"Democratic voters have decided that what an old white man — Donald Trump — broke, only an old white man — Sanders or Biden — can fix. "
No, that's not what democratic voters think, it's what you think about Democratic voters. Don't project.
5
This is a sad day in America. As of a period of time following Mr Blow's essay, Sen Warren has, indeed, exited the race for the presidential nomination.
What a pity! Yes, it is sexism, misogyny, ignorance, whatever.... Apparently, millions have not been listening to Warren's message because (slap my dirty mouth) she is SHRILL and SHOUTS out a sensible, feasible platform. Men just could not hack paying attention to a WOMAN with executive qualities!
Sad, indeed, for America, that respect is not given to half our population. Yes, I am a woman....I know.
Elizabeth Warren will always have my admiration, respect, and hope for leadership of our country.
8
To get past all the MSM hype (a bit of astroturf propaganda, I would say) we need to check history. Like compare and contrast Bernie's 2016 run v now.
By my quick parse, in 2016 partialling in only the states that have voted in 2020 (except CA, which Bernie will get more of, last time losing with 222 v Clinton's 325)so far (grapes to grapes, not v grapefruits):
Bernie then- 828
Clinton- 999
Neutral analysis would report he is doing far better in 2020.
&, extra credit- checking the upcoming states in the next two weeks, on 16 Bernie took the most of those.
So, to create a fake surge narrative, this was The Establishments best shot.
Idds are the final tally on Siper Tes?
Biden was 2nd, and the comeback kid still is #2
tell the truth, shame to dirty devils
Depends on what restoration you're talking about. Restoration of neo-lib Dems or FDR,JFK,LBJ Dems. Put another way, Biden or Bernie.
1
Bernie Sanders may be headstrong, but he’s not stupid, so I have to wonder how he can seem so confident that his revolutionary moment is at hand. From his campaign rhetoric you might think that all you have to do is get him elected and social justice will flow like a mighty stream. If Congress and the courts resist his fiat, as they surely will, he will call up his army of mostly young progressives, who will block intersections, disrupt official business, and confront the exploiter class where they work, play and dine out, shaming them into submission. That sort of thing, we all know, has been a great success in the resistance to Trump. When Sanders claims that Trump is an autocrat, he is really only half right. Trump is a wannabe autocrat. Apart from his iron grip on the GOP, it’s mostly strongman theater. But to bring about the swift and radical economic and social transformation that Sanders envisions would require an actual dictator in the Oval Office. Street theater and social media shaming wouldn’t suffice. If Sanders doesn’t realize this, the adulation of his youthful following has plainly gone to his head.
21
@Fidelio Perfect analysis, Fidelio, and the reason I could not support Bernie. Years of vitriolic, Bernie Bot protest is not an appealing future, IMO. We already have more than enough chaos.
9
@Fidelio
You observed: he’s not stupid, so I have to wonder how he can seem so confident that his revolutionary moment is at hand.
In response to your wondering, I offer this word: hubris.
8
As a life long Democrat, what I really want is to defeat Trump. I am a progressive with many close friends who are Republican. They are good people, who believe differently than I do. When I voted in my primary, I swung to the middle in order to support the possibility that these friends, who are sick of Trump, might have a place to come in from the cold. I love Bernie, and wish as a country we could accomplish what he wants. But this is a dire time and I felt I had to support compromise. It is not that I support the status quo. It is that we have to get Trump out of office. My 98 year old Dad, a lifelong Republican who didn’t even like FDR, did not vote for Trump. But if my Dad lives until November, and Biden gets the nomination, he will vote for Biden. A lot of people hate Trump, and his defeat is the goal.
28
@Barbara Fox I'm a Democrat, but my extended family are Republican. They all detest Trump for his lying, amoral behavior so I'm doing the same thing as you - voting for a candidate who will get Trump out of office and who my family might justify voting for as well.
10
Charles, please. Stop with this nonsense that Liz Warren's campaign failed solely because "she's a woman."
That is an all too simple answer that totally ignores the complexity and confusion of the electoral process in this country. A process that is made even more complex because of endless noise from 24/7 cable news, social media and pundits like yourself. It's a mess.
Here's why her campaign failed: instead of one or two major issues to campaign on, she campaigned on dozens of them. That is very, very, very difficult to do well. On top of that, she's a policy nerd. That's great for actually getting things done, but policy nerds often sacrifice personality. She tried to manufacture a personality that would fit this day and age. Again, difficult to do under pressure. The selfies and the beer videos...it was all too artificial.
It's a shame candidates have to debase themselves to these stupid stunts, but that's a reflection of the culture America has become: nonstop reality TV, the constant need to be entertained. It is no wonder Trump is President. It's an all too fitting punishment for our ignorant, pathetic culture.
5
It's not sexism. She's a lousy candidate, like Hillary. Want to see a woman win? Try Nicki Haley. She's got what it takes to draw a wide range of support (she proved it at the U.N.). So please stop with the "I can't win because I'm a woman" mantra. Americans aren't looking at gender. They're looking for leaders. Remember that next time you spend three years ripping a sitting president.
2
Charles, the lesson really is not color or age. Joe confirms the adage, you attract more flies with honey than vinegar. The guy who brings people together is judged to be the better leader.
3
@David More likely Joe and/or Democratic power brokers attracted the drop-outs of Buttigeig and Klobuchar with political promises, with the result that Joe picked up their moderate voters. I don't believe that overnight Joe Biden on his own turned into a more popular candidate.
2
@beberg1 polls are not accurate. New Hampshire and Iowa and Nevada were extremely small States
with very few Americans of African heritage. As soon as it was clear in South Carolina that Biden was the only one who could bring everyone together, as he did in South Carolina, not Bernie,
there was a ground swell for Biden. Biden has held
leadership positions in the senate and As VP, incomparable resume of leadership.
1
Can we please retire the “old white man” meme? I’m in that category and would have gladly voted for Harris, Booker, Klobuchar or Warren if I’d had the opportunity as a New Yorker. And if one of them is a VP nominee, I will do just that.
22
Not much new here. Progressives vs centrists, dream vs practicality, old vs young. I hope we will "coalesce" and support the candidate that gives us a fighting chance to rid our country of cancerous lesion AKA Trump. And if Joe wins maybe we will have the chance to see more of Barack and Michelle!
2
Mr. Blow, you are not living up to your last name. Some times to build something new, you need to blow down the old same, old same politics. If you are a good observant of nature, you can see that nature doesn’t hold on to old and decrepit trees, blows them down, so new ones can come out to stand the wrath of the wind. You are right that the moderate democrats and suburban moderate republican who voted for Biden don’t see the urgency of any radical change because they are happy with the status quo and probably agree with most current polices, they don’t want to change dogs, just their collars, but to say that those who stuck their head in the sand hopping that things will get better are more realistic that the progressive ones who have the courage to try to do what it is needed to solve the crisis we face, it is not how we have moved forward in our history regarding Civil Rights, Women’s rights, industrial revolution, etc. People need to rise and demand change.
3
Re: Bernie and Gradualism:
@S.P. Sadly, even if he were to be elected, college students would not be enjoying the free higher education and debt relief they are dreaming of today, not for years, if ever, from Bernie Sanders. He can yell and scream all he wants but congress will do as they please, especially regarding Sanders, who is notoriously difficult to work with. So my advice for today's youth, for quicker results, is to lobby your Senators and Representatives and vote for those congresspeople who will have a better chance of advancing your agenda than Sanders. Run for office if you're old enough. Laws, (like labor and minimum wage for example), can be passed on the state level too, don't forget.
10
Can not imagine the betrayal Elizabeth Warren must feel by the lack of support for her in Massachusetts and the rest of the States she valiantly campaigned in. She has consistantly taken up fights for the middle-class that left her with achievements or resistance to needed reforms. Since Tuesday reasons given by people are as empty as, " Biden will heal the country.", as if he is a doctor or he is comfortable like a couch. My Dad is 91, drives his friends to appointments, fishing, movies and he is sharper than Biden, never befuddled, which is terrifying to witness in both Trump and Biden. We all know Sanders is not going to seize corporations, he needs to tie in FDR and emphatically state the fact the Republicans want to privatize the VA and SSA Administration and cut benefits. The Boomers will pick their heads up, those caught in-between giving generational money to aging parents, young adults or save for college for their own children and lack cash for their own retirement will realize the safety the moderates are offering isn't in their best interest. We need Warren and Sanders and the ghost of FDR at this time.
1
I agree with much of your analysis, but I also think it's simpler than that: People are exhaused with the constant assults on reason, civility, and truth. Many of us simply want decency restored. This drumbeat of hatred, coupled with incompetence, has created an atmosphere of violence and anger which has poisoned media coverage and private discourse. We don't have to call it a revolution to turn things around dramatically.
2
Mr Blow
stated
"I am baffled by her failure to attract more of a following"
But I am baffled even Democratic voters didn't give any credit to her , sexism after Trump has worsened.
4
Most Democrats, moderate or otherwise, are very much in favor of a national healthcare system. We are also very much in favor of raising taxes on the very wealthy to pay their share and an increase in minimum wage.
A "revolution" won't get through the Republican Senate. All the Bernie-bluster in the world isn't going to make that happen. McConnell will simply refuse to let anything go for a vote.
Trump is a menace to the world. He is a blight on freedom, equality, and humanitarianism.
So this isn't a fight between a revolution and a business-as-usual Democratic race. This is a fight for the survival of the U.S.
I'm not interested in a glorious Democratic Socialist revolution. I'm interested in restoring our government to sanity, and re-taking our place in the world as the country to emulate - even with all its flaws and missteps.
In short, nothing any Democrat wants is going to matter if Trump wins. Everything else is just noise.
5
I don't need to wait around for history to inform me that getting rid of Trump is our only imperative.
Vote Biden for President.
Let Bernie be appointed the Czar of Vermont.
4
'Slow and steady' sounds like business as usual. For 30 years, Gingrich's book still is the GOPs template for their tribe: Compromise, Logic, Facts, Morality, Statesmanship, Critical Thinking, Common Sense, and CIVILITY have no place in this GOP tribe - these values are political defects. Now the dems are wiping the same sleaze Hillary tried in 2016 and it stinks even worse in 2020. Since the Senate utterly failed to honor their sworn oath and betrayed this nation and backstabbed our founding fathers, it is clear american democracy is dead, so why are we still communicating as if we live in a democracy? What democracy? What Oath? What Constitution? What Bill of Rights? Fail. Fail. Fail. It has become something else and the quicker we realize it the quicker we might wake up, if we aren't dead already. Our nation, especially this GOP, has metastisized into something post democracy. Should history ignore this GOP senate's betrayal of democracy? Backstabbing our allies? Traumatizing FOR LIFE tens of thousands children, and then watching Sessions grinning and justifying it by quoting scripture from a government podium? Where can I sign up for this kind of religion? This is what the American Evangelical flavor of Jesus tastes like - eat up. It sticks on evangelicals like syrup on a winters' day.
2
I hope that you will not be distracted by going left or right...you only have those choices in a Democratic country! Anything but Trump and the GOP; only after you retake your future that you may change things.
1
Wonder how many Southern Republicans, fed up with Trump, voted for Biden in the primary.
Is Biden their Trump alternative?
1
Best piece in weeks.
1
Is it just me or does anybody else find it ironic that a country founded on the revolution against the tyranny of a king, no longer not has the courage to revolt against tyranny from oligarchs?
2
@Carl
It's not that they lack courage, Carl. They fail to realize two things: 1) oligarchy has, for decades (always?) run this country. Just because we call them 'Founding Fathers' doesn't mean that the signers of the declaration weren't the oligarchs of their era;
and 2) that they are being treated like boiling frogs. By the time that is figured out, many MAGA supporters will unfortunately be in straights nearly as dire as those without housing in the L.A. and the greater SF Bay areas.
1
“ two men, two elderly men, two elderly white men.” This reduces two very complex and talented characters to 2D stereotypes. Trump is an elderly white man, but he might as well belong to a different species from Biden and Sanders. There might indeed be some sexism involved in Warren’s collapse. But a bigger factor is the fact that she blew up her brand by talking out of both sides of her mouth on health care during not one but two debates and during intervening interviews. And during her comeback, she took out Bloomberg but left Bernie unscathed. Finally, if Warren not catching on is a mystery, so is MIchael Bennett not catching on. So is, back in 2008, Bill Richardson not catching on. Running for President in the age of Twitter has to be one of the hardest things there is to do. So let’s give Biden and Bernie their due.
3
MSNBC just reported that participation among 17-29 year-old voters on Super Tuesday was between 11-15% on a state-by-state basis.
If these youngsters won't even come out to vote for Bernie during the primary, how am I to rely on them in the general election?
I'll stick with Biden, thank you. I want to WIN!
4
What I find interesting is this is the first time that the Black community, by there vote in the South Carolina primary, may be who essentially choose the Democratic candidate as well as the next president. The moderates as well as those who just fear that Bernie would loose to Trump were just waiting for a candidate to coalesce around. If the Black community in SC had chosen Buttigieg Klobuchar or even Bloomberg (which would been a vote of forgiveness) they would have been who the moderates and anti-Bernies would be ralling around.
2
Blow has no idea as to what he speaks of.
Fear rules, fear of Donald Trump and fear dishonestly and dishonorably promoted by moderate Democrats of progressive ideas.
The progressive's Medicare for All plan, totally doable, would benefit everyone greatly and would reduce overall healthcare cost substantially.
It is impossible to believe the moderates don't understand this. Some combination of the moderates seeing too much personal political risk in supporting the idea along with their traditional alliance with special interest i.e. Unite Healthcare.
Yes Mr. Blow, 27 million Americans want to go slow on getting healthcare and the rest of us can patiently wait for a solution to that one healthcare crisis throwing our family into bankruptcy and out onto the street.
2
Sanders is revolutionary--exciting, maybe, but not very reassuring. Biden is status quo ante--now that's what people really want.
Our democracy is the Titanic right now - sinking fast. Bernie is the on-deck musician, playing a beguiling melody, but will go down with the ship. There are not enough life boats for everyone should Trump win again. No lifeboat for a free press, an impartial justice department, nor the balance of power. No lifeboat for an endangered planet. No lifeboat for healthcare for all, even in an imperfect state. These will all sink if Bernie insists upon harping on all that is wrong about Biden. We all know he is not perfect, but what’s urgent today is to fix the hull, raise it up so it can float again. Biden can do that with Bernie's help, starting now. I hope Bernie does not contribute to the further demise of our democracy. We are up to our necks in water, gulping for air. I hope he is part of rescuing the hull.
1
This country, this democracy is our house - our collective house. Not a white house, black or latino, asian or eskimo, straight, gay or otherwise house. It belongs to all of us. We are all responsible for maintaining and protecting it.
trump has been like the sly, fast talking slick salesman who'd knock on your door in earlier times, con you into letting him in, then turn into a modern day version of a home invader. He's in the process of taking everything of value and vandalizing the rest while leaving his victims - us - dazed and frightened.
First things first. Together we get him out. Trust our laws and law enforcement bring him to justice (while we still have laws). He can run but he can not hide.
Then we set about putting our house back together. Repair the broken windows, the spray painted walls, the destroyed interior.
That's where I see us now.
We start with the necessary - a trusted, experienced hand to guide us. When we've put it back together and see that it's sound again, we can argue about furnishings and myriad aesthetics later.
3
I find it sad and frustrating that the idea of moving "closer in line with the norms of other developed countries" is defined in this country as "radical" and "revolutionary." I understand the historical and institutional forces behind that mindset, but it nonetheless remains incomprehensible.
2
I hope that Biden picks Stacy Abrams as a running mate. She is, by far, one of the competent young leaders today. Having her on the ticket would be a tremendous asset to Joe Biden. I'm not saying this because he may 'need' an African-American running mate but because she would be the best candidate for VP.
1
Everyone here needs to read Joe Klein's article today in the Washington Post. He says what many of the veterans of 1968 have come to believe. We've lived through this situation already and have learned from it.
With age comes wisdom.
4
One fantasy, not gonna happen, alas: Bernie and Joe both bow out because they can see the fight could be harmfully divisive or disheartening, and they throw support towards Warren, who is less scary, younger, and more nuanced than Bernie, and more vigorous and untainted by bad decisions than Joe. Sigh...
So whether it's 2 candidates left or 3, I want to suggest that the next debate not be on a huge shiny hard surface in front of hundreds of people, but instead, in a room with a small audience , candidates seated at a table, not far from, and not shouting at each other.
When Bernie and other say that the movement towards Biden shows "the triumph of the establishment", it paints every voter who remembers George McGovern's fate as purely a coward. I think many who are opting for Joe are responding to the feeling of "first, right the ship, Then we can work for other progress." I believe that if Biden is the winner of the election, he can and must do more than just get us back to our previous level of civility and administrative competence---already no small task.
2
How "refreshing' it is to note that because Joe Biden is now the front runner in the democratic party primary the "Wall Street' crowd are "back in the game" opening their checkbooks to once again dictate policy on their behalf while destroying what is left of democracy in America.
Remember 1929 and 2008, yet, it seems many Americans STILL have no problem at all with outward corruption and Oligarchs running the country. How sad.
6
@Deus
Since the market was down another 3.5% today, are you still so sure that Wall Street is "back in the game?"
1
I, too, fail to understand why Elizabeth Warren didn't catch on. Of the entire pack, she would make the best president. She is thoughtful, smart and well educated. She has experience legislatively, and she would be able to compromise. And she has plans - which means she has thought about a lot of this stuff. Are we really that mysoginistic a country?
1
@Betsy Blosser Yes we are.
Look at all the laws being passed in states and adjudicated at higher levels that allow state legislatures to pass laws that specifically govern women and their reproductive systems. There are states (and the us supreme court) who consider it okay to rape pregnant women seeking abortions with wands and cameras, despite that the aim to chasten women and make them feel guilty by forcing them to have this procedure and then browbeat them with images of a foetus is easily achieved with a non-intrusive ultrasound. Humiliation and degradation are the goals of such laws.
For years, many state legislatures have been inundated with laws meant to deny women their humanity and dignity. Forcing women to wait; creating laws that make it difficult for abortions to be performed; there are even bills that would give the rights of a person to a , fertilized egg while denying a pregnant woman those very rights of personhood as well as personal sovereignty.
There is a lot of nostalgia to put uppity women, people of color and young people back "where they belong" like in the fifties. It is rather as if the Taliban and all those misogynistic practices of fundamentalist religions have won in this country, too.
3
Whether we choose Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders we must concentrate on the promises made during the campaigning.
I respectfully direct everyone’s attention to “The Triumph of Injustice: How the rich dodge taxes and how to make them pay” by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman.
We all remember when Hillary debated Trump and brought up the fact that Trump paid no income tax whatsoever. Of course Trump boasted that “he was smart.” I suppose all Republicans and capitalists feel that way.
But to dodge a shared responsibility is not only callous but treasonous. A jail-able offense.
Here society has subsidized Trump with sewers, roads, and public infrastructure for his buildings and resorts. Society taught Trump’s lawyers when they went to school, and society has benefited Trump at every turn.
It’s high time this topic came to the forefront.
And it’s about time either Sanders or Biden tells us how they plan to tackle it. And how they plan on exposing Trumps income taxes.
Don’t even get me started about getting Trump’s DNA. Instead, I’ll direct you to E. Jean Carroll and her attorney.
1
Trump, his supporters, and his enablers, are an existential threat to American democracy. There is no more central issue in this election.
I have many concerns about Mr. Biden's ability to unseat Trump. At the same time, I am waiting to hear Bernie Sanders court moderate voters. Unless he makes some very clear and specific statements of outreach to those who currently support Biden, I can't see any way for him to unify the party, much less the country.
3
"And, I must say here, I believe that part of the explanation for that boils down to sexism."
Your analysis of why Warren's chances "evaporated," are unconvincing. And it is puzzling as to why, Mr. Blow, you cannot put your finger on the real reason.
The African American and/or Latino vote, the two main constituencies in the Dem party today, failed to come out for Warren, or for Kobuchar or even for Kamala Harris.
White intellectuals and affluent college educated voters just loved Liz Warren. Unfortunately for her, that constituency is somewhat limited. Warren could not grow her base. Its that simple, and there is not a hint of sexism.
Unless you are describing the Black and Latino voters as "sexist."
4
I think one good possibility would be a Biden candidacy that makes meaningful concessions to the Sanders wing of the party. This would mean vowing to prioritize and implement some of the things he says are currently unattainable. If Biden wins the nomination, he's going to HAVE to concede some actual, material gains to leftists and progressives if he wants our support.
3
@Jeremiah Crotser
Biden's BILLIONAIRE donors will not allow him to make those concessions which is why they gave him the money in the first place. If one is receiving campaign donations from billionaires, THEY are dictating policy, NOT the candidate and that policy is the "status quo".
4
As a member of the left wing of the Democratic party, I really think it is time for the party to split into 2 parties. I am hoping that a strong Social Democrat party will split off and develop into a third party.
If Bernie loses the nomination for the Democrat party, I would love to see him run as a Social Democrat.
I just think there is a major philosophical split in the democratic party. Bernie and Warren don't really fit as Democrats (especially Bernie). Bernie has constantly been fighting the party for a long time. It's time for the left wing to split off.
Bernie as Social Democrat 2020! (and beyond)
4
In general, people who say "fall in line" or "Vote Blue No Matter Who" are people who are NOT struggling financially (and probably have never been "truly" poor). If a candidate has not recognized your daily financial struggles (e.g. multiple jobs, zero healthcare) and only has a history of supporting legislation that contributes to such struggles (e.g. bankruptcy bill), then you DO NOT owe them your vote!
I honestly think Bernie's religion and Brooklyn accent had more to do with his poor showing among African Americans than people will admit (Black people can be prejudiced as well). Black people in the South (like most Southerners, unfortunately), are still wary of someone who is "smart," but "different."
I say this as a native African American Southerner.
4
Mr. Blow says a very important thing at the end of his opinion:
"In the end, I believe that voters are coalescing around an idea: While they admire the revolutionaries, they are more comfortable with slow and steady progress. Only history will be able to judge the merits of this approach."
What I add is that the punishment of educations, especially in middle and high schools, has done much to slow admiration of revolutionaries as well as a steady progress. Yes, "slow" is the definer of American's and other spoiled populations in a realization that the future cannot support advanced world societal norms simply because they are very complex to learn and understand. It is difficult for the most progressive policymakers to see that it is privilege that makes it easier for so-called "progressives" who are, in fact, some of the wealthiest and best educated people on earth. This is why they see the importance of giving all human beings a leg-up toward more than a difficult eking out of a shorter and more somber life. Wealthy societies as nations must elevate their support of struggling ones soon. As populations grow and fear among all rises, true revolutions based almost on poverty alone will rise as it is already doing in much of Western Europe-though yet controlled. While progressives know the ultimate choices we all must make, we too are afraid of giving up our privileges no matter how mundane or small compared to strong capitalists. Time for much thought, I believe.
1
It could be the way she comes across. Her voice and the way she shows emotion is not what one normally expects from a leader. It is usually disqualifying and that is regardless of whether or not the person is female or male. I think Anne Richards would make a good example to represent what I am trying and i think failing to point out.
Senator Warren has everything else in spades, in fact she is probably better at writing law and developing programs to implement the ideas coming from the Center that she and Bernie represent. But she comes across as weak somehow. If Anne Richards were saying what Warren did word for word, she would have won more and possibly taken it all. I don't know that can be fixed.
2
"And, of course, there is Tulsi. That’s enough words on that suspect candidacy."
Care to elaborate, Charles? This is, after all, your column.
3
The only person who could save us from this old-men disaster is Michelle Obama. Obama/Buttigieg would be my dream team.
3
I volunteered for and donated to Bernie up until yesterday--precisely for young Americans. And had very good conversations with diverse young Americans. However, from a practical standpoint, Biden is the ultimate choice, as voters have determined, to restore us to decency. When in critical condition you don't have plastic surgery or even "get fit," you address your current wounds and heal. Then you address the long-term conditions. I love Bernie and Elizabeth and their message. I love young Americans who have inherited a real quagmire in this country because the generation of their parents and grandparents (my generation, the boomers) were complacent and selfish and greedy. The best solution now is electing an experienced "healer," looking in the mirror at ourselves as a nation, and moving slowly and steadily forward.
2
The problem is that the basic liberal ideas you mention - less student debt, more affordable health care, a more aggressive climate plan, more level taxation - are not revolutionary. they are embraced by a majority of Americans and an even bigger majority of Democrats. Some of them, such as more level taxes, were even embraced in the past by Republicans like Eisenhower. On others like climate change, time is of the essence, and we are already way behind other countries. If the Democratic Party doesn't take on such issues (not just rhetorically), then what does it stand for anymore? I am struggling to figure that out. And I reject the argument that the failure of the Democratic Party to enact such basic liberal ideas is because they don't control the Senate. The Party hasn't led on such issues for decades including during years when they controlled the House and Senate, as well as the WH. I say this as a life-long Democrat. I feel like my party abandoned me long ago. I know I speak for many when I say our embrace of Bernie Sanders is not because we believe he would be a great administrator. He wouldn't. Or because we agree with all his positions. We don't. It is because we feel there is no where else to turn to hold the Party's feet to the fire on the very basic liberal issues you laid out. We feel abandoned by our party. Who is the Party for today? What is it for? If it is merely a kinder, gentler Republican Party, as it seems to be, then it has failed us.
2
I wonder, 55 years ago, would Blow have been trying to sell gradualism to Martin Luther King?
This not the time to tell college students that more patience is what they need, as they behold blighted prospects from their graduation platforms. This is not the time to tell people with ruinous medical conditions, for which they have no means to pay, that patience will someday deliver relief from bankruptcy to someone else, in a better future. And of course this is not the time to tell black people, who watch in horror as, "moderates," tolerate turning back the clock on civil rights—and as overt, proud racism re-emerges across the land—that now must be a time for consolidation and quiet, lest more-privileged people become disturbed.
History's verdict is already in on gradualism. The verdict is, acceptance of gradualism means stasis in fact. Blow has simply forgotten.
46
@S.P. --
Fifteen years from now, when today's college students are working, trying to buy homes and raising families, most of them will be voting a lot differently than they are today.
And before you speak for "black people" and what they are being "told" -- maybe you want to ask them why they voted for Biden in overwhelming numbers. If they saw Bernie as the one who would actually make change on their behalf, don't you think they'd be voting for him?
15
@S.P. Dr. King himself often preached about patience and understanding that the ship of state turns slowly, but must be turning steadily.
13
King wasn’t running for office. He wasn’t trying to govern. His role was to wake up the country’s conscience and establish a new set of norms. Sanders is great as a gadfly. He is provocative and in your face and he has great things to say. And I hope he continues to say them for many years to come because I do think that, gradually, they are establishing new norms. Just the fact that a person running for president can advocate for something like medicare for all and still be a contender is huge progress. Twelve years ago it would have been an immediate disqualifier. Change is hard and it requires great persistence. The one thing that is crystal clear to me is that if you want to change public policy you need to change the minds of the people first.
17
So now we are left with 3 white male candidates, all in their 70's. So much for diversity or new idea potential.
1
Excellent column.
I am happy for you that you never have to write another column about Michael Bloomberg.
I, like many Americans have felt utterly traumatized by these last four years. It almost seems as though I do not recognize my country. I just want some semblance of normalcy and decency. If I wanted an angry old white guy yelling at me all the time, I could look in my mirror. (At lease Joe isn't angry all the time). Biden is the clear preference for me.
Also, nothing is going to happen positively for progressive values in this country unless Democrats improve their standing in state legislatures and in Congress. Bernie on top of the ticket would be poison for Democrats running for state and national elections in Montana. That may not be fair or right; it just is the way it is.
I also appreciate your sobering comment on Elizabeth Warren. She seemed so much more of an attractive candidate than Bernie. I really have no idea why she was not the liberal alternative, but my guess is that Hillary Clinton might have some insight into the problem.
2
@skye6206 Um Bloomberg was not an angry white male. He kept his composure unlike crazy Bernie, and Biden.
You missed out on an extremely well versed, competent, intelligent candidate in Bloomberg.
1
I think sexism hurt Amy Klobuchar more than Elizabeth Warren.
1
It hardly bears discussing. The choice has already been made, but party leaders and by Democratic voters. The millions Sen. Sanders gave voice and hope to have been locked out of the Democratic Party and now are without a party. The winners take all in politics just as in the economy.
Martin Luther King dreamed of a world where people are judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. Mr. Blow, the race of the candidates should not matter. Sanders and Biden are the embodiment of the progressive and moderate wings of the democratic party respectively. Democrats are now faced with a clear and stark choice between contrasting visions for the direction of this country - namely, a fundamental reshaping of the economy and transfer of power from private interests to the government on the one hand and a moderate who wants to make changes to the capitalist system without tearing it down to reduce inequality without sacrificing dynamism. The fact that the two standard bearers happen to be old white men is irrelevant. If it is relevant, how do you explain the outsized support from the young and Hispanics for Bernie which hail from a completely different demographic.
5
"And the improbability of congressional passage doesn’t prevent anyone from supporting these plans on principle, as I do. But, for many voters, being a realist is more important than being a dreamer."
--
The "dreamers" are the ones who think we can afford to take a gradualist approach to climate change.
The "realists" are those who look at unacceptable incremental solutions on offer from the center-right and point out that they simply won't cut it if we want our grandchildren to inherit a planet that looks anything like the one we grew up on.
1
I read an interesting op-ed the other day that maintained Bernie’s approach to healthcare was not unlike Trump’s. That is, drop the ACA, which although imperfect has moved us closer to universal coverage, and replace it with something new and untested. Hillary tried to argue for incremental change via reforming the ACA. Bernie’s supporters would have none of that back n 2016 and show no signs of patience and/or practicality now.
6
Patience??? How much patience would YOU have if you desperately needed care but could not get it? How long could you wait in pain?
3
@Smilodon7 - Was on the ACA for 2 years from 2014-2016. Even with a subsidized premium (~$110 monthly), I still couldn't afford to avail myself of medical services I needed because of the high deductible (~3k) and co-pays. So it was of no value to me. I had to wait until went on Medicare.
The people who most tout the wonder & benefits of the ACA aren't generally the people who had to use it.
1
The problem is, that the alternative to what you call revolution is not slow progression but slow decline to a more and more inhuman society.
The idea that the moderates are center left are wrong. They are not even centre right but just far to the right on economic issues and maybe liberal on social issues.
Sanders is centre left - maybe more centre than left actually.
Biden is far to the right of Merkel in Germany, and Trump is an autocrat, supported by oligarks.
40 years ago the American worker was the envy of us in Europe. Now we pity you.
2
You are framing the choice wrong.
We are choosing whether to defeat Trump, or feel all self righteous and smug, take a chance on Bernie, and give the race to Trump.
Bernie is advocating pie in the sky. Even Denmark has long waiting periods for medical services. Do we think Americans are going to be persuaded, once the Trump machine starts telling for once actual truths about what the disruptions for many of us who worked for many years Medicare for all would mean? Many of us, if we could waive a magic wand or pet a unicorn and magically all of Sanders' promises could materialize might be willing to go along. But that is not what would happen.
Statistically, enough Sanders voters in MI, PA and WI withheld votes from the top of the ticket in the general election to give everything to Trump and stack the courts for a generation against everything they ostensibly believe in.
They are making threats again. This indicates they are not serious about saving the country. Bernie has created a cult that may be almost as dangerous as Trumps. The sooner they are shut down the better.
12
Let's put it like that. You want to 'save' the country for yourself because you have comfortable health insurance paid by your employer. The others who doesn't have such luxury, who is more scare to be bankrupted by healthcare than by longer wait for certain medical procedures, want the changes that will give them similar health insurance like you have now. For them, Trump or Biden means only one thing. They won't have the security you have. Why should they vote for your comfortable life, while you don't want to vote for change that will deliver the same comfortable life to them?
11
@yulia -- Few people have health insurance that is solely paid by employers. Most of us who are employed and have employer health care pay substantial premiums, co-pays and deductibles. Our care is rationed by plan limitations. We are required to follow drug formularies or pay out of pocket for prescriptions. Personally, I'd be happy to switch to a reasonable, single payer plan that doesn't increase my costs too much.
But as someone who's in a family where about 40% of our income is ALREADY going to pay taxes -- federal and state income taxes, local property taxes, sales taxes, etc. -- please explain to me EXACTLY how much of my family's money you think I should be paying so that other people can live the "comfortable life" that we WORKED to get.
You're the one who wants more of the money we earn. You're going to have to tell me why I should vote against my family's interests so that other people can -- without putting the work in -- have what we have.
8
@JM - You don't have a clue as to what "substantial" premiums really are!
Your employer pays the majority cost of your healthcare AND you don't even have to pay income tax on that benefit because Congress in conjunction with lobbyists, made it protected income that could not be taxed.
You have tremendously subsidized health insurance that you selfishly don't want others to have also.
1
No Charles, there was no 'fact' established yesterday that voters don't want dramatic change.
What yesterday proved was simply that the media and democratic establishment terrified the masses with weeks of a non-stop drumbeat that Sanders couldn't beat Trump, so many ran out and voted for Biden. That's what you saw, nothing more complicated than that. You're pretending that somehow people 'just made up their minds on their own', as though the NY Times, MSNBC, WAPO and others didn't dramatically poison Sanders by suggesting that the public won't pull the lever for him--when polls have been consistent that he's one of the most popular, if not the most popular, politician in the country. And they did it without the media ever asking the question: can Biden actually beat Trump? Biden is a candidate of extraordinary vulnerabilities, and the GOP will make sure that you know every single one of them, five times over. And they're much more substantial than a couple of comments on Cuba and Russia from twenty years ago.
I particularly bristle when the media create a reality--like yesterdays outcome--and then stand back and pretend they had nothing to do with it.
99
@blackman So the media, and the "Democratic establishment," and Elizabeth Warren are the culprits behind Sanders not securing the nomination? Bernie is just a victim of a misinformed, scared populace.
If you want to LEAD the Democratic party, you can't wage war against it. That's what ardent Bernie supporters do and it's not helping Sanders. Bernie knew after 2016 that if he wanted to be president, he needed to broaden his coalition, particularly among African Americans. Tuesday revealed that his campaign failed to do that sufficiently-- particularly when his core base (young people) didn't show up en masse. In fact, Tuesday revealed his coalition is shrinking as he amassed fewer votes in several states than he did in 2016.
6
@blackman
Yup.
In 2016, Michael Moore warned us that Trump was going to win.
Life has cratered for white men without college since ~2000.
One candidate recognizes their pain and says he'll bring jobs back.
The other candidate says he won't make any big changes.
Which one would you vote for?
Democrats are expert at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Trump will win again.
9
@blackman
Indeed, when the corporate media creates narratives and biased memes they verify Trump's accusation that they are the enemy of the people.
4
To truly unify the Democrats, both Biden and Sanders can choose Warren as their running mates - announcing this together, with the goal of beating Trump. Both of those old guys can campaign/win/lose and meanwhile, she is steadily sharpening the Democratic platform to address the climate crisis and rampant corruption. If neither wins, she retains the Dem senate seat.
2
This race is too important to lose. Another 4 years of Trump would be even more horrific/unimaginable. When I voted in Minnesota, I hadn't heard that Amy had dropped out. I wasn't going to vote for her anyway, because I had memories of Trump getting a kick out of berating Hillary (bullies enjoy beating up men AND women). I looked at my ballot and saw Biden's name right above Bloomberg's at the bottom of the ballot (clearly not alphabetical, with the B's at the bottom). I voted with my heart. Joe - tried and true. Carl Sandburg once wrote: "When a nation goes down or a society perishes, one condition may always be found - they forgot where they came from." Let's all wake up and remember.
5
At this point the Democratic party needs to do everything possible to ensure that its convention is viewed as completely legitimate. Democrats, please make sure your house is in order, and stays in order!!
3
@Susan
It's already too late. The scenario that played out after the South Carolina primary where Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar dropped out, was an orchestrated act of political collusion. There is nothing on the surface illegal about it but it was obvious that it was designed to blunt the rise of Bernie Sanders. It's analogous to a bunch of kids ganging up on somebody in the schoolyard. It's left a nasty taste in a lot of people's mouth. It shows the lengths to which the Democratic Party willing to go to show it's anti-progressive.
There is also the possibility that Bernie has a plurality of delegates going into the convention and similar tactics are used. If that's the case the damage to the Democratic Party is going to be long term.
1
@Carl
You are wasting time and energy fighting the Democrats. They have a right to run their party as they please. A new third party is long overdue. Put your energy there.
1
Joe Biden might be representing himself as a realist, but there is nothing realistic about nominating him: he's a doddering wreck who can barely string a sentence together without calling his wife his sister or saying he's running for senator instead of president or rambling about some guy named Corn Pop. In 2016, the Democratic party nominated the only person more hated than Donald Trump. This time it looks like they're nominating the only person more mentally unfit than Donald Trump. This election is going to be utterly grotesque. The spectacle of a clueless, out of touch party desperately propping up a confused old man as the Republicans deliver hit after hit is something I'm just going to tune out of. What in the world are these self-styled "realists" thinking?
3
Now that he is ahead of Sanders in the delegate count, Joe Biden needs to shift his focus to starting a crusade to beat Trump AND McConnell in November.
That way, he looks presidential and makes the best case for himself in the remaining primaries.
Engaging familiar faces like Kamala Harris, Corey Booker, Andrew Yang, Pete Buttigieg, Julian Castro, Beto and others with ties to minorities, to help him get a big win in the fall election will show he can organize and direct a team of smart and ambitious rivals, just as Lincoln did in similar times, when the nation was divided.
Securing a vice presidential candidate like Florida Congresswoman Val Demings, who starred as one of the brilliant team of House prosecutors in the Impeachment Trial, would be a great addition to Biden's campaign.
It would be a difficult for the Sanders campaign to counter, and it would help Biden roll up big percentages in states with black populations.
Winning Florida would be a death blow for the Trump Campaign. Val Demings on the ticket would help win Florida.
In 19 re-election campaigns of Republican Senators who voted to acquit Trump without calling a single witness, Demings could deliver a devastating account of Republican Senators proving themselves unfit for office.
Finally, her Orlando police chief experience might be the best crisis training ever to be vice president.
Previewing the fall campaign could be the best way Biden could start a crusade and finish off Sanders on the way.
1
@Dennis
You are assuming that Biden stays ahead in the delegate count. There are still primary and caucuses in western and midwestern states where Bernie did really well in 2016. Also Biden has built his delegate lead on the basis of strong support from more conservative voters and strong support of black voters in southern states. He's running out of those states. He's yet to score a blowout win outside of the South.
1
Sanders wants to have revolutionary changes to produce a fair and equitable society. He does not want gradual change as a long term result that involves repeated efforts to fix the status quo with partial improvements dictated by compromises.
But let us be clear headed about this ideal of transforming society to the perfect solution by revolution. Revolution is an act of rejection of the status quo in favor of an unproven hypothetical notion of what would be best. The trouble is that we all live our lives based upon habits and expectations based upon habits which work well in the status quo, so radical change can be and usually has totally disrupted everyone's lives disadvantageously. When order and consistency have been restored it has always been by new hard authoritarian regimes that are as oppressive as the regimes recently overthrown. After that, many new governments later, a liberal system may emerge due to gradual reforms.
Sanders is a man with dreams but not a practical reform leader, he wants it all so that he can see it soon. He must win the enthusiastic support of a majority of skeptical people but he seems not to appreciate that fact.
2
Any voter who was happy with the performance of Obama should be voting for Biden. They worked hand-in-glove and I am confident that a Biden presidency will have similar success. I find this rift between moderates and progressives concerning because a President Biden would look like an extreme progressive compared to Trump or any other Republican, while a President Sanders would be too progressive even for his own party and, if Republicans hold the Senate, we'd face four years of legislative gridlock. Biden has the far better capacity for working across party lines.
4
I would like to argue that major changes at a fast pace are impossible, or at least doomed to failure.
In the case of Medicare For All, restructuring the medical industry is possible, if difficult. But restructuring the mindset of Americans is the bigger challenge, and at point it seems beyond our reach.
To get M4A, you need to get most Americans to buy into these changes:
1. A much larger federal budget
2. New structures to provide transparency and oversight to new agencies.
3. More trust in federal agencies and government in general.
4. General agreement on spending priorities. Should we help older people more than college kids? Are business investments more important than environmental or opportunity investments?
5. General agreement on tax rates.
6. General agreement on the amount of income redistribution we want. Universal health care effectively means more income redistribution.
These things can be accomplished, but we're not there yet, and it may take years or decades to get there. If we shoot for the moon right away, there will be a quick and fierce backlash.
1
@Rob S
We have tried gradualism with regard to healthcare since Nixon propose Medicare for All in the 1970s. It as gotten us the less than the optimal Affordable Care Act.
Contrary to what you believe there is actually widespread support for Medicare for All. That's going to increase in the coming years as more jobs are based on contracts instead of being employed in the traditional sense. The failure has been to explain to the American people how this can be done in a pragmatic organized way, and how they stand to benefit. Right now the amount of misinformation around this issue is one of the biggest obstacles to implementing it.
If we can do Medicare, then we can do Medicare from all. What is missing is the political leadership by both democrats and republicans to get it done.
2
@ Rob
You are so right. You can’t change public policy if you can’t change the mind of the public.
2
@ Carl,
I agree with you here. I think we will see more and more support for Medicare for All as we continue to talk about it and understand what it really means. For example, I don’t think that many people realize that there is still a role for private insurance as a supplement to the basic coverage provided by medicare. And as that support grows it will enable congress to finally do the right thing. But it has to come up from the bottom before it can be imposed from the top.
2
Of course people are more comfortable with slow and steady progress. That is always the case. The more relevant question is how much pain is required to get "the people" to realize that slow and steady progress is not occurring? It is not a good thing, or even an ok thing, to require starving unemployed as a precursor to the New Deal or deathly sick old and poor people, high inner-city crime rates, and Jim Crow race/class oppression as a precursor to the Great Society. Progressive change does not have to be a dramatic response to widespread crisis. It can and be an earlier course correction made to avoid what is clearly coming a bit down the road. What is needed for this to occur is leadership. Articles like this one discourage leadership and followership, it's necessary counterpart. Don't tell us that the status quo is hard to change. Really. Reporting has influence. Tell us why it might make sense to challenge the status quo earlier rather than later.
I don't think it's a simple question of whether voters want slow change or fast change. I think Sanders and Biden supporters have virtually the same goals. The Sanders supporters I think believe the best way to accomplish those goals is by having bold proposals that push the overton window leftwards and get everyone talking about the things they want. The Biden I think supporters believe the best way to accomplish those goals is by trying to bring as many people into the tent as possible, even if it ultimately means watering down the proposals, to at least get SOMETHING passed soon.
To be honest, I think there is merit to both these approaches, and I think both are necessary. Sanders' bold proposals have indeed pulled the democrats leftwards and changed to conversation. Moderates like Biden, meanwhile, have been going out and winning elections which brings those things closer to reality.
I think the two approaches ultimately synergize well, even when they are in conflict.
1
Only in America could a candidate promoting mainstream social democracy, although unfortunately calling himself a democratic socialist, be considered advocating a revolution. Good grief, America, wake up and learn something about the world around you. Dozens of other countries have shown there are ways of mitigating the extreme inequities created by capitalism within capitalism. This involves structural and institutional reforms guaranteeing basic human needs are met as rights by a social democratic public sector. It is called the common good not a revolution.
6
@Arthur T. Himmelman Sanders uses the term revolution all the time. He calls for a "political revolution." In fact if he were not so purposefully using the term revolution perhaps no one would have thought he was trying to create a revolution.
6
@Tor Krogius Agree. I come from the same political crucible as Bernie in the 1960s, even farther to the "Left." At this time in the U.S., however, calling for revolution as a socialist is self-indulgent and a needless mistake costing the support of many voters. Clearly a missed opportunity because social democracy is an outbreak of common sense even billionaires, such as the $160 billion hedge fund manager Ray Dalio, agree is necessary in some form.
2
@Arthur T. Himmelman --
See the thing is, we're in AMERICA. So what Sanders would be considered in other countries is really irrelevant.
Castigating Americans for not having a Norwegian approach to democratic socialism is like getting angry with a cat because it won't act like a dog.
I prefer Bernie. But it's clear that more Democrats prefer restoration. Let's not kid ourselves that we'll get reform. It's doubtful Biden can beat Trump, but if he does we'll only get more of the rear-guard actions that brought us the fertile conditions for the rise of a Trump.
4
@Taykadip I prefer Sanders to Biden. But I have no understanding of those Sanders supporters who suggest they would not support Biden over Trump if Biden gets the nomination. The world is a worse place because Bush won in 2000. And it will be worse still if Trump wins in 2020.
3
@Tor Krogius
Here is the logic to not supporting Biden. The Democratic Party has tried to shove corporatist candidates down the throats of voters and they expect their support. Until they find out they cannot win doing this they will continue to do it.
Many people believe if that leads to four more years of Donald Trump as POTUS then so be it. A substantial number of voters are tired of choosing between a Republican, and a republican-lite democrat.
1
As for the notion we should ""Bern it all down" the BLOWviations of opinion artists like Chuckles should be taken as lightly as possible. Most of us with accrued wealth that we have worked decades to build for ourselves through sacrifice and hard work are not willing to squander those personal assets on those who make demands for """Free Everything's""".
1
@Mystery Lits
Nobody is advocating for "Free Everything." The profits that are the basis of your accrued wealth were more likely than not built on the backs of middle and working class people who have no seen real growth in their wages compared to inflation in the last 45 years. It's also in all likelihood built on the result of offshoring jobs to low wage countries at the expense of the American working class.
Selecting which stock or mutual fund to put into your portfolio does not constitute building a damn thing. You just had enough money to invest and you were through a combination of good decision making and luck to have benefited from the labor and skills of others.
If you weren't as selfish as you are you'd realize we all benefit from a society where people are healthier, better educated, and had jobs that paid enough where they don't need public assistance despite working 40 hours a week.
1
Yes, plus a lot of Americans want a break from the chaos -- and destruction -- that Republicans have wrought. Maybe a majority, even.
2
I just want calm to be the order of the day.
I don't want to hear about the president for two weeks at a time, barring a crisis.
The nation needs 4 years to heal and I think that will happen under Biden.
Pick a youthful, intelligent VP and see what happens in 2024.
4
Revolutionaries are not accommodationists. You're right. This will be a problem if Biden wins. This will have to be skillfully handled by Democratic tacticians. You don't see evidence of an appetite for social revolution. Right again. You address growing the safety net which is basically a taxation issue and offer the options of immediacy or gradualism. To this one would ask, "is immediacy doable?" Considering the widespread resistance to fair taxation it would appear as if incrementalism is the best approach that would yield lasting results. Another point you mention is the resistance in Congress to bold Democrat proposals. So it would seem from the above and your closing thoughts that America wants evolution, not revolution. I think the choice is clear for the right nominee.
2
@Leopold --
growing the safety net isn't "basically a taxation issue." People outside the US don't understand that Americans actually pay as much -- if not more -- to replicate with our tax and private payments what you get through your tax payments alone. When I add up what my family pays in various taxes, private health insurance costs and retirement savings, it's already more than half of our income. Our local property taxes alone (which are primarily paid to fund public education) are about 9% of our annual income. That's NINE percent, not 0.9%.
Please understand that the lower FEDERAL INCOME tax rates we pay are just one part of what we're paying to have services like people in Canada get.
That is why so many of us react negatively when the immediate response to any problem is to raise taxes. Maybe what we need to do to grow the safety net is to spend the money the government already has better.
@JM Could you direct me to sources that would offer solutions that would fix this problem of poor use of existing governmental funds in the States? From what you say, it seems as if the money is there. Why the widespread misery? Some group or groups lining their pockets with your hard earned money?
Restoration: The gradual downward spiral of the middle class, ever increasing income inequality, education and healthcare only for the wealthy, fossil fuels and a bloated Military.
Revolution: healthcare and educational opportunities for all citizens, action on climate change, fair taxation.
The words you have used to describe the two choices don’t do them justice.
4
Slow, incremental progress? Point it out to me will you? In education it was a graceful descent under Obama amid the sweet perfume of reform into the sewage of privatization. The school to prison pipeline was set in motion under Clinton and has revved on ever since. The feeling we get from a leader, his or her grace, intelligence, wit and humanity are quite irrelevant to their actual impact. What people did they put in key positions? What major initiatives got accomplished? Bottom line: no GRADUAL helper is going to move anywhere near what is morally required on healthcare, climate change or any other substantive issue. It’s just going to be a mediocre rerun you already saw 100 times and that’s if we’re lucky.
3
Obama got the most significant healthcare reform in 50 years passed. He secured the Iran Nuclear Deal and the Paris Accord, as well as a climate agreement with China and athe Clean Power Plant rule. He pulled this country out of a near-depression and saved the auto industry and thousands of jobs.
Could he have done more without a GOP Senate majority? Of course. But he achieved significant progress.
2
Mr. Blow, what young people who have not experienced life yet have to understand is that Revolutions DO NOT last. There is a huge inertia in human behavior where people are uncomfortable with rapid massive change that is imposed from "without". The long running resistance to abortion on demand is a reflection of that; so are the attitudes of many whites to racial policies.
It takes incremental, persisting change to modify human beliefs and behavior. The Fabian Socialists understood that. Or for another example, look how long it has taken the very idea of human equality to take hold in much of the world. It was only a hundred years ago that photographs of nearly naked Africans holding spears were common in even "serious" magazines. Or look gay rights which have taken far longer than the fifty years since the Stonewall riots to achieve. John Stuart Mill wrote in the middle 19th century that individuals should be free in their actions unless those actions harmed others. It's been well over a century, and the majority has only recently begun to accept his principle.
The French Revolution didn't last; the Commonwealth that fooled the British Civil War didn't last; the Russian Revolution hasn't lasted; the 17th century Dutch Republic didn't last. Evolutionary change is far more likely to LAST. The changes that most of us want are changes that need to LAST.
3
The American Revolution did not LAST either. Trump destroyed it.
1
@S. Jackson
No Trump do not destroy it. It was destroyed when politicians decided that the will of the wealthy and corporations was more important than the protection and welfare of American citizens.
This has been a long time in the making. From Reagan preaching "Trickle Down Economics" to signing of NAFTA and the repeal of Glass-Steagall during the Clinton administration. Trump is just the culmination of America becoming a full-fledge plutocracy.
Charles is partially right but the preference for moderate and incremental change only explains some of the Biden victory. There was also active and well funded opposition to Sanders from Wall Street and corporate Democratic donors, consultants, and groups like Democratic Majority for Israel that opposed not only the degree but also the direction of change. (This is what makes the 2020 Democratic primary different from 2026). Biden represents a pushback against progressive change and, if Bernie represents a revolution, a party establishment and donor counter revolution.
3
The problem with this argument is that the Biden campaign was broke leading up to Super Tuesday. In most states they didn’t even have a ground organization, much less advertising. Sanders has a well-funded operation in every state.
I think you can only see Super Tuesday as it’s own popular insurgency. It was led by African Americans, but it included people across all demographics.
I don’t think any candidate can be bought for $2,800, and I don’t think Biden can be bought for any amount of money. He may be preferred by Wall Street, which fears anyone who calls himself a socialist, but that doesn’t mean he’s beholden to them. And remember that he doesn’t need anything from anyone for a second term because he’ll be passing the baton.
3
@SandraH. , Fair enough point. But there were PAC-funded ads, comments by Bob Rubin, Lloyd Blankfein and others, and behind the scenes input about electability and unity to Dem insiders and media pundits. All of which certainly influenced primary voters on Tuesday.
@SandraH. , Fair enough point. But there were PAC-funded ads, comments by Bob Rubin, Lloyd Blankfein and others, and behind the scenes input about electability and unity to Dem insiders and media pundits. All of which certainly influenced primary voters on Tuesday.
As for Biden being influenced by donors in the financial industry, I'll point out his support for anti-consumer provisions in the Bankruptcy Law amendments.
Slow, steady progress is fine with me, but that is not really the issue. The issue is Trump -- getting rid of the worst and most dangerous president in U S history. That's the issue. That's what Democrats, to their everlasting credit this time, appear to be focused on. Secondarily, whatever else you may think of Sanders, his candidacy would be an absolute disaster for congressional races.
On all counts, there really is no choice here.
2
@Curtis Hinsley
Remind me again how Obama/Biden and Pelosi did on the downballot in '10 - '14? And how Clinton did in '16? When a slew of centrist Senators got their tails handed to them because folks preferred real Republicans to fake ones.
You’re looking at the wrong races because Trump was still a relative unknown. Look at how moderate Democratic candidates did in 2018–they won the House. Then look at the weak performance of Sanders-supported candidates in the same election.
2
"While they admire the revolutionaries, they are more comfortable with slow and steady progress." As with so, so much in American politics today, this only applies while Democrats are in power. Republicans simply don't care.
So it all comes down to Trump or Biden. What disappointing options for the greatest country in the world.
3
@Kristin
The United States of America isn't the greatest country in the world. The sooner more Americans realize this the sooner we can solve many of the problems that we have.
Having the highest GDP in the world doesn't make you a great country if there are armed forces veterans that are homeless, and children in poor neighborhoods can't get a decent education. A great country does not spend more on healthcare per capita than any country on earth yet ranks 28th in life expectancy at birth, and 34th in infant mortality according to OECD stats.
The ability to have a military that spans the globe killing people does not make you the greatest country in the world, when you can't win a war that you've been in for 19 years against a group of people with little formal military training who are armed primarily with AK-47, RPGs, and roadside bombs.
You do not have the greatest country in the world if your infrastructure is crumbling,
You don't have the greatest country in the world if the people in that country elect a liar, racist, narcissist, and philanderer as its president.
The reason we can't move forward as a country is that too many of us can't face what we are as a country.
Whoever the Democrats finally decide could best defeat Trump, my hope is that the progressives and moderates are working to form a presumptive administration and Congress that would promote some of the ideas that energized voters to back each of of candidates that once formed the diverse field of candidates. Beyond all the hype and hoopla (what Amy Klobuchar liked to call “the noise”), their were some good and even brilliant insights and proposals shared by many of the less successful candidates. And amazingly, even some candidates had plans for getting their ideas executed. Popular American politics, fueled by the media, the polls, the internet, and with seemingly infinite amounts of money has created this enormous multi-year sporting, celebrity event that we must endure that wears us out. At the very least, we should gain something from it. So now it appears the voters want stability over radical change. But there is no denying, the progressives have influenced a shift in the party’s platform. That tells me the party is responding to its diverse constituencies. I think that is something to admire and be proud of. Biden did not energize me, but if many of the ideas I heard or read from the candidates work their way into our government, I would be satisfied. One thing for sure, Biden will not be a “cult of personality” leader we unfortunately are being subject too. For that I am grateful.
When i was a kid, I wanted a motor cycle for Christmas. Of course, I was much too young for that, but... that didn't dampen my ardor.
I also agree that Bernie has some very good ideas about the direction of this country. We have been far too long in thrall to corporate interests and the super-rich.
But for now, I'll settle for my trusty old Western Flyer.
2
My feeling is it's more important to flip the Senate than who becomes president, although I will vote for any Democratic candidate. My worry is that if Bernie Sanders wins, even if we flip the Senate he will have a very hard time getting his initiatives passed. If Joe Biden wins, with a flipped Senate I think he will be able to accomplish more.
1
Why not have both? Bernie & Warren have expanded the political conversation about real shortcomings in 21st century America. However, Warren is now gone, & Bernie may be sinking. Trump won on a similar "everything needs fixing, my way" campaign, but a minority of Democratic voters are buying into Bernie's way. The issues won't go away, but the voters (choosing Biden) may be saying; "let's find a consensus".
@Bob The problem is that this "consensus" seems to be a one-way street. The centrists Democrats have the power and the backing of wealthy donors. They use their political capitol to make sure they win and progressives don't. When they get their way, they don't offer a compromise to get progressive support and work with progressives. No, they win the primaries and then passive aggressively insists that everyone else unites and supports their candidate.
Moreover, the Democrat establishment, including the NY Times, clearly oppose Bernie's policies. They at least view the policies as unrealistic and care exclusively about winning. The establishment expresses contempt for Bernie's supporters, still calling us Bernie Bros and blaming us for 2016. (I held my nose for Clinton.)
If this was a sincere offer for consensus and suggesting that we actively pursue change at a slower manner, I can respect that and work with you. But that's not the case. It's the centrists Dems get their way, and to heck with me and what I care about. They get their way and insist I be happy with it. Or else.
I recent being offered a false consensus, and then being badmouthed as some immature kid who runs home with the ball when he doesn't like the rules. I never agreed to play with you in the first place. I don't even like your wing of the party. You aren't treating me well or championing an agenda i support. So what is this bizarre idea that we will "find a consensus"?
1
I think both the realistic and idealistic wings of the part can find consensus on most issues—the need to address the climate change crisis, restore voting rights, achieve universal affordable healthcare, lower student debt, and rebuild our infrastructure and democracy.
If Sanders wins the nomination and election, I will expect him to find consensus on these issues with his fellow Democrats. If Biden wins, I expect the same.
Leave it to Blow to play the sexism card on why Warren not more widely accepted.
No thought given to the fact that she is an outright liar about a number of aspects of her background and that she is a watered down version of Sanders. Why go for revolution lite if you want revolution?
2
Warren seems like one of the most honest candidates in the field. Can you explain what you mean?
2
Mr. Blow - well reasoned, and I think accurate assessment, of the current electoral climate. I don't think many in the Democratic party don't agree with Bernie's aims: climate change, healthcare, student debt and a host of other problems must be addressed. It comes down to the timing and a realistic assessment of what is and is not possible. I think most voters have chosen the realistic, rather than the idealistic.
2
This is a difficult conversation that us older progressive Warren/Sanders supporters have to have with ourselves. It must be done though, because it needs to trickle down to our younger generation enough, so they they will vote for Biden in November if he is a candidate.
As we age we get a bit more intuitive, and I have to wonder how Bernie is feeling right now. He is one to foresee a lot of things, which is why he has voted in Congress like he has.
We still have time to go, but I do have a lump in my throat, looking at all of the current variables. And with Warren out, my mind wanders off into a trumpless world, and how to get there.
I think that Charles' take on the situation is right on point. Whether progressives, myself included, like it or not, the country as whole is nowhere near ready to elect a socialist or a woman, for that matter.
The fury of the Democratic primary makes it easy to forget how we got where we are in the first place. In 2016 the country chose Donald Trump, a known bigot with no governing experience whatsoever, over Hillary Clinton, a career politician with 30 years of political experience. Yes, Hillary was "disliked" by many, but that just proves my point - voters would rather vote for a white nationalist than a competent, but less than heart-warming woman.
There is little reason to think that this basic voter psychology is fundamentally different today. That is why Warren didn't fare better than many of us had hoped and expected she should. That is why Bernie would probably lose to Trump. As a group, Americans continue to be very, very conservative.
This being our starting point, any hope of a voter revolution or anything of that nature is nothing a pipe dream. An understandable, even noble dream, but still a dream.
The predicament we find ourselves in today is the culmination of many decades, even centuries, of non-progressive thinking and living. Puritanism, rugged individualism, male chauvinism, and improvization for the short-term are written into the American psyche. FEEL good (at least to white men) and it will decades, hopefully not centuries, to overcome them.
1
Despite his hopes and aspirations, and despite his claims, Sanders has not succeeded in achieving a multi-racial, multi-generational, multi-ethnic movement involving strong support from blue-collar and service work people. Perhaps these folks should be in his movement; but the fact is, they are not. Sanders has also manifestly failed to increase voter turn-out. If he really wants to get Trump out of the White House and give control of the Senate to the Dems, he should gracefully end his campaign NOW, before going into a struggle with Biden that will weaken Biden, who is also going to be challenged by Republicans determined to destroy him with Senate investigations into Burisma and Hunter Biden. There are many things I like in Sanders' vision of democracy; but for the sake of that democracy, he should now bow out. That will actually give him more of a voice in the future of the Democrat Party.
2
You bet it will 'vote blue no matter who" this November.
You answered your own question in your tagline: of course it's restoration and reform.
Not the Sanders pipe dream this election cycle--- any "for all" giveaways can only be accomplished in much, much smaller steps. And who can walk them through? BIDEN.
1
Warren dropped out about an hour or two ago. Was her demise due to sexism, as this column suggests? Surely her popularity was based on some combination of her policies, but she also milked the identity card -- she was popular with white suburban women who, talking heads now say, will migrate to Biden. I think she thought this herself. As she declined, she wasn't so much talking about voters as constantly talking about herself. Blow's nonchalant "two old white men" shows us the limits of the identitarian perspective. Some things speak to matters of race and gender but matter more, in and of themselves, than mere race and gender. This includes justice and equality. Bernie talked about citizens, and his surge (and perhaps his decline) wasn't rooted in the fickle and ideologically fuzzy shallows of identity politics and its demographic zero-sum world-view. Is it perfect? No. But it rests on a firmer, more consistent, vision of upending a system that has betrayed democratic values by allowing the very top to dominate our political institutions. What Bernie can't offer to our politically complaisant population, one that wolfs down one undigested political Cliff-note to the next, is comfort. That might be his undoing, but if that happens is a far better demise than Warren's.
1
Much better to improve Obamacare where it comes up short than to toss everything out and start anew.
Except for the Supreme court. We need to add at least 2 Justices and swing that court, by hook or by crook, because that is how we lost it.
2
There definitely is a double standard against Bernie. When Hillary won the nomination in 2016, the Democrats said Bernie and his supporters needed to get in line and support the party’s candidate (which he did). But when Bernie was the front-runner this time, many Democrats were saying “Sorry, I can’t bring myself to vote for him, he’s too far to the left”.
2
@S. Jackson Yes he supported Hillary, like all you Bernie supporters say. But the fact that he stayed in the race months after his campaign knew that he didn't have a chance and kept on attacking the presumptive nominee in highly personal and damaging terms, negates that weak-tea support.
Bernie Sanders is a politician who will take any advantage, fair or not, to knife-fight his way to the top. And the fact that he even needs to do that is evidence that his so-called movement is not supported by the majority of Democratic voters, of whom Sanders has yet to join as a party member.
4
@Charles E,
The question remains: will the Democratic Party push those who have qualms about Bernie to vote for him (should he win the nomination) as they did for Hillary in 2016?
@S. Jackson I hope so. Even though Bernie won't lower himself to join the Party.
1
Not again do we want to drive away dem voters to Trump !
Lets restore our democracy first .. we can think of the revolution later !
Its urgent since women are soon to lose their rights to "choice".. cant believe its happening in USA not Russia or UAE!
1
If the Democrats are going to win the election, it will be with Joe Biden as president.
The choice for vice-president will be important for many reasons. I don't think it should be another Joe Biden.
Mr Blow writes "I simply don’t see evidence that supports the theory that most Americans are clamoring for revolutionary change that moves the United States closer in line with the norms of other developed countries."
What I'd underline from those words is what Americans call "revolutionary" is the norm in most developed countries. And what I take from that is that Democrats win the election with good old Joe--and he is good, and he'll surround himself with competent, experienced, honorable people.
But Sanders' ideas should not just die. We're 43rd in the world in longevity: crazy!
I'l like to see Elizabeth Warren as vice-president. Not the job she wanted, but a straight path to that job. Again, I agree with Mr. Blow: if not for sexism, she'd have gotten hugely more votes in the primaries.
Lastly, I offer a strong suggestion: Joe Biden, please don't fall for Trump's taunts. If he calls you "sleepy," don't respond with shouting and theatrical anger.
You're not the master of the 1-minute response or the locker-room gibe. Tell us right out that you're not playing that game and then stay out of it. (Even Warren got caught: avoid!)
And make good old middle class Americans happy. They also really do want you. Trump is an aberration. Calm down, get elected. Thank you!
1
If you were a young supporter of Biden in 2016, say a 20 year old, you saw someone who would "make it fair"....
Fast forward....that person is now 24, has a job and a car, and is on his way, and he no longer wants to hear:
"Make it fair"...by giving what he earned and worked for to someone else. He WANTS to work towards a financial future for himself, work hard to get promoted, raise a family, maybe build a business. Being a "rich elite", or even a future "wealthy" person doesn't look so bad now that his 401K balance is growing....
On the other end of the 2016 spectrum...are the 65 year old white men who want to go back to 1950...they were promised the best healthcare they've ever seen....it has not materialized.
Instead, they have co-pays, deductibles, a threatened cut to Social Security, no pension, and 100,000 (maybe) in the bank. They know they can take a measly 4000. a year out to make it last. They don't "understand" investing, or even how to correctly take money OUT of 401ks, which they also don't understand.
These are the people who will now move to the middle of the road.
Also, 60 year olds like myself,who had THREE vets in my family (WW1, WW2,Vietnam) are SICK TO DEATH of this draft dodging
phoney grifter in the White House.
Elizabeth PLEASE support Biden so we can END this nightmare.
He may not be perfect, but he'll be a brake on this runaway train.
3
Realism. Exactly my thought. I consider myself a progressive, in favor of Medicare for All (I’ve lived abroad and see the value), see the issues of wealth inequality and know first-hand about student loan debt, but I also know that even if we had both houses of Congress and the Presidency these things will likely not pass if brought forth as a complete and radical overhaul. It takes consensus to get things done in our government and we don’t have that even within the Democratic Party.
There is no doubt we should be working toward fixing these serious issues but our government was designed to move slowly for a reason and a radical response is doomed to failure. I applaud those who would push us further to the left because those ideas will eventually become mainstream but do so with the expectation that it will take time to change the peoples’ mind.
3
This bogus reform vs. revolution dualist trope seems to have infected the entire media, even Blow. Sanders is not a revolutionary. He is an FDR type reformer. The policy proposals put forward by the progressive wing are not at all revolutionary, from the Green New Deal to create jobs out of fighting the existential threat of global warming to the demand for a social democratic health care system for all Americans instead of one designed to enrich Big Pharma and Big Insurance and their fellow travelers. Political revolutions are always bloody, and the only significant revolutionaries around today are the far-right white nationalists who dream of race war or civil war, and there are a lot of them.
Now, after disparaging the progressive initiatives as "impossible" "unworkable" or "just not going to happen," how about some serious coverage of Biden's agenda, if you can find one. That Biden will likely win the nomination doesn't particularly concern me, outside of his mental health, but how about some serious coverage of the issues the progressives have raised. The media, and particularly the national papers and networks need to seriously up their game, discard their cliches and pre-formed story arcs, and get serious about the underlying threats to democracy, instead of continued public opinion polling, or we'll slide into full-blown fascism with right-wing death squads way sooner than you imagine.
4
I believe ultimately Biden will be the Democratic Party nominee. Which is precisely why the Democratic Socialists of America must get out of the Democratic Party and become an independent democratic socialist party like Labour in Britain, the PSF in France, PSOE in Spain and SPD in Germany. Perhaps once this election is over, -Trump must be defeated at any cost- social democracy in the United States will walk on its own two feet. Listening, Ms. Ocasio Cortez?
Unfortunately third parties work in parliamentary systems, but not presidential systems. We’ve always had a two- party system because of the structure of our government.
However, if people enact ranked voting in their states, third party candidates can become viable. You have to go through the hard work of reforming elections before this can happen.
1
"While they admire the revolutionaries, they are more comfortable with slow and steady progress. "
British reformers figured this out about a century ago. It was called the Fabian Strategy, after a Roman general named Fabius who followed slow, methodical strategies ( unlike President Trash, these politicians studied history). The Fabians were responsible for many liberal reforms in British society.
2
I've got news for the Republican establishment. I've got news for the Democratic establishment. They can't stop us.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 22, 2020
Well Bernie, it seems like you were wrong about that. You're campaign is over, you just don't know it yet.
4
@John That won't stop Sanders. He will stay in the race as long as he possibly can get away with, just like he did in 2016. He isn't a Democrat, and he doesn't care a whit about the party. He will burn the house down to save it, if he can.
I will be so glad when this year is over and I never have to see the name "Bernie Sanders" in the headlines of my favorite publications again, until he dies.
2
It begs the question why do young people (when they vote) voted for older white man? They had a choice to go out en mass and support young candidates like:
Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg. Instead, they opted for the shouting establishment pseudo revolutionary white male. Why not Elizabeth Warren? She offered the same “goodies” as Sanders? Why young Latinos follow Sanders who’s revolutionary idea is inspired by policies that failed to succeed in latin America? In Cuba? In the Soviet Union?
Is it the blind spot that the liberal colleges failed to treat? An Asian American man, a Gay man and a Woman. The revolution was televised and we missed it.
You forget the influence of the orange toupee elephant in the room. Voters might be looking for a rest from chaos with a hope of getting some helpful programs through in the interim.
1
Charles, I love your writing, thoughts, and principles. But this time I'm going to complain about your stereotypes:
1. Biden being a candidate with "flaws". This overused term was slapped on Hillary and it's just too judgmental. These people have personalities, not flaws.
2. "Elderly (or old) white men". This negative term of the day has become acceptable for journalistic skewering. I'm one of those "old white men", but I think you'd like me if you met me.
3. Lack of Warren support may be due to "sexism". Another overused generalization. How did Hillary win the popular vote? She projected the needed intelligence and the strength.
These are my big nitpicks for an otherwise great writer.
1
"Will “Vote Blue No Matter Who” have currency if the nominee must be chosen at the convention or if Sanders’s supporters again believe that the “establishment” has conspired against him to unfairly thwart him?"
Once again, there's this disturbing and far off the mark generalization about the state of mind of Sanders supporters. Any such "conspiracy" seems to have vastly more currency in the minds of those who wish Sanders would just shut up than it has among his supporters.
Undoubtedly, many Sanders people will hold their nose and vote at the top of the ticket despite their feeling it's a waste of a vote.
And if the Biden folks offer no more than H. Clinton did as an olive branch, then it should be no surprise that those who Sanders infected with enthusiasm for his candidacy who otherwise would have sat this out due to the historic disregard the D establishment radiates for most anything to the left of the center line will feel little motivation to get to the polls.
It's this enthusiasm gap that should be addressed, instead of this mindless babbling about conspiracy theory. The only thing conspiracy theory addresses is the D penchant for writing off millions of voters in fear they will pull the Ds into the left ditch. Instead, they prefer to try to win votes from much smaller numbers of chimerical moderate R voters.
