The column in which the 'Always Republican' columnist starts to lay the groundwork to justify his vote for Trump in the fall. So completely predictable.
147
Beating Trump should be the priority. No one should be overly concerned about what a Bernie or a Warren presidency might, sorta, maybe look like.
This Henny-Penny-ism is absolutely ridiculous, and Bret and some other dispirited, now lukewarm Repubs like him should know better. Should know that no matter what Dem wins, truly fast breaking, extreme left turns will not be how that oresidency manifests!
Why? Too many obstacles in the road, namely the Repub controlled Senate. Plus,the Dem party itself, and especially in the House...the place the legislation gets made.
After Trump, one term of him, the nation will not be eager for huge swings, and as such Sanders or Warren will not be running up any hills with a huge following. But they will be preoccupied by fixing all things Trump left out in the rain to rust, allowed to wither, or purposely put in charge a bunch of Demolition men and a few women.
What will not happen, is the Dem party will not guzzle down the sycophancy potion and run towards either Sanders or Warren - like the Repubs have with Trump. There are no counterparts in the Dems to the Repub's, Jordan, Nunes, Graham, McConnell, Cruz, McCarthy, et al. At best there's an AOC, and she's not a threat!
Bret, former Repubs (who just want the GOP Clubhouse back) reflexively denigrate Dem candidates. They are just confused and believe that a Dem POTUS, staff and Cabinet, will be as reckless as a Trump POTUS, et al.
Like bad dogs you need a swat on the nose. "No!"
49
"a right-wing backlash that would have all of the fear and rage of the left’s Resistance — but none of its restraint." Thank you for an actual laugh-out-loud moment Bret. The "restraint" of The Resistance. Too funny.
25
"The truth of Trumpism is that it’s a morally corrosive and corrupting force, not a politically or economically catastrophic one." Are you kidding me?
60
Bret’s columns have gotten so predictable that I just go straight to the comments section for the joy of reading his critics. Brings a little sunshine to my day!
88
The "we don't want America to progress and have a social democracy people" are at it again! A few days ago, it was the NYT editorial board, then it was Paul Krugman and now Bret Stephens. It's a replay of 2016! This country needs to evolve. Enough of the dark ages! We need subsidized pre-school, affordable healthcare and education if we want this country to have any chance at competing in the future. What makes so many Americans uber regressive, I will never know! Is it that Republican propaganda has been as effective as Nazi propaganda was in the 30s in Germany? I am beginning to believe that is the case!
54
It’s gonna be Trump 2020. Remember the mellifluous Cajun call of James Carville Jr., “It’s the economy, stupid.”
Nothing! Nothing! Nothing else matters!
18
Yes. Let’s ask the children in cages, the Muslims banned from travel, the Nazis marching at Charlottesville, Marie Yovanovitch, the dead in El Paso, or a 1000 other examples, “Are things really different now than when Obama was President?” I think that I know the answer. Once again, what could be worse than a fascist with an enemies list?
52
I'll take reckless of recklessly criminal.
If the Republicans refuse to allow a proper and fair investigation of Trump's criminal conduct, the American people will make them pay. And if they believe that new damning evidence will not eventually surface, they are as incompetent and wrong as they currently appear to be
Donald Trump repeatedly claimed that he did not know Lev Parnas, and yet there he is on tape ordering the "take out" of the Ukrainian Ambassador, Maria Yovanovitch. right after hearing from Giuliani's admitted bag man and while sitting next to him at the same table.
21
"Not so fast" ...faster please.
22
Dear Mr. Stephens — This is not only wrong-headed for reasons too many to enumerate, but I believe truly dangerous. For his environmental rollbacks alone Trump should be drummed out of office. Dear readers — the corporate knives are out for those candidates with progressive policies that would require billionaires and corporations to pay their fair share. DO NOT BE CONNED! NYT — I get it that this is opinion, but I am shocked that this newspaper would print such reckless utter nonsense.
40
Brett Stevens is a Republican. "Liberal Republican" is just as real as a unicorn. Why should any American trust his advice to the Democratic Party?
43
save this column for to model a new one in 4 years from now to plead with Rs not to nominate ivanka against bernie. Adbusters won the late 90s! if you don't know now you know
7
such a straw man argument it makes me think Bret Stephens is auditioning for Fox News.
33
Sorry, I'm sticking to my guns on this one - absolutely ANYONE (or anything even) but this sickening excuse for a human being and president.
43
Readers should take Mr. Stephens' well-meaning advice with considerable quantities of salt.
Let's consider the notion that the platforms of either Mr. Sanders or Ms. Warren will be adopted wholesale on the day that they take office - or in their first term - or in their second term. The truth is, everything on their agendas will be subject to the politics of legislative compromise.
Think about the big ticket items Mr. Clinton brought with him to the White House - and Mr. Obama as well. Both of these presidents were relatively centralist, certainly I comparison with Mr. Sanders and Ms. Warren, and yet they ran into much resistance as they tried to shift things (a bit) to the left.
So that's a 50 pound block of salt right there: Neither Bernie or Elizabeth will have the powers of an Omnipotent Ruler - something I think they're acutely aware of, unlike the person currently installed at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Then there's all the salt in our warming oceans. Mr. Stephens once again demonstrates that he doesn't think climate change needs to be anywhere near the top of our agenda. I simply cannot share Mr. Stephens' faith that, with a hurricane bearing down on us, little imperceptible course corrections will take us safely to port.
Mr. Sanders and Ms. Warren have the potential to be conversation-changers and paradigm shifters.
Mr. Stephens stakes out a position as an apologist for the status quo when we desperately need change.
557
@rjk Your's is the best comment about the reality of the next election.
48
Bret, you must be joking!
16
"Has he significantly suppressed the press? Again, no." Um, no. As proof, check out henchman Pompeo's treatment of the most neutral and objective news outlet, NPR, the other day. Suppression as aggression revealed.
24
Bret Stephens fails to mention the dire need to break the Trump - Putin coalition.
16
After reading this article my thoughts : "Yep, Trump is going to be your president again"
11
Stephens under estimates the harm that Trump could yet do and grossly over states any "harm" that any Democrat can do. Trump clearly does not believe in the rule of law, especially when he interferes with his transactional aspirations. The likely failure of Impeachment would only embolden his documented criminal actions and surely taking his criminality to new levels. There was a reason that the left wing Social Democratic Party of Germany supported the right wing Paul von Hindenburg in the presidential elections of 1931 - as reactionary as Hindenburg was they knew that he would uphold the legal system of the Weimar Republic and strongly suspected correctly that his opponent Adolph Hitler wouldn't. Stephens knows that a president by her or himself cannot realize large domestic changes without the support of the legislative body, and likely the Supreme Court. Roosevelt wasn't able the them radical New Deal by fiat, nor could a Sanders or Warren. Trump beside operating as an unconstrained felon can also do real harm but gutting environmental protections when the planet might be in a death spiral. I would say to Stephens what the journalist said to the scientist at the end of the Godzilla film who was concerned that the weapon that could destroy the monster could cause other damage. Brett, you have your fears that could be come reality, but you have Trump which is reality.
17
I disagree , you most be a Trump supporter, Trump is using the presidency to make himself rich, his using immigration to make America white again, his insulting and bullies the allies, press anyone who against him, middle class and poor are not any better with him, I pay more taxes with him and my tax dollars are not being used correctly, corruption is his way of leading, he plays people so obvious and they are so blind. Yes ANY democrat running right now would be better. We need to clean the swamp he has created.
16
"Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama.
The truth of Trumpism is that it’s a morally corrosive and corrupting force, not a politically or economically catastrophic one. "
Sounds like a slippery, cowardly excuse.
Well,
" First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me." - Martin Niemoller
Replace some of the above with environment, constitution, health and respect for a common good and we'd have a new set of "First they"s.
Corrosive, corrupting, --- truly a slow catastrophe. I don't like Bernie or Elizabeth, but something has to be done to stop Trump and the Republicans.
26
Trump has broken Pandora's Box. The Republicans, now Democratic Protectionists instead of true Republicans, have proven the party has no center and will not hold.
There is now only a dictator. Trump will be known as the man who destroyed the United States of America. The worst President by far.
Who ever is the next President, they will be emboldened just like Trump to do whatever they want knowing that their party will back them no matter how badly they act. The defense will be, "Well, Trump did it and got away with it. So will I." Get ready Republicans for your worst nightmare. A national emergency declared about climate change with all its repercussions.
6
“...for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama.” Oh, Mr. Stephens, how wrong you are. Please read every one of these comments and then get out and ask more Dems and independents, centrist and otherwise their opinion. I bet the majority would soundly disagree with this statement. Trump is a cancer on this country and I believe you know that. I'm sorry your party ever catapulted this man into the oval office and the American psyche. He has damaged us greatly—but hopefully not irreparably. Vote Blue 2020.
17
So what you're saying is that you entire public persona for the last four-plus years has been a complete sham?
Got it.
8
I am ABSOLUTELY horrified by this piece if you truly believe that
Trump is a better choice because he is the devil you know!!! He is SO MUCH WORSE than that. He is truly dismantling our democracy. Sanders and Warren while politicians are fundamentally for the people. Trump is only for himself and NO ONE else. He is a narcissist who has ravaged so many aspects of our daily lives. There may be some people like you who do not feel the sting or worse the hatred that Trump sows. But there are millions out there who suffer mightily from his policies of hatred disdain and policies that enrich only those who need no more money than he's already given them.
THIS IS AN OUTRAGE- you should be ashamed to think this is a reasonable approach. HE is much worse than the devil we know as he is only in his first term and would be unleashed as a second term president. Spare us Brett you are fundamentally a Trumpist masquerading as a reasonable person.
24
Yes, God forbid corporate and corporate media elites get called to account. Raise the minimum wage to $22? (Where it should be based on 1977's minimum wage.) My steak Dianne will have to cost more!
You have no clue about the suffering of people who work for wages that are far too low, people who are sick that will lose their houses, families that suffer from addictions that were prescribed. So many have been left behind, with no chance of rising now that the American dream has been stolen by you and people you know.
I'll take a reckless President willing to address those issues, willing to rebalance the relationship between corporations and the money corrupted government to be more in favor of the people.
Want to make a real difference? Have a close look at the extreme privilege you have. You think it was your skill that got you there, and certainly that's a factor, but you are now part of a machine that exploits most Americans. You are part of a media system that thrives on clicks and dollars, truth is optional. And it has made you rich I'd wager. How about that *Middle Class* Trump tax cut! You probably made out just fine with that deception.
So buy a house in rural America and get to know your neighbors, the ones you wouldn't be caught dead talking to today. Get ready for a revelation. It's that, or get ready for more and more social instability.
Or just come out for Trump. He's your Daddy.
17
I KNEW it. GOP Never Trumpers had their hissy fits over Trump and as the election, and actual choices, loom, they come crawling back, one way or another. The worst of them did so earlier, and now Bret leads the stragglers back into the fold. Sickening to watch.
22
What a bunch of nonsense. Sanders and Warren are principled people with long records of public service. Any legislation they propose will go through Congress and the courts. However, DJT is a fascist-dictator-wanna-be. He is tearing this republic apart. I will vote exclusively BLUE--I can't trust Republicans ever again after the last three years. I will vote ANYONE BUT TRUMP in the hope that my kids and any future grandchildren might have a viable country and a livable planet.
26
“Has Trump abandoned NATO? No. Has he lifted sanctions on Russia? No. Has he closed the borders to all immigration? No. Did the president steal the midterms, or stop Congress from impeaching him? No. Has he significantly suppressed the press? Again, no.”
Well that was cold comfort. Trump may not have succeeded in doing these things, but it sure wasn’t for lack of trying - no more presidential press conferences or answering questions from mainstream journalists he doesn’t like, talk of border moats with alligators and poisonous snakes, treating NATO member Canada as “a national security threat” in tariff talks and the others as scofflaws, blocking vital witnesses at the impeachment trial, and of course making several attempts, to lift sanctions on Putin’s oligarchs like Oleg Deripaska, which even for this pusillanimous Congress was a step too far.
Does Brett seriously believe that Warren (my choice) or Sanders are more dangerous than the malignant sociopath currently occupying the White House and who believes he’s divinely chosen? Does he really want four more years with a “no holds Barred” (pun intended) Trump in charge of the country?
15
Trump reckless? He's rotten to the core! My heart is with Bernie, but not my head.How about Biden and Klobachar?
10
This argument is laughable.
Sounds like Brett is trying to find a way to bend reality to justify a fascist in the White House. If Brett can not understand how Trump has eroded the foundations of our democracy, turned away from NATO, empowered and emboldened Russia a million ways over without stopping sanctions, lied and sought foreign assistance in our elections, and blocked impeachment by blocking evidence, he should not longer be writing for any respectable publication.
Mr. Stephens, give us a break and stop trying to find ways to justify rooting for a team that no longer bears any resemblance to the conservative "principles" you claim to hold.
15
Two words: climate change.
I'm sorry. I would like to say more but the Times moderates comments for "civility", and I won't channel my Brooklyn playground childhood for a few choice words describing how I feel about the columnist's foolishness.
13
"Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama," says the affluent white guy who's never been underfoot in our social hierarchy or, apparently, truly considered the lives of the few he knows who are.
Easy for you to say, Bret.
Easy for you.
19
To bad Schiff isn't running. He knows dictatorship when he see's one.
6
A fire hydrant is better than Trump.
13
...says Bret L. Stephens from his position of wealth and privilege.
9
If everyone in the health insurance and fracking "industries" loses their jobs, so much the better. Do you "economic"-minded individuals not grasp biology? Chemistry? Physics? Logic? Rationality? Looking at you, Stephen Mnuchin. And you, Bret.
6
Had a conversation with a surgeon client of mine. He's the chief in a number one rated hospital in the country here in NYC. Needless to say, smart guy. We rarely talk politics, but he started it, so I entertained him. He supports Trump's policies, but cant stand him personally. He voted for Hillary. I said to him there's a real chance Bernie could be the nominee. He thinks given the mistake Democrats made last time with Hillary, they wont make the same mistake twice. With that, he also said, if the Democrats nominate Bernie, he will have zero reservations about pulling the lever for Trump. Socialism has no place here in America. He said Bernies Medicare for All would destroy quality of care that we now enjoy, but take for granted.
Personally, I think Bernie's going to be the nominee. Biden excites no-one. Once the voting actually starts, the candidate with the most energetic base wins.
At that point, the Democrat Party is going to have a hard time convincing the electorate that they havent gone full blown socialist, with a socialist at the top of their ticket. He'll drag the entire party down with him. At that point, every Dem Senator and House up for re-election will have to proclaim their support for their nominee. That means they all get branded socialists.
Good luck with that.
19
One more time a conservative voice at this paper is clutching his pearls and lamenting the death of capitalixm.
Well, Bret, we haven't seen real capitalixm in the U.S. for the last 40 years. We have seen crony capitalixm, we have seen vulture capitalixm, we have seen socialism for the wealthy and the giant corporations while we have seen austerity and a shrinking pie for everyone else.
The Rev. Al Sharpton asked, a while ago, Bernie Sanders the most salient question I have heard asked of a candidate: "If the Congress puts a bill on your desk that incrementally builds upon the ACA will you sign it?" His answer, never missing a heartbeat, was "Absolutely yes."
And that is the rub; neither Sanders nor Warren are running for dictator (as opposed to the guy your party nominated and elected). They know the limitations of presidential power. They know that bills which would explode our government or double our deficits and debt are not going to get through Congress (as opposed to the debt and size of government explosions that have come from republican presidents and Congresses).
Our institutions have held to some extent, but our National soul teeters on the edge of destruction.
I would exchange the current president with a rabid orangutan; he would be better looking and much smarter.
15
Wow did not see this one coming Bret Stephens you’ve done it again!
2
Anybody who could vote for Trump after we have seen his corruption--is just corrupt themselves. I love Bernie and Warren --they are honest and care about the people. You can't say that about any of the Republicans leaders who are now in the Trump cult. Trum is a danger to us all.
11
Mr Stephens is in denial. Dangerously so. By minimizing the effects Mr Trump has had on what makes the world safe he adds to the cloud cover over recklessness. The environment is being wrecked. We are only lucky that a clueless foreign policy hasn't caused more damage. Immigrants and those from any group Mr Trump doesn't like has been subjected to cruelty.
Get real, Mr Stephens. Maybe your life hasn't changed, but look out your window. Any sane candidate is better than this dangerous person who is throwing around a wrecking ball.
10
Maybe "the devil we know" (mentioned at least twice so far in these comments) is what Italians kept telling themselves as they voted for Berlusconi, perpetuating his corruption in office for nine years.
It was finally the women of the country who demonstrated against his known sexual deviancy that drove him from office.
What will it take for some people in the US to see that the devil is the devil, and no good can come of perpetuating Trump's rein? What act will finally be "crossing the line"?
4
Trump can win because of people like Stephens and others who, in the end, are doing just fine and want to keep it that way. They don't really care about others. So, they'll rationalize making a deal with the devil, just like Republican members of Congress. To suggest that Warren or Sanders or any other Democrat running for president poses the same threat to this country as Trump is pure nonsense. Stephens exposes who he truly is by writing this stuff.
10
Bret Stephens and David Brooks are republicans who want the veneer of respectability so that they do not lose the mouse clicks on their opinions - and therefore put their position at the NYT in jeopardy. They have been mildly chastising trump as they squirm over this "problem". (For the past three years!).
So they have been playing the cat and mouse game until the end of this impeachment approaches by tut-tut'ing and clucking their tongues over trump - until now.
Last night on the PBS News Hour Mr. Brooks showed his hand by telling us that the case against trump is not strong enough to warrant his removal from office.
And now Mr. Stephens declares that trump is a better choice that two of the top polling Democrats, Sanders and Warren.
I do not believe that he would vote for Mr. Biden either, truth be told.
In the words of Dorothy Parker, beauty may only be skin deep but ugly(R) is to the bone.
9
Bret, Your suggestion that Democrats will or should not vote in November reveals what you share with the conservatives who lacked the courage to stop the "T" party from hijacking the former Republican party: a tragic level of cynicism. You are part of the problem, not the solution. Generosity and love will prevail, without you, over greed and hate.
6
Others have already reduced your central premise to fish wrap. So I will respond to this, “Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama.”
Except for the embarrassment and shame we feel.
9
Here's some news: for many of those who do support Sanders, the rule of the wealthy and their minions has to stop. That's the true meaning of "resistance." If you're a Democrat or a Trump hater and you're afraid that the center won't vote for Sanders, here's something you don’t seem to understand: the left won't vote for Biden, or Buttiegeig, or Klobuchar, or Clinton, or Bloomberg. So if you want things to stay the same, nominate one of them and they will. But don't say you hate Trump.
"The devil we know" is taking us to a place where a corrupt constitution-defying leader cannot be investigated or impeached. Is that the country the founders envisioned?
331
Perfect distillation of selfishness, ignorance and fearmongering. I'm sure the GOP will award Brett its man of the year.
10
Anyone who starts a statement "The truth of Trumpism is ...." and follows this with what is so obviously a personal opinion, is not an impartial journalist.
5
There is so much wrong with this ham fisted defense, I wouldn't know where to start.
7
"devastating.." etc. Yes, dream up scary alliterations to demonize the Enemy (or two) one never suspected lurked in the corner of every dark political alley.... Perpetuate the 'truths" of Sainted Donald Ray-gun, first to warn you about the "young [black] buck in the check-out line at the grocery, buying steaks with food stamps swiped from the apron pocket of his Welfare Queen mother.. . Maintain the Righteous Tradition of so many moneyed Elders who buy the most expensive. extensive ads in every kind of media GIve me a bleedin' break, a most esteemed "thinker" on Sunday panels who write opinion for the Times. Does this, after the master practitioner Trump's three years, deserve respect??
2
Brett, are you not at all tuned in to the senate impeachment hearings? Have you been sleeping the past 3 years? Open your eyes man. Absolutely anyone but Trump. Not so fast? How about pedal to the metal?
12
Any sane adult.
7
Geez Brett,thats great but you know as well as I that no democratic president would ever be able to get a ‘socialist’ agenda through congress
3
What a disparaging and disheartening article. To put Warren on the same platform as Trump. The one key characteristic of the Republican Party is their hatred of poor people. Shame on you NYT for this article breaking down support of ideas to help poor people.
11
Stephens, as always, can justify all things trump by continuously sowing fear about the people-oriented policies of the “extremist” already-elected Democratic and Socialist candidates. Health care for all? So radical. Paying a living wage? Dreadful commies. Regulating corporate avarice? Tyranny. Battling fossil fuel poison? Outright militancy.
Be afraid, all. Stephens wants you to know that although Trump is concededly a greedy, sociopathic, proto-fascist Russian dupe, democracy is a far worse fate.
14
I was listening until the ‘overwhelming majority’ statement. Your straight, white, male privilege is showing.
All LGBT people, our parents and our siblings are impacted. Queer and questioning kids are committing suicide. Anti-gay violence is up. Empathy is down. Anti-gay laws and resolutions are increasing.
All people of color are impacted.
All women are impacted.
All religious minorities (including the over 30% who are secular) are impacted.
I think that’s well over 80%. But I guess when you live in Westchester that doesn’t constitute ‘overwhelming’.
“They came for the Jews ...”
One last point. If re-elected, Trump will quite possibly get 3 more Supreme Court appointments.
“And then they came after me...”
10
Fish or chicken. If you don't choose one, you get the other. Make no choice, you make a choice. Trump is terrible for one set of reasons. Sanders or Warren are not your cup of tea. Refugees in cages and children permanently ripped from the arms of their parents. Bigotry. Anti semitism. Misogyny. Bigotry. Nepotism. Emoluments violations. Political assassination. Politicization of the Justice Department. Strange and dangerous association with Putin. Impulsive. Ignorant. Narcissistic. Vulgarian.
Fish or chicken. You get one or the other. None of the above is not an option.
8
Stop getting your knickers in a knot. "Yelling" Uncle Bernie and "School Marm" Warren aren't going to get the nomination. The DNC will make sure it's Biden of course, just like they did with Hillary. Never mind that there might have been better candidates, it's whoever could raise the most money, as if money is the only important thing. It isn't.
1
Will my vote ever count? We have been living in an ever-diminishing power of the electorate...When 70% of the Congress will be dominated by 30% of the population, the future is increasingly dismal..We are like gerbils on a tread wheel...powerless to attain fairness with such overwhelming odds....How can the majority rule when only the minority vote counts? What a concept....the candidate who gets the most votes wins....
5
this is fear mongering.
9
This looks like the beginning of a slow Stephens migration to the Trump camp.
8
When a nation has been taken over by swine, who is going to rule it? A swine. Doesn't matter what arbitrary label one affixes to the entity. It's a swine. One feels that the impeachment is but a prelude to a monstrous event akin to a coup or arbitrary junta takeover of the Federal government. Complete with suspension of everyone's civil liberties in the name of maintaining "order." Putin and the Chinese all have a vested interest in turning the USA into a fascist dictatorship and Trump is their man, ahem, swine.
5
"Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama."
These days, I live each day with the fear of another holocaust, this time in the U.S. Pretty much not the same as any previous time in my life .
10
I wish The NY Times conservative writers would get that our capitalist economy is no longer an Ike/Rockefeller one. It’s been slipping into an oligarchy for decades.
11
Bret,
Please check this out from your own paper. Penned by Sydney Ember and brother Jonathan.
Sanders Seizes Lead in Volatile Iowa Race, Times Poll Finds
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/25/us/politics/democratic-iowa-poll-sanders.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
2
This op-ed is unbelievable. After watching the narcissistic, morally depraved and incompetent Donald Trump for almost three years, are you really suggesting we could do worse? You need to rethink this column, sir.
711
So, the Red Scare continues. Quick, look under your bed!!!
7
Seriously?? Who do you think you are kidding?? "Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama." Sure, if you are white and male. For American citizens who immigrated from other countries - particularly Hispanic Americans, this ridiculous statement DOES NOT APPLY. Have you been hibernating for the past 3 years?
5
Yes, things under Trump are about the same for most people, except the citizens who served in the military who have been deported, the children dying in his concentration camps, the people losing their health care, the children losing food stamps and school meals, those killed by his white supremacist, anti-semitic warriors. But your investments are doing great, so who cares?
Vote blue no matter who.
9
Who is Brian Riedl?
Is he expert at economic analysis or is he political?
Let me answer my own question.
He is political.
Why do you cite him?
Why do you think his analysis is any good?
Yes. Simply, yes. Anyone instead of him. Trying to run the country like the Mafia.
4
another hit piece against you progressives by the NYT. Trump has not been the same for a vast majority of Americans. What youre describing is the safety of white priviledege, but he has attacked our shared planet. he has attacked our values. he has attacked our way of life. and all of us are less safe because of it. and lets not forget what got us here was centrist democrats.
Democrat baby boomers have a choice. To continue their generational cold war era fears or to listen to young people, listen to black people. Listen to the millions of americans who do not care about the stock market because they know they will NEVER own stocks. we want jobs an education healthcare we dont want to go to war and we want a planet to live on after youve passed on.
5
Reckless president? Wasn't that what Franklin Roosvelt was called?
