argument top image

< Back to question Who should be the 2020 Democratic presidential nominee? Show more Show less

The Democrats are preparing to beat Donald Trump in the 2020 US Presidential election. While united by party, the contenders are divided on how they plan to take the US forward. So, who are the possible top candidates? What are their policies and what do they represent? And could they beat Donald Trump in an election?

Elizabeth Warren Show more Show less

What does Elizabeth Warren stand for? Warren's vision of structural change is what America needs.
(1 of 8) Next position >

Elizabeth Warren offers big, structural change

Warren has repeatedly called for "big, structural change," something that is necessary if America is going to progress.
2020 US Election Elizabeth Warren change
< (2 of 3) Next argument >

Vote

Not sure yet? Read more before voting ↓

Proponents


Context

All Democratic candidates believe that change is required in America. Few have big ideas of how to make it happen. Warren's brand of transformation is bold and promising.

The Argument

In America, like any capitalist economy, power fundamentally lies in the hands of the wealthy. Small, incremental policy changes will not fix this. On the contrary, America needs overarching structural change to rebuild society so the average American can benefit too. Warren policies include plans to end corruption in politics, a new wealth tax, getting rid of the electoral college, and the Green New Deal.[1] The driving goal is the same: major structural change for long-lasting benefits across all of society. Polls show that voters generally prefer structural change over the minor changes that might pass more easily, but whose effects are barely felt.[2]

Counter arguments

Warren is not an authentic supporter of 'big, structural change' - she is a proponent of incrementalism. For instance, take her walking back of her Medicare for All plan: While she initially supported Medicare for All and even released a plan to pay for it, she then stepped back to a plan for "transitioning to Medicare for All," under which the policy would not be fully implemented until her third year in office.[3] When push comes to shove, Warren does not have the integrity to provide the structural change she promises.

Premises

[P1] America needs large, sweeping changes to progress forward. [P2] Warren has the plans and ability to bring about these changes.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P2] Warren will not follow through with these changes.

References

  1. https://elizabethwarren.com/plans
  2. https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3641
  3. https://newrepublic.com/article/155756/elizabeth-warren-retreats-medicare

This page was last edited on Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 21:25 UTC

Explore related arguments