"Revolutionaries are by their nature not accommodationists."
If moderate Ds choose to accommodate...and only if...does Biden win. So far, not so good.
2
Getting rid of a pathologically ill man in the White House also qualifies as a revolution.
All the evidence points to the fact that Sanders has not been able to bring in new voters at all. In fact, it is states like Virginia and Texas that have been recording record turnout and they both went for Biden.
Let's not lose. Biden is boring, but he can also win. Sanders is exciting, and he can't.
3
CHARLES: Many good points made here, as ever, thank you for this. I'm as disappointed as any to see two old white guys contending in the Democratic race, and I'm an old white guy. How I long for the return of President Obama. As for gradualist vs. revolutionary approaches, you know only too well how worthless a gradualist approach was following the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It took an out-in-the-streets revolution for black people to get the civil rights well overdue them after 400 years here, most of these spent in abject helotry as well as poverty. But neither Bernie's 1960's barricades approach, nor Biden's traditional accommodation approach will achieve the economic and ecological changes direly needed in our situation. I share your genuine concern.
1
Wait for social unrest.
Before that, revolution, even just reformation, is premature.
1
Your own paper is saying that Wall Street is lining up to support Biden. Does that make Trump a better choice?
2
"And, of course, there is Tulsi. That’s enough words on that suspect candidacy."
No, it isn't enough words. What does he mean by "suspect", and what evidence does he have to label her that?
For what it's worth, do some research on Tulsi Gabbard and I think you'll find that Mr. Blow, and countless others in media, was glaringly dishonest here. It's actually quite shameful.
2
"...the theory that most Americans are clamoring for revolutionary change..."
Bloomberg: “I don’t think the country wants revolutionary change I think the country wants evolutionary change."
It's a mere matter of degree. And hyperbole on both sides.
Sanders does not aim to dismantle the Constitution--THAT would be a revolution--like rejecting Monarchy/Aristocracy. He wants government FOR common people, as opposed to FOR oligarchs/moneylords/royals. That's NOW a big evolutionary change--but in keeping with US political origins and mythology.
Bloomberg is an oligarch/moneylord. He is a conservative--pro status quo--maybe even more perks for moneylords. THAT is Aristocracy; it's been creeping up--evolving--for two centuries. It is also the real
revolution--the wheel going full circle--overturning the original US democratic revolution.
Sanders and Progressive what to change that. Paradoxically it's progress by remembering the ideals of 1776. Revolution only by going back to the original revolution!!
ANY of the younger candidates would have made a better POTUS than Trump, Bernie or Biden. Swallawell, Seth Moulton, Kamala, Buttigieg, Bennett, etc... I am mystified as to why one of them didn't catch fire but I blame Bernie and all of his pie in the sky, free-everything promises that he would never be able to implement. I just wish he'd go away.
1
What about you Charles? Are you for Biden or Bernie?
I know you hated Bloomberg and my guy has dropped out. He is decent enough to lay down all his 'marbles' with Biden and possibly ready to spend a few hundred million for Biden.
All in the name of defeating Donald Trump.
So are we in 'together' this fight or do you want to be a rascal Bernie Supporter who 'hates' everyone who does not accept Bernie the Leader (the version of "beating must continue until the morale improves...").
Where do you stand Charles?
2
"We choose to go to the Moon! We choose to go to the Moon...We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win, and the others, too." – John F. Kennedy
Revolutionary? Or practical/incremental?
3
According to many definitions Bernie Sanders is Jewish, and hence ‘not white’. How is this being factored in by the identitarian democrats
3
You say you want a revolution? Well Fidel, Ruhollah, Hugo, Ortega, Lenin you know! Biden is a strong, experienced national leader with an ability to work the Hill and with a level of tolerance that quite simply Bernie and the Sandernistas lack. And if Joe names Buttegieg as his running mate??!! There’s your revolution
Don't worry suffering people...the purple people (aka the complicit) eventually got around to ending slavery and so many other obviously terribly wrong things for which they should have taken an immediate stand.
They'll get around to you eventually...they're the good ones...they promise.
1
Mr. Blow, I hope that you are satisfied with yourself this week after Mike Bloomberg dropped out. Not that I think your serial unfair and biased vilification op-eds had anything to do with it, I think that you and the mainstream media acted shamefully for focusing so much negativity on relatively minor and virtually ancient arguable transgressions for which Bloomberg has apologized for and learned from, while giving Trump a relatively free pass on paying off porn stars and his constant lies. Bloomberg could have been one of our greatest Presidents. We are now stuck with a choice of two very seriously flawed and weak "old white men" (your words) as candidates - thanks for the help to OUR country, buddy.
1
This is it America. Go slow, play it safe until the roof collapses or until healthcare becomes absolutely unaffordable, because of inflation and price gouging or until climate change causes so much drought and famine that it cannot be ignored. This is who we are. I think the difficulty for most people is that they don't understand how campaign contributions have so much bearing on how a candidate will govern. Platitudes are nice and make a candidate seem like they grasp a problem, but once in office the candidate is made to understand by his donors what they expect and will tolerate. We do enormous damage to ourselves and the nation by ignoring these things. I simply don't believe that people understand how large these problems that face us are.
3
"two men, two elderly men, two elderly white men"
Charles, I am wondering which one of those descriptors bother you the most. We get it that men is a problem for your narrative. You used it three times.
So, now we are left with elderly and white. You used elderly twice, so maybe white doesn't bother you as much? But it still has to bother you or you wouldn't have included that in your descriptor of the remaining candidates.
There were a lot of candidates and every single one of them had something to bring to the table in ideas that would be great to move the country forward from its present place.
I just can't buy into the narrative that the remaining choices are there simply because they are white.
One of them was barely treading water until a day in South Carolina, when resoundingly, the citizens of that state stood up collectively regardless of age and demographics and chose one of them. They wanted to bring the country back to the calm and steadiness of previous administration. They wanted some peace restored. They don't want shouting and yelling and decisiveness to be the overriding mantra of our country. They thought one of those old, white, men could do that.
That was seen on Tuesday when voter participation increased and overwhelmingly the message that started in South Carolina echoed in the vote tally.
Everyone just wants peace to come to the land of the free.
I see us united for this brief space in time, across gender, age,demographics. Hope not chaos.
1
@Stinger
When you are a hammer, like Blow, everything looks like a nail. Which is why he brings his "critical race theory" to bear on this political race.
1
Americans fought a revolutionary war about 250 years ago against the British nobility, the rich folks of their time. And our founders fought for freedom. Freedom from what? What was the nature of the oppression they fought against? Simple. They fought against the crushing inconsiderate rule of the rich people of their time, who imposed much unfairness on the colonies as well as those of the British people. Why, oh why, are we and our leaders working hard to nip our own developing ersatz aristocracy in the bud instead of letting it develop into an overwhelmingly rich and thoughtless upper class of the sort early Americans fought and died to throw off? Trump shows a huge amount of lack of awareness of how the 99% live, die, and pay bills while the wealthy enjoy tax loopholes, capital gains taxes that are half the rate that the secretaries and janitors of the rich pay, and far less uncertainty in their lives regarding their ability to keep the lights and heat on, pay the rent and so on. The rich aren't crushed by the legal problems that unaffordably afflict the poor. As long as we let the upper crust get more rich and powerful, we are headed for very serious national trouble. Only a couple of Democratic candidates fight hard against that, and the media has been dismissing their progressive positions because the media bosses don't want to pay higher taxes. That's a very bad situation.
2
I agree. I used to be considered a "liberal" Democrat until the "progressives" went so far to the left. I supported three different candidates before deciding that Joe Biden's win in South Carolina demonstrated he could appeal to a broad range of people. My #1 priority is to restore our democracy and end authoritarian rule, #2 fight climate change, and #3 provide access to affordable health care for all. This is NOT the time for "revolution." This is the time for common sense, healing, and restoring civil discourse to our democracy.
2
Mr. Blow, I appreciate your perspective and I learn from your opinion on this subject and many other subjects. I believe the people of the United States (people of color generally, African Americans specifically, white liberals, moderates and everyone feeling the sting of economic & wealth inequality) are very afraid of the possibility of a second Trump Administration.
The people of the United States (identified above) WANT Reformation, but have decided the downside risk of a second Trump Administration is too great...and are willing to accept and support Restoration as a first step. The assumption is that Biden will undue all of the policy changes and initiatives Trump instituted.
Living in the United States with policies that were in place at the end of the Obama Administration is far better than the current policy environment created by Trump and the Senate Republicans. So, the title of this opinion piece is right on target...Restoration first followed by Reformation.
1
If the issue was civil rights, then the author would not be arguing for incrementalism. The Democratic Party now walks on the bridge in Selma once a year but what bridge does it walk on for economic fairness and justice? For those issues it still rests on the Lazy Boy rocker. Is Joe going to even raise the minimum wage or just say say he’d like to?
In our desire to eject Trump, it seems there are many of us are all too willing to curl up in the blanket of status quo.
2
Re your question about Warren: Most people really don’t like really smart people, a fortiori if female. “How should they like you when your very being is a silent reproach.” Goethe.
1
Let me be FRANK and CANDID.
Block voting by Blacks is not an expression of support for Biden's policies. It is a complete and overwhelming repudiation of any hope for the implementation of Sander's and Warren's policies. They have unequivocally given their verdict: "If you think the Democratic Party or the Powers That Be in America will let any Egalitarian Policies of Sanders or Warren, then you are a fool. We know that because we have lived and are living the life that these Powers will allow - slight improvement over Slavery!
But, I also believe strongly that Blacks have even stopped Dreaming for a better life which is the ultimate state of Hopelessness. And that doesn't bode well either for them or for the Nation.
3
Mr Blow
So what is Biden running on?
Human always evolve in ideas and society ...Why do you think or believe people wants to go back to the past ?
Biden will loose to Trump ...We heard all this 4 years ago and HRC lost ...I will rather loose on what I believe
1
The defining moment for me in 2016 was the minute they released the balloons at the convention and Clinton stood there feigning surprise and acting if as though she had never seen a balloon before, or maybe the color red, or blue. From the idiotic/fake look on her face, I just knew she'd lose the election. I'm trying to imagine Bernie standing there scowling and cursing as balloons fill the convention stage. Better they use fishes.
1
I have to ask, Charles: why does Biden’s racist past get a free pass?? His opposition to busing, eulogizing Strom Thurmond’s funeral and touting his friendships with segregationists??? I applauded you for calling out Bloomberg’s shameful legacy of Stop and Frisk. Why the double standard??
6
Bernie has zero chance of achieving his "revolution" and never will. A reasonable person would have figured that out last time and would never have run again. Electing an uncompromising zealot is not achievable and if elected he would utterly fail. Biden has an excellent chance of moving the needle in the right direction and that is the best we can hope for in a divided country. We can achieve universal health care just not M4A.
2
Moderates want progressive programs but they want them from liberal democratic governance not charismatic leaders. They want to decide for themselves about the priority in addressing them and how to address them. It's a messy business that by it's way of operating includes adversaries and people who wish to stick with the status quo. It means solutions diluted from perfection by compromises of all kinds.
Sanders et al who want revolutionary change find liberal democracy a nuisance which keeps those already with too much influence over public policies able to do so because too many of the electorate don't participate as they should. Better to have someone with the knowledge and power to act on behalf of all of the people.
1
"Slow and steady progress" is an interesting maxim to attribute to those voters who favor Biden. The problem I see with this view is that without making significant change to the voting process, i.e., getting wealthy and corporate donors out of the game, it's hard to see how we ever achieve something even vaguely approaching electoral democracy. History has shown that those candidates with the most economic backing win. Only one candidate has a different approach, and it's not radical: let the people decide who is the better candidate, not the oligarchs.
8
It seems that progressive Democrats are big mouth and small fighters. They dare not to act on what they think. It is totally naïve that a social revolution will pop up in the US.
1
Our young people have a 1.3 trillion dollar college dept hanging like a anchor on their necks and they cant discharge it through bankruptcy. They know Biden did it to them.
The anger in the Democrat base is seething. Give them a corporate shill to vote for you will have Trump unleashed with a mandate for another four years.
2
The phrase "South Carolina African American" needs to be added as the beginning of this sentence: "Democratic voters have decided that what an old white man — Donald Trump — broke, only an old white man — Sanders or Biden — can fix."
Can someone explain why the African American community were so much more in favor of Biden over all the other centrist Democrats?
1
Trump is too reminiscent of Stalin in his paranoia not to send chills throughout the body politic. If he could disappear his critics he would do it and his cabal of sycophant fascists would oblige. The combination of ineptitude and bigotry that appealed to his base has led to anything but Trump, not even just anybody. I am thinking my ex-wife’s Maltese, Venus, for instance. Hunter Biden? With daughter Ivanka and wife Melania, does he really want to go there?!
1
Biden or Sanders?
Biden!
Trump is waiting for either but Sanders is low hanging fruit Trump will persecute from behind the podium at his rallies and as he struts non-chalantly behind the rope-line at those daily gaggles on the South White House lawn:
"Bernie will crash the markets and destroy your 401K's from the day he gets elected!".
1
Supposed moderates: Let's leave some people behind. =)
1
Biden & Democratic voters have defeated the Bernie "revolution," chose REAL change. Biden pulled off upsets in the Midwest/Northeast, DOMINATED the South! Joe will be the nominee. My predictions were the only ones even close to what actually happened, too. https://realcontextnews.com/the-best-guide-to-super-tuesday-no-seriously-bidens-got-this-and-the-nomination/
As a 12 year old I did my first picket for the right of Black Americans to eat at the SH Kress' lunch counter getting arrested and having to go to jail with older picketers. As college students in DC my wife and I worked in George McGovern's campaign as young volunteers even crowding our 1 bedroom apartment with other students in the 1969 Washington Student March to end the Vietnam war . Over the years I grew a small business and understand what it takes to make a business profitable. As much as I like Bernie's progressive ideas if elected his ideas will take time to move through Congress if they move at all. if the Senate remains controlled by McConnel probably not at all. I will vote Blue no matter who but after the debacle of the McGovern campaign would like to elect someone who can win and bring other folk along with them. I think at this point I will hold my nose and vote for Biden after voting for Warren in TX primary. Hopefully he will select a young progressive female as his running mate. With Bernie as the nominee I keep remembering the McGovern debacle we experienced. To win Texas, Bernie, is a long shot however if we Dems get behind Joe he may have a chance to carry TX.
2
@Rational Person
Yeah, it was not pleasant to see only one state go for McGovern, a moderate but liberal Democrat, verses Nixon, a conservative Republican. It was as if all of American ideals for fairness and liberty for all was being voted down. But like it or not, most Democrats and all Republicans saw McGovern as too extreme for their preferences.
Hey, Charles, why no mention of California? Here, the exit polls show that strong majorities of Dems favor very progressive policies. We are the biggest state and the fifth largest economy in the world.
East Coast bias in your column??
1
“Democratic voters have decided that what an old white man — Donald Trump — broke, only an old white man — Sanders or Biden — can fix.”
What exactly is broken and how is Biden going to “make steady, incremental, progress...” in fixing these problems?
Biden’s position on immigration —“Folks, I voted for a fence...I voted for 700 miles of fence,. But, let me tell you, we can build a fence 40 stories high...”
Biden’s position on Abortion—“I’ve stuck to my middle-of-the-road position on abortion for more than 30 years. I still vote against partial birth abortion and federal funding, and I’d like to make it easier for scared young mothers to choose not to have an abortion, but I will also vote against a constitutional amendment that strips a woman of her right to make her own choice,” he wrote in his book “ Promises to Keep”.
Biden’s position on wealth inequality—“I don’t think 500 billionaires are the reason we’re in trouble..,The folks at the top aren’t bad guys.”
Looking at Biden’s position on just these three issues makes you wonder if he really is a moderate candidates who will take incremental steps to solve problems or if he’s a “status quo” guy who will accomplish nothing new.
1
I have volunteered at a VA hospital for the last 11 years I have worked closely with Nurses and Doctors. It is maddening for me when I hear so many of these intelligent people supporting DJT. I wonder what they see in this Con man/ criminal. He hates black and brown people and idolizes right wing dictators. His hatred of women is disgusting. Yet women vote for him. His obsessive hatred of immigrants and his love of the WALL is beyond comprehension. Good luck to us all if he is reelected.
Charles I value and respect you totally. For some reason you have lost all insight and perspective.
Why? It’s the crumbling Cliff moment in American politics. It’s like the time Obama was elected only in reverse.
Then bold action was wanted by an Obama candidate who stirred our hopes but was yet steady and balanced. Change not revolution following Iraq and the failing economy.
Now we again face a disaster. A megalomaniac president a Republican Party afraid of losing all power and seeking to incite our fears of non male non whites taking over.
A woman candidate could be elected but none were Michelle Obama unfortunately Warren the smartest but a phony she didn’t dare be her true smart self. Self destructed. The others just not smart enough politically.
Sanders is another Trump on the left. He is a megalomaniac as well. Frightening if allowed power.
Corey Booker with more experience and seasoning could and should be our next president after Biden.
We need Biden. He promises what should actually happen. To lift us ALL up. No more stratified society with black Latin women gay Jew all down and no switching of them up and male whites down. No more elite class and poor servants. It’s time we all work together.
This virus may just illuminate the need to stop classism racism sexism and deal with our health and the planet. It all countries stop viewing capitalism as the guiding light and replace it with social democracy NOT socialism it will be a better world
As always, Charles Blow, like all moderates, pretends that his own ideological worldview is "pragmatic," or just plain "common sense." Perhaps Blow has forgotten the words of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. in his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail:"
"...I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice;...."
"So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?"
Excellent opinion and I agree. Biden2020
Or, voters are more concerned with pest control in the Oval Office and are concerned that it is done properly.
Moderation is one thing...but Biden? Dangerous choice. He better choose a fabulous progressive woman as his vp to have a shot at all.
There's a revolution going on right now in the USA. It's a fascist revolution. It happened in the 30's.
Due to global warming the left will not stop Trump at the Maine border. They will need the help of everyone of the corporate tools who are currently posing as African Americans and suburban women.
1
Joe Biden shouldn´t be compared to Hillary Clinton, actually. She was mentally 100% there, sharp, witty and specific about her agenda. I didn´t vote for her in the 2016 primary but I had no problem doing so in the general. In contrast to Clinton, Biden is not all there. He can´t finish the simplest of sentences, gets tangled up in his words in ways that are not related to stammering but to blanking out, just recently he went around lying for weeks about being arrested in South Africa.
He plagiarized a speech the last time he ran (anyone remember that?), he did much more than vote for the Iraq War, as head of the Foreign Relations Committee he advocated for it with all he had and bullied other democrats into voting for it. He didn´t vote for the Crime bill, he wrote it. There are still people in jail because of that bill who shouldn´t be there. He got to the right of Newt Gingrich on so-called "welfare reform" and has called for cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and it´s all on tape.
The Republicans will use all of that against him. And he´s shown signs of cognitive impairment that no one who has any experience with the condition can deny. He is not the safe choice at all.
2
@JJ - Hillary was 100% where exactly? In her safe space while Donald Trump bashed her night after night on national TV. Sharp and witty? "I short circuited"? "put coal miners out of work"? "basket of deplorables"? Specific? She co-opted more and more of Bernie's platform the more the campaign went on.
2
A return to bed rock middle of the road democratic values can win. Free everything and open borders gives us for more years of trump.
Charles Blow is baffled by Warren’s failure to attract more of a following. I’m not, although I think she’d make the best President. It’s long been known that Warren’s appeal is to people demographically like me -- highly educated and white.
Nor am I baffled as to why Sanders lost out on Tuesday. I’d attribute it to ta media campaign against him, led, as it seems to me from afar, by the New York Times, serving members of the DNC well.
2
To my way of thinking everything Elizabeth Warren did was bad. She dressed poorly She ran around the stage like a teenager, She has a high squeakily voice. She rather destroy another candidate than promote herself.
Nothing in her presentation was real.
2
"Does one demand immediacy, or is one satisfied with gradualism?"
Well, that would depend on where one is on the socioeconomic scale, wouldn't it. Whether one has the luxury of scratching their tail waiting for crumbs from incremental change or not. I know one thing for sure, the only way not to get desperately needed change is to not even bother to try. Bernie or Warren would fight tooth and nail for it. Even if not successful (and I'm not an idiot, I fully realize they won't get much passed), that's how change, even the incremental type, happens. Those who want to get back to the Obama years seem to be utterly clueless as to why, after all of those lost seats, people wanted to escape them in the first place.
Bernie or bust.
2
It will come down to who Warren choses to support when she drops out.
2
Charles, You are baffled by how many voters did NOT support Elizabeth Warren? Listen up Charles, as she would say, it is NOT sexism. It’s her! She is not a good campaigner. Started out strong and kept slipping backwards. Her voice was irksome. Her lecturing tone was off putting. Her broken record sad stories got old, and began to sound hollow. Is she smart? Yes indeed. Is she capable of being president? Absolutely. But she lacks genuine charisma and in the USofA you gotta have some of that to be president (even if it’s majorly twisted sicko charisma in the case of you know who). I do NOT support the idea that Elizabeth did poorly because she’s a woman nor is that true for any of the female candidates. They were all excellent but didn’t have the “connect” quality. Find the right female candidate and we will get her in the White House for sure.
1
@Hortencia
Are you sure you’re not talking about HRC in 2016?
1
@AT, not a bit. I’m talking about Warren. This opinion is not just mine.
If Biden is the nominee, all Trump has to do is run an ad showing Joe promising to “appoint” a black woman to “the Senate” and another ad showing Joe looking befuddled while his wife physically battles a “dairy protestor.” Nothing need be said and Trump will be re-elected easily. I’m beginning to think the DNC wants to lose the election.
1
Definitely restoration. Trump 2020.
3
did blow miss the fact that Biden won maine and Massachusetts, and that Sanders carried Vermont by much less than in 2016?
1
@rhporter
Clinton and Sanders split Mass just about 50-50 back in '16. Add Bloomberg to Biden, and Warren to Sanders, and the split is about the same. A bit more for the progressive wing this time, even.
Blue no matter who? You have to earn my vote. Biden is in the early state of dementia. He will lose to Trump bigtime. He can't form full sentences .The establishment knows this but he is the only one they can congeal around . Bidens going to lose but as long as the rich dont have to pay more taxes and the boomers get to keep everything they stole from future generations its all good.
1
Let me assure you, if congress, senate and executive are all blue, things will happen extremely quickly... first 100 days... FDR style... we will see health care for all , major, fairer tax re-structuring, action on climate change and an effort to repair our global reputation.
This will occur no matter which Democrat is at the helm - but ONLY if all of congress goes blue. Either candidate will jump at the chance.
The revolution does not originate in the white house- it occurs 2 miles down Pennsylvania Ave in the capitol.
1
@John in WI
You seem to be unclear as to the influence of corporate donors. Do you think those seats come for free? Ask Mike Bloomberg, who bought a solid chunk of them.
Warren was an unlikeable candidate who had issues with the truth. That seems like a lot more parsimonious reason for her lack of success that sexism or misogyny. Blaming the voters for a particular candidates lack of success is absurd.
2
Re Warren, see Richard Hofstadter’s 1963 “Anti-intellectualism in American Life”.
2
Between Biden or Sanders? Of course Sanders!!! But I do not support characterizing the candidacy of Tulsi Gabbard as suspect. What are you insinuating? Let's show some respect,, if nothing else, for the fact she is a Hawaii Army National Guard major and a member of the House of Representatives. It is bad enough Hillary Clinton smeared her as a Russian asset. Tulsi is suing her as she well should.
1
I wonder if it ever occurred to you that there are plenty of old white men who care deeply about the rights/lives/well being of people who are neither white, nor old, nor men. Why do you always put a divisive lens on humanity and all the characteristics that should, and most often do, go with it? Do you really believe that we only favor people who look like us?
Unfortunately there’s a thing called global warming and an oncoming pandemic with massive amounts of Americans uninsured.
I think slow and steady might not be the way to go.
1
Two old white men running against each other for the Democratic nomination for our 46th presidency? Against an unfit old white American would-be dictator, Donald Trump. #45? You posit restoration and reform, or revolution, Charles Blow. It's a replay of 2016, when the Republicans winnowed down their 17 candidates to one unforeseen winner, Donald Trump? No, today looks more like post-Weimar Germany in America. A dictator-in-waiting and division, hatred and bigotry sown among the American people. We aren't a European country. We still have the right to vote, though so many other American rights in our Constitution have been gainsaid, rolled back. Will endorsements for either of these two old white men candidates from VT and DE mean anything as the novel Coronavirus Covid-19 makes inroads on us as the Spanish Flu of 1918-20, changed our world and brought revolution and wars in Europe to the world? No matter who is running as a Democrat this election year, We must vote against 4 more years of Trump. Hillary Clinton and Al Gore won their elections of 2000 and 2016 by popular vote. Their elections were overturned by the gerry-mandered electoral college and the Supreme Court. Could such a shocking outcome occur again this year? Not voting is not an option.
Joe Biden, with his leadership role in the disastrous Iraq invasion and in cheerleading for NAFTA, is perhaps the LEAST electable Democrat the party elites could have gotten behind. Now it seems likely that Trump will weaponize Biden's wayward son, Hunter, against him, and Joe Biden's own wayward mental capacity -- the big Elephant in the Room. Q. What is the DNC thinking? A. They'd rather help re-elect Trump than let Bernie win.
1
@ando arike
I have no doubt that the DNC is just fine with Joe's mental decline. All of that last minute support they mobilized didn't come for free. He'll be just a placeholder to rubber stamp the agenda of the DNC and their donors.
In 2016, Southen conservative blacks, in their folly, were entirely responsible for nominating the most hated candidate in the history of the Democratic Party, Hillary. Needless to say, Bernie won the white vote in the primaries, and crushed Trump in the crucial Rust Belt exit polls, proving he would have spared us Trump and fascism had the blacks not nominated a loser. Let’s hope Biden does not blow the determinative white Rust Belt vote and prove Southern blacks disastrous choosers of Dem candidates yet again. Southern conservative blacks, just like equally conservative white Evangelucals, vote the way their easily bought preachers tell them to. What an irony that the people on Super Tuesday most determined to block the $15 minimum wage for McDonald’s workers and to deny adequate (or any) health insurance to lower-class blacks were mostly female conservative Southern black church-goers. Somehow this does not seem like what their “Lord” meant at all about how they were supposed to treat poor blacks. Until Southern blacks start voting for what the Rust Belt working class wants economically, imstead of what the Wall St. Democratic Establishment wants, Southern blacks may well be one of the most lethal arrows against Dems in all of Trump’s quiver.
Unfortunately, our planet cannot wait for a slow and steady approach. We have to put aside every other consideration and vote as if our kids' lives depend upon it. I think Donald Trump is the most loathsome creature who ever walked the Earth, but if he were aggressively fighting climate change, I'd vote for him over a "decent" guy with a slow and steady approach.
Vermont and Maine are the whitest states! Do you know why?
During the Great Migration from the South, there were no jobs in Maine and Vermont. People had been migrating out of Maine and Vermont since 1800 for the jobs to the states south and west.
Mainers and Vermonters have been among the poorest of the poor for 200 years. No sane person seeking prosperity would move there, so very few Afro-Americans are Mainers and Vermonters.
Many Mainers and Vermonters see Sanders' ideas as a way out. Will it take 100 more years before rust belt voter realize that Vermont and Maine are on the right track?
2020 looks to be a repeat of 2016. Once the dust settles from the Democratic convention, I believe that the Trump administration will launch an investigation into the Biden's and the Ukrainian company that paid Hunter Biden. All done to hurt Joe Biden in the general election. In the meantime, the Russians will be trolling the Bernie supporters to confirm to them that the Democratic nominating process was rigged. This is to get Bernie's supporters to either stay home or vote for Trump. Sound familiar? Then there will be the October surprise, some event like Comey's last-minute investigation into Hillary.
1
What Sanders has done during his Presidential runs is promise that he will make government serve the people instead of the special interests. That in fact has been the message of all of the self proclaimed progressives, they will be the charismatic leaders who will make government serve the people's interests instead of the wealthy elites and corporations.
Let that sink in.
Liberal democracies do not serve the people, they represent government by the consent of the governed, government which run by office holders elected by the people. Autocracies serve the interests of the ruling factions in any country. Totalitarian systems serve the interests of an ideology. But liberal democracies give the people what they want, because the government is already accountable to them by the ballot boxes.
In that context, the candidate for office should be expected to frame a platform in terms of what those who support the candidate wishes to achieve, not what that candidate will give to them.
Bernie is running as a charismatic leader who will make the government act as he decides to deliver his promises. That's Trump's line, too. Both are offering authoritarian governance.
1
I join those who have responded calling for reality. None of us can be sure what reality is, but we have to make judgments about. Reality is the only approach. It is not a choice of slow and steady progress vs. revolution. It is a choice of progress with Biden or regression with Trump. This is the only choice in reality.
"Almost all of the boldest proposals I’ve heard from Democrats this season would fail to make it through a Congress that looked even remotely like the one we have now."
I noticed that several months ago, when a Democratic group announced a wish-list of abortion bills.. Two of the proposals -- abortion funding and a Freedom of Choice Act replacing Roe vs Wade -- failed to make it through Congress even during Bill Clinton's administration. Another -- limiting the issues on which states are allowed to vote ( hint: abortion isn't one of them) would probably be considered unconstitutional. The group putting together the wish list showed no awareness of any of these problems.
What President Trash's administration has proved is the importance of having intelligent leaders who consider issues carefully. Not "revolutionaries".
After four years of Trumpian chaos and constant uproar, the US craves calm and reassurance and not revolutionary disruption. Therefore Biden and not Sanders.
3
Our system of government with checks and balance is designed to slow things down. The filibuster in the Senate also really slows things down. I think most Democratic voters support the center-left because they are willing to deal the reality of our system of government. We don't have parliamentary system as they do in European countries where one party has control, To make the two-party system work most effectlyrequires incremental change. The right wing is trying to bring about rapid change by destroying our system of government and replacing it with an authoritarian system in which the minority has permanent control. This would allow for sweeping changes to turn the US into a white supremacist Christian nation. That is what revolution on the right looks like and why it is so critical to defeat Donald Trump.
1
Was Obamacare gradualism? It was every bit the quantum leap that Medicare For All is now, and was derided the same way. It didn't get a single Republican vote as Republicans don't hesitate to remind us. But unlike MFA which has to make its way thru Congress the rescission of Obamacare is in the hands of the courts now. Can we afford gradualism on climate change? The clock doesn't stop ticking and Australia, Brazil, and California are on fire. I would suggest to you that pollsters may pose the question as Restoration or Revolution, but the question that respondents hear and are answering is ... what is the safe option to defeating Donald Trump. We thought we had the safe option in 2016. It didn't work out that way. That revolutionaries are not accommodationists is not by nature but by definition. Those who are comfortable with gradualism should consider that by the time they become uncomfortable it may be too late.
3
We romanticize with the revolutionaries but are scared of revolution. The younger people are bold and want to change but older people want a stable life with slow change. We always say that known enemy is better than unknown being. We are scared of socialism and do not like the socialist revolutionaries like Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Fidel Castro. In Democratic party primary this year, we see that the older voters like Biden, a stable politician over Bernie who seems to be revolutionary socialist . Most of the Americans are at the center but the extreme activists who participate in primary push both the parties to extreme left and right.
1
I agree with all of what you say Charles.
There really is only one issue we need to move on with expediency, and that is climate change.
Biden needs to put Jay Inslee on his list for certain appointment to his administration.
The Green New Deal can't be an after-thought.
3
"A crusading Bernie Sanders now faces off again against a more mainstream candidate, one with flaws that give many voters pause." Charles, do you dismiss the very many legitimate "flaws that give many voters pause" of a Sanders candidacy?
2
It is easy to burn down a house. It is difficult to build one!
The Russian Revolution offered slogans similar to Sanders... "Power to the People." The result was over a century of anything but "Power to the People."
That being said, V.P. Biden's response regarding the present financial stratification in America cannot be silence. He should directly address this pivotal issue... not in platitudes, not simply by "Building on Obamacare," but with a direct call to address a tax code which presently shields the wealthy at the expense of the multitude.
That is the issue which Sanders justifiably and effectively promotes. If the Democrat Party wants a future it must address this issue too.
The past several decades of hands out to wealthy patrons will simply not do. We cannot continue business as usual because a tipping point has been reached!
3
I'd like to see a reconstituted two party system. Let's call them the Progressives and the Moderates. To get there, the Republicans who enjoy far too many unearned benefits would have to recede into a tiny rump.
We could get there with a Democratic majority in both the Senate and House, elimination of the filibuster and then a major governance overhaul that focuses on the Courts and voting.
We don't have to assume the Republicans will be with us forever.
2
Good column, as always. But where is the slow and steady progress? Democrats have been promising this for decades, and yet the country has steadily shifted to the right for the past 40 years. The slow and steady progress is going the wrong direction. Electing a moderate isn't going to reverse that or even put up a firewall.
5
@Number23
Excuse me? You think Obamacare and marriage equality don't count as progress? Not fast or far enough. Fine. But it is indeed dramatic progress, which began with FDR. Democratic progress has been under assault by each Republican administration and Congress, and passing and implementing all the changes we want as fast as we want them are simply not realistic.
2
The thought in Mr. Blow's column that sticks with me is that the two remaining Democrats are "elderly white men", one of whom will be running against an elderly white incumbent. What's wrong with this picture? Why do the millions of younger voters have no choice except an elderly white septuagenarian, who is unlikely to fully understand or share their concerns for the future? As a septuagenarian myself, and, acutely aware of the reduced level of energy that is part of this stage of life, I would be all for a constitutional amendment prohibiting anyone 70 or over from being president of the US. At least some level of youthfulness should be a requirement for one of the world's most difficult jobs. There is a minimum age requirement, why not a maximum?
2
Totally disagree with Charles’ last sentence regarding the choice we Democrat’s face. The true choice the majority of Democrats proclaim over & over, even in exit polls on Super Tuesday is this: we’re voting for who can beat trump. Period. No buts. I am so anti-Bernie but he’s my guy if he gets the nomination. I’ll throw up a little in my mouth but he’ll get my vote.
4
Upwards of half of Democratic voters, black and white, suburban, urban, and rural, are voting on a single issue—fear of Trump. They turn toward what they know, Joe Biden. The actual issues were swamped—many if not most of the voters who support Medicare for All voted Biden. The American political system is an unwieldy morass of mainstream media, social media, billions of dollars in competing interests targeting political, racial, gendered, and micro-social groups. Progressives are going to have to come up with a solution or they face becoming a walled off minority of whiners and shouters.
3
With the climate crisis, there is no time for slow and steady progress. Not to mention student debt, health care, especially with the Coronavirus outbreak. That sounds like cover for “keep the status quo.”
2
A feeble-minded milquetoast candidate calling for a return to “normalcy” or a lifelong fighter for working class Americans advocating for fundamental change?
I’m sticking with the latter choice/candidate because this country desperately needs revolution not cosmetic reform.
