An Unforced Error ?

[kentuck]

Did Elizabeth Warren make a political mistake by saying how she would pay for M4A ?

There is no doubt but that her primary opponents will attack her for it.

Was it really necessary for her to come out with all the details for her plan at this time? What is to be gained?

Considering how difficult it was to pass the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), it is difficult to see how Elisabeth's M4A plan could be passed thru the House and Senate at this time?

How difficult will it be for her to recover from this "error"?

[The Mouth]

1. I don't think it was an 'error'

so much as a problematic position she put herself in with no single, good, way out.

She was losing credibility amongst many because it's fine and dandy to have a great program or societal solution, but unless you can explain, in depth and detail to us HOW you are going to pay for it, it makes you look dishonest or at best naive.

Just saying "We'll tax the rich", or "It will be less expensive than the cost now" simply doesn't fly, and I say that as someone who really likes the Senator and would gladly vote for her.

So she was on the horns of a dilemma- either say, with enough detail to satisfy us excel geeks who do budgets and taxes for fun- how it's REALLY going to be paid for, *or* lose credibility.

I give her credit for doing the best she could have, shows bravery. It's not like anyone else has anything that much better to suggest, in my opinion.

[Kahuna7]

6. Yes. If she is the nominee, every Democrat running next year will be forced

to either defend it or oppose it. If they defend it they risk losing their own election. If they decline to defend it that will damage the nominee.

[Baked Potato]

19. This...

Wedge issue we didn’t need.

[brush]

8. Huh? How was that not an error?

The first error was going all in on MFA and saying no one could keep their current healthcare.

This of course led to demands of how to pay for it and being vulnerable to repug spew that it will cost $30,000,000,000 (that's trillions) and lose 200,000 jobs.

Yeah, there was error there and she basically confirmed that it was by now walking it back with a transitional plan to get to MFA. That should've been her position, and the Party's position all along.

As the OP says we all know how hard it was to get the ACA passed and with us taking both the House and Senate highly in doubt, how could one believe that a 30 trillion dollar healthcare plan would pass a repug-held senate?

[Baked Potato]

10. Not brave, IMO

Tactical mistake by her and her staff.

[beastie boy]

21. I don't think she had a choice.

Warren has already gathered as many voters on her right as she could, mainly at the expense of Harris and Biden. (her poll numbers have been leveling off for the past month or so). Now, to expand the base of her support, she has no choice but to look to the left of her. And this means competing directly with Bernie.

And Warren has a plan for this: on the one hand, she has been articulating competing, but more detailed, plans, be it MfA or tax reform, and on the other, she has been courting Bernie to assure his endorsement in the unlikely case he drops out before the Convention. Sanders stands to lose in this race, because he has nowhere to turn for additional support except his core base on the left.

In my opinion, neither Sanders nor Warren have a chance against Biden without the endorsement of the other. It's a zero sum game because they have entered the phase of competing for and splitting the same vote. On the other hand, if the two of them manage, despite their profound ideological differences, to unite their voters behind a single candidate, Biden is in trouble. Of course, Sanders and Warren joining forces is unlikely, especially if Buttigieg manages to replace Sanders as #3 in the race, or if he drops out and endorses Biden, but this is pure speculation at this point

[thesquanderer]

24. I agree, I think it was her best move. Here's why...

To some extent, she has kind of made her name on having well thought out plans for all her positions. That's her brand, if you will. "I have a plan for that." So she doesn't have the luxury that some others have of not providing a lot of detail. That is, the lack of detail on this one issue--and it's a big one--would be conspicuous by its absence, unlike other candidates who have plenty of positions that lack detail.

There was no perfect answer, but if she hadn't come out with a plan, she'd never get away from the criticism of not having a plan. And now at least she can say to the other candidates, "okay, you say your plan is cheaper, but it still costs something, how do YOU pay for YOUR plan... and how do you deal with the fact that it leaves people uncovered or out of pocket for more things?" She can argue from a position of strength.

[The Mouth]

26. "There was no perfect answer, but if she hadn't come out with a plan,

she'd never get away from the criticism of not having a plan"

Thanks, exactly my point, but said better.

[crazytown]

2. Not an error.

There has been enough unforced push back from competing campaigns to say they see a threat. The hyperbole is telling.

[exboyfil]

3. Probably

I think our candidates should recognize that everything will be a negotiation to get passed. I would start with a strong hand with certain key principals that will not be negotiated away.

Still I will happily pull the lever for her in November if Trump is the candidate on the other side.

[abqtommy]

4. I don't see any "error" on the part of Elizabeth Warren. She has a plan that she has

explained. Compare and contrast with the reTHUG's touted "tRUMPcare". Whether we strengthen
the ACA or implement Medicare For All We The People are ahead.