2
Word to your readers: never take advice from a Never Trumper. They don’t have your interests at heart.
5
The New York Times now begins it's lurch towards favoring Trump. This is who they are, who they've become. Bernie is such anathema to their notions of prestige and self-importance and wealth, that they are willing to support the worst President in history, rather than entertaining the idea of supporting a non-ideal candidate. I am not surprised, this writing has been on the wall for a while now, but it is still disappointing. I want the Times to remain a relevant fixture in the minds of future Americans, with this type of writing as their standard, however, they will not be for much longer.
5
Any Dem will follow the Rule of Law and respect their oath to the Constitution. So, yes, anyone but Trump.
Mr. Stephens seem to be making an argument that trashing the Constitution is better than electing someone who will respect it.
9
Dear Mr. Stephens,
We are being governed by a man who seeks to transform government into a racketeering outfit, whose calculations only concern his pocketbook and damaged ego. There is no law that will stop this man and his enablers. As for the consequences, think of the ballooning deficit he has generated with the benefits going exclusively to the very very rich -- a policy on which he did not campaign and is not supported by a vast majority of Americans. Who is reckless? Relying on the Manhattan Institute, a notoriously right-wing outlet, for "facts" is arguably reckless. So is judging ideas as if they were realities. Neither Sanders or Warren -- and a good deal separates them, which makes the article sound like an ideological scree -- would abuse their powers of office to fund pet projects not legally funded, as Trump has done by funding "his" wall. Neither seeks to impoverish Americans and both have carefully crafted plans for shifting the engine for the American nation slightly toward the public realm, away from Those Who Have, where it has been tilted since 1981. The use of your estimable perch both to smear as "reckless" these candidates for the presidency who are responding to growing socioeconomic inequality and to suggest that the current agent of public indecency and enemy of government is better than they is, well, reckless.
4
Well explained on a difficult decision lot of us readers might have to make. Give us a middle of the roader is a much better solution to present leader. Please....
2
Mr. Stephens, No amount of money is too great to save the planet from the inevitable scourge of climate change. We had better get with it!
2
I do not see a reason to worry about Sanders being the nominee. With his track record he will pass nothing. Nothing. Nothing.
Sanders and Warren are just as unwilling to work with political opponents as Trump is? This is grossly untrue, and is getting into the territory of GOP suppress-the-vote tactics. The truth is that all the Democratic candidates, despite their different ideas, are operating in good faith. Trump and his weak-kneed sycophants are not, to put it mildly.
And saying that Trump is "only" tearing apart the moral fabric of American society, whereas Sanders and Warren would dare to lance at least some of the underlying rot in our economy and society? I'm sorry, I don't want to contribute to online anger. But this piece seems to be lacking in logical, political, and moral maturity.
6
I find it perplexing that Bret Stephens can manage to undermine the progressive candidates while at the same time excusing some of Trump's policies. I will add that while he talks about the cost of the programs proposed for the public good, he has no mention of the $1.5 trillion dollar tax cut given to the rich and corporations.
Mr. Stephens, we have a criminal grifter in the Oval Office who is aligned with Putin, has put children in cages, has emboldened white nationalism and is destroying government institutions. Anyone else is better than this man, anyone.
6
Wow! You may be right (I mean correct, there's no dispute about whether you're right ), before you know it, these socialist schemers will legalize marijuana and we'll all be working for the government and be too stoned to know it. Who could possibly choose to lose a minimum wage job in an amazon warehouse for the threat of a higher paying job with a government agency? Who wants to prevent the contamination of ground water at the expense of the benign folks who profit from indiscriminate environmental destruction? Who needs health insurance when, let's face it, in a well-functioning economy a low-wage worker is a replaceable and therefore disposable commodity? Wouldn't we rather have them die than see them on the streets of our Potempkin cities, built solely for tourists, techies and wealthy investors? And what about the people who manufacture cages to house the criminal migrant children? Will they go? or the private prison industry, what happens to them? I'm concerned, really concerned.
10
I've been waiting for and predicting this day would come when the main organs of the MSM suddenly wake up and realize a real progressive candidate could be our next President.
After three years spent maligning Trump and milking his opposition for readership and ratings for their own profit, there would come a day when they realized that was all about to go away and be replaced by a real threat to their bottomline and the bottom lines of the elites and corporations they really serve.
When that day came, they would reverse course and back Trump, slowly at first and, then, as the socialist threat grew greater, with more and more ferocity. Here at the NYT, first it was the endorsement of two candidates who have no chance of winning, then "liberal" Krugman called Bernie a liar, now this, a full throated defense of Trump for four more years. Someday has finally arrived
3
The pursuit of Trumpism is the path to the end of democracy in America. Anybody but Trump...the choice is crystal clear to any real American.
6
How can we get our "progressives" to understand the limitations of their movement. Sanders or Warren will frack the party. If one of these divisive candidates wins the nomination the center will be left unoccupied. Someone (independent or 3rd party) may try to occupy that ground, and may do well in the election. The Democratic Party needs a candidate to bring us all together. Presidents Obama and Clinton did this. Sanders or Warren will not.
110
Bernie Sanders never even thought to apologize about his cavorting with the Soviet Union. Instead, when asked about the bread lines in the communist block, he snapped back that at least there was bread to be had.
As a person who grew up in a communist country and had to wait in line for bread and milk and toilet paper and everything else, voting for Sanders would be like voting for a former low-ranking member of the Nazi party who stubbornly refuses to denounce Nazism and instead keeps saying that some things were good back then. You might try to ignore history but you can’t fake it.
6
Very important topic. Too bad the OpEd is so breathtakingly shallow. Sanders is far from my first choice of candidates but please reconsider.
First, what parts of the Sanders campaign platform would make it through Congress and into law ?
Second, there is an unbridgeable gap in the Character of these two men. Edmund Burke thought this the most important virtue of all for a politician. What can you trust Trump to do, unbound, in a second term ?
1
While I share your concern with a Sanders or Warren nomination, I will still vote for either over Trump because each has the character, moral and ethical strength to make decisions based on what they believe is best for Americans. I may be wrong, but even if either is elected president, Congress will be populated by members who espouse a spectrum of political philosophies which would limit the leftward swing of our national policies and structure. I believe that either will use executive authority to accomplish many policies that they can not get through Congress, as has the current and many prior occupants of the WH, but the guardrails on our democracy would be kept intact (unlike w/Trump). This option is still exponentially preferable to a 2nd Trump term. Until we have a system that requires a majority to win election (i.e., >50.1% of the popular vote irrespective of the electoral vote majority), and allows us to vote for "none of the above" thereby reducing the number of votes (and %age) received by either candidate, abstaining from the voting is not only perilous, it is an abrogation of all American citizens' responsibility. I for one will not place our country, our democracy, in jeopardy by waiting for the perfect candidate and risk allowing Trump to occupy the WH and defile our country w/a 2nd term.
6
Trump and his elected Republican apologists are an existential danger to our American democracy. Radical strengthening of democratic institutions and processes are needed now or America is in danger of becoming an autocracy.
Democrats must realize they are the only group that can save America from descending into oligarchy. Only a united Democratic Party can save our way of life and American values, We hold these truths to be self evident, that all human beings are created equal, that we all have the same rights, that to protect these rights governments are instituted by humans, deriving it's just powers from the governed.
2
Most of this column is nonsense. Personally I could write for pages explaining the objections I have to Obama’s policies, especially those that knowingly gave away billions to corporations and banks while screwing over homeowners who were sucked into unpayable loans. But I was never ashamed of him as president. Surely I don’t need to remind you that Obama speaks in full sentences and would never have bragged about assaulting women. Life with Trump is a nightmare. His sympathy with the racist right and his tendency to bring out the worst in this country’s bigots is undeniable. As Michael Cohen put it he is a liar, a con man, and a cheat. Both Sanders and Warren want to defend the American people from such real dangers as bankruptcy due to heath costs (still a huge threat) and the real effects of climate change. Trump is still trying to undo the real gains in Obamacare and supports fracking despite (or because of?) the damage to the environment. His destruction of environmental regulation is unending. You are right in saying that he is a “morally corrosive and corrupting force” but I suppose you really believe that socialized healthcare will bankrupt us, but consider the fact that this country now puts more money into military spending and endless wars than the military budgets of the next 7 highest spending countries and those include Russia and China. Most of the rest are American allies. Of course those “allies” are the most common victims of Trump’s insults. Go figure.
5
Considering what we are facing via the climate, nothing less than a radical shift away from corrosive climate policy will be good enough to save our collective behinds.
3
But our stalwart Bert Stephens is a climate change denier.
1
Thanks, Bret. You just convinced me to vote for Sanders. Fracking and health insurance gone? I can’t wait.
7
Before believing the statistics that are quoted in this article, check out the Manhattan Institute. As Mark Twain said "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."
3
There’s the last 3 years in a nutshell: “The truth of Trumpism is that it’s a morally corrosive and corrupting force, not a politically or economically catastrophic one.”
A trade the country cannot afford, just so some get tax breaks and their judges.
2
B.S.: your column reads as a desperate cry for a world in which white men continue to rule our economy (you use coded language: American capitalism) and for a political and ethical ethos in which making sure life is decent for “a majority of Americans” is acceptable. Under Trump, the rights of POC, women, and immigrants have been stripped. Environmental protection policies have been rolled back, making more people vulnerable to future devastating effects of climate change. When you talk about labor, I hear an argument for keeping millions in minimum wage jobs, trapped under the imprisonments of corporate bosses and owners. If you think that Americans experience daily life as “mostly the same” under Trump and Obama, you haven’t been listening, and you must live in a bubble. When I listen and learn about the hopes and policy implications of Sanders and Warren campaigns, I see possibility for a more equal and just and healthier future - for individuals and the environment. So what if more people work for the government instead of private insurance companies and Amazon warehouses? Why should the pursuit of free markets and unchecked capitalism lead to mass poverty and inequality? Where is your moral center? Where did you go wrong?
6
This is exactly the sort of diminish the excesses of one side, catastrophize the other argument that plays into supporting Trump. Unlike Warren and Sanders, who respect our democracy and Constitution, just how little Trump does either is underscored by the ongoing impeachment trial. None of your arguments hold if you view the larger picture. There is no holding your nose and being above it all when the President encourages armed militiamen, engages full assault on science and the environment, ignores the Constitution, urges harm to an Ambassador and cavorts with some of the worst dictators and strongmen in the planet. Trump keeps pushing past the limits; in the current situation, if you enable him you are with him. Take heed. I’m not a Warren or Sanders supporter, I will vote for whichever Democrat wins the nomination.
8
Here's a civics 101 brush up for you: the president isn't a king and it is vanishingly unlikely that Bernie will actually accomplish anything in his platform, should he be elected. As others have noted, almost anything of note has to get through congress. If the democrats fail to retake the senate-- which is entirely plausible-- the entire Bernie domestic policy platform is mostly dead on arrival. Even a slim senate majority would require dems to win in conservative states, so they'd not be marching in lockstep. You'd need a supermajority to overcome the inevitable filibusters, and I don't know of any projections for a democratic senate supermajority. And (now the history brush up) even when dems did have a supermajority in 2008, passing the ACA was an epic struggle.
When I look at Sanders and Warren I'm mostly annoyed at how they pander to civic ignorance. If they were honest they'd admit that their projects, under the current system, are at best aspirational. Anyway, you are a New York Times political columnist and should really know better.
I think Sanders in particular would be an ineffective president, well meaning but weak kind of like Carter. But the man's a functioning adult for god's sake, that's still an improvement.
7
The environment, the environment, the environment. Clean water. Clear air. Devastation in the Midwest, crushing farmers and crops - you know, the things we need to eat? Multiple and increasing numbers of hurricanes and other catastrophic events coming faster and faster. Australia burning. CA and other western states burning. And not only has the Trump administration refused to address this in any positive way, it is actively making things worse on orders of magnitude.
How short sighted is this column. How short sighted are some of the comments. You can't eat or drink money, stock certificates, or investment portfolios. But hey, let the good times roll, and let the Americans that haven't experienced the good times just rot.
Sanders and Warren are at least living in reality and trying the address the needs of the forgotten, which is the majority of us.
10
"Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama."
I do not think women facing having their reproductive rights controlled by the government as decided by a court packed with conservative justices, including two by Trump, would agree with your statement.
I do not think that families who depend on the ACA and facing the end of the ACA due to the Trump Administration's law suit , agree with your statement.
I do not think that minorities who have been targeted by white nationalists would agree with your statement.
I do not think millions of people who believe we must begin reversing the effects fossil fuels believe that they are better off today with Trump's reversal of fuel standards in California.
I do not believe that people facing more water pollution and air pollution in their places of work and home feel that they are doing just fine.
Come to think about it, I think you really need to go back and check out the validity of your use of "majority", because millions of individuals and families are negatively impacted by Donald J. Trump.
10
You seem to think that if Bernie is elected all of his campaign policy proposals immediately become law. Also, completely uncritical citation of the far right Manhattan Institute is pretty sketchy. Even my brief reading of that article and Bernie's policy paper that it cites show that they only list the costs in his paper but not the savings.
2
So the situation you’re describing isn’t logically valid. This is what I understood you to say:
1) Pres. Trump wants to do many terrible things, but hasn’t been able to achieve those goals because democracy has hindered him. So maybe he isn’t so bad.
2) Candidates who are proposing very progressive programs, if put in office, will be able to implement all of their programs. They will have the kind of power Pres. Trump wants, and will find no impediments to achieve all their goals.
No, that’s not logical, and doesn’t even take into account the proven dishonesty of our president compared to the proven integrity of the democratic candidates.
Also, my life has changed under this president. My husband works on navy ships. He’s not in the navy, he just helps support the work the navy does. If Pres. Trump starts a war, which he came very close to doing recenty, my husband will be on a target and may never come home.
5
Everytime I read Stephens' articles, I feel as if I'm buying something from a snake oil salesman or ideas from a guy who has a doctorate in political confusion.
Upholding the Constitution must count for something. The Truth must count for something.
If we, as a nation, suffer because we adhere to the principles that keep us free and encourage other countries to strive for freedom, then it is totally worth it to either remove Trump from office or elect a new president in November 2020.
Stephens, you are taking your political smoke and mirrors to higher and higher levels.
Choose the moral ground and stay there.
Or start wobbling and weaving and join the spineless GOP Senate.
8
Stephens presents a false conundrum: vote for Trump, Warren or Sanders. What about the many other fine candidates on the Democratic side that are not as radical?
I realize he was trying to make a point that literally ANY candidate would be better than Trump, but the article fell flat because it left no way out of his false conundrum. After one of the first debates, Stephens expressed his respect and fondness for Buttigieg, which I share. He is not a radical and instead provides a voice of reason that we so sorely need.
I disagree with Stephens’ conclusion that America has not changed radically or irreparably from the Trump administration. Although I am ONLY 67, I have witnessed several presidential administrations in my lifetime, and I have never seen such a cultural shift as I’ve seen in this one. Trump may not have blown up the foundation of the US government, but he is doing his best to accomplish this task, especially in the area of foreign relations where he actively insults respected career diplomats. But we must remember that Trump was ELECTED to be president by millions of people who share his views and continue to support him at his rallies despite what I consider to be abhorrent behavior.
Our country needs to elect a new president who can adequately address the needs of all Americans. At this time in our history, a rational, centrist candidate who respects the needs of all would be the best choice.
3
Should we weep for all the tobacco farmers and processors who lost their jobs because of the anti-smoking campaign? Why are health "insurers" any different?
4
Think that the author makes some good points about Sanders, particularly in regard to Medicare for All, which would have profound impacts on the economy. However, disagree strongly with the author that life is pretty much the same for citizens under Trump as it was under Obama. Trump has had an absolutely catastrophic suite of environmental policies that have fundamentally undermined our ability to lead on critical issues like climate change, ability to have clean air and water and protect our public lands. And just consider the administration's relationship with science- it deliberately attempts to undermine any science that doesn't support corporate and fossil fuel interest.
2
Mr. Stephens, how do you not hold Trump accountable for poisoning our relationships with our allies? Do you honestly believe that with Trump and our most critical allies that it has been a "no harm - no foul situation" up to this point?
We disagree. IMO, Trump and the Republican Party's damage to our image, relationships and most importantly, our moral standing in the World will take decades to repair, if it is repairable. The damage that Trump and the conservatives have done to this country internationally is incalculably gigantic.
6
With Sanders or Warren it is more likely we will get a tweaking of Obamacare with a public option and price control on drugs. Hardly earth shaking and small potatoes compared to the New Deal legislation (you know the program that brought us Socialist Security). To vote instead for an unrestrained criminal who wants to out source our national security service to Putin and help guarantees that any environmental disaster comes sooner than later is not a prudent choice.
10
The “banality of evil,” Mr. Stephens, is key to its success. Few in Chicago were overly impacted by Al Capone, for example.
Rights, freedoms and privileges slip away two ways, to paraphrase Hemingway. Gradually, and then suddenly. The cost of freedom, as our National Archives reminds us at its gateway, is eternal vigilance.
The banality of evil appears to have lulled you into complacency.
8
@Heisenberg No, he knows exactly the evil he's purveying. He'll do anything for another tax cut.
Once again, Bret Stephens, the supposed conservative with a conscience, argues that we have to get rid of Trump - EXCEPT if the alternative is someone whose policies are farther to the left than he'd like, because heaven forbid, we can't have that!
What lazy thinking. If governmental inertia has managed to stave off Trump's [real] attempts to veer into authoritarianism, why wouldn't Stephens also acknowledge it will stave off the [hypothetical] impending socialist apocalypse he envisions under Sanders or Warren? Particularly since Warren for example is actually open to compromise?
Because scaremongering about the disasters of the "reckless" left is what Stephens does best.
12
What Bret says has value - because he is illustrating how many center right voters are going to make their decision. We may not like it or agree, but that’s how they will vote. And we need them to move on from Trump.
So don’t blame Bret for shining a light on the situation.
3
I don't agree with this at all... but worry that many out there think this way. I also don't think it's fair to conflate Bernie with Warren. Warren would be a very different (and far superior) candidate, but also has the benefit of appealing to those Bernie folks on the left when didn't vote last time (and are this partially responsible for this mess)
7
If we could ever fix the corrosive roadblock that is the US Senate - make it more representative of our aggregate national will - it wouldn’t matter as much who is president.
What if we could convince a group of senators to become independent? Say the 4 most moderate Dems (maybe Manchin, Heitcamp, Donnelly and Tester) and Reps (Collins, Murkowski, and, well, 2 more among several possibilities), join Angus King as a 9 vote swing block? (I’m leaving Sanders out of this - he should be a Democrat).
The above have little to lose by going Independent; in fact, some would probably improve their re-election prospects. If they could stick together, they could vote to prevent the majority party from passing wildly partisan policies that corrode our democracy.
Why not?
2
You might say a vote for Trump or for Sanders or Warren is really a vote for polarized gridlock.
So maybe they are two sides of the same coin. Nothing really good or bad gets done. For all the Trump Derangement Syndrome out there, Brett is right that Trump has had few tangible effects on daily life; he is more of a symbol of a wider culture war.
In contrast, a vote for a Bloomberg for instance may actually be a vote for some kind of policy change, however incremental it may be.
3
i have no doubt if the rich in this country could trade in our democracy for a king and ability to hold onto their inherited wealth bret stephens would lead the charge. here before you is a man who earned nothing in his life.
4
For roughly the past 40 years, the U.S. government has embraced at least some part of the supply-side economic philosophy made famous, or infamous if you are one of the numerous unfortunate souls in the middle and lower working classes, by Former President Ronald Reagan. This philosophy has enriched the upper classes to the point where it has financialized our economy. This has had a devastating effect on our manufacturing base and virtually all industries that middle-class America relied upon to support itself. This approach has altered our government’s fiscal priorities by drying up tax revenue we used to reserve for social programs used to support the majority of Americans. The middle-class has suffered and shrunk over the past several decades. This is why today we reference the loss of the American Dream. The supply-side economic approach has created jobs, millions of jobs. And unemployment overall has been low, historically low in some cases. However, the jobs that have been created by this approach are low-wage hourly jobs that could not sustain one’s living, forcing many Americans to string together two or more of these jobs for survival. And overall, wages have failed to increase while Americans have been forced to work more hours and take less vacation time than our northern European brethren. Frankly, unless you are well-off, I think you would be voting against your own economic interest if you did not enthusiastically support either Mr. Sanders or Ms. Warren.
3
By implication, we should preserve the fracking industry because it employs a lot of people? Drug dealers employ people too, but we don't seek to prevent them. We look at what they do, and make judgements based on that.
As for health-insurance employment, that's part of the problem in that bloated industry. Yes, every one of those workers needs a a new chance, but we, together, can't afford to let these inefficiencies survive in the name of full employment. That's the Soviet way, and look how well they did.
4
This column falls far short of a serious argument against Sanders and Warren. While there are many errors, I'll just point out the most obvious. Stephens argues that while Trump wants to do all these bad things, he hasn't been able to. On the other hand, somehow Sanders and Warren will both be able to implement every program they've ever considered. That's disingenuous to the extreme.
In addition to the logical inconsistency (comparing apples to oranges), it's worse. In the 2nd term, if Trump beats impeachment, he may actually be able to implement those programs he's wanted to but has been held back by institutional resistance. The institutional checks have been eroding (see the impeachment trial), and with an additional electoral victory by Trump, they will likely collapse. An emboldened Trump will be worse than any possible Democrat.
And as for Sanders and Warren, while both are pushing policies that would entail dramatic change, Stephens should be smart enough to know that they will need to be modified to pass Congress, so his fears of radical change are unwarranted. But while not all their policies will pass, at least they are pushing in the right direction and the people pushing them are moral, responsible, intelligent leaders (in contrast to Trump).
Trump is an existential threat to this country, so yes, it requires voting for ANY Democrat over Trump.
7
To think Sanders or Warren could get Congress, even a Democrat-controlled Congress, to go along with their more extreme proposals is far-fetched.
I don’t know why Bret Stephens keeps making that argument. For such a smart and experienced observer, he should know better. Before passage into law, all their grandiose, legislative proposals will be adapted to reality. Pragmatism will ultimately rule.
The problem is that two years will be wasted while either one learns the limits of what she or he can or cannot do—just as two years were wasted by Obama on the same. Faced with so many crises, that is two years the country cannot afford.
More to the point, there is no convincing evidence that either Warren or Sanders could win over the swing voters in the battleground states needed to capture the Electoral College.
These swing voters are real—not "mythical" as some on the left claim. They include moderate Republicans, suburban women, and traditional lunch-pail Democrats who voted for Obama before turning to Trump. https://tinyurl.com/syeyjhu
These moderate "persuadables" will vote for a Biden or a Klobuchar, but not a Warren or a Sanders. There is no convincing evidence that suggests otherwise.
5
Stephens isn’t a smart and experienced observer. That will become clearer to you the more of his columns you read.
Neither one would get their policies enacted into law by Congress Bret and, unlike Trump, neither would ignore Congress and, unlike today's Republican Senate, their's would fight them tooth and nail.
Then there're the 164 Right Wing ideologues Mitch has shoved into the Federal Court system over the past 3 years. So no worries, we're set to go retrograde for decades to come no matter who the Democrats nominate or who wins the Presidency in November.
1
The issue here, Mr. Stephens, is one of momentum. It takes a lot of energy to move something very large. But once that large body begins to move, look out!
The size of the American government is titanic. It's direction and course have been changed by Trump. We see it in small ways now, but the downstream effects of this president are likely to be very large over the next 4-10 years.
The slow but eventual enormous effects that Trump will have on the judiciary, environment, national debt, fractured alliances, and trust in just about every aspect of the American government is about to crack wide open.
The tsunami is about to hit, and when it does we won't be adequately prepared. The alarms will go off after the fact.
1
As an American Muslim, my life is dramatically different and precarious under Trump—I get it, Stephens is not concerned about people like me.
639
@Michael
I do not disagree with your assessment Michael, however, how much more dramatically different is your life under Trump than it was under the Bush administration?
11
Well yes. Which is why I’ll once again end up voting for Trump.
3
@Greenie Given that you live in Vermont, your vote for Trump will not count anyway. Trump won less than 30% of the vote in Vermont in 2016 garnering zero electoral votes. So go right ahead.
1
I was struck by this:
“And an assertively left-wing presidency would spark a right-wing backlash that would have all of the fear and rage of the left’s Resistance — but none of its restraint.”
What is that supposed to be? A threat? A reason not to vote against their preferences for fear of the violence of their reaction? Or what?
“Nice little country ya got here folks. Be a shame if something happened to it. So don’t make us do anything that we’ll regret later.”
Unbelievable. The republic is truly in mortal danger if we have come to this. Historically speaking it reminds me of Southern threats during the 1860 election.
10
"And an assertively left-wing presidency would spark a right-wing backlash that would have all of the fear and rage of the left’s Resistance — but none of its restraint."
Oh, you mean like the backlash that happened against the moderate, centrist Obama?
6
Who is not exhausted by the Democrat’s relentless partisan ‘resistance’ efforts to oust their arch nemesis, Donald Trump?...to say nothing of their ‘progressive’ agenda, which will seal our future as an overpopulated, environmentally overburdened, increasingly impoverished, culturally splintered, politically chaotic third world country.
