 |
Re: Republican Brown wins Ted Kennedy's Senate Seat |
 |
01-21-2010, 10:12 AM
|
#1
|
The Greatest One
TheGame is offline
Location: Bakersfield CA
Now Playing: Shut the hell up and quit asking me questions
Posts: 3,412
|
Re: Republican Brown wins Ted Kennedy's Senate Seat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond
That may be part of the problem, but I think the broader problem is the divergence of opinions as to what Obama should be doing. Like you say, many feel as though he went too far right, but just as many (or around the same number) of Democrats think he went too far left. This is quite a dangerous position for a politician, as he has weakened support from his base, as well as from moderates, and increased resistance from the opposition party (ie. the tea party movement).
Senator Brown may very well be the revitalization of the liberal / moderate Republicans in the Northeast, but it's too early to tell. I hope it is, though.
|
I agree that there are a lot of people in general who thinks that he went too far to the left, but the majority of those are republicans. And the majority of people who think that he went to far to the right are democrats. As for independants it seems to be split. Sorry I don't have any polls to post yet, but I'll look them up when I have more time. (Heading to work)
I will say this though, it does seem that history is repeating itself. When the republicans are in the majority, there are a lot of liberal republicans who do things that demoralize their base and eventually cost them elections. When the Dems get in control there's a lot of conservative Democrats who do the same thing and cost them in the end.
How it costs them is.. you demoralize your base, and they don't show up to vote. They don't nessicarily have to vote for the other guy, they just don't want to vote for you.. While the minority can paint everything wrong in the world as the majority party's fault, it makes people in their base more passionate about showing up and voting.
This election was a mid term, so nobody expected the turn out to be as high as the presidential election.. but I'm willing to bet more Mccain supporters showed up then Obama ones.
__________________
"I have been saying this for some time, but customers are not interested in grand games with higher-quality graphics and sound and epic stories,"-Hiroshi Yamauchi
I AM TheGame, and I am THAT DAMN GOOD
|
|
|
 |
Re: Republican Brown wins Ted Kennedy's Senate Seat |
 |
01-21-2010, 10:42 PM
|
#2
|
Devourer of Worlds
Professor S is offline
Location: Mount Penn, PA
Now Playing: Team Fortress 2, all day everyday
Posts: 6,608
|
Re: Republican Brown wins Ted Kennedy's Senate Seat
This was from Politico.com, and I thought it was an excellent assessment of what is going on with the Democrat leadership right now, and patronizing politicians in general (on both sides):
Quote:
Do the Democrats 'get it', you ask?
It's a big tent party; some do and some don't.
Somebody very cruel once said that Hubert Humphrey is a man who is twenty years ahead of his time -- but that his time is 1948. That was a damning comment in 1972; it's an even more damning one today, but I'm afraid this describes the mindset of a great many good Democrats.
For these people -- earnest, passionate, often very smart and engaged and many of them good friends of mine -- the 1940s and 1950s model of progress still holds. The world is divided between three groups of people: a large mass of basically good but oppressed and poorly educated working people (and small farmers) who need guidance, enlightenment and protection; evil and greedy corporations and special interests who seek to grind them down and suck them dry; and honest, competent, well educated professionals whose job it is to steer society forward in the interests of the ignorant mass. Unfortunately the evil and greedy interests and their sly minions are good at befuddling and confusing the dumbass masses, using such retrograde themes as patriotism, religion and always and everywhere racism.
For Democrats with this mindset, the party has to balance the interests of the masses and the classes. That is, the masses are, regrettably, too stupid to know what is good for them. It is necessary for the enlightened professionals to steer a middle course between the unreflective populism of the masses and the self-destructive and shortsighted greed of the special interests. These Democrats interpret the populist revolt against the Obama administration (evil "teabaggers" and all) as a sign that the Democrats have steered too far toward the classes, creating a window of vulnerability for evil minion Republican demagogues to confuse the masses about who their real friends are. To hold this in check, the party needs to embrace more 'populist' economic rhetoric: crosses of gold, bankers foreclosing on widows, the whole William Jennings Bryan playbook. Card check, tax the rich, a hugely expensive jobs bill, regulate the hell out of business. This, they are deeply and utterly convinced, will foil the minions completely and let everyone know beyond any doubt who the real friends of the people are.
It is extremely difficult for people steeped in this mindset (as I was for many years) to wrap their heads around the core idea powering American politics in the last generation: a revolt by the 'dumbass masses' against this basic social map of the world. Huge chunks of the masses today don't think they need or want tutors, directors, counselors, union leaders, civil servants or anybody else managing their affairs. They hunger and thirst for social and political autonomy -- it is the liberal world view that they long to be freed of.
For many lower-middle and middle-middle class Americans, the upper-middle class has a basic strategy to protect its privilege and position: to define horrible social problems which require a privileged upper middle class professional establishment to manage. The fight over the role of government in America today is less ideological than class: the middle middle class and its allies think that the upper middle class and its allies use the state as a system to tax other people to defend the privileged class position of professionals, managers and civil servants. More and better funded university professors; more snooty lawyers with more power; more bureaucrats with life tenure and fat pensions; more money thrown down the rat holes of public schools dominated by self-seeking teacher unions.
To people coming from this (increasingly common) perspective, Democrats actually become much more offensive and patronizing when they embrace what they think of as populist economic rhetoric. When 'populist' Democrats try to respond to public dissatisfaction by offering their services as tribunes of the people out to crush evil monster corporations and vicious robber baron plutocrats with big new government programs, they unintentionally confirm popular suspicions that they are using public grievances to strengthen the class that many Americans think is their real enemy.
The war on upper middle class privilege is the cause today that for better or worse embodies the spirit of American populism. Some Democrats get this; most don't and, probably, sadly, won't.
|
__________________
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:21 PM. |
|
|
|
|