on this.

Good for her!

Would MFA increase taxes on the middle class? Yes, no, why, or why not?

...which Republicans will definitely bring up. The simple answer is: “your taxes will rise a bit, but your medical costs will drop.”. A politician who ducks the question with a canned answer sound like a politician, and that’s a problem for voters who feel that politicians of all stripes can’t be trusted.

I don't think it would be.

But, "dodged the question" is useful for those who oppose Warren.

Canada taxes tobacco, gasoline, and alcoholic beverages

The only news anchor to score lower on Jeopardy than Tweety was Wolf. I remember when Tweety was in a fight with Phil Donahue over going into Iraq. Tweety was pro, Donahue was against. Of course msnbc fired Donahue he didn't toe the right wing narrative.

Atticus, I listened to the questions that cnn was asking, the purpose of that debate last night was to bring down Bernie and Warren. I want to see if cnn does the same tonight for Biden and Harris?

TAPPER: At the last debate, you said you’re, quote, “with Bernie on Medicare for all.” Now, Senator Sanders has said that people in the middle class will pay more in taxes to help pay for Medicare for all, though that will be offset by the elimination of insurance premiums and other costs. Are you also, quote, “with Bernie” on Medicare for all when it comes to raising taxes on middle-class Americans to pay for it?

WARREN: So giant corporations and billionaires are going to pay more. Middle-class families are going to pay less out of pocket for their health care. And I'd like to finish talking about Ady, the guy who has ALS... (this was the first dodge of the question)

--- snip of Warren discussing the guy with ALS ----

TAPPER: Thank you, Senator. Just a point of clarification... (because she dodged it the first time)

(APPLAUSE)

... in 15 extra seconds, would you raise taxes on the middle class to pay for Medicare for All, offset, obviously, by the elimination of insurance premiums, yes or no?

WARREN: Costs will go up for billionaires and go up for corporations. For middle-class families, costs -- total costs -- will go down. (Dodge number 2)

It was a 'yes' or 'no' question. The transcripts and playback clearly show she avoided answering it.

The media abhors nuance. Taxes wouldn't go up in a vacuum, but the soundbite most assuredly would have.

========

News reports are reporting exactly what she said. There's no indication the media would NOT have reported it had she responded "yes, and here's why" or "no, and here's why."

What people are seeing in the playbacks that will run 24/7 is her avoiding the question.

"I will raise your taxes". No gifts for the GOP.

Don't think so.

That isn't a difficult concept.

They're reporting exactly how Warren answered - or didn't answer - the question.

"I don't do 'nuance'"?

W, I believe.

... only thing that take money out of people's pockets. In a a democracy, paying one's fair share of taxes is a patriotic duty, but one's tax burden does not exist in a vacuum; living in our society imposes many financial obligations on us.

Isn't it odd that the question was not: "Will MFA reduce premiums and out-of-pocket costs for the middle class?" Because saying, "Deductibles and copays will be eliminated... but your taxes will go up bit," sounds very different than, "Your taxes will increase... but, but that will be more than offset by having no deductibles or copays" -- because it puts the emphasis where it belongs: on the reduction of healthcare costs, which is not only the intended consequence of MFA but is also the greater financial impact when compared to any tax increase.

========

The problem is that the question in this format does not allow for an easy back and forth discussion. It comes off as suggesting that the entire means of financing the proposal is through middle class taxes.

Those type of questions cause confusion for everyone.

a program that has many flaws...I am not in favor of MFA. And running on it will cost us the election. It also has zero chance passing.

The bottom line is what concerns me. If those Republican voters who supported the tax heist had just flipped to the bottom line, instead of ignoring it along with thousands of pages meant to confuse and obfuscate, they would have been very enlightened.

Few of us would want, much less expect, to get something for nothing. And a majority of those who do, for various reasons, regret not being able to carry their own weight.

"If taxes go up slightly to pay for a program that saves people greater amounts of money..."

She could also point out that people pay taxes for other programs that save them money:

"We know that taxes funding basic needs save individuals money. Taxes spent on roads and bridges save drivers not just time but money they'd otherwise spend for car repairs and extra fuel."

And so on. Nothing there the Republicans can use against her in a video or audio clip.

Dodging the question simply calls more attention to what she ISN'T saying.

I like and admire Warren. One of the best things about her is her directness. It doesn't help her to sound like just another politician.

adopt right-wing framing and talking points. Right-wingers learned years ago that if they frame the narrative, they win.

Finally, some of our candidates are starting to fight back. Pete Buttigieg is the best at re-framing of this field, IMO, and Elizabeth Warren is not far behind. We should be supportive of this, not rw talking points.

and to show how well she handles it. This is desirable, I'm told.

had been out to sea for weeks, and was beginning to go through sex withdrawals. Fed up with the lack of sex, he asked one of his shipmates what he did when the pressure was too much to take.

"Well, there's a barrel with a hole in it near the mop storage. When it gets to be too much for us, we use that."

So the sailor went over to the barrel and decided to give it a go. Finding it was better than he'd expected, he began using it regularly, and his problems seemed to vanish.

After a couple of weeks, his commanding officer began to take notice, and said, "You seem to be a lot more relaxed. What's your secret?"

The sailor, embarrassed to give a straight answer, simply said he'd been getting better rest.

"Well good, sailor. You're going to need it," replied the officer. "Today's your turn in the barrel."

I don't think it is right to use that punchline without the whole joke.

Voters would consider this a bait and switch.

If she had simply answered "Yes," it would almost surely wind up in a Trump ad.

There are really good ideas here. I hope the aids to the candidates sometimes check out these threads.

wherein private taxes are premiums, deductables, copays, etc.

All proponents of MFA need to use the phrasing along the lines of "Healthcare Costs will go down." If we lead with "taxes will rise", the other side will drill out-of-context sound bites into the ground.

Although I support Sanders, I am comfortable with Warren's answers.