Date: 2005-02-23 12:13 pm (UTC)
I'm not arguing about the rightness of these issues. I'm suggesting that if Senator Newwave stands up and says "I'm for things that promote opportunity and against things that suppress opportunity," then the follow-up question will be "Do you believe in giving workers the opportunity to invest their payroll taxes for themselves, or are you a stinking flip-flopper?" Our position is correct and moral, but it's because we believe in freedom FROM want and not freedom OF economic risk. That doesn't fit on a bumper sticker.

Nor does it need to. Remember that Newt Gingrich won his day with ten ideals, and the Preamble of the Constitution lists six. It doesn't seem defeatist to allow ourselves more latitude. Add "undeniable human dignity", "equality under the law", and "having a government that doesn't have to hide its actions from you" to "expand opportunity" and you've got a great foundation for a populist agenda that has more platform than gaps and that on the surface no one can disagree without sounding kookish.

I think that Tom is on the right track with the notion that our platform should be able to be printed on a card that can fit in your wallet and be generally predictive of how we would stand on a general issue that will come up in the future. But I'm not sure that anyone has won election in the US with a comprehensive policy that would fit on a bumper sticker, and I don't think I'd like to be led by the sorts of people who have historically won on such simplistic agendas.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

December 2015

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789 101112
13141516171819
202122 23242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 17th, 2025 09:05 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios