I think she has cemented the progressive wing frontrunner for now. She has more to her than Sanders.
I reserve the right to change my mind (again) but after last night’s performance I’m on team Warren. She struck me as having the most well thought out plans for addressing the major issues, especially health care.
She’s at the top of my list now, too - accomplished, with a compelling background (not that it’s Trump-proof), steady and unflappable and articulate. I wish she weren’t so open about adopting positions from other candidates that prove popular, but that’s how the process does work. Her age isn’t a factor because she is still vigorous, while the older candidates clearly are not. It isn’t ageism, btw, it’s stamina-ism and alertness-ism.
I’d be happy with Buttigieg as President, too, or Booker, with Harris and Klobuchar as my third tier, all for similar reasons. Of course I’ll vote for the Dem nominee, since any of their candidates are far superior to the incumbent, even Williamson. But Biden and Sanders have both had their runs already and there isn’t enough left in their tanks. O’Rourke did a fine job starting his Senate campaign and needs to continue it. Castro wasn’t going anywhere and now he can’t, and Yang needs to quit making the rest of the party look as foolish as he is.
And, of course, “Nevertheless, she persisted”.
There would certainly be some satisfaction, I won’t deny it, in seeing Moscow Mitch’s face at her inauguration, although there would be quite a bit more in him no longer being majority leader.
She and Bernie did nothing to dispel the very valid points that other candidates made against their healthcare proposals. Not a single thing she said answered the basic question of why we can’t let people decide for themselves whether they want to be on “Medicare for all who want it” instead of forcing everyone onto Medicare for all. And she makes the same error a good friend of mine made in assuming that everyone hates their health insurance company. I showed him some polling demonstrating otherwise, and he was genuinely shocked and said he must be living in a bubble and that he would have to reevaluate his support for Warren.
Do people like their insurance companies, or just the coverage their plan provides (if they’re fortunate enough to have one)? Would they still like them if they saw what they really cost, compared to Medicare? There’s more to it.
The result of the next phase of reform is unlikely to be exactly what anyone currently proposes. The political negotiation process would certainly leave some room for the lobbyist-heavy Big Insurance - even Britain’s NHS has room for it - even if it amounts to just selling more Medicare Supplement packages. But a negotiation starts with asking for more than you know you’re going to get, and it isn’t wrong of Warren to stake out such a position.
On the other side, we’re *still *waiting for “Repeal and Replace”, when all we’ve actually had is “Vandalize”.
I am now shifted to soft on Team Warren but I am still concerned that she has not yet had to demonstrate any ability to weather attacks with a track record of doing poorly when attacked in the past. And I am concerned about some things, such as the pandering she does on some issues that she is smart enough to know better about (e.g. nuclear power), and the political loser for that is MfA.
Still for now I am more believing the theory that supports her electability than the one for Biden. It’s not his gaffes though. Sanders would be toast; Harris showed she does not have the goods; and no one else has any chance whatsoever.
Given that it is rapidly becoming clear that the race is shaping up to be her v Biden I am surprised everyone else has avoided going after her at all. She’s been given a kid glove approach and I don’t think it serves her well. People need to see how she can be strong and effective in the face of attacks, if she can be.
You don’t ever worry about being even slightly premature, do you? 
Well way back when I was dating … ������
So if she doesn’t show the ability to weather attacks, are you back softly on team Biden? Or was his garbled debate finish disqualifying?
LOL! ISWYDT
I’m not about to doodle pictures of the Blue Cross/Blue Shield logo with little hearts all around it, but I actually do get a warm feeling when I see it. You, my aforementioned friend, and Warren may all feel that I am wrong to have this reaction, but I doubt I am anywhere near alone.
Probably back to Biden. They weren’t disqualifying to me, just enough to make me more worried about his general campaign than I am currently of hers. It’s still close. He was fine for two hours forty five. Her proving unable to weather an attack? That would be disqualifying.
Even when it’s on a bill with a box labeled “Patient Balance” at the bottom, and a multi-digit number printed in it?
I went without health insurance entirely for over a decade, and then spent a couple years with a very bare-bones health plan. Now I have a low deductible and never get denied or seriously delayed for anything, unlike my Canadian relatives. That same bill they send also shows how much they are paying on my behalf for some very expensive sleep studies and complex, high-tech medical equipment. I have no complaints.
At the moment she is not giving much away to attack policy wise. Several others are in line with her. It’s when the stage starts getting smaller and the protection of a one-percenter willing to take on Biden and take the hits goes that the race becomes truly alive.
For now her biggest problem will be if she attaches herself too close to Sanders who has plenty of subject matter to attack. But she is smart and seems aware that a dose of pragmatism is needed.
And for the record no democrat is going to bring up the Native American thing to jab her and not once in three debates has she been asked about it.
Yes, BCBS is much better than no coverage at all. It seems what you’re happiest about is simply *having *coverage. But it’s hardly the best you can do.
Here’s the thing for me: being able to weather an attack is generally a skill you learn, not an innate ability. Given the DNA test debacle, we can assume she’s not a natural. She is unfortunately set up as a minor saint in the party and so I seriously doubt she’s going to get the practice she needs.
So if “not being able to weather an attack” is your line in the sand for Warren, I advise you to accept that it’s likely true and/or get over it. If you are stuck on the notion of only considering the top two polling, you are faced with two very flawed candidates. You shouldn’t take Biden’s gaffumbling as so “baked in” to his current numbers. When you’re as old as him, people read stuff into it even if you’ve been doing it forever. Most people voting haven’t been closely following Biden forever.
I would not trade it for the coverage my mom and sister get in Canada (or sometimes don’t get, like when my sister went down to Seattle to pay for her own knee surgery after getting tired of waiting). But Warren wants to force me to do so. As Mayor Pete very astutely wondered aloud, why can’t she trust people to make their own choices?
Would any of them trade their Canadian coverage for BCBS, costs included, though? Would you?
They are fiercely loyal to their system and would not trade. But I’m saying I wouldn’t trade either. I would rather stay with BCBS even with the costs rather than have something “free” that includes the long waits they endure.
Again, why not let everyone choose for themselves rather than force everyone onto the new government system? As long as you have something to cover people who don’t have coverage now, what’s the problem?