Skip to main content
Politics

Return to Answer

historical context
Source Link
iono
iono
  • 107
  • 5

1) Because Bernie Sanders is running and is very popular

The stakes are higher for property owners, this time – certainly much higher than any election since Reagan. Sanders'There is a much more meaningful difference in economic policy between Sanders and most Democrats than there was between the Dem and Repub candidates in the general over at least two decades. Sanders' social-democratic policies are a major threat to the rich and the ruling class, so the dominant and more conservative wing of the Democrats and American liberalism more broadly are scrambling to either a) muddle and congest the primaries and/or b) keep testing fresh new faces to find a candidate that can defeat Bernie. There's only so much column space in papers and airtime on TV - the Dem debates were a good example of this effect.

The popularity of social-democratic policies (usually self-described as "socialist" which is not historically correct) advocated by people like Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and to a lesser extent Elizabeth Warren has pushed the Dem playing field to the left – at least in terms of terminology. There has been a distinct change of language even among the more conservative candidates, making gestures towards policies like socialised healthcare payment, socialised education payment, and stronger progressive taxation. If the right wing of US liberalism can co-opt immensely popular terminology like "Medicare4All", "socialism", "UBI" etc. while implementing drastically watered-down versions of these things, that's an efficient way to stymy this radicalisation by "letting off steam".

2) Because they consider Trump a soft opponent in the general

Many liberals are still prone to trusting in polls and conventional political wisdom / norms, despite the upset of 2016, and by those metrics they think that previously-unappealing centrist candidates could win against him.

1) Because Bernie Sanders is running and is very popular

The stakes are higher for property owners, this time. Sanders' social-democratic policies are a major threat to the rich and the ruling class, so the dominant and more conservative wing of the Democrats and American liberalism more broadly are scrambling to either a) muddle and congest the primaries and/or b) keep testing fresh new faces to find a candidate that can defeat Bernie. There's only so much column space in papers and airtime on TV - the Dem debates were a good example of this effect.

The popularity of social-democratic policies (usually self-described as "socialist" which is not historically correct) advocated by people like Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and to a lesser extent Elizabeth Warren has pushed the Dem playing field to the left – at least in terms of terminology. There has been a distinct change of language even among the more conservative candidates, making gestures towards policies like socialised healthcare payment, socialised education payment, and stronger progressive taxation. If the right wing of US liberalism can co-opt immensely popular terminology like "Medicare4All", "socialism", "UBI" etc. while implementing drastically watered-down versions of these things, that's an efficient way to stymy this radicalisation by "letting off steam".

2) Because they consider Trump a soft opponent in the general

Many liberals are still prone to trusting in polls and conventional political wisdom / norms, despite the upset of 2016, and by those metrics they think that previously-unappealing centrist candidates could win against him.

1) Because Bernie Sanders is running and is very popular

The stakes are higher for property owners, this time – certainly much higher than any election since Reagan. There is a much more meaningful difference in economic policy between Sanders and most Democrats than there was between the Dem and Repub candidates in the general over at least two decades. Sanders' social-democratic policies are a major threat to the rich and the ruling class, so the dominant and more conservative wing of the Democrats and American liberalism more broadly are scrambling to either a) muddle and congest the primaries and/or b) keep testing fresh new faces to find a candidate that can defeat Bernie. There's only so much column space in papers and airtime on TV - the Dem debates were a good example of this effect.

The popularity of social-democratic policies (usually self-described as "socialist" which is not historically correct) advocated by people like Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and to a lesser extent Elizabeth Warren has pushed the Dem playing field to the left – at least in terms of terminology. There has been a distinct change of language even among the more conservative candidates, making gestures towards policies like socialised healthcare payment, socialised education payment, and stronger progressive taxation. If the right wing of US liberalism can co-opt immensely popular terminology like "Medicare4All", "socialism", "UBI" etc. while implementing drastically watered-down versions of these things, that's an efficient way to stymy this radicalisation by "letting off steam".

2) Because they consider Trump a soft opponent in the general

Many liberals are still prone to trusting in polls and conventional political wisdom / norms, despite the upset of 2016, and by those metrics they think that previously-unappealing centrist candidates could win against him.

Source Link
iono
iono
  • 107
  • 5

1) Because Bernie Sanders is running and is very popular

The stakes are higher for property owners, this time. Sanders' social-democratic policies are a major threat to the rich and the ruling class, so the dominant and more conservative wing of the Democrats and American liberalism more broadly are scrambling to either a) muddle and congest the primaries and/or b) keep testing fresh new faces to find a candidate that can defeat Bernie. There's only so much column space in papers and airtime on TV - the Dem debates were a good example of this effect.

The popularity of social-democratic policies (usually self-described as "socialist" which is not historically correct) advocated by people like Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and to a lesser extent Elizabeth Warren has pushed the Dem playing field to the left – at least in terms of terminology. There has been a distinct change of language even among the more conservative candidates, making gestures towards policies like socialised healthcare payment, socialised education payment, and stronger progressive taxation. If the right wing of US liberalism can co-opt immensely popular terminology like "Medicare4All", "socialism", "UBI" etc. while implementing drastically watered-down versions of these things, that's an efficient way to stymy this radicalisation by "letting off steam".

2) Because they consider Trump a soft opponent in the general

Many liberals are still prone to trusting in polls and conventional political wisdom / norms, despite the upset of 2016, and by those metrics they think that previously-unappealing centrist candidates could win against him.