I’ve never voted ‘Republican’ in my life...but after 40 years, the faction formerly known as the Democratic Party has finally succeeded in loosing my support.
3
This argument makes the assumption that whomever follows Trump will have complete success executing their agenda unlike any other president ever.
Our society is profoundly unstable right now. We have been swinging further towards the extremes with each cycle. We need to dampen the oscillations and start moving back towards the middle. Anyone not a Republican is a move in the right direction, a moderate would be a big step in the long term.
3
Mr. Stephens' columns keep sinking lower and lower. His arguments in this one are based on shortsightedness with regard to Trump and and phony predictions about a Warren or Sanders presidency. He seems unconcerned about a Trump second term - apparently he thinks there are still some adults left in the White House to control Trump's impulses. Moreover, Trump would be unconcerned about electoral niceties and would very likely begin plotting how to hang on to power after 2024. We can expect emergency declarations and refusals to comply with oversight.
However, Mr. Stephens assumes that congress would pass all of the proposals emanating from a Sanders or Warren White House. I can't imagine any of their more extreme proposals making it through both houses. Furthermore, he seems to ignore the typical campaigning strategy of appealing to the more engaged activists during the primary and then pivoting to the center if one wins the nomination. I expect this is likely what Warren would do.
One must take everything politicians say with a grain of salt. They say what they think they should say to get elected. The public senses that our politicians are phony. Some are so disgusted with this state of affairs that they voted for the biggest liar of them all. It wouldn't be so bad if he were just a liar, but he is also a megalomaniacal narcissist. None of the Democratic candidates is in this same league. None.
8
Yes, Bret, anyone but Trump.
What we all seem to forget due to the Chicken Little noise is that there will be no "your private insurance is gone tomorrow" effect. Agendas of this magnitude require Congressional support, actually they are supposed to require legislation, debate, corrections and then sign on. Hopefully that's what life will look like during a Warren presidency. Until then, a half illiterate, misogynist, xenophobe in the White House is not in America's best interest.
2
Bret Stephens doesn't understand the economic reality of the working class. Rents are through the roof, wages are flat. If you don't own stocks (None of my friends do), this economy is trash.
Sanders and Warren are the only politicians that aren't living in a fantasy bubble.
3
Yes Bret, exactly. Bernie Sanders has corrupted the Democrat Party. His ideas are ridiculous. What country does he think he is in? A lifelong Democrat I will not vote for either Sanders or Warren. Period. And, as Bret is pointing out, there are most likely millions of us, moderate Democrats AND moderate Republicans, who can not imagine voting for a socialist. Honestly, this is ridiculous and frightening at the same time.
2
This is a ridiculously written article. So, basically, the author is stating, let’s just leave things as is because I’m scared of any change that will actually help the working class and not bow down to the 1%.
5
The president has undermined NATO, has closed off our borders to asylum seekers (ask an immigration lawyer) and compounded racist sentiments. We need nearly anyone but Trump. He is that bad. Even Pence would be an improvement to not have a president tout white supremecists. It’s tough these days for anyone who is not a white make in the US. I’m not a fan of Bernie Sanders and he is another stubborn old white man but at least with him well stop with racist taunts and all around indecency and at least have some attempts to help out the middle class.
2
Mr Stephen's, I suggest you read Erin Kaplan's op ed. And the letters in response. Dont forget them Mr Stephens. Maybe you just might see how white, Male, Christian, economically comfortable your perspective is in stark contrast to a majority of Americans whose daily experiences include disrespect, fear, hate, dehumanization, financial insecurity, lack of control over their future or their family's future... and the sickening feeling that America is losing democracy.
2
I'm 59 and no POTUS in my lifetime has been as awful as the impostor in the White House. I wasn't much for Clinton, but voted for her, and I sure as heck intend to vote for anyone that winds up on the Democratic ticket in November. I just wish I honestly felt like one of the current contenders stood a chance.
5
You disproved the entire premise of your story in the headline. “Let’s not exchange one reckless president for another.” Let’s absolutely do that!! Anyone or any thing would be a better President than what we’re stuck with for 11 more months.
2
“Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama.”
And that, boys and girls, is what we call White Male Privilege.
6
Mr. Stephens, When I got to "...life is pretty much the same..." I thought you and I can't be living in the same country. Perhaps you decided to stop reading. A coma maybe?
Either that, or you're the guy who jumps off the 30th floor balcony. Someone shouts to him as he passes the 15th floor "How's it going?"
Our jumper says "All's good so far!"
2
"First, the argument overstates the extent to which this presidency has eroded the foundations of liberal democracy at home and abroad. Has Trump abandoned NATO? No. Has he lifted sanctions on Russia?"
One can debate the virtue of arms race and applying plus threatening sanctions, freezes etc. to all and sundry, but in what way it is an indication of "liberal democracy"? Brett neither likes things "liberal", nor tries to understand what it is.
1
Sorry Bret. As a fellow Jew I feel a kinship to you. But I have a sinking feeling that Jews in Germany prior to 1933 may have been saying something similar. Ehh, life under the Nazis is not so bad. And they won’t be around for long. So don’t worry.
4
Bret, if you think life is substantially the same under Obama and Trump, please try a different skin color.
4
Bret, there are priorities in life ! Getting rid of Trump is one. Caligula voted for his horse....I would vote for a horse against the egostic incompetent person today in the White House. Please do not try to sow division...Whoever will be elected will have to cope with the checks and balances this country has, as even Trump, so far, had to accept it...reluctantly
1
So you prefer out of control corruption on the hands of an unhinged despot?
2
Anybody but Trump.
5
ANYBODY!!!
5
Electing either Warren or Sanders could lead to civil war. Since 1980, the vehemence of each side has increased with every election. We are not at the brink of all-out military action, but its spectre is appearing on the horizon for the first time since Lincoln was shot. If we elect either of those two, I predict out-and-out acts of war from right-wing militia.
We need someone who projects deep wisdom and concern for all, who represents the concerns of both Democrats and Republicans who fear the divisions in this country more than any other issue.
When are we going to learn that success at the ballot box, and successful implementation of even desperately needed policies is going to be short-lived, evaporating with the next election cycle? Or that the fracturing of this country has been dramatically increasing with each election?
We need someone BIGGER than every contentious issue, someone who speaks from a heart large enough to respect, even have compassion for our opponents. We need a Ghandi, an MLK, a Mandela. We need someone who is going to speak to our common humanity, not just our legislative goals.
Bret,
Go read Erin Aubry Kaplan’s latest column and then get back to us on whether life is really not that different under Trump. Not that different for us established white men maybe, but a whole hell of a lot scarier for everyone else.
3
This is why Brett Stephens gets no respect. He has that huge problem that so many people have: understanding orders of magnitude and assigning the proper interest and investment Accordingly. There is no one in the Democratic field remotely as dangerous as Trump. There is nobody off the street as awful as Trump.
3
Bret, I am 83 years old, 'been around the bend, so to speak. Has my life been the same under Trump. NO. And like many of my friends, sleepless night, anxiety, worrying about our future, and democracy, new and ugly Anti-Semitism, all this has changed my life and many others i know. An op-ed column today, seemed to compare Trump with Lincoln's desire to be re-elected. Maybe so--one saved America, the other is destroying her.
480
Stephens is unable to grasp the reality that social democracies make windfall profits and then, invest their profits back into their society. He seems to not know these countries exist. Not only do they exist, but they also beat the United States in liveability, infant mortality, education, health, oh, right, but I also forgot two other categories that social democratic countries top the US in- arts and culture.
So, why is Bret L. Stephens so scared of progress? Go into the light Stephens! Go into the light! He pouts that 'Fracking and health insurance — two industries that collectively employ hundreds of thousands of people — wouldn’t be better-regulated or reformed in her administration. They’d be abolished.' without any understanding that these industries would be replaced with other industries which pay more, and pave our way to a greener future. Stephens needs to get out more.
4
There are lot of comments here, probably most of them critical. The problem is that Mr. Trump's persona is mixed up with his policies. One could criticize and disagree, and work to temper those that are too "conservative" (pro-business) in their goals, or anti-environmental. But, when it comes to his persona, perhaps he has simply tweeted too far: "Toot Sweets! Toot Sweets,
with tweetable, [un]eatable sound!
Nothing grinds your gears like seeing comments from "lifelong democrats" who will opt to stay at home if either Sanders or Warren is the nominee. Don't describe yourself as compassionate if you won't put your vote where your mouth is. Don't tell me you care about poverty, healthcare, education, etc if you won't put your vote and tax dollars towards improving it.
Democrats who don't vote in November are selfish. The gravity of the situation necessitates making some concessions for the greater good.
If you don't care more about the greater good than Joe not getting the nominee versus Bernie, well you're not much better than the Senate Republicans.
5
Given that Mr. Stephens lives in a state that Trump is going to lose by more than one million votes, the electoral college gives him the luxury of voting third-party or staying home. If he resided in one of the small number of swing states that will decide the next presidential election, his position would be reckless and irresponsible.
3
OMG, Mr Stephens overlooks Trumps total imperial presidency. If Trump wins, after his total no cooperation with impeachment process, we will indeed have a dictator instead of a president. And any future president could be so too.
Warren or Sanders will not be able to stop all fracking or destroy private health insurance. At this point anyway we still have a sort of democracy with a legislative branch with some power and independence.
Maybe we can strengthen methane rules on fracking, look seriously at the issue of radioactivity and worker health, maybe protect sensitive public lands. Maybe we can have a public option and better regulated health insurance. That’s what will come from any Democratic win.
I have kept reading Mr Stephens to be exposed to a variety of opinions. Very disappointed to be exposed to this Trump rant.
4
My friend told he he would vote for trump over Warren and Sanders.
He is no longer my friend.
Anyone but trump, and preferably Sanders or Warren.
5
Wrong, Bret. All the terrible things Trump has done will make life for Americans in the future much different than life under Obama. And if reelected, Trump will be emboldened to do even worse. Anyone but Trump- yes Bernie, Warren, Bloomberg, Pete, Amy, whoever will stop and reverse the degradation of America Trump hastens, daily.
6
Since I cannot read minds, I can’t tell you definitively what Bret is thinking. However, it is possible that the real reason Bret prefers Trump to Sanders is not a matter of recklessness, but rather that Sanders offers a leftist economic policy while Trump, despite all his buffoonery, is simply carrying out the economic agenda of the Republican establishment of which Bret is a member.
2
Just come and say man! People would respect more.
"I will vote for Trump id Sanders or Warren are the Democratic presidential candidates"
See?, is not that hard.
I'll vote blue no matter who. But there are a lot of Americans, especially in places like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, who won't. And as the Germans say, even if Warren or Sanders became president, it wouldn't get eaten as hot as what is was cooked.
2
It is evident to me that the best Democrat for the Presidency isn’t even running. His eloquence, intelligence and knowledge of our Constitution is evident. He would be the perfect foil to Mr Trump. His name is Adam Schiff.
5
The fundamental flaw in this argument is the underlying assumption that Trump will fail to achieve his objectives and that Sanders or Warren would succeed. I wouldn't go to bed every night worrying that Sanders or Warren would plunge us into a Socialist hellscape (like Sweden, heaven forfend?) - but I do go to bed every night worrying that Trump will bully and blunder us into war.
6
DJT is a "morally corrosive and corrupting force." So how can he also be "not a politically or economically catastrophic one"? The latter follows from the former, particularly when it is from such high levels of government.
And one could easily argue that DJT has already, in fact, been a political and economic catastrophe. A high stock market is hardly evidence to the contrary; it is the basis of the dangerously high inequality we are now experiencing that will inevitably lead to chaotic social upheaval. Sensible European leaders have essentially given up on normal relations with the US until DJT is gone, and our standing in the world has been irremediably diminished the world over. Scientists and professional diplomats are routinely dismissed in favor of a fatigued, narcissistic ideology.
Life is "pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama"? Tell that to the Jews, Muslims, Hispanics, and African Americans in this country who live in increasing fear, to the still unemployed, to those who are losing their healthcare access, to the women who want legal access to abortion (and even just abortion information).
I am a privileged white male, and my life is in no way "pretty much the same" as it was under Obama. Neither is anyone's.
5
OMG I could barely stomach this article this morning as the President's henchmen are lamely arguing in the Senate. Are you seriously slamming Bernie because he wants to stop fossil fuels and end private (and greedy) health insurance companies? We have to have faith that the balance of power will keep any president from going to far astray. This isn't helping.
3
I disagree with Brett. He makes vague assertions that Warren has politically dishonest policies, but does not define what they are and why are they “dishonest”.
This kind of journalistic innuendo is pernicious because most people who read it on the right swallow it as fact without bothering to check what it is really saying: nothing at all!
As far as his assertion/opinion that most of the work force would be employed by the government, so what? What’s so bad about that? They would have a living wage and benefits which right now are depending on the whim of the private employers.
I am not enamored of Bernie, although I voted for him the last time around, vis a vis Elizabeth and Amy, but I think he is afar better bet than Trump !
2
You call Trump a “morally corrosive and corrupting force”. But then make an argument that he should remain in office for logistical and economic reasons.
Sadly, this seems to parallel the position of many of the senate republicans as well.
4
All Dem candidates are institutionalists--they will play with those in the playground. I can't see any of them actively subverting our government. They will win or lose initiatives based on the rule of law and conventional arm twisting--because they know and respect law.
End of discussion.
4
Perhaps I, a Western Canadian from a very "Conservative" area, can honestly claim that the Trump presidency has not affected my life in any real negative way (at least economically), but even I can see that someone of moral character is required in the white house. Yes, economically things are fine, but even I can see that another Trump presidency will lead to Democratic demise....worldwide. When I look back on the damage to truth and fairness world-wide, just in the last 3 years, it is astonishing. And yes, I do blame Trump and the Republicans.
I know a few things for sure. 1. Sixty Three Iranian- Canadians would be alive today, if not for the Trump presidency. 2. My once close family would not be divided right down the middle (yes...even in Canada we now can "enjoy" Christmases with our Trumpian relatives) 3. I would still be a Conservative if not for the Trump presidency. Now, my eyes have been opened and am finally admitting that I am a....gasp..."Liberal".
ANY moral leader is better than an amoral leader. Autocratic dictators can be "left" or "right", but Autocratic Dictators should NEVER be supported by either "left" or "right" moral people.
8
More fear-mongering by the well-off chattering class,unwilling to share the wealth with the peons and serfs.
One of the best parts of going in the NYTimes comments section is getting my daily dose of salty, parochial, anti-Bernie balderdash, from your average everyday Centrist concern trolls and limousine liberals afraid of a more just society.
We are the closest to outright fascism we have ever been. And it is not being carried out in the name of "socialism" but corporatism, masquerading as "free market" capitalism, and in the name of nationalism/imperialism disguised as patriotism, and Christian fundamentalism disguised as morality. If you do not see this, then you are simply too comfortable in your bubble of financial security and don't really want to look with eyes wide open. You might feel secure for now, but it won't last much longer. This top-heavy house of cards is on the verge of crashing and you are going to find yourself on the opposite side of the fence of the oligarchs you presently support and defend.
The reality is that Bernie Sanders is still the most popular politician in America and is beating Trump 52-45 in the latest CNN poll. He is also beating him in all the significant midwestern battleground states.
The foundation of the left is solidarity and co-operation amongst the working class against the capitalist class.
Not with the super-rich, not with exploiters, not with the puppets of those exploiters like Biden, Pete, Warren or Klobuchar.
Feel the Bern!
4
In real life, a clear majority of the American people, including a majority of GOP voters, support the policies proposed by Sanders and Warren. Here's why.
All other Western democratic capitalist countries have included those policies for decades already, and instead of all the "Armageddons" that Republicans told us we'd have to fear, it has been abundantly proven that they do the exact opposite: they benefit both the country and ordinary citizens.
So conservatives' fundamental mistrust of "human nature" is just that: an irrational fear.
Time to learn how to deal with it, instead of massively spreading fake news so that you can continue to win elections even though no one actually supports your policies anymore - and then even accept an utterly corrupt clown as your "leader" ... .
3
Thank you for the affirmation that rich people would, in fact, prefer fascism over paying taxes. We’ve always known it, but it’s good to have fresh reminders of what we’re up against.
If the ruling elite did not want radical politics, perhaps you ought not to have let national problems fester into global crises.
2
So essentially you stand for nothing except more of the same that caused the elections of Trump, Bolsonaro, Brexit in the UK and the rise of populism all over the world, most noticeably in Europe, and, in fact, significant American support for Sanders and Warren.
Useless, frightened opinion by a writer who looks more and more out of touch.
2
Yes, at least a couple of the Democratic candidates have pandered to the young and to the left, offering foolish policies that they cannot at any rate deliver. However, unlike Trump, all seem relatively sane, capable of listening to expertise, willing to deal with reality. Unlike Trump, their dishonesties are those of "normal" politicians, not the inabilities of Trump to deal with reality. It is unlikely that these politicians would sell out their country purely for personal gain, nor engage in the systemic corruption of Trump. And let's face it, while Trump might not have totally destroyed everything yet, his inclinations seem wrong, and his behavior has not been improving. Does the writer really believe he would not do worse in a second term?
2
As a pre-Boomer (in other words—ancient) I’m with the Millennials. Millennials care about affordable health care, climate disaster—that’s already here, and affordable education.
If Bernie or Elizabeth could get past Republicans and lobbyists, maybe jobs for frackers would be lost. Now that would be sad. We’d miss out on those fun earthquakes and that delicious poisoned water. Could they get jobs in cleanup of toxic waste, or solar and wind power?
Yes, insurance company jobs would be lost. Things change all the time. Whatever happened to people who built carriages, typewriters, VCRs?
I want kids who have stainless spoons to have a chance equal to that of kids with silver spoons to afford an education.
Neither Bernie or Liz would have our allies cringing, or Putin licking his chops in glee. Neither is a mean spirited buffoon. So please, Bret, don’t imply that we’d be better off with Trump.
4
Only in Bret Stephens’ world is a Senator who champions the middle class deemed the radical, while the impeached Incumbent who flouts the Constitution daily, dabbles in starting wars with rogue nations, and poisons our government and society with his cultish loyalists is not all that much of a threat.
Despots rise upon the soft enablement of those who underestimate their danger.
1
Actually my life is different under Trump. I see issues I care about upended--health care, the environment, women's rights, the separation of church and state, and many others. I live in a constant state of stress that we will have WW III, and there are no adults in charge. I find his racism, his corruption, his amorality nauseating. I will vote for anyone over Trump.
3
Bret, to say "the truth of Trumpism is that it’s a morally corrosive and corrupting force, not a politically or economically catastrophic one" is not true. Trumpism is economically catastrophic. Trump and his allies denigrate basic and advanced education, and they denigrate the advancement of science. This will obviously have economically catastrophic consequences for the US.
1
"Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama."
Bret, with all due respect to a rather respectable, conservative, you are quite wrong in the above statement. Not only has Trump and his criminal cabinet sought to undo all that was good in America, they have frequently succeeded.
From Trump's policies of keeping our allies on edge, while genuflecting to Putin and other bloody-handed despots, he has kept up his war against all things Obama. He and the Republican Party continue to destroy our election system by keeping democratic voters away from the voting booths.
Education secretary, Betsy DeVos, continues her war on public education while rewarding for-profit trade schools beholden to shareholders (like her own family) more than to the needs of student.
Interior and EPA have been stripped of career scientists and regulators in favor of those who need to be regulated.
These infractions are a mere sliver of the criminality infused into every corner of the Trump administration. Over the decades, Trump has watched NY mobsters and how they work, finding willing thugs who will protect him from prosecution, and worse.
Trump has found his thugs in Fox News, and other right-wing media gasbags, as well as House and Senate Republicans who fear his tweets more than their voters.
No, Bret. Nothing is as it was under Obama. We are on track toward autocratic rule. One more Blue Wave is required to end the madness.
1
Anyone but Trump does not mean that the choice needs to be either Sanders or Warren, there are other Democrats and even some Republicans that would be up to the task. Mike Pence would be a better choice than the current president. Eroded the foundations of Democracy, no, but just as you don't plunge head first into an unknown body of water, this president is testing the waters. He hasn't suppressed the press, not yet but he does like the idea. Every point you make he hasn't done, yet. The only thing this president cares about that is American is the dollar. His term in the White House is nothing more than a four year free promotional advertisement for the Trump brand. Trump has sullied our nation, our public servants and our reputation as a world leader. He is a cancer that needs to be removed as soon as possible.
1
Someday, the far left will provide some rational basis for their constant “sky is falling” cries that President Trump is an existential threat to life on Earth.
For the past three years, we normal folks have been waiting to see the stormtroopers marching down Main Street; judges hauled off to gulags; and books burned in the town square; etc.
what we’ve seen is conservative judges appointed to courts (just as liberals appointed liberal judges); police officers reasonably enforcing the law; illegal aliens being deported when appropriate; schools teaching; hospitals treating; the economy improving; and the national debt continuing to grow at an unacceptable rate.
To those of us not subject to unwarranted hysteria, life under Trump has been a bit better than under liberals, but it nothing to write home about.
1
And now chameleon Bret shows his true color. Having spent months hiding behind red, white and blue false coloration, pretending to be a reasonable American, pretending to be a never-Trumper, he is changing back fujly to his natural Republican-Party-uber-alles red. Now we see clearly that he wants another Trump term, no matter how devastating to America, because he sees that as a win for his Republican Party. Using typical Republican propaganda tactics of cherry-picked quotes and out of context factoids, he is now arguing that Trump isn’t all that bad, and those Democrats are far more dangerous. No need to look at the long term deleterious effects of trashing environmental and workplace regulations, of sending the budget deficits and national debt skyrocketing, of destroying our relationships with allies and emboldening our enemies. No, just fear the Republican propaganda cartoon representations of the Democratic candidates. If Bret weren’t such a good Republican, he might be capable of shame at his flagrant dishonesty, but, as we are seeing with every single Senate Republican, the morals that make shame for bad behavior possible do not reside in Republicans.
Yet another column from man-without-a-party Bret Stephens that reveals the moral and logical bankruptcy of his position as a Never-Trump Republican. When your party has gone off the rails because its ideology/behavior over the last 12 years have come to an unsustainable climax, why not try to muddy the waters?
He cannot actually expect his readers to buy the argument that they should re-evaluate voting for Sanders or Warren because Trump's utter degradation of our democracy has been "overstated." Has Bret been following, you know, this hidesous sham of an impeachment trial? Does he forget that the issue is not just Trump himself, but a feckless and cowtowing party that enables his worst, anti-democratic impulses and behavior?
The worst part of this column: when Bret implores us to soften our views of Trump's destructiveness, he reasons that the President hasn't "significantly" suppressed the press and also didn't outright "stop Congress from impeaching him." So according to Brett, the fact that Trump hasn't yet become a total dictator and done what would functionally amount to a coup should assuage our fears?
Stephens likes to think of himself as somehow apart from Trump's GOP, but with arguments and little phrases like this, he only proves that he's been tainted. When your argument is that Trump hasn't "significantly" suppressed the First Amendment, then I see no distinction between Stephens and the abominable phenomenon he claims to be apart from. He's caught the bug.
2
To make even the remotest comparison between Trump and any of the Democratic candidates is a travesty. Does Mr. Stephens require the list of lies, the demonstrations of ignorance, and the strategic gross errors he has made to get the point?
2
I used to fall into the "anyone but Trump" camp, but then I remembered Dennis Rodman. I think Dennis Rodman would be a worse president than Donald Trump.
2
“Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama.”
Say that to all of the people of color, immigrants, and non-Christians who live in fear, who are more explicitly discriminated against and slandered and targeted, and who are experiencing the worst effects of the moral decline in this country.
Your privilege is showing, Bret.
3
The real success of right wing media is not the promotion of right wing positions, but fear-mongering about the left. Seemingly intelligent conservatives can see through Trump's act, but are nonetheless convinced that progressives are a greater danger to society. Erick Erickson was spouting similar nonsense on Bill Maher's show last night. He acknowledged that Trump is a menace, but still could not imagine himself voting for Warren or Sanders.
These reactions appear visceral, and manifest themselves as something like "yes, Trump presents a fascist threat, but nothing nearly as dangerous as 'socialism.'" The GOP's blowing up of the deficit to give even more money to rich people is met with a yawn, but OMG, don't let the progressives in or it's economic doom!
The most powerful part of the propaganda is not informational, but emotional. It is the generalized transmission of a feeling; a sense of foreboding with regard to anything that even whiffs of social reform. As we can see here, even pundits like Stephens can't avoid its subconscious undercurrents. Unfortunately for the rest of us, they then use their formidable writing skills to spread fallacious arguments without even realizing that they are doing it.
It is a shame that Stephens has this position to propagandize against change when we need it most.
For better, more intelligent views, the “Comments” are the citizens and readers opinions.
1
Climate change, gun control, the proliferation of fake news, sexual assault, the demeaning of all people of color, gender, disability -- none of that matters? Bret, you identified a conclusion and are trying to develop a rational argument to convince us of it. But here's the thing: I'm not even sure you've convinced yourself.
