|
On November 09 2020 03:11 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2020 02:09 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 09 2020 01:23 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:
What you're saying is that if enough progressives existed, Biden would suddenly shift political winds to that position except you can't admit that. I mean, I'm not Zambrah, but sure, I do believe that. The thing is though, there's a conflict between different 'types' of politicians. Should they be reactive (weathervane-type), or reformers? Myself, I believe that virtually all the 'great' politicians are reformers. They don't simply react to public opinion, they also shape it. It's not a virtue by default - while I think all great politicians are reformers, I believe it also holds true for the most abhorrent ones. Trump has not only responded to the ugly side of his electorate, he has also shaped public opinion (but from my perspective largely in a negative manner, some of it very dangerous/damaging. The entire handling of COVID is one such example, where I am confident that if Trump had backed expert opinion rather than contradicted it, it would have been more closely adhered to by the public). The weathervane politician is the 'career' politician, ones that never opine anything that does not poll well. They are the kind that opposes gay marriage publicly even if they are privately positive towards it / don't give a damn on a personal level. More likely to be technocrats, sure, and often they will provide us with some incremental improvement backed by experts. But this group is unlikely to provide society with truly meaningful change. Which type you prefer, will largely be determined by how content you are with the current direction of society. Sanders is a reformer. Yang seems like one, too - even if I agree more with Sanders than with Yang, I will give Yang credit for being the type of politician who tries to come up with solutions to problems society faces and then tries to convince people that this is the right solution, rather than checking the polls to see what his opinion should be. Clinton was absolutely an example of a weathervane politician. Biden is largely one, too, although I don't see him as being equally cynical about it. Obama, I actually think wanted to be a reformer, but he was largely neutered. (I do believe Biden is a genuinely caring human being. And I think the US needs some degree of bland , inoffensive leadership for the problem of 'increased societal division' to possibly be addressed. However, I also believe you need radical change to deal with many of the political issues you struggle with. Biden is probably as good of a unifying candidate as the US could find right now - so he checks that box, but I don't see him provide the actual change required, because I think you need changes that don't necessarily have majority support at the moment. ) The problem is that your reformers never have power. You point out that Obama wanted to be a reformer. His first reform of healthcare cost him the house and his entire presidential agenda. Your previous post pointed out that Bernie isn't a "mainstream politician" despite being in the US congress for thirty years and he was a politician in Vermont before that. I don't put any value in people having ideas. You have to get them implemented for them to have any meaning. What has Sanders reformed besides getting more pork for Vermont? The most interesting thing about the election to me was Florida voting for a $15 minimum wage and Republican. That would be a reform I could point out that Sanders champions. The logical thing to happen is that your reformer's ideas become main stream enough to get them elected. Not this, they don't have majority support but we're going to force them through anyway that you're posting.
Frankly, the ACA was worth it. Every politician has a more or less limited political support and capital. Obama spent it on Obamacare. That insured millions and millions of Americans and change countless lives for the better. So I would say, it was well spent capital.
I wish he could have done much more, of course, but that is a BIG legacy.
