Pelosi: Ideas like Medicare For All and free college may fire up the left but won't beat Trump.

[Skya Rhen]

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[wasupaloopa]

1. If we don't beat trump there will not be universal health care for another generation becuase the

courts will be packed with conservatives.

We need to win first then bring our ideas to the floor.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

28. There won't be *any* health care, let alone universal health care.

[still_one]

76. Yup. The republicans are actively trying to invalidate the ACA behind the scenes through the courts

[Mme. Defarge]

2. Whatever Nancy says!

She has more than earned my respect and trust.

[NurseJackie]

3. She's absolutely correct.

And as we've seen in the past, the "youth vote" loves to attend rallies and post online, but for some reason they don't vote in the same percentages or as reliably as older voters. Historically unreliable and just not enough of them to make a difference when it counts.

[billpolonsky]

4. Brilliant.

Is she TRYING to keep voters away from the polls?

Lord help us all

[Cha]

25. Nancy Pelosie knows what she's talking about.. she

helped get us our House Victory in 2018.. we wouldn't be going through Impeachment inquiries now without that.

[George II]

44. She also helped push the ACA through in 2010.

[Cha]

51. Some People have short memories for all the

Brilliance that is Nancy Pelosi.

Thank you for that reminder, George

And, so did Joe Biden!

“When we passed the Affordable Care Act, I told President Obama it was a big deal – or something to that effect.”

https://joebiden.com/healthcare/

[MelissaB]

75. Yes, she does!

[Cha]

85. Hey Aloha, MelissaB!

[redstateblues]

70. She's trying to beat Trump. MFA is a GE loser

[treestar]

146. I give her opinion a lot of weight

given her experience. And she has been proven right about these things.

[pangaia]

5. We always get left with the pile of shit to fix,

before we can even BEGIN to build something..

".....the next president must abide by pay-as-you-go rules because “we cannot just keep increasing the debt.”

That would limit the ambitions of an Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders."

[questionseverything]

83. that quote pissed me off....running trillion bucks in the red is fine for repubs but when dems get

in charge we must PAY AS WE GO

I expect to hear this from pubs but not from democratic leaders

[Bradshaw3]

6. Democrats in 2016 didn't have those ideas - and didn't beat trump

So there's that. It's just as good or better a bet that running on the status quo will get Democrats beat in 2020.

[thesquanderer]

14. Good point. You could make the argument, "that's what we tried last time, and we lost...

...so maybe the better answer is to be more ambitious in our plans."

People didn't vote for Trump because they wanted incremental change... they wanted to shake things up. I would not assume that sentiment is gone. Maybe things just need to be shaken up in a different direction.

I guess in part it depends on how much you think Hillary lost based on platform vs. how much she lost just because she was Hillary. If it was really the latter, then another "incremental change" candidate can make sense, but to the extent that people aren't excited by "small steps," maybe it is a more adventurous platform that is needed.

[empedocles]

38. In 2016 BS was an easy, helpul, target to rally against

[Bradshaw3]

119. Good points

Saw a recent poll where people still want change. Tweaking and incremental aren't going to excite enough to get out and vote, exactly the problem in 2016 (along with cheating which we will see again in 2020).

[TexasTowelie]

129. Another spiteful anti-Hillary comment.

I need to double-check to see if I'm at Democratic Underground.

[Cha]

33. Nancy Pelosi helped get us the BLUE WAVE House Victory in 2018..

why we're Impeaching the psychotic asshole now.

[Bradshaw3]

118. Has nothing to do with my post

She said we won't beat rrump with those proposals; we didn't beat him in 2016 when we didn't have them.

[George II]

34. So having those ideas WILL beat trump in 2020? What's the rationale behind that, and how...

...will it come to pass?

"Democrats in 2008 didn't have those ideas" and yet Democrats won in 2008. Same thing in 2012.

Ah, the ol' ubiquitous "status quo", of which I've never seen anyone able to provide a definition.

[Bradshaw3]

117. Her point was about trump

So was mine.

[George II]

112. Some interesting reading:

https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2016_DNC_Platform.pdf

[Gothmog]

115. Pelosi cautions 2020 Dems over liberal proposals: 'You must win the Electoral College'

I stand with the leader of our Party, Speaker Pelosi

Link to tweet

“What works in San Francisco does not necessarily work in Michigan,” Pelosi said in an interview with Bloomberg News published Saturday. “What works in Michigan works in San Francisco — talking about workers’ rights and sharing prosperity.”
“Remember November,” she added. “You must win the Electoral College.”

While the California Democrat declined to endorse any candidate in the primary race, she unloaded on progressive policies, saying they fail to make inroads with swing voters who backed President Trump in 2016.

“As a left-wing San Francisco liberal I can say to these people: What are you thinking?” Pelosi said. “You can ask the left — they’re unhappy with me for not being a socialist.”