1
One big serving of socialist scare for the election, better dead than red , or to put it in Bret's terms : better Trump than the someone who doesn't cowtow to the free market capitalism . The assault on the press, the lies, the disdain for the constitution, nothing matters next to fracking and a healthy insurance industry (even so the insurance industry is making billions from healthcare). After all, Bret is a true republican, when it comes to his position as a white privileged member of society: Trump is annoying with his tweets but after all, he is good for my pocket book ... The apples do not fall far from the tree !
"The truth of Trumpism is that it’s a morally corrosive and corrupting force, not a politically or economically catastrophic one. "
Apparently it has not occurred to Mr. Stephens that the more propaganda sources like Fox, the more lapdogs, like GOP members of congress, and the more apparatchiks Mr. Trump appoints to the federal courts, that political and economic catastrophic results are not merely a possibility, but inevitable.
What does one expect to happen from a corrosive or corrupting force?
It makes me wonder if Mr. Stephens was one of those brilliant pundits who assured us all that Mr. Trump would rise to the office and become presidential, when it was obvious and predictable to many of us that Trump would remain the bratty, insecure, paranoid, ignorant man, and serial fabricator he had been during the campaign.
Warren or Sanders worse or just as bad as Trump? Simple. No.
Did Bernie destroy democracy in Burlington? No! Did he introduce a Communist order in Burlington? No! Did he disrupt commerce and industry in Burlington? No! Did he improve life and democracy in Burlington? Yes! Did he make it better for those with modest incomes to live in Burlington? Yes!
Mr. Stephens, yours is a diatribe with no foundation.
I am a former Vermonter whose staunch Republican parents learned to enjoy working with Bernie. I admire what he did and how he did it. He restored our pride in what is now one of the most beautiful cities in our country but which had been neglected until he came along.
"The truth of Trumpism is that it’s a morally corrosive and corrupting force, not a politically or economically catastrophic one."
Oh. Well. I guess that's OK then!
Here's the thing. Sanders and Warren are institutionalists who will have to get legislation through what is in all likelihood going to be a Republican senate still led by McConnell. Sanders and Warren will get exactly nothing on their agenda done.
The current situation is untenable because that same Mitch McConnell will continue to let Trump trounce the constitutional order. McConnell and senate Republicans combined with Trump are the true threat to pur republic.
5
The problem with the “devil you know argument” is that it’s the devil. Say what you want about Sanders and Warren, but at their base, they at least possess a moral code. As is evidenced by the world’s trending embrace of demagogues and strong men, we can ill afford four more years of an unrestrained Trump. It is the choice between an existential threat in Trump, or a leftest government. Trump is a threat to democracy.
476
Nothing will matter if we don't reverse the trajectory our planet is on and that the world's scientists unanimously agree upon. Climate change is real. Time is running out. We've got one opportunity to keep Earth inhabitable for future generations. Does anyone really believe Donald Trump will initiate these life saving changes for the future of humanity and the rest of life on Earth? In fact he is doing everything in his power to actually make things worse. C'mon Brett, wake up. The priority of global survival supersedes any and all arguments you can make about Donald Trump's reelection. I'd vote for Donald Duck over Donald Trump if it helped to save our planet from the consequences of climate change.
2
This winter as we watch Australia burn and twiddle our fingers about the outrages idea that it is somehow our actions that might be causing just a bit of it. We are still being asked what is the moderate way out of our self emulation? Bret, we collectively have dumped the gasoline on our head and even now are trying to flick our Bic. You want to debate the merits of Premium, High Octane or Regular. We have danced down the path of the Market, supply-side economy and here we are watching the whole world begin to burn. Well, we have tried making little changes for the last 40 years making the rich just a little richer each year, and now we are truly out of the frying pan and in the fire. It is not the first time in human events that we have had to make some big changes, and if we want to survive we better get started.
4
The biggest problem with a Sanders or Warren Presidency is that it would be ineffective. They are both proposing policies that they cannot push through on their own and it is doubtful that they could get them passed even with a majority in the House or Senate. That being said, if it has to be one of them, Sanders is at least honest about his intentions and the possible cost of what he proposes. Warren, on the other hand, is a better educated, more polite and moral version of Donald Trump. She wants what she wants and she wants it now, and she will do what she can to destroy anybody that gets in her way.
1
Sanders is no Warren. Look at the work she did under the Consumer Financial Protection Agency in the aftermath of the 2008 financial meltdown. Warren would not gut the State Department. Warren would not fill her top cabinet positions with lobbyists whose monetary interests run in direct opposition to the purpose of the agency they lead. Warren would not create a hostile work environment whereby an exodus of exemplary career public servants leave their government jobs or whereby the National Archives fearfully edits a photograph to avoid her ire. Warren would not circumvent hearings and appoint “acting” individuals to cabinet posts. Warren would not engage in shadow diplomacy sending her personal attorney to dig up dirt on a political opponent nor would she flout the law or abuse her power. Warren would not thumb her nose at disclosing her tax returns or enrich her personal coffers by encouraging pay to play at her non-existing golf courses and hotel chains. Warren would not destroy American Capitalism— it is already doing that to itself starting with the Reagan era when the government became the enemy and Rupert Murdoch got the opportunity to amass a fortune and create a media organization that dismantles the truth and which has since been abetted by Citizens United. Sanders thinks only he is right. Warren hasn’t stopped learning; she was a republican at one point. Will she win the nomination? I don’t think so. Will Sanders win? I hope not.
2
As a devout centrist, I am not now worried about dictatorship from the far left. It isn't as if what they are talking about will ever happen; not unless the House holds and the Senate flips.
Even then, there is still the inherent, dysfunctional undertow that seems to be the guest of honor whenever Democrats in power get together to strategize--cue Clinton's first term when the Presidency and both Houses belonged to Democrats, and the Supreme Court was comparatively liberal.
The populist/progressive push is no putsch, because it is mostly all talk, and everybody knows it. Sanders has been living in a Socialist utopia for more than thirty years because he has enjoyed the enchanted life of Congressman and Senator, all expenses covered. He has not been required to actually persuade a voting majority through compromise--or to actually accomplish anything of note--even in his own party. Do I imagine that, as President, he will suddenly become the Persuader-In-Chief? Hah! Most of his peers, especially the Democrats, don't like him...
Warren has to navigate that oppositional minefield between rivalrous Democratic fiefdoms. If she succeeds, the process will "center" her, because that's what it does, and she is action-oriented and practical, underneath it all.
If it comes to that decision, I will hold my nose, cross my fingers, and do what it takes to throw the bum out. Given what you know, so should you.
Right now (and in November, please) it has to be anybody but Trump.
3
This argument has two big flaws. First, it understates the damage Trump and his Soprano family collaborators have done to the US and the world (as well as how much time it will take to undo the damage). And second, while Sanders and Warren do propose extreme and unworkable solutions to serious American social problems, their legislative proposals to enact these ideas will be dead on arrival to any Congress that will take office with them in January 2021. The Senate and House Republicans are loyal Soprano Family foot soldiers. No conceivable Congress taking office in 2021 would fall in line with Bernie’s policy panaceas or Warren’s either.
5
Citing Brian Reidl's suspect study showing government spending rising to 70% of GDP under Sanders' plans, which miserably fails the smell test, Bret Stephens has lowered his standing in this reader's eyes.
I'm not a Sanders supporter, but demonizing his plans is beneath Stephens, I'd have thought. Or worse, he accepts Reidl's analysis at face value which shows economic naivete.
4
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren make me nervous. In many ways, they remind me of Donald Trump when he was running for president.
The key difference between these two Democrats and that one Republican is that they are a lot smarter than he will ever be.
But that doesn't mean they're better, maybe just more dangerous. I don't think either one has the ability to get along with fellow Democrats should either be elected president.
The only commonality between Sanders, Warren, Biden and Trump is that they are all senior citizens so the argument of age simply melts away.
I know a lot of people voted for Trump because they did not trust Clinton. I worry a similar mindset could occur depending on who the Democratic nominee will be.
A presidential election should not become some kind of trick bag, but I think it could. I'm as nervous who will win the nominee as I am of Trump winning. This is not a good place to be.
2
At least some of this discussion would be better had if we had some idea of where the legislative branch will settle out post presidential selection. I reject pretty much everything Trump stands for and does, with his assault on the Constitution at the top of the list. However this is not and has never been a socialist nation, and any migration away from that should be carefully debated by something other than the intergenerational popularity contest we're now seeing. As a practical matter we should expect many voters to use the "better a devil I know" argument, hoping Congress will restrain Trump. The other side of a very thin coin is to hope in case the socialists win, it will do the same. If I have to I will vote for the Constitution and restraint of whatever egotist obtains the office.
1
Ok, we got the opinion of a conservative Republican who he will support for the nomination. So this Democrat now is 100% sure that he supports Bernie Sanders. Thanks Bret for convincing me.
4
If the 2020 election were solely about who would control the executive branch, including the regulatory apparatus and America's fearsome military might, I would vote for the Democrat, but the 2020 election is also (like all elections) for the Supreme Court, the institution that has the final say on all legislation, federal and state and where Sanders and Warren make absolutely no concessions -- even symbolic -- to conservative beliefs.
Thus, I am on the fence on my vote. I have some economic conservative ideas (, eg I'm very wary of public sector unions), I actually support Medicare For All and am a very committed environmentalist in my personal life, but I can't stand the thought of the ACLUification of the Supreme Court.
Mr. Stephens, a consequence of your false equivalency argument could sustain voting for Trump or not voting which, amounts to the same thing. If Mr. Trump is elected for a second term this form of reasoning would have been instrumental for some in that result. In that circumstance, it is hard for me to conceive of an act of contrition on your behalf that would square the deal. You really should think a bit more about the import of your idle musings.
jd
2
Bret, I have to take your warning with a grain of salt. I still believe in the balance that our three branches of government provides.
I would like to see specifically what you would like to see happen with respect to the major problems facing our country. Then I might have some reference points in judging your criticisms. Perhaps Gail could help you with that.
1
The danger Donald Trump and his reelection presents is that most if not all successful, self made, powerful, people will tell you they had a role model that helped shape their beliefs, mentor them toward their career goals.
For better or much more likely the worse, Donald Trump has so far and as he continues in the most powerful office in the world will knowingly or not, serve as a powerful role model for someone, maybe not even born yet, that desires to be like him. That person will likely aim to achieve even greater status, enact even more change, and attain even more power, control and domination over the levers of govenment and our daily lives.
Donald Trump when finally out of office, be it impeachment, losing the election or ultimately death has and will continue to exert an extraodinarily negative influence over our country for who know how long and in ways we don't even know yet.
I *might* pay attention to Mr. Stevens' arguments, in spite of his previous assaults on logical thinking, but has he forgotten Congress? Hard to do much if you don't have a supermajority in the Senate, which is definitely not happening in our lifetimes.
I'm no fan of Bernie the kvetch Sanders, but Mr. Stephens writes as if he could get any of his "program" through Congress if he were elected president. His career in Congress, however, has produced nothing--a totally ineffective Senator. Hence, no damage should he be elected. He would act intelligently on the environment--Trump's attacks on the environment you fail to mention as you do his assaults on the checks and balances. Much the same reasoning applies to Warren though she is more legislatively adept than Sanders. But to match up Trump with Sanders and Warren--c'mon!
There's a good possibility that Klobuchar or Buttigieg can win, which would be an incredible change from the disastrous Trump.
Bernie Sanders and Eliz Warren scare me, too. However, I'd hold my nose and vote (very reluctantly) for either of them in order to get rid of Trump b-e-c-a-u-s-e Republicans in Congress would significantly curtail what those two want to impose. At least with either of them, Trump would be gone. That's worth anything, imho. Then, it's likely either of them would be 1-term presidents anyway and, with a little bit of luck, Dems could do better next time around.
1
Bret - You should know that the Constitution will prevent Sanders, Warren or any President from enacting any legislation unless a majority of the House and 60% of the Senate approve and pass it. Is your true point that what the people want is so threatening that majority rule should be avoided ?
1
@Rob The Constitution only requires majority approval in the Senate, the same as in the House. The 60-vote rule is a matter of custom which can be changed; some Democrats would like to eliminate it.
@Carl Yaffe Yes, I know all about the 60 vote rule and how is corrupts the Constitution, but I doubt it would be changed.
Mr. Stephens,
You have left out a number of critical things: foremost is Trump's attach on the environment and his detachment from science regarding climate change. Nothing has to the potential to have a greater consequence. Also, his consistent lying and haranguing of our most vital institutions creates a latent instability in our democracy which could become kinetic all too quickly.
As for Bernie and Warren, they would need a majority in both houses to get anything substantive passed which is unlikely. And even if Dems controlled both houses there are many moderate democrats that would not be persuaded. Meanwhile, they would bring stability back to climate policy and foreign relations.
4
I guess you’re ok with how the economic furniture’s arranged. It’s working out pretty well for a shrinking number of Americans, including you and me. But try this thought experiment. How would you feel about these arrangements if punditry got paid the minimum wage sans health care?
7
Was Bret listening in on this morning’s bedroom conversation of two avowed Independents? We have voted both ways on the top and undercard of our ballots for more than 3 decades. This morning’s discourse concluded with, at least wrt Mr. Sanders (my small town mayor in college btw), the devil-you-know argument has currency in the swing states. Regrettably, vast numbers of voting Americans on both sides of the aisle lack the good sense to see the value of moderate policies (e.g., some lessening of taut regulations, but not Trumpian evisceration of clean air, water, and food regulatory paradigms). Sanders is Trump in sheep’s clothing. Hard stop. Warren is extraordinarily intelligent, but she too may be perceived as the greater of two evils and mobilize ‘defensive’ voting. Her mendacity, unlike Trump’s, is not overt. What you see is not what you get. Biden may be a bit too avuncular for those seeking a safe space. He plausibly can beat, and very well trounce, Trump. Paired with Klobuchar or Harris, we have a winning ticket.
2
I am not a Sanders or Warren supporter. But Trump is actively trying to declare himself President for Life.
No other candidate is actively trying to destroy our democracy. And he just might get away with it.
7
I am an anyone but Trump voter and based on what I have seen of the present Republican party (now the Trump party) I will never vote for a Republican again for any office. As far as how expensive and divisive the ideas of Sanders and Warren being, those ideas are just that. They are aspirational not realistic and will never happen because too many members of Congress will not vote to go down those roads.
10
You argue that Trump has done no lasting damage, therefore we, as a nation and as a world, will survive a second term with no lasting damage. You are ignoring the fact that in a second term Trump would be unconstrained by the imperatives of running for re-election. In short, we would see Trump unbound. That is the stuff of nightmares.
7
Trump is always unbound. I can deal with that a lot better than Sanders or Warren.
As if getting rid of fracking is a bad thing. The toll on aquifers is not worth it,eh? Bret bemoans the loss of jobs but somehow has a soft spot for the status quo of devastation of the middle class - what about the loss of full time jobs and the transfer to a 'gig' economy where time at home with the kids is supplanted with time behind the wheel driving the 1% to their parties? Turning the ship of state in a new direction happened after the depression and it needs to happen again after the 'great recession', the upshot of which is the election of Trump.
5
Your column is fear-mongering at its finest. Fear is not the smartest motivator but has been an effective tool of the Right. Climate change and gun regulation are two issues igniting young voters. They will not be moved by your arguments that the middle will opt for "none of the above". They will be heard on the issues that will shape their future and, I predict, they will come out to vote in unprecedented numbers.
9
@Diane: So it was in 2008 for Obama, but he was left high and dry by the same people in the census year election two years later.
Bret, I'm disappointed. You totally miss the bigger point. You state that most Americans' lives are much the same under Trump as they were under Obama. Even more importantly you state: "The truth of Trumpism is that it's a morally corrosive and corrupting force, not a politically or economically catastrophic one." That's the point. He is corroding and corrupting the country daily. In three years he has done serious damage to our institutions (think about the intelligence community for just one example; better yet, think about about our standing amongst our fellow nations.) You think that's OK, as long as our quotidian lives remain the same. For how long? How long will it take for the corrosion and corruption to destroy totally the fabric of our society? I'm no fan of Bernie or Warren, and I hope our nominee is one of the more moderate candidates. If, however, one of them becomes the nominee, I'll take my chances with a president who may have extreme ideas but is sane as opposed to a madman who thinks he is king.
12
Anyone but Trump general election; anyone but Sanders or Warren in the democratic primary. It's one thing to identify problems, populists on the left and right have no problem with complaints, but addressing problems while minimizing the creation of new problems (unintended consequences) is a challenge beyond the capacities of both the narrow-minded left, represented by Sanders and Warren, and the narrow-minded right represented by, well most of today's Republican party. Sanders and Warren are both dangerous divisive ideologues, not as bad as Trump but bad enough. Our system needs some massive tweaking, not a disruptive overhaul; 90% evolution 10% revolution. Sorry for the trite cliche but we should not throw out the baby (the vibrancy of our economy) with the the bathwater (the excesses of the current system). There are some ideas the left has with merit, restructuring taxes, a green new deal of sorts, but the people proposing these bold programs would likely implement them recklessly. Personally I believe Bloomberg is the most qualified in that he studies issues deeply and has a track record of putting ideas into practice (despite some notable missteps). Buttigieg offers a vision for beginning the process of reuniting the nation and demonstrates excellent temperament and judgement. Klobuchar is clearly a competent choice. For now though my primary vote goes to Joe Biden as a likely one term president grooming a worthy VP successor as the best chance of defeating Trump.
2
There is nothing more important than defeating tRump. His administration is gutting vital environmental protections and denies climate change, an existential threat to survival of mankind. His foreign policy actions, from abandonment of allies to imposition or tariffs dangerously disrupt the world order. I dislike Bernie and do not agree with the policies of either Warren or him. I will vote for them if either is the candidate because there is no way there will be enough support for their policies to become law. What will happen is reality result in policies that move the needle toward a more equitable society. Tax reform that is fair, not a giveaway to the 1% and corporations, and movement toward some form of universal health, reasonable environmental protections and regaining respect of both allies and adversaries. There is no way there is support for destruction of an entire Industry and most people recognize that corporations are not the enemy but vital job creators that must be fairly regulated to assure corporate policies recognize the interests of constituents from employees to the country and localities where they are located. Without infrastructure ranging from contract law to roads and bridges plus a healthy educated workforce corporations cannot enjoy long term success.
4
To be read alongside Ezra Klein's essay today about the roots of and remedies for the coming legitimacy crisis.
2
Bret: are you saying you'd vote for Trump if either Warren or Sanders were the candidate? Or would you not vote? Either choice is unacceptable. The first order of business is to get Trump out of there
Then it's time to remember that Congress does serve as a moderating influence on an honest president. In a normal (i.e. non-Trump) world, the two branches of government (executive and legislative) lessen the singular influence of each.
Consider, as well, what the country will look like with a second Trump term. I don't want to live in that country. My guess is you don't either.
Please vote. And please vote for Trump's opponent, whoever she may be!
5
@Betsy Blosser If Bret lives in the tri-state New York area (or in California, for that matter), it doesn't matter whether he votes for president, let alone for whom, as the Electoral votes of all of those states are pre-destined to go to the Democratic candidate.
Why is it that everything that comes from the right, including the never-Trumpers, sounds like an extortion racket? Sanders and Warren may not be the center right the totally-out-of-power Republicans like Stephens want, but they are also not the caricatures of destruction they present them to be. I, as a Californian, support Biden simply because he has the administrative knowledge and depth to start repairing what Trump has damaged. But continuing to paint Sanders and Warren as bogeymen will only serve to tear down the Democratic Party which even Stephens sees is the last bulwark against Trump’s tyranny.
6
I'm always surprised at how easily we fall for the lie that the President gets to make all of these decisions. Both Trump and Obama promised in their campaigns to get us out of endless wars; Both instead increased our involvement. Both promised us better treatment of whistleblowers: Both have gone after them even more. Both promised us relief from the surveillance state: We are seeing more intrusion into our private lives than ever before. We're like a bus flying downhill with failing brakes and we are arguing about who should be driving. The one demon we should ALL be fighting is Citizens United - the train wreck that has upended our democratic process and makes columns like this and our opinions not worth the pixels it takes to make them.
3
My first vote for President was in 1972 for George McGovern, a far left progressive running against an unpopular president. Nixon won 49 states
I won't make that mistake again.
1
@Neighbor2
It's not 1972 anymore. Gens X, Y & Z are now over 60% of the electorate. They lean farther left than their elders. And they outvoted Boomers & Silents in both 2016 and 2018. Watch as they do so again in 2020, by an even larger margin.
4
@Neighbor2 Why was it a mistake? If you had voted for Nixon, or not voted, would the result have been different?
Have you considered the possibility that something might be deeply wrong with the American voters?
1
I don't disagree with a lot of what you have said. However, although my life, economically, has not changed under Trump, my emotional life has changed, and my view of the future has changed. I wake up every morning and go to bed every night worrying about what has happened to our democracy. Given another 4 years, Trump and his minions will probably destroy it. However, I see Sanders as particularly inflexible, and without a global vision. Warren will insist on her own way, and not listen to anyone who disagrees with her. Conservatives hate them. Actually, we do need someone more middle of the road, with common sense, who can bring civility back to public discourse, who isn't scandal ridden, reverse Trump's policies, and set us on the path t more income equality, address climate change and actually stop endless wars. I think the only viable candidates in this mold are Joe and Amy, and maybe Bloomberg. But if it comes to staying home, voting for Trump or voting for any Democrat, I will vote for the Democrat.
7
Neither a Sanders nor Warren voter am I, right now. I disagree with Bret S. because neither Sanders' or Warren's programs would stand a chance passing congress. Despite DT's assertions, Congress, both houses, would either refuse to pass their programs or would modify them drastically.
1
A few comments:
--If Trump succeeds in demolishing the Affordable Care Act, as a doctor caring for poor people I will lose my job. So a second term of Trump could absolutely demonstrably affect more people than the first.
--There is no way Sanders and Warren are getting their ambitious plans through Congress intact. So all of your doomsaying about what would happen in their administrations is really just fantasy.
6
Call me lacking in courage, but I'm looking to be relieved of political exhaustion. Listening to Bernie and Elizabeth exhausts me almost as much as listening to The Donald. Give me Biden, Pete, or Amy for relief, coupled with competence and responsible, bridges-across-the-aisle progressive effort. Right now, I'm thinking a Biden-Klobuchar ticket that would "sew up" the upper Midwest.
4
Essentially the choice is demand side bias econ policies or supply?
FDR bequeathed us demand side.
Reagan bequeathed us supply side.
Demand = wages; supply = wage suppression.
Graph 2 at bit.ly/EPI-study shows us that the median wage has been flat for 48+ years despite GNP rising 150%. From 1945 to 72 it rose in lock step with GNP (presumably when America was great).
Choosing Sanders is nothing other than choosing the Mixed Econ system FDR left us with.
Back in the day FDR ended the Great Depression and defeated global fascism and rebuilt a destroyed world.
He’ll do the same again if we let him.
4
Why would someone seemingly honorable resort to the “3 card monty” argument that Is standard for Republicans to use against “medicare for all”? That argument is that your withholding for healthcare would double while failing to note that the overall actual cost to a worker would shrink. Why would it shrink? The actual cost to an employer of a worker is salary PLUS healthcare insurance costs ( plus retirement). Since the worker doesn’t see this hidden cost, he doesn’t realize he is paying for it in lost wages. Since the cost of heath insurance under a single payor system would be lower than our current private system, the worker would actually be better off assuming the employer turns over to the worker the cost of the health insurance the employer is no longer paying. In essence, the new tax is LOWER than the cost of the premiums that the employer is paying( and considering in the cost of the employee). Try being more honest
7
Moderates and Democrats in general can bring the Republicans back towards the center by registering as Republicans and voting for moderate candidates in the Republican primaries. Take back that party and do it in a coordinated, strategic way.
The status quo is reckless.
Millennials, now in their early 30s, own 4% of American real estate. Boomers owned 32% at that age.
The top 10% of households are on track to have 100% of the wealth in the U.S. just 33 years from now.
The list goes on and on...
4
@Zep. Perhaps the ME-llennials should be patient and wait until their parents pass on their property to them.
“Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama.” Perhaps, although I could argue that civility is down and stress is up leading to an increase in opioid addiction and suicide. But that aside, it’s not the “now” I’m worried about - it’s the future. And under know circumstances can I imagine the offspring of an overwhelming majority of Americans will be better off should Trump get another term. Specifically in the areas of healthcare, the environment, and social services.
1
Your argument is based on the ability of Warren or Sanders to enact their leftist agenda. While they may have the support of the squad and their followers, they would not be able to gain the support of the centrists in their own party or the Republicans. I don't sense that Warren or Sanders would ignore the law and the constitution as Trump does. What these two candidates would continue is the deep divisions in this country that Trump has increased. They would not bring us together. The Democrats have other options, and all of them would certainly be better than Trump.
1
@John Bence: Warren and Saunders seem leftist only because of the move to of the Republican Party to the extreme right.
@Jeff Try to convince most Americans of that. Sanders has called himself a socialist. That puts him firmly on the left. I'm pretty far left myself, but I know that many Americans will not support the Sanders and Warren healthcare policies. Here in Las Vegas, the Culinary Union was largely responsible for Hillary carrying Nevada in 2016. They have a great healthcare plan, and they certainly would not be willing to trade if for what Warren and Sanders offer. I will be willing to bet that the Culinary Union will support Biden. Democrats will lose if they put forward a candidate who is as extreme in their own policies as Trump is in his.
