it may be), and 2) make the middle class pay far more in taxes (even though those taxes would likely be more than offset by the end of high private insurance premiums). On top of that, no Democrat has done a good job of pointing out that our current Medicare system, with all its flaws, is still light years more efficient than private insurers.
Even Jake Tapper’s question last night on Medicare for all contained the false GOP narrative that out-of-pocket expenses would automatically be much higher.
4
A health care system that provides access to all citizens isn't a fantasy it is implemented in all of the other developed nations, the Fantasy Island here is Mr. Bruni's deep belief in American Exceptionalism--so exceptional that policies which work other places can't possibly work here.
Decriminalization of illegal border crossing? I happen to love The Sound of Music. The hills are alive Frank or do they just have eyes?
Elimination of college debt? Well since the State University system was established to provide affordable education to residents of the states, that would be called adhering to their mission statement Frank. Or, are you a supporter of
Trump University, Betsy let-them-pay DeVos, and the continual destruction of our educational system via predatory practices?
Frank, let us hope that when Herve calls out "the plane, the plane" people will be smart enough to figure out that the plane has been circling the Fantasy Island of our refusal to act while the world wonders about the clouds of delusion encircling our about to erupt Krakatoa.
3
As someone with the same affliction as he disclosed , I was puzzled by the title of this piece . I was captivated by Frank Bruni’s last op ed in which he wrote from a small Greek island about his participation in a clinical trial to improve his chances to stabilize his eyesight. For personal reasons, I hope it works. “Hope is the little thing with feathers that perches in the soul.” Fantasy Island was alluded to by some of the more skeptical commenters.
I couldn’t disagree more with his take on the second debate. I saw it as two wise and skillful progressives with track records establishing their credibility against some visionless outliers trying to sell us the status quo.
How is that supposed to inspire voters? “Vote for me, I won’t make things better, but I promise not to make them worse.”
4
Warren is delivering the swing voters (and 2020) to Trump and GOP by stating that questioning her and Sanders' fantasy ideas is to follow the GOP's talking point. No, she is wrong! This is the talking point of a lot of swing voters who will decide 2020, and this is the ONLY point that Trump and GOP can potentially attack the democrats in 2020.
Warren is delivering 2020 to Trump and GOP, and she is smart enough to know it. She is just gambling. Most of us do not gamble, certainly not with another 4 years of our lives.
Universal healthcare is not a “socialist” conspiracy. It is a “human right”. Outside of the USA, all other “First World” countries (i.e., European nations, Canada, Australia, Japan, Taiwan) have universal care. All of these countries pay far less for their citizens healthcare than what Americans must pay for the max profit insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, tort lawyers, HMO’s and PPO’s. That profit is why these industries pay our politicians so many bribes to keep us away from universal care.
Facts:
• The U.S., at $7,960, has the highest total expenditure on health care per capita in the world.
• The U.S. expenditure is $2,500 more than most civilized countries with national healthcare systems, including Norway ($5,352), Switzerland ($5,344), Netherlands ($4,914), Luxembourg ($4,808), Canada ($4,478), Denmark ($4,348), Austria ($4,298), Germany ($4,218) and France ($3,978).
• In the U.S., healthcare expenditure as a percent of GDP is 17.4%. This compares to expenditures per capita in the other nine listed countries of 11.8% and less.
• The U.S. spends by far the highest amount on pharmaceuticals and other medical nondurables of the nations cited. These industries pay GOP politicians vast sums to keep their excessive profits coming.
• In spite of this, the U.S. life expectancy, at 78.2 years, & lags behind all the other countries studied.
Google “Healthcare costs by country”. We Americans are being played for suckers.
9
Fantasy, or rather hoping for radical changes to a failing system is the only chance for America to save itself.
Too many people in the media support the corporate choke hold on our moribund democracy.
Corporate power is the cause of our collapsing world, not the solution.
3
I don't know who is in charge of Democrat strategy but whomever it is needs to be sacked.
Here are a few salient points that the party ought to consider if they want to unseat Trump...
A country with unlimited immigration and a welfare state will bankrupt itself.
We can have either sustainable and responsible environmental policies or we can bring millions of people up to a "western" standard of living, but not both.
Economic issues will trump (pun intended) identity politics every time. The Democrats under Bill Clinton sold the working class of this country up the river under the guise of "globalism" so their rich donors could further enrich themselves and then have the gall to insult them ("deplorables"? really?). It's not racism that got the working class to vote for a two-bit con artist like Trump, it's that people don't like being insulted and having their livelihoods and downtowns eviscerated.
4
Frank, thanks. You are right about Warren and Bernie's fantasy.
But my fear is that the Democratic party, is not focused at all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frankly, Frank, I think Democrats need to focus on democracy.
Trump, if re-elected, will destroy democracy for the USA, period.
Frank, please consider the DEMOCRACY song of Leonard Cohen.
Cohen prophetically sang, "Democracy is coming to the USA."