Sanders 2020
2
Americans are such a risk-averse disappointment. We have a healthcare affordability crisis and yet people reject Medicare/Universal healthcare. Students are mired in debt and many cannot help the economy because debt payments eat up their income, etc. Not to mention, we need MASSIVE funding for a Green New Deal--Climate Change is here and we are woefully unprepared to mitigate its effects. A centrist admin will only frustrate people; with Biden as the Presidential nominee (no vision, no energy and in cognitive decline), I don't expect much in the way of addressing the pressing problems we have now. Sadly, I see frustration and cynicism on the part of the electorate who supported him. Will another form of Trump arise in 2024 when the nation is fed up with a President who doesn't deliver? Something to think about!
Seen from the other side of the Atlantic it’s striking that americans Can accept a system, where 1% owns more than fifty % of all wealth in the world without doing anything about it.
It’s also striking that your HEALTH system considers of leaving the poorest in the garbage Can.
Will US ever reach a position where few has too much and fewer too little. You’ve Got 200 years to obtain such standard and nothing has happened!
4
Realism now is, in a very real sense, revolutionary! With a President who lies daily, denies science, and is more a reality TV farce than a leader, the Democrats can meet the yearning of the population for a sensible, honest experienced leader who knows how to govern! This is the moment. The future of our country and the globe requires that we seize it!
2
I write this after reading that Warren has dropped out. Given the facts we face in 2020, Obama's back-to-back victories in 2008 and 2012 are amazing unicorn events... The open-minded voters who elected an African American more than a decade ago appear loathe to elect a woman and even more loathe to elect a Democratic socialist who seeks economic, racial and social justice. I hope that those who see Biden as the candidate who can get down-ballot support for Democrats are right... and I hope even more that IF that down-ballot support results in having a Democratic House and Senate that Biden will reverse all of Trump;s executive orders... but am I hoping for too much?
3
Yes- incremental change (reform) feels less risky & doomed than a Revolution.
For young white guys and- apparently- some Latinx citizens- going for broke makes sense.
But for the vast majority of voters- the best antidote to chaos is calm, the best remedy for incompetence is competence, the only answer to a con man is an honest man.
4
“I believe that part of the explanation for that boils down to sexism”
No it doesn’t. Why is the progressive explanation for everything increasingly boiling down to some “ism”? So Democrats were able to vote for Hillary as a woman to be their nominee in 2016, but now suddenly they are all misogynistic?
Maybe Elizabeth Warren just dropped the ball in the campaign.
2
Joe Biden is the status quo and Republicans own the status quo. Biden wants to heal but if he goes to McConnell with hat in hat Mitch will make him kneel. Get along Joe will continue to make deliveries in the Genteel neighborhoods and leave just enough in the poor ones to quell any revolution, the Republican status quo. Nothing new to see here, just keep moving.. I think the recurring question for Joe is - How high is the water Mama - er Joe.
I,and I believe many others, will Vote Blue No Matter Who.
A tree stump would be more ethical and intelligent than Trump, and I would gladly vote for one to get him out of office.
2
Like Charles Blow, I am baffled by Elizabeth Warren's poor showing in the primaries. She is far and away the most qualified candidate, and by rejecting her, primary voters have left us with two very flawed old white men. What we do not need is a bellicose old man yelling at us--and if he's elected, yelling at members of Congress. I can envision the reaction to his rude approach--total rejection, not a willingness to negotiate.
3
I have looked at Sanders’ career in Congress, his fiscal policy, his foreign policy, other politicians that he is in alignment with, and I don’t like what I see. It’s as simple as that.
2
What I don't get is how the DNC decided that Biden was their man. I will gladly vote for him over Sanders, but Biden? Really? That's the best the DNC establishment could come up with?
His entire candidacy has hinged on the many months-ago contention-turned-conventional wisdom that "only Biden can beat Trump." Biden? Really? Let's hope the assertion is now a self-fulfilling prophecy.
As for Warren, my strong choice, I am so sorry she didn't get further. I thought she was in the perfect position between radical revolutionary Bernie, and the moderates.
She is a reformer, not a revolutionary.
Part of her failure, compounded by sexism, is that she tried to present herself as a radical when she's just too pragmatic. I don't really believe that she wants to decriminalize border crossings, end ICE, and give every person who walks across the border free comprehensive healthcare (like Bernie foolishly does). I don't believe she ever though she could bring in Medicare for All in the short period of time she first stated she could (like Bernie actually fantasizes about). So, to her credit, she walked that back, but started looking like the ersatz Bernie. Her authenticity started being questioned by the zealots she was courting.
1
It may be a cliche, but the unifying slogan for Democrats this year should be "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good." Because the real alternative to the good is not the perfect: it's horrifying autocracy. And horror is what we'll get if Democrats don't reconcile their differences, fast.
1
Many people are voting for Biden because they feel others are more likely to vote for him. The primary contest has now resembles a polling of everybody's personal poll, based upon their hunches, what they hear in the news, and above all on fear.
Primary elections ought to show the totals of personal support for each candidate, based on person affinity with them and their policies. Voters should trust the process to bring forth the truth about support for individual candidates. But voters are terrified and they don't trust that the process will produce the best candidate. They are anxious to act now. So instead of voting for the person they most like, they vote for the person they feel most others will accept.
Animals, including humans, don't make the best medium or long term decisions when they are anxious and afraid. The majority of voters has been betrayed by the system and forced to accept minority rule by a cult-of-personality. Millions of people, even the most progressive ones, are terrified of the prospect of four more years of Trump. The pressure since day one has been intense and unrelenting, leaving people are exhausted and stressed beyond normal reason. The result is that too many voters have chosen to approach the primary elections as they would the main election.
Dear Mr. Blow,
Consider one of the issues relevant to this election- climate change.
If we had begun making small, incremental, year-to-year changes in our behavior twenty years ago we would be some of the distance we need to be to address this problem successfully.
Unfortunately, our net carbon emissions and the net carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have continued on their asymptotic rise. See the readings from the monitoring observatory in Hawaii. We are obviously long past the moment when incremental changes will address this problem successfully.
Hence, the real issue is no longer incremental versus radical. If an existential problem exists and only radical change will address it, you have no choice as an individual or as a society.
I realize that many people deny that climate change is occurring or, if it is occurring, that it represents an existential threat. They are more than welcome to vote for a candidate of little or incremental change at best, Joe Biden, or Donald Trump, who denies climate change entirely and seems dedicated to making the problem worse.
If you believe we face an existential threat in at least climate change (nuclear proliferation should be tossed into the hopper, too), then you must also face that fact that radical change is needed and a candidate of radical change necessary- Bernie Sanders, if he is indeed radical enough.
I wish I believed we have ten years before we find out the right answer to this conundrum.
2
@Jonathan Penn
Biofuels supported by Ms. Pelosi and the Obama administration led to the deforestation of Indonesia to produce cheap palm oil now in all our foods. Sometimes the cure is worse than doing nothing. Brazil should be boycotted or sanctioned for amazon's fires intentionally set for agricultural clearing. Even the indigenous populations are being squeezed out. I think with the short window we have small ultra nuclear plants should be built but not on earthquake fault lines nor population centers like the Indian Point in Buchanan was and is currently being decommissioned.
Was it the black southern voters or white wealthy voters who do not want the government taxing/taking their money and giving it to social programs they do not agree with.
3
Warren is disliked because she is a dishonest, disloyal, opportunist. Tulsi, who's campaign is not at all "suspect" is disliked and shunned by the establishment because she is honest and speaks against imperialistic international intervention and "forever wars". Like Bernie only even more real. Her not to be forgiven crime against the Party was resigning from her post as vice-chair of the Democratic National Committee to support Sanders in 2016. I rarely agree with Blow but on this point he is being especially ignorant or dishonest.
2
This election isn't really about race, creed, color, gender or the like as much as it is about democracy versus aristocracy, greed and criminality versus truth and the law. In other words, it's between who can slay the despotic dragon. Bernie or Biden. Or neither of them. Everything else is just nothing but foolish conjecture as our country races its way to extinction.
Once again, we've seen this same slow motion train wreck speeding down this same slippery track before with the same catastrophic results. Only difference this time is that there won't
be a next time.
1
Charles Blow said this: "And, I must say here, I believe that part of the explanation for that boils down to sexism."
"And, of course, there is Tulsi. That’s enough words on that suspect candidacy."
Michelle Cottle said this: Representative Gabbard of Hawaii is hanging on but has never been more than a curiosity"
So a Congressional Representative, who served her country overseas after 9/11, is to the NYT OP/ED folks "suspect" and a "curiosity?" Maybe you two should look in the mirror when it comes to sexism.
2
"Democratic voters have decided that what an old white man — Donald Trump — broke, only an old white man — Sanders or Biden — can fix." Really? This is a far fetched conclusion. People voted out of fear for who they thought could win (Biden) or out of hope and heart for who and what they wanted (Bernie). Although, I do agree that Warren faced the old double standard. As an articulate, at times agressive speaker and debater, she challenged female norms.
There are female political leaders behind the scenes that have let me down. House leader Nancy Pelosi was associated with alot of Hollywood and Washington fund raisers and didnt clamp down on corporate beltway lobbyists by party members during the Obama years. Now Ms Pelosi emphasizes kitchen table issues following Perez's effective new direction of the party. Ms Pelosi excused an educated congresswoman's non stop comments which were confirmed to be antisemitic with simply saying in February, 2019, "it wasn't intentional". Does this soft scolding have anything to do with the increased deadly attacks 6 months later against practicing Jews? Sanders was out of consideration when I found out he hired Woman's march co founder Linda Sarsour. I found her to be very personable and smart, the evening after the first march in 2016 seeing her in the stage at Federal Hall ,NY . I was dismayed later when she was accused of not being tolerant of a Jewish cofounder of the march. The Jewish leader blamed her and others on the board for pushing her out because of her support for Israel. I believe that by hiring Ms Sansour, it says alot about Senator Sander's myopia and it is not cumbaya, as in the folk song .
I give Sanders credit for opposing the war in Iraq. He and President Trump had something in common . There is also something to behold from the significant Hispanic vote he got in the Southwest.
The Democrat base is seething with anger. Dismiss their concerns at your own peril. Having to pay a few buck more in taxes or Trump with a mandate for four more years. Its your choice.
3
@TinyBlueDot
Yes, to those young I say it’s called growing up, working, sacrificing, earning your spot in society, bearing your own load.
Most of our kids have no real knowledge of what their life would have been like growing up as their grandparents, never having gone to college, some experiencing very primitive living conditions, suffering thru the Depression, losing friends and family in a war. Nor do they have any exposure to living with deprivation on the level of most human beings except when riding in a taxi from an airport in a developing country to the hotel they are staying in or the cruise ship on which they are sailing.
The Left wants to sell a new wager, pull down the minority who are supporting all of the social programs, who may have risen from struggle in their own “American Dream”, tax them further to salve a deep envy that haunts so many intellectual liberals who see their inferiors gather in more money than they deserve.
What the voters say is that human striving is okay, normal. The reason that America has such high in-migration is that America offers freedom and not a hand-out. Does anyone emigrate to China, to Saudi Arabia, even to Canada, a Socialist option that still is just a drive away? Or what about Mexico with low-cost real estate? How many move and start over just to our south?
When push comes to shove, the Progressive truth is that people, in their weaker selves, take the gift in exchange for a freedom.
In time, the State owns them.
1
Here in Iowa, Elizabeth Warren's only win on caucus night was Johnson County. Those of us who live here know that this is significant. Yes, the "People's Republic of Johnson County" is highly educated and liberal--and it is also disconnected from rural Iowa and the people who live there. There's a smugness to the county, a kind of lazy intellectual superiority complex. EW spoke to *that*, not to the values-driven voters who live in more rural parts of the state, voters who went for Obama in 2012 and Trump four years later--and for Buttigieg in the 2020 caucus. Every time EW used that verbal tic "Look!" I cringed, because to rural voters it sounds condescending, like, "Look, you uneducated fools, at what I the Harvard professor have to tell you." As the Times pointed out yesterday, EW could have used the "Betsy from Oklahoma" narrative to much greater effect. But she didn't--she was the policy wonk. This was just one of many flaws in her campaign.
Yes, there is a double standard, and yes, it was certainly applied to EW and to Klobuchar. But it does women no good to blame a failure like this solely on sexism.
@Iowan
Has it ever occurred to people that maybe,just maybe, it is the voters who are the problem and not the candidates?
"Or, more precisely, practicality becomes a self-imposed constraint on progressivism." excellent, mr blow. i believe this formula covers american pragmatism. i don't know how close it is to '... genealogy of pragmatism', dr. cornel west's philosophical book defining, defending the subject. but 'revolutionary' - your 'immediacy' - reminds me of the introduction of obama-care, remember the computer chaos? yet it forced the radicals to dance surly but effectively toward and then around the republican traumatists, even, once close to the light, merrily with the recalcitrant fools. and we know what happened, whatever modicum of it, but progressive change came. defining it's own, new, pragmatic history.
Mr. Blow just imagine a pundit writing in a different era what you are writing today, and how absurd and sad that would look in hindsight. We look back and see the incrementalists arguing against women and blacks getting the vote or having their civil rights recognized, arguing before that against abolition, later against getting out of Vietnam.
Someday hopefully we will look back at the people who said we couldn’t address climate change or wealth inequality or lack of access to healthcare with the same degree of freedom from their incrementalism
1
While Trump supporters callously where suits designed to resemble the border wall, and Trump with appalling vulgarity appointed his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to solve the issues of the Middle East, we have to ask, where are these clowns now when the world faces the modest challenges posed by COVID-19? They are nowhere to be found, and all of Trump and his supporters' disregard for the so-called deep state and trained experts has somehow grown silent as they hide behind the skirt of Anthony Fauci and others that they would have readily ridiculed at other times. It is high time the American people grow up and stop chasing snake oil salesmen and hypocritical preachers that lead our country down a primrose path to perdition. If anything, it was the virus, if not the bond market, the stock market and their own 401ks that reminded Americans to quit fooling themselves and face the facts: running this country is not for amateurs and hucksters. Barack Obama always knew that It's about time that those who so vociferously opposed him, came running back to him by voting for his VP. If anything, Super Tuesday's vote was a vote for a return to normalcy, i.e. a return to Obama.
We need more people like you who take a principle stand and refuse to retreat even though a ton of readers were against your opinion about Michael Bloomberg. Congratulations Charles for your moral courage and stand against Bloomberg's candidacy regarding his election chances.
Charles Blow, the USA has been around for 244 yrs now.
As of 2016, it has been in the clutches of Putin's Kremlin, via Putin's Actual Puppet, Donald J. Trump.
Look at what has happened to the IC, DoJ, DoD, Ed. And let's not forget it all began with the gutting of the State Dept after Trump installed RexT, Putin's official Friend -- so designated by a shiny medal -- as Sec'y of State.
The CDC lost 80% of its budget & now we have a health emergency -- of which Trump underling Pence is officially the czar. EPA regs from the past 50 yrs (weak sauce to begin with, as Flint, MI reveals) have been abolished by DJT.
This is simply not the year to prove any points about how visionary Americans can be in terms of electing a "type". I would vote for Hakeem Jeffries, Val Demings, Elton John (yes!), Mayor Lightfoot, or De Blasio -- in a heartbeat. But I also know I am in the minority in that Weltanschauung.
We must be realistic above all about what the priority is today: the Constitution, defeating Putin on US soil. Getting our country back.
I am impressed, very impressed by Senator Sanders. I was also & remain impressed by Mike Bloomberg. He has vision, courage, understanding & a genius for organization-building that frankly we really need after the rampage of the overgrown orange ostrich who, Godzilla-like, has ravaged our institutions.
I support Joe Biden & will gladly help him win.
I feel Sen Warren, many of whose ideas I share, was glib & condescending ergo unpersuasive.
If any Times (and Blow) readers out there are like me, a lifelong liberal Democrat, they wake up these days depressed and despairing, barely hanging on to hope. That's the deep PSYCHIC damage the current president has wrought. And because the metaphor is irresistible: the so-called Ship of State has been broken into shards and fragments, the lifeboats (were there ever any?) are gone, and those of us who believed in its solidity and sanctity are now just thrashing about in the waves hoping for a segment of mast or spar to drift by. So-called Super Tuesday "went" to Biden largely because those who threw their support his way are looking not for anything revolutionary (Sanders) or plan-based (Warren) or practical (Bloomberg), but for something approximating -- let's keep it nautical for a moment -- a calming of the storm. Despair and depression are draining. I for one can't take -- heck, can't survive -- another four years of Trumpist inanity, insanity, and evil. I can't. And so Biden represents for me -- and I presume for many others -- a return to something like decency, something like prudence, something like hope. G__ help us all.
2
I agree. I am anti Bernie for many reasons, but your post touches on two of them. I am sick of an old and angry man barking at we the people, being rude to those who disagree with him. To me, demeanor counts. I am sick of seeing deranged Trump cult members cheering ignorantly for him at rallies and spouting off their defenses of him with a passion that has no place in government. With Bernie, we'd still have that framework and I cannot hear it; nor can our country.
1
Time is speeding up: climate chaos, financial transactions, news cycles, information, reputations, demographics are all changing faster and faster. Slow steady change may be the only kind of change Joe Biden can fathom, but that is not the same thing as having a realistic view of what's necessary. The realists understand the world as it is and want a politics that is suited to the times. The dreamers are the people who believe that the way we've done things for the last century is the way to keep doing things even as the world around them is changing in ways they can't comprehend.
3
I don’t disagree with Mr. Blow’s analysis of the situation, but as a 73-year-old woman who has voted for, contributed to, and worked for primarily white, male, Democratic candidates throughout my life, I must say I am thoroughly disappointed - no, appalled - at the choice Democrats are apparently left with.
Extreme-right Republicans have run amok for decades and threaten just about everything I and most of the people I know hold dear about this country. We have Godzilla in the White House breaking everything he touches, endangering lives, futures, freedoms, and any remnants of the principles I have always thought of as America’s bedrocks. And what are Democrats doing? Once again snarling at each other in the old battle against “moving too fast” or trusting anyone who is not white, male, and past his prime. I think they scared themselves to death (or allowed the Republicans to) by electing Barack Obama, who, while a very refreshing change, seemed also to always be touching the brakes rather than wholeheartedly pushing for things that needed to happen but that were just seemed a tad out of reach.
I will wake up and vote on Election Day in November, but if my choice of Democratic candidate is either Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders, I won’t do it joyfully. If pushed to make a choice between the two, I’d choose Sanders, but not with any enthusiasm. I hope with all that’s in me that someday I can pull the lever for a visionary, courageous woman. If she’s not white, all the better.
1
It would seem that the bigger problem is that most, if not all, Republican incumbents need to lose their offices. The thing is, it doesn't look to me like Democrats are doing anything effective towards achieving that, not even the removal of the Republican in the White House.
2
I don’t know anyone who thinks they are choosing incremental progress over revolution. We are choosing progress over impotent rhetoric.
4
The primaries (as assessed by the candidates' debates) were a stunning success, as far as they went. They showcased a number of impressive candidates with promising ideas/policies.
They also suggested that there might be a market for TV discussion, not by commentators, but prospective candidates. Possibly, if the primary campaign continued for a decade, a consensus might develop for some policy(ies).
What the primary did NOT do, is refine and analyse the proposed policies.
So there is a vast structural problem: relatively sincere proposals do not get analysed and refined in a debate scenario, at least not if the debate is about presentations to voters, who are to select candidates.
One obvious solution might involve including teams of academics and businesspeople, which could tag proposals with price tags, etc. Perhaps the various candidates might form teams, which would then continue debating.
The process was useful and fascinating, but failed to distill the various proposals into more refined initiatives within coherent, feasible policy suite.
The best debate series did not, in itself, solve the problem.
"Even if Congress weren’t a hurdle, there is still the worry that the government is too incompetent and inefficient to undertake multiple structural changes at once. I, too, worry about how much the government would get wrong before it got it right in this regard."
Even if nothing was done, right now, the government is getting it wrong.
@Robbie J.: Every mixed economy has to allocate functions between public and private sectors. Public functions typically encompass projects and services that pay off in terms of quality of life rather than money profit, whereas entrepreneurial businesses are typically money profit oriented and operate in the private sector.
The US is very confused by the Congressional abrogation by Congress of its fiscal responsibility to manage the public sector to the Federal Reserve Bank, which it expects make up the difference with monetary policy.
"Pragmatism becomes a self-imposed constraint on progressiveism." What kind of nonsense is that? Pragmatism isn't a self-imposed constraint; it's a reality-imposed constraint. Unless you are content being a powerless dreamer in Trumpocracy.
1
It does seem as if this country is still right-wing overall, given that so many in the American version of a progressive party, the Democrats, are supporting a right-winger like Biden. Mr. Blow seems to be saying that the majority of Americans want to stay in their caves and wait for their brow ridges to recede.
8
@Jackson He’s anti-choice on abortion and against universal health care/coverage, for starters.
Moderate Democrat. Moderate Republican. What's the difference between them? Nothing.
6
Hate to break it to Charles, but Trump got more primary votes in these states then all of these Dems combined.
Trump is running unopposed.
Prepare for Trump II....the redux.
4
Mr. Blow is correct on many things here. Warren definitely suffered from sexism. Voters are not comfortable with a female for president and especially an intellectual female. Second, Obama was not a particularly leftist president despite the insane incoherent rumblings on right-wing media outlets. His moderation and common-sense appeals to many voters and Biden represents that path as well.
1
"Restoration and Reform, or Revolution?"
How about sanity, Charles? How about getting back to the fundamentals of how our government was designed to be run instead of how it is being run? Do you know of any presidential candidate who's willing to give up power not authorized in the Constitution?
"Put another way, Biden or Sanders?
Sanders loves socialism, not matter how much he says he's merely a "democratic socialist". Biden's mental acumen has clearly seen better days. Both will continue to increase federal power with new programs. That may be OK with you now, Charles, but at some point the taxes will be at a point where even you say "enough!"
It's hard for me to believe that the vast majority are happy with the status quo from 4 years ago. Rampant economical inequality, insane health care costs, a rapidly deteriorating natural environment, worsening pollution, legislation by the elite corporatists, lousy wages, and disappearing opportunity for the middle and lower classes to find decent paying steady jobs. The Democratic Party is once again showing what timid little sheeple they are, being ruled by a minority of White Male bullies, who have zero integrity or interest in the Common Good. Well, you'll get the government you deserve, more of being pushed down, told to keep waiting for that mythical pay-off that's juuuuuust around the corner. And things will just get worse, although at a slower speed than under Trump.
2
I get tired of the reason that Warren did not do well is because she is a woman.
I did not approve of Warren and yet I voted for, financially supported and really felt Amy, a woman would make a great president. So I guess I am not sexist.
And now I will vote for Biden.
Slow and steady progress - downward.
5
As the saying goes “it’s the economy stupid”, or put another way, voters are concerned about “bread and bitter issues.” In ordinary times those familiar platitudes reflect essential truths.
This election is not occurring in ordinary times, the election is not about ordinary issues.
Trumpism is as unique an affliction on our body politic as coronavirus is on our physical bodies. Trump and his assault on truth, objective fact, decorum, the norms of governance, the replacement of government bureaucracy with an autocratic kleptocracy run by lackeys, yes men, family members and lobbyists, is a existential threat to our Democracy. Ignorance, greed and conspiracy theories rule.
This election is about nothing less than saving our Constitutional order. An economic revolution will have to be put on hold.
Put the economic revolution on hold. Put the climate crisis on hold. Put the disenfranchised working class on hold. "Nothing will fundamentally change", Joe tells his money men. Republicans and Democrats are basically the same, but Trump Tweets. The horror.
1
Regarding Tulsi Gabbard, you are way off on that one. What do you mean by "suspect candidacy." You must be a believer in myths. She is a very smart Major in the armed forces and speak regularly on national issues -- and speaks wisely. She needs to be a a high place in our federal government.
You make a false, dangerous and sad statement regarding her.
3
It is not the "government", it is the republicans.
2
This is a good assessment of the ideas percolating. But it doesn't explain why the embodiment of these ideas is two old white men. We couldn't even find younger white men?
“It’s 2016 all over again” and the result will be the same. And the division between the haves and have-nots will get even greater.
Just consider that someone just spent $ 500,000 of his own money on a vainglorious political campaign - because he could. And if he wanted, he could have stayed in and still not feel the pinch in his wallet. But he realizes there are other ways to throw away his money. And he will, in support of a candidate someone once noted “has never taken a stand to do the right thing” - and still he will not feel a pinch.
Heck, he’ll just borrow some of that money the Fed is giving away to the “haves” and win back his loses in the current volatile stock market.
And that is the basis of Bernie Sanders campaign. It’s not so much a “revolution” as “revulsion.”
The mainstream Democratic Party hollers that Trump is tearing the country apart. It’s complaints are muted, however, when it offers “small changes” to fix what it claims are HUGE problems.
“Small changes” gave us a racist “crime bill,” an anti-labor, anti-environmental global economy, support for a “war of choice” that upended a region of the world which is reeling 17 years later, and a bailout of the financial markets. “Small changes” also solidified a conservative Supreme Court which is about to overturn the last remnants of Obama’s signature achievement and will ultimately crack the Roe v Wade nut.
History has already rendered its verdict. The mainstream just hasn’t paid attention.
3
Mr. Blow, I believe that you are triangulating in order not to offend the numerous Bernie supporters who comment on these op-eds. You know darn well that Bernie (and Warren, for that matter) are both fundamentally dishonest about what they can get through Congress. Especially Sanders. What an appropriate name for such an abrasive person. The end of the election can't come soon enough for me. I expect to see a President Joe Biden, a former president and real estate tycoon spending the rest of his life in the courts, and a certain stubborn old man spending the rest of his life railing about class inequality to the four walls.
1
My conclusion: the United States is a country facing huge problems with no will or ability to solve them.
6
I read with interest another opinion piece assessing why the Democrat party isn't AOC's party, written by Jennifer Steinhauer. Her arguments dovetail with what Mr. Blow is talking about here.
Here were some striking observations:
“Ocasio-Cortez, the young Latina who proudly identifies as a democratic socialist, hadn’t been all but vaulted into Congress by the party’s diversity, or a blue-collar base looking to even the playing field. She won because she had galvanized the college-educated gentrifiers who are displacing those people.”
The piece continues.
"In short, deeply blue areas, especially with young and affluent voters, may be seeking political representation far to the left of the Democrats who were once easily re-elected. But as scores of Democrats saw in 2018, and still more saw on Super Tuesday, much of the rest of the country’s Democrats, especially older African-American voters who are a major component of the base, prefer more centrist candidates. This is the dichotomy that hangs over the party today."
The first observation was so ironic. Claiming to support policies that help people of color (Democratic Socialism) at the same time they are participants in a system that disempowers people of color (gentrification), yet they vote against what those people actually believe they need. Why is that? Paternalism? A guilty conscience?
1
My wife and I voted as our children voted. As boomers involved the 60-70s in N. Y. we understand and support the urgent and existential challenges AND massive opportunities we face right now. America is in the hands of a ship of very corrupt fools. And most of us know it.
I think so many re so burned out by the chaos, lies, madness inherent in this crowd and their fearful "leader" that we just want to stop the destruction these people are causing.
Stop the bleeding, calm down take a few deep breaths and then unite and take urgent action together as a nation and the only nation on earth capable of uniting the world and tackling the climate emergency, health care, and envisioning and building the future together.
The current nutcase in our Oval Office hasn't a clue.
On healthcare, student debt, taxation and climate change, Blow says: “The only question is one of pacing: Does one demand immediacy, or is one satisfied with gradualism?”
I think Blow misses the point here and generally. It’s not about “pacing” but about extent and degree; it’s about, at root, the type of capitalism that can function rationally and humanely in the 21st century— and about the role that capital (bill “sponsorship”, lobbying, money transparent and dark) should play in healthily democratic societies.
And ultimately, predictably, here we have it from Blow:
“...there is still the worry that the government is too incompetent and inefficient to undertake multiple structural changes at once.”
Ah yes, when it comes (most notably) to ecological responsibility, health care and the wealth-distributing mechanisms of capitalism (labour laws, taxation, financial regulation...), the captains of unfettered markets are somehow more competent, more efficient at designing legislation serving the common good, than would be representatives of the people.
2
The problem is that Biden is not mentally fit to be president.
He is showing signs of decline and maybe even early dementia and that even before he is elected. We had Reagan with worse issues, but then he was already in office. I’m surprised the DNC is not taking that into consideration. Of course Trump has mental problems too but they are more a case for psycho analysis.
1
@Alexander
Bernie friends, Trump is trying to sow division, screaming “rigged” at every turn. Don’t buy it. Please don't buy Trump's propaganda. We’re having a contest of real voters. Nothing wrong with that. No superdelegate nonsense. Like Bernie says, let's give the nom to whoever gets the most votes. Above all, from Bernie to Biden voters: what unites us is much more than what divides. I don’t just mean despising Trump. Bernie and Biden both want to (1) get more healthcare to more people. We might disagree on how but we can’t deny Biden means it; he helped Obama get healthcare to >15 million folks who didn’t have it, most folks with lower income or pre-existing conditions; (2) reduce gun deaths, via background checks, waiting periods, renewing assault weapons ban, maybe even repealing gun maker immunity from liability, etc. (3) reverse trump tax cuts for rich, raise capital gains taxes so middle class incomes are not taxed higher than rich folks investments, raise effective corporate taxes via closing loopholes (no more Amazon 0%!), and more. (4) fight climate change. (5) restore honesty decency good governance & respect for science to the EPA CDC etc (Obama and Biden created an epidemics “czar” on NSC which Trump eliminated). (6) humane treatment of immigrants. (7) protect voting rights (~700 polling stations closed in TX since ~2013), and much more. I know there are important disagreements, but there are big agreements too. Let's defeat Trump together.
3
Then why did Biden tell his wealthy donors not to worry because in his words "Nothing Will Change?"
4
"Immune to the blandishments of religions, countries, families, and everything else that puts both average and above-average citizens in the limelight, pessimists are sideliners in both history and the media. Without belief in gods or ghosts, unmotivated by a comprehensive delusion, they could never plant a bomb, plan a revolution, or shed blood for a cause."
T. Ligotti
3
Bernie is not white, he's Jewish. he comes from an era where Jews were most definitely not white. that is the main reason why he has a candidacy based on social justice, which returns to the prophetic progressive Judaism that predominated in the New York area when he came of age. it is precisely why white people and black people ultimately were confused about him and perhaps trusted a traditional white man instead of a progressive Jew with a prophetic vision of social justice one who was marching with Martin Luther King while Joe Biden was making friends what Strom Thurmond. I have a sinking feeling those African Americans who put their faith in Biden are going to be sorely disappointed whether he wins or not but especially if he doesn't. in the meantime please don't demean him by calling him White.
6
@mark what didn’t help either us John Lewis saying he didn’t know anything about Bernie’s protest in Chicago during the civil rights movement. He feigned ignorance..
1
Since, for the most part, politics is ALL about interest of varying degree(s), as an ADOS, I would ask each of the two Democrat contenders which:
1. What is your agenda for ADOS and their increasing efforts in seeking redress for slavery and 100 years of Jim Crowism interest?
2. Are you for "open" borders?
3. Do you agree the current immigration asylum system is completely broken?
4. Do you promise to ensure E- verify will be fully operationally and mandatory within 6 months of your taking office?
Warren is disliked because she is a dishonest, disloyal, opportunist. Tulsi, who's campaign is not at all "suspect" is disliked and shunned by the establishment because she is honest and speaks against imperialistic international intervention and "forever wars". Like Bernie only even more real. Her not-to-be-forgiven crime against the Party was resigning from her post as vice-chair of the Democratic National Committee to support Sanders in 2016. I rarely agree with Blow but on this point he is being especially ignorant or dishonest.
1
Well, Elizabeth Warren just dropped out. Mail-in balloting in Florida is over -- so there are likely to be many votes for Warren already cast. I have also not heard her endorse Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden. News at 11.
I'm NOT voting for a moderate. If Biden wins the nomination, I'm writing in Bernie. If you want progressives like me to come along, don't vote for Biden. Vote for Bernie. Don't take my vote for granted.
4
Charles Blow says Elizabeth Warren partly failed because of sexism. He gives no evidence to support that claim. Let’s not forget that Hillary Clinton garnered three million more votes than Trump in 2016. I don’t think sexism played a significant role in Warren’s drastic drop from leader to also ran. I know it was not the reason I gave up on her. My heart sank when she said, repeatedly, during the early debates, “I’m with Bernie.” That was a crucial mistake. Bernie acts as if America were 1917 Russia, in need of a “revolution” to make life better for more of its citizens. It isn’t and it doesn’t. Biden’s policies for incremental improvement are in the American tradition and more suitable for America: increase the minimum wage, increase Social Security benefits for the neediest, provide better health benefits and strengthen union rights. While clearly in favor of American-style democracy and capitalism, Biden recognizes that an important part of both is a strong welfare state. Warren may have had some better ideas about how to fix America’s problems. But we never found out what they were after her voice was drowned out by Bernie Sanders’ rants.
The problem with gradualism is that it's gradual. Coronavirus isn't gradual. Climate change is no longer gradual. The mortgage payment isn't gradual. Childcare isn't gradual. The light bill isn't gradual. College tuition isn't gradual.
Incrementalism is all well and good if a family has everything handled. But if they are having difficulty coping now, change years or decades down the road doesn't help. It can even shorten their lives. Of course these problems can't be solved immediately and the president can only do what he can do in cooperation with Congress. But without a Commander-in-Chief willing to entertain big policy changes, these ideas won't be considered at all.
2
As a Michigan resident, I am infuriated that Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, Pennsylvania, and the like vote so much later in the season.
In these states, we have 1) Diverse and large populations more representative of the entire country, 2) A good mix of dense-city dwellers, rural families, union workers, as well as a large class of 'educated elites', and 3) Have strong Republican AND Democratic bases.
This means that we are states that are constantly faced with having to vote for candidates that have to work across the aisle with people of other parties if they ever want to get anything done and stay in office.
By the time we get to vote, both the Democratic and Republican fields have often winnowed down candidates on one extreme or the other.
I truly believe that our states, if we had the chance, would've been more likely to vote for a Moderate like Amy Klobuchar who's much younger than Biden and has a strong track record of being an effective Senator, or a more Progressive candidate like Warren who had plans for structural change but also a strong desire to with Republicans to get bills passed and reduce polarization.
And long as the Primary process continues to vote state by state, we'll never get a true voice at electing the most effective (and less polarizing) candidates.
Both parties need to adopt Same Day, Ranked Choice voting with in person AND absentee/mail in voting. There's no other way I can see forward to make sure all voices are represented.
1
Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders may have flaws, but they are nothing -- NOTHING -- like the flaws owned by Hillary Clinton. I held my nose to vote for Clinton. I can breathe the fresh air for either Biden or Sanders. And that may be the biggest difference between the 2016 and 2020 elections. At least in my opinion....
