I've found that putting arguments into simple, general terms tends to make people rethink their positions.

I had an argument with my dad a while back about single payer health care. A lot of people on the left might frame it like "don't you think everyone is entitled to access to health services?" But an idea like this is like nails on a chalkboard to my dad, who believes everything should be merit based, even access to health care.

Instead, phrasing it as "wouldn't you prefer it if we paid the same amount of money every month and when we go to the hospital we don't have to worry about any out of pocket costs?" This really nailed the point home to him. It's not about entitlements or whatever. It's about people not being destroyed financially by bad health. We skip over the feely stuff, we skip over the specifics of cost. We can both agree that this mechanism makes a lot of sense for most people, and the current system is rather arbitrary.

Anyway, he's still firmly a MAGA trumper but I do think on the aspect of health care, he does see single payer as a viable alternative.

> Instead, phrasing it as "wouldn't you prefer it if **we** paid the same amount of money every month and when we go to the hospital we don't have to worry about any out of pocket costs?" This really nailed the point home to him.

I can already hear the nails on this one, because the goal has now been camouflaged.

Nowhere in that statement is there an allowance for people to not pay into the system: Everyone is forced to pitch in, even if they don't want to. An exit door must be available, no exceptions.