And they're not just trying to change your mind. They're also working to get the support of the electorate directly.
Now imagine some of those groups had absolutely superb PR. Literally making childhood cancer sufferers healthy again.
Now imagine, like every industry that wants government influence, they hire your friends into highly paid do-nothing jobs, donate generously when you raise money for your charitable foundation, and so on.
Now imagine they're a big employer. And they've got a whole bunch of jobs. Office jobs. Highly paid high-level jobs. Well paid mid-level jobs. Jobs that employ lots of minority groups.
Now imagine that the most efficient outcome would be to shut down all the insurance companies and nationalise all the hospitals, but you don't have the political capital to deliver that, it'd make a lot of people very nervous, and you're not even sure it'd be a moral thing to do anyway. So you'll probably have to settle for a middle ground that keeps a lot of the existing middlemen fat and happy.
Now imagine, even if your reform is a huge success and goes way better than you have any right to expect, people are still going to die in hospitals, and some people are going to say some of them are your fault.
Now imagine turning a blind eye to the problem has been working just fine for the last 20 years. It'd be so easy to just let sleeping dogs lie...
Look at Obamacare. A lot of Democrats will say that this was a genuine attempt to move toward single-payer, a public option, etc. and that they simply had to make compromises to get what they got passed (a change that undoubtedly helps many people but does so with a regressive tax, and certainly doesn’t simplify anything).
they simply had to make compromises to get what they got passed
For much of that Congress, the Democrat caucus had complete control (with filibuster-proof control of the Senate); they didn't have to "compromise" with a single Republican, hence zero Republican votes.In this particular case, the notion that Medicare works at all (let alone well) is a point that about half the country will not concede because it’s one of many a shibboleth that keeps the “sides” at each other’s throats.
One half will throw a fit no matter what gets done. It would be interesting if Trump suddenly announced support for single payer Medicare for all. Republicans would think it's the best thing ever and Democrats would suddenly be against it...
Way too much blind ideology in this country. Before I came here I thought the US is a pragmatic country that gets things done but now I see that leadership can't even agree on a shared perception of reality. When you talk to right wingers or left wingers you don't even recognize that they are in the same country.
Any evidence of this? Because there is plenty of polling data to show the R camp switching positions based on who is in charge. Never seen it apply the other way.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2017/10/25/republica...
I think you’ve got this wrong. I think that in most cases partisanship and hero worship is a lot stronger than support for specific policies. I think you’d find that people wouldn’t change their stated views on single-payer, they’d just reframe the situation so that they can continue to love/hate Trump and blame the other side for everything they don’t like.
Look at bump stocks. I know staunch Trump supporters who have bump stocks and strongly oppose almost any form of gun control. Does Trump’s bump stock ban make them like Trump a little less? Perhaps. But it certainly doesn’t change their political affiliation in any measurable way.
Same goes for those who oppose Trump. I’m sure they agree that the bump stock ban is nice, but do you think they’re suddenly “coming around” on Trump? I doubt it.
Just look at deficits. A few years ago Obama's deficits were the number one concern. Now Trump has raised them even more and all concerns are forgotten.
Is that accurate? Sounds more like NRA propaganda to me to keep people in line.
The actual truth is both parties believe in gun control and both parties believe in the Second Amendment. One side just panders to gun owners and the NRA more than the other.
And, tbh, democrats do not hold NRA in high regard, so thinking that they always be worse on gun control sounds like a reasonable assumption to me.
I mean, I get your point, but guns does not illustrate it well.
As far as their options, it depends on what they want. If they want the complete repeal of all gun laws... no lawmaker is going to support that. Everything else is a matter of negotiation, though.