5
The following really resonates with me:
"Even if Congress weren’t a hurdle, there is still the worry that the government is too incompetent and inefficient to undertake multiple structural changes at once. I, too, worry about how much the government would get wrong before it got it right in this regard"
I don't think the problem is one of competency or efficiency, I think the problem is patience. Revolutionary change is rarely simple, quick, or painless. How tolerant will Americans be of a revolutionary change when the implementation process results in unintended consequences? If the policy is one that enjoys nearly unanimous support, I'm sure that we would overcome the resistance, but when the policy itself is controversial (like universal healthcare) opponents will exploit the smallest incidental problem to justify and bolster their opposition to the policy itself.
While I would love to see Bernie's revolution come to fruition, I think it's a pipe dream. The kind of change that Bernie wants to bring (if it's even possible) will probably take a generation to achieve.
Biden will lose to Trump. People are pulling out a list of lies he has made. One was: "I graduated in the top of my college class and got several more degrees after the first one." All lies of course. Trump is gathering those lies now; and Trump will make mince meat of him without hardy trying. Joe now can barely finish a sentence without being able to cognitively put it together and finish it. He is slow and often incoherent and rambling. He cannot beat Trump. I have been a democrat all my life but will not vote for Biden. I held my nose and voted for Hillary in 2016 but I'm finished doing that.
4
How about a Vision, rather than a Plan-for-Everything? Slow down a bit - more about your your personal life (which is actually pretty inspiring), though perhaps the debate-of-the-week format wasn't the best for her despite the zingers. Don't get so shrill (Mike could be too).
But actually we need you for the incredibly dedicated, imaginative, and persistent Senator you are.
1
It sickening that we are even having this conversation. Since Reagan ,we the people,have taken about twenty-four steps back, and ,maybe, four or five steps forward. The supreme court has leaned neo-conservative for almost fifty years. The upper echelon and corporate tax rates have been slashed by thirty ,maybe forty percent. Wages have flatlined. Civil and voting rights are being chiseled away,and many Democrats act like republicans when it concerns public policy. We the people have a serious character defect.
2
History will judge us vapid in the face of inflammatory rhetoric and the slow nihilistic push tumbling backward into the old world order. We weren't even dreamers...we were nightmarers, the untoward revelations of those would rather not be part of the status quo.
3
Spot on. We no longer have dreams, only nightmares.
People are tired, Mr. Blow, in every conceivable sense. Our nation has been under a relentless, 24/7 psychological assault for the past three-and-a-half years, and a great number of people are just sick of it, weary with the constant dumpster fire of endless scandals, corruption, vileness and chaos that make up this “administration,” and simply want some peace, some competence, and a government that is actually functional.
That is why Mr. Biden is surging. He may not bring a revolution, but he will bring at least a bit of sanity and order to an exhausted nation that badly needs it.
3
Oh! Thank you so much for your recognition of the erasure of Elizabeth Warren. I have followed your columns avidly and written often in support of the issues you highlight.
Today it feels as though the energy and support are flowing in the other direction. It is a balm to see you validate the outrage that many of us American women feel about the sexism that blanketed coverage of Warren.
Detailed exit poll results show a so-called “gender gap” in her votes, with a big disparity between male and female voters.
Poppycock. Gender gap? This is how we normalize bias, as if it’s mere tomayto - tomahto.
Having to ‘vote Blue no matter who’ brings an all-too-familiar wince now. It’s a commonplace of the female experience to go high despite your own erasure.
Of course I and other female Warren, Harris and Klobuchar supporters will do the right thing in November. It would be awfully nice if the electorate had felt the same way about their candidacies during primary season.
Ohio's not a swing state anymore. Don't bother lumping it in. Keep that attention on MI, PA, WI, AZ, FL, NV and VA. Maybe go for NC and GA. But move on from Ohio. Here everyone traded in their union membership for conservative megachurch membership.
1
Please, Senator Sanders, stop. As the saying goes, you may be right—dead right. We are the cast of millions in this never-ending horror film, and we need the film to end. This is the part of the movie in which an “ordinary” but decent Joe is down, bleeding out. The bloated monster is about to finish him off. (SFX: MUSIC) Cut to: hapless, helpless Joe. Through a blur, he looks up and sees a figure approach. CAMERA ON: You, Bernie. You can take the bullet for the sake of us all. Please, Bernie. Put Joe on your shoulders and stop the madness. Be a saint instead of a spoiler.
2
I want to argue that transformation has to be placed between reform and revolution. Depending on the latter’s insistence of immediacy, transformation can be either an extremist revolution or a gradual transformation in this categorization.
We need transformation because the world is socially, ecologically and economically in chaos. We need progressive transformation, leaving behind extremes on either side of the sustainability philosophy spectrum.
In my opinion which is not yet widely shared, we have to transform the most basic global system, i.e. the unjust, unsustainable, and therefore, unstable international monetary system as a way to combat the looming climate catastrophe and also the Covid-19 emerging pandemic. This monetary transformation also includes financial transformation that would shift from a debt-based to a credit-based global system and would take back the money creation privilege of privately-owned banking systems. The commercial, intellectual, ecological, ethical and strategic dimensions of these two transformational proposals are seminally presented in Verhagen 2012"The Tierra Solution: Resolving the Climate Crisis through Monetary Transformation" (www.timun.net). Comments an outstanding global citizen: “The further into the global warming area we go, the more physics and politics narrows our possible paths of action. Here’s a very cogent and well-argued account of one of the remaining possibilities.” Bill McKibben, May 17, 2011.
Incrementalism has been progressives' favorite drug for 120 years. They start stockpiling it whenever any type of apparent radical seems to have electoral possibilities.
3
‘Will “Vote Blue No Matter Who” have currency if ... Sanders’s supporters again believe that the “establishment” has conspired against him to unfairly thwart him?’
A good question. A better one would be what are pundits like Blow doing to dismantle this completely false fevered conspiracy thinking? Progressive leaning columnists and talking heads have been very willing to indulge and even nurture such fantasy in the hearts of Sanders most passionate supporters. They are aiding and abetting Trumpist Nationalism and betraying the standards of their profession by delegitmizing democracy and subverting the credibility of facts.
Tell people the hard truth: There is no “establishment conspiracy,” just a lot of people who don’t agree with Bernie and/or prefer Biden.
2
Sanders or Biden...not so fast. Unless Democrats hold the House and gain control of the senate, a new president will be great only in that we won’t hear Trump, Trump, Trump 24-7.
The moderates desperately want upheaval too.
They fervently desire the removal of that sociopath, fraud Trump and his congressional sycophants.
After that, which Bernie probably can't deliver, there will be an attempt to improve society in terms of climate change, affordable housing, responsible gun control, more equitable tax structure, higher wages, gender equity, health care, comprehensive immigration reform, and prescription pricing.
"Democratic voters have decided that what an old white man — Donald Trump — broke, only an old white man — Sanders or Biden — can fix."
Not really, Charles. Voters, led by non-activist, non-pundit African Americans, have simply said that they want to fix things sooner rather than later.
Also, the coastal elite snobbery that drives the lecturing about how Warren was really the best candidate after all and the snide shots at Gabbard are of the same cloth that got Trump elected in the first place. You might as well say "basket of deplorables" and get it over with.
The truth is that Warren's "plans" were flimsy; they included large scale economic gambles and she was initially inflexible with them, until polling demonstrated their unpopularity, at which time she did a 180. The wine and cheese crowd loved Warren, but working class people never trusted her.
Maybe we should trust in the wisdom of African American voters.
2
I wonder why Trump is supporting Sanders. Trump tried to bribe a foreign country to interfere in our elections by withholding allocated aid to get dirt on Biden'
Trump is concerned that Warren's continued presence in the race is hurting Sanders, and Trump wants her out. Heck , he's even concerned about how the DNC is treating Sanders ( with false and misleading statements, of course.)
Trump is a Bernie Bro -- for now.
1
Trump's currently working to take us back to the 50's. Looks like the Democrats are taking us back to 2016. Sigh.
2
If only "gradualism" were an option! What the Clintons & Obamas & Bidens have given us is not gradual progress, but gradual retreat. Do you remember that Biden, in one of the early debates, actually bragged that he had negotiated making the Bush tax cuts permanent? The GOP plays Biden & the Democrat moderates like violins.
Life in America is mean, nasty and brutish and that’s the way we like it. Americans don’t want change no matter what they say; it’s the attitude, ‘I suffered through it and so should you’. We want a better life for our kids, but not for theirs. What many Americans want is the America of an old Western, where everyone was white and those who were not were savages, an America where the tall sheriff would protect everyone while the other townsfolk sheltered in place. They want the America where good people went to the Christian(non-Catholic) church and the bad people wore black and hung out in the saloon. When someone like Bernie shows up, he is attractive to some, especially to the disadvantaged and the young who too often don’t vote. Most actual voters like the idea of change, as long as it means changing to a more certain future imbedded in the imagined past.
2
Your point about government incompetence and inefficiency is well taken. A lot of that incompetence is because the current administration has hounded many dedicated, capable civil servants (not to mention Cabinet members, etc.) out of their jobs. Those desks are now staffed - if at all - by hacks who have no idea what they are doing, nor any interest in finding out.
Any new Democratic administration will face a simple, boring, crucial task: rebuild the civil service. Until that's done, many worthy initiatives go nowhere (direct DoJ to enforce voting rights and pursue white supremacist terrorism and white collar crime; have IRS chase down wealthy deadbeats; un-DeVos education; undo the damage to Obamacare; reinstall sensible environmental oversight; this list could go on at distressing length).
The federal government can and should be made more responsive and efficient, maybe even smaller. But first it needs the Humpty Dumpty treatment. That task does not call for a revolution. And a revolution without doing that first risks creating a brand new goshawful mess.
1
Its time for Warren to throw in the towel. She is a registered Democrat and should endorse Biden. That will open the door for the Obama's - both of them to endorse Biden. They already endorsed Biden for VP and once Warren capitulates, Biden will be the only remaining Democrat. Job done.
Once that's established, the stage opens up for people like the Clintons and Jimmy Carter to endorse Biden.
Biden then needs to build and announce a superb cabinet team in waiting, and spend as much Bloomberg money as possible comparing the Trump cabal to the Biden dream team. Trump will go crazy on Twitter and Fox, but the weight of pro Biden anti Trump support will secure the white house and the senate. Trump will look like a chump. Its rope a dope time.
The Obama's will energize the black and brown vote that are essential to flip House and Senate seats. Bloomberg will bring on business leaders, Clinton still has good support.
Build a great TEAM BIDEN USA and Trump will be history. We need the next 6 months uniting great people to lead a great America.
Bernie has refused to be a Democrat - I like his ideas, but America is not yet ready. Democrats need to win a marathon - not a dash.
it is not about sexism or racism - it is about beating Trump. Arguing the merits of women candidates and Bernie and white haired men is a waste of valuable time. Trump and his supporters love to watch the mud slinging. I would rather watch Trump and Sessions eat each other alive.
1
Laughably, Biden was nearly at the bottom of my choices but ahead of Sanders. Sanders has been a spoiler for Hillary and now my 1st choice Warren, so I’m stuck with (can’t we all just get along) Joe.
Ok....I’m an adult and I’ll take whomever I’m given and I’ll vote for them.
Here’s my advice to everyone with any influence over their youngsters of able bodied voting age; set a date for voting, pick them up and drive them to the polls under the pretense of threat of loss of relationship and or services that we as parents and yes you guessed it, “influencers “ do have, and kindly inform them that the revolution will have to wait.
I don’t disagree with Sanders and believe he can win the presidency but he will lose congress decisively!!
You move legislation from the ground up not the top down. Trump is a symptom of a disgusting right wing strategy that plays just fine for the grievance politics that have been playing out since Nixon. While we’re staring at the shiny object (Trump) legislation is being passed that is destroying our country. VOTE!!
I will vote for Biden if he gets endorsed by Anita Hill and all the survivors to those killed in the Iraq war, Americans as well as all the collateral victims.
Or perhaps vote for Trump if he get the endorsement of all parents who have lost their children in the family separation process and those who have accused him of sexual misconduct.
The Democrat party is no better than the Republican party and their candidates are pretty well matched. But, you must consider that one of the two misogynist candidates opposed the Iraq war and the other one promoted it more than the republicans.
Voting is meaningless any longer.
1
Mr. Blow. I am facing an outdated cataract operation because my insurance only pays for knife surgery, not the laser surgery my physician prefers.
I'll be a few months short of seventy when I retire, because of money, and I have not been radical in my ways, worked all my life, even through the time I was in a doctoral program while raising my son, and having some miscarriages.
That son graduated from USC, which cost some money—which you must understand, as you have a son who went to Yale—and he worked hard to get himself into an MPP program at GW, and was accepted, but turned it down because—100 grand in debt came with it. Yes. We are a country which prices knowledge out of the hands of its citizens. And—my salary puts me in the top 10% of earners.
I like to talk policy rather than biography—I've been turned off by recent political speeches all about wives and sons. I think the days of such schmaltz are numbered. So I'll just add that when three people in this country have as much wealth as half of our citizens, and a man as intelligent and schooled as yourself cannot see a crucial need for change there—well. I realize I do not fear beating Trump, I do not fear one remark about the good policies of a teapot despot more than I fear a person who voted to kill hundreds of thousands and spend two trillion on a phony war.
I do not fear any of this more than I fear those who simply want to continue in a broken system. I have to wonder why you cannot see.
#feelthebern
2
I almost always agree with Mr. Blow but not on this one. I'm a Sanders supporter and will vote blue no matter who. Also, to me, "incrementalism" is tantamount to defeatism in the current political climate. It's gotten practically no-where, even with the ACA as a "compromise" that's fragile enough still to get undermined by Republicans after they couldn't "repeal and replace." The Republicans are utterly ruthless to get their things done or continue to stop good things. Anyone ignoring their lack of fair play now is amazing to me. Fair play was and is absolutely necessary for the "politics of the possible" and "incrementalism" because of its involvement in honest compromise. Trump and his Republican ilk define compromise as keeping to their position over and over until the other side gives in. What kind of "restoration" can obtained if it still refers to a big nothing? Democrats don't have to copy Republicans entirely, but someone once commented that civil doesn't have to mean servile. The "revolution" provides at the very least an emphasis on determination to make things better, not just to go back. Going back to some perception of what was better is what Trump says--his lie about making American better "again." Nope--that approach would indeed be copied by the Democrats. Dare I note that MLK was always for non-violent resistance but relentlessly. To me, the Obama approach to which Biden links himself is exactly the moderation that MLK criticized.
2
The problem with gradualism is it can be interrupted by a president like Trump. The ACA is an example. This was maybe going to morph into M4A but along came Trump to tear much, if not all, of it down.
1
Revolutionary change appeals to the imagination but the disruption of community life that results brings great loss and suffering as regular and stable life turns to anarchy and then a tyranny to restore order. Gradual change offers sustainable fundamental changes.
Sanders ignores this issue by attributing all the obstacles to the improvements he proposes not to the risks of disruption from revolutionary change but to reactionary, powerful elites which rule without any accountability to the citizens of this country. He still thinks like a young person who has nothing to lose by eliminating what exists.
The American Revolution did not achieve it’s ideals except one. The idea that all are created equal was accepted as true and that all should have equal say in governance. That was a big change that eventually made all the difference.
Since FDR democrats have been cowards. Cowards in the face of lies from Republicans. Every Democratic proposal from FDR forward was intended to expand the middle class, lift up the downtrodden, and ensure health of the less fortunate. Meanwhile Republicans have called all of it socialism, lied about the value of taxes, and supported a plutocracy intended to do the exact opposite of anything resembling help for those not born to great wealth.
Clinton passed welfare reform and the crime bill to appease the right wing. Both have been abject failures that have served to only harm marginalized communities.
Obama refused to prosecute war criminals which led to the longest unnecessary wars in history and our abdication under Trump of the entirety of the ME.
Biden appears poised to repeat all of those mistakes and more.
1
Tiny Blue Dot had a great point. The younger people want a revolution because they have never enjoyed the advantages moderate candidates offered Americans decades ago. They have not had their slice of the American dream, for the most part. They work hard, get paid proportionately less, have fewer benefits, and more debt. They are having fewer children because of finances. As for them not voting, that may be because they do not identify with the candidates or feel it doesn't help because when they do because policy changes, if any are small. So there are philosophical differences.
1
All you have to come to realize is the American people want nice slow, gradual change. They really want a single payer or Medicare for all health care system. They just don't want it shoved down their throats. They always want an out. And they really want to believe the American capitalist Horatio Alger model still works. Even though, deep down, they know it does not. They certainly don't want their noses rubbed into that reality. Donald Trump has shown them that there are two ways to get what you want. One is to put a gun to the peoples' heads and threaten them like Trump does. The other is to lure the people to your side with a cookie and then get them to want more. Like with Obamacare. So the reason Sanders is starting to sour is he is like Trump, in many ways. No matter how hard he tries or how many hand gestures he uses, or how loud he gets, or how unwavering he is, he will only attract 40% of the Democrats in America. And now the 60% are starting to consolidate around Biden. Sanders needs to realize he is very unlikely to be the nominee and if he is, he won't win. Because the Democrats haven't rigged the voting system in Democrats favor the way Republicans have.
1
If climate change is fast and furious how will slow and steady progress be remotely adequate.
5
“Vote Blue No Matter Who” should be rejected by everyone. Its not a binary choice between Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden. There is a third alternative: Donald Trump, who is deserving of reelection. Young voters are rejecting Bernie Sanders and his divisive and "you verses me" rhetoric. Its not a way of thinking for a productive and happy life. Joe Biden is just a creature of corrupt political swamp in D.C. that got endorsed by Jim Comey. No need to say anything further.
In California, Republican turn-out was high and the R's look well-positioned to retake 5-6 house seats with a slate of diverse candidates. People are fed-up with "do-nothing Democrats" that have no solutions, no vision, and no experience in solving problems.
1
Blow, pretty even-handed. I commend you for that. However, the NYT speaks more to and receives comments from the Upper West Side more than the country as a whole.
Remember Gore's analogy of the frog in the pot of boiling water? Many Democrats are sitting there, looking at the rising steam thinking its a sauna instead of a mortal threat.
We have only this decade to ameliorate the most catastrophic effects of the climate crisis. It will take us, even working as fast as time will permit, at least three years to authorize serious action and a year following to get out contracts to address it. By the time action starts to takes meaningful effect, we will be living on borrowed time. That makes "incremental" a death march.
Our ostensible choice is between the status quo and mobilization. Just kicking out Trump and his gang of thieves to return to inequality and precariousness for the many will do for the NYT group. The result will be a quicker end to life on this planet, but you can accrue lots of stuff on the way. "A short life but a merry one."
The other choice is to accept that several factors are convening that make continuation of the same old same old untenable. These factors include a rapidly moving climate crisis, a democracy in critical condition, and widespread misery for the middle and working class. How long do we have before real violent revolution takes hold? Don't think it cannot happen here.
Violent revolution can and will happen here if the poor and working class continue to be ignored. Anyone who reads history knows this. If you make people desperate and angry enough they will revolt.
It is unfathomable to me that so many people who support Bernie or Warren seem to think that because they support very progressive policies, their election would put them in place - as if by magic.
Young progressives' rhetoric almost always strongly implies this fallacy. This really is political "magical thinking" at its worst in my opinion. Instead of just being "woke", also actually wake up and look around. Much as we might like to think otherwise, Bernie's/Warren's big plans would never pass any congress that can reasonably be imagined within the next 8 years.
1
I'm fine with a female president. What bothers me about Warren is that her platform is such a moving target, it's hard to take seriously her pledges to "fight" for this and "fight" for that.
We don't have time for slow steady progress on climate change. That train left the station over 30 years ago.
2
@geofnb
It left about the time the so called "Green" Party helped install GWB in the White House.
It’s not 2016 all over again, it’s 2020. Way different, as we have an extreme right wing party in the white house.
1
Progressives intent on revolution rather than reform make me think of the wide receiver who sprints for the end zone....before he secures the football.
As the Warren campaign progressed, she abandoned her respected “I have a plan” approach and started desperate pandering. Stating that a nine year old trans student will have veto power over choosing a potential cabinet secretary was so unserious and took her pandering to a ridiculous level. It wasn’t sexism, it was a bad candidate.
Mr. Blow, when it comes to the climate crisis, "slow & steady progress" isn't going to get the job done. Only an all-hands-on-deck! response will slow the effects of global warming. Can the world unite in this emergency? Not if the richest country is taking a moderate approach to reducing carbon emissions & switching from fossil fuel energy to green energy. If Biden wins, will he bow before the oil, car, & utility companies, or will he step up & help save the planet for future generations?
Sanders would have tried, I believe. But if the Senate remained in Republican control, he wouldn't have had a chance to do anything except via executive order as President Obama did toward the end of his second term. The problem with executive orders is that they can be overturned by the next president, as we have seen.
So if Biden is president, I hope all you NYT columnists & the DNC & superdelegates are right that his coattails will keep the House & flip the Senate. Maybe a Democratic Congress will push Biden to take bolder moves than he would on his own. What does he have to lose by spurning the special interests for whom immediate profit is their only concern? How likely is it that he will run for a 2nd term?
I wish he would choose Warren as his VP candidate, but it will probably be Klobuchar (appeal to Midwest swing states); hopefully that doesn't backfire. The same sexism that may have undone Warren might be directed against a Biden/Klobuchar ticket.
Vote D; it's our only hope.
2
America has had 40+ years of incrementalism: steady movement to the extreme right by the Republican party and the steady abandonment of the middle and working classes by the Democratic party (i.e. NAFTA, China's admission to the WTO, erosion of social safety nets) to corporate-sponsorship. In 2016, the DNC tipped the scales in favor of an establishment candidate with a long history in DC and the baggage to show for it. Biden is crippled with the same baggage minus the ability to complete a thought to the end of a sentence. With Biden's voting record on Iraq, odious crime bills and his consiglieri role for the credit card companies, Trump will make mince meat of him. Unfortunately, black voters in Southern red states are duped by their leaders (Clyburn) into casting a ballot against their own best interests and instead are told to cast a vote for the democratic candidate they think would be most palatable to their fellow Southern white voters (Biden). It's 2016 all over again. The DNC would rather lose to Trump than to Sanders. One thing for sure, today's rally on the stock market in response to Biden's "wins" on Super Tuesday tells you that Wall Street knows that Biden, unlike Sanders, has got their back.
4
I take a tiny measure of comfort in reading a sadness in your column that matches my own, and likely we both wonder if at least there is any chance that Biden will choose as his running mate someone who is not an old white man and win.
1
While the press is selling this as revolution or restitution. It is neither. We either go forward and change there fore surviving or we go backward and while that may not mean death it may be pretty horrible. Both Men are stubborn, Joe tells us if you are serous about health care and climate change do not vote for me. Bernie says, it is Medicare for all or nothing. What I can tell you is the Affordable care act is not the answer. So Joe if you are not willing to go back to drawing board or if you going to have Max Baucus as your negotiator we do not stand a chance by we I mean America more specifically most of our kids. Bernie AOC is Right if you are not willing to bend and negotiate a little. Nothing will get passed. You have the people Nina Turner is perfect talented smart articulate. She could get this done the right way. Finally Joe if you do what the Clintons did or what I think Kobochar and Bloomberg would have done this thing is dead before you start. If you win you have to sit down with us because if you lock us out we will be gone forever. Both America and the Democratic Party will be changed forever in a terrible way.
Chuck from Ohio
1
I voted for Obama in two elections, but he never represented the change I believe the country needed then and needs even more now. What worries me about a Biden presidency is that he will move in the same overly cautious way that Obama did, putting inequality on a far back burner and acting weakly--and only in his second term--on climate. If Biden continues in this vein we could end up with a demogogue again who sounds the populist message in even crazier ways than Trump. Incrementalism is a failed policy. Biden must prove he can be bolder.
3
The tortoise and the hare - we'll see if slow and steady wins the race.
I don’t like Biden. In 2018, he showed up in Michigan to give a $200k speech for a Republican incumbent & co-author of the famous McCain thumbs down anti- ACA Bill, while the Dem candidate was within 4%. This was 3 weeks before the election. Biden said at the time that incumbent Rep. Upton was a long time friend & colleague. He is also a historically bad campaigner. But apparently we are so nostalgic for the good old days, here we are with Mr. Work-Across-the-Aisle and a man I consider as a lobbyist masquerading as a politician. I considered him the weakest of the Dem field. I would say God help us, but Pence is already working that line.
6
There are two important factors that Mr. Blow doesn't take note of here. First off, it isn't only the White House and Congress (or, more specifically, the U.S. Senate) that need to be remodeled; it's also the Supreme Court. With the retirement of Anthony Kennedy and the miscarriage of justice perpetrated against the honorable Merrick Garland, we presently have a SCOTUS dominated by the sort of people that even Torquemada would have regarded as excessively conservative. We desperately need to win the White House if for no other reason than to see to it that Ruth Bader Ginsburg is not succeeded by another self-serving "originalist." Then too, we simply cannot afford to spend too much time determining whether we favor a reformer or a revolutionary. This, after all, is no ordinary election: rather it's the one chance that we'll get to rid the nation of a "president" who has overturned the rule of law and stripped it of its fundamental decency and integrity. Some of his predecessors have managed to do almost as much through misjudgment or miscalculation but only Donald Trump has done this willfully and deliberately. If he's not gone after next January, whatever greatness this nation has thusfar retained will not survive until 2024. Yes, vote blue no matter who! That's not a choice; it's an obligation.
2
My preference is Warren but too often in the last month or so she's come across like the grumpy helicopter mother who wants you to eat all of your greens or youre going to have to sit at the dinner table all night until you do. The tone of some of the things she has said publicly has just made me wince. If Im a person who would like to see a president warren how are people who aren't supportive of warren reacting to her? Her polls and results seem to be saying, not well.
Its tragic that such a smart and accomplished woman is, like Hillary Clinton was, a terrible retail politician (although Clinton was also hampered by her history of compromises and her stale ideas).
It may be right to say that this is sexism, but its also the case that candidates like Warren have the responsibility of addressing that problem and finding a way around it.
Either you’re ok with 30 millions of Americans having no health insurance or you’re not. Biden and his supporters are perfectly happy with the healthcare status quo.
I hope everyone of them winds up, sooner or later, going through medical bankruptcy. I hope they post a GoFundMe to pay for surgery. And I hope to be there to tell them ‘no’. They will not get my money, because they are living (and dying) through the exact system they fought so long and hard to preserve.
2
“The only question is one of pacing: Does one demand immediacy, or is one satisfied with gradualism? This construct puts progressivism at odds with practicality.”
There’s another subtle difference. It’s one thing to say fix Obamacare, full stop. It’s quite another to profess a policy preference for a single payer MFA goal but espouse an incremental path to that goal.
I’m not sure which is a winner in these times, but Warren certainly seemed to move from MFA now to MFA down the road, and her candidacy tanked soon thereafter. Bernie hasn’t budged; it’s MFA now or bust, paid for by all those instant savings when everyone gets sick all at once.
Biden hasn’t articulated a long term health care objective. But increasingly “Biden” and “articulated” are becoming strangers to each other, so there’s that.
Health care is a big issue in 2020 and may determine the outcome in November. With Trump giving the insurance folks free rein to stiff the sick, Biden’s approach, “get us back where Barrack took us and tinker” might actually be a winner.
I wholeheartedly agree that sexism is a problem that many people are not even consciously aware of. I have heard the flimsiest of reasons (from other women too) on why they could never have casted a vote for Warren or Hillary. It’s nothing to do with issues, it just things such as “her voice” “she annoys me” “just something about her” and I don’t hear these same people say these sorts of things about the men who run. I find it sad that we haven’t gotten past this. Women are held to a different standard.
2
Sadly you may be right. Voters even my feminist friends seem willing to forgive Biden for Anita Hill, the cirme bill, the Iraq war and a myriad of other sins. And no one seems to be willing to discuss the failures of the Obama administration which Biden touts as his legacy, including keeping the US in Afghanistan, not closing Guantanamo, and a less than stellar record on immigration.
Agree completely, Mr. Blow. Without 60 Democratic Senators, Sanders couldn't get anything done. The Senate needs to be flipped first, then strengthened. It will be hard, and it will take a long time, perhaps longer than I will live. But eventually major change can happen. The rotten core of the GOP Senate is vulnerable now, in two years, and in four years. We need to eject as many of them as we can.
1
You do remember Colorado and California voted last Tuesday, no?
In 1984, Joe Biden called for cuts to social security.
In 1995, Joe Biden called for cuts to social security.
In 2018, Joe Biden called for cuts to social security.
That's not status quo...that's going dreadfully backwards.
7
"The only question... Does one demand immediacy, or is one satisfied with gradualism?" This is emphatically not the only question. Needs must when the Devil drives! The idea of revolution across America now, or in the foreseeable future, is ludicrous. I was a member of the Irish Labour Party decades ago. Our general secretary gave us the slogan: "The Seventies Will be Socialist." I liked that, but even I knew it was a pipe-dream---except that the gen sec didn't specify the century! Nevertheless, I think Ireland will turn socialist before America does.
Satisfied with gradualism? Is that even available? Metaphorically, God gave us a heart and a head. The human condition includes the challenge of harmonizing the two. To be all heart is to be a Mayfly, here today, gone tomorrow. To be all head is to be a snake in the grass. Let's look to our neighbors and not to our own stubborn vanity. Will we consign children in cages, or in sub-par schools and housing to the snake-in-the-grass who inhabits the White House? Will we sit in a burning house, and read manuals on home safety?
1
Sen. Sanders' ideas were revolutionary 30 years ago; today they are mainstream and necessary. Most young people I know are only offered part-time or contract positions that offer no benefits. There needs to be access to healthcare if this is the future of employment opportunities. Sanders' views on climate change need no further explanation.
For a number of reasons, VP Biden's nomination, in my opinion, will not only ensure four more years of Trump but will severely damage the Democratic party.
Labeling Ms. Gabbard's candidacy as "suspect" is poor journalism as the least and libel at worst. HRC never had any evidence, yet the NYT simply adopts disparaging comments about a woman, patriot, veteran.
1
The main problem is that most voters are sheep that follow the herd. The Democratic sheepherders have now told them to follow Biden and they hobble along. You need a wolf like Sanders to battle a wolf like Trump and his republican Wolfpack. In this era with it’s enormous challenges there’s no place for evolution, it desperately needs revolution.
1
How the Democratic “Establishment” fixed Super Tuesday results seems to be a bit of a reach. No voting irregularities (other than those baked into our decidedly white-privedeged primary process) or interference by the notorious DNC seemed to play a part in defeating Bernie. Instead it looks like many US CItizens, many of color voted against Sanders. His acolytes are so obedient to his campaign they can only argue that those who voted against him must be suspected of corruption, ignorance or corporate manipulation. Is it impossible for them to consider it wasn’t Bernie who lost ... it was Socailsim and Berrnie’s ridiculous efforts to “re-educate” the population on its merits. If committed progressives really want to have a sunstantive impact on our government, they have to dig in, develop deeper connections to all Americans and (heaven forbid) dump Bernie.
I do caution against a return to the normalcy of Obama. His economic policies largely continued three decades of economic conservative policy started by Reagan. These policies are largely what got us Trump. What if a return to "normalcy" gets us someone worse than Trump?
3
Mr. Blow, you say that you "don't see evidence that supports the theory that most Americans are clamoring for revolutionary change" and at the same time state that Warren's lack of popularity is due to sexism. I'm not saying there is potentially no sexism at all but from my view point, Warren is "Sanders Light". People who are looking for a revolution want to go all the way, as opposed to just going half the way. In the end, Warren's lane is relatively narrow.
Perhaps some sexism did come into play after the debate when Warren unnecessarily went after Sanders. That left a bit of a bad taste in my mouth and these sort of snapshots give me the impression that that is the "real" person and not the public persona that we usually see.
We can't afford a gradual approach to the climate crisis. We have 12 years to address the problem before it becomes irreversible. Biden's gradual approach sets a target of 2050 to become carbon-neutral. That's much too late.
Let's take a look at what gradualism will continue to give us: Gradualism will continue to allow a parasitic and cruel health insurance and pharmaceutical industry to kill thousands of Americans every year for profit. Gradualism will continue to ignore soaring wealth and income inequality while doing little or nothing to ameliorate it. Gradualism will allow college debt to continue to crush an entire generation. Gradualism will give us inadequate half-measures toward our crumbling infrastructure.
Gradualism has also given us Democratic leadership that endlessly waters-down policy and legislation in an attempt to appeal to Republicans. (A fool's errand if there ever was one.) Gradualism has also given us decades of Democratic leadership which refuses to investigate or prosecute the blatant criminality of Republican office holders for a sappy grasp at "healing". That's not just infuriating, it's a disgusting abandonment of the rule of law. Trump and his administration are the most criminal in history, and they must not be allowed a "look forward not backward" approach to their crimes.
Biden may win on gradualism, but if he doesn't fix the concerns above, he'll only further infuriate the electorate and set the stage for a worse Trump down the road.
2
@Dominic I agree - it doesn’t look good at all.
Elizabeth Warren should drop out, and endorse Biden. She can pay tribute to Bernie in her speech, but she of all people knows the dark side of the Sanders campaign - the current sexist bullying by his supporters being but one example.
Sanders is happy to tank the Democrats, again, with his ideological crusade. We can't afford that.
The Warren supporters I know are not going to switch to Bernie; they'll back Biden instead, because Warren and Biden are closer to each other on the essential question: should we work to repair our society, or burn it to the ground?
This will never get done in the Democratic Party, it is too corrupted by corporate money. Next time third party. Take the "movement" and turn it into a party that can challenge the money Republican or Democratic. Start this third party the very second Biden wins because if all you "moderates" are wrong, and its not like you haven't been wrong before, there might never be another election here at all.
1
“I believe that part of the explanation for that boils down to sexism. I am baffled by her failure to attract more of a following”
It seems that Charles is often too baffled to consider any explanation other than discrimination. Wasn’t Warren the frontrunner for a while? Did all those people suddenly remember they were sexist when entering the voting booth?
1
Thank you for this. There is no question in my mind that sexism played a major role in keeping Elizabeth Warren out of serious contention. I am deeply disappointed that the dream of a woman president is deferred for another four years. I will hold my nose and vote for whomever is the ultimate candidate and work to defeat Trump, but it's bitter. My mother died without ever seeing a woman president. I don't want that to happen to me.
Yes young people, you have to wait a little more. You still have a few more child bearing years left. So you get your first mortgage at 40 instead of 25. Life expectancy is still over 70 so you can still limp over the finish line. As long as life expectancy stops going down.
1
I am as sick of old white men as anyone can imagine. Regardless of who wins 2020, I cannot wait for 2024.
America is a politically moderate country. Most Americans recognize the shortcomings, but the solutions do not begin by emphasizing political polarization.
That’s the difference.
Mr. Blow, I campaigned for, and voted for, Hillary, and would have supported either Amy or Kamala had they stayed in the race. I did not support them because they are women or black, or in spite of reservations about electing a woman. Please be more careful about suggesting people are sexist or racist (or whatever) because they don't feel a given candidate would beat Trump or would be elected to the presidency. I like and admire Elizabeth, but feel she is not going to win again Trump for reasons having more to do with her continuing summary dismissal of the value of our overall capitalist system. It has more to do with a certain blindness she shows to economic realities, and with her failure to substantiate how she will replace with better governance and more even-handed, democratically effective wealth distribution the (apparently, according to her and Bernie, massively corrupt) system we have. You should think before you start flinging charges of whatever-ism at whomever you see as supporting a gal or guy who is not your own choice to win America's presidency.