The speaker specifically singled out Medicare for All as an example of a policy that may be beyond the pale for moderate voters the party will need to win back next year.

“Protect the Affordable Care Act — I think that’s the path to health care for all Americans. Medicare For All has its complications,” Pelosi said, adding that “the Affordable Care Act is a better benefit than Medicare.”

[Bradshaw3]

116. Ahem they didn't win the electoral college in 2016

[Gothmog]

133. That is why we need to listen to states like Michigan

Voters in a key swing state like Michigan are not sold on progressive candidates

Link to tweet

Democratic enthusiasm to vote against President Donald Trump in the 2020 election could be matched by Republicans motivated to oppose a more progressive nominee.

At least that’s the historic argument for why a moderate Democrat could have the advantage in swing states, said Matt Grossman, director of Michigan State University’s Institute for Public Policy and Social Research. While Democrats consider which of their candidates is best positioned to beat Trump, recent polling suggests Democrats in Michigan and other general election battlegrounds are motivated to vote but less enthusiastic about progressive policy ideas.,,,,

A majority of Democratic voters in Michigan put Medicare for All at the bottom of their health care priorities, the KFF survey found. Union members have also expressed issues with losing health benefits they fought for over decades of negotiations with employers.
Candidates in the moderate lane like Biden and South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg favor expanding coverage under the Obama-era Affordable Care Act. Biden and Buttigieg support giving people the option of buying-in to Medicare but don’t want to expand it to everyone.

Biden’s campaign has come out swinging against Warren’s Medicare for All plan, saying it’s too costly and would hike taxes on the middle-class.

Trump and other Republicans call Medicare for All a “socialist" policy, portraying the plan as reckless and expensive. The “danger” of socialism is poised to get a lot of mileage in Republican campaign messaging during the next year, Grossman said.

[treestar]

148. they might have lost a lot bigger

probably would have. Anyone who won't vote because they are not excited enough is just shooting themselves in the foot and making it take longer long term. If Bernie himself won, Congress would not be liberal enough for his ideas to pass.

[Bradshaw3]

153. Or they might have won

See I can specualte just as easily. And they didn't have to have Bernie to have those ideas. Point stands. They didn't have those ideas and they lost. And it could happen again in 2020.

[treestar]

154. You've got no better

Proof than I.

[Bradshaw3]

155. Exactly

Which make your claims pointless, as I pointed out.

[emmaverybo]

7. Tremendous respect for her political insight. Nice to see her claim her position as a "left-wing

liberal” who finds these bold, new ideas to be losing propositions. And no, we can’t keep increasing
our record high debt.

I want to hear candidates address existing programs in peril—Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid.

[doc03]

8. She is 1000% right. Medicare for everyone and free college

is like poison in the purple states. The Republicans will hang that, Beto's gun confiscation and whatever AOC says around our candidate's neck whoever it is. Those ideas my have done too much damage already. But any anyone of them got my vote over Trump. I am just concerned we will run someone too far left to win the EC.

[Thekaspervote]

17. Yes... she is right and happy to hear her chime in.

[doc03]

21. The county I live in in Ohio was 100% controled

by Democrats 10 years ago now every office is held by Republicans. It is social issues , loss of union jobs and guns that have turned it Republican.

[Baked Potato]

78. Yep!

Too far left will be a disaster.

[BeyondGeography]

9. She sounds concerned

[Cha]

24. Damn Straight Nancy Pelosi is Concerned about

Beating trump like she helped Beat the repubs in the 2018 Blue Wave House Victory.

[nini]

26. we all should be concerned

We have to beat that fascist or the next 30 years are going to be a nightmare for this country.. maybe beyond that.

THIS IS NO TIME TO BE A GOD DAMNED PURIST!

[BeyondGeography]

36. Heaven forbid the people pushing these "radical" ideas win the GE

That’s a concern for some too.

[nini]

45. It's not the ideas

It's the way they're framed and what expectations are in getting them done. It can be done but half the population is going to see 'trillions' and freak out. The GOP will run on big tax Democrats and get away with it because uninformed people are stupid. It's reality. 40 years of right with brainwashing simply is not going to be done in one swoop.

[BeyondGeography]

54. All the anti-MFA candidates are articulating those points

The only thing she’s adding to the discussion is divisiveness.

[LakeArenal]

77. Yes

[Demsrule86]

82. The concern is that they don't have snowball's chance of winning the general and will perhaps lose

the House as well by running on unpopular ( in the general) policy. Nancy who has the best political instincts of any politician is warning us that we could lose in 20.

[treestar]

149. They won't get enough in Congress anyway

and we will hear about how "disappointed" people are in them.

[LanternWaste]

143. One might even imagine that being concerned is part and parcel of her job description.

On the other hand, one also might simplistically and implicitly trivialize her to appear clever.

