{"version":"1.0","type":"rich","provider_name":"Acast","provider_url":"https://acast.com","height":250,"width":700,"html":"<iframe src=\"https://embed.acast.com/$/695d5c48154465cd6010f4b3/695d5c65154465cd6010ff14?\" frameBorder=\"0\" width=\"700\" height=\"250\"></iframe>","title":"Purity Is Poisoning the Progressive Movement","description":"<p>On today’s episode of Hear Me Out: the purity test.</p><p><br></p><p>Purity, in political science, doesn’t have anything to do with morality. It has to do with whether your policy aligns with your principles. </p><p><br></p><p>From <a href=\"https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/03/bernie-bros-2020-campaign.html\">“Bernie Bros”</a> to the <a href=\"https://slate.com/podcasts/what-next/2024/02/what-biden-beating-uncommitted-in-michigan-means\">uncommitted vote against Biden</a>, we’ve seen progressives protect ideological purity… and punish stances that don’t align. An <a href=\"https://www.thedailybeast.com/progressives-radical-dream-policies-dont-even-exist\">all-or-nothing stance</a> on issues like universal healthcare and student loan forgiveness might sound appealing to voters. But does it doom progress, practically, if an increment isn’t good enough?</p><p><br></p><p><a href=\"https://www.shaniquamcclendon.com/\">Shaniqua McClendon</a>, VP of Politics for Crooked Media, joins us to argue against progressive purity politics.</p><p><br></p><p>If you have thoughts you want to share, or an idea for a topic we should tackle, you can email the show: <a href=\"mailto:hearmeout@slate.com\">hearmeout@slate.com</a></p><p><br></p><p>Podcast production by Maura Currie.</p><p><br></p><p><em>You can skip all the ads in Hear Me Out by joining Slate Plus! Sign up now at </em><a href=\"http://slate.com/awordplus\"><em>slate.com/hearmeoutplus</em></a><em> for just $15 a month for your first three months.</em></p><p> </p>","author_name":"Slate Podcasts"}