But lurking behind this argument about the future is a dispute that's really about the past. It’s a debate over what Obama accomplished in office -- in particular, how significant those accomplishments really are. And it's been simmering on the left for most of the last seven years.

On one side of this divide are activists and intellectuals who are ambivalent, disappointed or flat-out frustrated with what Obama has gotten done. They acknowledge what they consider modest achievements -- like helping some of the uninsured and preventing the Great Recession from becoming another Great Depression. But they are convinced that the president could have accomplished much more if only he’d fought harder for his agenda and been less quick to compromise.

They dwell on the opportunities missed, like the lack of a public option in health care reform or the failure to break up the big banks. They want those things now -- and more. In Sanders, they are hearing a candidate who thinks the same way.

On the other side are partisans and thinkers who consider Obama's achievements substantial, even historic. They acknowledge that his victories were partial and his legislation flawed. This group recognizes that there are still millions of people struggling to find good jobs or pay their medical bills, and that the planet is still on a path to catastrophically high temperatures. But they see in the last seven years major advances in the liberal crusade to bolster economic security for the poor and middle class. They think the progress on climate change is real, and likely to beget more in the future.

Staying with the Clinton-vs.-Sanders contest, MSNBC's Alex Seitz-Wald makes a very smart point: Geography likely gives Clinton a big advantage in Iowa. Why? "Iowa is a caucus not a primary. That means a supporter in one place is not necessary as valuable as a supporter in another place... Take the university towns: More than a quarter — 27 percent — of Sanders supporters come from just three counties of Iowa's 99, according to the Register poll, each home to one of the state's largest universities. But those three counties award only 12 percent of the total 1401 delegates at stake statewide. 'He's setting the world on fire on the college campuses,' [Iowa Dem strategist Jeff] Link explained. 'That's great if you're in a primary, but it's not as much if you're in a caucus.'" If Clinton wins Iowa, this will DEFINITELY be one of the reasons why. But don't discount Sanders or his operation at all.

The Des Moines Register editorial board announced on Saturday that it would endorse Hillary Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) in the Republican primary.

The editorial board wrote that Clinton has the necessary experience to be president of the United States:

The presidency is not an entry-level position. Whoever is sworn into office next January must demonstrate not only a deep understanding of the issues facing America, but also possess the diplomatic skills that enable presidents to forge alliances to get things done.
By that measure, Democrats have one outstanding candidate deserving of their support: Hillary Clinton. No other candidate can match the depth or breadth of her knowledge and experience.

The Iowa paper wrote that Clinton is not "perfect candidate, as evidenced the way she has handled the furor over her private email server." But the editorial board said that it's "almost inconceivable" that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) would be able to "remake Washington in his own image."

The Hillary Clinton campaign on Tuesday said that recent attacks from conservatives show that Republicans are hoping Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) will win the Democratic nomination because they believe he would be easier to beat in the general election.

In a Tuesday evening statement, the Clinton campaign's communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, mentioned an ad from the Rove-aligned super PAC American Crossroads, which accused Clinton of being in Wall Street's pocket. Palmieri said the ad suggests that Republicans want to face Sanders in the general election.

"While Senator Sanders tries to make a case on electability based on meaningless polls, Republicans and their super PACs have made clear the candidate they’re actually afraid to face. The Sanders argument falls apart when the GOP spokesman is trying to help him and the Republicans run ads trying to stop Hillary Clinton in the primary," she said in the statement.

“Now, there are things we can do to improve it, but to tear it up and start over again, pushing our country back into that kind of a contentious debate, I think is the wrong direction,” Clinton said.

Sanders objected to Clinton’s characterization, emphasizing his past support for the existing health care law. “We're not going to tear up the Affordable Care Act. I helped write it. But we are going to move on top of that to a Medicaid-for-all system,” Sanders said.

Clinton, however, emphasized the political difficulty of approving a single-payer system. She noted that a Democrat-controlled Congress was unable to even approve a public option allowing Americans to buy into Medicare. And Sanders had no good answer when asked why the state of Vermont couldn’t pass an expensive single-payer plan, saying that was for the governor of Vermont to answer.....

Whichever Democrat wins the nomination will have to overcome the opposition that independent voters in Iowa and elsewhere have for Obamacare. Cozying up to Obama also could have consequences after the primary season.

Clinton mostly succeeded Sunday in keeping Sanders off balance, pressing her attacks and distracting him from areas where she is weakest. That’s enough to give her the win for this debate – if Iowa Democrats don’t choke at the negative attacks.

“Now, there are things we can do to improve it, but to tear it up and start over again, pushing our country back into that kind of a contentious debate, I think is the wrong direction,” Clinton said.

Sanders objected to Clinton’s characterization, emphasizing his past support for the existing health care law. “We're not going to tear up the Affordable Care Act. I helped write it. But we are going to move on top of that to a Medicaid-for-all system,” Sanders said.

Clinton, however, emphasized the political difficulty of approving a single-payer system. She noted that a Democrat-controlled Congress was unable to even approve a public option allowing Americans to buy into Medicare. And Sanders had no good answer when asked why the state of Vermont couldn’t pass an expensive single-payer plan, saying that was for the governor of Vermont to answer.....

Whichever Democrat wins the nomination will have to overcome the opposition that independent voters in Iowa and elsewhere have for Obamacare. Cozying up to Obama also could have consequences after the primary season.

Clinton mostly succeeded Sunday in keeping Sanders off balance, pressing her attacks and distracting him from areas where she is weakest. That’s enough to give her the win for this debate – if Iowa Democrats don’t choke at the negative attacks.