You chose poorly.

[ritapria]

10. The purpose of a Political Party is to improve the lives of it's citizens

The purpose of a Political Party is not to keep the Donors happy with incremental change …..Deliver for the people and they will deliver for you ….. Playing around the edges lead to the rise of Newt Gingrich , George W. Bush and Donald Trump …………..The New Deal lead to 5 Electoral College Landslides ……….

[MarcA]

19. Agreed. Keeping the billionaire tax cuts and corporate welfare will Not

prevent an economic downturn, it will only make it worse when one occurs.
Democrats need to constantly let this be known. I suspect some of this timidness
comes from fear Of and fear By the Beltway insiders and Wall Street types.

[Dream Girl]

56. And then there's reality.

[Gothmog]

80. The purpose of a party is to get its candidates elected

I and other true Democrats have been working hard to turn Texas blue. We hope to pick up six congressional seats in addition to the two seats we flipped in 2018. We have a chance to defeat Cornyn in the Senate. The Democrats picked up 12 seats in the Texas House and need 9 more to take control of the Texas House prior to the next redistricting session. If Biden is the nominee, Texas will be a battleground state. If Warren or sanders is the nominee. Texas will not be a battle ground state and we can forget about keeping the two seats that we flipped in 2018

Speaker Pelosi is worried about losing control of the House with a weak top of the ballot ticket with a program that will kill down ballot candidates
.

Link to tweet

The most-vulnerable Democrat in Colorado’s state House, Bri Buentello, is dreading door-knocking in her rural district now that Elizabeth Warren dropped her massive “Medicare for All” plan into the presidential arena.
“This is going to cause down-ballot damage in swing districts and states if she’s the nominee,” Buentello says, describing how her Pueblo-area constituents — who voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump in 2016 — were already echoing criticisms about a giant, one-size-fits-all big government run plan that cancels private health insurance and raises taxes.
Story Continued Below

The fear of blowback is indicative of the broad and largely negative response to Warren’s proposal from centrist, moderate and rural Democrats — many of whom, like Buentello, back Joe Biden in the primary. And it exposes the fault line between those who fret about winning voters in the center and the activist progressive base propelling Warren to the front of the Democratic pack.

The long-awaited plan to raise the $20.5 trillion she says is needed to pay for single-payer health care in America is Warren’s attempt to answer critics after weeks of questions from rival candidates about the cost of her proposal and the prospect of higher taxes. Warren promised, as she has in the past, that "not one penny in middle-class tax increases” is necessary to finance the effort.

[Demsrule86]

84. Losing this election will do exactly the opposite...so maybe we need to run on those ideas that can

help people and help us win...a public option makes sense...MFA does not.

[treestar]

150. The People are not all that informed or

knowledgeable about their self-interest.

The purpose of a political party is to make a coalition that can win and thus govern.

[guillaumeb]

11. Nonsense.

These "pay as you go" rules are regularly ignored when the war budget needs to be increased, or when a tax cut for the rich is proposed.

This mantra of not increasing the debt is a right wing talking point that is only mentioned when vital social spending is proposed.

[mvd]

160. Agree. I don't like Pelosi and Obama interfering and taking the "moderate" side.

They sound afraid, and I do not like it. Even if you can’t get Medicare For All passed right away, what good does it do to run away from it? Start with big ideas and then you can compromise from a better position. Which also brings me to the debt. It we have to go into debt, I would much rather do it for MFA than tax cuts for the rich!

[guillaumeb]

163. Exactly, and well summarized.

The GOP, with the help of the US corporate media, is pushing the debate to the right, so this mythical center is actually a right wing spot.

[Joe941]

12. I respectfully disagree.

What good is winning if you dont bring meaningful change?

[luxpara4]

15. If dems don't win, the only change

Will be for the worse. Pelosi is correct, win the election then make changes. Here in iowa The super liberal stuff is just not flying - even with trump haters.

[ritapria]

16. Latest Emerson College Poll

Bernie was the only candidate defeating Trump in Iowa : 51% -49%

[luxpara4]

20. I caucused for him last time,

But my husband and I won’t do it again. I bet those numbers are from college kids who end up not actually voting - sad but true. Repubs here that hate trump say they will only vote for Biden or stay home. He’s not my 1st or 2nd, but I will vote for the dem candidate. I’m sickened that others won’t do that.

[Gothmog]

86. The Margin of Error in this poll is 4.7%

[demosincebirth]

104. Thats not a sure win.

[LanternWaste]

144. So polls finally matter, eh?

Well, the year gets old pretty fast and I'm guessing the old tune that 'polls don't matter!" isn't quite done yet and will be trotted out on a sandwich board again when ethically convenient.

