Trust Me | The New Yorker Comment

Listen to support it, WNYC Studios.

From the pages of The New Yorker, this is the weekly comment podcast. In Trust Me, Amy Davidson Sorkin reports on how last week's debate was largely about radical or just how ambitious the party and its candidates are prepared to be.

Resilience in the face of a personal setback was the subject of the final question in last Thursday night's Democratic debate in Houston, when it was the turn of Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend to answer, he spoke about the years in which he lived with the fear that as a military officer and an elected official in a socially conservative community revealing that he was gay would end his career.

But he reached a point, he said, where he was not interested in knowing what it was like to be in love any longer.

And he came out during the final months of a campaign.

When I trusted voters to judge me based on the job that I did for them, he said, they decided to trust me and re -elected me with 80 per cent of the vote, and what I learned was that trust can be reciprocated.

Buttigieg's story was moving on its own terms, but it also threw into relief a fundamental question of the Democratic primary race.

What vision of themselves and of voters are the candidates willing to trust?

At a basic level, that question has to do with being able to convince voters that they are being spoken to without deceit.

former Representative Beto O 'Rourke of El Paso has that ability and it was on display in one of his stronger moments on Thursday asked whether he was serious when he said he would require the owners of military -style weapons to sell them to the government he replied hell yes we're gonna take your ar -15 your ak -47 politicians are often anxious to offer assurances that no one is coming for anyone's guns, but O 'Rourke said he believed that these gun owners, too, were sick of seeing children dying in mass shootings.

When he visited a gun show recently, he added, Some people told him they'd be willing to give up their guns because … I don't need this weapon to hunt, to defend myself.

Doing the right thing, O 'Rourke said, was not a separate task from bringing all Americans, including conservative Republicans, into the conversation.

The health care segment of the debate also hinged on questions of trust. The Medicare for All bill, which Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont wrote and Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts signed on to, includes a provision on page 8, as Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota helpfully pointed out, that would effectively ban most forms of private insurance.

In this respect, the bill is far more restrictive than not only the public option, but also the European universal health care systems that Sanders admires.

Both Buttigieg, who favors Medicare for all who want it, and Senator Kamala Harris of California, who introduced a plan in July that includes a longer transition and a larger role for private insurers, maintained that people should be trusted to choose their own option.

Harris has zigzagged on the issue.

She originally signed on to Sanders' bill, raising a different question of trust. Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, who co -sponsored the bill, has also backed away from elements of it.

When Sanders said that workers whose unions had agreed to wage cuts in return for private health care coverage would be able to recover that money from their employers, Vice President Joe Biden told him, for a socialist you've got a lot more confidence in corporate America than I do.

That exchange, like several others on Thursday, was largely about how radical, or just how ambitious the party is prepared to be.

Is sweeping, structural reform the best way to effect change, or is Obamacare worth building on?

Some factions in the party have been busy rejecting parts of Barack Obama's legacy in the area of immigration, for example.

Pervasive doubt about existing institutions could make it easier to persuade people to commit to entirely new ways of doing things.

It could also lead them to give up on a political system that they think is irredeemable or just mean.

Julian Castro, the former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, did not help matters when during a discussion of public option insurance enrollment, he seemed gleeful and a chance to portray Biden as dottery.

Are you forgetting already what you said just two minutes ago?

He asked. Castro later said that his approach was the way the primaries are supposed to play out.

But his jibe seemed a crude bit of gaslighting, since Biden hadn't quite said what Castro claimed he had.

As Klobuchar put it in an interview following the debate, the remark was not cool.

Castro barely qualified for the debate.

He is averaging about 1 % in the polls.

Of the 10 candidates on stage, only three—Biden, Warren, and Sanders—are polling in the double digits.

For some of the others, to continue competing seems to call for either an extraordinary amount of confidence in themselves, or, especially in the case of Andrew Yang, in the resonance of their message.

Yang, a businessman, presents a notable example of the twinned qualities of pessimism and hope.

He believes that in the face of automation, traditional responses to unemployment, such as retraining programs, are hopeless, but that with a universal basic income of $1 ,000 a month, and the boot off of people's throats, Americans will not sink into inertia but remake their lives and their country.

He undercut his own message on Thursday, however, by announcing, game -show style, that his campaign would give that money to 10 American families so they could try the plan.

At its most developed, the strength of the case for basic income lies in how it would change the entire economic climate, not just the prospects of a few lucky winners.

There is also the reciprocal aspect of the trust equation, having faith in voters.

The Democratic Party seems split on the question of how much of its resources should be directed toward certain voters, particularly white working -class men struggling with de -industrialization.

The willingness of so many voters to cast their ballots for Donald Trump has been disorienting.

But the case remains that some of those same people previously voted for Obama.

The categories are rarely neat.

As Buttigieg noted, where I come from a lot of times that displaced autoworker is a single black mother of three.

None of this is easy.

Even Buttigieg's decision to come out publicly, which he did in 2015, would likely have turned out very differently 20 years ago, but it is true that the victories surrounding LGBTQ rights have been brought about by a combination of activism, litigation, and people telling their stories within their communities, throughout conversation, as O 'Rourke put it, as well as confrontation.

This is how primaries ought to play out.

Every election is an exercise in trust. That was Trust Me by Amy Davidson Sorkin, from the New Yorker Magazines issue for September 23, 2019, narrated by Jamie Rinnell.

Audible .com produces a weekly audio edition of The New Yorker.

To subscribe or to download individual issues, we invite you to go to www .audible .com and enter New Yorker in the search box.

To subscribe to the comment podcast, go to www .ny .com or to the New Yorker Room on the iTunes Store.

[Trust Me: Navigating Ambition and Ideology in the Democratic Primary]-[Trust Me]

📋 Summary

Trust Me: Navigating Ambition and Ideology in the Democratic Primary

The Reciprocity of Trust

Candidacy and Conviction: The Case of Beto O'Rourke

The Healthcare Divide and Structural Reform

Political Posturing and the Challenge of Authenticity

Conclusion: The Exercise of Trust

🎯Key Sentences

📝Key Phrases

📖 Transcript