|
On November 09 2020 03:11 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2020 02:09 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 09 2020 01:23 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:
What you're saying is that if enough progressives existed, Biden would suddenly shift political winds to that position except you can't admit that. I mean, I'm not Zambrah, but sure, I do believe that. The thing is though, there's a conflict between different 'types' of politicians. Should they be reactive (weathervane-type), or reformers? Myself, I believe that virtually all the 'great' politicians are reformers. They don't simply react to public opinion, they also shape it. It's not a virtue by default - while I think all great politicians are reformers, I believe it also holds true for the most abhorrent ones. Trump has not only responded to the ugly side of his electorate, he has also shaped public opinion (but from my perspective largely in a negative manner, some of it very dangerous/damaging. The entire handling of COVID is one such example, where I am confident that if Trump had backed expert opinion rather than contradicted it, it would have been more closely adhered to by the public). The weathervane politician is the 'career' politician, ones that never opine anything that does not poll well. They are the kind that opposes gay marriage publicly even if they are privately positive towards it / don't give a damn on a personal level. More likely to be technocrats, sure, and often they will provide us with some incremental improvement backed by experts. But this group is unlikely to provide society with truly meaningful change. Which type you prefer, will largely be determined by how content you are with the current direction of society. Sanders is a reformer. Yang seems like one, too - even if I agree more with Sanders than with Yang, I will give Yang credit for being the type of politician who tries to come up with solutions to problems society faces and then tries to convince people that this is the right solution, rather than checking the polls to see what his opinion should be. Clinton was absolutely an example of a weathervane politician. Biden is largely one, too, although I don't see him as being equally cynical about it. Obama, I actually think wanted to be a reformer, but he was largely neutered. (I do believe Biden is a genuinely caring human being. And I think the US needs some degree of bland , inoffensive leadership for the problem of 'increased societal division' to possibly be addressed. However, I also believe you need radical change to deal with many of the political issues you struggle with. Biden is probably as good of a unifying candidate as the US could find right now - so he checks that box, but I don't see him provide the actual change required, because I think you need changes that don't necessarily have majority support at the moment. ) The problem is that your reformers never have power. You point out that Obama wanted to be a reformer. His first reform of healthcare cost him the house and his entire presidential agenda. Your previous post pointed out that Bernie isn't a "mainstream politician" despite being in the US congress for thirty years and he was a politician in Vermont before that. I don't put any value in people having ideas. You have to get them implemented for them to have any meaning. What has Sanders reformed besides getting more pork for Vermont? The most interesting thing about the election to me was Florida voting for a $15 minimum wage and Republican. That would be a reform I could point out that Sanders champions. The logical thing to happen is that your reformer's ideas become main stream enough to get them elected. Not this, they don't have majority support but we're going to force them through anyway that you're posting.
Popular policies are regularly shot down as "pie in the sky" despite a majority of Americans wanting them, at the end of the day, when it came to the ACA its an issue of Obama playing Republican games and winning Republican prizes. He let it burn him out politically for a long time, he had the power to have run through something damn near European, but Democrats dont sieze on power like Republicans do. Thats the issue, Democrats rarely get power but when they do they strive to be as ineffectual as they can, so any change they do manages to irritate advocates of change for being Republicanized and irritate conservatives because change. They need to study the Republican playbook, not to learn how to play nice, but how to copy how they wield power (or obstruct the use of power, really.)
Its a really, really sad state, its crap that we have a government that exists for one side to brute force the other via the system, but its what we have and pretending we can all play nice with each other just enables the bad actors to act badly and get their way.
We also need to stop being god damned dictated at by weather vanes.
MAKE THE POLICY POPULAR! I believe our ideas are good, progressives have to sell their ideas to the American people! Weathervane politicians have normalized forcing the public to decide whats good for them so that they can bandwagon alongside the public, but we need to work on actually SELLING our policy ideas to them, convincing the average American why what we want to do is good for them. Thats obviously hard, Americans are ignorant, sometimes willfully ignorant, but at the end of the day if we're going to be organizing anyways, getting out there, talking to people, talking about why our policy is good for people will be key to making our policy more popular, assuming they arent literally already popular enough.
TL is special, people like Biff and Jimmi already generally seem to agree with progressive policy, and people who dont like Danglars and Wegandi aren't ever going to agree with it even if it they were on their deathbed and the progressive policy would literally save their life.
We should work to appeal not to the Wegandis and Danglars, but first to the stereotypical Trump demographics, frame it similar to how Kwark does but... like... not so... horribly. Americans do love a fight, I sincerely believe framing it as a fight is the right way there. Fighting the billionaires, and the like. But poor, uneducated working class people should be a priority demographic as they're the people who are most likely to be impacted positively by progressive change. People in the middle and upper classes are already comfortable, they're cagey, the Republican ones are almost unwinnable imo, they're too fearful of change. The ones like Jimmi and Biff are doable, the barrier I see with that would be one of convincing that we are viable winners, the tough part of that is the DNC is very, very, VERY interested in keeping progressives as "the problem" faction of the party, they fight us all the time, the blame-the-progressive shit has begun and its going to be a hard media battle to fight.
