Former Virginia Democratic Governor Terry McAuliffe, a close ally to the Clintons, is mulling a presidential run. At first glance, he could be seen as a Democrat who isn’t veering on the far left of the spectrum. Yes, he pushed Medicaid expansion as governor, but the Republican legislature always blocked it up until recently. Elected in 2013, McAuliffe was pretty business-centered, sticking to issues where he could do the most with what he had in Richmond. He didn’t go hardcore against gun rights, he couldn’t. And the closing years of his administration saw him enact a concealed carry reciprocity agreement that made Virginia one of the best states in the country concerning carry rights. The anti-gun Left was not pleased. So, with McAuliffe out in 2017, you cannot serve consecutive terms in Virginia, and with 2020 on the horizon with no Hillary Clinton in the mix (so far), he’s considering a presidential run. Heck, everyone is on the Left. It’s open season. In a recent interview with CNN, McAuliffe also reminded us, though I know some of you already knew this, that pretty much everyone who is running for the Democratic nomination is pro-socialized medicine, and have zero ideas for how to pay for it (via Real Clear Politics):
DANA BASH, CNN Host: What about Medicare for all?
TERRY MCAULIFFE: Hmm?
BASH: What about Medicare for all?
MCAULIFFE: We all support Medicare for all. The system as it exists today...
BASH: You support Medicare for all?
MCAULIFFE: Yes, but we have got to figure out how we pay for it. It's unrealistic in terms of how we pay for it today.
But do we want everybody covered under health care? Of course we do.
BASH: But this is specifically -- you know what we're talking about. This is an original Bernie Sanders idea that a lot of potential 2020 competitors have signed on to.
You're saying you're for that?
MCAULIFFE: I'm saying I support that everybody in this country gets access to quality, affordable health care, whatever you may want to call it, because the system today -- and I was a big support of the ACA, but we do need to tweak it to take it to the next level. We have got to fix it.
Am I for health care for all individuals, affordable, quality care? You bet I am. The key is -- and this is why I say governors are very important, because, when we make promises, we have to deliver. We have to actually pay for what we're actually promising.
So, as we get into this debate, let's have an honest, realistic discussion of where we need to go as a nation.
But, clearly, what we have in the White House today is not working.
For years, Obamacare’s detractors had theorized that the original law signed by Barack Obama was flawed by design, so as to create another narrative for why the government should takeover the entire sector altogether with the fullness of time. They have the hard-core Left lock step behind this socialist trash of an idea. And the voters appear to be open to it as well. That is, until you tell them that their employer-based plans, for which they adore, will have to be gutted and skinned to ensure the big government health care monster can live. Then, support drops rather fast (via NBC News):
The public is divided over a single-payer health care system, with 47 percent favoring such an approach and 46 percent opposing it.
But when supporters are told that all health care costs would be covered under a single-payer system — but that it would eliminate employer plans and that there would be only one government plan — the numbers move to 36 percent favor, 55 percent oppose.
So, that’s it. There aren’t any centrist Democrats after all. Now, a part of me doesn’t care. This is just the natural progression of a party that is dominated by the snobby professional elites, who are liberal, condescending, and totally insufferable. But There’s also a part of me that liked this breed of Democrat because on a few issues, we could get them into our camp and pass certain laws quickly without having to worry about the annoying clowns of the Left getting their endless hours of oxygen on MSNBC, pouting talking points because it was already a win for us; the right flanks were vulnerable because their more centrist colleagues weren’t onboard. Specifically, this occurs on gun rights bills, Democrats in the West are a bit less enthusiastic to adopt the gun-grabbing ethos of Moms Demand.
Trump is probably going to win re-election, as the 2020 Democratic clown car is a mess. They’re divided. They have no agenda. And the blood sports to see who can out-crazy and out-Democrat the other could make the red wedding look like Sesame Street. We’ll let them duke it out. For McAuliffe, he’s trying to toe that middle line. Yes, he all but said that he supports some form of government-run health care, but he also took a swipe at his party’s push for free college and a federal jobs guarantee are too good to be true, pie-in-the-sky ideas that can never be sold seriously to the voters. McAuliffe took to the pages of The Washington Postto voice his concerns:
…some senators have started to discuss a “federal jobs guarantee” — a promise that, in certain formulations, means that anyone who wants could have a government job paying $15 an hour with great benefits. Sound too good to be true? It is. Proponents of a jobs guarantee are smart people with good motives, but they surely recognize that it is not a realistic policy.
Similarly, a promise of universal free college has an appealing ring, but it’s not a progressive prioritization of the educational needs of struggling families. We need to provide access to higher education, job training and student debt relief to families who need it. Spending limited taxpayer money on a free college education for the children of rich parents badly misses the mark for most families.
When the stakes are another four years of Trump degrading our country, do we really want to use the 2020 campaign as a first-time experiment on idealistic but unrealistic policies?
It sure sounds like he’s going to run, though he forgot to add that Bernie Sanders’ health care agenda is just as crappy.