Thread by @LemieuxLGM

I will observe again that the "Overton Window" was back-of-a-cocktail-napkin bullshit developed by an also-ran libertarian think tank, whose thesis was that Bush's drive to privatize Social Security would be a smashing political and policy success for the right

https://twitter.com/IChotiner/status/1350511916955783168

As Chotiner suggests, a big problem is that people defending the "Overton Window" don't seem to understand what the theory is. Advocating to move policy in your direction per se isn't the "Overton Window," unless your stated endpoint is DELIBERATELY crazy and unrealistic

The core fallacy of the Overton Window is its implicit assumption that in politics the other side has to meet you halfway and can't just walk away, and the problem in most cases is that this transparently false

And so what ACTUALLY happened with Social Security is that Bush said "if you don't like my extreme proposal make me an offer" and Pelosi responded with "fuck you, that's my offer." And Dem elites are MORE liberal on Social Security now than they were in 2005.

"Advocating for a $15 minimum wage and convincing party elites to support it" isn't the "Overton Window," it's just politics. The theory of the Overton Window is that if you want party elites to support a $15 minimum wage you should advocate for a $200 minimum wage.