4 ms·

That is because it's easy to support an abstract policy like "better social safety net" or "solve climate change". When the actual policy implementation is rev

That is because it's easy to support an abstract policy like "better social safety net" or "solve climate change". When the actual policy implementation is revealed and people see how it will affect them, they realize it's not free of trade-offs and downsides. For example, higher taxes and higher gas prices will make a lot of people drop support for climate policy.

bediger4000 4y ago
Doesn't cover gun control or abortion rights. Those would be cheap.
- twblalock 4y ago
  Support for gun control and abortion rights might be high, but it's not evenly distributed. Most people in California would vote for both. Most people in Arkansas would vote against both. As the voters in each state also choose who they send to Congress, we end up with a legislature that reflects the state-by-state preferences of the voters rather than the results of a nationwide opinion poll. Polling the American population as a whole, when support for these policies and congressional representation are determined on a state-by-state basis, is not that useful.
  - lanstin 4y ago
    Except, as we saw in Kansas, when left wing policies, like abortion access, marijuana legalization, minimum wages, and Medicare expansion do go on the ballot they often win or at least get much more support than you would guess from believing the Republicans. If we could get more direct voting on these policies, it is quite likely to be quite different outcomes from the representatives chosen by primaries dominated by fanatics system currently in place. As someone that grumbles constantly at all the technically complicated ballot initiatives I have to wade thru in CA, I would prefer a system where the elected representatives shared the values of the people they represent, but maybe the internet has rendered that impossible.

4 ms·

That is because it's easy to support an abstract policy like "better social safety net" or "solve climate change". When the actual policy implementation is rev

by twblalock 4y ago

bediger4000 4y ago
Doesn't cover gun control or abortion rights. Those would be cheap.
- twblalock 4y ago
  Support for gun control and abortion rights might be high, but it's not evenly distributed. Most people in California would vote for both. Most people in Arkansas would vote against both. As the voters in each state also choose who they send to Congress, we end up with a legislature that reflects the state-by-state preferences of the voters rather than the results of a nationwide opinion poll. Polling the American population as a whole, when support for these policies and congressional representation are determined on a state-by-state basis, is not that useful.
  - lanstin 4y ago
    Except, as we saw in Kansas, when left wing policies, like abortion access, marijuana legalization, minimum wages, and Medicare expansion do go on the ballot they often win or at least get much more support than you would guess from believing the Republicans. If we could get more direct voting on these policies, it is quite likely to be quite different outcomes from the representatives chosen by primaries dominated by fanatics system currently in place. As someone that grumbles constantly at all the technically complicated ballot initiatives I have to wade thru in CA, I would prefer a system where the elected representatives shared the values of the people they represent, but maybe the internet has rendered that impossible.