[Thekaspervote]

18. If nothing else please please remember the SCOTUS. RBG may not last thru 4 more years

There’s meaningful change in that alone

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

29. You've gotta win first. If you lose, the only change is for the worse.

[Dream Girl]

58. If Bernie is the nominee, we will lose. Take it to the bank...

Warren too. No way this country will elect a late 70’s Jewish socialist. Anti-semitism abounds. I’m sure running against Bernie would be Trumps fondest wish.

[redstateblues]

71. Sad but true. My moderate spouse won't vote for him.

She won’t vote for Trump either. The Socialist thing is a deal breaker for a lot of folks. That’s what kept him from getting the nomination last time.

[theaocp]

110. She'd rather NOT VOTE than vote for Sanders?

Unacceptable. May as well vote 3rd party.

[Dream Girl]

61. And before you alert on me or some such. I would love to see Warren's ideas enacted

Bernie’s too, though I don’t much care for the guy personally. I’m just pragmatic. Comments like yours make my blood pressure rise. Do we want another four years of Trump? Do want to lose our democracy for good? Sheesh...

[Gothmog]

132. Keeping trump out of power is a great reason to win

[The Valley Below]

136. Adding a Public Option to the ACA would be very meaningful change.

[treestar]

151. well it stops Republicans from bringing meaningful change

as to their concept of it.

[peggysue2]

13. Reality check

From Madame Speaker. And the wise words:

Remember November

Because if we don't win then? We can kiss it all good-bye.

[Kid Berwyn]

22. New Deal for the 21st Century

Is what we need.

[Cha]

23. We need to BEATrump like we BEAT the repubs in the HOUSE

like We Did in the 21 Century in 2018 Blue Wave Midterms!

[Girard442]

27. Yes, the Dems must abolutely win over the swing voters. All, what, twelve of them?

[empedocles]

39. 42? House seats

[aidbo]

30. Nancy is facing a primary opponent.

https://jacobinmag.com/2019/07/nancy-pelosi-shahid-buttar-primary-challenge

[empedocles]

41. Could not find any poll numbers

Could get substantial 'campaign contributions though'

[George II]

43. Just about every California politician faces primary opponents. They have single primaries....

....with both parties participating, with the top two candidates going to the general election. More often than not, in heavily Democratic districts, two Democrats go to the general election, no republicans.

Here's the 2018 primary result:

Nancy Pelosi (D) 68.5% 141,365
Lisa Remmer (R) 9.1% 18,771
Shahid Buttar (D) 8.5% 17,597
Stephen Jaffe (D) 5.9% 12,114
Ryan Khojasteh (D) 4.6% 9,498
Barry Hermanson (G) 2.0% 4,217
Michael Goldstein (Independent) 1.4% 2,820

Total votes: 206,382

I don't think she's worried about Shahid Buttar, he couldn't even get enough votes to finish second and go to the general election.

BTW, she won the general election over Lisa Remmer by 86.8% to 13.2%

[mcar]

49. ...

[Demsrule86]

87. No one will beat Nancy...waste of time and money and she is the best...

[sop]

31. What issues does Nancy suggest the Democratic party run on?

"Trump is a bad guy" didn't work so well in 2016. Maybe it'll be enough in 2020, since Trump has been shown to be infinitely worse than anyone thought possible.

[emmaverybo]

50. What's wrong with good old presidential qualifications, sound and doable plans for healthcare,

education, climate change, and trade plus support for civil rights, and a dramatic change in foreign policy? Oh, and protection for our existing, imperiled social safety net—Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security?

Every candidate has policy proposals, some more realistic and economically feasible than others.

[sop]

66. Moderate Democratic party incrementalists will really like those promises

Left-leaning progressives believe the Democratic party should aspire to something more ambitious than the same old things moderate politicians have been promising for decades.

[emmaverybo]

73. Ambitious-sounding plans do not substitute for presidential qualifications or economically and

legislatively sensible plans. Plans that throw the baby out with the bath water may appeal to a wing of the Democratic Party, granted a sizable minority, but not to the majority.

[sop]

97. That sizable minority better turn out and vote, otherwise it's Trump for another 4 years

[emmaverybo]

99. They should vote, but not dictate to the majority. Educate, don't dictate, and don't threaten to

stay home as a way of getting support for plans or candidates.

[theaocp]

111. Yea? In this very thread and on this site are folks saying that VERY thing

if Sanders is the nominee. The best anyone can counter is, "he won't be the nominee, so there." Mind you, this is hypothetically talking about the GENERAL, so clean up on aisle moderate. Do so, or bring up some whataboutism. Cheers.

[emmaverybo]

126. Example? I do not see ONE post that supports your claim. Have NEVER seen a LIBERAL say

that here. All here are liberals. I responded to what I took as a threat in a post—party better adopt M4All or progressives are outta here.