1
I think the article touches something very important. To an extent related to this I do not understand why Bloomberg hasn't been able to get more traction - being a foreigner I see him as a good middle of the road solution for a country that is significantly divided politically. Somebody that could truly appeal to both the left and right, and hopefully bring both sides together to actually get things done. Maybe not to the extent the die hard Warren and Sanders supporters would like to see, but a good start for the future.
2
I bemoan the fact that hard working, financially pressed, time-pressed American citizens think we can be casual about our government. In older age I have had time to read extensively and think about what is going on, Unfortunately TV is no help in identifying how destructiveT's changes to our needed agencies that protect us for less pollution, better health, bette relations with other countries respect for the rule of law, etc.
Fact 1: No Democratic wants socialism; they want social policies that will preserve what is good about living here.
Fact 2: Our current financial health started before T Useless tax cuts. Our national debt under T is increasing by billions of dollars each year. We're digging ourselves into a frightening hole. No easy way out
Fact 3 Republicans are counting on ill informed voters. not knowing their self interest, will vote for dreams, not reality.
We must wake up and deal with reality.
7
If a Democrat would cast their vote for Trump over whomever may win the democratic nomination, they should re-evaluate their political nature and question if they themselves are democrats at all.
6
Why on earth should we listen to a Republican about who we, the Democrats, should nominate? What Bret et al really want is a moderate Republican cloaked as a Democrat...
8
What about climate change? Sewage now being allowed in our rivers? Reducing regulations on air quality? Allowing toxins to be spread on the land?
Elect a "democratic socialist " as opposed to destroying our world through disbelief in science?
Seems to be a no brainer choice to me. I am not a Bernie fan, but I will be voting for him if the nominee.
11
Trump has high jacked the Republican Party, even the radical right wing is now backing policies it decried just 4 years ago. Look at the 4 year old videos of today's Republican Senators calling out Trump's depraved propsed policies and statements.
Elizabeth Warren is the Democratic Capitalist candidate. She is the candidate that best exemplifies the common good. She wishes to give ordinary people of America the agency and power to influence our government, businesses, work life, safety, and democratic institutions for the common good.
From farmers, to mothers, to students, to children she plans to put people first as our country's values state - All created Equal.
7
@Folksy: I disagree. Trump did not hijack the Republican Party. He represents what the Republican Party has become: A far right wing, fascist, misogynistic and racist party. Trump was and is just what the Republicans wanted. I will never forget that the Republican Party opposed the Civil Rights Act. Liberal Republicans moved to the Democratic Party and conservative southern Democrats became Republicans overnight.
I am a blue state, blue bubble democrat and fear the election if Sanders or Warren is the nominee. I think Bret’s message is an important one...Trump will win if either of them is the democratic pick.
7
@CY Be an American first. Trump and the Republicans are destroying democracy. Vote for Trump and you too are destroying democracy. I don't like Bernie Sanders but any "democrat" is far better than Trump. For anyone who is not on the far right to say they will vote for Trump over any Democratic candidate is appalling or the writer is a Republican pretending to be a Democrat.
1
So the republicans continue to elect reckless candidates, such is Trump after Bush Jr., but the democrats should refrain and confine to middle-of-the-road candidates. I don’t think that this is how it works, because usually action triggers proportionate reaction. Sometimes the reaction could, and perhaps should, be acute in the other direction, until the political discourse converges towards a moderate middle.
8
Republican here who voted for President Obama. Anything but Trump would sink the country and capitalism.
Bernie is too old. Warren is too weird. And they both would sink the country with this massive reconstruction. Capitalism works, but it just needs some guardrails that aren't too radical. And people who feel left out need to work with the system.
My liberal friends here in Seattle (and they're dozens of flavors of them) always ask why I'm a Republican. I tell them one thing works: I'm for free markets.
America, love it or leave it. That's for the leftists and socialists that support Bernie Sanders and Liz Warren.
4
@Thomas Penn in Seattle : Wealth over Liberty? "Love it or leave it" to you really means "my way or the highway". What you are telling me is that if I don't vote the Republican Ticket, I'm a traitor who must leave my country? That is fascism. Exactly why you will vote for Trump.
Anyone but Trump is still the right approach. We survived disaster in his first term, but are living on borrowed time. However, a moderate candidate is still the best approach for normalizing the out-of-control Republicans in Congress. Best for normalization would be a moderate Republican president, but if that is not possible, a moderate Democrat.
4
So many commenters have zeroed in, articulately and passionately, on the terrible reductionism and noblesse oblige in Bret's piece, it's hard to add too much. I would note these twin patterns in his columns over the past two years: Bret was very late to the party with the view he expresses (finally!) in the opening paragraph, that Donald Trump is an utterly lawless president and execrable human person. Bret--just a quick heads up: we have known that for some time now! And Bret has also, for some time now, written columns in which he presents alarmist, and arguably off the mark, critiques of both Ms. Warren and Mr. Sanders. Sounds like more of the same here. I'm so weary of appeals, no matter how sophisticated, to moderation in the face of the extremity and, now, constitutional nihilism of the Republicans. Republicans who have no concept of, nor commitment to, a true republic.
5
Thank you Bret. We need to reform our nation, not burn it down. The anticipated candidates in 2020 Trump v. Sanders or Warren present the same choice as 2016 - pick your deeply flawed candidate. My wasted vote on Neither in 2016 stands, but I hope there is a better alternative this election.
4
Why exactly should we taking advice from a Republican on how to beat Trump? Somebody's whose on career has done VERY well under Trump pretending to be one of the sole voices in his party "against" the President?
6
Stick to the facts:
Sanders Seizes Lead in Volatile Iowa Race, Times Poll Finds
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/25/us/politics/democratic-iowa-poll-sanders.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
Bernie in 2020 and beyond. May the lord give him health and a long life to lead us out of the abyss we have fallen into.
As I've said numerous times that all of the republican never Trumpers would only vote for the likes of Biden or Bloomberg. Brett has proven one thing to me after his piece, just ignore anything he writes in the future. Never trump means never, not with a caveat.
8
Well said.
I have softened in my categorical "I will vote for ANYBODY but Trump" stance, since 1.) he has been hemmed in and prevented from wreaking as much damage to our republic as I had feared, and 2.) the Democrats' insanity is increasing, and is driving me toward the previously unthinkable prospect of voting for Trump.
2
Bret Stephens is right. Anyone but Trump may work for the left but it will not work for the nation. I would not exchange Trump for a reckless, clueless, brainless, spineless, careless, experience less president. In fact I would be as petrified if any of the 4 B list presidential candidates Bernie, Butti, Biden and Bloomberg become the nominee of the Democratic party and a heart beat away from being president ie if the president is no more by then of the divided states of America. I am glad the NY Times Edo board did not endorse any one of the B list candidates.
The USA is currently in a state of schizophrenic state of mind and I blame the media for this state of the American mind. I hope the free and fair minded American independents will tip the scales in favor of the best patriotic American who will care for all Americans first to be our president. More and more I see distressed poor homeless who need a president who will help them find a home in America.
2
"Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama."
This statement is clearly false.
First: The tax "cut" eliminates all deductions for state and local taxes over $10,000. Since most Blue states, and even some Red states have both hefty property and income taxes, virtually every middle class person on the coasts or in the moderate-to-liberal mid-west has been negatively impacted.
Second: When the tax "cut" went into effect, people all across the nation not in the top 1% or .1% saw that their tax refund was, instead, a tax bill.
Third: Jews, Muslims, Latinos, Blacks, and Immigrants (non-White) now live in terror of deadly attacks from White-supremacist racists who feel free to openly murder in churches, synagogues, mosques, and even WalMart stores.
Fourth: Immigration, by anyone who is NOT White and from Europe, or NOT Christian / Jewish is heavily barred from entry. This week The Bahamas' government (a majority Black government) warned its citizens that if pregnant, they may well be barred from entering the USA IF the immigration officer suspected the child will be born here and entitled, under 14A, to instant citizenship (something Trump detests).
Fifth: Trump has VIRTUALLY abandoned NATO and all our allies, TRIED to lift Russian sanctions, and did everything he could to steal the mid-terms. Failing never meant not trying again.
Only Tulsi Gabbard would be nearly as bad as Trump.
9
As an outsider, not a US citizen, I want to make a remark.
The brunt of the argument of Bret Stephens is that it too costly to implement the plans of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. However, pretty much any northern Europe country has done so, a lot of them very successfully,
in particular Scandinavian countries. And all have a lower GDP per capita than the US. Of course you can go to far in "socialism", like France but that will take many presidencies. Meanwhile, if I remember it correctly, did opinion polls show that if Bernie Sanders would have been the Democratic candidate for presidency in 2016, he would have beaten Donald Trump. I think that a core issue is that a large part of the US electorate has lost faith in the political establishment. As an outsider, Trump did profit by this in 2016. Outsiders such as Bernie Sanders and to a lesser degree Elizabeth Warren, may therefore be best positioned to recapture the Oval Office.
10
At 5 AM here in Sweden, I read Bret Stephens' column suggesting according to the headline - "Let's not exchange one reckless president (Trump) for another."
He did not write the headline but I think it captures pretty well the position he expresses in the column.
I immediately composed a reasoned comment suggesting that generalizations he makes in this column about the life of the majority of Americans post Obama and about the end of American capitalism under Sanders or Warren are extreme and unsupportable.
I closed by wondering who he would vote for since in his conversation with Gail Collins he said that he would never vote for any of the 3 individuals I name above.
I clicked on SUBMIT and was blocked in a microsecond. This text is a new version to see what happens when I click on SUBMIT.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
04:35 h GMT
3
Facts, logic,morality, all irrelevant.
Any statements not addressing primal, atavistic emotion are at best merely interesting.
So many Are their fear, not having fear among their choices.
It is possible to use the FDR quote to shed light on our times but I prefer the line from the Bridge of Spies movie where the captured Soviet spy when asked if he was afraid of execution answers, “Would it help?”
Humans around the world are making political choices as if their individual very survival is at stake. Minds close, creativity vanishes, feeling for the Other disappears, emotional intelligence is lost, theory of mind, mirroring, is gone.
Why? What purpose does this destructive mess serve? Our times cannot answer this question. Our descendants will look back in amazement at our obtuseness— Why didn’t we understand?
All we can safely say now is Nothing Succeeds like Excess.
Trump, Sanders, Warren all represent the attraction of mere anarchy.
1
"Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is the same under Trump as it was under Obama." Short-term and uninformed thinking. Millions have lost health insurance; and the ecological disasters are going to harm all of us. These are just two examples of Trump administration problems--not to mention that the measure of our country's financial health has to do with how much money the rich have, not how much the rest of us have, which is less and less as wages stay the same but inflation grows.
4
What a disappointing take from Stephens, yet again.
He talks about the erosion of institutional norms, but then says daily life hasn’t changed for most Americans. That’s a non sequitur.
Important norms HAVE changed, even if it has not yet impacted day to day life for most Americans. Listing a few things that haven’t happened doesn’t change the fact that our courts are packed with inexperienced political sycophants, the executive branch has created dictatorship-like norms while damaging legislative balance, and we have reversed all progress towards even the minor steps in the right direction on critical issues: Iran nuclear deal and Paris accords to name a few.
And the idea that Sanders or Warren would upend American capitalism falls flat because Mr. Stephens fails to address the fact that it is already a fundamentally broken system. Wealth inequality is out of control and steering us towards serious crisis; the wealthy pay the lowest taxes; climate change is being ignored to all of our peril; subsidies still exist for thriving pet industries (agriculture, oil, etc.); and our infrastructure is toast.
And what about the human component of it all? Children in cages at the border, separated from their parents. Roe v Wade threatened. Healthcare still out of reach of many. Young people drowning in student loan debt.
To seriously consider any of the current likely democratic candidates as worse than another Trump term is intellectually dishonest and morally bankrupt.
15
Here are some good news for you to undo your disappointment:
Sanders Seizes Lead in Volatile Iowa Race, Times Poll Finds
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/25/us/politics/democratic-iowa-poll-sanders.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
Note the source for extra pleasure.
I can understand the columnist's opinion, but he is a conservative, a climate change skeptic, a tax cut supporter, a person who likes all of Trump's judicial picks, an opponent of government programs like Medicare and Medicaid.
In other words, he is a Republican who dislikes Trump's personality but loves Trump's policies.
He is entitled to his opinion. But he doesn't get to tell Democrats whom they should nominate. Even Republicans wouldn't listen to him in 2016.
22
"For the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama."
This is only true if you falsely define of what "pretty much the same" means, and falsely define what an "overwhelming majority of Americans" means.
There are Americans you may have heard of; they're the approx. 7 million American Jews. Anti-Semitic attacks have skyrocketed since Trump took office. Attacks are at the highest levels in the American history. The mass killing of Jews by Anti-Semites from Pittsburgh to Jersey City, unheard of in America, are now regular events since Trump.
In Puerto Rico over 3 million Americans suffered horribly, and over 3,000 Americans died, because Trump vilifies and refuses to allow the use of mandated aid to any Americans he personally dislikes.
Approx. 700,000 working poor American mothers and children are now starving because Trump gutted the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Under Trump 25 million women have lost reproductive rights and the right to control their bodies. Trump just spoke at the largest anti-abortion rally in America.
There is not enough room to continue. Destruction of the rights of tens of millions of black Americans; check. Destruction of the rights of millions of LGBTQ Americans; check. Destruction of the rights of....
You can only say that things are the same for most Americans under Trump if you exclude every American who is not a white Christian straight man with sizeable stock portfolio.
22
A few things to consider:
- Trump is not just doing nothing, he's actually taking us back in time on climate change and pollution, that should be a huge disqualifier
- He will likely replace RBG's SCOTUS seat for yet another misogynist, gun promoting right winger
- In lockstep with McConnell, his powers are unchecked and breaking the Law goes unpunished
- He is a huge deficit spender and when the economy turns, likely during his second term, probably even more so. This is exactly how Turkey turned its booming economy into a low growth, high inflation nightmare (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/24/business/turkey-erdogan-istanbul-election-economy-inflation.html)
So please, do not try to to paint Sanders and Warren as the left's mirror image of Trump. Any of their policies work in Europe, and after compromise with Congress, it will leave America right where it's supposed to be: just right of Europe. Not the libertarian, everyone fight for themselves hellhole the Republicans are dragging us into.
And Bernie does compromise, by the way. He's voted for Obamacare at every single occasion.
16
Life has certainly changed for this American, though not economically. Instead, I am ashamed of my country for its treatment of children at the border. I no longer see the US as a leader with at least good intent in the world. I try not to know whether my neighbor supports Trump because, despite myself, the knowledge has become a “litmus test” when meeting and befriending people. I actually consider retiring in another country. I used to think Republicans leaders would protect our country in the end and side with democracy over Trump. I thought we would have the fortitude to make our planet a healthy place.
I used to enjoy SciFi, but now wonder if —instead of invaders threatening earth (a common plot) — far into the future, humans will be the invaders displacing residents of another planet because we ruined our own and have no respect for other living things.
10
I'm no fan of Bernie or Warren, but come on, Bret, you know neither of them is remotely as reckless, dangerous or ignorant and stupid as Donald J. Trump. More important, neither would be a lawless wrecker of our institutions. And we both know that their most grandiose proposals would never pass a Democrat-controlled House or Senate, never mind one run by Republicans.
Would they engineer an assault on American capitalism? All those pesky regulations on Wall Street, strict environmental rules, imposing public responsibility on monopolistic web platforms, and of course, higher taxes to pay for universal health care coverage, expanded educational opportunities and badly needed infrastructure improvements? I suppose you could call it that. Just as the Right sought for decades to paint the New Deal-Fair Deal reforms as a communist conspiracy to subvert our way of life.
15
@John Burke Liz Warren is a reasoned, very intelligent person and a pragmatic choice and not a 'crazy' socialist as the right would have us believe. She'd make a great president.
1
Has the sky fallen in Canada because they have universal health care coverage?
No, of course not.
Time to end your reckless criticism of policies that will make life better for millions of Americans, Mr. Stephens.
20
Mr. Stephens,
In response to your editorial.
1) No erosion of liberal democracy? Have you missed the last 4 months of news about Ukraine? You know, that country that cadet Pompeo claims no Americans care about. Mistreatment of legal immigrants? Arbitrary travel bans? The list is long.
2) "Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama." Overwhelming majority? Infrastructure? Attack on National Parks? Reversal of clean water and air provisions? Attack on civility? Kowtowing to fanatical Christianity? And for the top 1% tax bracket, it has not stayed the same, it has become more lucrative.
3) Your argument was pretty much invalidated when you brought up the possible peril of the fracking and health care industry. I can't think of any industry less deserving of sympathy than fracking and health care.
4) Warren and Sanders are a "frontal and highhanded assault on American capitalism." American capitalism? It needs to be assaulted to solve social inequality, to protect the environment and address climate change, and to provide a better health care system.
Some where behind your rhetoric is a fear that your old convictions have failed this country and given us Trumpism and you can't quite bring yourself to suggest that we need change, not just from Trumpism, but from business as usual with, say, Joe Biden, who you endorse by omission.
Bret, don't just hear Gail Collins, listen to her. She knows best!
13
Dude, these arguments are poorly thought through and dangerously short sighted (think Pres Trump, Pres Trump Jr, President Ivanka). Just bc he has failed at some of these things for now does not mean he has A) not succeeded in many similar things behind the vale of larger catastrophes over the last 3 years.... Has Trump abandoned NATO? No. (officially no, functionally yes) Has he lifted sanctions on Russia? No. (come on, this would be about item 50 on a 100 item concern list) Has he closed the borders to all immigrants? No. (he's working on it and the republican establishment now firmly behind him shows no signs they are willing to stop him) Did the president steal the midterms, or stop Congress from impeaching him? No. Has he significantly suppressed the press? Again, no. (this is the least thoughtful point of all..half of the people in our country are fed news from a combination of sources completely dedicated to his brand of fact denying, conspiracy promoting, and disinformation spreading. The other half is so muddied by his constant scandal that even legitimate news is quickly relegated to back pages. I'm not really a Bernie or a Warren fan myself, but the arguments in the column are, while spoken eloquently and with small flourishes of truth, silly.
5
It isn't four more years of Trump I fear the most. What I fear is what will happen in the sixth or seventh year of his presidency, when his fans grow tired of him and go looking for someone even louder, angrier, and more vicious than he is. Because once that happens, we will have an outright Fascist president come 2025, not a mere authoritarian like Trump. It can always get worse before it gets better.
2
Wow, really? Our lives have not been affected? I’m so disappointed in you Mr. Stephens. Someone should read this piece to you and you need to really hear what you’ve written. Also, you should sit down and talk with people who have been and continue to be affected by the innate cruelty of this administration every single day. Ask the family members of the victims of the mass shootings at Walmart in El Paso or the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh if they have been affected.
7
Misleadingly specious case. Stephens wants us to give Trump a pass because he hasn't yet succeeded in implementing his most damaging intentions, but condemn Sanders and Warren because of the exceedingly remote possibility of their being able to implement their most extreme proposals if they were president. Better the devil you know? Sounds like Stephens doesn't really know what a devil is.
7
Yes, ANYONE but TRUMP. None of the candidates on the Democratic side is as reckless, dangerous, and unfit to be president as Trump. You are, as usual, just trying to tell Democrats that they must cater to conservative voters.
7
You're going to have to come up with evidence better than the economic analysis of The Manhattan Institute. Come on Bret.
6
A well balanced piece from one of the NYT resident never Trump comservatives. Elections in our country are de facto binary events. And I for one think Sanders or Warren is a far greater threat to the long term successful future of the US. Which is why I will vote for Trump and at least as of today expect him to be reelected. The only question I have is after Warren or Sanders is crushed will the Democratic party move left or right?
3
Any so called expert who talks about the increased tax burden of healthcare without subtracting the current total cost of private insurance (employer and employee contributions and taxes) has no credibility and you should know better than to reference his work.
4
You are so out of touch Bret. We are long overdue for an upheaval, the one percent has ruled long enough.
Reckless? Even you know that the Congress needs to be involved. Oh wait maybe not. Trump is showing that he can do whatever he wants.
Anyone who suggests that Sanders or Warren are more dangerous than Trump is reckless.
6
It is sobering to think that our choice as voters could likely be between 4 more years of the most corrupt president in our nation's history, and a dramatic move toward socialism. Here's hoping that the moderate voice rises above the din.
1
I'm with Bret, even though he's a conservative Republican. I'm a Democrat, but I'll never vote for a Democratic candidate whose campaign is funded by working Americans, not corporations.
Remember, if they want to spend money helping ordinary people, they're bad. If they're for lavishing tax cuts on the rich and spending over half the budget on the military, they're good.
The status quo is great for everyone. That's why we all have good healthcare, secure jobs, and no suspicious rise in the national suicide rate. Everything is fine, so vote accordingly.
"Anyone but Trump." Ha! What a joke.
4
@Chris Your comment is a joke, right?
It has been generations of the supposed path of incremental pragmatism that forms the foundation of the need for project’s like The New York Times’ 1619 project. For 400 hundred years, Black Americans have been on the path to equality with no ETA in sight. For many Sanders and Warren offer an opportunity for them and their progeny to “arrive”.
3
The Democrats are making a good case that Trump must be removed because he is a demagogue, the biggest threat to a republic.
Worse, however, is that Trump fits the bill of an ignorant, self-serving despot whose extravagance and incompetence metastasize throughout society before spectacularly collapsing the empire.
3
Speak for yourself! Life might be the same you and those like you under Trump as under Obama but that is not the case for those of us who are not white men. Even those of us who have not as yet been personally impacted live with the anxiety of living in a world where racism, xenephobia and sexism has become the norm and practiced by the so called leader of the free world.
4
Wisdom starts with the fear of God - Wisdom “in elections” starts with knowing that: what you, and those around you, believe in, is not what the whole United States believe in!
This article is dead on. Thank you for some objective writing on DT. I will not be voting for Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.
1
@Aurora Apollo
So you like public schools? Social Security ? Those are scary “socialist” programs too. But then I see you have no idea what socialism is, nor do you understand Sander’s and Warren’s proposals.
What empty sacks these Republican lawyers are, all the way up to the mouse presiding over the whole affair.
2
No, the US has not left NATO, nor did some of those other things happen. Neither did Ukraine launch a Biden investigation, nor did the US withhold promised funds. See what I'm getting at? That your first argument is very weak because you know that Trump would do all those things and worse if he felt 100% empowered. Which a reelection would unleash on the world. Sanders and Warren are not ignorant foot stompers. Anything they do...and I mean anything...would be less harmful to the US and the world than another four years of Trump.
4
Fine. Then, by all means, let the devil you know stay in office until the end of time.
So you hate Trump. You expect the Democrats to give you a Republican lite candidate or we get Trump. Let me tell you something, we all want Trump gone, but we will not sacrifice our principles to give republicans someone to vote for. You guys will close the curtain and vote republican if Satan was running as a republican.
4
Yes, anyone but Trump. Nice try, but your offerings don’t cut it. Anyone but Trump!
3
Whew! You almost talked me into supporting Sanders! Never! Warren is much smarter than you give credit.
However, trump is a horrible human. But George Bush has killed more Americans, and allies and Iraqis and caused much more American debt, and has pushed organized religion into our government and lives than trump. At least, if there is an ever after, Bush and trump will be burning together. That gives me strength and solace.
I am convinced for a long time that Bret Stephens and all conservatives opinion writes at NY times will eventually vote for Trump and not vote thereby increase the chances of his election. Obviously in democracy every has the right to vote they way they like to do so but people who have megaphone of NY times not only there expressing their choices and tendency but they go through multitude of reasons to discourage to vote the eventual Democratic nominee with arguments and reasons which probably would reasonable if the Republican nominee was not Trump. November election will either get us back to constitutional red and liberal democracy or will accelerate the lawlessness descent to chaos and possibly fascism.
They’re all dangerous radicals, Americans - liberal or conservative, a bunch if radical rabble.
Um really just same the same as under Obama?? Our air is being polluted, our waterways are next in line, our national parks are in dire shape and we have children in cages. And soon, we may have prayer in public schools. Not to mention all of the vitriol from white supremists, mass shootings and rapidly rising healthcare costs. But Javanka....
I hate Sanders but if he is the nominee, I will do whatever it takes to get him elected.
3
Has Trump signed the death warrant for millions by denying the climate crisis?
1
Thank you, at least centrist democrats can stop projecting their Bernie or Bust fears and admit that theyre more Republican than Liberal.
Democracy has been permanently changed by Trump ~ immigration, racism, antisemitism, policing, war for oil, the SCOTUS, THE ENVIRONMENT: all changed by Trump.
We dont need another bail out the super rich drone striker compromising with Republican president. Hope and change. that was the promise. Bernie is actually the from runner, but the NYT doesnt like him so they wont report it. Hes raised far more money than any other. He electrifies the huge voting block of Americans who dont usually vote.
