CLINTON,
Iowa (AP) — Seven Democratic presidential candidates will stand on
stage this week in Los Angeles, a pool of survivors who have withstood
almost a year on the campaign trail, sustained attacks from rivals in
both parties, and five rounds of high-pressure debates.
And
while the field has been effectively cut down from more than 20 in the
span of six months, a deepening sense of volatility is settling over the
Democratic primary on the eve of the sixth and final debate of 2019.
The remaining candidates, those in the debate and some trying to compete
from outside, are grappling with unprecedented distraction from
Washington, questions about their core principles and new signs that the
party’s energized factions are turning against each other.
Lest
there be any doubt about the level of turbulence in the race, it’s
unclear whether Thursday’s debate will happen at all given an unsettled
labor union dispute that might require participants to cross a picket
line. All seven candidates have said they would not do so.
The
Democratic dilemma is perhaps best personified by Elizabeth Warren,
whose progressive campaign surged through the late summer and fall but
is suddenly struggling under the weight of nagging questions about her
health care plan, her ability to compete against President Donald Trump
and her very authenticity as a candidate.
Boyd
Brown, a South Carolina-based Democratic strategist who recently
decided to back Joe Biden only after his preferred candidate, Beto
O’Rourke, was forced from the race, likened Warren’s position to that of
someone falling down a mountain grasping for anything to slow her
descent.
“She’s got real problems,” Brown said.
Warren
has avoided conflict with her Democratic rivals for much of the year,
but she has emerged as the chief antagonist of the leading candidates in
the so-called moderate lane, former Vice President Joe Biden and Mayor
Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana. Seven weeks before Iowa’s Feb. 3
caucus, the Massachusetts senator is attacking both men with increasing
frequency for being too willing to embrace Republican ideas and too cozy
with wealthy donors.
Those
close to Warren hope the strategy will allow her to shift the
conversation away from her own health care struggles back to her
signature wealth tax and focus on corruption. Yet she could not escape
questions about her evolving position on Medicare for All as she
campaigned in Iowa over the weekend.
When
asked about health care, Warren told a crowd of roughly 180 people in
the Mississippi River town of Clinton, Iowa, about a plan to expand
insurance coverage without immediately moving to a universal,
government-run system. She promised that those who wanted government
health insurance could buy it before finally concluding, “At the end of
my first term, we’ll vote on Medicare for All.”
The next question came from a man who said he was on Medicare and mostly happy about it, but had lingering issues.
“You call it Medicare for All and it’s better. Can’t you change the name?” he asked of her proposal.
“I
like your suggestion,” Warren responded, in a tone suggesting she
wasn’t entirely joking. “Let’s call it health care for everybody.” She
later added, “Let’s call it better than Medicare for All. I’m in.”
Even
entertaining a name change seemed to mark yet another shift for Warren,
who first co-sponsored Medicare for All in 2017, but began pivoting
away from the proposal after experts questioned the plan she released in
October to pay for it without raising middle-class taxes. She
subsequently released a “transition plan” promising to get Medicare for
All approved by Congress by the end of her third year as president while
relying on existing insurance plans, including those established by
Obamacare, to expand health coverage in the interim.
Warren’s
Democratic critics suggest her evolution on the issue has stalled her
momentum because it goes beyond a policy dispute and raises broader
questions about what may be the most important personal quality in
politics: authenticity.
Indeed,
Buttigieg, Biden and other rivals have seized on her shifts. Even
Bernie Sanders, Warren’s progressive ally and Medicare for All’s author,
seemed to pile on by promising to send a full bill to Congress
implementing the measure during the first week of his administration.
Without
naming any of his rivals, Biden adviser Symone Sanders said candidates
would not succeed in shifting the conversation away from health care
this week even if they wanted to. She said to expect another “robust
exchange” on the issue, which “is not going away and for good reason,
because it is an issue that in 2018 Democrats ran on and won.”
Tough questions for Warren haven’t just come from her rivals.
Since
Thanksgiving, she’s shortened her typically 30-minute and more stump
speech to around 10 minutes and used the extra time to take more
audience questions — only to be forced further on the defensive about
health care.
Barton
Wright, a 69-year-old technical writer, pressed Warren on Medicare for
All at a recent event in Rochester, New Hampshire, noting after the
event that he wants a deeper explanation.
“It
just sounds awful,” Wright said. “It sounds ‘like Hemlock for All’ for
people who don’t like Medicare. And that’s a lot of people.”
Even after questioning Warren, however, Wright said he was helping her campaign and still plans to vote for her.
Meanwhile,
Buttigieg, the surprise member of the top-tier, is grappling with
issues of his own that expose another fissure between the moderate and
progressive wings of the party.
Protesters
aligned with Warren and Sanders tracked him across New York City last
week banging pots and pans and calling him “Wall Street Pete” as he
continued his aggressive courtship of wealthy donors. The 37-year-old
seemed genuinely confused by the protests, which he was forced to
acknowledge during at least one Manhattan fundraiser because the noise
outside was so loud.
As
he faced supporters in Seattle over the weekend, Buttigieg acknowledged
that the intra-party attacks will almost certainly continue, although
he tried to downplay the intensity of the infighting.
“There’s
gonna have to be some fighting,” Buttigieg said, “but I’m never gonna
let us get to where it feels like the fight is the point.”
The
fighting is almost certain to be on display at Thursday night’s debate,
especially among the four candidates in the top-tier: Biden, Buttigieg,
Sanders and Warren. The three others on stage — Minnesota Sen. Amy
Klobuchar, billionaire activist Tom Steyer and entrepreneur Andrew Yang —
only narrowly hit the polling threshold needed to qualify and have an
obvious incentive to make waves of their own as well.
Voters don’t want a public fight, even if they sense one is coming.
Steve
Wehling, a 43-year-old University of Iowa employee, said he doesn’t
like Democrats feuding with each other, but he won’t hold it against
Warren or anyone else. He said he understands that, with the caucuses
looming, “all of the campaigns are really starting to put the squeeze
on.”
“Voters
turn on the debates and still see 10 people on stage and I think a lot
would of them would like to see the field narrowed down,” said Wehling,
who plans to vote for Sanders and says Warren is his second choice. “The
pressure is really on.”
___
Peoples reported in New York. Associated Press writer Hunter Woodall in Rochester, New Hampshire, contributed to this report.
No comments:
Post a Comment