Democratic Debate Nov. 20, 2019

Once again there were few differences among the candidates who made the cut; rather, it was a question of emphasis:

Tulsi Gabbard emphasized her objection to "regime-change wars."
Elizabeth Warren emphasized her wealth tax and all the things it would pay for.
Cory Booker emphasized housing and the problem of gentrification.
Amy Klobuchar emphasized her ability to win in red and purple states.
Pete Buttigieg emphasized his distance from Washington and its inability to accomplish anything.
Joe Biden emphasized his experience, especially as a member of the Obama administration.
Bernie Sanders emphasized his battle against "corporate interests."
Andrew Yang talked about his children and his proposal for family leave.
Tom Steyer continued to emphasize climate change.
Kamala Harris talked about the importance of black churches and labor unions.

With little policy differences among the candidates does it come down to who can defeat Trump, assuming Trump is still in office next year, or who can get a progressive agenda into law?  I am leaning to Warren, Sanders, Buttigieg and Yang.  They all show intelligence and the ability to analyze and think things through.

Democratic Debate Oct. 15, 2019

Again, there was little actual debate this time.  All twelve candidates support (among other things):

Impeaching Trump

Single-payer healthcare

Codifying the right to abortion

Making it easier to unionize

Subsidized childcare

Making college tuition-free and eliminating student debt

Stopping gun violence with background checks and eliminating assault weapons

Prosecuting purveyors of opioids.

Working with and supporting our allies around the world.

Of course there are differences about how to accomplish these things.  Warren and Sanders want single-payer healthcare with no private insurance while others, especially Pete Buttigieg, want to keep private insurance and offer a public option.  I recommend the article in the Oct. 21st issue of The Nation, "The Public Option is a Poison Pill" by David U. Himmelstein and Steffie Woolhandler, which details how private insurers have become expert at gaming the system and using their lobbying clout to undermine attempts to rein in their abuses.  This year private insurers will take in $252 billion more than they pay out, thanks in part to those of us who have repeatedly received claims returned stamped "claim denied" or "not in network."  Elizabeth Warren's suggestion of a wealth tax to help finance healthcare was met by Andrew Yang's claim that it was something tried by European nations and eventually repealed.  The reason it was repealed in several countries was because of the numerous exceptions the wealthy were able to achieve; it still exists in Norway, Spain and Switzerland.

Each candidate made a personal appeal, not so much on the issues as on their personality and experience.

Joe Biden played an instrumental role in the Obama administration.

Elizabeth Warren created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Bernie Sanders wrote the Medicare-for-all bill.

Amy Klobuchar, Pete Buttigieg are from the Midwest, crucial to beating Trump

Tom Steyer was among the first to urge impeachment.

Cory Booker has important urban experience.

Tulsi Gabbard was in the army for 16 years,

Julian Castro is an expert on housing.

Kamala Harris was a tough prosecutor.

Beto O'Rourke is from the red state of Texas.

Andrew Yang is a knowledgeable entrepreneur.

I would support any of them.  But who can defeat Donald Trump, whose re-election campaign is well under way?

Democratic Debate Sept. 12, 2019

It seems a little strange to call this a "debate," since there was very little difference among the candidates.  One slight difference is that, though everyone agrees on single-payer healthcare there are some differences about how exactly to get there.  Some candidates say that if one likes one's health insurance you should be able to keep it, for instance.  Warren, however, said "I don't know anyone who likes their health insurance" and I concur; anyone who "likes" their insurance usually means that it could be worse.  Those of us who have health insurance through an employer know about high deductibles, co-pays and many things not covered.  Private health insurance is something of a scam whereby the "insurer" charges as much as possible and pays out as little as possible, often denying coverage in order to increase their profits.  This is a clear conflict of interest and there are many, many stories of those who have had to file for bankruptcy because of their medical bills and most of those people have health insurance. As Sanders says, "healthcare is a right."