I don’t think a majority for progressives feel that way, however.

[Demsrule86]

88. The same thing that won the mid terms...the ACA with a public option...the GOP are trying to kill

health care and Trump is corrupt of course...you know it depends on where you are in the country...different things sell in different places.

[Cha]

32. Nancy is very smart. She knows how to run a campaign, a party, & an inquiry.

Link to tweet

I'm certainly listening to Nancy Pelosi..

[BlueWI]

35. The 1990s wants its conventional wisdom back.

Clinton, Pelosi, and Obama all need to stay out of the primary. Let the actual candidates pursue the nomination by sharing their best ideas with rank and file Democrats. There's no need for broad brush statements that privilege certain candidates and criticize others. That's a recipe for party division that sure didn't help in 2016.

[melman]

52. +1

[Locrian]

64. +1,000,000,000

Lot of establishment and conventional wisdom that "just knows" what is right....

[Kurt V.]

69. +1

[Demsrule86]

89. No, people can do what they want...personally, I think it will take all hands to beat Trump and MFA

will cause us to lose.

[BlueWI]

96. Was it ever in doubt that people can do what they want?

Of course they can. But some actions have adverse consequences, like fomenting divisions in the party.

Let the candidates running for the presidency address rank and file Democratic voters during the primary. That's pretty simple to do and it respects the process better than headline grabbing opinions that turn up in opposition advertising.

[BeyondGeography]

94. She was for it before she was against it

Link to tweet

[BlueWI]

121. Interesting history on this issue.

Thanks for posting!

[eilen]

130. In the 103rd Congress (1993)

Democrats held the House and the Senate in 1993.

Clinton had also raised taxes so there was an increase in revenue.

"The Deficit Reduction Act raised the top income tax rate from 28 percent to 36 percent for those earning more than $115,000, and 39.6 percent for income above $250,000. It increased the corporate income tax from 34 percent to 36 percent for corporations with incomes over $10 million. It also ended some corporate subsidies, taxed Social Security benefits for high-income earners, and created the earned income tax credit for incomes under $30,000.

It raised the gas tax by 4.3 cents per gallon. It also limited the ability of corporations to claim entertainment tax deductions." https://www.thebalance.com/president-bill-clinton-s-economic-policies-3305559

[George II]

37. We have the ACA already and if we can all pull together we could possibly win and improve on it....

...which was the original plan.

And "free college" is never going to work on a national level, but it can certainly be accomplished on a state-by-state basis.

Some states have already implemented "free college", most notably New York. Their program will be fully phased in by next year and provide free tuition to almost a million people at CUNY and SUNY schools.

[emmaverybo]

101. San Francisco too for its multi-campus two year college. Another way to provide college access

without debt is through tuition waiver programs at the state level.

[Scotch-Irish]

40. Well, remember: She was against impeachment, too.

Just hang on, Nancy. It's a different world, and none of us know the new rules just yet.

[George II]

42. She was never against impeachment, she just felt it wasn't time yet, and if you've been....

....following the recent news, she's been proven correct....again.

[Scotch-Irish]

68. I follow the news 24/7

But that wasn't what she said at the time. She thought impeachment was "divisive", and that it would "hurt the dems". If Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders wins the primary, Nancy will be totally in favor of them.

Just watch.

[Demsrule86]

90. You know impeachment is not really helping us yet...don't know if it will in the end. I expect she

felt given Trump's criminal behavior,there was no choice but it could still bite us in the butt.

[brush]

47. One thing we do know, if we allow repugs to tag us as the party running on...

busting the Treasury with $30,000,000,000 MFA that will cut 200,000 jobs, we lose.

Warren made a mistake by coming out with Medicare for All. She should've pushed for building on the already in place and popular ACA to get us to MFA.

[questionseverything]

91. ya know that losing 200,000 jobs is such a crock of you know what

those 200,000 jobs are about denying people coverage they have already paid for

plus many more jobs will be created in actually taking care of peoples healthcare needs

and repubs don't mind the deficient they are creating this year nearing a trillion bucks because of their tax decrease for the ulta rich

[Scotch-Irish]

93. That's so true. All those negative talking points don't have a clue who Elizabeth Warren

is and how she crunches numbers in her sleep. There is no other candidate running who has as firm a grasp on where every penny in our economy goes....she knows what she's talking about and can prove it. If she had access to the bully pulpit, she could educate the country on why those trillions spent on "health insurance" are just additional taxes people are paying to prop up an industry that is milking us dry, and messing up the medical system.

Our entire medical system under "privatized health insurance" is broken.

[questionseverything]

122. well said

[brush]

98. It probably is a crock of shit but that won't stop repugs from running ads 24/7...

spewing their lie. Best to run on building the popular ACA which can lead to MFA.