[Baked Potato]

5. To be blunt:

Democrats want to take your guns... CHECK

Democrats want to raise taxes... CHECK

Democrats love Big Government Programs... CHECK

[TidalWave46]

9. Those are just some of the reasons I'm a Democrat!

Glad we are finally saying it.

[Turin_C3PO]

12. We can't give in to

the right wing narrative since Reagan that government programs are a bad thing. They’re not and we should proudly defend successful government programs such as Social Security, Medicare, etc.

[Baked Potato]

15. I want to win

We get a majority, then move on issues. Democrats always show their hands when they don’t have to.

[kentuck]

18. I tend to agree.

Get the majority and then pass your agenda. Republicans never say they are going to give the billionaires a taxcut before the election. They do it after they win.

Democrats might find something there?

[Baked Potato]

20. It's because Democrats are honest folk,

always trying to give people the answers and numbers in advance. We have to get smart to beat these well-trained BS artists.

[TidalWave46]

7. My respect for her has increased.

I don’t think I’m alone in that.

[The Mouth]

14. Agree.

And even if it *WAS* an error, a point I am not going to defend vehemently, HOW ONE RESPONDS TO AN ERROR tells you more about the person than any speech or mere symbolic action they perform.

I'll clarify- I don't like MFA personally, nor do I think it a viable position going into the general; but I'll support the nominee and, in addition, even though Sen Warren isn't my first choice, I give her credit as being perhaps the most knowledgable on the economy and how to balance the potentialities and dangers of capitalism of any.

So, I don't see it as an error, but I'd agree that stridently pushing MFA in the first place may well have been one; we'll see.

[Hoyt]

11. She had to come up with something. Even Sanders said it would increase taxes, implying increases

for most people.

She should have thought about funding, and her credibility, long before being forced into it.

The most damaging aspect of her funding announcement is that the cost is not $34 Trillion over 10 years, but $52 Trillion. $34 Trillion was roughly what we have supposedly been spending through current system.

Not only is it difficult to see how that would be enacted, it's difficult to see how anyone running on that could win the General Election.

I believe a heavily subsidized Public Option will get us to MFA sooner than running on "MFA, whether you want it or not."

[ritapria]

13. Taxes on the Middle Class need go up to finance MFA

It ain't "free stuff" ... MFA should have been enacted 50 years ago …….. It's a Great Deal for most Americans …..

[blm]

16. We all know it will take a few years to hammer out and more to

transition and implement. Some of those railing against it now were fine with Obama speaking supportively of Med4All throughout the 2018 campaign cycle. He considered it a winning issue for Dems.

[beachbumbob]

17. Any one who says M4A will not have an unintendended negative effect on middleclass americans

with taxes are only fooling themselves. We need transition and the best way forward is fix what we know needs fixing with ACA to begin with. People can understand and relate to that, otherwise it all comes across as pie in the sky liberal nonsense

[jcgoldie]

22. Single payer health insurance is "pie in the sky liberal nonsense"

Pretty shocking to read that kind of conservative ideology here on DU on a regular basis because it doesn't suit the platform of your candidate. Please don't tell Canada, Denmark, Norway, Australia, Taiwan and Sweden that they are living in a fantasy land where health insurance is a public right which is extended to everyone.

[AncientGeezer]

29. Most of(maybe all) your listed nations allow a private option.

Sen. Warren's plan would eliminate that option for us....per her.

"Under Ms. Warren’s plan, private health insurance — which now covers most of the population — would be eliminated and replaced by free government health coverage for all Americans. That is a fundamental shift from a market-driven system that has defined health care in the United States for decades but produced vast inequities in quality, service and cost."
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/01/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-medicare-for-all.html

Edit it to add.....it's NOT free.

[Baked Potato]

23. Yes, we need to fix the ACA

And show these MFers we are not abandoning a hard fought win by a two term great President. If we let the ACA go, the Republicans will chalk it up as another cave in by Democrats. The ACA was relatively popular until it was chipped away at. The Public Option can be added with little turmoil and show we are not quitters.

[BlueMTexpat]

25. No, she didn't.

Wait and see.

[LAS14]

27. No way! Her brand is to have a plan. Not a plan like "during the Obama years."

I was so happy that she was able to actually come up with a plan that didn't tax the middle class. Great news coverage! And healthcare for all is SO COMPLICATED that everyone, in the end, has to vote for whom they trust, or for the vision they want to work toward.

[flamingdem]

28. How many more errors will EW make?

She seems green after all this time in the Senate. What gives. It was obvious that we have to ease into ANY changes in health care/insurance.