Rambling incoherency... ending? I hope its ending. Look, my Bidenesque ranting concludes with;
We have to make our policy popular/make people understand its popular. In particular for the traditional stereotypical Trump demographics.
We have to keep primarying Democrats until they respect that progressives can be winners.
We need to put aside our idealized idea of how gov't should function in the US because its not how power is wielded here.
EDIT: Also a Trump related note,
We're in a stage of American politics where our business as usual shitshow is creating and incentivizing Donald Trumps. The Proof of Concept has won an election, he drove absurd turnout for his side in this election even if he lost. This is NOT the time to be weak and timid because the next Donald Trump is not going to be hampered by a pandemic, they might not be a daft moron with infinite scandal.
This is a thing I keep seeing and it frightens me. BIDENS ELECTION DIDNT DEFEAT FASCISM IN THE US.
We're still teetering on that precipice, ready to start falling down. Could happen as soon as next election, I get people want to be relieved about Biden but FUCK, GUYS, WE ELECTED DONALD TRUMP AND WE ALMOST ELECTED HIM TWICE.
Be scared. Understand that Democrats and Republicans as we know them have brought the conditions to bring him to power, and their preferred nonsense will bring more and more forward, we need to nip this in the bud, this isn't the time to go soft, fascism in the US is still alive, stamp it out, don't get complacent, please sweet jesus.
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
On November 08 2020 22:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Out of curiosity, when will the USPMT thread be reopened, now that the election is over (except for Donald Trump's never-ending, nonsensical threats and bullshit)?
Time to go back to the other thread.
https://tl.net/forum/general/532255-us-politics-mega-thread
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37120 Posts
After further discussion, we've decided to keep the Election thread open for a little bit longer.. I am locking USPMT again and opening Election day thread again for the time being.
|
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On November 09 2020 06:08 Nevuk wrote:
People are dumb. He said he was going to replace Obamacare with Universal Healthcare, a lot. Of course he was lying, but I'm positive a lot of his voters were still convinced by that.
Hell, I'm sure they're still convinced he's going to do it, even after the last time he was asked for his plan he passed over a binder of random (already passed) legislation.
Feels strange to disagree with one of your posts :p
I mean yes he did say that, but I don’t think it was ever really seized on by his base. I dunno in 4 years I barely recall any positive post re universal healthcare from the Trump wing of my social media outlets, and a hell of a lot of stuff that was anti-Obama care. And not anti it not going far enough...
As to what they [i]do[\i] want I’m at a loss as they loudly complain about the misdeeds of private insurance, don’t like ACA and certainly don’t like the idea of a European kinda system.
Near had a heart attack at the ‘You don’t have permission to post in this thread’ over in USPMT, thought I’d been blooming banned again!
|
On November 09 2020 05:46 Zambrah wrote:I still think fringe conservatives are not a great group to choose to work on, at least not if they're the types Biden was trying to pick. I think we need to work with and educate the huge group of working class people around the country that progressive policies are targetted towards helping. It seems counterintuitive given they're deeper Trump-types than fringe conservatives, but I think what they saw in Trump makes them more amenable to being addressed. Nice easy to understand policy that clearly benefits them, making it super, SUPER, icantstressthisenough HYPER clear that they are listened to, that they are cared about, that their plight is not ignored. I'm biased though because the lower class is my class. 
The group Biden would have been trying to court would be the "generally lean rightward, but disenfranchised with the Republican party in general and especially with Trump as president." There's a lot of establishment politicians of that type, and some number of generally well-to-do voters. Those kinds of people always vote, and they did indeed come out for Biden.
