Interesting comment by my Poli Sci professor today…

[anotherproletariat]

He says that the success of Sander’s “free college for all” recruiting tactic essentially guarantees that we will never have tuition-free public education. Other politicians are seeing how this absolutely resonated with young voters, many of who say that they see their campaign contributions to Sanders as an investment in their future tuition costs. Aside from this being impractical on the surface (even if such a policy could be enacted, it would never happen in time for the current generation of college or even high school students to benefit), the cost of this program would clearly come as a result of higher taxes.

Because of this powerful new political tool, it incentivizes politicians to leave this issue on the back burner, allowing it to continue to be relevant for many elections to come. This is exactly what has happened with the abortion issue on the right. They made a deliberate decision not to overtly overturn Roe v. Wade during the last part of the 20th century, to allow for recruitment of single issue and religious voters to their party.

[GusBob]

1. I think also that private schools could benefit from this

public institutions could become overcrowded and the overall quality of education could suffer

private schools, meanwhile, would become, or continue to be, islands for the wealthy and upper classes. Their graduates would hire their graduates. Which in effect happens already but they would not have to worry about changing tuition rates

[Lucinda]

2. It is an interesting point and a sad commentary on the system. Add it to the fact that the Sanders

campaign came up with the idea by polling what would resonate with that age group, and it paints politicians in a very bad, manipulative light.

[anotherproletariat]

3. I think that was his point...putting politics ahead of the good of the country.

Unfortunately, people don't seem to care.

[Lucinda]

4. I taught a section about the way media & theatrics can manipulate voters, when I was in grad school.

There are sooo many variables out there now in the election system that candidates are trying to master/manipulate to gain any sort of an edge on the opposition.

Taking survers/polling to find out what people want to hear, venue selection, staging of rallys, etc. You can see it in Sanders when he answers questions. He keeps it simple. Yes or no when possible. Don't say too much. Keep up the buzzwords and slogans. That can work for a while, but with 24/7 media coverage, we start to realize he keeps saying the same thing over and over. When we are lucky, people sort of wake up, and realize that they really have NO idea what he would actually DO that will help make their lives better.

There are politicians out there, like Hillary, that actually see their job as public service, and they feel compelled to do as much for their constituents as they can. I wish we could clone that aspect of her.

[anotherproletariat]

5. I agree, and you make good points about how Sanders handles the media.

He managed to maintain his strategy for many months, and only recently have most of the public really seen the holes. I think the real political strategy is anticipating low voter interest, and most people just letting comments slide.

[Lucinda]

6. It happens far too much. People don't want to do their homework, and they often fall

in line behind a candidate for the most bizarre reasons. And once they commit, it would take something truly awful to shake them loose. Trump wasn't too far off the mark when he could shoot someone and not lose any voters. The voters in one state did get mad at him though, when he ditched their debate. Fickle bunch.

What makes me saddest about all this, is watching people I thought of as smart, kind, and well informed, turn into the opposite because they feel compelled to defend some seriously stupid stuff their candidate says and does.

Elections could provide a ton of material for fascinating dissertations in both Poly Sci, and Psychology disciplines.

[Stand and Fight]

7. This is also known as a "wedge issue", and I think your professor is being far too cynical.