Whether the next president wants Medicare for All or Medicare for All That Want It seems like a small issue. Whoever wins will need to be flexible and work with Congress on a bill that can pass and makes sense. The details really do not matter at that point, assuming they’re not advocating something ridiculous (Mexico will pay for the wall!). All the Democratic candidates would work to make things better, and Trump won’t. That’s the issue.
I think Mayor Pete is the centrist break in case of emergency candidate. Unfortunately Joe Biden is taking the wind out of his sails due to name recognition. That may change by Iowa. It would be nice if it came down to Buttigieg vs. Warren. IMHO that would be the best case scenario going forward from Super Tuesday through the end of the primaries.
Oh, and the notion of “Warren’s coronation” is ludicrous, given that a few months ago, it was Biden who was going to be “coronated”. Objection to Warren being “coronated” basically just amounts to objecting to the fact that, in the end, one candidate is going to win the primary.
Since that “pivot” comes just a week after his exploratory committee and months before his actual campaign launch, I think a lot of people would call that consistent.
…a lot of people can think whatever they like. A lot of people see Mayor Pete as nothing but an empty suit. A lot more people think Biden or Warren should be the democratic nominee for President of the United States. To flip from “Medicare for all” to “not Medicare for all” in less than a year is a pretty big flip.
It’s a minor flip. Very few people who favor one will have strong feelings against the other. (and among those that do have strong feelings, I’d bet they favor Pete’s proposal as less “threatening.”) Does a public option really turn people off enough to check out of the 2020 election?
…the difference between universal coverage and non-universal coverage is not a “minor flip.” Its an entire paradigm. Yes: people have strong feelings about this. I’m surprised you’ve missed the healthcare debates on these boards alone, let alone the debates that have taken place in public. Pete’s entire schtick is to be “less threatening.” No big ideas, focus tested policies that are right-down-the-middle.
And I’ve consistently said whomever gets the nomination should get the support. If Mayor Pete gets the nomination I’ll be happy to shut-up about him and would encourage everyone to back him. That doesn’t mean that I think his version of “a public option” would turn people off at the next election. It just means I personally think there are better options out there than his proposals.
I can agree with that. There are probably better options from a policy perspective. I wish elections were about policy.
I could happily vote for most of the current field (and would definitely vote for any of them, even Bernie, who gets the nominations)
I guess my point is that by the time we get to January 2021, the next President will probably be advocating for the best program they think they can get through Congress, regardless of what they think the best hypothetical plan would be. Warren could shift to Pete’s plan, or vice versa.
…Warren isn’t going to shift to Pete’s healthcare plan.
Congress might. Is she going to veto it?
And it isn’t just the flip, but that he’s attacked other candidates for supporting it, when a year ago, that was his stated position.
It’s one thing to change one’s mind, but if you held a particular position a year ago, you at least ought to consider it a reasonable position for others to take, even though you’ve abandoned it.
And if you’ve swung so far that you no longer consider your last year’s position even reasonable for others to hold, then boy howdy, you sure were an idiot a year ago, why should we think you’re smart now?
…Congress isn’t Warren. Congress aren’t going to adopt a barely thought-out-plan from the guy who will probably eventually rank maybe fourth or fifth in the race for the nomination.
Somehow I picture asahi with several men in black leather jackets behind him speaking in clumsy English, “Emergency. Everybody to get from street. Emergency. Everybody to get from street.”
Thank you for the refreshing common-sense. All the hand-wringing over M4A details is just silly at this point.
[quote="Banquet_Bear, post:60, topic:843006"]
...we are approaching the endgame here ...
[/QUOTE]
I'm NOT saying you're wrong. But there's something profoundly counter-productive about our political system if, with the election still 12 months away, we're in the "end-game." In the olden days, candidates were often not selected until the summer conventions.
As for a possible Draft Michelle Obama movement:
(1) I realize it’s a dreadfully unlikely long-shot.
(2) While decorum might require that Madame President sit behind the desk, we could expect the First Husband to provide major campaign help and Presidential advice.
(3) It does NOT strike me as far-fetched that next November Trump would have a 65% chance against Warren or an enfeebled Biden but only 25% against Michelle.
(4) Of course she doesn’t want the job. Duh. But with the odds just mentioned and guessing $3 trillion as the cost to America and the world of four more years of Trump, for her to run would be her gift to humanity with a value of over a trillion dollars. At one stroke she would become the greatest philanthropist in all of history.
(I think $3 trillion is a very low under-estimate of the cost of a second Trump term, when climate change, geopolitics and America’s own growing inequities are all considered. Recall that Dubya wasted trillions just with his Iraq misadventure.)
Biden isnt too old, but if you keep saying that, over & over & over, it *will *play into the hands of the GOP and kremlin and give Trump a second term. They, I am certain, appreciate your efforts on their behalf. :rolleyes:
Actually there were several.
trump is 73 years old, but we dont hear the GOP saying he is too old.
Perhaps we Dems should take a page from their book and not attack our own candidates based upon crap like this.
I agree. I have a generic preference for someone younger, but all of the “old” candidates are light years ahead of Trump.
Or, is he actually wanting trump to win, posting stuff like this over and over? 
[QUOTE=Lamoral;21955389…
I’ve said many many times I think Pete Buttigieg is the most likely to beat Trump, and I do not think being gay is as big of a liability as a lot of people think. This isn’t 1992, it’s not even 2002. Being gay isn’t a punchline anymore. It is WAY more accepted than it’s ever been.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but not in “Peoria”.
Mayor Pete is a great guy, and I hope America is ready for him in 2028. But not in 2020, sadly.
He’s young and maybe after getting a senate seat or on the cabinet, he can take the electorate by storm in about a decade. Let’s hope.