Why can't Democrats realize the threat of Trump to democracy?
Why can't the NY Times discuss the song and the threat, now?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Democracy is coming to the USA" with a new wave,
if we can defeat Trump and the RIGHT in 2020!
The confusion caused by the “losing your insurance” charge is a tempest in a teapot. Employers are contractually bound to provide a certain level of coverage by union contract. The employer will be required to buy private supplementary insurance for all features not covered by Medicare for All.
I can only conclude that those throwing out this complaint are witting or unwitting pawns of the health insurance industry or Vladimir Putin.
3
Here is a pundit who thinks he is progressive when it comes to LGBTQ issues and will not hear of anything that does not treat all the five letters equally as everybody else.
So far so good.
When it comes to Medicare for all, or universal healthcare which equalize people with respect to a basic human right, he shows his true colors: a conservative failed food critic.
Why is it hard to understand that what Bernie and Liz Warren are proposing is as realistic as expecting the sun rise over the equator every morning?
We have a president and his disgusting treasury secretary cutting taxes of the wealthy by over a trillion dollars by a couple of strokes of their pens and calling Medicare for All a fantasy island?
Here is a man who wrote an article last week about the miracle cure, mastic of Chios and talks about fantasy islands!
5
"Take away options"? Really? Are you kidding? With options like copays, deductibles, precertification, no coverage of out of network and preexisting conditions, and extortionate drug prices, I say "come and get them."
3
All of the candidates are living on Fantasy Island, so is the entire country which is why the current president is a TV celebrity. He is an honest fraud, rather than the policy making variety that has fallen flat over and over.
The policies are revealed as destructive and self-contradictory because their foundation is industrialized waste and the squander of irreplaceable resources including credit. What drives the so-called policies is fashion ... what drives the makers is pandering.
Meanwhile, our nation-threatening problems gather out of sight like a pack of starved hyenas and we pretend they are not coming for us.
Good grief!
I’d like to see them working together to put forward an electable candidate, rather than beating each other over the head.
Selecting Warren or Sanders will guarantee re-election of Trump.
1
You are so wrong. The same garbage was said about Social Security and Medicare. They are now the two most popular programs. Republicans don't need to say anything. Just let bruni and the "can't do" democrats spout their points. I have Medicare prescription coverage through a private insurance company. A relatively new drug was just prescribed for me. My monthly copay is $1,800. Medicare for All would fix that.
3
Hi Frank! Think about this: when people do not have adequate health care available they get sick and die. America has decided that this is OK. All other advanced countries have another view. Try to squint your eyes and imagine being sick and not being able to afford treatment and laying in your bed waiting for the end when other people in other countries are cured and leaving the hospital. Supporting a policy which allows certain people to simply die is hard for me to understand, particularly in the "richest" country in the world.
3
You are so right... and after reading the mostly angry comments to your opinion, I’m convinced its Trump in 2020.
2
Pete is the cute smart gay boy scout, the reserved 50's dreamboat. Gay men everywhere must be thrilled. Many of us women were thrilled to see a smart woman running. We unabashedly said so.
2
Perhaps we could make better decisions if, instead of pejorative labels like "Fantasy Island", the NY Times columnists used their columns to educate us about the details of candidates positions and why the candidate argues that it is the best solution to the challenges facing the country.
3
Congrat Mr. Trump - you will be our next President again. CNN guys killed dems. It was so boring to watch. It is fantasy Island for CNN and their moderators. They now should have a meeting among themselves and start taking a side. Either Dems or GOP. Being neutral days are history. There is no middle in America anymore. So, FOX News is the winner.
1
Perhaps it is true that our country is so insane that we will never vote for a presidential candidate who wants to give us a single payer health care system.
I am, however, incensed at how writers in the media keep referring to single payer systems as fantasies. That just makes us sound ignorant and ridiculous. Every other decent country in the world has some version of a single payer system, even countries with far less resources than we do. It’s not a fantasy. It’s not even that hard to do. We’re just too foolish and brainwashed to implement it here. Apparently we would rather pay more for less.
The real fantasy is that we can continue having for profit healthcare insurance companies as middlemen, providing nothing yet controlling everything, and have reasonably priced healthcare for all of our citizens. It doesn’t work and it never will.
It is our country that is marooned on Fantasy Island in thinking that we can keep this current for profit “health care” system and get good results.
2
Excellent column, on target. The Dems seem to have a death wish: Of course Trump is loathsome and needs to go, but advocating utopia won't get the job done. Doesn't anyone remember the lofty dreams of McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, even Adlai Stevenson?
All were excellent, well meaning men who promised to "fight for what's right". You know how well that turned out.
2
Lots and lots of wonkiness.
@clarity007, it's almost like they think the President should be smart. And know a lot. There's a crazy new idea, isn't it?
2
Wrong, the media and the oligarchs want you to believe this but these two are just a little left of center the rest are in republican territory.
4