Stop grasping at winning people who would ever vote for Trump. and try reaching the 44% of voting Americans who want to be inspired by a future where being an citizen means that no American dies of preventable disease, no American starves, no American goes homeless. Democrats have been losing because they are no longer interested in LEADING.
We have Republicans and Republican-light. Make the Democratic Party Great again. Give us something to fight for. most Americans believe our country can provide as much and more as EVERY OTHER Industrial nation in the world.
3
It’s not “anyone but Trump”, it’s “”anyone who’s not Republican”.
4
You know the guy bagging your groceries? I would take him over trump in 5 seconds.
5
You are just so out of touch Brett Stephens, its BIDEN and BUTTEGIEG who pose the existentialist threat to this country. We NEED Bernie Sanders to clean up this mess all the mainstream and right leaning dems and corporate dems created ! Wow, talk about being out of touch...
4
“Will spark a right wing backlash..”? How? How is it possible for the Republicans to move any farther right than they already are without becoming actual (not metaphorical) fascists?
5
Are you kidding me?
You catalogue Trump's manifest failings and then you use the 401K defense. Hey, my bank account is good, so, what the heck.
This is like a failed bank robber being acquitted because he never got out of the bank with money. This story alone warrants Trump's removal.
https://www.vox.com/2020/1/24/21080886/mike-pompeo-ukraine-question-npr-reporter-yovanovitch-explained
2
Anyone but Biden.
Biden's lobbying for the credit card industry has done more to put financial shackles on low and mid income slaves to credit. For that alone, he should not be elected. But his "I didn't know what my son was doing inUkraine" when Joe got caught firing the Ukraine prosecutor who was investigating his son's gas company - that pathetic attempt at covering up his corruption should put him behind bars.
1
I still don't think that Middle America is ready to elect an elderly Jewish Socialist politician as the 46th President.
@sharon5101
Considering that about 35% of them support neo-Nazis you're probably right.
I stoped taking you seriously when you wrote of fracking as an industry that needs to be regulated rather than abolished.
3
The thing that continues to be left out of many of the opinion pieces about the democratic field is that any of them, moderate or more extreme, will face a wall of resistance to their efforts to make big or small changes/changes back to our institutions. And the opposition will likely be effective since as noted the democrats will attempt to do it with some politeness and consensus, not with bluster, hyperbole, lies, and a Giuliani.
I believe Mr. Stephens relatively rational outlook would include the assumption that Senators Warren and Sanders have different beliefs than he and think the numbers add up, when they do the math relative to the benefits to society, ie: they don’t want to drive the economy into the ground, make us unsafe, run the wealthy to the Cayman Islands, cause civil strife, and then ride off into the history books as a demon. I do think there are worse ways to live than as the Swedes, Canadians, Dutch, Icelanders, etc (maybe socialism needs colder environs, government study anyone 😏?). The problem with any system seems to be it’s administrators (people) and the people (again) it serves. As a unit, a society goes warily into the night. Getting a majority, and it would need to be a huge majority, of the people on the same page for systemic change feels impossible in this political/social climate...so...let’s at least put a decent, thoughtful, intelligent person in the White House...the rest will take more time.
I don't think that "for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama." I'm an older person and I can't remember when Americans were living - day after day and now year after year - user such an ominous cloud that now emanates from the White House. Relationships between friends and even family members have been strained over one person - Donald Trump. There is no "down time" for anyone under this political cloud.
4
Denial is not a river in Egypt. For most Americans, nothing about life is much the same under Trump as it was under Obama.
Of course, the Americans this author cares about are really not the majority of Americans, are they? The author also fails to mention that the more writers like himself dismiss whatever Trump attempts, the more he attempts to promote and protect himself, the more he destroys America.
Also the argument understates and trivializes the radicalism of what the administrations of Reagan, Clinton, Bush and Obama have allowed American capitalism to become. The wealth gap is an assault not only on the majority of American citizens but also on capitalism itself, turning it into crony capitalism. The wealth gap has wreaked devastating dislocations to millions of American workers lasting for years. It has ALREADY had disastrous effects on the country that will persist for decades.
In quoting calculations from an economist from the Manhattan Institute, founded by Antony Fisher and former CIA Director, Bill Casey, the author neglects mentioning the hundreds of millions of dollars we have spent on unneeded weapons systems and an unneeded war in Iraq. He also neglects mentioning the recent unneeded tax break that gave corporations and the obscenely wealthy more unneeded millions.
I find it highly unlikely that any program of Sanders or Warren would wreak the devastation already wreaked upon the country by the Iraq War or the now still widening income gap.
3
His Presidency may not be an economic or political disaster, but it is an environmental and integral catastrophe.
3
The difference is that neither Elizabeth Warren nor Bernie Sanders is the "devil". Neither is working to make either Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren "great" while Donald Trump, in spite of his hats is not trying to make America "great again", he's only out to serve his own selfish interests. Neither Elizabeth Warren nor Bernie Sanders believes that Article II of the Constitution grants them the right to do whatever they want. Both know that they have to work with Congress and, in spite of what they say on the campaign trail, they know that they won't be replacing private health insurance and laying off millions of workers any time soon. Fracking won't be eliminated immediately either but the methane leaks surrounding it may be. Additionally, while Donald Trump may not yet have accomplished all of his most disastrous plans, he has appointed hundreds of judges and two supreme court justices that will shift our nation to the right for decades. While I wish her the best of health, the likelihood that Ruth Bader Ginsburg can serve another 5 years on the Supreme court is slim. The fact is that while Donald Trump is reckless and may be the "devil we know", neither Bernie Sanders nor Elizabeth Warren is reckless and neither is the "devil". So, while we might be better served by an Amy Klobuchar or a Joe Biden, I'll take either Bernie or Elizabeth over Donald any day!
6
I agree with Bret, up to the point where he accepts the possibility of a vote for Trump.
Obviously, if Sanders or Warren is the Dem nominee, it will be coast-to-coast nose-holding time on Election Day just as it was in 2016; only this time Trump is a completely known quantity.
That should mean Trump loses.
However, I don't see any Bernie/Warren coattails = continued GOP control of too much of Congress and the State capitols, as many voters seek to prevent a radical president from going too far. Maybe that will be the best our ailing democracy can do at this time.
1
Regarding the evil things Trump hasn’t done, you left out an important word: “Yet.”
539
Having a President advocating for lots of leftist policies does not mean that said President will achieve 100% of those leftist policies. It's time that we actually elect somebody with big (and popular) ideas in order to shift the frame of the debate. The Republican party and Trump have been shifting the Overton Window steadily rightward for decades.
It's time we start catching up with the rest of the world on the myriad leftist ideas which have tons of merit and work in other OECD countries. No other country has so failed to rein in health insurance, pharmaceutical companies, fossil fuels, military spending, etc. like the US has. It's time we start actually taking some left wing ideas seriously. That's why I'm all in for Bernie or Warren.
5
First, the argument overstates the extent to which this presidency has eroded the foundations of liberal democracy at home and abroad. Has Trump abandoned NATO? No. Has he lifted sanctions on Russia? No. Has he closed the borders to all immigrants? No. Did the president steal the midterms, or stop Congress from impeaching him? No. Has he significantly suppressed the press? Again, no.
These will be accomplished if he is reelected. Rome wasn't destroyed in a day.
3
The Times has an anti-Bernie and anti-Warren thing that I think may be evidence of a 'we're really liberal' until you threaten the board or stocks or tax-base of the wealthiest investers type deal. It's 100% clear that income inequality is one if not the greatest threat to american democracy and the primary solution to that is changing and enforcing tax laws, ideas both Bernie and Warren support. So, why does the Times, a paper I think generally tries to rely on facts want to encourage persuading against these two? I'm guessing there are some Billionaires who could answer that question and they have, as per usual Billionaire behavior, a particularly strong say.
8
For many people, "anyone but Trump" isn't just (or even at all) because he's an existential threat to democratic institutions or the U.S.'s moral reputation.
He enacts violent policy constantly that has a devastatingly urgent and real impact. Children stolen from their parents and locked in cages, forever traumatized. Sacred and sanctuary land bulldozed, polluted, destroyed. A green light on the irreversible destruction of the planet through continued and increased emissions.
This argument is yet another attempt at false equivalency, and reveals the author's stunning disregard for those suffering the most under this leadership. Why care about the sanctity of the trappings of democracy if you don't care about its people?
7
From Never-Trumper to Trump-Normalizer, and it only took 3 years. Bravo, Bret.
13
Except for the fact that Bret always was a never-never-Trumper.
You’re kidding me. No one is more reckless and lawless than DJT.
9
It is quite simply inaccurate - and dramatically so - to say that Trump’s Presidency is a morally corrosive force, but not politically corrosive. As Robert Gates, Defense Secretary under both Bush and Obama, and Susan Rice, Obama’s National Security Advisor, both recently said — in separate interviews — the dysfunction and discord in Washington is now our Number 1 national security threat. We are becoming a country that is incapable of governing itself. Talk to businesspeople who return from China, amazed at their infrastructure and how they are surpassing us. And that is just but one example. Trump is the ultimate manifestation of the Republicans indifference to, and indeed hostility toward, government. They think government would screw up a two car parade. In fact, without a well functioning public sector, our society’s fundamental health and future prospects are seriously jeopardized. Trump — and the attitude of indifference to good governance that he brings to the job — are a danger to the Republic. If you don’t see that, you’re blind.
12
I find this column hard to swallow. Trump truly has been destructive to this country ( divisiveness, loss of responsiveness to democratic mechanisms, arbitrary border policies, undermining of environmental protections, capriciousness towards the word of this country in alliances and international institutions etc. ). Trump tears at our national fabric in a way that is just hard to perceive the regulated capitalism models of Sanders or Warren doing ( and also it should be noted that despite the lumping, both Sanders’ and Warren’ approaches differ from one another and appeal to different people). The house managers have brilliantly laid out a case for part of the problem with the current administration. Against Trump, I cannot conceive of not voting for the Democratic standard bearer that emerges, whether they represent either a ‘moderate’ or a ‘progressive’ wing of the party.
11
Sanders and Warren want to turn the US into a 'full strength' social welfare state (like France)...instead of 'medium strength' .....where we are now.
If that idea appeals to you ...you should support them.
If not.....don't.
Any other thoughts?
3
Thank you, Mr Stephens, for making your values perfectly clear. Moral and political corrosion is less of a problem for you than is a threat to the privilege of those at the top of the growing divide of income and wealth inequality. As to the economic policies of Warren and Sanders, the New Deal did not cause the Great Depression, it brought us out of the depression.
16
This column is very much on the mark. Excellent writing, Mr. Stephens. Personally, Mr. Trump is repugnant. He has undermined the institution of the Presidency, though, in the opinion of many, including myself, less so than President Bill Clinton.
Trump's policies have by and large not been bad, and are often appropriate and good. I realize this is an emotion-laden issue for many, particularly on immigration. I don't like some of Mr. Trump's tactics, but overall I believe slowing illegal immigration is the correct thing to do. This country can and should encourage immigration - legal immigration. Our failure to do so is very much a bipartisan failing.
Importantly, our economy under Trump is strong.
The fact is that the socialist policies espoused by Senators Sanders and Warren would likely devastate this country, and risk doing far more harm than another Trump presidency. For strong evidence, look at Venezuela. Venezuela is a country endowed with fabulous natural resources. And yet, thanks in part to socialism, it is a failed country. The collapse of Venezuela happened quickly. For another example, consider Zimbabwe.
There is an alternative to another term of President Trump: the Democrats could nominate a rational, centrist candidate. Such a candidate would likely win the next election.
The semi-endorsement of Sen. Warren by the Editorial Board of this newspaper poses a far greater threat to America and its prosperity than our current President.
1
A little clarifier: The stock market may be doing well, but that’s the economy for those who own stock. The rest of America is not doing well.
2
And for the sake of argument, let's just say that Trump is driving our country toward minority rule with an oligarch ruling class like Russia. There are two sides of these sorts of over reaching smears.
And why is the economy doing so well? Are there specific policies that the Trump administration has espoused that can reasonably take credit for it? How about the hidden costs of environmental ruin, the financial risk of unsustainable debt, the weakening of social safety nets, the risk of financial catastrophe with reduced financial regulations, decreased diplomatic leverage with our allies which increases the risk of war? Or is just that the oligarchs are happy? are we doing well today but failing tomorrow?
When I buy stock in a company, I evaluate the CEO as part of due diligence. I would not buy stock in a company associated with Trump. His motivations are not aligned with his shareholders. They are aligned with his own interests. Sell your shares don't buy his lies.
1
Here are some good news for real people not just the one percenters that Bret represents:
Sanders Seizes Lead in Volatile Iowa Race, Times Poll Finds
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/25/us/politics/democratic-iowa-poll-sanders.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
Note the source and the writers.
And Stephen's take on the Democratic nominee is relevant because of...?
Oh ok. It is not.
9
@Claudio
Because he is essentially spouting republican nonsense and the delusion that our only alternative to Trumpian fascism is a return to the failed neoliberal econmics that has given us extreme economic disparity and climate destruction.
Brett's column today surprisingly and disappointingly echoes the alarmist writing in a column by one his former Wall Street Journal colleagues just a few days ago. It caricatures a healthy debate on government's role as a headlong dive into socialism.
if in politics, as in physics, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, the Democratic Party is having its "tea party'" moment, just as Republicans did 10 years ago. Hopefully, there will still be a Democratic Party and not a slavish personality cult, which is what the Republican Party has become.
Fortunately the Democrats have viable moderate alternatives who will address economic, environmental, and international issues in a more sensible way. I am hopeful that democrats do get to the middle. If you're on the edge of the road, you're likely to end up in a ditch.
Ask yourself this: who would you rather have governing the country, a Democrat or an organized crime family? We have the latter now, and I for one will vote for anyone who can get us away from this co-optation and manipulation of our government and democratic institutions for gangster-like personal gain.
5
Bret, this is just plain reckless.
I support Elizabeth Warren because she is precisely what the mainstream was fifty years ago when we thought about economics in a saner way. I am a liberal who believes in New Deal Capitalism as does Senator Warren. She is no radical.
And although I do not support Bernie, I would much rather have a Democratic Socialist who respects the Constitution than a laissez-faire radical such as Trump who totally disrespects that sacred document.
7
Sanders waves his hands at people with a condescending vision that he plans to enlighten his subjects with. Lenin.
Warren dismisses questions with her 'plans', implying her superiority since she has it all figured out. Mao.
When you look back at history, the most damaging effects have been from non-incremental, revolutionary ideas that were largely untested.
We now know that socialism has never produced a prosperous society. Never.
Socialism is a crazy thing to 'try' in America, and its effects will be damaging for decades, if not forever.
These two power-hungry politicians are trying to fool the American people into trying it 'one more time' with promises of free stuff for votes.
One thing you can be assured of -- no matter what happens under their political and economic system, Warren and Sanders will always live very well. They will be protected. Like all the other socialist leaders before them.
5
@AW
There is noting Leninist about Sanders or any of the solutions he has put forward. Nothing. He is a New Deal progressive. I that sounds radical it is indicative of how ar to the extreme-right our country has sunk.
2
Yeah...kinda like the "socialist" President Franklin Roosevelt. He really destroyed this country with Social Security???!!!...hmmmm
1
@AW: They are both scolds with short suits in humor.
"Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama."
Exactly. No Trump supporter here, but... Trump's two biggest non accomplishment - accomplishments that will very likely get Trump re-elected are: he has not tanked the economy and he has not gotten the us into another war.
Again, these two facts: Trump has not ruined the economy nor has he plunged the U.S. into another foreign entanglement will likely get him re-elected. Right now, I do not hear too many people complaining about the performance of their retirement accounts, and that does not bode well for either Sanders or Warren if nominated.
1
Thank you, Bret, for putting into words what I've been thinking. AS hard as it would be to admit Trump would do a lot less damage that Warren and Sanders.
1
Let me begin by saying that I have been a faithful voter of the Democrats for 30 years. Now, I agree with this column 100 percent. I cannot see myself voting for Sanders (not a Democrat) or Warren. Simply, they are too far too my left; just as far to the right as Trump is. I genuinely think their socialist policies would be devastating to the country. If they win the nomination, I will not vote for President. Many other Democratic and Democratic leaning voters in the states that will determine the election feel the same. Please check out the recent NYT The Daily podcast about union voters in Pennsylvania. Getting a few more radical voters in CA or N.Y. won't help to defeat Trump. Arguing, as many of the readers do here, that Congress will prevent the enactment of their radical agenda is a weak justification for supporting Sanders and Warren.
2
Maybe Mr. Stephens needs to do a little soul searching.
What is he really afraid of?
A loss of political (and therefore, personal) identity?
A loss of a job?
9
Right on, Bret. I despise Trump, am a life long Democrat, baby boomer generation, but I am not a socialist, and do not fall into the ANYBODY but Trump category. If my choice comes down to Warren or Sanders vs Trump, It will be a very difficult choice between staying home or voting for the devil I know.
102
@Mary
Well Mary, google polling. Fact is, strong majorities of DEMOCRATS want:
Medicare for All (depending upon how it's explained)
Higher Taxes for the Rich
Campaign Finance Reform
More regulations for Wall Street and Banks
More Gun Control
Less Military Spending
A Higher Minimum wage
Stronger Action on Climate Change
Marijuana Decriminalization
And, by the way, polling shows at least slight majorities of Americans in general ALSO support the liberal view on these issues.
So why should our Democratic leaders side with your conservative view over what the majority of Americans want and what STRONG majorities of Democrats want?
Isn't it more rational to be worried about fed-up Democratic voters being lost to the likes of a candidate like Stein?
126
@Mary Really? A tough choice? I understand Bernie and Warren are not the best choices but really? You would vote for Trump?
123
@Mary Bernie isn't a socialist either. He's a Democratic socialist - big difference. Look it up.
112
The Progressive need to call out these plutocrats on the right and the left. The right makes no excuses for standing 100% with Trump the rich and large corporations. The left stands 100% with them also but plays lip service to keep the working class in line. No more. The corporate democrats are worse than the republicans. We know the republicans are our enemy.
3
@gene
Indeed, Republicans are far more honest about their positions and you can trust them to be who and what they are. Corporate liberals, on the other hand, talk the good talk and then attack anyone who takes it seriously.
You can’t be serious. How can any policy proposed by Sanders or Warren be worse than handing our country over to a dictator? And not only a dictator, but a man who is fine with poisoning our water, destroying our planet, tossing aside our alliances. No economic policy from the left can be worse than an emboldened version of what we’ve had over the past three years.
4
This is completely misguided.
Trumpism has coalesced voter anger into a personslity cult with a demagogue at the center.
Neither Warren nor Sanders have displayed a temperment as narcissistic as Trump's, nor is there any guatantee they would have the power to herd Democratic cats in lockstep. They would not have a wealthy donor base manipulating the campaign system to enforce compliance in the primaries. Neither Pelosi nor Schumer would be toadies. Both would offer substantial opposition if in charge of their respective houses.
Certainly quoting a right-center think tank about what a Warren or Sanders presidency would be like is pushing another example of Republican projection. Something GOP supporters do so well. They see Democrats as themselves: stuck with a demagogue with no respect for norms nor knowledge of and respect for institutions, rules and laws. We are not that party. You are.
But the warning is appreciated. We need to insure a functioning two party system that is responsive to the wishes of its citizens, and not one where elites own or manipulate a once shared government and economy for the benefit of the few. Yes Bret, the anger is palpable. But where once FDR tried to undermine post-Depression radicalism through jobs, anger is unabated at elites who have divided our country into diminishing majorities and thriving elites. People would prefer a responsive democracy. Our system no longer guarantees the best choices but purs bi-polar animosity in play.
3
Mr. Stephens dramatically understates the negative impacts of the Trump presidency. Trump’s vitriol and race-baiting have unleashed dormant hatred, political division and violence across the US. This genie cannot easily be stuffed back into the bottle. His inane tariff war with China and $17 billion in bailouts to farmers is an economic opioid. Trump’s ignorance and indifference to facts, abject lying and fealty to Putin has weakened democracies and empowered dangerous autocrats across the globe. Trump’s inane bullying and bloviating are a constant embarrassment, to the point where he is literally a cartoon in international meetings. His corrupt dealings and mob-boss mentality, with GOP assistance, fundamentally imperil American elections and confidence in government. He is the singular most dangerous threat to the US and a second Trump term is unthinkably frightening.
2
Just a moment Mr. Stephens. Trump hasn't really changed anything? Deliberately undermining the rule of law is not a trivial transgression. I would agree with your premise if Mitch McConnell and his merry band enablers hadn't abandoned the separation of powers and oversight of the executive. McConnell says that Presidential abuse of power is not impeachable. Fear of tyranny was a driving force behind the Constitution's impeachment provisions --- put there by its drafters who had just fought a revolution because they believed that George III was a tyrant.
1
There isn't a country on earth that hasn't made their health-care system public. Also, there isn't a country on earth that did not have a private health-insurance industry before that.
Also, there isn't a country that doesn't still have a private health-insurance industry; because public health-care doesn't cover everything in most countries., for example, eye care and certainly, dental care. You can get supplemental plans through an employer or by buying it separately.
So the jobs at the insurance companies are not at stake, except for those who process the idiotic claims and counter-claims litigations. The only thing that's at stake is the profits of giant health conglomerates and derivatives and Big Pharma.
1
Mr Stephans you forgot one comparison between life now and under Obama.
Many economic things are the same but our proximity and movement towards dictatorship has moved rapidly forward. The evisceration of our democratic institutions has been breathtaking and the capitulation of the Republican Party has left that institution unrecognizable from what it was under Ronald Regan.
I am a centrist and I agree that Warren and Sanders’ policies are problematic but I also know that in a centrist society like ours they will never enact the extreme versions of the policies they espouse. Also I recall your dire warnings in the past about deficits under Obama. Now..crickets. So lets not cry wolf too loudly.
The real issue that stuns me in your analysis is that the most dire warning issued by conservatives in response to any socialist agenda is usually the attendant reduction of freedoms with a larger government. And yet you mention nothing about what Trump has done to our freedoms. Have you heard his comments about “dealing with” term limits if he gets re-elected?
Some of us care as much about democracy and its continuance in this country as how our 401k is doing.
And finally no democratic candidate is mentally ill as Trump clearly is. None of them will lie 15,000 times. And a mentally ill leader almost got us in a war this month and may do so again.
So yes, any Democratic is better then a mentally ill pathalogical liar threatening our freedoms and who may lead us into a war.
2
Not convinced. I’m still voting for anyone the Democrats nominate if the GOP choice is Trump. Watch Gotham on Netflix and see how Trump’s toadies want to act. Madness reigns and destruction becomes a hobby.
3
You seem to forget that Sanders or Warren would not be able to get any of their crazy policies passed. But our current pretender is teaching our children;that lying, cheating, bullying, breaking laws is the way to get by in life. I would trade that for most anything. Morality has been tossed from the GOP.
1
The idea that Trump hasn’t affected the daily life of most Americans seems, at best, exceptionally naive. I’m a Canadian, and Trump has affected my life and the life of those around me more than any Canadian politician ever has.
The degree to which both Sanders’ and Warren’s plans are being viewed as extremist by many centrist democrats is also quite striking, especially to someone who comes from a country which has enjoyed universal health care for some time. Your costs will NOT rise to the level that Stephens is suggesting in this article. You literally pay up to 10 times the cost for prescription drugs that we do. Under Bernie’s plan, those costs will normalize with what other countries pay, and though costs will ultimately go up a little, the longterm cost/benefit will be a blessing for current and future generations. Plus, the current US system is not capitalism, it is an oligopoly controlled by a few very wealthy people, under the guise of a free market.
If you don’t invest in health care and education as both Sanders and Warren plan to, you end up with a sick and stupid society. This is not extremism. It’s just common sense. It’s long past time for the US to treat their citizens as well as the rest of the civilized world does.
5
You've got to be kidding. Any of the Democratic candidates would be better. I would pick Warren. However, I agree that we don't have a great slate to choose from. Adam Schiff would be a great candidate, but he's not runnung.
But to re-elect the worst president we have ever had would be a horrendous mistake. War and recession would be very likely and how would he handle that? May God protect us !
1
Bret's message is so predictable. Old. Tiresome. Bernie's economic message is bad. Trump's is good. As was the Shru's. And Ron Reagan's. There is not much hope for our future when such drivel is regarded as quality political commentary.
2
Voters would have to be crazy to change horses in the middle of an economic boom and put it all at risk.
@Bill
Some people care about others, and the environment.
To imply that he’s not suppressed the press is absolutely and unequivocally wrong.
By withholding documents to the House and Senate, Trump subverts the truth and the ability for information to get to the American people.
That he allowed Kashoggi’s death to go unchallenged flies right in the face of your claim.
2
Are you kidding, Bret? Trump is an autocrat-in-waiting who has exposed the fragility of our system. Has he suppressed the press? Who needs suppression when you can convince a substantial portion of the public that the mainstream media puts out "fake news?" He has cozied up to dictators while alienating our allies, destroying our moral standing on the world stage. He has expressed a desire to profit from our military. He lies every time he opens his mouth. He has endeavored to deprive millions of healthcare. He has caged children at our borders. He has fomented hatred of minorities of all kinds. Perhaps you think these things are not politically or economically catastrophic, but that is only because they don't affect YOU. The Constitution recognizes higher values than the ability to remain complacent because "life is pretty much the same."
