Mapping the world's opinions

argument top image

Who should be the 2020 Democratic Party presidential nominee? Show more Show less

The Democrats are preparing to beat Donald Trump in the 2020 US Presidential election. The current field is filled with contenders who vary on policy and vision 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 Positions) Next >>

Elizabeth Warren offers big, structural change

Warren has repeatedly called for "big, structural change," something that is necessary if America is going to progress.

<< Previous (3 of 3 Arguments)
Elizabeth Warren change 2020 US Election

Context

While all Democratic candidates believe that change is required in America, there are differing opinions as to what the size and pace of this change should be.

The Argument

In America, power fundamentally lies in the hands of the wealthy. Small, incremental policy change will not fix this - on the contrary, America needs overarching structural change in order to rebuild society to benefit the average American. Warren will introduce a variety of policies like ending corruption in politics, a new wealth tax, getting rid of the electoral college, and the Green New Deal.[1] Each of these policies will introduce structural change which will benefit all members of American society for years to come. Polls have shown that voters generally prefer structural change over more minor changes that may be easier to pass into law.[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

Proponents

Do you agree?

Sign up or log in to record your thoughts on this argument

Explore related arguments

This page was last edited on Thursday, 16 Jan 2020 at 10:35 UTC