Charles Blow, in his column today, claims that Sander’s plan for healthcare is “Quixotic.”
Hillary's incremental reform of Obamacare is the Quixotic quest. As long as Republicans control either house, no change will pass short of full repeal. But sooner or later the Republicans will lose their majorities. So the question for a Democrat who favors improvements in our health care system is: Which candidate will lead sooner to Democratic majorities? Because until we have those, any plan for improved healthcare has to wait.
Sanders has been raising that question from the start of his campaign. If Clinton has even acknowledged it, that's under the radar. Which plan we prefer for improved healthcare is secondary to this, except to the degree it motivates voters to provide Democratic majorities. Since Sander's plan gets more people positively excited, it's the better plan to present now. This is pragmatic, not Quixotic politics.
Is it realistic to run for president without offering a clear, distinct vision of a better world? Or is it idealistic to run for president implying that the current social arrangements are already so close to ideal that only modest tweaks should even be contemplated? To my mind: yes and yes, and Bernie’s the realist in this race.