A group that progressives might be more capable of courting is the working class, Obama-Trump voters that cost Clinton key states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their main concern is economic policy that could help them out of their current predicament, less so than any trash like precedent or "international norms." A mix of Obama nostalgia and a botched Trump handling of the coronavirus let Biden edge out those states this time around, albeit barely. I wonder if Sanders would have done better, at the cost of "risking" a Florida loss.
|
big tech censoring wombat
Conservatives believe firmly in rudy/trump on the subject of fraud but is there any proof coming out ?
|
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On November 09 2020 06:28 Erasme wrote:
big tech censoring wombat
You can censor me but you can never censor my truth! Oh wait maybe you can...
|
On November 09 2020 06:28 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2020 05:46 Zambrah wrote:I still think fringe conservatives are not a great group to choose to work on, at least not if they're the types Biden was trying to pick. I think we need to work with and educate the huge group of working class people around the country that progressive policies are targetted towards helping. It seems counterintuitive given they're deeper Trump-types than fringe conservatives, but I think what they saw in Trump makes them more amenable to being addressed. Nice easy to understand policy that clearly benefits them, making it super, SUPER, icantstressthisenough HYPER clear that they are listened to, that they are cared about, that their plight is not ignored. I'm biased though because the lower class is my class. The group Biden would have been trying to court would be the "generally lean rightward, but disenfranchised with the Republican party in general and especially with Trump as president." There's a lot of establishment politicians of that type, and some number of generally well-to-do voters. Those kinds of people always vote, and they did indeed come out for Biden. A group that progressives might be more capable of courting is the working class, Obama-Trump voters that cost Clinton key states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their main concern is economic policy that could help them out of their current predicament, less so than any trash like precedent or "international norms." A mix of Obama nostalgia and a botched Trump handling of the coronavirus let Biden edge out those states this time around, albeit barely. I wonder if Sanders would have done better, at the cost of "risking" a Florida loss.
Yeah that's generally my thoughts. NeverTrumpers have an outsized media presence, but represent a miniscule portion of the electorate, which is easy for politicans and reporters to forget.
There are a few 538 charts that sum up my thoughts on the issue. Basically, appealing to centrist voters by ideology is not a winning strategy for any national party, simply because there isn't any coherent ideology among self identified moderates.
Here's 1, I'll see if I can find the other on never trumpers (they represent the bottom square on this, but identify as conservatives, and are vanishingly few in number)
+ Show Spoiler +
“the moderate category seems less an ideological destination than a refuge for the innocent and the confused"
(Innocent meaning "no coherent ideology" here).
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-moderate-middle-is-a-myth/
|
On November 09 2020 06:22 Seeker wrote:
After further discussion, we've decided to keep the Election thread open for a little bit longer. I am locking USPMT again and opening Election day thread again for the time being.
So, that means the election isn't over yet? Oh no!
|
Dissecting the American electorate is hard.
I maintain we should definitely focus on developing the electorate we want rather than chasing the electorate as it... mutates...
|
United States10569 Posts
On November 09 2020 06:28 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2020 05:46 Zambrah wrote:I still think fringe conservatives are not a great group to choose to work on, at least not if they're the types Biden was trying to pick. I think we need to work with and educate the huge group of working class people around the country that progressive policies are targetted towards helping. It seems counterintuitive given they're deeper Trump-types than fringe conservatives, but I think what they saw in Trump makes them more amenable to being addressed. Nice easy to understand policy that clearly benefits them, making it super, SUPER, icantstressthisenough HYPER clear that they are listened to, that they are cared about, that their plight is not ignored. I'm biased though because the lower class is my class. The group Biden would have been trying to court would be the "generally lean rightward, but disenfranchised with the Republican party in general and especially with Trump as president." There's a lot of establishment politicians of that type, and some number of generally well-to-do voters. Those kinds of people always vote, and they did indeed come out for Biden. A group that progressives might be more capable of courting is the working class, Obama-Trump voters that cost Clinton key states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their main concern is economic policy that could help them out of their current predicament, less so than any trash like precedent or "international norms." A mix of Obama nostalgia and a botched Trump handling of the coronavirus let Biden edge out those states this time around, albeit barely. I wonder if Sanders would have done better, at the cost of "risking" a Florida loss.
