gtn130 wrote:dckingsfan wrote:gtn130 wrote:They can be taken seriously because the problems they're trying to solve are real and imminent, and nobody else in Congress is actually trying to accomplish anything. Centrist Democrats want incremental progress only at the behest of their donors - things like tax incentives and flex spending accounts and other bull**** that doesn't actually help anyone. Republicans are obviously evil and want fascism.
There is no vehicle for passing any progressive legislation. There is no reality in which the GND ever becomes law until maybe 2024. Nailing down all of these wonky details you're looking for is a fool's errand because they don't actually matter to voters. If there were more dckingsfans in the world then people like Howard Schultz and Bill Kristol would have a constituency - they don't.
The GND is functionally an Overton Window mover that gets people talking about what matters. The people attacking random arbitrary details in the proposal that would change 100x over between now and when this legislation could actually pass, are 100% doing so in bad faith.
First we preach that we don't want ignorance. Then it is okay to be ignorant. Guess we are okay with voters that are good with the best catch phrase. MAGA vs. GND - you'll never know the details... and they don't matter. Just trust me.
We live in a representative democracy. We don’t need to be policy experts to support policy outcomes. AOC and Bernie are fighting for policy outcomes that I want. I don’t have the time to sift through policy details to determine the impact each thing will have on the deficit or how certain carveouts will impact industry or costs.
The alternative is vote for people who don’t support the policy outcomes I want. That isn’t a reasonable alternative.
Questions for you: what are the policy outcomes you want? “Sustainable government” isn’t an answer. What services do you expect the government to provide and to what extent?
Who in politics do you support? Who would you most support in 2020?
I think that is the crux of your argument. Therefore you don't actually need to understand what is being proposed.
You could make that argument for the other side, no? Edit: I care about the makeup of the SCOTUS therefore I am will to vote for a tax cheat and serial liar.
And what outcomes are they fighting for that you want if you don't know what their policies will actually do? You don't - this is the definition of willful ignorance.
And that doesn't even take on the costs - which are enormous (and the answers have been disingenuous). 