[questionseverything]

123. omy goodness...so the repubs will lie,cheat and steal...well there is a surprise to no one

parts of the aca are popular but it isn't all that or Obama wouldn't have lost both the house and the senate


maybe if we demand m4a we will get a decent public option

[brush]

124. You do know that Dems knew the ACA wasn't the end game, right?

A public option among other things would be part of building on it.

Let's get real. Us progressive Dems of course want single-payer whether it's MFA or however it's arrived at but a 30 trillion dollar price tag scares other voters and we aren't the only ones voting.

We need to attract voters not scare them away to get rid of trump, which is of utmost importance if we want to keep our republic.

How 'bout we effin' win the WH first then when we have control we figure out how to do single-payer?

[mcar]

46. Kick!

[FloridaBlues]

48. That's why Biden will win ! No training wheels needed.

[Kurt V.]

53. Simply not true. stick to impeachment and producing good bills.

[Dream Girl]

55. She's right. People are in la-la land thinking we will get elected with a far left agenda

Can’t believe how naive some folks are...

[redqueen]

57. Why not link the article, and copy and paste Sahil's comments?

[Auggie]

59. Madam Speaker is right, of course. We win with JOBS!

[Skya Rhen]

74. Pelosi is not moved by the left. She was moved by Trump's obsessive fear of the frontrunner which

resulted in him committing a clear, impeachable act.

Notice that she is still not even touching the Mueller report, which the left was hammering away as warranting impeachment.

[maximusveritas]

62. She's right. It's not about being liberal or not. It's about being smart or not.

Obama was the same way. A progressive, but a pragmatic progressive.
These Sanders/Warren people are just emotionally reacting to the Trump Presidency by trying to go further to the left, when we should instead be reaching out to those in the middle turned off by Trump's extremism and incompetency.

[femmedem]

63. When it comes to transitioning from fossil fuels as fast as possible

I think persuading labor and looking for ways to include labor is far better than saying, "Ok, don't want to offend labor. Let's carry on wrecking the planet then."

This is an area where everything hinges on us moving far faster than is comfortable or acceptable to most people. We have to do it regardless. And we need our Democratic leaders helping to get this message out and pushing for this, not dismissing candidates with the courage to do what is necessary.

Speaker Pelosi, I love you. But this is a fail in my book.

[guillaumeb]

65. Very well said.

Half measures lead to nowhere.

[highplainsdem]

67. She's right! K&R!

[redstateblues]

72. I'm with Leader Nancy.

[Baked Potato]

79. What does SHE know about anything??

[Gothmog]

81. I stand with Speaker Pelosi

Link to tweet

[Kashkakat v.2.0]

92. BOTH/AND - does it have to be either-or? Why not aim high, but be realistic at the same time - the

priority RIGHT NOW needs to be a) getting elected and b) securing things the vast majority of American public is in agreement on ie social security/medicare/Medicaid and other existing social programs and public services, restoring environmental and worker protections, equal rights, voting rights, securing our election system, transparency in govt, anti-corruption measures, etc etc etc.

I really don't think we know the half of what damage has been done. The OLD new deal needs fighting for as much as a new one!

[Gore1FL]

95. Maybe we should just run republicans for president with republican agendas.

That way we'll be sure to win...

[emmaverybo]

100. So it's either the left-progressive agenda as articulated by Sanders and Warren or it's

Republicanism. In other words, our way or the highway.

This is the very mentality the majority does not favor.

[nini]

102. exactly

I'm so tired of all that.

[Gore1FL]

105. No. Let's just elect a Democrat.

I am tired of nominating GOP-lite to be safe. We end up with Bush and Trump when we do that.

[emmaverybo]

106. We ended up with Trump mainly because Russia helped put him over the top. By your definition,

the majority of people in the Democratic Party actually belongs in the Republican. In your world, only left progressives who subscribe to the notion of “the transformation” or “the revolution” are true Democrats.

Sorry, but you won’t win any election with left progressives as your only voters.

[Gore1FL]

107. OK whatever you say. Let's chase Fascists to the right to be safe.

We should absolutely abandon our values for false electoral narratives!

[demosincebirth]

103. Madame Speaker, you are sooo right!! Fixing ACA, is the only way.

[betsuni]

108. K&R

[Tarheel_Dem]

109. Nancy, be prepared for your inbox to be destroyed.

[myohmy2]

113. firing up...

...the base and our country with much needed 'revolutionary' ideas for 99% is the ONLY way we'll beat trump...

...'more of the same' won't cut it...'more of the same' brought us trump...

...think big and we will be rewarded...

...President Sanders will make it happen with the new found presidential 'leeway' created by trump and the republicans not supporting his impeachment...

...a hard-nosed President Sanders will get us MFA, one way or another...

...if you haven't noticed, the rules have changed...