2
I want to agree with Stephens here, and I think he’s got a couple good points beyond the easy indictment of the obvious guff about health care and taxations that Warren and Sanders—especially Sanders!—are dishing out. And then there’s the, “Relax, our democratic institutions are generally keeping trump in at least some kind of check.”
However, three problems.
1. As others mentioned, the environmental policies are flat-out crazy. And they’ll get far worse. Trump is literally mortgaging our future.
2. There’s a very distinct chance that Trump—especially in a second term—will bluster, tantrum, and stupid us all into something truly gawdaful. Like getting Seoul nuked, or a shooting war with Iran. Every time he starts one of these little insanities, I already wonder if this is the time we go. Because neither Warren nor Sanders would make his worst mistake: to think everybody respects and fears and secretly admires him.
3. Whatever their problems, neither Sanders nor Warren would lie, spray acid on the laws and institutions, and weasel around Congress like Trump.
Wow. Mr Stephens is running scared. Terrified that Bernie and Warren are gaining traction.
The utterly false statement, issued from his ivory tower, that “life for lost Americans is pretty much the same as it was under Obama” is utter ridiculousness. I operate an eyeglass shop, where a lot of our frames, cases, cleaners etc, have been subject to tariffs, slowed production, etc. They cost more to buy, and now to sell. This drives people into the Warby’s (thanks NYT for highlighting them too, ugh!) to get their Amazon like deal. It’s hard.
My coworker, who is American, goes across the border to visit family, and her Century pass has been held up, because of our issues with Mexico.
I have kids, who I would like to ensure have clean air, water, etc. Trump is rolling back those protections everyday, and yesterday I read that he’s getting ready to pounce on our so called “entitlements” like Medicare and Social Security. That is reaching, again, right into my pocket.
Also the fact that everyday, I wake up and have a low grade worry factor about what the Dotard is going to do today. Is he going to nuke some third world equivalent of himself and justify it by saying they were “nasty”? He makes us less safe everyday with his loose canon/grifter ways. It’s hard to believe that Stephens doesn’t feel it too. I long for the days when he is out of office, and ranting somewhere else, rather than in our Oval Office.
Mr Stephens, you need to get out more!
4
“It’s a frontal and highhanded assault on American capitalism.” Yes, American capitalism that makes a few citizen richer and richer and average people poorer and poorer. This capitalism should be attacked and destroyed, replaced by democratic socialism.
3
What you are not considering is climate change. Climate change trumps Trump. We don't have the luxury of time to live through another 4 years of Trump. Period.
4
What you call a reckless candidate is what the rest of us not in the rarefied punditry world we call a candidate who wants to give us what every citizen in advanced economies already takes for granted. It’s not about rearranging furniture, it’s about having furniture.
PS: Stop mentioning socialism. Nobody listens and you sound like Trump.
7
Yes, anyone but Trump - any of the Democrats running for the nomination would be an huge, tremendous improvement over a mad, science-denying, would-be dictator.
2
No, the threat posed by Trump far exceeds any threat of a genuine socialist agenda making it through our politics. AN untethered Trump, is a truly terrifying thought. It won't just be four more years of this incompetent madness, with vanity assassinations, kids in cages and illegal shadow operations. No,without Trump concerned about being humiliated from an election, he will literally act on nearly all his corrupt, deluded and dangerous impulses. I have a lot less confidence in Bernie or Elizabeth turing us into a socialist state.
I don't agree with Mr. Stephens. Any one of the remaining Democratic candidates if elected President will be a 100% better option than struggling with Trump, a 'pathlogical liar' who has made more than 16,000 false or misleading claims since taking office. Also, a comment below by Ken L (Atlanta) is spot on: "Trump has hijacked the Republicans in Congress and set the tone for tribal warfare, which destroys our chances of tackling the big issues: climate change, infrastructure, you name it.'
I think the Senate will acquit Trump because every Republican Senator's head is most likely "on a pike," as Congressman Adam Schiff mentioned in yesterday's impeachment trial.
So, if Trump agrees to debate (you never know what he'll do) - I will vote for the Democrat who wins the Primary but before that happens I set aside the candidates who share my concerns & values - - while I decide the best candidate who can stand toe to toe with Trump in a debate and not allow him to bully him/her like he did to Senators Rubio, Cruz, Hillary & former Florida Governor Jeb Bush.
So, while Mr. Stephens states "What they (Democrats) can’t do is nominate a reckless candidate of their own and insist it’s the only moral choice," - - I reply to Mr. Stephens: none of the candidates will be as reckless as Trump.
4
"Not So Fast"
Yes, very much so fast, more important than anything else at this juncture so fast.
2
Of course, the fact that the science on catastrophic global warming changes the calculus. Trump has in fact done very great damage by his moronic belief that it's a "hoax." We simply must have a President who can and will act based on reason.
1
Well it has been a very tough few weeks for Liberals.
The House managers threw the Biden’s under the bus, spending hours defending them, giving the Republicans all the cover they need to call Hunter Biden as a witness.
Those same House managers called US Senators traitorous, called the President a dictator, and told Republican Senators Trump said he would “have their heads on a pike” if they voted against him. All In Senate Chamber in front of every Republican Senator!
Trump eliminates the world’s worse terrorist mastermind, without going to war with Iran.
Trump holds a massive March for Life.
And now even the NYT publishes a widely read column about how dangerous two of the leading D Presidential candidates are.
Pinch me - is this a dream?
“Let’s not exchange one reckless president for another”. Luckily their is NO ONE in the Dem line up that could equate to the current electoral college winner. Yes! Anyone But Trump.
2
Bret has convinced me that anyone but Trump is the best course.
3
So you don’t believe Trump is an existential threat to our Democracy. Not-Really-Never-Trumpers and Bernie-or-Bust-Bro’s, a pox on both
1
And the Supreme Court?
1
It is very clear who Trump and the Republican Party thinks has the best chance to beat him
1
Trumps anti climate stance is reason enough to toss out this article as out of touch. I’ll be voting to end his assault on a habitable earth.
1
Uh no Bret, life is not the same or a majority of Americans under Trump.
2
We can’t abolish slavery! Think of what it would do to the economy.
Not to mention the effect such a proposal would have on the pro-slavery faction. It might even push them to do something crazy, like attempting to secede!
Any candidate running on a platform like that is irresponsible and I won’t vote for them.
2
Yes Bret. Anyone. Or are you just conceding that 240 years was a pretty good run and we should give up now?
2
Mr. Stephens,
Ask gig economy workers, truck drivers, people with student loans, people losing access to affordable health coverage,
Public school teachers how they feel about the “great” economy.
Sanders or Warren frightens you more than Trump.
Ask the anti semites and the KKK how they feel about another Trump term.
They are empowered and emboldened and your fellow conservatives are keeping their mouths shut because you are afraid of higher taxes and a level playing field for the aforementioned victims of capitalism and political apathy on the right.
3
So Mr Riedl made some projections, did he? I am always amazed at how non-economists like Mr Stephens treat numbers from a study like gospel. I am reminded of how Mark Twain laughed at projections of how fast the Mississippi River was straightening itself, with the end result likely to be that it would in the end be fully straight, sending a vast plume of water would shooting out over the Gulf of Mexico. "Lies, damned lies and statistics," he called them.
How did that Hillary experiment turn out the last time we appealed to the “moderates”?
1
Anyone but Trump? Oh yes, please! Anyone from the Democrats side would be a breath of fresh air...and the more reckless the better...
4
If the Democratic Party is stupid enough (w/out foreign intervention) to nominate Bernie, then the party will split before November.
“Has Trump abandoned NATO?” Agree, no. But it is not significantly discredited by many Americans, likely most Republicans. “Has he lifted sanctions on Russia?” Agree, no. But Americans downplay the role Russia played in our elections and we will never know how many believe Ukraine is to blame! “Has he closed the borders to all immigrants?” Agree, no. But he did close to a number os Muslim majority countries targeting this religion. “Did the president steal the midterms, or stop Congress from impeaching him?” Agree, no. But his has created an autocracy among Republican legislators who never, ever challenge their leader and checks and balances are severely compromised at present. “Has he significantly suppressed the press?” Again, no. But the public trust in serious news organizations like this one have been severely compromised. The same goes with our intelligence organizations. And how long this damage will last, nobody knows.
“Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama.” Who is the vast majority? White Americans? Do blacks and non-white European immigrants feel as safe and comfortable with this country as they felt during the Obama era? Do Jews feel as safe as they did going to the synagogues? Do Muslims feel welcomed at all?
I am sure we all know the answers to the above questions. So, no, life is not the same.
I completely agree. And don’t forget women and those in the LGBTQ community. Their lives are certainly not the same and their civil rights are clearly under attack.
You ask, then answer...did the President stop impeachment? No.
I disagree. He has through his White House sycophants told GOP members of Congress he will essentially have their heads if they vote against him on the measure of new witnesses, or ultimately vote to impeach.
Did the President stop impeachment? Yes.
'Let’s not exchange one reckless president for another.'
Yeah, let's.
4
Wow. What an uninformed column. Bret Stephens needs to pick up a copy of "The Fifth Risk" by Michael Lewis to understand just how seriously our government is being undermined by this President.
3
So predictable. Sanders and Warren are Socialists. Socialists are Communists. Case closed. Except we would prefer a social democracy over fascism. We are not living a representative democracy. You know that, right? The president of the USA should be the person who wins the popular vote. Period.
2
Remind me again why trump is so bad. He is like reagan. I will absolutely vote for him over one of the nuts the democrats are pushing.
1
@one percenter
Could it be that deregulating water safety and undermining healthcare and Social Security are not in the public interest? None are as blind as those who refuse to see.
Comparing Trump to Regan is an insult to Regan and his legacy. It’s very similar to those who compare Trump’s impulsivity and fragile ego to that of a 5 year old: which is itself an unfair insult to 5 year olds.
War! War! War! No doubt in my mind that Trump will instigate another war in the Middle East which would be catastrophic for America, the world and climate change. My mind is made up—anyone but Trump. America has to stop going to war. If capitalism suffers under a socialist president then so be it. No more war!!!
1
No, Bret! Anyone but Trump-- even a yellow dog!
2
No Bret, literally anyone is better that the guy your party put in charge. Anyone. Perhaps including pets and livestock. Anyone.
1
You say “ And an assertively left-wing presidency would spark a right-wing backlash that would have all of the fear and rage of the left’s Resistance — but none of its restraint.”. Doesn’t that say it all -“but none of its restraint “.
The right can inflict Trump - Trump! - on the country...but how dare the left think they can inflict the horrors of Sanders or Warren on the country! I will gladly take 2 terms of Sanders followed by 2 terms of Warren followed by two terms of AOC over another term of this disgusting human being named Trump.
3
Sounds as if the average US citizen is caught between the devil and the deep blue sea!
And finally the mask is off. If this were signed by the editorial board I’d be even less surprised.
4
Why not just ask Mr. Putin who he wants as the next POTUS (actually the first US Monarch) and go with that? Saves billions of dollars. "Trump/Putin 2020-24, and beyond!"
2
I don't think you have a clue, Bret, on what "fracking" is.
Fracking is the organized and deliberate injection of over 400 chemicals into the groundwater that is later used for drinking and crops.
There is no way that those 400 chemicals can be "cleaned" from those waters..... ever.
This week Trump threw out the 1972 EPA regulations on air, surface water and surface soil.
"Fracking" is what is going on on what is BENEATH your feet.
Oh, absolutely: Elizabeth Warren is my Number One Choice.
She would be your's too if you weren't such an ideologue.
You would seriously choose Donald J. Trump over her?
You loose all credibility, Bret.
2
I think the premise here that Trump has done no real or lasting harm is mistaken. If Trump is reelected, I believe he will do the things he had till now failed to, including leaving NATO, lifting sanctions on Russia, more closing of our borders to immigrants with brown skin, and suppressing the press.
5
Brett, you're argument doesn't take into account what foreign governments are -- and will continue -- getting away with if Trump is reelected. Will you be satisfied to see Russia overtake all of Ukraine? Or Poland? Another egregious murder of a journalist and political activist by Saudi Arabia? More Uighurs in Chinese concentration camps? All with Trump nodding approval?
Sanders or Warren might have us debating our domestic affairs (remember, there is a Congress they have to get through, by the way), but at least either would keep a shrewd eye on what's going on in the world and our national security. Trump is in league with the dictators.
5
Trump can't get what he wants, and neither will Sanders or Warren if they are elected. A left-leaning centerist with a go-slow approach would be best, but we're not likely to get one.
"And an assertively left-wing presidency would spark a right-wing backlash that would have all of the fear and rage of the left’s Resistance"
Anything but Trump will spark a right-wing backlash whether they are moderate or not. Remember the resistance to Obama?
5
How did the eight years of “slow go” that preceded Trump pan out??
Why do some people call for middle-of-the-road just for the sake of middle of the road? FDR was certainly not middle-of-the-road, and that is the type of person that America needs in the White House. We need a change agent, a remodeler. Not someone who will just rearrange the furniture.
4
The point: Defeating Republicans, Trump and Trumpism requires building a bigger coalition than their basket of deplorables.
A candidate promising to massively increase EVERYONE's taxes, take away employer provided health insurance, decriminalize illegal border crossings, and over turn our economy and role in the world will not win the 2020 election.
There is no massive coalition for that, especially at a time when people are begging for realignment to the center, competence, and normalcy.
Add to this that Sanders honeymooned in the Soviet Union, runs as an avowed socialist, is not a Democrat, praises Castro and Chavez and Maduro, and much, much more...
It is magical thinking to believe that this is the way forward and the Republicans have already won.
Bret makes case for Bernie Sanders in his defense of Trump. The Congress and the Constitution will keep him in check. My concern now that he is being taken seriously and without the DNC playing interference is how he will address his role as Commander-in-Chief.
1 How would he have reacted as POTUS after 9/11?
2. If the U.S. were attacked with nuclear weapons, would he respond in kind?
3. If the U.S. were threatened with attack with nuclear weapons, would he concede to request for surrender in the interest of sparing the world a nuclear war? ( I hope his answer is no, I unfortunately think we still have to live with Mutually Assured Destruction as the deterrent).
4. Under what circumstances would Sanders commit troops to combat? While Sanders may have never wanted to be put in position as a soldier in war , in a justifiable war time situation, we have men and women who have volunteered for our armed services knowing they may be put in such a situation and if necessary, Sanders is aware that he might have to commit armed services to war.
3
Mr. Stephens, let me provide you with an example of real recklessness: trump’s systematic slashing of the CDC budget. Now the world is facing an outbreak of a particularly nasty and deadly strain of the corona virus, which has spread from China to Europe and Australia, with two confirmed cases in the United States. And we are not prepared to fight the disease as effectively as we need to be.
Anyway, the proposals of Warren and Sanders are not reckless. Instead, they are aspirational, in the same way trump’s promise of better and cheaper healthcare for everyone was aspirational. The difference is that trump had no intention of, and no plan for, keeping any part of his promise, whereas Warren and Sanders would work toward making America better, fairer, and healthier than it is now. And they wouldn’t slash the budget of the CDC, crippling its ability to respond to the next pandemic.
Anyone but trump. Our lives depend upon it.
6
Since the beginning of the 20th century both Roosevelts, Eisenhower, Johnson, and Clinton made massive changes to regulation, civil rights, infrastructure and free trade no less dramatic than what Warren and Sanders propose. Please- enough hand wringing Brett Stephens!
3
@SHK The also ran as moderates and governed as liberals. Most Sanders and Warren supporters argue they are running as socialists so they will govern as liberals.
As do many other readers, I agree with Mr. Stephens three arguments with one caveat,
What Warren and Sanders propose is radical, but one needs stop and weight the consequences of continuing Trump’s policies:
The deficit and debt will continue to grow dramatically as a result of Trump’s tax policy
Income will continue to migrated to the top 1%
We will trade clean water and clean air for greater economic growth
The economic and national security concerns of climate change will be unacknowledged and unaddressed.
Trade wars and efforts to forge trade deals without our allies will continue.
The objective should not be to embrace Trump instead of Warren and Sanders.
It should be to reject all three.
2
What I take from this column is that many moderate independents and center-right Republicans who despise Trump will not vote for Sanders or Warren. This column constitutes a warning to Democrats: nominate one of these candidates and prepare to lose against Trump.
3
Mr Stephens asks questions like, "Did he steal the midterms?" and "Has he ended freedom of the press?" While these things haven't happened yet, we know for sure that Trump is trying to steal the next election and will stop at nothing. We are also seeing the Republicans in Congress bowing ever more to Trump's will. Mr. Stephens, how can we know where a Trump, emboldened by surviving impeachment and re-election, supported by a slavish Senate will take us? If the Senate fails to remove him they will have proved they no longer believe in the rule of law, and we already know Trump does not. It is insanity, and I mean that literally (in the original sense), to sit there and say,"Nothing really bad has happened yet, so the status quo is better than some abomination like universal health care or free university." Insanity, Mr Stephens.
4
@sasha cooke: Sit back and watch counsel who work for a man with 16,000+ lies under his belt. They're the creme de la creme of American jurisprudence.
THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING!!! Cone on, Bret, you know better than this. No president gets all he or she wants, or Trump would be king for life by now. Congress will ensure that any changes proposed by Sanders or Warren will be gradual and measured. But at least they will be in the right direction for the benefit of the American people, unlike Trump's disastrous schemes.
9
A question: how much of the furor over Trump stems from a growing simple-minded if not childish perception of the role of the US president?
Have we completely forgotten or even abandoned the model of a federal government with divided and checked powers? We cheer when each sitting president expands executive power in defiance of congress--as long as we agree. But then we jeer when the parties and policies flip. We seem to attribute almost mystical powers--and blame--to the executive office.
I suppose that industrialized campaigning, and retail media, have an easier job motivating people when they condense politics down to single figureheads. As well documented, voters can be riled up every four years, but cannot name their US senators or representative.
Maybe we do indeed get the government we deserve. But I wish for a better world, where the president would be less important.
1
@Bob Krantz: The US Constitution, written at the very dawn of the Industrial Revolution, is a corporate charter.
You're wrong about things not having changed. I no longer have peace of mind about the health of our democracy, fabric of our great nation, safety of our environment and future if our planet in light of inaction in strategizing and cooperation on the threat of climate change. Before Nov. 20, 2016 I had peace of mind that our leaders would keep us on the right path forward. No longer.
11
I am speechless.
3
And let's never forget, whenever they come up for re-election, to vote against any senator who votes against witnesses or documents in the current trial.
15
@polymath: Two thirds of the senators will not even be held to account by voters in this election year.
While I support neither of these candidates and hope for a moderate savior, wouldn't the political apparatus buffer either of these two extremists the same way that it has prevented Trump from wreaking complete havoc? What they say and what they'll be permitted to do are two entirely differently things. And if the Senate remains in GOP hands, that gap becomes almost infinite.
8
For hundreds of years, the upper class in this country have been so terrified of the highly regulated capitalism so common in Europe they'll say or do anything to keep it from happening here. Sadly, I think their fear is real. That it's also completely irrational won't help us in the end.
4
Your entire argument, Bret, is predicated on Sanders or Warren implementing their stated campaign objectives in their entirety. Apart from FDR in times of crisis living Americans cannot begin to comprehend, that has never happened.
But underneath it is the false notion of a Sanders cult. Yes, Sanders represents a movement as much as it does a political campaign and, like Trump, it's a movement as timeless in our politics as the nativism Trump tapped.
But Sanders is no Huey Long. The entire theme of his campaign is anti-ego, no dear leader, no messiah, no "I alone can fix it."
Sanders is no William Jennings Bryant, driven by religious fervor, relying on biblical images to create dangerous yet moving oratory like Bryant's Cross of Gold speech.
The Democratic party will not fall into line behind president Sanders as Republicans did with Trump. And Republicans certainly won't follow Sanders.
So, more gridlock? Perhaps, but electing Joe Biden takes us back to the conditions that created Trump in the first place. All candidates offer visions that seem absolute but Sanders is a wise, veteran politician who seeks to tip the scales.
They need tipping. And as counterintuitive as it may seem, that may be just the adjustment our politics needs. We're not swapping out loons here, just moving in a long-deferred but necessary direction.
14
Gee Bret, way to conveniently overlook all the terrible damage Trump and his truly appalling administration are doing to this country. His minions spend their days undoing and undermining laws and regulations intended to protect the environment, our health, and our rights while taking a jackhammer to the foundations of our democracy, but never mind that.
On the other side you ring the alarm bells about Sanders and Warren while ignoring that anything they want to implement would have to get through Congress.
Bottle line: unlike Trump, neither sanders nor Warren would pose a threat to our fundamental rights or the environment. Oh and they believe in science and won't lie every time they speak. So for the sake of our country there is no other choice: Vote Blue No Matter Who. PS. I'm working on the buttigieg campaign.
21
THE SKY WILL FALL! THE SKY WILL FALL! OMG Bret, me thinks you overstate and dramatize a Warren or Sanders presidency. Do you think any one person will be able to create such catastrophic change? Realistically, the best we will probably get is a Public Option added to the ACA, or perhaps a Medicare buy-in for those over 50.
But we will get reinvigorated relationships with our allies, enforcement of clean air and water regulations, and perhaps real infrastructure and clean energy spending. Most of all we will get HOPE!
17
Perhaps "anybody but trump" voters really mean "anybody they can respect". I admit to being old, but I have always believed that Americans want a President they can trust, who is honest, who him/herself respects American institutions and the public servants who uphold them, the rule of law and the Constitution. It is very hard for me to understand why and how DJT has any appeal for any American who honors American history and the values that have built this great country.
14
Sanders and Warren would devastate the American economy? No, Bret. You are confusing them with the Republicans, who under George W. Bush destroyed the middle and working classes with the worse economic recession since the Depression. And under Trump are rolling back the few protections the Democrats, under Obama, put in place to that assisted in the recovery.
It was always clear to me that your never-Trumpism was quite shallow, and now you’ve demonstrated that it is just as shallow as Lindsey Graham’s and Ted Cruz’s.
14
@S. Jackson
Can you cite the Bush law, policy, or directive that caused the economic crisis of 2008?
Did the Bush tax cuts cause people to stop paying their sub prime mortgages?
As a matter of fact, the Bush tax cuts contributed to heightened economic activity, which resulted in smaller and smaller deficits.
Look it up.
No, you need to look up Bush’s deregulation of mortgage lenders in 2004, releasing them from the laws that required they keep a cash reserve on hand. That freed up billions of dollars that mortgage lenders then loaned to unqualified buyers. That is what directly lead to the sub prime mortgage debacle. That is what threw gasoline on the housing market creating an economic bubble that burst in 2007. Those lenders, knowing their loans would be defaulted on, then bundled and sold those loans to others. In doing so, they lied through their teeth about the loans viability and value. Look it up.
Mr. Stephens: By publishing an outlandish set of nightmare statistics that have no connection with reality even if Bernie's program were to be enacted In Toto, you do little more than to confirm my suspicions that a fundamental lack of truthfulness and an inability to reason correctly remain the defining characteristics of the conservative commentariat. Let's get real: the issue with Trump is not his policies or his character, horrendous as they are. The issue, rather. is Trump's wholesale assault on the rule of law--aided and abetted by nearly every Republican lawmaker on Capitol Hill. The next election--whomever the Democrats eventually nominate--will be fought not over issues of relative recklessnesses (Trump has no near competitor there) but rather over whether or not, as Gerald Ford put it, we remain "a government of laws and not of men." Do yourself and the republic a favor, and put your pen to work in favor of the latter.
11
Bret doesn’t know the difference between reckless and sociopathic.
6
I lol’d. Someone as divisive as Trump, what a joke.
2
From the outside of America, it really is funny (sad funny) to see the doomsday predictions respecting a Warren or Sanders presidency - which promise -GASP! - little more than an attempt to take baby steps toward simple things that basically many other civilized countries have already had for years.
Sensible health care for all, acknowledgement of scientific reality, recognition that you can't have three quarters of your population working for peanuts while a few dozen control all the remaining wealth, and freedom for women and gender-diverse people to just be left alone to do with their lives as they please. The list goes on.
The civilized world needs America to wake up and catch up, because we need you on the team if we are going to make the world a better place. If it takes a 'radical' like Warren or Sanders, then let's get on with it.
17
I agree with Bret Stephens and I also feel that Michael Bloomberg is the one person who will support the middle class that has been flattened and that the Far Left and the Far Right are similar And don’t care about the middle . Trumps reframing and distorting and distracting won’t stop until he changes the morals and ethics and laws of our non sectarian country
3
It's the insidious nature of the Trump's attacks on our democracy and our world that allows people like Bret Stephens, wrapped in privilege, to say most people's lives haven't changed under Trump. Hate crimes are up, a tolerance for open racism and homo/transphobia makes daily life more uncomfortable and dangerous for many. Millions of people no longer have access to healthcare. Thousands of children are imprisoned for the crime of being migrants. The increase in air pollution for the first time in generations affects many with respiratory vulnerabilities. The attacks on our electoral system continue, and the right to vote is threatened in many states. We can't even imagine what the denial of climate change will mean to all of us, and soon.
