So I've been thinking a lot about how we talk about politics versus how we should talk about politics.

At the debate so far, the topic of K through 12 education has technically been covered but it was raised

primarily as a question about Joe Biden's record on school segregation and

Kamala Harris's objection to that record based on her own personal experiences. The millions of students who attend

schools that are as segregated now as they were 30 years ago, they weren't really part of the conversation

at all. Now admittedly I noticed this because I was eager for Bernie Sanders to have an opportunity to discuss his Thurgen

Marshall Education plan which was described in the nation as, quote,

the most progressive and equitable public education agenda of any presidential candidate in the

modern history of the United States. He actually has an integration

plan. But my personal frustrations aside, sometimes it seems like the people who run the

news are less interested in eliciting information that would be useful to voters.

People who really worry about their children's education,

then about creating viral moments.

While education is framed as an interpersonal dispute,

health care is framed as an accounting question, rather than an ethical one.

How will we pay for that, rather than can you ever put too much value on a human life?

And when it comes to so-called identity politics, well, it feels like we're

having increasingly reductive conversations. Myriad headlines opine on a given candidate's ability to capture the interest of Latin X voters.

Reporters ask me, what is the campaign strategy to, quote, attract black students in particular?

Asian American voters are completely

invisibilized despite making up enormous percentages of

populist states like California and New York. And Native American voters are more often than not treated as a footnote.

...