[emmaverybo]

125. Magical thinking: Bernie knows the only way is Revolution which only Bernie can bring on, Hillary

brought us Trump, Bernie can fix healthcare cause he’s Bernie, if YOU out of step people have been asleep, well feel the Bern cause he is the change blah blah blah

Sorry, but only Bernie-world people believe this stuff.

I can’t be hypnotized or lobotomized.

Hillary is not why we got Trump!

That is pure bs and shameful that Bernie or supporters still saying this.

[myohmy2]

127. well...

...support who you want, believe what you want...

...but why we got trump is much bigger than Hillary...it's 50 years of 'more of the same' that has decimated the middle class and our manufacturing base...it's 'more of the same' that has handed our political and economic systems to the 1% who now own it all...

...if you think 'more the same' is the way to go, then God Bless you...but it's going to be a lonely path...

...times have changed, things have changed and we must change along with them...people have wised up,

...they KNOW Bernie's going to deliver...

[emmaverybo]

128. I think no progressive candidate has a mandate right now as none is in power. I think it would serve

progressives to stop acting like they do. Work on getting that power. Yeah, the times they are a changin. No, the party majority, liberals, are not Mr. Jones. And Bernie is neither prophet nor
“The change.” This smug attitude his supporters demonstrate is actually what holds him back.

Obama talked change and he brought some, but he was never arrogant. This “get with the program” or you will be left behind refrain is old 🎩. Heard it in the 60’s. Times have changed.

[Beringia]

114. I don't know much about her whole history as a politician

But it seems she must have had big dreams to have the ambition she has. Was she emboldened and inspired by the 60s feminist movement, her family? She sounds like a pragmatist and not a visionary.

[Demsrule86]

120. She single handedly pushed though the ACA when it was all but dead...she is both...a visionary and

pragmatic...the best combination in my opinion.

[Gothmog]

161. Speaker Pelosi is an amazing leader

You are correct. It was Speaker Pelosi who got the ACA adopted

[Demsrule86]

162. She has always been a roll model for my girls...I adore her.

[Gothmog]

131. Medicare for All would hurt down ballot candidates

I and a good number of real democrats are working hard to turn Texas blue. In 2018, we flipped 12 seats in the Texas House and 2 congressional seats. We need to pick up 9 seats in the Texas House of Representatives to flip this body and control redistricting. I am working on 2 campaigns for state house seats. The DCCC has targeted 6 congressional seats and I am working on one of these campaigns. If Texas down ballot candidates are forced to run on an unpopular policy such as Warren's plan, we will lose these races I really like Larry Sabato and agree with this study http://crystalball.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/medicare-for-all-a-vote-loser-in-2018-u-s-house-elections/

“Medicare for All” has emerged as a key issue in the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination campaign. Two of the leading candidates, Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), have made Medicare for All a central issue in their campaigns. Warren’s and Sanders’ proposals would abolish private health insurance in the U.S. within a few years and move all Americans into a government health plan based on the current Medicare program but with no copayments or deductibles.

Several Democratic candidates, including former Vice President Joe Biden, who has led in most national polls, have been highly critical of this idea. These candidates, along with a number of health policy experts and pundits, have attacked Sanders’ and Warren’s Medicare for All proposal as prohibitively expensive and politically unrealistic. They have also argued that embracing Medicare for All would alienate many independents and moderate Democrats and risk costing Democrats the electoral votes of several key swing states.....

Conclusions
An analysis of the impact of Medicare for All on the 2018 House elections indicates that Democratic challengers and open seat candidates in competitive districts who endorsed a version of Medicare for All similar to that proposed by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren did significantly worse than those who did not. This negative effect, close to five points of margin after controlling for a variety of other factors, was clearly large enough to affect the outcomes of some House contests.

It is possible that the estimated effect of Medicare for All was a byproduct of other differences between supporters and non-supporters. For example, supporters might have taken more liberal positions on a variety of other issues as well as Medicare for All. Even if that is the case, however, these findings are not encouraging to supporters of Medicare for All. They indicate that candidates in competitive races who take positions to the left of the median voter could get punished at the polls. Democratic presidential candidates would do well to take heed of these results, particularly as the eventual nominee determines what he or she wishes to emphasize in the general election.

[aikoaiko]

134. Nancy says no until the rank and file says yes.

For example, Impeachment.

[BlueWI]

135. Black voters and liberal voters

are the most consistent Democratic voting blocs, but they get the least respect when it comes to policy, in addition to putting up with messaging like Pelosi's in this case.

STFU and vote for us isn't the kind of messaging that strengthens turnout among either black voters or liberals - remember 2016? How about a sincere thank you for decades of consistent support, along with acknowledgement of policy differences, and a unifying message of the necessity of defeating Trump?

