46

Now let’s talk about something you might call the Kloubachar Paradox. She had a very interesting Town Hall last night.

She also just said no to single payer. 

This is gutsy by Kloubachar but  it carries risks:

Call it the Kloubachar Paradox-her position might be the best to win a general but lose the primary-Jeb Bush tried something like that…

TBH I have mixed feelings about pushing so hard to the Left.

To be sure, this is part of a debate. There is a narrative that ‘you have to do more than simply run against Trump’-Cory Booker has been pushing that idea very hard. My gut reaction to this is-why? I mean if Trump is a clear and present threat, a racist, xenophobic, authoritarian who didn’t even win his own office legitimately-who speaks to Putin about what to do on foreign policy-why do you need to make it about yourself?

I know the conventional answer is that the Democrats ran against Trump in 2016 and ‘lost.’ Sorry but in view of the Comey letter and Russian interference this ‘loss’ gets an asterisk.

This is an inference that hasn’t been proved-even if you ‘lose’-or even lose-an election doesn’t necessarily mean that the reason you lost was because of A. It could be B, C, , X, Y, or Z. The Left presumes the reason Hillary lost was because she didn’t come out unequivocally for free college, single payer, and breaking up the banks. That’s one possible logical inference-but there are any number of others-she didn’t go to Wisconsin or the Comey letter is the actual reason she ‘lost’-no Comey letter, no ‘President Trump.’

What’s notable is going as far Left as humanly possible isn’t what won the Democrats a historical landslide in the 2018 elections.

Regarding ‘Medicare for All’ it’s not at all clear that this is a general election winner even if it’s a Democratic primary winner. I still think that the best position for now at least is Medicare for All(WhoWant it). 

There’s not a huge difference between implementing single payer vs. the public option. You can tomorrow add a new insurance payer called expanded Medicare or Medicare for All. the only difference is that this is the only step for the PU but for SP you have to next get rid of all other insurers in the country.

Is it easier to implement-and sell politically-the public option that simply gives Medicare to the 29 million Americans currently without insurance or single payer which also calls for the other 180 million Americans-to come up with a round number-who are currently who at least believe they’re pretty happy with their current plan to lose it?

Remember all the furor over ‘if you like your plan you can keep your plan?’ Obama got roasted simply because a small subset of people didn’t get to ‘keep their plan’-to be sure in that case these were often bargain basement plans that didn’t come close to adequate coverage. But single payer would require those with plans that are sufficient and that Americans are very happy with going away. If you like your plan you still can’t keep your plan. 

But again, this is the Kloubachar Paradox-even if, single payer is arguably problematic in a general election it may be that you can’t win a Dem primary in 2020 without being for it.

Which is why the best political strategy is for a pragmatic candidate to not wear her pragmatism on her sleeve. Remember that  CENTER and LEFT are relative terms. Relative to the Democratic primary 2020 it might be that Kloubachar has put herself on the RIGHT and with  Warren and Bernie occupying the LEFT and FAR LEFT respectively, the true Centrist position in 2020 is: Kamala Harris.

Harris has come out for Medicare for All. Of course, this is a signifier-is she for single payer? Yes she has again clearly stated. 

Presumably, at some point she’ll come out with her own specific plan, even if she has already endorsed Sanders’s. She hasn’t gone into too much in the way of specifics, though she has talked and written about how her mother’s illness and death shaped her views on the problems of the current system. But having taken and now reiterated the single-payer position, she won’t have much ability to move toward something different, especially with many Democratic primary voters seeing single payer as a litmus test.”

Her wiggle room at this point is perhaps that she hasn’t gotten specific just yet. And it may be that single payer for Democrats in 2020 is that dismantling Obamacare was for the GOPers in 2016-once they got into office they weren’t actually able to do it.

It might be that the Democrats will flesh out a lot more of how they want to proceed towards achieving Universal Heatlhcare when they actually have a governing majority.  So the truly pragmatic position in the 2020 Democratic primary might be to be for single payer but don’t get bogged down in specifics-the reality of governing for the Democrats might end up being Sherrod Brown’s proposal to expand Medicare to all those 55 or over. 

Like Kloubachar Brown doesn’t sugarcoat it-he doesn’t support Berniecare period.

But again, the pragmatic position may be support ‘single payer’ but avoid getting into specifics. Then pass Sherrodcare when actually in office-as the votes won’t be there for single payer just yet. The fervent opposition to the PO by the SPers makes no sense as it’s quite possible that if the PO works out it could be the gateway to SP. One way to achieve SP is to insist on both steps up front-cover the 29 million AND force the other 180 million of their plans NOW. Or it could mean cover the 29 million now and over time faze the other 180 million off their plans-preferably voluntarily.

I just hope Democrats learned the real lesson of 2016-to achieve any of your ambitious policy goals and visions you have to actually win the election.

Now this move by Kamala I really like.

I’m actually glad to see her repudiate ‘democratic socialism.’

Don’t get me wrong, I actually agree with Alexandria Occasio-Cortez on many issues-though I see the Green New Deal as more an aspirational affirmation of first principle than sober policy goals– but I’m not a fan of this term. I’m cool with social democrat but democratic socialist is a bridge too far. Social democrat has a fine historical tradition but democratic socialist makes ‘socialist’ rather than ‘democrat’ primary.

FN: Ryan Cooper.

This.

License

October 28, 2016: a Day That Will Live in Infamy Copyright © by . All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book