People like Ilhan Omar and Tlaib need to get that message out of progressive values in the non-D safe districts. I'm not familiar with ACA or universal healthcare, but I think a big worry from those swing voters and even lean-R people is that universal healthcare is the same as the big scary words of socialism and communism. But they need to tell them, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this, is that under Bernies or other soc dems plan of healthcare, their taxes might go up a tiny bit, but they make all of that back and more by being able to see the doctor for practically no price. And it goes further because those people in those swing states need the healthcare and trips to the doctor more, because they're the ones that don't practice preventative health/medicine. If they can really get that message across where these people don't rely on getting a job for healthcare, or can actually go see doctors for pennies, then I think they'll have a stronger chance of making large grounds in those voters and get progressive policies squarely in the mainstream.
|
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On November 09 2020 07:14 FlaShFTW wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2020 06:28 LegalLord wrote:On November 09 2020 05:46 Zambrah wrote:I still think fringe conservatives are not a great group to choose to work on, at least not if they're the types Biden was trying to pick. I think we need to work with and educate the huge group of working class people around the country that progressive policies are targetted towards helping. It seems counterintuitive given they're deeper Trump-types than fringe conservatives, but I think what they saw in Trump makes them more amenable to being addressed. Nice easy to understand policy that clearly benefits them, making it super, SUPER, icantstressthisenough HYPER clear that they are listened to, that they are cared about, that their plight is not ignored. I'm biased though because the lower class is my class. The group Biden would have been trying to court would be the "generally lean rightward, but disenfranchised with the Republican party in general and especially with Trump as president." There's a lot of establishment politicians of that type, and some number of generally well-to-do voters. Those kinds of people always vote, and they did indeed come out for Biden. A group that progressives might be more capable of courting is the working class, Obama-Trump voters that cost Clinton key states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their main concern is economic policy that could help them out of their current predicament, less so than any trash like precedent or "international norms." A mix of Obama nostalgia and a botched Trump handling of the coronavirus let Biden edge out those states this time around, albeit barely. I wonder if Sanders would have done better, at the cost of "risking" a Florida loss. People like Ilhan Omar and Tlaib need to get that message out of progressive values in the non-D safe districts. I'm not familiar with ACA or universal healthcare, but I think a big worry from those swing voters and even lean-R people is that universal healthcare is the same as the big scary words of socialism and communism. But they need to tell them, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this, is that under Bernies or other soc dems plan of healthcare, their taxes might go up a tiny bit, but they make all of that back and more by being able to see the doctor for practically no price. And it goes further because those people in those swing states need the healthcare and trips to the doctor more, because they're the ones that don't practice preventative health/medicine. If they can really get that message across where these people don't rely on getting a job for healthcare, or can actually go see doctors for pennies, then I think they'll have a stronger chance of making large grounds in those voters and get progressive policies squarely in the mainstream.
People have been saying this for at least 15 years, it just doesn’t land.
As to why it doesn’t land I’m genuinely unsure.
