,
5 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
It's wild to me watching ppl treat issues like climate change or even healthcare as if they're voters' personal niche preferences instead of matters of life and death. Some policies save lives while others don't, so why wouldn't policy be the main factor in deciding electability?
It's an indictment of the US political system that candidates who accept the most corporate money and change their policies accordingly are seen as the most pragmatic while voters who'd like to be prioritized over profits are seen as stubbornly idealistic.
Call it what you want to, but, in my opinion, if you walk out of a private fundraiser with healthcare CEOs and suddenly decide that your healthcare plan should cover fewer ppl to cover more CEOs' profits, it doesn't make you more pragmatic or electable, it makes you more corrupt.
If you want to win, you have to acknowledge that ppl who just don't want to die from climate change aren't engaging in "purity tests," and that ppl who cannot afford medicine shouldn't have to swallow their pride.
You have to acknowledge that things fundamentally need to change.
You have to acknowledge that things fundamentally need to change.
The refrain that says Trump can be challenged w/o challenging the system that helped create him must end. Real electability for Dems won't just be in helping ppl Trump has hurt, but also in helping ppl who were hurting before him. That can only happen via transformational policy.