People are scared. When they are scared they vote for safety.
Biden connects on an emotional level. Bernie dispenses tough love and unvarnished, clear truth. Joe puts a hand on your shoulder and comforts you. People are scared. So who do you think they will choose?
As an old white man, I must say I am appalled at the prospect of another old white man as the next President. The time for old white men to lead us is long past. It's a new world with new national, international, and global problems, and many, many new opportunities. Let's look forward not back.
US citizens are the incompetent shareholders of the world's largest corporation. People can't even wisely decide what responsibilities belong in the public sector, and what should be private. And the whole mess is tensioned by unequal representation to make law, and unequal protection from law, rooted in slavery. And I do mean protection from law, by the constitutional limitations on what can be legislated.
2
Joe Biden is a vote for the status quo, circa 2016.
Is it better than Trump? Absolutely. Is it depressing? Absolutely.
There was NO such clear preference among Southern Democratic primary voters to return to Barack Obama-era policies. Besides, what exactly Barrack Obama era policies, exactly?
It was pure vote bank politics based on you know what.
Slow and Steady progress? Like Slow and Steady wins the race? There is no relevance between them.
I guess if the Southern Blacks chose status quo and certainly not Progress, then that's what they will get with Trump. Biden is no match for Trump's antics and certainly no match for the passion that Trump's supporters have.
I am and will be Bernie voter even though I derive little personal advantage from his overdue policies. Those who chose status quo (Biden) are the ones who will lose the most. I will take a hike on the election day because I will get more out of that holiday than from the election results in whichever way they may go.
2
Citizens United, Citizens United, Citizens United, Citizens United.
As a person wanting more change that will care more about the people than the wallet, the biggest and most destructive problems in this country come from greed for power and money, and fear of losing a cushy position in Congress and other gov't strongholds. GREED & POWER.
That said, I am also a realist. Change cannot happen as suddenly as I want it, as many want it; so let's start with what an be changed now ------ VOTE, VOTE, VOTE, VOTE. We cannot survive another 4 years of DJT. We cannot survive another SCOTUS appointment by this joker, or the massive number of other judges. We cannot survive years more of a McConnell Senate.
What has been created in our government, all branches, lacks civility, humanity, common good, and empathy. Our democracy is failing. It is breaking my heart.
It will take some time to put “things” back together and restore relationships around the world. There are hundreds of progressive bills on McConnell’s desk. If the Senate is not flipped, they will remain there, no matter who’s in the White House. I like Biden but will vote for the democrat anyway. Will Sanders people do the same?
Obama negotiated with himself before he even stepped into the room to be rolled by the GOP. Biden will do the same, extolling his decency, and call it "compromise". This nation suffers from a form of Stockholm Syndrome, where much of the population inexplicably shares the same concerns as the ruling elite, and much to their continued detriment. They have been so cowed by corporate stooges in the congress and media inciting their fears that they dare not question the status quo. In any other nation, they'd be out in the streets, but here just they stare at their screens and binge-watch TV, which by the way, they're paying two or three times as much for as in truly civilized countries. A nation of well trained sheep, getting what they deserve.
3
In every discussion of who is more "electable", Biden or Sanders, there seems to be an intentional avoidance of the cognitive problems facing Joe Biden.
We now live at a time when Democratic voters are just as eager as Trump voters to say, "fake news" to anything they do not want to acknowledge. Anyone who observes the self-evident decline in Joe Biden's mental faculties are reflexively seen as troublemakers ("Bernie Bros!") perpetuating lies. To me, it's clear that the people saying Biden is the most "electable candidate" are voting for a Biden from a decade or more years ago. That man no longer exists. They are voting for the way President Obama made them "feel." Ironically, it is the people supporting Sanders that are seen as the unrealistic, pie-in-the-sky dreamers by the Biden-as-he-was supporters.
I think even if Biden miraculously won the White House, he frankly is not a man up to the job in his current mental state which will only continue to decline. The presidency is an extremely demanding job, yet we've lowered the bar so low, we are not thinking 2 months, let alone 4 years, down the road.
Does anybody really think Biden will bring reform? He's only gonna give you the restoration part.
1
Of course, I will end up voting for Biden if he wins the nomination. BUT, I will enthusiastically vote for him if he chooses Stacey Abrams for VP!
We cannot afford to take it ‘slow and steady” as we address climate change. My fear is that Joe Biden is ignorant on this issue and will do nothing of substance as we will reach the point of no return.
1
I don’t think most people want little change. Medicare for all is wildly popular among Democrats. At this stage, none of it matters. The group think is that Biden is the only one left to defeat Trump, and that’s all that matters to many. Incidentally, the sexism that ruined Warren’s chances, she, by far, the best candidate, is fear a progressive + woman couldn’t beat Trump. It’s all about removing that menace.
" less student debt, "
Warren and Sanders introduced divisive solutions, contrary to Warren's bogus analogy to Social Security. That was and is an inclusive program that does not currently exclude those who have retirement savings. Following her line of thinking those who have saved for retirement would be penalized in terms of their benefit. Yes there's a minimum benefit.
People have legitimate complaints that her plan penalized those who have paid off or are paying off their student loans on time. Warren's response to this ("Of course not" when asked about relief for those who had paid their loans) spoke volumes about her thinking - you paid off your loans because you're privileged so shut up.
Furthermore she attempted to deflect attention by referring to the costs of post-secondary education when she was a student. If you want to lower the costs then please do so.
Regarding "restoration and reformation", well you had a three term mayor of NYC who supported stop and frisk. Then during the current campaign he's converted to a forward-thinking point of view. Next time someone accuses a group of citizens for using dog whistles please turn your ears towards the self-proclaimed liberal NYC.
Busing was raised as weakness on the part of Biden. Again, look to NYC. Its public schools are racially segregated as well as subjected to a high degree of what is normally referred to as white flight.
Now back to hammering on the folks in flyover country.
Old ER Doc here. The ABCs of trauma: clear airway first, then restore breathing, then improve circulation. If you do this out of order, the patient dies.
RIght now, #1: Airway = restoring our democracy and rule of law.
#2: Breathing = climate, climate, climate #3: Circulation = everything else.
"It’s 2016 all over again." Why do we have to be captive to pre-packaged narratives? Are we bereft of vision when those are the only stories we can tell?
I am not an American and maybe that is why I don't understand any of this.
When Reagan took power America led the world. Your (We're number one) signs meant something . Forty years later your people are so far behind you will never catch up. We have long made healthcare, access to education and security of person rights and our latest right is access to broadband because without access to broadband you can't be equal.
I recognize moderation when you are leading or keeping pace but too much of America believes their past is better than their future and if access to broadband isn't a right they are 100% correct.
Globalization opened many doors and closed many others.
I don't know why on a day of catastrophes the Dow climbs 1200. I don't believe Wall Street believes Bernie could do anything even if the chances he could be elected are the same as their chances of getting into Heaven.
I know you are all being gaslighted because there is no dividing line between truth and fiction and the more obvious the facts the less the facts have meaning.
You started with Kamala , Corie, Julio, Andrew , Elizabeth Bennett and Insley and ended up with the odd couple. That is a twilight zone I refuse to visit.
America was supposed to about the creation of a more perfect union. America ended when Reagan tore the future from the White House roof.
3
in other words, same old same old.
got news for you. same old same old is why bought us to this
perilous moment in history. our democracy hangs by a thread.
this nation has made no advances for society since LBJ.
before LBJ, nothing happened since FDR. they bought liberal
change that has benefitted all Americans.
it's time for liberal change now. this time will not come again.
SANDERS 2020!
Biden clearly owes his 11th hour, plucked from the ashes political existence to black Democratic voters. They should not, will not, be content with “gradualism “ in the policy areas which are of vital present concern to them, and also to a substantial portion of white Democratic voters. These include income inequality, housing, education, health care, voting rights, employment, and perhaps even reparations. This heightened imperative is the necessary pathway according to which “gradualism” must be replaced by a “revolutionary” mindset. If Biden doesn’t adequately deliver, which is difficult to imagine, he will undoubtedly face an enormous backlash amidst the justified cries of betrayal and abandonment.
Sometimes you have to have a Restoration before you can have a Glorious Revolution.
1
Trump is a least a Baby Boomer. Sanders and Biden are out-spoken members of the Silent Generation. All three are Vietnam War draft dodger, but Vietnam draft dodging is more a qualifier than a disqualifier. Trump (bone spurs) and Biden (childhood asthma) used notes from family doctors to escape conscription. When Sanders ran out of student deferments, he avoided the the draft by applying for conscientious objector status, knowing he did not qualify for CO status. His application was denied, but he aged out of the draft while his application was being processed. George W. Bush (arguably) and Bill Clinton (arguably) also dodged the Vietnam draft. Obama evaded the military draft by not turning 18 until after the military draft had ended.
I’d like Sanders to drop out and give his support to Warren. Sanders won’t get the nomination, and if he did, he wouldn’t get elected, but for now, a contest between Warren and Biden would be more productive. It would also be better to have Warren (eventually) drop out and support Biden than it would be for her to drop out now and pretend to support Sanders. Biden gets the nomination, the rest is all about appearances. Biden can win, and if all he does in four years is not be Trump, I’ll be grateful. I’d prefer President Warren, but knowing when, and how much, to compromise, is the secret to success.
Revolution is needed. The American health care system leads to thousands of unnecessary deaths every year, with estimates 30,000 upward. Millions don't have health care, and medical bills are the largest cause of bankruptcy in the U.S.
Our health care system doesn't need patching up, as Biden proposes, which will still leave millions uninsured and thousands dying. It needs total reconstruction, aka., Medicare for All, health care as a human right!
There is nothing worse than having our health care and drug manufacturers controlled by companies whose first concern is profit.
1
When it comes to addressing climate change, incrementalism is just a longer word for disaster.
3
I think the calculation is this-- with Biden we also know
1)who his nominees and agency leadership will be
2) a return to science, facts, compassion and justice
3) openness to solving difficult problems without antagonizing people who are honestly trying to help make things better
4)a hopeful possibility of retaining the house and swinging the senate
I know he garbles his syntax. But his mind and his values, his intellect and his personality are clear and steady. People really do trust him. He has been in the spotlight for years and he has been consistent, even-tempered, honorable. That is a clear as day. Voting for war 20 years ago is old news and was based on information later found to be false. I can forgive him for Anita Hill. He has clearly grown. He doesn't seem the least bit hesitant around smart capable women, or smart capable anybody.
He doesn't need Bernie to be yelling at him about urgency-- of social justice or climate change. He knows the time is now without yelling. People who are old enough remember Ralph Nader and his yelling, self-centered, stiff-necked campaign and how that turned out, especially in Florida with Bush v Gore. Bernie knows how much progress over the years has been blocked by republicans in congress- not the imaginary establishment. Biden helps the down ticket.
Biden will take all the best minds and hearts we have and all of our best spirit as people of our nation and be at the front of our journey to a much better America.
2
'Voting for a war long ago'. Checks notes, we are still sending the American working class to die in that 'long ago war'.
Super Tuesday was very revealing. Biden's slow ship seems to be sailing in. Bernie's status as a game-changer, which has served him well, also makes him just that, a wild card. Still, the prospect of real change always comes with a certain amount of jitters. Trains, those new-fangled modes of travel, as Charles Dickens knew, brought apprehension because the future is often scary to contemplate. Both Bernie and Biden share remarkable strengths.
1
I don't have nearly the confidence Biden will defeat Trump. He was the weakest candidate of the moderates if not all the Democrats. The voters voted the way they voted, but I'm mystified as to why Amy Klobuchar or Peter Buttigieg did not come out on top. I'm reading little enthusiasm about Joe Biden. If even the people who voted for him are not enthusiastic and he's run for president unsuccesfully twice already, I don't see why we have any reason to feel confident he would defeat a charismatic incumbent Republican with an unshakeable fan base who will stop at nothing to get reelected. I do not believe 2020 is as different from 2016 as many readers think.
2
Many voters in the Democratic primaries are NOT reflecting a preference for "restoration and reform," or for "revolution," so much as for who they think can not only beat Trump, and, hopefully, retain the House and re-take the Senate.
But voters should understand, particularly from the Super Tuesdy results: Results will not depend on the qualify of the candidate in November. Joe Biden has, to date, run a terrible campaign. He was literally carried into the lead by James Clyburn, Black American voters, Bloomberg, Buttigieg, Klobuchar and O'Rourke.
My point is: The 2020 election will be decided not by the quality of the candidate, but by the quality of the voters. What matters is increasing actual turnout in November to defeat Trump, to retain the House, to re-take the Senate..
If the quality of voters is not high enough, we will get neither "Restoration and Reform," or "Revolution."
The only two issue in 2020 is: "Trump and Republicans? Or not Trump and Republicans."
To Sanders supporters (whose platform I certainly support, and would love to see): If Sanders is not nominated, and you sit out the election, you will not be "punishing the DNC." You will be punishing all your fellow Americans you claim to want to help. We do need a "revolution." We will get a "revolution." Just maybe not this year. But we may never get a "revolution" in our lifetimes if Trump is re-elected, or Republicans are left to either control or thwart Congress.
1
@Robert Henry Eller Same goes to Biden supporters who say they'll vote Trump or stay home if Sanders is the nominee.
That’s what we are always told. Change is coming, but not now. Next year, next decade. But what they really mean is the fifth of Never. We have heard we have to wait yet we get little progress for so long that we no longer believe you. We have been lied to for too long. Better think if something else if you want our support.
True change never happens when people just shut up and go home. But shifting public perception doesn't change overnight. That is why progressives need to keep the ideas alive, so that in time, we have enough support to move forward. With more support are more voices who can come together to create rational plans from seemingly radical ideas.
Incremental changes are better than nothing, but they are also much easier to undo. Look at how the GOP has been chipping away at the ACA with the goal of dismantling it entirely. Look how the Trump, with the GOP, has been destroying the EPA, HUD, CFPB, access to Medicaid & benefits, access to Medicare, protections for LGBTQ, access to abortion, access to affordable housing (including homeownership) incrementally, right before our eyes?
We must do better than mediocre. In the meantime, we must defeat Trump.
2
"In the end, I believe that voters are coalescing around an idea: While they admire the revolutionaries, they are more comfortable with slow and steady progress. Only history will be able to judge the merits of this approach."
How about recent history... say, 4 years ago? We've entered a Groundhog Day-esque nightmare. In 2016, the media pushed this exact same "Restoration v. Revolution" argument, arguing for HRC and a centrist approach/continuation of the Obama legacy to win moderate voters while saying liberal Democrats should just wait until their great-grandchildren get the "slow and steady" progress they're fighting for now. That blew up spectacularly in 2016 and the media has spent the last 3 years loudly trying to out-humble each other on who was most wrong about 2016.
Here we are again, and pundits are at least aware enough to say how reminiscent this is of 2016. Yet in the the same breath, they push the *exact same* narrative they did 4 years ago, and which they've spent the last 3 years explaining was wrong. It's honestly astonishing to watch. Give me one piece of evidence the *exact same* strategy that failed in 2016 will work now? Especially when every poll has Sanders doing better than Biden against Trump.
Our country has progressed in fits and spurts and regressed "slow and steady." I think your argument is exactly backwards. Democrats are terrified of ideas. What's the point of having power when the only way you know to get power is to promise not to use it?
6
In a country where a significant percentage of those without health care will likely die before they would if they had care, the question is not how much Sanders “revolutionary” ideas will cost (even he admits no one knows) but how long will they take to be implemented. Would that be in years to meet this life or death emergency? I recall when Republicans were working to stop passage of the Affordable Care Act, Mitch McConnell and others predicted that if they “don’t stop this now, we will eventually end up with socialized medicine.” That’s the gospel according to Mitch. It is what animated Republican governors to stand in the way of implementation of extending benefits and a Medicare option for their states most vulnerable citizens. It’s what drives the Republican congressional members to repeatedly work to overturn ACA in the courts. So what’s not progressive about thwarting those efforts and extending ACA to cover the remaining American who are not covered? It’s not revolutionary? For the first time in US history, US Citizens will have access to affordable health care. How is that not revolutionary?
I tire of white politicos and pundits condescendingly writing off support for Biden by African Americans as a reflexive nostalgia for Obama. African Americans have had promises made and never fulfilled before. And it’s not just wanting to get rid of Trump. The current crisis over Corona virus shod reminds us who is vulnerable and how urgent the situation is.
1
I am hugely frustrated at this false dichotomy of "moderate reform" and "radical revolution." Sure Sanders should have toned down his rhetoric, but he is not advocating for the pesants to storm the castle.
Instead, all he has been saying is that its time for Americans to stand up and demand more accountability and responsiveness from our political and economic institutions. What is REALLY radical has been the takeover of our country by Monopolistic Corporations and Wall St. Excess over the last 40 years. We are truly becoming an oligarchy.
There is a Democratic Establishment (including Biden) who sound like nice social liberals but are actually enablers of this systemic concentration of wealth and power. Many easily move from political office into KStreet and Wall St. St. That culture is the real "bread and butter" issue and the reason the bi-partisan landscape and messaging is very right-wing on those issues.
Only Bernie and Warren have tried to rectify this and steer the Democratic Party back to true Liberalism for the interests of the working/middle class and the poor. It's not "revolution" but reform.
6
@John Townes I agree. Every time I hear another democratic candidate touting their ability to reach across the aisle, I wonder what of our rights is going to be compromised away next.
You don't see the GOP "reaching across the aisle"--no, legislation from the Democrats (even that proposed by so called moderates) mostly lands in the graveyard that is Mitch McConnell's desk.
Charles' comments may strike some as a turning back, but the context of American politics has changed drastically since Trump has been in office: he has undone so much of Obama's progressive, or simply "sensible," policies in just about every sector of American life. I am confident Joe will restore all of what Trump has laid waste to and then some.
3
His corporate masters won’t let him. It might raise their taxes a couple of percentage points. They might even have to sell one of their yachts.
"Does one demand immediacy, or is one satisfied with gradualism?"
Immediacy is imperative - to the left. America has been living gradualism for 250 years. Gradually moving further and further to the right. Obama-Biden might have been the last best chance to right America's wrongs. But they didn't do it. Bernie Sanders is a second chance.
Biden is a tranquilizer. Bernie Sanders is an inspiration.
7
Too many wealthy Americans look out for their own financial interests, and contribute to Congress to have them also look out for their wealth. Difficult cycle to break. Mother Nature or nuclear war will be the only forces that will break this vicious cycle unfortunately. Then the wealthy will ask for help from the poor.
6
The analysis by Charles M. Blow of where “the two elderly white men” stand on the issues is correct. It is a question of revolution (Bernie Sanders) versus incremental change (Joe Biden).
The ultimate question, however, of which old man the voters should choose depends upon a factor which is more important than the choice between gradualism and upheaval. That overriding factor is electability, coupled with a chance to make some positive improvement instead of encountering rigid opposition.
The name of the game is beating Donald Trump and electing more Democrats to office at both the state and federal levels. On this score, Joe Biden is the only game in town.
2
Nobody knows what electability is anymore. People thought Hillary was the answer last time too. Yet, here we are.
1
If only the "powers that be" had chosen as their "alternative to Bernie" Elizabeth Warren. At least then there would be a chance to
1. Defeat the current president of the U.S.
2. Be some change to believe in.
I am 78 years old and Senator Sanders has been my hero since I lived in Burlington, Vermont, in the 1970's. We need universal healthcare - as all other industrial nations have. And the planet is in deep trouble.
So why choose Joe Biden, with his painful record of supporting big banks, Clarence Thomas, gaffes, and on and on????
6
Dear Betsy,
We still hardly know ye. I appreciate that, as Professor and Senator Liz Warren, you keenly understand and challenge the siren call of money and power in Washington. However, I prefer to see you as Betsy from Oklahoma because it speaks more directly to your life-long experience in “the last mile” of our society where most of humanity live and struggle. You, among the remaining candidates seeking to unify our country in a senior capacity, are uniquely qualified to institutionalize trust in our corridors of power by rebooting capitalism. Stay the course in whatever capacity you best determine.
2
Overall really agree except for the one major disruptive factor: climate change. Scientists say at best we have nine or 10 years to really do massive major change and that’s on God’s time/physics time and will push all of us to except revolutionary change in that arena at least.
1
The incrementalist approach to a more just society has failed. Obama’s presidency demonstrated that. And Joe Biden’s leadership skills are inferior to those of President Obama. A Biden presidency means stagnation, a continuation of the conditions that led to the election of Trump. The Democratic Party has to offer a more promising vision than Republicans, or it will always remain in (insincere?) opposition.
In order to appease their financial backers, the Democratic Party leaders and a compliant press have convinced many voters that Biden has a better chance of beating Trump than Sanders, but the argument is not compelling.
One might suspect that Tom Perez and Harry Reid would prefer Trump to Sanders.
2
"While they admire revolutionaries, they are more comfortable with slow and steady progress." Most people fear change. Key to leadership is having followers' willing support for change. Beat them from behind, they scatter or turn on you. Charge ahead without them and when you reach the top and look back, they're still at the bottom. Steady progress may sound exasperating in this trumped up era, but it's the most productive route to effective, sustainable change.
4
The most important thing for me in this election is getting more Democratic seats in the Senate. No matter who is the president, without some support from the Congress we will get nothing done, no matter how moderate or progressive it is.
The nation wants to be able to talk to their families again and their neighbors. With Sanders, his revolution and all, we get an attitude that is more Us and Them. We are weary as a people of living in constant turmoil about policies that we cannot change and will not change until we clean the Senate of the GOP policy of No.
6
"Even if Congress weren’t a hurdle, there is still the worry that the government is too incompetent and inefficient to undertake multiple structural changes at once. I, too, worry about how much the government would get wrong before it got it right in this regard."
Paul Wellstone often agreed with your statement. It is evidence based. Government agencies that actually implement structural change have no built-in mechanism for responding to data that shows the need for mid-course correction in a timely manner. They seldom, if ever, have the authority to formulate and implement corrective action due to Congressional and Presidential oversight. They do not point our needed changes unless and until the structural changes have failed or in imminent danger of failing.
That is not really the issue.
Corporations and wealthy investors now effectively control our government and political discourse to a much greater extent than ever before in our history. We need to implement change to take back our government and our democracy. That cannot be done by incremental change.
4
Just for the record: as a Sanders supporter, I will very certainly, most definitely support WHOEVER the Democratic nominee for President may be. I suspect there are millions of people like me. Just sayin'.
6
Not an ecological thought here, Mr. Blow, nor of vast income inequality. Both have cost me dearly in my life of almost seven decades.
I cite facts from UN conservative scientists who in October of 2018 said exactly what the current Democratic Centrists want to avoid, an "unprecedented" change in the way the economy operates, in "scope and speed" is to stop climate chaos.
If I were to vote my direct economic self-interest I would be an Elizabeth Warren Supporter, for her $200 monthly increase in SS, which would be spent on auto repairs since I drive a 20 year old car..
I would spend every penny of that on what I need but cannot now buy...so I am part of deficit demand in the economy.
But I support Bernie Sanders because he puts the Green New Deal first, the most sweeping change ever proposed to the Congress. In Bernie's 35 page version as opposed to the 14 page official resolution there is $2 billion or more for the Appalachian Regional Commission, way, way above what Congress usually appropriates.
You never mention the Green New Deal, the UN report or the fact that some poor whites are to the left of a corporate leaning conservative Black Congressional leadership.
Too bad too few of that leadership had the courage of Rep. Cummings, who did support the GND.
Today, MLK would be considered just as radical as Sanders - by the black leadership. ...and Sanders is his heir, not Joe Biden.
I think the stance of the black leadership is just tragic.
4
Biden could win the presidency and the the senate could go to the dems! Woo-hoo! A public option! Student loan forgiveness! higher taxes on the rich! We'd be all set, right?
Wrong, wrong, wrong. The reason why Sanders and his supporters make such a big deal about not taking money from corporations and billionaires is because from whom a politician gets his/her money determines what they are able to do while in office. Look at who's contributing to Joe Biden and ask yourself, "Are they going to let him do even incremental change once he gets in office?" The answer is no.
7
The only question is one of pacing: Does one demand immediate action or should one be content with expressions of concern and hollow symbolic gestures that might bring us to the goal sometime in the next two centuries?
5
The heavy-handedness of the DNC has shown the revolutionists they cannot revolt peacefully through the existing two-party system.
Rather than allow the system to work, whatever means was used to have Pete and Amy step down, keep Warren in as a spoiler, and rig Super Tuesday; has pretty much handed the reins back to the GOP.
By disenfranchising those who desperately see a need for change in their lives and then seeking to install someone who cannot refrain from lying about his Civil Rights participation, we will see four more years of the same.
Congratulations. You can put lipstick on anyone, but it changes nothing beyond the superficial.
To call the new leader in delegates a reformer, while Wall Street is rushing to fill his pockets, is a new level of deflection.
Think about what damage will be done next election when we have three parties contending!
I want to thank all of the people and institutions who took part in this farce.
4
Although we have failed to come up with a woman candidate in the top slot, we may likely see female running mates on both tickets. And given the age of both guys, 2024 could well bring us our first woman president.
1
Biden vs. Sanders? Incrementalism vs. revolution?
I think it's even simpler than that.
We can't get ANYwhere unless we oust Trump, flip the senate and/or replace McConnell, and send a few others (Collins, Graham, Nunes etc.) packing.
We know that if we can do that, what we get afterwards -- no matter where on the spectrum -- will be better than what we have now. And people will choose based on how they want to escape our present quicksand.
BTW, am I the only one who thinks that Elizabeth Warren will withdraw from the race before the weekend is over, and that she will endorse Joe Biden? Sure, her policies align more with Bernie's, but she's in and of her party. She endorsed Hillary over Bernie in 2016. TBD.
7
Biden vs. Sanders? Incrementalism vs. revolution?
I think it's even simpler than that.
We can't get ANYwhere unless we oust Trump, flip the senate and/or replace McConnell, and send a few others (Collins, Graham, Nunes etc.) packing.
We know that if we can do that, what we get afterwards -- no matter where on the spectrum -- will be better than what we have now. And people will choose based on how they want to escape our present quicksand.
BTW, am I the only one who thinks that Elizabeth Warren will withdraw from the race before the weekend is over, and that she will endorse Joe Biden? Sure, her policies align more with Bernie's, but she's in and of her party. She endorsed Hillary over Bernie in 2016. TBD.
1
If all of the people who love what Bernie stands for but feel that Bernie can't win would vote for him, he absolutely could win.
7
BIden has sat by and done nothing for several years now. If elected, I doubt he will do anything to make changes.
Biden's idea for health care is to re-establish Obamacare. We all know that is folly, for all it does is continue to feed the giant corporations. Have any healthcare costs gone down since Obamacare went into effect?
Perhaps Sanders and Warren come across as too pushy. Well if someone doesn't start pushing somewhere, we'll continue down the road to complete domination by the wealthy and corporations. Revolution may be too strong a word. But compared to the devolution that has been underway in our country since Reagan took office, it really is a revolution to have a government that is by and for the people.
I am not expecting overnight changes. If/when Sanders or Warren becomes President, the changes they call for will have to come about gradually - maybe not even in my lifetime - but come they will.
Biden is the face of corporate America with a big smile. Like Reagan, only not a Republican.
And before anyone gets started with the "Bernie Bro" schtick: I don't owe any student loans (I spent 12 years paying mine off and that was 40 years ago!), am not looking for free tuition (although I think it should be available to in-state students at public institutions), and believe that the age for Medicare eligibility should come down every year until we all have coverage (I already have Medicare, plus insurance from my employer).
6
We are forgetting the meaning of progress "forward or onward movement toward a destination" - the destination may be Medicare for all and free higher education - but the journey will have stops. We need to restore and reform. Revolution helps no one because chaos is not progress.
2
It’s hard to wait when you are hurting. Being told you must continue to do so and be patient maybe for years is a slap in the face. Calling for incremental change is basically saying that you don’t care about the plight of the working poor who are suffering right here, right now. Do the people living on sidewalks have years to wait?
Al Franken said, on multiple occasions, "Republicans say government doesn't work. Then they get elected and prove it." It's taken a long time for them to get Democrats to believe this too.
Government has proven itself competent time and again when we build, expand and rely on expertise and good judgment. The current administration is emblematic of what happens when you don't.
We need a return to government competency, and that includes making the case for government. Sanders and Warren both have made that case more than Biden, though he is riding Obama's competent historical coattails.
Column in short: Democrats are more non-political conservative than non-political liberal in their approach to political liberalism, and government is less and less trustworthy.
If it wouldn't be catastrophic, I'd suggest a "No Government At All Day" - but I'm too conservative a liberal to think it wouldn't be fatal for far too many people.
2
The Democratic Party has ignored the needs of the working poor for decades. Why would anyone trust them now?
1
I'm not anywhere near the upper 1%. Never received a big fat inheritance, or with a PhD earned more than $50,000/year. I do not resent, as Sanders and Warren are so fond of blaming, billionaires. I've never been much interested in money for the sake of money (my great-aunt called it filthy lucre); I do not measure myself, and other people, by the almighty dollar. As long as I can pay my medical bills, property taxes, and give my family members Christmas and birthday presents, I'm satisfied. Let us be glad for people who aren't bored by the machinations of money, who create jobs and big businesses (thank you, Bloomberg), so long as they pay their fair share of taxes and generously donate part of their largesse to the least of us.
1
As long as you can pay your bills. That’s just it, so many of us making poverty wages cannot. Is it any surprise they are angry?
1
@Smilodon7 Yes. I have been a waitress, so I sympathize. And this is why we have unions, to demand higher pay and better working conditions. Organize.
Biden was never my choice, but in a world in UTTER chaos, I will support the candidate that can bring change to the SENATE!! And yes, I do believe Biden is a better top of the ticket candidate to help sway on the fence voters to step up and vote BLUE in these very important senate races going on all over the country. There's one thing we all know: MCCONNELL MUST GO. That is a FACT.
4
@Anamyn
The problem for us all, beyond the obvious issues that incremental centrism will not adequately address is that nominating Biden hands another term to Trump on a silver platter.
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/biden-would-be-just-the-challenger-for-trump/
1
Gradual and incremental may work for many issues but we have at most a 12-year window to do revolutionary things to mitigate its effects. The Green New Deal or something similar in scope and pace is absolutely necessary if we are to have any chance of turning things around. The centrist Democrats like Biden are too cosy with the corporations and Wall Street who are driving the destruction of our only planet. For the life of me I cannot understand people who do not feel the urgency for revolutionary change at least in this one area on which our very lives and our children's lives depend. For this and other reasons Bernie is the one.
5
Both candidates have flaws - but you imply only Biden has issues. For the mainstream, that’s what makes Biden appealing, achievement and decency in the face of personal tragedy. For Sanders, as you note, he is a crusader - imperious and self-righteous. Let’s see who America prefers.
1
A better take than the others, but still somewhat overstated. The Golden Age of Obama is precisely what led to Trump. Obama didn’t address underlying problems, and neither will Biden. And the next Trump might be even less benign.
11
It’s only about who is best equipped to defeat Trump and, hopefully, flip the senate. Period. Neither evolution nor revolution can happen if those two events don’t happen.
Health care seems to be one of the most important issues in this election, yet Biden proposes a modest tweak of the ACA. As someone who was forced into ACA insurance I can report that it is not sustainable for the lower middle class - making over $71k their is no subsidy and the cheapest insurance is $20k per year with high out of pocket costs and a high deductable.
7
It is better than nothing, but it really only works as catastrophic insurance because of it isn’t an extremely pressing issue, one cannot afford to go.
Even with the full subsidy, it’s not enough. A $20 copay which looks reasonable is unaffordable if you don’t have $20. Average people just do not make enough nowadays, period.
1
Most voters are watching the destruction Trump is wreaking and realizing that it is far easier to tear something down than it is to rebuild it. We have years, if not decades, of work ahead of us, IF we can get Trump out of the White House before he really takes a wrecking ball to things in his lame duck second term.
Free universal health care? Free college? Forgive student debt? Universal minimum income? Path way to citizenship? All good ideas, some more than others, all requiring long term dedication to their implementation; none of these are going to slide through congress, no matter who is president or who runs the Senate.
Doesn't mean we shouldn't head in the direction of progressive or even revolutionary policies, but first things first. You don't sit around arguing about what color to paint the kitchen when the house is burning to the ground. First we need to put out this fire, then begin the process of rebuilding. Sanders supporters will moan that we keep putting it off, but part of the reason we are where we are is because of the voting habits of much of the so-called Liberal/Progressive wing of the party.
Republicans are not the only ones who got the president they deserved.
3
We have been promised for years that something will be done but it never happens. This is why we don’t believe you now. Obama and Biden could have listened to our concerns back then, but they did not. Why bail out the banks, but not anyone else? We all know who really controls the politicians it’s the corporations & wealthy making the campaign donations.
And I vote in every election. Too bad it does no good.
2
Revolution offers no assurances of outcome, only rejection and upheaval, often accompanied by armed conflict.
Restoration and reform with Biden promises return and respect for Obama and much more. Return to dignity, decency and rationality in the White House offers psychological reassurance and relief from the daily dose of ignorance and deliberate chaos The likely choice of a woman or African-American man or woman for Vice President broadens the base of support and sense of investment from people in communities across the country. And Biden knows Congress, the down ballot state and district representatives, who contribute and cooperate, not just rubber stamp, the utterances from the administration. Finally, mainstream Democratic Party values, so maliciously maligned as "establishment" controls, in fact align with Constitutional oaths and the better angels of our nature.
1
Then why did the mainstream Democratic Party abandon the working class?
1
I was an early Warren supporter (middle aged white guy) but left her and it had nothing to do with sexism and everything to do with "I have a plan for that" - out here in fly over country, and likely in large swaths of the coastal lands, people don't want our lives problems solved by Washington or by know it all elites (who don't and aren't). If she had stuck to level the playing field, tackle health care, and restore dignity she probably wins. Bernie is now on the receiving end of the same abandonment. I'll take a floundering Biden any day over zealots.
1
And you will get nothing but another corporate dem who won’t do a thing about inequality or climate change.
1
The media has portrayed Bernie as somehow radical or fringe, when he is not. This OP-Ed is no exception. Biden like Hillary is just another face of the Democrat Establishment, which is just another face of the Establishment. The Bloomberg side show was immensely successful to consolidates support around the candidate who will best protect the billionaire class. Five hundred million dollars was spent on wealth preservation. And his remark en passant that he will eventually giving it away, so what? Even if true (I doubt), he wants to give it away and not have it taxed away.
Bloomberg won.
6
Anony
It’s not red-baiting to say that Bernie has not supported human rights in Cuba. Not billionaire entitlement to say that Bloomberg can do what other wealthy frankly don’t in support for gun restrictions and in funding health measures in communities of color. It’s shameful that Sanders condones lying about Biden’s sarcastic ‘support’ for Ryan position on social security...watch the remarks in context?
Radical chic ever shows itself in trying to shame moderate positions. I’m not buying it; Bernie is a courageous man, but yes, a fringe candidate.
While Charles's assessment seems logical (if not overly simplistic), the real question is can Joe Biden beat Trump. Unfortunately, I don't believe so.