|
Yang and Stacey throwing it all at Georgia. I really think without Trump at the top dems have a good shot. The Republicans are already pulling away from Trump and that is bound to hurt them just a little and both races where already close
|
United States10569 Posts
On November 09 2020 07:18 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2020 07:14 FlaShFTW wrote:On November 09 2020 06:28 LegalLord wrote:On November 09 2020 05:46 Zambrah wrote:I still think fringe conservatives are not a great group to choose to work on, at least not if they're the types Biden was trying to pick. I think we need to work with and educate the huge group of working class people around the country that progressive policies are targetted towards helping. It seems counterintuitive given they're deeper Trump-types than fringe conservatives, but I think what they saw in Trump makes them more amenable to being addressed. Nice easy to understand policy that clearly benefits them, making it super, SUPER, icantstressthisenough HYPER clear that they are listened to, that they are cared about, that their plight is not ignored. I'm biased though because the lower class is my class. The group Biden would have been trying to court would be the "generally lean rightward, but disenfranchised with the Republican party in general and especially with Trump as president." There's a lot of establishment politicians of that type, and some number of generally well-to-do voters. Those kinds of people always vote, and they did indeed come out for Biden. A group that progressives might be more capable of courting is the working class, Obama-Trump voters that cost Clinton key states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their main concern is economic policy that could help them out of their current predicament, less so than any trash like precedent or "international norms." A mix of Obama nostalgia and a botched Trump handling of the coronavirus let Biden edge out those states this time around, albeit barely. I wonder if Sanders would have done better, at the cost of "risking" a Florida loss. People like Ilhan Omar and Tlaib need to get that message out of progressive values in the non-D safe districts. I'm not familiar with ACA or universal healthcare, but I think a big worry from those swing voters and even lean-R people is that universal healthcare is the same as the big scary words of socialism and communism. But they need to tell them, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this, is that under Bernies or other soc dems plan of healthcare, their taxes might go up a tiny bit, but they make all of that back and more by being able to see the doctor for practically no price. And it goes further because those people in those swing states need the healthcare and trips to the doctor more, because they're the ones that don't practice preventative health/medicine. If they can really get that message across where these people don't rely on getting a job for healthcare, or can actually go see doctors for pennies, then I think they'll have a stronger chance of making large grounds in those voters and get progressive policies squarely in the mainstream. People have been saying this for at least 15 years, it just doesn’t land. As to why it doesn’t land I’m genuinely unsure.
Yeah I guess I've seen it tried before. Like I said in the USPMT before it got re-closed, the overwhelming majority of people's views in this country move like a glacier. It's hard to get people to budge. Status quo is comforting and warming, it's a nice warm blanket while a snowstorm is outside and you don't want to leave. Because the snowstorm is uncertainty while, as long as you're still surviving, the blanket is perfectly fine in your little corner of the room.
|
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On November 09 2020 07:20 FlaShFTW wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2020 07:18 WombaT wrote:On November 09 2020 07:14 FlaShFTW wrote:On November 09 2020 06:28 LegalLord wrote:On November 09 2020 05:46 Zambrah wrote:I still think fringe conservatives are not a great group to choose to work on, at least not if they're the types Biden was trying to pick. I think we need to work with and educate the huge group of working class people around the country that progressive policies are targetted towards helping. It seems counterintuitive given they're deeper Trump-types than fringe conservatives, but I think what they saw in Trump makes them more amenable to being addressed. Nice easy to understand policy that clearly benefits them, making it super, SUPER, icantstressthisenough HYPER clear that they are listened to, that they are cared about, that their plight is not ignored. I'm biased though because the lower class is my class. The group Biden would have been trying to court would be the "generally lean rightward, but disenfranchised with the Republican party in general and especially with Trump as president." There's a lot of establishment politicians of that type, and some number of generally well-to-do voters. Those kinds of people always vote, and they did indeed come out for Biden. A group that progressives might be more capable of courting is the working class, Obama-Trump voters that cost Clinton key states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their main concern is economic policy that could help them out of their current predicament, less so than any trash like precedent or "international norms." A mix of Obama nostalgia and a botched Trump handling of the coronavirus let Biden edge out those states this time around, albeit barely. I wonder if Sanders would have done better, at the cost of "risking" a Florida loss. People like Ilhan Omar and Tlaib need to get that message out of progressive values in the non-D safe districts. I'm not familiar with ACA or universal healthcare, but I think a big worry from those swing voters and even lean-R people is that universal healthcare is the same as the big scary words of socialism and communism. But they need to tell them, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this, is that under Bernies or other soc dems plan of healthcare, their taxes might go up a tiny bit, but they make all of that back and more by being able to see the doctor for practically no price. And it goes further because those people in those swing states need the healthcare and trips to the doctor more, because they're the ones that don't practice preventative health/medicine. If they can really get that message across where these people don't rely on getting a job for healthcare, or can actually go see doctors for pennies, then I think they'll have a stronger chance of making large grounds in those voters and get progressive policies squarely in the mainstream. People have been saying this for at least 15 years, it just doesn’t land. As to why it doesn’t land I’m genuinely unsure. Yeah I guess I've seen it tried before. Like I said in the USPMT before it got re-closed, the overwhelming majority of people's views in this country move like a glacier. It's hard to get people to budge. Status quo is comforting and warming, it's a nice warm blanket while a snowstorm is outside and you don't want to leave. Because the snowstorm is uncertainty while, as long as you're still surviving, the blanket is perfectly fine in your little corner of the room.
