I largely agree with your conclusions. We should stack the courts and pass as much progressive legislation as possible. As history shows, we might only have two years to ram everything through, and we can't afford to waste time.
Joe Biden Says He Can Work With the Senate. The Last Time He Tried, Mitch McConnell Picked His Pockets Badly.
In 2012, the GOP was in trouble. Mitch McConnell turned to his friend Joe Biden for a lifeline.theintercept.com
Frankly I don't see how that's not the most likely outcome in a Bernie or Warren Presidency.
And Biden has been for killing the filibuster in the past when it was convenient. Sanders wants a complicated, more likely to be opposed budget reconciliation parliamentarian over-ride, but likely would back the filibuster nuking in the end cause frankly that's more likely to get support.
I say raising the morality of billionaires does count because it's more than just policy. It certainly moves the Overton window further left in that regard. Saying that billionaires should not exist is pretty damn good.
Not to mention that M4A which I completely support would lead to a ton of job losses in the private sector. There are just too many middle-men involved in healthcare for it not to be a problem, and it might even lead to a recession until it gets sorted out but by that time repubs will have full control and roll everything back.
Oh, I'm aware of Biden's fumbling and belief that he can work with Republicans. And I do believe he believes that stupidity to an extent. I don't believe he thinks he'll get a single vote for healthcare and some other things since he was there for that.
Considering a republican would then elect two more supreme court justices... No, that would not be preferable.
Well the hope would be that the supermajority would be able to pack the courts or impeach some judges.
There is nothing in Bernie's history to suggest he is going to walk back on M4A, and if he did, he would .... well I doubt the die hards would turn on him, but there is no way you can run on something as definitive as his plan ("I wrote the damn bill!") and then just immediately walk it back in the general.
Literally the only path to Democrats getting 55+ Senate seats (let's not even talk about 60) requires Trump winning in 2020.
The issue is, "left" as defined on Era isn't as popular as people want to pretend it is. The idea that America is really this far left country that just needs the courage to be a socialist utopia is just...it's peek incredibly online bubble. We have polling that shows M4A and getting rid of private insurance is not that popular, even among the Democratic base when compared to things like the public option or M4AWWI. But if we don't do this, according to Twitter and Incredibly Online Folk, we're basically Republican lite and doomed to 10,000 years of darkness. This idea that we just need to keep running further to the left is the most bizarre thing to me. It reads like fan fiction of an electorate that doesn't exist. It fundamentally misreads the actual coalition we have to win elections.
Do you really think there's enough support in the senate for a public option?
Don't forget the perennial "We have to start as far left as possible so that we can negotiate our way down. Don't start with a compromise!!!!!" that ignores the way politics actually works. If the votes aren't there, they aren't there. If Kyrsten Sinema won't vote for single-payer, that's it. You can't bully her because you have no leverage over her; she's only accountable to the people in her state, many of whom would actually like her being the ~~~responsible~~~ Democrat and telling the big bad socialists no.
Medicare for All Who Want It (basically a robust public option/buy-in).
Well ideally we should be nuking the Electoral College but that requires an amendment. Let's get the other stuff in first.