To distinguish themselves each of the candidates found some way to be unique.  Everyone said, "I am the only one on this stage who:

"served in the Obama administration"  Biden
"served in the armed forces" Buttigeg
"voted against the Iraq war" Sanders
"started a business and a non-profit" Yang
"lives in a black/brown neighborhood" Booker
"is a Senator running from the Midwest" Klobuchar
"has been a public schoolteacher" Warren
"is from Texas"  O'Rourke
"has served in the Cabinet" Castro
"has been an attorney general" Harris

I think any of these candidates would make a good President and, at the moment, my favorite is Warren; Biden is too befuddled and has too much for which to answer and Sanders is sometimes too strident in his repeated (and justified) denunciations of Wall Street and corporate interests.  Warren makes her positions clear in a forthright manner, including precise ways of financing single-payer healthcare and paid family leave.

Democratic Debates July 30 and 31, 2019

Can we call these presentations debates when there's such substantial agreement on the important issues:  climate change, immigration reform, single-payer healthcare?  On July 30 some candidates want to proceed quickly --especially in combatting climate change -- others want to proceed more slowly, in stages, some even advocating constitutional amendments to correct some of the more absurd Supreme Court decisions.  Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are the energetic elders, while Beto O'Rourke and Pete Buttigieg are youthful insurgents.  The other potential candidates are more cautious because, apparently, they think caution necessary in order to win.  Pete Buttigieg correctly says they will be called "socialists" no matter what they advocate; the only question in my mind is whether the fear of socialism can be stoked by name-calling in a population that seems quite comfortable with social security, Medicare and public schools.

In the July 31 debate it was Biden versus the crowd.  Everyone had a gimmick of one kind or another:  Biden wanted to build on what Obama had done, Yang wanted to give everyone $1000 a month (shades of Upton Sinclair), Inslee wanted to focus on climate change, Gillibrand on women's issues, Bennet on segregated schools, Gabbard (the only veteran on the stage) wants to stop the endless wars, De Blasio wants to "tax the hell out of the rich," Harris wants to stop predators (especially the one in the White House) as she did in California , Booker and Castro want to stop divisiveness   Generally there was little disagreement about issues such as healthcare and immigration, with different plans for getting to single-payer healthcare and citizenship for immigrants.  Biden stumbled a bit in defending his votes in the Senate and his role in the Obama administration while no one in the second debate offered the compelling progressive alternative that Sanders and Warren did in the first.

Democratic Debates June 26 and 27, 2019

My continuing complaint:  no mention of unions whatsoever.  A number of candidates made references to the current state of inequality and stagnant wages but no one mentioned one of the biggest reasons:  the decline of unions.  I think a minimum wage of $15 is fine but I don't think that takes the place of active unions that fight for their members and I would like suggestions about how to reinvigorate unions.

As for the candidates themselves there was little disagreement on the major issues:  single-payer healthcare (though there were various suggestions on the best way to get there), immigration (Sanders made the intelligent suggestion that we make a much greater effort to improve life in Central and South America) and a path to citizenship, major efforts to combat climate change, support our allies and avoid wars.

As for the individual candidates;  I think Biden stumbled considerably in attempts to defend his record on busing and his vote for the Iraq war (his touchy-feely campaigning and Anita Hill were not discussed).  For me the most articulate and intelligent candidates were Warren, Sanders, Harris and Buttigieg, who was even willing to admit "I couldn't get it done."  Sanders inveighed against Wall Street and the insurance companies but did not have many specific proposals while Warren had quite a few.  Gillibrand and Harris were the most articulate about family leave and subsidized daycare. Booker, de Blasio, and Castro were passionate about what they had done and what they could do and de Blasio was particularly articulate about speaking to the working class, as was Buttigieg about not forgetting those who do not go to college in the rush to eliminate college debt.

