Today, Paul Krugman published an opinion column with his thoughts on last night’s debate. Krugman says he’s not sure what the debate means for the primary race but he’s relieved it has at least changed the subject from Bernie Sanders’ Medicare for All plan:
Wednesday’s Democratic debate was far more informative than previous debates. What we learned, in particular, was that as a presidential candidate, Michael Bloomberg is a great businessman — and that Elizabeth Warren remains a force to be reckoned with…
What does all this mean for the nomination? I have no idea. But maybe the Warren-Bloomberg confrontation will help refocus discussion away from so-called Medicare for all — which isn’t going to be enacted, no matter who wins — to an issue where it matters a lot which Democrat prevails. Namely, are we going to do anything to rein in the financialization of the U.S. economy?
Krugman’s curt dismissal of Sanders’ top campaign priority is certainly an interesting approach. But he’s not the first to make this case. Just last week Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is Sanders’ most popular surrogate in the race, said something equally dismissive in an interview with HuffPost: