Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Hillary Clinton

Showing Original Post only (View all)

Rose Siding

(32,623 posts)
Fri Jan 29, 2016, 11:40 AM Jan 2016

WP Editors dispute Sanders' response to their editorial [View all]

Hillary has weathered disagreements with the press for a long time and come out little worse for the wear. Now that the media is spending time on vetting Bernie -they waited too long to do it!- some of them aren't liking what they see.

Bernie Sanders’s ideas are not too bold. They are too facile.

‘IF THE Washington Post wants to say that our ideas are bold, I accept that,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Thursday in response to a critical editorial we ran about him. “We’ve got to create an economy that works for the middle class. And whether The Washington Post likes it or not, that’s what I intend to do.”

In fact, we would love that — and we were heartened that Mr. Sanders chose to engage with our editorial. Yet our disagreements with Mr. Sanders are not as he portrayed them; they do not concern the problems he chooses to address or the boldness with which he proposes to address them. The nation could use big measures to take on climate change, advance public health, tackle poverty, shore up entitlement programs, boost education, improve our democracy and do all sorts of other things that Mr. Sanders cares about. We argue for policies such as a carbon tax and public campaign financing, even though they are subject to massive and possibly insurmountable political opposition, because they would lead to large and needed changes.

What concerns us is not that Mr. Sanders’s program to tackle these issues is “radical,” as he put it, but that it is not very well thought out. We are far from the only ones, for example, to point out that his health-care plan rests on unbelievable assumptions about how much he could slash health-care costs without affecting the care ordinary Americans receive. “Their savings numbers are — well, politely said — simply wrong,” Emory University health-care expert Kenneth E. Thorpe told Vox. Mr. Thorpe, who is not hostile to single-payer systems of the type Mr. Sanders favors and has even advanced single-payer plans of his own, released an analysis Wednesday finding that Mr. Sanders’s proposal would cost $1 trillion more than the candidate estimated. That is not over a 10-year budget window. That is every year...................

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mr-sanderss-ideas-are-not-too-bold-they-are-too-facile/2016/01/28/e7125bca-c60a-11e5-9693-933a4d31bcc8_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-d%3Ahomepage%2Fstory


The word is tailor made for the argument:

fac·ile
ˈfasəl/Submit
adjective
1.
(especially of a theory or argument) appearing neat and comprehensive only by ignoring the true complexities of an issue; superficial.
synonyms: simplistic, superficial, oversimplified
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Hillary Clinton»WP Editors dispute Sander...»Reply #0