Backing off from lofty ideals may not be an attractive or welcoming thought, but our government needs to get something of consequence to Obama’s desk. Soon. Voters are not particularly taken by either party right now, but they are going to be tempted to side with the minority party if they see that the ruling party is not getting it done. There’s no telling how well the Republicans could do in the Democrats’ stead, but voters might feel they have no option but to try it out and see what happens.
Please share widely!
“Passing a bipartisan bill would help solidify incumbents from both parties and restore more confidence in our elected representatives.”
<
p>First, I don’t think you mentioned what the subject of such a bipartisan bill might be. Second, it has become increasingly clear the GOP has zero interest in bipartisanship. If the Democrats want to get something of substance on Obama’s desk they can stop cowering and push something through, even if it means blowing Senate rules out of the water in the process.
Basically, if you’re the minority party, bipartisanship is never politically helpful.
<
p>There is a heavy political price for healthcare reform. But that price has already been paid. Now the Dems in Congress need to get it through instead of getting scared.
Research shows that soldiers are more likely to be shot running away from the battlefield than they are standing and fighting. Our members of Congress need to learn the lesson the military already has. Once you get into a fight, you need to finish the job, whatever it takes.
It’s unclear what they’re for. What is clear is that they’re for making all sort of sweeping changes.
<
p>It turns out that those sweeping changes are good things, but since the Democratic Party leadership has not seen the need to campaign for these things politically, all we hear about are the catchy objections Republicans are making.
<
p>The Republicans have message discipline.
<
p>The Democrats don’t even have a message.
<
p>That’s like taking a fife to a gun fight.
Free Advice – Democrats talk to each other too much. For example, single payer is received wisdom in progressive circles, but unaffiliated voters are deeply suspicious of the same government that cannot renew their driver’s licenses without a two hour wait taking over health care triage.
<
p>And calling them stupid buffoons for not agreeing with you is less than helpful.
<
p>To be a piper, you have to have a tune worth listening to.
I suppose if I added a cup of policy and a cup of politics to my blender and pulsed it a few times I might get a comment like that too — and just as useful.
It sounds to me like Republicans talk only to each other at least as much as Democrats do.
<
p>I believe the previous point is that Democrats have to lead on something such as single payer. The lack of enthusiasm for single payer is a direct function of the lack of leadership on it. Besides, people love Medicare it would seem and single payer is basically Medicare without the age restriction.
<
p>Government is not interested in taking over health care triage. It would be the exact same talented doctors making those decisions. The government’s role would be to pay for it, not to actually do it.
<
p>I don’t see anybody calling opponents stupid buffoons, so I would suggest playing the victim isn’t any more helpful.
There is value in talking with other liberals on single payer. Off the top of my head, the following occur to me:
Certainly, one will hear from conservatives on this. It’s useful to have an opposition to try to shoot holes in one’s pet theories so that they can grow up into healthy adult theories. Nonetheless, liberals care much more about getting their own theories correct than non-liberals and so one should expect fruitful comments among us.
<
p>So I just don’t get the horror, though, that’s involved with liberals talking to one another.
<
p>We don’t have cooties.
<
p>And under single payer, no one will. đŸ™‚