The Iowa Caucuses have been a disaster. There's no doubt about it. People in Iowa caucused almost a week ago and we still don't have any kind of definitive answer as to who the winner is or even what happened. We know the math was riddled with errors and Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez called for a recanvas, something the state party refused to do.
Conservatives have repeatedly asked how the Democrats would successfully implement government-run health care, like Medicare for All, if they struggle to count people's votes? After all, the health care system is far more complex than basic math. Although, if you look at how the Democrats' divvy up delegates, it's no wonder there are all kinds of questions being raised.
CBS News' Margaret Brennan asked Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) point-blank how his party could be confident in socialized medicine when they can't succeed at something far more simple.
"Your campaign pointed some inconsistencies in the results out in Iowa, as did two other campaigns. Columnist Peggy Noonan wrote this: 'They can't run a tiny caucus in a tiny state but they want us to believe they can reinvent American health care?' How damaging is it that the Democrats couldn't get this right?" Brennan asked.
"It is damaging," Sanders replied instantly. "It really saddens me because I went all over the state of Iowa and they're beautiful people, good people, who take their responsibilities very seriously. The fact that the Iowa Democratic Party that has received all kinds of money, could not count those votes in a timely matter is really a sad state of affairs."
"Right, but you're advocating for the empowerment of the U.S. government to take over the entire health care system," Brennan reminded him. "This, just optically, looks like the party can't run its own caucus."
Bernie was quick to interrupt her.
"Margaret, that's not a true statement," he said. "[I'm] not advocating for the United States government to take over health care system. What I'm advocating for is an expansion of Medicare. Medicare exists. I want to expand it over a four year period."
"Right, which would be administered by the U.S. government," Brennan replied. "And your administration if you win."
"But it's not a 'takeover.' People will still go to the same doctor. They'll go to the same hospital. We will substantially lower the cost of prescription drugs," he stated. "The cost per person will go down. People will be paying less that way but it's not a 'takeover.'"
Brennan reminded Sanders that the criticism is about competency.
"Straight out of the gate, how do you reassure the public that the party, the ticket that you are running on, can do this and do this successfully in the states ahead?" she asked.
The Nevada Caucuses are set to take place on Feb. 22 and they're "short of volunteers... 1,000 caucus chairs and they might have to hold two caucuses at once."
"This doesn't look efficient," Brennan said.
"That may well be the case but let's get back to the United States government," Sanders said. "I'm not the chair of the Nevada Democratic Party."
Bernie can't answer the question because he knows conservatives make a valid point. He can't discredit what we've said all along. He can argue semantics all he wants. Medicare for All is the government taking over health care as we know it.
"The fact that the Iowa Democratic Party that has received all kinds of money, could not count those votes in a timely matter is really a sad state of affairs," Bernie Sanders explained. pic.twitter.com/9P6oRh082C— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) February 9, 2020