But for you, Bret Stephens, noting much has changed, I guess. I'm very happy for you.
12
The most important issue is climate change which is an existential threat to our species survival. Any Democratic candidate will be better than Trump in mitigating the effects of climate change so,vote blue no matter who!
While I do not agree that Increasing the size of government is in and of itself a dangerous thing, what troubles me about Sanders and Warren (the NYT endorsee) is their zealotry. They are absolutely certain that their policy prescriptions are the right ones and they are willing to bet the entire U.S. economy on those prescriptions. In other words, they leave no room for error, and since much of what they propose has never been tried, there are inevitably big errors in their proposals. All that said, either one is better than Trump because Trump wants to destroy America’s most precious possession—democracy. He did not steal the midterms because he did not yet have the power to do so. But the GOP is working hard to give him the power to steal the 2020 election, and, after that, all bets will be off. I don’t want Bernie or Warren, but they are not vicious, nasty, power-obsessed people. Trump is. So it is wrong to equate him with Bernie and Warren as Mr, Stephens does.
3
"First, the argument overstates the extent to which this presidency has eroded the foundations of liberal democracy at home and abroad"
Come on, Bret. Give him time, i.e., a second term.
4
Wondering if Bret Stephens is planning to vote in the Democratic primary. If he's registered as a Republican, he probably can't participate in the Democratic primary.
3
For every policy decision that we anticipate and factor into our voting, the POTUS makes dozens of daily decisions that are under the radar. That's why character outweighs almost any other consideration. And because we humans tend to be short-sighted and responsive mostly to immediate concerns, we should attempt to counter our own myopia by choosing a president who can envision and respond to what's ahead--most importantly, climate change. Consider your vote a proxy that your grandchild gave you.
5
All the people who claim that a Warren or Sanders presidency would be a disaster already have very nice health care for themselves and their families.
All the people who claim that a Warren or Sanders presidency would be a disaster can afford to send their kids to college.
In short, all the people who claim that a Warren or Sanders presidency would be a disaster spend very little time thinking about what it must be like to live without adequate health care and with poor educational options. They have nice lives and live in nice places.
They do probably spend a lot of time thinking about their money, their 401Ks, their current comforts, and their fears of having these things slightly diminished.
10
If Sanders or Warren is the Dem's candidate, and one of them wins in 2020, then the economy will tank.
Then the American electorate will do a complete reversal and elect another Trumpian Republican in 2024.
This tribal "us vs them" will continue for the next 100 years or longer.
Just hot from the presses:
Sanders Seizes Lead in Volatile Iowa Race, Times Poll Finds
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/25/us/politics/democratic-iowa-poll-sanders.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
7
@Blunt
Since when does one believe in polls?
Didn't work in 2016, and now we have Trump.
Anyway the rubber will hit the road for Sanders in South Carolina.
Stay tuned.
@N Smith
And you say that about South Carolina because the black population (you are black if I remember correctly even though you also were raised in East Germany)?
If Blacks don’t vote for Bernie because they are afraid still after all those years of being taken for a ride by the centrists like Clinton and Obama (yes Obama) they have only themselves to blame.
1
Don't cherry pick from a single poll. It's shows either contempt for your readers intelligence or that you just feed them what they want to hear. The RCP index of polls shows a small plurality of voters don't want Trump removed.
With the U.S. GINI (measure of inequality) at 47, removing the cap of SS contributions and including all sources of income would raise the same amount as the current rate (12.4 for self employed and 6.2 for those whose employer as a surrogate pays half) to 4.63% for SE and 2.32% for employees. 68.43% of filers (households) earn less than the cap and for most of them their payroll tax is greater than income tax. Strange that you would choose the payroll tax to pay for MFA. Does Bernie? I don't think so. If he does, he needs a better economist, one that can do math. BTW want a tax cut for the those earning less than $137,700? 1.57% of every dollar earned is $2162 at the cap.
1
While not its intention, the article underscores the need for an independent candidate with a chance to win. In our two party system, that can never happen, but it's what I'd like to see, then we wouldn't to make Clinton or Sanders vs Trump type choices.
Agreed. But the only way it can work is to get rid of the electoral college.
Article number 53 by a conservative guaranteeing that only a moderate that he finds acceptable to his ideology could possibly beat Trump. Nonsense! Trump won by claiming that he was an independent, there to protect "the forgotten man", get him better,cheaper health care, better job and wages, middle class tax cuts, jobs back from China and Mexico, protect him from illegals,protect his safety net, along with pro-life and religious freedom. He lied about all of the economic, populist issues. Those people still want what Trump promised, so the only way to get it is by voting for Bernie or Liz. Since Bernie is the original with the same message for 40 years, it's Bernie. So America, if you want to beat Trump, nominate Bernie, he'll win in a landslide!
5
if we don't change the direction of climate change nothing else matters...we're all doomed. trump is a total and complete disaster for mankind. warren and sanders understand that.
7
@alan But wouldn't the "worst" Democratic nominee be better on climate change than Trump? It's a cliche, but the perfect is the enemy of the good.
“The truth of Trumpism is that it’s a morally corrosive and corrupting force, not a politically or economically catastrophic one.”
Not politically or economically catastrophic? Your list “wrong things” Trump has sought to do glaringly left off rolling back all of the positive environmental policies that have taken decades to put in place. Climate change is the biggest threat to our existence and Trump’s response is to pretend it’s not happening.
6
Enough! Trump IS a danger to our democracy! And every Democratic presidential candidate running is not!
Yes, ANY Democratic nominee over Trump!!
9
The idea is not to choose the next dictator. The choice is clear between candidates and a party which respect the limitations of democracy, and a President and party which clearly intend to take all power for themselves without regard for others. Furthermore, the Republican party is controlled by big-money corporations and individuals whose economic interests are opposed to most of those who vote for them because of their support of racism.
4
Now who's being an alarmist? The figures on the cost of Bernie's programs are assuming he passes everything undiluted by any compromise. First, he's unlikely to get most of what he wants passed into actual legislation. Second, the entire Congress would also have to go strongly progressive. That's not going to happen. So give me a break!
6
Brett downplays the worst aspects of Trump's behavior. Trump has divided us with racism, a tidal wave of lies, underhanded dealings, corruption and self-serving gluttony.
Apparently Brett thinks we can all overlook this by avoiding Bernie Sanders who can offer more than lip service to pay inequality, racial equity, global stability. The whole world will breathe a sigh of relief with Sanders, because he's simply not a loose cannon, nor is he corrupt.
5
@BeauB The world will breathe a sigh of relief with any of the Democratic candidates, and the world will be laughing as the Democrats act like babies in November and hand the election over to Trump. The smart Americans will soon leave, as we even smarter ones already have. At least living in the Florida Keys, you're a short boat ride away from a sane country.
I have an answer. Bloomberg. Wait and see.
2
"Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama." "Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."
9
Bret's case againt Sanders and Warren is a rehash of version of capitalism that resisted the reforms of the New Deal and has sought to dismantle them ever since. It is a refusal to acknowledge that, left to itself, its fundamentalist interpretation results in monopoly power rather than competition and imperils democracy with resources sufficient to ignore the public interest.
That a fearfull electorate might prefer the devil it knows in November is a real possibility–one that this column exacerbates.
5
Conclusion: Trump is no good; however, the author does not want anything to change, therefore Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are far too dangerous, therefore... the only acceptable candidate (acceptable to Mr. Stephens) is..... [anybody but Sanders or Warren -- the only two candidates determined to bring about the changes the country so badly needs.]
Yuk!
6
Every system has to change according to the time to sustain. Democracy is not an exception. Liberal democracy needs to adjust to sustain and to face challenges of the time. This is the only thing happened under Trump. There has been no real erosion of the foundations of liberal democracy at home and abroad, only tinkering at the edges to face challenges like demonic forces like ISIS.
Has Trump strengthened NATO? Yes. Has he taken stronger measures against Russia? Yes. Has he taken stronger measures to control illegal immigration? Yes. Did the president take measures to conduct the midterms normally? Yes. Did he allow to get impeached? Yes. Has the liberal press become stronger under Trump? Yes. Has the economy become stronger? Yes. Has he challenged unfair trade deals? Yes. Has he started unnecessary wars? No. Has he taken stronger actions against terrorists and bullies like Iran? Yes. That means, under Trump there have been positive changes, though sometimes our anxieties went up due to strong actions he took, which in retrospect have proven to be better like the killing of Soleimani.
1
All good points Bret, but you should have ended with a strong, eminently reasonable argument for a Biden-Klobuchar (or Klobuchar-Biden) ticket.
2
Bret, are you seriously comparing anyone else to Trump on the recklessness issue? My emphasis in a presidential election has always been (until 2016) on specific policy issues and general trustworthiness of the respective candidates. This is different. We have what amounts to a national emergency with a sociopathic liar untethered to any norms of patriotism or interest other than his own. The main issue now is to get this man out of the Oval Office. Anyone would be better.
8
The problem at hand is that the choice is either black or white. We are not offered a pleasant shade of grey.
The argument that the majority of American’s lives are the same under Trump as they were under Obama is a projection of a perception of reality. Many wealthy white American’s lives are no different. This is true. However, projecting this reality as the reality of the majority of Americans shows nothing but a massive blind spot.
2
Oh please. Bret stop stoking fear of socialism. Bernie and Warren are for capitalism, just not unfettered capitalism.
6
A famous French comic once said, ''if voting could really change anything it would have been made illegal long ago''. Maybe... in any case, we need to take back the legislatures and the Senate. Impeach Trump in 2021 for any of the long list of offenses, boot him right along with Pence and call up Mnuchin, Barr and Pompeo for obstruction and contempt and thow the lot of them in jail.
3
As if there is a comparably corrupt, authoritarian Democrat. Reckless hardly begins to describe the present danger.
3
Mr Stephens, you say of Ms Warren, "She doesn’t have one climate plan. She has at least five, costing in the trillions . . . ."
What do you think tit will cost to our planet to reelect the candidate with no climate plan? The one who thinks climate change is a hoax?
5
Two reasons to defeat Trump: Nuclear weapons and Supreme Court.
5
I disagree with this argument.
1
Is he devastating the environment?
Is he loading the courts with one sided judges?
Is he ruining our standing in the world?
Is he causing the worst divisiveness America has ever seen?
Must I go on with this list???
8
Mr. Stephens – I know how you feel, but you don't have to cast your lot with either Scylla and Charybdis.
Why not do what Odysseus did, and sail on between them? There are other candidates, you know.
1
Andrew Yang! Trending. Reported as 4th in the polls today. Look up some of his talks on YouTube. Not right, not center, but forward!
1
And Trump isn't "blasting at the foundations" of our institutions? Our values? Our entire way of thinking about who we are? Our constitution? What the heck do you think "foundations" refer to?
4
Shorter Bret: living a mile from Chernobyl ain’t so bad. It’s very quiet, no close Neighbors, and dirt cheap.
Seriously.
4
"No President has been tougher on Russia than me".
"I have placed more sanctions on Russian than any President before me".
Bret Stephens, do you realize how far you (an alleged Trump critic) have bought into the gaslighting?
4
When you vote keep in mind that the Supreme Court outlives all presidential administrations.
4
In sum: So long as we are merely morally corroded and corrupted, life is good.
5
Stephens would rather see a right wing authoritarian be re-elected for four more gruesome years than hand over the reins to a social democrat. Every liberal reader of this article should learn from Stephens that supposed “never Trump” conservatives are not their friends.
4
You don’t need to be a soothsayer to envision the dangerous world we would live in with 4 more years of Trump.
Oh, and climate change.
3
“Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama.”
Falling life expectancy. Soaring rate of suicide. Record levels of debt. The very air that we breath and water that we drink is deteriorating for the first time in decades. Climate change-fueled disasters are a regular occurrence.
Mass killings and hate crimes are so common they barely make the news.
And it’s only been three years.
What country does the author live in?
5
Half the population would be employed by the government? This is worthy of a YouTube conspiracy theory video.
3
You lost me at jobs versus the environment. A classic foil to throw people off the truth of climate science. I can tell you one thing: anyone who refuses to understand that climate change is the single greatest threat to the survival of humanity is no longer valid to express an argument. EVERY discussion we have from now on as a species must start and must end with climate change. To put it more simply, what jobs are you fighting for when there is no habitable planet to live on???
3
Trump hasn't changed ordinary peoples lives... That statement actually says a lot. Ordinary. So those of us who have been fighting every day to hold back the bigoted, hateful, arbitrary, greedy actions by Trump aren't ordinary? Those of us who have disabled family members that Trump is okay making fun of aren't ordinary. Or Gold families who Trump has no respect for? Or those whose healthcare costs have gone up because Trump is sabotaging ACA. Or those Americans who are caught in the backlash of climate change? Or farmers whose livelihood is at risk because Trump has no clue about trade? Or 34 Americans who are now suffering from "headaches" because Trump murdered a Iranian government official? Or Muslim, Jewish, Hispanic, and Black Americans who can feel the swell of bigotry because Trump condones it?
Bret - you don't do your homework. Millions of Americans are impacted by Trump. You are just not paying attention.
5
The more the right wing NY Times talking heads engage in fearmongering against Sanders and Warren, the more convinced I am that they're the right people for the job.
4
I don't know how this reporter won't a Pulitzer, peddling "fear and exagerations" instead of facts.
Always right wing pundits try to frame the debate in how much M4A is going to cost but maliciously avoiding to say that the current cost is equal and that M4A has the opportunity to bring savings by removing the bloat, the unnecessary middlemen, the prices abuses, the marketing cost, the fabulous CEOs pay.
Those savings get invested back to cover all the 331m citizens with no fear of high medical debt or bankcrucies. With no fear of running out of insulin to live because you can't pay the continue price gougging. M4A will bring massive leverage to negotiate prices and prevent the abuses of the crony capitalism.
How misleading is his comparison, if it gets implemented the jobs that will de lost, without measuring imapct
2
Nothing will ever wash away the 2 major crimes of Donald Trump; his crimes against humanity as evidenced by the separation of children from their parents; 100 of them under 1 year of age, as well as putting them in cages. And his crimes against the planet as evidenced by his climate change denial as the world burns. And no amount of foggery by Bret Stephens will alter that.
2
Gonna vote for the Democratic nominee.
5
Yes, so fast. The sooner, the better.
The two American industries that are the most direct products of free market capitalism are fracking and private health insurance, the two industries cited by Brett Stephens. Fracking is an industry developed to increase the wealth of those owning inaccessible resources of fossil fuels, the health of the planet be damned. And private health insurance Is an industry that adds an overhead cost to the American health care industry, making this the most expensive health care industry in the world.
If one wanted to mount an attack on the problems of free market capitalism, eliminating fracking and private health insurance would be a good start.
4
I'm so tired of people of extreme privilege telling others some version of this: "The truth of Trumpism is that it’s a morally corrosive and corrupting force, not a politically or economically catastrophic one. It’s a reality Trump’s critics need to internalize lest their criticism become a self-defeating caricature."
First, it has been and will continue to be economically catastrophic when you look at the upcoming entitlement slashing, the rebalancing of our budget toward corporate entitlements and away from any sort of social safety net for folks who have been growing poorer and poorer.
Second, it has certainly been politically catastrophic if your rights have been endangered--if you are a Dreamer, a queer person, a woman with a desire to have control over her own body, people who live on lands which are now being polluted bc of executive rule changes, and countless others.
Third, and back to why it's so galling to hear straight, white, cis men tell us we will be seen as hysterical, a caricature--the moral deficiencies of Trump and his administration, combined with the increased presence of white supremacists, the increased number of reported hate crimes, the devaluation of our day to day experience as oppressed people, and the near constant badgering of any and all opponents, has a very real effect. However, Trump will indeed win--already has in fact--when a smart, open minded NYT Opinion writer can't even see the current pain and future suffering of fellow citizens.
5
I am sorry Bret. Once again I don't buy your argument. you need to hold the Republican party voters responsible.
5
Loving something requires sacrifice. Some show it for this country through public service, most do through paying taxes. The GOP are cowards who can’t even sacrifice a little extra out of their paycheck for country. They hide behind flag waving and military worshipping while the working classes keep this country up. And when they’re in power they have the gall to STEAL our money for their own personal gain (looking at you Trump, Duncan Hunter, Scott Pruitt, Ben Carson, Chris Collins, the list is endless). Don’t be a coward, Bret. Make a sacrifice for once and vote Democrat.
2
After wstching closing argumsnts for the last two days, I find the solution fo the Democratic quandry right befofe oyr eyes: draft Adam Schiff.
2
I would vote for the Democratic town dog catcher over Trump. He is a singular danger, and has already come close to destroying America as we know it.
6
It is interesting to hear this stream of rationalization.
"Has Trump ended the sanctions on Russia?"
Good Lord.
Don't you get it? We don't judge Trump by what he has been prevented from doing (like ending sanctions on Russia). We judge him by what he would do and wants to do.
As Peter Rucker has just written, Trump wanted to have Rex Tillerson repeal the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act so that US businesses could bribe foreign governments to "win deals."
I guess what Stephens is saying is we should give Trump the benefit of the doubt.
Sorry, I tried that once. While I didn't vote for him, I did have this fleeting hope that he might grow into the office.
It was clear in short order that such a thing was not possible.
Rather, Trump, the human crime wave, has permanently scarred this nation.
One can only wonder what Mr. Stephens thinks about how Trump will behave in a second term after he has evaded impeachment and won't face voters again.
No thanks. I'll take my chances with anybody - literally anybody over this narcissistic, lying, genital-grabbing, corrupting, ignorant, racist, lazy clown.
Seriously, you have to wonder what it would take for Stephens to come to the conclusion that "Hey, you know, this guy is an erratic, ignorant, lying, fool and we need to get him out of there."
What would it take...
Sadly, we will likely see it thanks to Republicans in the Senate.
We richly deserve what we get.
4
If you really want to get confused, just watch some old Milton Friedman videos on youtube on your way to your local socialist gathering after your job flipping burgers! You’ll wind up despising too much government but still desire clean water, affordable healthcare, childcare, etc. This new you also won’t know who to vote for!
What I see lacking in your analysis is the vision of a re-elected Trump. A President with no guardrails, a bunch of yes men in his cabinet (Sec of State Giuliani? Treasury Sec Trump Jr.? Supreme Court Justice Barr?), and no requirement to face another election. A President emboldened by an impeachment acquittal and a re-election. If you did not like Trump V1, you're going to absolutely hate Trump V2.
5
Electing or re-electing a polarizing candidate ..dilemma solved with a middle position candidate....who is that ?
Bloomberg will not debate.....Booker has no following.....
SOMEONE NEEDS TO STEP UP. or we will have that uncomfortable feeling of national division and antagonism again.
I will vote for this keyboard before I vote for Donald Trump. I have never called him president. He is the worst man, bar none, to hold the office in my 64 years. You know all of the reasons.
But there is an election in November so what to do?
Think about it. Our institutions are holding against the least competent president, the most ignorant, the most criminal, the most selfish, the least dedicated to American exceptionalism in our lifetimes, perhaps in US history. So all of us, even you Bret, can deal with ANY Democrat.
Get on the Anyone but Trump train. For the good of our children and grandchildren. And be on the right side of history.
5
Just astonishing. Just absolutely astonishing. Come out to California next October Bret, when the wildfire smoke is so thick it's hard to make out the tent cities under the freeways through the oceans of Teslas and Porsche Cayennes. A frontal and highhanded assault on American capitalism is what's desperately needed. And you compare Senators Warren and Sanders to Trump in defense of your blindness? Incredible.
5
Stephens' lackadaisical attitude about a climate emergency should have disqualified him from having as column in this newspaper. He proves his obtuseness about the scale of the threat again here.
5
"Devastating dislocations to millions of workers lasting for years' .. devastating effects on the country lasting for decades" ...
Sounds like what happened under Reagan and the Bushes. Oh, wait .. I forgot about Hoover and his Hoovervilles ....
We get it Mr. Stephens... you favor Trump, because he's the far lesser of evils ...
3
Columnist after columnist in the NY Times keeps telling us why we need a "centrist," when the so-called center is so far to the right we might as well be living in the age of the robber barons. What I see is that you're all scared witless of Bernie--an FDR Democrat.
6
One word: judges.
3
Here we are at the predictable endpoint of the Republican destruction of the presidency. First, it was: “He’s a successful businessman and can get the country back on the road to prosperity.” Then, OK, “he’s a wildcard, but we need to shake things up.” Then came “he’s only joking. It’s just locker room talk.” Then “He’s fallible. Give him a mulligan.” Then: “He committed no crimes.” Then, “It may be a crime, but its not impeachable.” Now, it’s, “Well, the Democrat might be worse.”
The GOP has slowly waded neck-deep into a cesspool, all the while telling us how sweet it is and now they want us to know that it could be worse. It sure could.
Maybe the problem is the GOP.
2
Bravo! A sensible, honest, unbiased, intelligent opinion. For our times this creates an incredibly high standard, especially for the New York Times.
While I really like Elizebeth Warren, my ideal ticket, the one that most assuredly should be able to beat Trump, is Biden/Klobuchar.
2
Neither Warren nor Sanders have the dictatorial/autocratic tendencies of trump, nor would the Democratic Party — which has shown itself to be the ONLY party that cares about our Constitution — support the complete power grab that you gin up in your nightmare scenario, Bret.
Perhaps under trump you have forgotten that this is a Constitutional Democratic Republic, and are OK with trump's disregard for the law, separation of powers, and penchant for grifting and self-dealing.
We haven't forgotten, and we're not OK with it.
Face it: your perfunctory statements at the opening of your columns -- about trump being a 'lawless president and revolting person' yada yada yada are just window-dressing for your ultimate support of trump.
3
Bret,
I hear they still love you downtown. Please, do us a favor, and put this stuff in the WSJ.
2
You seem blind to the damage trump is doing to the environment, to fair housing, to the quality of the federal judiciary, to the virtue of honesty, to civil discourse, to public schools, to the rights of women, to racial harmony, to the constitutional balance of powers, ...I don’t know how you could write this column.
3
It's not a serious argument and the fact that you are framing it as one is as frightening as it is revolting.
3
"Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama."
"for the overwhelming majority of straight white men" is more like it
3
Science, Bret. You understand the concept I'm sure. We need a President who does also.
2
“Yet for the overwhelming majority of Americans, life is pretty much the same under Trump as it was under Obama.”
A truly chilling observation. Like frogs in the proverbial pot set to boil, a whole lot of people in America have no idea what’s coming down the pike if he’s re-elected. It can make one crazy, as in how can they be so blind, or worse, stupid? Well, here we are, and collectively we can’t say we didn’t know......at least those of us whose heads weren’t buried in the sand or glued to Fox.
3
Wow, another false equivalence argument. There are bad people on both sides, Brent? Seriously?
2
Mr Stephens, what are you thinking! Another term of this totally inept, self-serving, dangerous, ignorant person would totally destroy the country. He thinks he knows everything, you know the "stable genius". That's a joke. He thinks Climate Change is a Chinese Hoax and doesn't understand the difference between the words weather and climate. He recently asked, "just what happened at Pearl Harbor". He only cares about the very wealthy, remember the huge tax break they got, but nothing for the middle class. He has no conception of anything. The taxpayers are paying millions of dollars every time he travels to one of his golf courses, etc. etc. He must be voted out of office, if impeachment doesn't get rid of him.
2
Sorry Bret, you're wrong. Neither Bernie nor Warren nor even my neighborhood plumber could do as much damage as Trump, a dangerously unstable narcissist and serial liar with his finger on our nuclear trigger. And if his successor can make General Electric or Amazon pay their fare share of taxes, all the better.
3
You have got to be kidding, Mr. Stephens. Equating the Democratic presidential candidates with Trump? In what universe may they be considered as dangerous as he is?
We have a "president" who is an avowed white nationalist - who has repeated that he believes the KKK and neo-Nazis are some very fine people.
And as far as Americans living the same kind of lives under Trump as they lived under Obama? Are you kidding me? For those of us who are people of color, we're now nothing more than targets for Trump's white nationalist, heavily armed base. Walk down the street now as a person of color, Mr. Stephens, before you make this claim.
We have a "president" who has singlehandedly destroyed every one of this nation's alliances in the past three years, many of which took the past seven decades to create. And we have a "president" who is publicly urging Russia to continue to interfere in our national elections.
In what conceivable realm are any of the Democratic presidential candidates remotely this horrific?
This column is just one more of Stephens' desperate attempts with "what aboutism" -- and we are way past the point of these baseless comparisons. The fact is, once this Republican Senate keeps Trump in office, he will be limited only by his imagination and the laws of physics.
And it is an insult to many of us, especially citizens of color, to tell us our lives are unchanged under Trump, as he praises the white nationalists in Charlottesville.
4
I'm not super impressed by scary numbers coming from the Manhattan Institute.
1
There are other candidates who could reverse the fate of
the sullied GOP....
Consider William F. Weld who will challenge Trump in the
New Hampshire GOP primary...Weld 2 term Governor of
Massachusetts..
Never mind parsing the DEMS all the time: There are other
candidates who are worthy of being POTUS