There is no upside to the involvement of surrogates to this level in the primaries. Pelosi has enough to do leading Congress in the midst of an impeachment inquiry. Weighing in on the primaries is not going to motivate anyone, given that moderate and liberal voters in the primaries are perfectly able to make up their own minds, and too much left bashing is more likely to depress turnout. The best course is to signal trust in Democratic voters and back off.

Moderate Democrats were defeated in 2016, 2004, and 2000, and even Clinton never got a popular vote majority, even over a mediocre Republican candidate like Bob Dole. What lessons have moderate Democrats learned from these defeats? Obama's biggest victory in 2008 was not made by bashing the left - it was made due to a unifying message that didn't divide Democrats against each other. Moderate surrogates came out big for Clinton in 2008 - did it help her? Did help her in the GE in 2016?

We have to mine deeper to get all of the lessons from election losses and avoid repeating the worst moments in the recent past.

[The Valley Below]

137. I'm with Speaker Pelosi!

She's the best!!!

[helpisontheway]

138. Exactly. So if far left want to stick with Bernie/Warren then they better not

say a word once Trump gets 4 more years. Be “right” and get 4 more years of Trump. Just like Sarandon wanted to say she was “right” once Trump won in 2016.

[Gothmog]

139. From Harry Reid

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

140. In battleground states, MFA is a bad idea

Link to tweet

?s=20

[Recursion]

141. Anything that gets rid of anyone's private insurance is poison

The fact that this is idiotic does not change the fact that it is true. If we run on replacing people's insurance with Medicare, we lose, even though that would be a good idea. Being right doesn't actually count for much in politics.

[Autumn]

142. Love you Nancy but you are 100% wrong. nt

[aikoaiko]

145. Isn't polling showing EW and BS beating Trump?

Affordable college and health care for all are OK.

[Gothmog]

147. Medicare for All's JOBS problem

Link to tweet

Initial research from University of Massachusetts economists who have consulted with multiple 2020 campaigns has estimated that 1.8 million health care jobs nationwide would no longer be needed if Medicare for All became law, upending health insurance companies and thousands of middle class workers whose jobs largely deal with them, including insurance brokers, medical billing workers and other administrative employees. One widely cited study published in the New England Journal of Medicine estimated that administration accounted for nearly a third of the U.S.’ health care expenses.

Even if a bigger government expansion into health care left doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals’ jobs intact, it would still cause a restructuring of a sprawling system that employs millions of middle-class Americans.

University of Massachusetts researchers who analyzed the 2017 version of Sanders’ Medicare for All bill estimated that nationwide more than 800,000 people who work for private health insurance companies and a further 1 million who handle administrative work for health care providers would see their jobs evaporate.

The workers generally earn middle-class wages, according to the November 2018 study forecasting the economic ramifications of Sanders’ plan. The median annual income of a worker employed in the health insurance industry is nearly $55,000; for office and administrative jobs at health care service sites, it’s about $35,000, researchers said.

“The savings don’t come out of the sky,” said Pollin. “The main way we save money is through administrative simplicity. That means layoffs. There’s just no way around it.”

[Gothmog]

157. CNN poll-voters want realistic plans that can be adopted

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

158. When it comes to Medicare-for-all, listen to Nancy Pelosi

Link to tweet

When it comes to Democrats’ obsession with Medicare-for-all, listen to Nancy Pelosi. The House speaker put it more politely, but on the very day that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) unveiled her plan to remake the U.S. health-care system for the lowball price of $20.5 trillion, Pelosi made it clear that she thought this was political insanity.

“I’m not a big fan of Medicare-for-all,” Pelosi told Bloomberg TV on Friday. She cited the cost. She noted the “comfort level that some people have with their current private insurance.” And she cautioned, “Remember November.” Pushing Medicare-for-all “would increase the vote in my own district,” the California Democrat said, “but that’s not what we need to do in order to win the electoral college.”

Indeed. For years after passage of the Affordable Care Act, Democrats paid a steep, and unfair, political price for enacting the law. Then the electoral calculus flipped. Health care became a political winner for Democrats, and the Trump administration offered the party a gift with its continuing crusade against the ACA.....

A smart party would seize this opening and go on the offensive against the Republican effort to take popular coverage away from millions. Instead, the Democratic presidential field is immersed in a destructive internecine battle over the wisdom of a massive entitlement expansion. Imagine President Trump hammering Democratic nominee Warren in a general-election campaign. He would accuse her of plotting to take away your private insurance, dangerously hiking federal spending and, citing Warren’s primary rivals, ultimately socking the middle class with a tax increase when she can’t raise enough otherwise.

[NurseJackie]

159. She's right, you know?

I trust Nancy Pelosi.

[Gothmog]

164. Nancy Pelosi is "not for doing away with Obamacare" and prefers to give people choices.

Link to tweet