I believe if Biden wins the nomination, it will be a sad and humiliating journey to a massive defeat. He has no real message, no fire of inspiration and is already struggling to put coherent sentences together. It will, unfortunately, only get worse. I'm massively disheartened...
11
The only problem is that the slow and steady progress of which Mr. Blow speaks is to the right. The genius of the march of Republicans to the far right, intentional or not, has been that the neoliberal economic policies of Clinton and Obama (and presumably Biden) that created the problem of which Donald Trump is merely a symptom, seem spuriously progressive.
7
Biden now has the best chance and with him running against Trump, the plutocracy has it very nearly as they want it (Bloomberg would have been better for them). Following Obama's policies will mean that Goldman Sachsers will occupy the important economic positions, big bankers will not be subject to any punishment or regulation, and inequality will continue to increase while wages stagnate, as they did in Obama's terms, despite what is now the longest expansion period in history. Is this the progress that most people really want, or is it what they are told they want by the major media and its pundits?
8
@skeptonomist Blow should face facts and recognize that electing a "centrist" Democrat means negative economic progress for those in lower economic tiers. Inequality increased during both the Clinton and Obama administrations. For the major media, which have campaigned relentlessly against Sanders especially, this is not necessarily a bad outcome - their owners, writers and talking heads are doing fine.
3
What happens when the masses can no longer afford a subscription? I only have one now because they were running a $4/month online subscription sale.
The urgent consideration is to defeat Trump. I do not believe that sexism is involved. I would expect Biden (if he is the nominee) to choose a woman or an African American (perhaps both) as his running mate, and hopefully one who is more progressive than he is. If that ticket wins the election and the House and Senate, then, and only then, can we begin to make the changes over the next few years that we liberals are seeking.
1
There's more going on here than just policy. Bernie is a divisive candidate who shouldn't be surprised that many people simply vote against him. He is the Democratic version of Trump.
4
"The only question is one of pacing: Does one demand immediacy, or is one satisfied with gradualism?"
Unfortunately gradualism, AKA "tinkering around the edges", is generally used to head of real, systemic reform. Gradualism's greatest triumph, the ACA, has been used to stave off universal healthcare and shore up corporate profits.
Obama's recovery efforts of 2009/2010 were aimed at assisting corporations and had very little to offer the 90%. It's like the old story about the sailor hauled before the mast for drinking his mate's rum ration. His excuse was that his ration was on the bottom, so of course he had to drink his mate's to get to his. Only in this case, the wealthy had to drink the relief belonging to the rest of us to get to theirs.
6
Not that my vote matters much anyway at this point, but I will not vote for Biden because my progressive ideals have been attacked nonstop during this period by readers and the media. "Bernie will destroy the country. Progressives are evil, etc. . . How dare people support him? Moderates are the only right way to think because we MUST beat Trump." I'm disappointed that NYT has been a major player in all this negativity. Every single day there has been at least one piece attacking him and by extension, people who support him. I used to vote Democrat, but now I have little use for any party.
But other readers too, attacking Bernie and attacking people like me who feel like we need major change and not inertia. If a person doesn't like Bernie or Elizabeth, that's fine, don't vote for them, but don't bash a candidate who can possibly defeat Trump. If defeating Trump is our end goal as we claim it is, why would we shoot ourselves in the foot in this manner? He might still win! No one can predict the future. If there is one lesson we should have learned, it is that polls are flawed. If they weren't we would be discussing President Hillary. The way to bring unity is to be nice to each other, whether progressive or moderate. Angry voters can withold their vote, and that has just as much power as voting.
4
"Reform" is a lovely idea, but it is impossible when corporate lobbyists control Washington.
Medical care is becoming a luxury good instead of a common good.
A mild revolution repressed will become a "burn it all down" revolution if problems remain unsolved. If the pendulum isn't allowed to swing, it will eventually break free to swing harder.
Ironic that it seems to be Democrats who are in favor of "slow steady progress", because that is the true conservative's way.
The purported "conservatism" of the GOP has no intention of conserving anything but the vast money-grabbing abilities of the uber-rich.
18
It is not a two-person race. Here's the thing the media won't admit: Bernie Sanders lost the nomination on Tuesday. It's over. To make up the delegate gap that he now has, he will have to score blowout wins in most of the remaining states. Unless Biden suffers some unforeseen calamity, that's extremely unlikely. There is no longer anyone siphoning the non-Bernie vote from Biden, so he will carry majorities--which is something Bernie has failed to achieve everywhere except Vermont, and there is no reason to believe he will achieve it going forward. It's over. Let's stop pretending. Bernie should exit gracefully now so the party has plenty of time to unify and focus on beating Trump.
5
As a Warren supporter, I admit I am very torn with the prospect of having to choose between Bernie and Biden, for many of the reasons outlined. Another is the level of antipathy towards moderates I have seen from many in the Bernie camp. Anecdotal, but in my FB feed (admittedly from the same small group), I have read talk of “moderate psychpaths” and wanting to “kick the Biden bros in the throat,” and seen a meme of Bernie kicking the decapitated heads of his opponents (I should note it was a cartoon at least). I have a hard time believing that Bernie is willing to work with members of Congress to the right of him (which is more or less everyone) on a per issue basis. And, I worry that his isolation of moderates, as spurned by his supporters, will mean losing in the general. But then, a vote for Biden feels like giving up on meaningful change. Or, is it that defeating Trump needs to be sufficiently meaningful change for now.
4
Your observation that most people are not up for revolution is spot on. If one half of the country is revolutionary, and the other reactionary, that is the setting for civil war.
Those of us who voted for Biden, even if socialists as I am, abhor the prospect of civil war, or more Trump.
Decency, even movement towards unity, would be such a relief.
6
What "progress" was made under the Obama/Biden Administration?
Healthcare costs rose, as did out of pocket costs, student debt skyrocketed, wealth inequality increased (on the back of a recovery for the rich only), corporate power increased, tax burden was shifted further to the working and middle classes, the deficit rose, carbon emissions increased, the USA stayed enmeshed in wars of choice with no exit plan, corporations continued to dodge taxes and legal accountability, wages stayed stagnant and the rise of the gig economy created low wage and low benefit jobs for millions. Medical bankruptcies increased, the luckless poor got foreclosed on, and job-killing trade deals were crafted.
And moderates expect Biden to reverse any of these trends? Really? Do they not understand that the DNC establishment coalesced around him precisely because he can be relied on NOT to reverse them?
13
Young people understand the intense grip that banks, fossil fuel corps, pharmaceutical companies and the insurance industry, Wall St. as well as google, amazon, facebook have over our lives. The people who have organized the world in this fashion will not give an inch without a real fight, perhaps a terrible fight. They are the ones who have made their revolution against us.
Obama could not make any headway against these monsters, and neither can Trump (who has also tried, in some respects). Charles Blow, please tell us what kind of incremental change we need to make the playing field more fair.
4
It is not really 2016 all over again.
The major difference is the presence of the President. Democrats seem united as never before, in their countrywide hunger and thirst to see him out of office; and to resuscitate Obama's signature policies like The Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare); multilateral agreements; an EPA which protects the environment; a well funded CDC and NIH capable of emulating S.Korea's stream-lined response in a pandemic; a return of Science; and a modicum of honesty and decency in public life. et al. The overwhelming vote for Biden is based on the hope of support from disaffected Republicans and Independents in November. It would be a bitterly ironic pill for Trump to swallow if he lost the election, to discover that he it is who brought unlikely fellow-travelers together.
The 2020 election is also different, since Bernie has effectively moved the Democrat party to the left. Issues he espoused that made him an outlier in 2016, are now in the Democrat conversation. No matter who heads a Democrat administration if elected, what championed cannot easily be brushed under the Oval Office rug anymore.
5
What about Biden's performance inspires confidence that he is the candidate to defeat Trump? He's a poor, meandering debater. He had a weak campaign organization in the early states -- no presence "on the ground," which doesn't speak well for his ability to GOTV in November. He has no interesting ideas to offer to inspire excitement in voters. There are passionate Bernie supporters, Warren supporters, Buttigieg supporters -- no one is excited about Joe Biden. He gets votes only from a sense of duty. With that resume, what makes him the candidate to lead Democrats to victory?
14
@Tom I am concerned about that as well. I felt more confidence if Klobuchar or Buttigieg had been nominated but now I believe we are more likely to lose to Trump.
1
@Tom Trump will eviscerate Biden during debates; and quite frankly, Biden is not offering the working people anything to really fight for.
His name is not Donald Trump. In the end that will be enough this year.
1
First, Warren is a smart woman. That explains a lot.
Second, if Bernie wants real change and not just stroking, he needs to read the tea leaves. His message is a bridge too far right now, but with some moderation in approach possibly he or the next President can get us there. The movement needs a foundation and it doesn't exist yet. Sell the ideas of universal healthcare, affordable and accessible education, housing. Sell infrastructure and employment opportunities; explain how we get there for everyone while curing climate change. There are solutions and ideas without scaring working class people and without scaring powerful people on wall street. Get them all pulling and pushing in the same direction and we can get there. Biden is not Warren and is not Bernie but he seems safe. Bernie has our attention and if he could modulate his messaging without the my way or else, he could get more votes. Until he does, Biden seems the safer bet although I don't think he can do what needs to be done.
So, Bernie, which is it? Want to preach or get elected?
2
@bjb3 "A bridge too far right now" People have no healthcare and climate change poses an existential threat -- when do you believe will be the "right time"
It's too bad we always have to be treated to the suggestions that race or gender was and is a driving force for what voters do. Defining Maine and Vermont as the whitest in America may be accurate but I'd conclude their tendencies are more about being very rural. And the votes in all the states are still being fragmented between multiple candidates. What would these primaries look like if Warren and Bloomberg were out? But we all have our lens. Mine looks like this. I've voted for Republicans historically. But the daily drama in the White House is tiresome. So is it's effort to dismantle the ACA instead of making it stronger. So is it's effort to ignore climate science and dismiss environmental importance. The most recent tax law is irresponsible. Those are not liberal ideas. They are practical ones.
2
Too many of us have gotten too comfortable. Saying your liberal is one thing - being it quite another. Another thing, that comfortable portion, although for the most part retired, are still young enough not to have tasted the 30's and 40's. Not pleasant, that taste. Sanders is not, I repeat, not a revolutionary. His is a counter-revolution. Some of us are old enough to remember and some of us would rather not. Thus, Biden.
2
Before the Democrats go too far down the intra-party rabbit hole of incrementalism v. revolution they should remember that nearly half of the country remains solidly in lock-step with the GOP and its blind loyalty to Trump. At this point electability is all that matters and the Democrats, like the GOP, need to build, not tear down, an "establishment" to win. Bernie's movement politics are cool for conversation at the coffee shop but Joe's party politics, ungirded by signature Obama accomplishments such as the ACA and bolstered by the endorsements of Amy, Pete and Mike, are the basis of a substantial realignment of institutional power right now. That's not a progressive liability, that's progress. And how t win.
7
McCain was a moderate Rep candidate, not very exciting but solid Republican. Republican establishment was all for him. Result, he lost to Obama (the first black American President). Moreover, Reps lost the Congress. 8 years later, Trump is a wild card for Rep establishment. His past is dubious, his Government experience is nonexistent, his remarks are offensive, but Rep establishment let it play out, and the result was the most unprobable win not only the Presidency but also the Congress.
Where would we be today if, say, LBJ had listened to those “moderates” and their mantra “it’s no time yet” to pass civil and voting rights? And the “revolutionary” Medicare and Medicaid?
We have serious problems. Our democracy is under siege and ordinary people need solutions not platitudes and inertia.
15
@sapere aude Moderates did not oppose Medicare/Medicaid legislation. Southern Democrats who were not moderates opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Medicare/Medicaid legislation in 1965. Moderates like Hubert Humphrey were early supporerts of both pieces of legislation.
https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/07/30/the-politics-of-medicare-and-medicaid-50-years-later
1
A conversation with a Canadian co-worker clarified how the successful social programs and health care programs in Europe came to be....after WWII most of Europe was ravaged by the costs and damage of that war and the lingering damage from WWI a mere 20 years earlier. There were few hospitals, much of the infrastructure was destroyed, few people had income and the Axis countries were under military control of the Allies. The only possible access to health care for the population was with government providing it. Canada, wisely adopted their government health care at the same time due to economic issues after the war as well...the US flirted with the idea but the medical profession lobbied hard against it...by the time of Reagan years, the for profit aspect of medical care accelerated and invaded the overall economy in a big way. Hospitals which had been run by religious organizations either closed or became profit oriented and the cost of care rose rapidly. The ACA attempted to address both cost and increasing coverage, but the constant GOP attacks chipped away everything that meant to contain costs in their efforts to make it fail. M4A would never get passed or last a full Presidential term with the kind of attitude in the GOP any time soon. The culture and the power in the Congress needs to change first. The demographics may give us a more liberal consensus in the future, but any "revolutionary" changes done too soon can be easily undone with the next election.
6
The element missing from this analysis is Trump. I am less concerned with whether a candidate will embrace incremental change or revolution than with whether that candidate can win in a general election.
4
Bernie has to see the writing on the wall at this point. It's not the establishment or the media conspiring against him, the voters are simply afraid that he is too radical to beat Trump. I hope Bernie's ego doesn't prevent him from exiting the race in a timely manner. He should be working to mobilize his enthusiastic supporters to get behind Biden. I've seen too many negative comments from Bernie supporters, I realize the wounds of Super Tuesday are still fresh - but us Dems need to stick together and vote no matter what.
6
I share your feelings about Warren. Unfortunately sexism is alive and well in this country.
I think that the election of djt has gotten people motivated for systematic change but that happens over time. It's how the far right GOP has now dominated. Local elections matter. Every election matters. State governments that set gerrymandering and voter purges matter. Those anti abortion folks fought decades to get laws passed so that in some states it's near impossible to get one. their victory is near at hand with this Supreme Court that was handed to them in the last election.
Progressives, get out at every level and VOTE. put your people in place so that someone like Bernie as president can be effective. A few in the House is not enough. There are common sense bills in the Senate languishing now, a medicare for all bill will just join the pile. You've got to build from the ground up, not top down. Run for office. VOTE!
1
I love Charles Blow and rarely miss an opportunity to read his insights. However, I strongly feel that Charles has really missed very integral piece in today’s revolution or realism column. He fails to incorporate the capitalist/corporate component. Yes, historically change in America has been incremental. It has taken us nearly two centuries to clear the nation of the evil of slavery/racism and we still have a long way to go. It took decades to get decent health care legislation following the passage of Medicare, and have spent the last decade fighting to get rid of it. Yes Charles, incrementalism is one thing, corporate control, unleashed by Ronald Regan and continued through today is another. We now have an unfettered, nearly unregulated capitalism overseen by corporations. Regrettably, this component did not make it into your column and we are all the worse for it. Sorry!
7
"Some will say the Northeast is not representative of the country because the three states that voted there on Tuesday are so white and so small."
Can someone please explain this to me? Massachusetts is neither particularly small nor white, it's larger in area than NJ, its population is only about 2.2 mil less than NJ's and African Americans comprise 7.4 percent, Asians 6.4 percent, etc.
If exit polling in the state of Maine revealed a preference for a more liberal agenda than Obama's and yet voted for Biden over their rural regional neighbor Sanders, then the reason could be the specifics of the policy proposals, ie the quality of the message or else the messenger himself.
Assuming Elizabeth Warren is still in the race this morning, she would also overtake Ronald Reagan as the oldest person ever elected president.
5
We have had a revolution. Rights that have been won over roughly the last 100 years have been attacked and some will be ended in less than 3 years.
The midterm election was a wave of moderate to moderate conservative democrats retaking the House. The opportunity to retake the Senate is in front of us with a moderate candidate that can get another Democratic Senator in places like AZ.
Democrats have to build a broader coalition then Republicans because they have less representation. That's just a fact of our Democratic Republic at this point in time.
I listened to both Bernie and AOC last night on cable news show. The way they dismiss the millions of democrats who voted for Joe Biden as corporate shills was stunning. That's not how you build a coalition to defeat Trump and build majorities in Congress that can actual do things to improve people's lives.
I want to start moving forward again. We need a broad coalition to do it. My hand is out to progressives and conservative democrats, rich, middle class, working class and poor.
I'm afraid Bernie Sanders is going to burn the party to the ground between now and the convention. It's time for a little pragmatism and grace.
7
Firstly, this piece suggests there is still a race and in reality there isn't. The voters spoke loudly and emphatically and Biden is the candidate. Why? Because of emotional connectivity and behavioral economics. A far broader swath of voters have an emotional attachment to Biden and that's what general elections ultimately boils down to. And voters don't like uncertainty! And what's more uncertain than a campaign based on revolution? No voters are pragmatic and would rather have a safe and familiar win with potetnailly less upside than a risky loss with potentially more upside. This is human nature 101.
4
@Wechson It wasn't just about the voters. The election was also unfair. All the moderates dropped out before Super Tuesday and endorsed Biden. Eleizabeth Warren was still in the race and competed against Bernie for the progressive vote. I realize there are a lot of Bernie haters who are convinced Bernie will destroy the country, but that was unfair. Bernie/Elizabeth split progressive votes, and Biden had all the moderate votes for himself plus the endorsements from the former candidates.
2
yes it's absolutely about the voters. I'm sorry you are disappointed but the election was the furthest thing from unfair. Biden took on the most scrutiny in the first few debates as the front runner. Since then he has had to deal with a far wider group of competitors in his ideological lane, certainly more than Sanders who just had EW. Biden had less money than Sanders by a wide margin and still had to contend with Bloomberg. None of this, absolutely none of it, is "unfair". it's the will of the voters and the spoke loudly and definitively.
1
Revolution not evolution was my naive vision for reforming public education forty years ago. Then, I spent the end of my teaching career attempting to lead that reform at the district and state level in a smaller district and a less populated state, working with many cutting edge colleagues as well as a few who should never have been given a blunt scissors and many others in between. Lesson learned: Significant and sustainable change comes with painstakingly hard work by leaders with a vision, a respect for and understanding of the hesitancy of those they are trying to lead and an incredible reserve of patience. It is hard to be patient when so much despair and inequality exists, but Mr. Sanders conviction that he has a shortcut reveals an ignorance of the change process and underestimates the differences we must overcome before we can agree on the common vision in the first place. Case in point: A fellow citizen believes that a vote for Biden is the same as a vote for Trump and decides to stay home. Really?
4
Here's what every undecided voter must come to respect:
This race between Trump and "fill in the blank", is about having an American dictator aligned with Putin, or restoring the Justice and State Departments, the Intelligence agencies and the government, to the job of working for the American people instead of one man.
That is the issue that must be made plain and respect is trusting the American people to decide not to snuff out the democracy that has been the light of the world. In March, the Supreme Court will hear Donald Trump's appeal regarding the question of whether the Constitution of the United States of America provides a system of checks and balances, or if we already live under one man rule.
5
Perhaps as much as wishing to return to Barack Obama policies the American voters wish to elect a man who was firmly connected to Mr. Obama, who did reflect his policies, who learned from the president and who is similar in character. Mr. Biden seems a dignified and upstanding gentleman, who, while certainly not perfect, does represent what is good and worth preserving about the American government and way of life.
5
The beauty is that the Dems are existentially split on the old, slow candidate (who may even forget what office he's ambling towards) and the revolutionary who is against everything most voters are for. Neither has a path to victory in November.
1
Mr Blow:
There can be no slow and steady progress in dealing with the climate crisis. We have a little over 9 years to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 45% according to the IPCC. We ar seeing all around the globe the impact of the heating of our planetary home.
I recall listening to an interview with the brilliant and prescient comedian George Carlin in December of 2007, about 6 months before he died. He felt the country had been in a long slow decline and that in relation to the climate crisis we were not going to change our ways. He felt it was lost cause then. I have now come to the same conclusion.
3
I'm re-posting what my Sanders-supporting millennial son told me after the Super Tuesday results were announced. It's very relevant to the discussion.
"Your generation is doing it to us again. There is no stopping your greed, even as it hurts your own children. You make it hard and costly for us to go to school. When we’re done, we get mostly low pay, temporary employment without benefits. We’re always at the mercy of a potential health problem to take away the little that we have and worse. Many of us need to work 2 jobs to feed and clothe ourselves and share a roof above our heads. Owning a house has become a fantasy. You have messed up the environment to such an extent that many of us see no prospect for a healthy future. You even gamed the voting process to make it difficult for us to vote. Who wants to line up for 4 hours or more after a hard day’s work?
"As last night clearly showed, you’ll gang up to prevent any progressive from winning. Biden, a candidate who appears to be on the verge of senility, wants to return to the pre- Trump era. The upper classes and the mainstream media are very comfortable with him since he's unlikely to change anything. But they should know that if he becomes the Democratic candidate in November, we probably won’t show up. Maybe another 4 years of Trump will make things so bad that you'll finally understand that dramatic changes to American capitalism are badly needed."
There's a lot of anger here, but I get it.
13
Unfortunately the climate crisis won't wait for slow and steady progress. We should have started that in the late 70's. We need an emergency that only Bernie Sanders and his supporters seem to understand. If Biden is the guy, I don't think we should be voting in November or we just vote for people like AOC who align with our values. If Democrates lose, so be it. Maybe we're not democrats.
3
Newton's first law of motion is immutable. An object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force.
Sometimes a nudge will suffice. Universal suffrage in America required 346 years of nudges before it was written into law. Translation of law into practice has taken another 55 years, and is incomplete. But, Hey, all's well that ends well, right?
What is the trajectory of lead atoms accumulating in the developing brains of children in Flint, and in rural Iowa? What is the trajectory of unequal pay for equal work? What is the trajectory of the temperature on the surface of our planet? What is the trajectory, the forward outlook, of war veterans sleeping on steam grates?
Will a nudge suffice?
1
Sanders supporters may sit this one out, just as too many did in 2016. It remains to be seen whether that will sink Biden as it sunk Clinton.
Sanders' theory of the election was that he would attract massive numbers of new voters. That theory was not realized, at least in the primaries. One conclusion from that fact is that the phantom voter in the primary would be a phantom voter in the general. The implication is that phantoms on the sidelines don't matter. The election will be fought over real voters, not will-o-the-wisps or unicorns.
4
@Thomas Briggs
Stop blaming Sanders supporters for Hillary. There is zero data to support that position.
2
OUCH! I'm in an old white man - 72- and apparently that's the worst thing a human can be these days. I am well educated and well read, have a sharp mind and articulate tongue. I'm liberal, compassionate and giving to those less fortunate than I.
I compost, recycle, drive a hybrid, and pay close attention to local and world events and care deeply about the future of humankind. . I share my wealth with others. I know how to delegate, work well with others and I treat others with respect. I'm strong, sturdy and dependable. I have a lifetime of experience to guide me. So tell me what's wrong with that
15
@nlightning
Nothing wrong at all but we don't have enough of your kind and that is what is wrong!
In the final analysis, I think the American people are a practical lot. Bernie paints an exciting picture of what could be (If elected), but a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Biden may be boring, but has much broader appeal, therefore is much more likely to defeat Donald Trump. And IMO, that's what's driving the polls. Get rid of Trump at all costs. Bring us together, Joe!
6
It's all well and good for some voters to be "more comfortable with slow and steady progress." But that comfort may come with a high cost. Because the climate crisis isn't going to hold off until our self-involved and short-sighted species feels prepared to confront it. Like it or not, sweeping changes will be required to mitigate and adapt to this existential threat. The longer we delay, the more difficult and hurried our response will become. "Slow and steady progress" is a luxury we can ill afford. Time is not our ally.
4
So, the progressives should just wait for slow gradual change? The only change I have seen in my 48 years is in the wrong direction. Unions have been crushed. Inequality has risen to levels that rival the days of the robber barons. Wages are stagnant. We had a financial crisis where the only people that were hurt were the little people while the bankers are still billionaires and still in charge of their companies. I have seen millions of my fellow citizens be crushed by medical expenses. College has become an unobtainable dream for many because of the cost. Sure, I will wait...that seems like a reasonable request. I mean in the long run none of us have to worry about any of this. All of our troubles will be behind us.
12
surprisingly, I've become a camper way out in the "Burn It Down" camp.
The Times They Are a Changin', and current global western and eastern cultures are evolving into something else, and our current times reflect the struggle between future paths and philosophies, just as surely as the times were drastically changing between 1914 and 1947.
Could be that when Queen Victoria died, and "horsepower" became a scientific term rather than a fact of daily life, the human world began to evolve and here we are, still evolving.
In any event, it's an accepted path that a mature forest needs to burn before desperately-needed renewal in that forest can occur.
Entropy always prevails. Always.
This is The Way.
We know this in our bones, yet still we struggle.
Burn it Down!
-C
5
We don't need a revolution in order to accomplish a huge amount of good.
Start with healthcare. There's a good chance the Republican Supreme Court will strike down the ACA this year. If so, Biden, supported with a democratic Congress, will have a terrific opportunity to implement a reformed ACA, with additional benefits and perhaps more affordable. And to expand Medicaid to hold-out states.
Then go to taxes. Pretty easy to tax the wealthy more and keep your moderates happy if your have all of Congress.
Then education and jobs. Raise the minimum wage, give teachers tax breaks and schools other support, start and fund an infrastructure initiative to improve roads and railways, to connect rural America with urban America and to promote industry and tech to move to rural scenes.
And tax breaks and funding to promote sustainable energy source.
Fortunately, the democratic House has already passed many bills to achieve these ends. All it takes is a democratic senate and president and we can move forward to rescue all of our country, moderates and rural voters alike. The racists and misogynists, hopefully they'll have to wait a long long time.
5
Why would Biden do that when he didn't do it when Obama was the President and the Congress was Democratic? What changes now? How it will be different today from 2010?
@yulia I don't think it's Biden, I think it was the democrats in Congress who wouldn't support much in the way of new bills or initiatives. Things are different now.
1
It wasn't always Bernie or Biden. I personally preferred Warren, not because she promised "revolution" but because she had some sensible ideas to shore up our social safety net, correct the vast gulf between rich and poor in this country and protect ordinary folk from the robber barons of the Republican Party. What was not to like in her consumer protection bureau? Since not enough voters felt as I do, I will now be voting for Biden as the best choice to beat Trump. Getting rid of Trump is paramount, for our health, our safety, our international alliances and our planet.
5
I think this piece frames the situation incorrectly. The Obama administration would have been a lot more progressive than it was if Obama had had an answer to Republican obstructionism, which he manifestly did not.
But we do now. The unified Democratic Party which is appearing before our eyes offers a realistic possibility of removing Republicans from power up and down the ticket, and in particular in the Senate. This would put Democrats in the novel situation of being able to bargain from a position of strength, assuming there are any Republicans with an interest in doing that, or alternatively just disposing with the filibuster and getting on with it - which Senator Elizabeth Warren would be more than happy to expedite.
So harkening back to Obama is not an exercise in nostalgia. It is a recognition that we can do it better this time - not to mention the visceral hunger for a restoration of decency to public life.
5
Evolution, not revolution, seems to be the preferred method of change in the natural world. Even climate change, which we all rightfully fear, is an evolutionary process that is taking place over years. While it may look like it, it's not coming tomorrow. If Mr. Biden should become the nominee, Democrats would be wise to use his presidency to begin the evolutionary process of turning power over to progressives. A progressive VP would be a start, and a Cabinet with progressive-leaning members who can actually get things done would also be welcome. Mr. Sander's revolutionary ideas need to be converted to evolutionary action and policies. I felt Ms. Warren was the best candidate to bridge this gap, but she is well-positioned in the Senate to work for this kind of change. Democrats should use a one-term Biden presidency (or a two-term figurehead presidency a la Ronald Reagan) to develop a long-term strategy that includes down-ballot strategies reaching all the way into statehouses and governor mansions. Building solid and deep roots is the way to go, and it takes patience and time. My fear is that we live in an historical moment where immediacy is valued far more than is patience.
4
You say: "I simply don’t see evidence that supports the theory that most Americans are clamoring for revolutionary change that moves the United States closer in line with the norms of other developed countries. There doesn’t even appear to be that clamoring by most Democratic voters.
That’s not a judgment, but rather a fact."
This is some weak tea, Mr. Blow. Either the policies are revolutionary change or they are conventional ("in line with the norms of other developed countries"), but they cannot be both. And how you can describe your perspective as "fact,"when you just prior say that you anecdotally "just don't see evidence" is a betrayal of the journalistic standards we have come to expect from you.
Just come out and say you think Biden should be the nominee (because you THINK he can beat Trump, even though he has weaker policies and rides white privilege) and deal with the consequences. If this is the type of courage you implore your readership to display, you should be willing to do the same.
2
I would love a Revolution, but the electoral college is a real thing.
Revolution can’t happen if the voters from 2016 that were on the fence and the few Republicans fed up with trump in swing states aren’t ready for it.
Biden has a chance to pull these people to win the electoral college. California can’t do it alone.
2
I didn’t appreciate Warren’s obnoxiousness and mean spiritedness in the last debate. She’s against filibustering but did it herself on stage. We already have a “nasty” president. We don’t need to substitute one for another. We need somebody tough but she’s stepping over the line.
It was clear that when she behaved this way she actually came across with less power, and easy to discount. It made me think she wouldn’t do well against Trump on stage.
This has nothing to do with her being a woman. I thought this of Castro when he threw a jab at Biden for forgetting.
5
"Now is not the right time." "I'll think about it." "Maybe later." If your parents have uttered any of these to you as a child, you already knew it usually meant "never". Slow and steady wins the race, sure, but that's only if you got the time. Gradualism works just fine for older folks, as they won't really have to live with the Earth they left us.
6
People living without access to affordable healthcare or a decent living wage can’t afford to wait either.
3
I've read your columns for a long time and am disappointed in how you are framing the argument but not surprised.
I feel the Democratic Party is coalescing around one single white man at this very moment and making a catastrophic mistake. It seems a foregone conclusion that Biden will be awarded the nomination - he won't have won it by fighting for it with words and ideas - and I already know how this is going to turn out.
I no longer consider myself a Democrat nor will I vote for the selected nominee Joe Biden. At this point it does not make a difference to me whether Trump has four more years or not - I have less than zero interest in a Biden Presidency. I'm out.
11
@Rae
So you wanted the party to coalesce around a different white man?
For a few weeks the actual choice has been Biden or Sanders.
A Democrat deciding to not sit out (which in practical terms is a vote for trump) demonstrates a care for personal ideals over getting the best change for everyone (however small the change may be).
2
@JJ Clearly my comment indicates I feel the process is rigged.
And I resent the lecturing about why I have to vote. Who are you to moralize about my motives? I am a thoughtful person and will do what is right for myself. I am not telling you not to vote for a corporate tool.
2
I see it as a pause, if Biden is nominated. This country needs to catch its breath.
4
It's amazing that conservative democrats want the comfort zone of Obama era by choosing Biden. Obama had so many progressive plans, not revolutionary, but certainly progressive. He was obstructed every Inch of the way. Look at the ACA, Garrett's appointment to the Supreme Court, all done with the guidance of McConnell. Sanders is well aware that he sets out a paradigm shift in society, one that is long overdue in a civilized country. His plans will take months, maybe years to move along, but God almighty he's right! One needs guts to make things "better", not back peddling and certainly not reminiscing . It's so sad we can't move this country along because the main objective now is to topple the worst president in our history. Whoever is the Democratic nominee should be voted in, that will achieve objective #1, then we'll need the house and the senate and of course the Supreme Court nominee to reset our national progressive goals.
5
Obama started negotiating from so far to the right he had nowhere to go. He really didn’t fight that hard for progressive policies.
3
18-29 year old voters were in large too preoccupied or busy to actually vote on Tuesday. Bernie Sanders promises us that he will convince them to vote in November if he is the nominee.
I'm sorry, but Mr. Sanders has been planning for Super Tuesday 2020 for FOUR YEARS. He helped write the nominating rules for this contest. And yet HE COULD NOT GET HIS BASE TO VOTE in large enough numbers on the most important event of his political life so far! This after FOUR YEARS of preparation and tens of millions of dollars in resources.
Sorry. The revolution is not coming this year. It will live on in the twittersphere, but will never break the barrier into reality. The revolutionaries are too busy instagraming their dinners. :)
13
If Biden is the nominee, we're going to have to hope his mental faculties hold up well enough so he appears more competent than Trump. Admittedly that's a very low bar, but Biden's many gaffes haven't shown any sign of abating since winning South Carolina. I hold my breath every time he makes a televised appearance. Of course if he's the nominee, we'll never know whether Sanders would have made the fiercer opponent to the incumbent.
What seems certain is that Sanders, before going down to defeat at the convention, will broadcast Biden's every bad decision and vote, reduce his record to tatters and the candidate to a sad puddle of bad judgments. This will not serve the party, or the country, at all well, and could make a Democratic win—against the worst sitting President in living memory—an uphill battle.
4
You're too tied to the semantics..It's really about moderate voters wanting decency again. Once we have character, everything else will follow.
4
People face the choice between incrementalism and revolutionary quick change all the time. Do we hold on to a job that gives us security and work towards something better or do we quit the job and go for the whole enchilada all at once. What we choose depends upon our circumstances. If you have a family to support or other responsibilities and do not have other income you will act more conservatively. But the young with less obligations will try to go for it. Human beings do the best they can in these decisions and none is better than the other. It is only a choice based on our situations and politics is often ruled by these same variabilities.
7
@just Robert
If your house is on fire do you want incrementalism?
It is.
1
It's almost impossible to do one big thing right, let alone transform an entire economy, even if you have the right policies, and it's doubtful that any one persons vision of the right policies would satisfy the myriad of individuals who make up our diverse nation.
It's virtually impossible to predict all the unintended consequences of even the most carefully thought out proposals.
Medicare for all, the progressive pet legislation, would be a death knell to Roe vs, Wade as the federal govt. is prohibited from spending money on abortion. Performing abortion is not permitted. Good luck getting the bible belt to agree to change the restriction.
You couldn't run a candy store successfully this way. You might feel that organic food is preferred over 'normal' candy. Then take an item and test out your theory. See if the organic item outsells the normal item. Throwing out the entire stock and replacing it all with organic food would be a crazy way to find out if you read the public's pulse correctly.
It's unimaginable that you could transform a diverse and complicated economy for the better overnight, no matter how well your intentions are, or how nice the end result might look before you begin.
2
The problem is, while voters might favor a return to Obama-era policies, Joe Biden is most definitely not Barack Obama. He was vice-president, and despite all of his proclamations of "We did X," it was Barack Obama who made the policy decisions and organized the Executive Branch to carry them out. Joe Biden's history is that he goes along to get along, and that, during his Senate career, he has favored many of the policies that gave us Trump. I can imagine, for example, that a President Biden would choose judges that he knows Mitch McConnell would confirm. I just don't see Biden as a strong leader.
5
This is not over. If you heard Bernie late nite on Super Tuesday, you’ll have an idea of what’s to come. More than anything Bernie will protect social security. Biden cannot be counted on. While Biden was getting lucrative job for his son, Bernie was standing in solidarity with workers. Fair wages, sick leave, health care, should not be revolutionary. The choice is clear.
