Thread by @ezraklein

The words we use to describe ideologies are imperfect, but they exist. There are liberals, neoliberals, democratic socialists, conservatives, neoconservatives, libertarians, etc.

But we have no vocabulary for describing approaches to the tactical dimension of politics.

But more important than the policy differences between the candidates are the differences in how they intend to make passing any policy possible in a broken system where bipartisanship is a joke.

The difference between a candidate who wants to abolish insurance and one that just wants Medicare buy-in are nil if neither candidate wants to get rid of the filibuster.

With the filibuster is in place, neither bill has a chance.

There's no shorthand for the difference between candidates like Warren and Buttigieg and Inslee, who envision sweeping reforms to allow partisan majorities to govern, and candidates like Biden and Klobucher, who emphasize bipartisan compromise and relationships.

We often assume political style matches ideology, and the more modest you are in your aims, the more compromising you are in your style, and vice versa.

But that's often not true.

Bernie Sanders, say, is much more policy ambitious than Inslee or Buttigieg, but says "he's not crazy" about eliminating the filibuster or changing the Supreme Court. Booker is the same.

The absence of usable language here makes these debates hard to have. Much easier to debate more concrete ideas and more familiar ideological labels. So we end up debating policy plans as if they'll all pass unchanged, and ideological philosophies as if they'll get implemented.

Back in 2007, @mschmitt9 talked about how the most important question in the primary was "theory of change." That's true now, too.

America's political system is broken. Another campaign full of big promises followed by dashed hopes will only increase disillusionment.

The core challenge for Democrats, even if they win the election, is: How does the party that believes in government make governing great again?

The thing I find appealing about Buttigieg is this is core to his pitch. He goes further than the other candidates I've heard in both having bold reform ideas and promising to prioritize them before policy change in office. vox.com/policy-and-pol…

But other candidates, like Warren and Inslee, have big reform ideas too.

This is the beginning of a necessary debate. We all know that the candidates' big policy ideas are going to have to fight their way through the political system. We should demand details on how.