Skip to main content

View Diary: Taxing the rich: it's not about "fairness" (182 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  We are in agreement, but ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The diarist was talking about the right argument, not the best way to sell that argument to Joe Lunchbox..

    Two different things.

    We Kossacks have a much more sophisticated view of politics than Joe Lunchbox. To sell that view, we have to use terms that Joe understands. I know that sounds cynical, but it's political reality.

    You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows. --Bob Dylan-- -7.25, -6.21

    by Tim DeLaney on Sun Nov 25, 2012 at 08:54:46 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I don't understand. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      brooklynbadboy, Sparhawk

      First you say the diarist was talking about the right argument, rather than the way to frame it in order to sell it.

      Then you say to sell it , we have to use the terms that Joe Lunchbox understands.

      I interpreted this diary as saying "fairness" is a bad way to sell it and "less inequality" is a good way to sell it.  And then the diarist goes on to give a long (but good) argument as to why reduced inequality is good.

      My point is that while a Democrat is spending 1000 words to explain that, his Republican opponent will just say "Communist" and the debate will be lost.  For, in reality, any argument in this country that is framed around changing results rather than opportunities is always attacked that way.  And the attacker always wins, because things that can be labeled Communism or Socialism or anything that even smells a whiff like it are DOA in America.

      Democrats get government programs done by labeling them as something other than Socialism, not by wrapping policies in Socialist arguments.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site