State of the Union 2019

The most absurd part of Trump's surreal and sleazy state of the union speech was his denunciation of socialism, "we will never be a socialist nation."  First of all, we already are:  Medicare (which was originally denounced by the medical community as "socialized medicine"), public schools. public libraries, social security, the post office, etc.  The major things we don't have that more "socialist" nations in Europe have are single-payer health care, free college education and childcare for working families.   The fear of socialism, of course, is less immediate now for Trump than the fear of immigrants, a subject on which Trump continues to dissemble, including stating that a wall in El Paso has stopped illegal immigration when the evidence shows otherwise.

Among other things that Trump did not mention was the separation of families at the border (though he did denounce abortion) and two things important to the working classes;  the shutdown of the government that deprived many workers of their paychecks, and unions, which were instrumental in raising wages until recently, when they have constantly been under attack by Trump and his allies. Otherwise the sotu was a typical Trump dog-and-pony show, including lauding WW II veterans and the Republican attendants popping up like "whack-a-moles" to applaud every absurd Trump assertion.

Stacey Adams's response to Trump was refreshing, pointing out that Trump mentioned nothing about the government shutdown, education, gun control, the burden Trump's trade wars have placed on American farmers, tearing families apart at the border, climate change, the affordable care act (which Trump claimed during his campaign to replace with something "better and cheaper" but has never made the slightest attempt to do), voter suppression and a respect for diversity.

Manifest

The one current network show I watch is NBC's "Manifest," a mixture of science fiction, police procedural and soap opera.  An airplane runs into some turbulence and when it lands it is five years later (the flight took three hours).  The show for a while was about a government conspiracy to kidnap and interrogate the passengers, then turned into a show about some of the passengers "seeing" the future and recently has brought in non-passengers who disappeared for periods of time, have miraculously survived and also have "callings," seeing the future.  One thing I like about the show is its unpredictability; too often I see a network show, like it and turn it on again only to find the plot exactly the same.  Perhaps most network TV watchers want that kind of predictability.

The various plot strands are woven carefully together by creator Jeff Rake and executive producer Robert Zemeckis (who directed the Back to the Future movies).  Josh Dallas plays Ben Stone, who returns from missing five years to find his wife with another man; his young son Cal, who was with him on the plane, has stayed the same age while Cal's twin sister Olive has aged five years.  Stone leads the inquiry to find out what has happened, as well is what is happening:  some of the plane passengers have died under mysterious circumstances. Next week is the final episode of the season and we'll see if the various plot elements continue to come together or further unravel.

Trump from the Oval Office, Jan. 8 2019

I know I haven't posted much on this blog recently, mostly because there's not enough good TV or radio to write about, e.g., I watched a couple of episodes of The Cool Kids -- the idea of a comedy about Shady Meadows retirement home sounded full of possibilities -- but the show, created by Charlie Day and Paul Fruchborn, spent more time on the inflated laugh track than on the dialogue.

Of course Donald Trump on TV last night was even more depressing:  he looked like a turtle that was trying to sneak back into his shell as he dispensed his distortions in an attempt to get his wall, as though his manhood somehow depended on it.  His most risible comments were how the wall would help African-Americans and Hispanics (unemployment is low now) and how it would stop drugs (most of which come in through airports or hidden in trucks and motorcars.) He even made a comparison with ex-Presidents living behind walls (not true) to protect their loved ones.  I found myself waiting to hear about the virtues of Hadrian's Wall, The Great Wall of China and the Berlin Wall, until I remembered that Trump knows nothing about history and perhaps has never even heard of these walls.

Senators Pelosi and Schumer made brief responses to Trump's nonsense, suggesting (quite reasonably) that Trump open the government while talks continue and that we should not be governed by temper tantrums.  Trump is certainly no friend of the working classes who are suffering without their next paycheck and has contradicted himself,  suggesting that the furloughed workers are probably Democrats on the one hand (for which he has no evidence) and that, on the other hand, they support the shutdown!