9100. Didn’t you only hit 9k like 5 minutes ago?
I reckon the best shot is to ram it down people’s throats and just go and do it. Not exactly subtle but I think it may actually take a better functioning system actually existing and people interacting with it before they come round to it.
In the age prior to internet ubiquity, such a system being a crazy pipe dream can kinda work as a counter argument, especially without counter-examples.
But people seem to not respond well to ‘hey here is this thing that we do that works’ either. Then it shifts to the American exceptionalism of the US is too unique for it to work there.
|
But status quo had a unanimous Fuck You thrown at it when Trump was elected, the lesson from this election isnt that we want the status quo back its that Trump was a god awful wretch.
Thats always been the fear with Biden, that people take a Biden win as somehow indicative of someone like Biden being what people want instead of just being what he is, the Only Alternative to Trump.
EDIT: Also the theory behind Bernies healthcare plan isnt just that you save money via seeing the doctor, but that what you lose in taxes costs less than what you pay monthly for your jobs healthcare. I know I was losing hundreds a month on my healthcare plan when I had one.
Aside from that, encouraging people going to the doctor has the additional benefit of creating an additional buffet of preventative care. Instead of people going to the hospital when they require complex difficult medical treatment because they never knew about the issue, they can see a doctor, it can get identified, and then we can prevent the need for that complex difficult expensive medical treatment via preventing it from happening at all.
American healthcare is actually a sick joke in every facet that isnt the one where you have metric fuck tons of money and can afford cutting edge medical treatment. In every other way its garbage.
|
On November 09 2020 07:20 FlaShFTW wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2020 07:18 WombaT wrote:On November 09 2020 07:14 FlaShFTW wrote:On November 09 2020 06:28 LegalLord wrote:On November 09 2020 05:46 Zambrah wrote:I still think fringe conservatives are not a great group to choose to work on, at least not if they're the types Biden was trying to pick. I think we need to work with and educate the huge group of working class people around the country that progressive policies are targetted towards helping. It seems counterintuitive given they're deeper Trump-types than fringe conservatives, but I think what they saw in Trump makes them more amenable to being addressed. Nice easy to understand policy that clearly benefits them, making it super, SUPER, icantstressthisenough HYPER clear that they are listened to, that they are cared about, that their plight is not ignored. I'm biased though because the lower class is my class. The group Biden would have been trying to court would be the "generally lean rightward, but disenfranchised with the Republican party in general and especially with Trump as president." There's a lot of establishment politicians of that type, and some number of generally well-to-do voters. Those kinds of people always vote, and they did indeed come out for Biden. A group that progressives might be more capable of courting is the working class, Obama-Trump voters that cost Clinton key states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their main concern is economic policy that could help them out of their current predicament, less so than any trash like precedent or "international norms." A mix of Obama nostalgia and a botched Trump handling of the coronavirus let Biden edge out those states this time around, albeit barely. I wonder if Sanders would have done better, at the cost of "risking" a Florida loss. People like Ilhan Omar and Tlaib need to get that message out of progressive values in the non-D safe districts. I'm not familiar with ACA or universal healthcare, but I think a big worry from those swing voters and even lean-R people is that universal healthcare is the same as the big scary words of socialism and communism. But they need to tell them, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this, is that under Bernies or other soc dems plan of healthcare, their taxes might go up a tiny bit, but they make all of that back and more by being able to see the doctor for practically no price. And it goes further because those people in those swing states need the healthcare and trips to the doctor more, because they're the ones that don't practice preventative