McClatchy: “Warren’s summer-long rise in polls and fundraising success in the Democratic presidential primary is usually attributed to her detailed policy agenda or longstanding appeal to liberal diehards.”
“But Warren supporters and other friendly Democrats cite another reason for her ascent: Voters who expected to see an awkward policy wonk on the campaign trail are instead impressed by a candidate they describe as authentic and charismatic.”
“That shift has marked a key development in a primary where many Democratic voters say they are most interested in a candidate who can defeat Trump next fall. And it speaks to Warren’s ability to reach beyond her natural base of progressive activists, connecting with voters who might be more ideologically moderate but nonetheless drawn to her.”
New York Times: “The settings on Mr. Biden’s trip were idyllic: a speech on the banks of a river in Dover, a news conference outside of a Portsmouth ice cream shop, a house party in a lush backyard here in Atkinson. But the words suggested that the former vice president is entering a new and more confrontational phase of his 2020 campaign.”
“Mr. Biden’s fresh efforts to highlight distinctions with his rivals — over issues that ranged this weekend from health care and foreign policy, to electability and executive orders — come as he seeks to move on from weeks of scrutiny of his decades-long record, and to offer a more substantive and forward-looking vision beyond his early focus on defeating the president.”
Playbook: “If You’ve watched the NRCC this cycle, you will notice that the GOP’s House campaign arm has focused a good deal on branding incumbent House Democrats as socialists. This is part of a strategy: They believe Democrats have veered far outside the bounds of the traditional Democratic Party, and voters are not going to stand for it.”
“The NRCC is launching socialistshowdown.com today. It’s a ploy to try to foster primary challenges for House Democrats. The banner of the website features Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Sen. Bernie Sanders, Rep. Rashida Tlaib and Rep. Ilhan Omar next to Fidel Castro and Vladimir Lenin.”
“Beto O’Rourke revealed Sunday that his family’s ancestors owned slaves — a fact he said injected new urgency into a slate of policy proposals designed to grapple with slavery’s legacy,” NBC News reports.
“The Guardian first reported O’Rourke’s family history, saying that ‘abundant’ documentation exists on the website Ancestry.com of the couple’s ‘slave-owning’ ancestors and ‘their support for the Confederacy.’”
Politico: “If Bernie Sanders’ team had its way, every reporter covering the Vermont senator would put out a tweet disclosing their unvarnished, personal feelings about the candidate.”
“It’s not going to happen, but campaign manager Faiz Shakir thinks he knows what it would reveal anyway.”
Said Shakir: “This isn’t intended to be a sweeping generalization of all journalists, but there are a healthy number who just find Bernie annoying, discount his seriousness, and wish his supporters and movement would just go away.”
Nate Cohn: “It is commonly assumed that Democrats benefit from higher turnout because young and nonwhite and low-income voters are overrepresented among nonvoters. And for decades, polls have shown that Democrats do better among all adults than among all registered voters, and better among all registered voters than among all actual voters.”
“But this longstanding pattern has become more complicated in the Trump years. The president is strong among less educated white voters, who are also overrepresented among nonvoters. And Democrats already banked many of the rewards of higher turnout in the midterm elections, when the party out of power typically enjoys a turnout advantage and did so yet again, according to 2018 Times/Siena data.”
“The past few weeks have put on remarkable display just how far to the left the Democratic Party has moved, with many in the 2020 presidential field now embracing previously untouchable positions on health care and immigration,” the Washington Post reports.
“Democrats once touted their defense of those with preexisting conditions — a stance supported by the vast majority of Americans — but many leading presidential candidates now support ending the private insurance coverage on which most of the country relies. Democrats used to focus almost exclusively on reuniting migrant children and their families and protecting undocumented immigrants brought here by their parents; now many of the candidates are openly espousing making illegal border crossing a civil offense rather than a criminal one.”
“The high-profile shifts on issues that voters say they care about most mark a risky gambit by many candidates to tap into new energy in the party’s liberal base, the home of some of its loudest voices in the primary season. But it is triggering new worry that it comes at a cost: confirming Republican arguments that Democrats are far out of the mainstream, a threatening posture when moderate suburban voters have been the linchpin to winning general elections and down-ballot races.”
“They believe Democrats have veered far outside the bounds of the traditional Democratic Party, and voters are not going to stand for it.”
On the contrary, AOC and others are a return to the old time values of FDR and the New Deal, and what they want polls surprisingly well with both parties. Especially Medicare For All, it routinely polls in the mid 60’s. As for chanting “Socialism!” it will not work this time, foolish Baby Boomers might buy it, but it does not work on younger Americans.
It might work on the older cohorts whose votes you can count on. You can hear the “too far left” business from a couple of candidates even.Warren still does the best job at explaining the benefits of people-oriented policy. But overall, it is a shame that while the conversation is ripe that there is not enough effort to go for a bigger vision.