2
"While they admire the revolutionaries, they are more comfortable with slow and steady progress. Only history will be able to judge the merits of this approach." There is a flaw in this reasoning. Slow and steady is not winning any races here. We aren't getting anywhere with incrementalism. Just ask coronavirus. It's is truly shameful that the richest country in the world does not have universal healthcare. Electing another moderate will net us the same thing we've had for decades because they want to make everyone happy and not rock the boat and in the process, we make little headway. Never mind Bernie Sanders. Elizabeth Warren was an amazing candidate, but a lot of the negative sentiment came down to the the old "America isn't ready for a woman president." In four years, we'll either have more chaos with Trump, or we will be in the same position with the same problems that we were in in 2016.
6
Tell people living in tents or sick people who can’t go to the doctor because of no/unaffordable insurance that we need slow steady progress and they must wait for help so that corporate America will be comfortable with it. I’m sure that will go over well. Can this be any more tone deaf?
I do not doubt that the US needs a revolution in healthcare, in fair taxation, in regulation of predatory capitalism, and in support for green energy to start addressing climate change. But before any revolution can happen, we need to get rid of the person sitting in the White House calmly tearing down every presidential norm, eliminating all regulations that cut into corporate profits, refusing to obey laws that do not benefit him, and establishing utter corruption throughout his administration. So for most Democratic voters, the question isn’t whether we’re ready for revolution but rather who has the best chance of defeating Donald Trump because if he is not defeated and has four more years of unrestrained lawlessness and corruption, we will not even recognize the country we have left. It most likely would no longer even be a democratic republic. Voters know that Biden doesn’t have big plans for change, but they’ve decided that big change must wait. In other words, we’re not out choosing new wallpaper for the dining room when the house is burning down.
4
One of the lessons of 2016 was NO BERNIE, but in 2020 all the fuss over him managed to obscure the best progressive candidate, Elizabeth Warren. Funny how that happened - Bernie ruining the chances of a progressive who might have actually gotten something done, but count me among those who suspected from the very beginning that the DNC was going to hand us Joe Biden, regardless. If the circular-firing-squad debates weren’t done simply to discredit all the challengers, that was still the result. Disappointing, but how much better than Trump is Joe Biden? Probably a lot. He’s not who I wanted, but he’s worth voting for.
7
Push, fight, and struggle as one might, the time is not always right for revolution. The world is not an ideal place, but whose ideal(s) are we talking about? After DJT, most Americans want stability and sensibility.
4
But by the same token, after Ten 'stability' after Obama, many Americans craved the changes away from such stability. That is why we have Trump and the Rep Senate.
1
Maybe it all has to do with stress. Maybe older voters cannot handle it as well as the younger folk, and a return to "normalcy" is all that they can handle after almost 4 years of stomach churning stress. Big changes only means more turbulence. I hope that the older generation of all colors will vote for Sanders if he is the candidate though, and likewise for the younger one, if it is Biden.
I want what Sanders wants. I want what Warren wants. Corporations have been deciding about our well being for way too long, and Biden has some big industry donors to whom he must be beholden to. Warren has acquiesced to a more gradual ease-in of policy, and was therefore scoffed at by some progressives. However, she knows darn well that something like a public option is just window dressing, as it can never truly give everyone the benefit that a genuine universal health CARE program can. I like her, but I think many people do not even bother to listen to her common sense.
I totally understand the Biden/Obama thing, but I have been totally onboard with Warren/Sanders. However, this is the season of giving pause, and I just want trump out. I want the Senate and the House, and I want a better future for my son. So where does that leave me? Probably in my sensible shoes.
6
The young are a lot more stressed than older people. They have huge student loans, high housing costs, jobs with tiny paychecks and few benefits. Older people mostly already own homes, have retirement plans, and had better jobs and won’t have to live with the consequences of global warming like the young will. So of course these problems are more pressing for the young.
4
@Smilodon7 Of course what you say is true, and this is one of the reasons I support Sanders/Warren. However, different age groups handle stress differently. With many older people, their minds and bodies are not as capable of the physical manifestations of it. I am looking at it through the eyes of a general older generation and not myself. I am willing to see the changes; I welcome it, and for the life of me, I cannot understand why other's my age don't, especially if they have kids. So yeah, it borders on selfishness. But not all seniors are as pat as you describe. That's one of the reasons why we are progressive.
Will progressive voters get it through their heads that legislation can originate in congress? Biden is not going to veto progressive bills to reform immigration, rein in climate change and corporate greed, add a public option to the ACA or make Medicare for all. Warren will be a great majority leader who can push through finance and anti-trust legislation and Sanders can sponsor Medicare expansion. Much can be accomplished domestically if only the voters will make McConnell the minority leader. And let's stop the damage to the federal bench!
4
It is difficult to see the DNC that put such effort to de-rail Bernie's nomination, will be on board with such changes in the Congress. The Congress could not pass the bill to address the 'surprise billing'. The bill is popular among Reps and Dems alike, but there are politicians Reps as well as Dems who voted against the bill because they have ties to healthcare industry. Tell me, where is the condemnation of these Dems by the DNC? Why the Dem establishment doesn't put up the effort to push these Dems away?
2
@mls Elizabeth Warren has zero chance of being majority leader. She would be a very effective Attorney General under a Biden.
Of course he would. What planet do you live on. He will be a terrible president, and he will pave the way for a worse than Trump president to take over after him. We can not afford a Biden presidency. Period. The world can not afford a Biden presidency.
I've long been a Bernie supporter but the results from Tuesday cannot be ignored. Biden will most likely be the Democratic candidate and will win the nomination on the first ballot. There is a simple reason for Sanders fading, he chose to run as a Democrat despite his long-held disavowal of the party, its leadership, and the core of liberal centrists forming its majority.
Because our lives are riddled with regrets and what-ifs, there is always the question of what effect Sanders running as an Independent thirty party candidate may have had in a general election. Certainly, it is possible the Democratic vote may have been split resulting in Trump's re-election. Less likely, but possible, Sanders may have been the first third-party candidate elected president. We will never know.
Biden is not among my first five favorites to be the Democratic candidate. Because Trump is, in my mind, an existential threat to the nation and an enemy of the people, I will vote for Biden reluctantly and with regret. An Obama comes along only once in a very long time, hopes for change will remain dreams deferred for too mamy Americans for years to come.
@Rick Spanier What Sanders could do and has done has triggered or accelerated a left swing in "the pendulum," both in the Democratic Party and more generally. It's difficult to see him getting elected until his 18-35 yo support (which is impressive) ages another ten years and votes in higher proportions. By then, Bernie will be 88 or dead.
Hopefully this swing will produce another younger leader who could continue Bernie's legacy.
1
@MKR When Bernie's base ages (ten years from now) they will have kids and stable jobs and will reject a "revolution" that disrupts their lives.
“The only question is one of pacing: Does one demand immediacy, or is one satisfied with gradualism?”
I think that depends greatly on whether one makes a living wage and already has affordable healthcare. It’s considerably more urgent for those that do not have this. It sounds very tone deaf for moderates to lecture people who do not share the benefits they do about how they must be patient and wait, wait, wait.
4
The Bernie Sanders "revolution" is a political movement a presidential candidate in a national election.
In response the NYTimes and most mainstream pundits have created something call the "Moderate Democrat" who is committed to "gradual reform".
But what are these "gradual reforms"? More critically, what have policies of the Democrats actually been?
The Democrats bailed out banks but not homeowners. We know the party supported the financialization of the economy and the resultant flood of over seas investment.
This has produced a rising GDP and the dominance of Wall Street, but also crippling inequality.
Democrats ended welfare but never replaced it with job-fare. Democrats gave us mass incarceration when we asked for a comprehensive approach to drug addiction and crime prevention.
Democrats have failed to roll back anti-labor laws while still courting the labor vote.
And Democrats have supported every disastrous American war from Vietnam to the still endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So where have these "moderates" that we keep hearing about been? When Obama prosecuted more whistle blowers than any other president and reneged on government transparency was this a "moderate" policy?
The reason there is a Bernie revolution is because the Democratic Party abandoned its roots and caste its lot with the multi-nationals, not the people.
Regardless of what happens in November this revolution will continue because you have left us with no other choice.
13
Exactly! How many years are we expected to patiently wait for real reform?
Inequality is a threat to everyone. How many gig workers will not be able to stay home if they get the corona virus because they have no paid sick leave? How fast will the virus spread if it gets into the homeless population?
2
@Drspock
Democrats led by Obama not only bailed out the very corporations and banks that have caused the disaster but they also did so on the backs of the poor retired folks solely dependent on Social Security. They denied the paltry Cost of Living Raises (COLA) to the Social Security recipients (2009, 2010).
Throw 4 trillion dollars to the over greedy, over fed, obese banks and corporations but deny the average $4 COLA increase to the poor senior citizens? This is what America is about?
And now, so many are talking about getting back to Obama days! Is this delusional or insanity or both?
I voted for the known vs the unknown. We would rather suffer in the present than risk an unknown future. Trump and Sanders represent the unknown.
4
Gee, we know Reps and Dems for many many years. As matter of fact that is only what we know. You can argue Trump was somewhat unknown, but by now we know him as well.
Bernie Sanders has been a fringe player in American politics his entire adult life and he’s been more successful in that role than anyone else. You have to give credit where credit is due, but Sanders elevation to presidential candidate in 2016 would seem to have been grounded in issues and events that soured many voters in both parties on the old, established order. That rejection gave us Trump who vaguely promised to drain the swamp and return America to its former level of greatness with no details. It didn’t matter. Details only get in the way. Image is everything. Being an older, white male is currently central to that image. Biden, like Trump, has no great need of policy initiatives. Representative Clyburn understands this and his Biden endorsement speech ended with the words “We know Joe. Joe knows us.” Contrast this with Clinton and Warren who developed elaborate, detailed policy statements on a wide range of issues. Warren’s popularity nosedived in Iowa not long after she explained how she would pay for M4A. In both cases they turned off large segments of the electorate. Details only get in the way. And, they are women. Image is everything.
1
"Revolution" has become a buzzword that blends the critical elements of anger, hate, and fear. On the one hand, Sanders attacks billionaires buying elections, on the other, he offers monetary rewards practically with no limits while hiding the cost of those rewards. And, monies he wants to spend to get those votes are not his, it belongs to us.
The answer to the problems he articulates is not in the rewards-based "revolution" but level headed, steady progress.
2
Seems to me,Bernie is quite open that his programs will cost money and taxes will go up for the rich folks. It is moderates that who actually claim to achieve the same results while hiding the cost. Take the public option Take the public option. The moderates claim it will cost only 1t vs 30t for M4A, totally ignoring 49t that ordinary Americans will have to pay for their program through higher premiums and deductible. And passing through the Congress? if the public option is so easy to pass, why it was not pass before when Obama was the President, Biden was VP and the Congress was Democratic?
1
@yulia, it seems to me that Sanders never mentions the total cost of his proposals nor how he will implement them. As to the taxes, even he admits there will be tax increases on the middle class. Why is the insistence that this "revolution" will be a piece of cake and will not cost anything to the middle class? The USA is not Denmark, nor is it Switzerland, or Turkey, ...
Tell that to someone living on the street.
Incrementalism is fine, but it assumes that society remains static while we take our time to institute these gradual changes. It does not, and so what looks like small steps forward is really 'one step forward, two steps back'.
6
Incrementalism might work when the problems started but we’ve had 40 years of wage stagnation. That’s not going to be fixed with a few little tweaks.
2
A few points. We lost Kamala and Booker and others because of one thing: money. Sanders can raise it, and I assume now so can Joe. The others could not. Blame our broken campaign finance laws which allow a Steyer and a Bloomberg.
Virginia, a rapidly changing state thanks to D.C. suburbs had every group in the party, except college kids voting Biden. Every primary for congressional or Senate Democrats went mainstream not hard Left.
You correctly, and ominously point out that Sanders is not denouncing both his followers (and Trump sock puppets) false narrative of a grand conspiracy. Millions of voters at polls on Tuesday are not a conspiracy. It's called democracy.
5
@Unworthy Servant
You can't just blame money for the losses of Booker and Harris. She showed she was nowhere close to ready for prime time. For some reason, voters didn't seem to take to Booker. Even his own CBC, who along with many black voters, seemed to prefer Biden even back then.
I still think it's kind of a shame about Booker though. Very smart and underrated candidate. Still think he'd make a great VP and liaison to Congress. And I'd feel a lot safer on his hands if something should happen to one of the old guys while in office than I would with, say, Stacy Abrams.
1
Booker vote against the bill that would allowed to import cheaper medicine from Canada. He was one of 13 Dems who voted against and blocked the bill. Why? Clearly, because behind his nice facade and nice world, there are corporate interests that are more dearly to him than plight of millions of Americans.
I agree with your reasoning - the Democratic candidate must also appeal to swing voters and moderate Republicans, and in order to win them over, the candidate's policies and vision must be centrist - but centrist for this country. The priority for the Democrats must be to win this election both for the presidency and down ticket. That said, I would hope that the progressive wing use its leverage to negotiate with Biden and the party moderates for significant change in the status quo after the inauguration. 100 days to take the first steps - or else. Public option, cheap public higher ed, more housing, tax and constrain the financial sector, an end to the gig economy, gun control, election reform from gerrymandering to the electoral college to money...get Elizabeth Warren involved. Change is sorely needed. None of it can happen overnight anyway.
4
Oh great. Vote for us and we will do something for you after the election. Because politicians have never ever decided to change their minds once they got into office, right?
The urgency for change is based mostly on one's perception of the need. We are right now at about 1 degree F above preindustrial and headed for 4 or 5 degrees by the time my grandson is 89. Fires, famine, monster hurricanes, NY city under water may be headed our way. Some are proposing a green New Deal and being criticized for pushing too hard for change. Its too timid if anything. I get people want to beat Trump, but when we do, we need sweeping change or we will have Ted Cruz in 4 years. We need a program that proposes real solutions to many problems and paints the Republicans as obstacles. Reality will move them out of the way probably sooner rather than later, provided the alternative is sound and plausible.
3
With regards to Sen. Bernie Sanders, an interview by Rachel Maddow on 3/4/2020 is very revealing. She asked Sen. Sanders why he did not ask Rep. Jim Clyburn for his endorsement. Sen. Sanders' answer was very revealing. Sen. Sanders stated that he and Rep. Clyburn have very different politics and that, "There is no way on God's earth that Clyburn was going to endorse me ". Just take a moment and think about that answer. What does it mean? Bernie claimed to like Rep. Clyburn but his very bitter answer shows otherwise. Sen. Sanders explained it by saying that he and Rep. Clyburn have very different politics. What? If his politics are not similar to those of Rep. Clyburn, a beloved leader and an icon within the Black community and among Democrats in general, I have a problem with that.
4
@Mark Clark Puh-lease. He and Joe are longtime friends and it was a known fact that he was going to endorse him. Bernie speaks plainly.
Why do you have the problem? Do you think Sanders policies as M4A will hurt the black communities?
In reality, the moderates and the progressives want the same things: fair taxation, reversal of Citizens' United, affordable health care, attention to climate change, etc. The fundamental difference between the two is: the incrementalists (moderates) - unlike the progressives - want reform to be slow and sketchy enough so as not to offend their corporate donors. It is not possible to achieve necessary change while appeasing corporate America at the same time. A Biden Presidency will at best be like treading water plus a lot of meaningless comforting rhetoric for four years. On the other hand, I am afraid that a Bernie Presidency can not be. Some choice!
4
Since the Reagan administration the GOP has worked to undo much of the New Deal, and has successfully shifted the political dialogue to that end. This imbalance has created a widespread consensus that Sanders' progressive proposals are "revolutionary", even though they only include European-style healthcare access and a return to Eisenhower-era taxation of the wealthy. It is revealing that the media now presents a flawed, uninspiring and frequently befuddled candidate as our only viable alternative to the present administration.
3
Folks in a large poll were asked, a year or more ago, which democratic candidate they thought most electable---Biden. Then they were asked which candidate they would make president if they had a magic wand--Warren. There's only one way to connect those two dots. If Warren's first name was Warren she would be our nominee.
6
Most Americans aren't clamoring for "revolutionary" change, which is why most Americans don't support Bernie Sanders campaign, and more broadly, Progressive ideology.
That's not to say that progressives haven't expanded their base of support - they have - but if Super Tuesday verified anything, it's that that support maxes out at about 35ish% of Democrats. With all due respect to Progressives, that's not even 25% of "all voters".
You can't win on huge sweeping change initiatives with less than a quarter of the country supporting not just the theory of what you are selling, but also the implications of turning those theories into actual laws.
My biggest gripe with Progressives isn't the ideology they are selling, it's the moral juxtaposition they have created in the process. Progressives see themselves as right and good and true, and paint those that disagree with a broad brush of ignorance, corruption and immorality. This has proven to not just be foolish, but entirely counter-productive to their cause.
When people argue that Bernie Sanders employs the same blame and scare tactics as Donald Trump, Progressives repudiate that idea on moral grounds without taking a moment to consider if it is, in fact, and authentic view from a reasonable person. This, unfortunately, reinforces their morality loop and insulates them from true debate and the only real basis to enact lasting change - compromise.
6
Well, by the same token, considering losses of the moderates in last 20 years, not so many people want the moderates in power that is why we have Trump and the Rep Congress. I love how the moderates call on the progressive to 'look at reality'. Of course, by their logic, considering the losses of Dems in last 20 years or even longer, Dems should give up and merrily join the Rep Party.
The assumption that we have "slow, steady progress" vs "revolutionary change" is more than highly questionable.
6
Of course, if there is to be progress, which is by no means guaranteed however the elections go, it will be slow and incremental. Congress will have to say yes. The Senate, in which a minority of the population hold the majority of seats, must say yes. Revolution or reform is a false choice.
Was Trump a revolution? A revelation, perhaps, but no revolution. Lots of ugliness, but big money is still in control, as it has been. How much control it maintains will depend on the elections, but it is not going aways anytime soon. Biden has always been a big money player; Warren and Sanders not so much, but neither one as president would have the power to do more than mitigate the situation.
2
Charles,
Another thought provoking column - thank you.
Unfortunately, like another Times columnist who I read regularly you made statements that distracted me from the overall message.
I do not base my vote for a candidate on their gender or race. Moreover, voters selected Biden and Sanders not for their elderly whiteness but because of their policy appeal, just as I voted for Obama with the same motivation.
Regards,
Daniel
4
"Will 'Vote Blue No Matter Who' have currency if the nominee must be chosen at the convention or if Sanders’s supporters again believe that the 'establishment' has conspired against him to unfairly thwart him?"
For crying out loud, Sanders isn't even a registered Democrat.
4
@Schaeferhund
I'm not a registered Democrat either, and I support Sanders. However, unlike '16, the Tuesday primaries seemed to be run fairly enough. Without the ability of Superdelegates to override the will of regular voters, of course Biden supporters and voters had the freedom to endorse and vote as they see fit, Biden seemed to have won fair and square. I also claim to freedom to vote as I see fit in November. I don't know how that will be as of yet, but i can tell you for free it won't be for Trump or Biden.
2
@Schaeferhund "...Sanders’s supporters again believe that the 'establishment' has conspired against him..."
When Amy and Pete quit the day before Super Tuesday, to back Biden, that is suspicious.
While Joe's vision, track record and charisma may be lacking regarding the challenges we face and pace with which we "Should" pursue change if we don't first restore a level of normalcy there is no happy ending. Normalcy used to be a low bar, a president interested in serving the public not himself, a president who doesn't lie to us all the time, a president who treasures the rule of law, the constitution and democracy and a president who will restore dignity and our respect in the world. We must have this first! I do hope that Joe surrounds himself with a more imaginative, progressive, younger and diverse cabinet to chart the future.
8
Although nothing will likely happen until Warren makes a decision to stay or leave, I'd really like to know Biden's and Bernie's VP choices.
Their ages concern me, and I'd also like to see some diversity on the ticket.
Booker, Buttigieg, Castro, Harris, Klobuchar, O’Rourke, Patrick and Yang would all be a good running mate or Cabinet member.
Warren, if she withdraws, would be a great VP or Sec. of Treasury or Federal Reserve Chair.
Having some of these people on Biden's or Bernie's team would help unite and ease concerns.
Above all, we need a huge turnout.
There is no not voting this year if your preferred candidate doesn't wind up the nominee.
Myself, not a Bernie fan, but it is hard to see how he would be worse than the dysfunctional Trump government we have now. If he[s the one, he'll get my vote.
Vote Democratic in November.
Every office, every seat.
Holding the House and flipping the Senate is even more important than the Oval Office.
Vote D.
13
As a dual Canadian-US citizen I am probably more liberal than most (I voted NDP in Canada) and I agree with Bernie on almost all issues. Why doesn't this country have health care for all?!
But millions of Americans are afraid to vote for a Democratic Socialist or a woman. And until they are, yes, getting rid of Trump is more important.
I hope if Biden's the nominee he makes a strong, smart VP choice to ensure it's not all old white guys vying for the top spots.
6
I live in Virginia which has recently become a solid Blue State and the key to change is to have a Democratic Presidency, House and Senate. Then, and only then, will we be able to make the changes this country so desperately needs. We are seeing legislation passed now that we have waited decades to happen. It is inspiring. So much so, that we had a record turnout in the Super Tuesday primary. That is the way forward.
6
Mr. Blow, I read every Column and appreciate your insight.
I disagree with your assessment. The fact that Sanders is neck to neck with Biden -- and building such a successful campaign is evidence that a growing number of people recognize the need to change. The fact that Sanders has been able to get this far in a grassroots funded campaign (no corprorate money, no superpac money) is historic.
In exit polls, medicare for all nearly always gets majority support. Kennedy's medicare architect designed it with the plan for it to be incrementally expanded to include everybody, but subsequent democrats refused to consider this option and 40 years later we have crisis.
With regards to climate, we do not have time for incremental change. Wait really does mean never. Scientists are telling us we need to take radical steps to curtail climate change. Lives are at risk. Our oceans are dying. We are living in a time of mass extinction. Young people see this. They have grown up watching us do nothing.
Biden is a conservative. He has championed austerity measures including cuts to social security and medicare throughout his career. He supports Fracking which is one of the most potent contributors to climate change. He opposed busing and he wrote the 1994 crime bill inventing the term "superpredators." He chaired the Clarence Thomas hearings and disrespected Anita hill and other victims. He drummed up dem support for GWB's Iraq war.
6
Few seem aware of the extent to which Biden supported deregulation of the banks. In voting to repeal Glass-Steagall, he helped set the stage for the Great Recession. And hailed as one of Biden's major legislative victories was the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA), characterized as "perhaps the most anti–middle class piece of legislation in the past century." Adam Levitin of The American Prospect states, "Not only did the law discourage bankruptcy filings, but it made it harder to wipe out credit card debt and student loans in bankruptcy. The result was greater profits for consumer lending businesses, many of which are based in Biden’s state of Delaware. Not surprisingly, then, by lowering the risk of bad lending decisions, the Biden bankruptcy bill unleashed a glut of aggressive private student lending, which has contributed to the massive rise in student loan debt." https://www.google.com/amp/s/prospect.org/api/amp/politics/bidens-votes-on-the-bankruptcy-bill-middle-class-joe/
Well, I guess you don’t have Mike Bloomberg to kick around anymore.
Now it’s just a question of who will do the best job for Americans along and if that translates to defeating trump, which is still job 1.
In my opinion, your opinion is important, but you should focus on getting people to go to the polls and vote. In 2016, there were a lot of factors that contributed to trump’s election, but the people who didn’t vote was a big one. Voting is a right, not an obligation. In my opinion, that right also gives each of us a responsibility to cast a ballot so that the peoples’ choice is made by all the people.
That also means that tactics to suppress voting should be outlawed and the laws already in place should be strictly enforced. Manipulation is a dangerous weapon and it must be defended against.
2
Revolutions almost always end badly. Edmund Burke's "Reflections on the Revolution in France" should be required reading for Bernie Sanders and each one of his supporters.
6
@Mad Moderate
What Sanders represents is a not a revolution but a counter-revolution. A return to pre-corporate leadership that we had prior to the 1980s. It isn't radical. It is our last and only chance to restore the Republic and to mitigate and adapt to the climate catastrophe now unfolding. California's firs season is upon us and in the antarctic its been close to 70 degrees. It's now or never.
2
@Al M There are big structural problems in the US economy. But Bernie a) would lose to Trump with disastrous consequences for everything Progressives hold dear and b) even if he won, the president alone does not have the ability to alter the structure of the economy in any meaningful way. "Alone" is what most characterizes Sanders. He's shown himself to be closed to compromise and cooperation... doesn't play well with others.
As for the word "revolution"... that's Sanders' word. He chooses it for himself.
3
Sanders is not a revolutionary by any stretch of the imagination. He’s not even a socialist, as Krugman has tirelessly pointed out. A social democrat.
6
We lost our best centrist President candidate Bloomberg. I attribute much of the vitriol directed at him from this column.
There are no perfect candidates, and we lost an excellent one. It’s too bad that this column and columnist was blinded to the many fine qualities he has.
For someone who has his focus on getting Trump removed, he has moved us closer to Trump. Sanders can not win, and Biden is asleep at the wheel.
4
History has shown us that at least in a democracy the former is the way to go, restoration and reform.
If you do the latter, history has shown us you get a disaster or worse the end of the democracy.
Lincoln carefully and legally ended slavery not what the abolitionists wanted to do, break the constitution and end democracy as we know it.
FDR brought us the safety net and financial regulation, not an end to capitalism that socialists and communists wanted.
MLK successfully ended discrimination with legal means, not revolution and avoided a race war where blacks would have been much worse off.
The list goes on and on.
Fight Trump with Biden not Sanders. Americans do not want socialism and a revolution.
They want moderate, progressive answers to issues that Trump demagogued.
Democracy and working within the law work slow and are frustrating but history has shown us its the best way to go.
11
Lincoln carefully and legally ended slavery? Ok, yes. It also caused a war. Sometimes you have to fight for what is right.
@Paul I find your aversion to change rather startling given the fact that as an American citizen are you not also a citizen of a country that was born from a Revolution. If Biden is the nominee in your next election I fear that the current man in your Oval Office will steamroll over him due to Biden's lack of conviction policy wise. If some how Biden wins the only benefit you and your fellow citizens will get is to be able to respect the occupant of that office again.
MLK successfully ended discrimination? What country do you live in?
I was an early supporter of Warren, and I am not baffled by her waning support. The problem? She never compared her brand of progressivism with Sander’s. She repeated over and over that she was just like Sanders until she seemed like nothing but a loyal puppy. I wanted to scream at her to say exactly why she would make a better president than Sanders.
4
@Kb Like you, I was an early supporter not baffled by her loss of support. She went completely off message. What was/is she about? Who knows?
The inability of Democrats to unite astounds me. The entire world is facing some of the most serious and intractable problems it has ever faced and yet liberals and moderates within the same party can't even seem to have a conversation about them.
The role of government is to lead and in a democracy that starts with consensus. I would suggest that the liberals and moderates at least agree on what problems we're going to tackle and to have a conversation about them. In any event, anyone who says they have all the answers to our problems in their back pocket ought to be committed to the looney bin.
So, I'd suggest that we start with Biden offering Warren the 2nd slot with the promise of giving her a seat at the table where her views will be listened to. What a novel idea, a coalition. Parliamentary democracies everywhere having been doing this forever.
That ought to give the Democrats the immediate solution to our number one problem; removing Trump from office. With that fresh wind in their sails, they ought to be encouraged enough to start solving a few more problems.
2
I’m ok with Biden/Warren. If he goes with Buttigieg or Klobuchar or another moderate, I doubt very much we’ll be out from under Trump.
While I agree with much of what Blow writes, his essay is a bit too rigidly binary for me. I get the temptation, when the Democratic primary has been narrowed to a "two-old-white-men" race. But casting these contests in rigid binary terms perpetuates the paralyzing divisions in our politics and governance.
I would add to Blow's observations the old saw that you can't do anything about public policy unless you're in office. Once you get there, you can focus on what you want to do and how, and what you can do in partnership with Congress under current political circumstances. Apparently, a significant number of Democratic primary voters believe that we can't get into office without appealing to "moderate" Democrats, Independents and Republicans. As it happens, that's also what we need to govern successfully on behalf of those who desperately need the government's support.
6
Our choices now are a longer stretch before we destroy most of the habitable Earth, a shorter span, or an accelerating span. Guess which candidate leads to which? I am learning to be mournful for my son’s future.
4
Very surprised by this from Mr Blow. Particularly the “suspect” comment about one candidate while discussing the original diversity of the group. Sanders’ views, which he has held his entire political career, are no longer revolutionary. And, quite frankly, necessary. With fewer and fewer employers offering benefits, access to health care is imperative. Biden, extending Obama’s 8 years of slow (snaillike) progress is not enough. There will be people dying in the streets. And if it is everyone’s chief concern is to remove Trump from office, Biden’s nomination will ensure four more years of this nightmare. Biden has obviously lost a few steps (and I won’t go further). He will be on stage alone during debates. It will not be pretty.
6
@DP "Biden has obviously lost a few steps (and I won’t go further). He will be on stage alone during debates. It will not be pretty."
Too bad Bernie can't be Joe's pinch hitter. Joe debating Trump will be a couple hours of elder abuse. People will cry.
The problem is the middle class is in slow and steady regress, not progress. A middle-of-the-road candidate is in the middle of a road heading downhill. We need to go up hill.
People believe they have more chance to lose than they have chance to gain. They don't believe in themselves.
2
@WJL
That may change as we are entering a severe recession caused by coronavirus that will may take years to recover from. Meanwhile, we have a liable planet to lose and it is going fast.
1
Trump was the big winner on Super Tuesday, in my view. If the youth stayed home for Bernie, you can bet your house they will stay home for Biden. Sorry, but if the Democrats honestly think that Biden is the best shot to beat to Trump, I fear they're going get deeply depressed come Nov. 3, and may regret their choices this week.
This is about the Democratic establishment believing more in an elderly statesman who represents the past, instead of someone who's addressing the problems and concerns of our youth.
Of course, the primaries are not over yet, and more surprises could be on the way. (What will Elizabeth Warren do?) But, as is of today, voters will have to choose between an elderly moderate corporate politician and an elderly radical corporate politician. There's not much of a choice there, and the youth know that.
4
I think, Mr. Blow, that "practicality becomes a self-imposed constraint on progressivism". It is such a constraint as to be a hindrance. Slow gradualism is always too slow to effect change in anyone's lifetime, which is why Martin Luther King rejected it.
Practicality is defeatism. It means taking one look at Congress as it is, and giving up in advance, because of a belief that real progressive bills can never make their way into law. Actually, Republicans in Congress are not motivated by reason and the good of the country: witness their incredible obstruction during the Obama years to even the most moderate policies. So the best we can hope for from Biden will be fake progressivism at best, with stasis and gridlock being the most likely outcomes.
We need a revolutionary who will fearlessly find ways to pressure the Republicans. And who will pack the federal courts. The Democrats should have chosen Elizabeth, and now too many are rejecting the next best thing: Bernie.
But actually, the Democratic party won't even make it to the White House with Biden. If it should choose him, it would be making the 2016 mistake all over again. Going with a safe, uninspiring moderate who will lose to Trump in the general election.
4
It is amazing to me that there are people who think that we have the luxury of still talking about divisive issues when the very Republic is in danger. This President and his supporters have transgressed basic Constitutional norms over and over. The roles of the three separate branches of government have been subsumed under this President's thumb. The Courts are packed with conservatives. Our public lands, air and clean water are being compromised because of roll backs of laws and corporate greed. The human rights issues are heinous. Lets steady and restore our Ship of State first by winning the Presidency and winning the Senate (a huge task)! Then we can call upon those able progressives in our Democratic Party to address the basic human rights we deem are so important. We do not have the luxury of a revolution. A rock solid and overwhelming unified blue restoration is needed.
8
There is nothing wrong with slow but steady as we all know from the tortoise and the hare race. The question is - can we start much needed new social programs, tinker to fix weaknesses and continue to grow them. That kind of social change requires a commitment of time far longer than a 4 year term of office. We may have to fundamentally change the vision of America as seen by all Americans. We may need to persuade people that rugged individualism is a thing of the past and probably never really played well in actual towns and neighborhoods. We are indeed all our brothers' & sisters' keepers.
Mr. Blow, as to the sexism you mention regarding Elizabeth Warren I want to say I am not sexist and I think she is not getting the support she needs because she is not the right person for the job. I live in Massachusetts, worked for Hilary last time and do not support Warren for President - I will continue to vote for her for Senate.
2
It is so tiring to see Sanders as labeled as impractical; the Times during the 2016 battle published as article listing the respected economic team that worked out the mechanics of the man’s proposals.
Of course nothing happens until Congress acts – well known fact of government – but Sanders’ Times’ interview by Editorial Board gave a clear report that the man will march out of D.C. as needed to pressure for change in congressional districts – if needed.
This is not a more of the same politician – bless him.
5
It's encouraging that there is almost no mention of the fact that Bernie Sanders is Jewish, another group, like women, who have historically suffered voter discrimination. Warren is indeed the smartest candidate with a proven record of making radical change (the Consumer Protection Bureau), but maybe the fragility of that institution has been instructional to voters who want solid changes that won't fade. Assuming anti-feminine bias is one reason why women are afraid to vote for a woman, because they think OTHER people are biased and the candidate will lose. Better to leave that assumption aside.
I hope that the Democrats will have a more robust plan for what they will do if they control government than Obama did. He frittered away a couple of years trying to make nice with the Republicans and we all suffered for it.
3
Believe it or not, my father grew up in a largely barter-based farm community where money (hard cash) was rare and hard-to-get. Money was not the first resource they turned to in need.
Today, money is everything. Those who have a lot of it use it like a club on the rest of us, and if there is a threat of their losing any of theirs or being taxed at a high rate, they can always dump their stocks and cause a panic, thus scaring people into conformity.
The problem is, the big corporations are predatory and cannibalistic. They can't just sit on their $billions and be happy keeping it. They're at war with each other and the rest of the population upon whom they rely for more cash transfusions like in the Crash of 2008.
The extreme wealth disparity in our country is a bigger destabilizer than any Progressive ever dreamed of, but since we are all afraid of losing our grip in society, or our status, we conform and continue to feel that the status quo is the way to go.
The problems are still out there for the vast majority of the population, the National Debt is out of control, and there is no indication that either party is going to change anything. Biden doesn't lift my hopes or spirits. Trump depresses me.
3
The improbability of anything passing the congress that has a public rather private based dimension is the reality. The congress is now hopelessly divided. This is a period where money rules the halls of congress more than ever. And the voters are encouraged to play along. National health insurance is treated like a communist plot to overthrow capitalism. When in fact it has been shown over and over again that better health care outcomes and less cost are the result of gov't run programs. Free markets are generally regarded as self evidently superior to any mode of economic activity yet they often devolve into monopolistic oligarchies as the biggest fish eat the smaller ones. Housing crises are created when gentrification drives out the poor and middle class for those with money who want exclusivity. Public housing is pushed further and further out as the desired real estate which often were once blighted neighborhoods takes over. Ultimately the politics in this country will either become a big money derived oligarchy or democracy that pushes back. The congress as it is now constituted is dominated by Citizens United politics.
2