Commentators are making a lot out of many of the Democratic candidates attacking Elizabeth Warren in Tuesday\u2019s Democratic Debate. They are writing Joe Biden\u2019s obituary, saying that the others are leaving him alone because he is no longer relevant. Warren is the \u201cnew\u201d front-runner, and that\u2019s why she got the most \u201cheat.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There is some truth to this. Warren has moved up in the polls, currently tied with Biden in most. But there is a more important reason that Biden was left pretty much to himself in the fourth Democratic debate. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Biden is the target of Donald Trump. And it\u2019s not just from the President\u2019s infamous \u201ctweets:\u201d the President of the United States pressured the leaders of other countries to give him dirt on Biden. Trump may well be impeached for doing it. So what Democrat wants to align him or herself with Donald Trump against Joe Biden? That strategy just \u201csucks.\u201d In fact, it was clear that several candidates, particularly Cory Booker, were ready to defend Biden against such attacks. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
I didn’t know much about Tulsi Gabbard, other than her biography as a veteran and Congressman from Hawaii. I did hear \u201crumors\u201d that somehow Gabbard was a \u201cPutin ally,\u201d but I didn\u2019t have any direct evidence of that: until last night. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Listening to Gabbard create a narrative of \u201cregime change\u201d in Syria sounded much like Russian talking points during the Obama Administration. She made it sound like President Obama sent troops to back the rebellion against Assad, and re-wrote the rebels as all terrorists. They weren\u2019t, and the facts are that President Obama didn\u2019t send US troops to back them. Gabbard doesn\u2019t get to re-write history to fit her own narrative, and her attempt to do so raises questions about where she\u2019s coming from.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I learned something last night. Somewhere along the way, I missed the \u201cFOURTH INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.\u201d That\u2019s what I get for being sixty-three and retired, I guess. I missed a whole REVOLUTION. But I do know about industrial automation. Gee, Hillary Clinton got in trouble for talking about that four years ago in West Virginia. She said that the coal mining jobs were gone, even if mines were re-opened. Clinton was criticized for saying the day of the coal miner working the open seam was over, machinery would take his place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So this new idea by Mr. Yang really isn\u2019t that new. And if automation displacement was the major answer to industrial unemployment, then why are all of those factories opening in Mexico and China and other places? GM can automate their plants, but it looks to me like they are more interested in using manual labor, and taking bigger profits. Not a revolution, just a corporation trying to increase stock values. Mr. Yang shouldn\u2019t miss the point; automation is only a small part of the industrial and employment dislocation happening here in America.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But I can also see Mr. Yang\u2019s appeal to younger voters.\u00a0\u00a0He speaks \u201cthe language\u201d of the \u201cinternet educated electorate\u201d (like that phrase?)\u00a0\u00a0He legitimately made fun of Senator Grassley\u2019s questioning of Mark Zuckerberg, demonstrating a lack of \u201cFacebook expertise.\u201d\u00a0 That joke cut against some of the other candidates: too old to understand “Tweets.” \u00a0Yang has a lot to add to the debate, pushing Democrats to deal with more modern social communications.\u00a0\u00a0But he\u2019s not going to be the nominee.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Democrats all want healthcare for all. Senators Sanders and Warren want to move America to Medicare for All. It\u2019s a great idea, and if there were historical do-overs, it\u2019s exactly what America should have done in the 1930\u2019s and 40\u2019s. But we didn\u2019t. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
A man not on the stage last night was Congressman Tim Ryan. He makes an important point: we need to recognize that many Americans are satisfied with their current insurance plans. Labor unions have often negotiated great health care for members, and given away other benefits to get it. Those union members aren\u2019t willing to give that away, especially when they aren\u2019t guaranteed to get back the other benefits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On the other hand, there\u2019s a majority of Americans who aren\u2019t in unions. The millennial generation isn\u2019t unionized, and they are looking for a better way to get health insurance. So we are in a transition period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Transition and \u201cdo-over\u201d isn\u2019t the same thing.\u00a0\u00a0This means that while the Sanders\/Warren plans of Medicare for All may be the ultimate goal, how the United States gets there, how long it takes, and who has to sacrifice now to get it; all need to be considered.\u00a0\u00a0Booker, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Biden are all offering a longer transition period with expanded public options.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Democrats have to look at electing a President as well as choosing a nominee. Whether that can be done with the \u201cbig ideas, big goals\u201d of the Warren\/Sanders wing, or more moderate candidates is unclear. What is clear is that primary voters are often the most motivated, and Sanders\/Warren are strongly connecting with them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Senator Amy Klobuchar made a strong case for staying in the race. She positioned herself as the moderate who could draw independent and Republican voters, and implied that the Warren\/Sanders candidacies risk losing that middle ground.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This was her best debate, showing strength and emotion. The question is, will the Democratic primary electorate be interested in anyone near the middle besides Biden? Klobuchar is betting that they will, but so far, Biden\u2019s nailed down the center.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We loved Joe Biden as Vice President. He is inexorably linked to Barack Obama, and that makes him a politically powerful force in the 2020 election. Who can forget the \u201chot mike\u201d whispered comment to the President about the passing the Affordable Care Act, \u201c\u2026this is a big f**king deal!!\u201d It was, and we loved it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But there is a reason why this is Biden\u2019s third<\/strong> Presidential campaign. <\/p>\n\n\n\n When Biden speaks in the debate, it always seems to be halting, correcting, and to fade away. It would be easy to blame old age for that, using it as a reason to say that Biden is too old for the job. But Biden did that when he ran for President in 1988, and he did it again when he ran in 2008. It isn\u2019t old age; it\u2019s Joe. Like that or not, that\u2019s who he has always been. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe Next Cut<\/h3>\n\n\n\n