One type of framing of last night's debate.
Last night's debate, while entertaining, seemed to highlight (among other things) simplicity versus complexity.
Sanders is saying a lot of things are simple. Break up the big banks. Reinstate the Glass-Steigal Act. End the drug war. Overturn Citizens United. Don't vote for dangerous legislation like the Iraq War Resolution. I agree with all these points. But he has to gain consensus from republicans and democrats in Congress (many or most of whom are corrupted to various degrees by special interests and campaign contributions). How will they even pass comprehensive campaign reform if most of them don't seem to want it? Clinton said she wants it too, but there doesn't seem to be much consensus in Congress on it.
Clinton is saying a lot of progress is more complex. Lowering health care costs, preserving social security, gaining de jure and de facto equality for black people and women, require piecemeal gains and long term vigilance. But it leaves people feeling cold if one doesn't take bold moral stances or if legislation is watered down via compromises that may harm others, as in the case with our jobs being outsourced.
There's something to be said for each of these approaches. But I think both candidates are forced into a somewhat silly corner trying to distinguish themselves from one another. If Sanders is President of course he would understand the complexity of a lot of issues. He actually helped write and sponsor the Affordable Care Act and he knows that also from being a Senator and serving on committees. If Clinton is President she knows that some things are actually simple. They just require her to sign legislation or refuse to sign it.
I think Sanders supporters may say 'if you don't get the simple stuff right you can't hope to get the complex stuff right, you've got to take bold moral stances.' And I think Clinton supporters may say 'if you get 93% of the simple stuff right, progress is being made and if you just keep repeating yourself about revolution eventually people will turn you off or rip you to shreds.'
What are your thoughts? How do you perceive these distinctions (or 'distinctions')?
= new reply since forum marked as read