health/medicine. If they can really get that message across where these people don't rely on getting a job for healthcare, or can actually go see doctors for pennies, then I think they'll have a stronger chance of making large grounds in those voters and get progressive policies squarely in the mainstream. People have been saying this for at least 15 years, it just doesn’t land. As to why it doesn’t land I’m genuinely unsure. Yeah I guess I've seen it tried before. Like I said in the USPMT before it got re-closed, the overwhelming majority of people's views in this country move like a glacier. It's hard to get people to budge. Status quo is comforting and warming, it's a nice warm blanket while a snowstorm is outside and you don't want to leave. Because the snowstorm is uncertainty while, as long as you're still surviving, the blanket is perfectly fine in your little corner of the room.
If all of you had to spend an obligatory year around age 18 and 30 in an European country, I think things would change very quickly. The undisputable benefits of free healthcare and college education are hard to sell if people have never seen that it is a possibility. The same goes with how far communism actually is from what even the most progressive democrats want to achieve.
|
On November 09 2020 06:43 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2020 06:28 LegalLord wrote:On November 09 2020 05:46 Zambrah wrote:I still think fringe conservatives are not a great group to choose to work on, at least not if they're the types Biden was trying to pick. I think we need to work with and educate the huge group of working class people around the country that progressive policies are targetted towards helping. It seems counterintuitive given they're deeper Trump-types than fringe conservatives, but I think what they saw in Trump makes them more amenable to being addressed. Nice easy to understand policy that clearly benefits them, making it super, SUPER, icantstressthisenough HYPER clear that they are listened to, that they are cared about, that their plight is not ignored. I'm biased though because the lower class is my class. The group Biden would have been trying to court would be the "generally lean rightward, but disenfranchised with the Republican party in general and especially with Trump as president." There's a lot of establishment politicians of that type, and some number of generally well-to-do voters. Those kinds of people always vote, and they did indeed come out for Biden. A group that progressives might be more capable of courting is the working class, Obama-Trump voters that cost Clinton key states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their main concern is economic policy that could help them out of their current predicament, less so than any trash like precedent or "international norms." A mix of Obama nostalgia and a botched Trump handling of the coronavirus let Biden edge out those states this time around, albeit barely. I wonder if Sanders would have done better, at the cost of "risking" a Florida loss. Yeah that's generally my thoughts. NeverTrumpers have an outsized media presence, but represent a miniscule portion of the electorate, which is easy for politicans and reporters to forget. There are a few 538 charts that sum up my thoughts on the issue. Basically, appealing to centrist voters by ideology is not a winning strategy for any national party, simply because there isn't any coherent ideology among self identified moderates. Here's 1, I'll see if I can find the other on never trumpers (they represent the bottom square on this, but identify as conservatives, and are vanishingly few in number) + Show Spoiler +Show nested quote +“the moderate category seems less an ideological destination than a refuge for the innocent and the confused" (Innocent meaning "no coherent ideology" here). https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-moderate-middle-is-a-myth/
Thank you for this chart, confirms the data of the last chart I used but is more recent.
It's pretty amazing that even though there is virtually nobody in the bottom right, your government always ends up either there or slightly top right, and this is the quadrant that we are supposed to court to win general elections.
|
Would there be a way to find the numbers for these sorts of demographics in the 90s? Im curious where these Democrat leadership types who would have been in their political youth in the 90s get their insistence on their god awful mediocre strategies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/drutman-middle-3.png?w=575)
