A -- super -- significant psychological (human social instinct) insight -- with which to get progressives on board for sector wide labor agreements?

Everyone else knows it is hard to get the most progressive economists, politicians (are there any?) and journalists to push for anything practical (e.g., sector wide labor agreements) for common folks whom they supposedly just don't identify enough with.

I personally am always asserting that elitists cannot push anything practical because males cannot conceive of affecting opinion even one layer beyond whatever they -- instinctively -- see as their "hunting pack" (fellows in the same profession). Blocked from within from trying to spread an idea any farther.

Put the two together.

Obama is useless -- wont push obvious good paths with the public -- because he mechanically sees his fellow elitists as his hunting pack and is emotionally blocked from trying to directly present any good path on its merits alone beyond the elitist "pack." If the same big brain Obama was "one of the boys" -- lately a cab driver?-- he would feel perfectly free emotionally to wage the kind of politics we all feel he should -- specifically and mechanically because the average person would then seem part of his male "hunting pack" -- not just from some sort of general empathy everybody thinks.

That presents a much more mechanical explanation which I think I can work something out of -- to finally, at last get elitist "hunting pack animals" :-) to finally consider sector wide labor agreements on merits alone.