“but many leading presidential candidates now support ending the private insurance coverage”
159,000,000 people have employer based health insurance and there are people who telling them it’s going to end for something similar to Medicare that’s going to be better.
“many of the candidates are openly espousing making illegal border crossing a civil offense rather than a criminal one.”
which to most people sounds like and looks like no borders at all.
I don’t care where one sits on the number line in regards to liberal, moderate, or conservative, people are going to respond to these issues. either positively or negatively. Imagine if you will, that you have to give up your employer based health insurance because someone is going to give you something better. Then imagine that you drive, fly, jump, climb, or whatever to cross the border and all you get is a ticket to appear, if someone even bothers to ticket you.
Now imagine an election where those policies are winning policies. On those two things alone, I will predict that we are facing four more years of the current administration. I think many/most people of good character want to vote against Trump, but there is such a thing as a bridge to far for them. One can opine about right and wrong all day long, but ultimately, if you try to push people too far, they will opt for the devil they know – status quo. Anyone who has ever been in change management knows this.
“but many leading presidential candidates now support ending the private insurance coverage”
That’s a lazy sentence. Other than Sanders and Warren (and even she can get a little vague), the other top candidates seems to have a hybrid plan – expand Medicare, phase in single payer, etc..
But that really isn’t the debate, since the Republican plan consists of no longer guaranteeing coverage for pre-existing conditions, kicking kids off their parents’ insurance, allowing insurance companies to cap dollars spent, no longer covering prescription drugs, maternity care, etc..
That’s the debate, and it’s the one Dems had in 2018.
Sure it’s a lazy sentence. But here’s the thing: What will people hear?
1. ending the private insurance coverage
2. Republican plan consists of no longer guaranteeing coverage for pre-existing conditions, kicking kids off their parents’ insurance, allowing insurance companies to cap dollars spent, no longer covering prescription drugs, maternity care, etc..
No need to answer, it’s rhetorical. Lazy people are fed a lazy diet of lazy messages, to fit their lazy approach to the issues.
What we know is that there is and will be a knee jerk response to the meme of ending private insurance AND because at least one said it, they are all associated with it because they are all Democrats. I used to think that people were just ignorant and that if I spent enough time and energy I could educate them. Now I think that they are both ignorant and stupid and cannot be educated. Unfortunately, being stupid does not effect their right to vote and vote they will after they have absorbed lazy memes.
MFA polls high because people think it won’t effect them and their private insurance. Ask the question a different way and you get different answers. A CQ-Roll Call poll reported that voters have different definitions of the idea and polls show the public is wary of eliminating private insurance. A poll released this month by the Navigator Research firm found that 47 percent of registered voters would support a “Medicare for All” program that would provide Medicare to all Americans and eventually eliminate all private insurance, while 73 percent said they would support a “Medicare for All” program that allowed people to buy into Medicare but would allow people to maintain their private insurance. There are 538,000 people employed by the commercial insurance industry. Will they vote for MFA?
If MFA is defined by opponents (or supporters) as ending private insurance it will lose and so will candidates who are associated with it.
I remain pessimistic that we will have a change in administration come 2020.
People will hear effective messaging and there really isn’t any around M4A at all. Lots of people have private insurance and a pretty big group of those don’t like that insurance. For lots of good reasons, too — high deductibles, high co-pays, limited geographic coverage, all of the usual. There are some who really do like their insurance. But as of now there are still large majorities of people polled who are in favor of a single-payer type insurance. An indicator that people are very interested in another option. And what you don’t get here is that there are PLENTY of employers who would love to get out of the managing employee insurance business for something that gives them more price stability over time.
Your pessimism is rooted in how you see people who don’t need insurance or who have insurance they like will react. The people who are pushing changes — whether it is the Biden ACA upgrades or the M4A — are trying to get as many people as possible the health care they need for a reasonable price. If you are not a fan of changes to the health care system, that is OK, but if you want people to know that their ambitions will result in some status quo, you can just take a seat.
I am a fan of changes to the system. I am also a fan of providing as many people as possible the health care they need at reasonable cost. I don’t know why my comments would suggest that I am not, since all I was talking about is messaging and not policy.
And my pessimism is rooted in the fact that people are always more accepting of the devil they know. They don’t have to like their health care coverage, but that doesn’t mean they are not more afraid of what would replace it. What many fail to recognize that is that the opposition will take every opportunity to feed that fear and demonize it.
But, really, this is change management 101 – fear of the unknown. It isn’t rocket science.
P.S. I’m not a big fan of my health care coverage. But that doesn’t mean, I am willing to give it up because someone promises me something better. Lots of people make lots of promises, lots of times. And I’m guessing I’m not alone in that regard.
If you don’t ask for what you want, you won’t get it. So if you want better, figure out what is on offer and ask for it. No doubt the messaging needs a great deal of sharpening up AND it would be REALLY NICE IF DEMOCRATS COULD GET ON A SOLID PAGE HERE. From Biden to Bernie there are good ideas for improving the system.
Who let the rational person in?