File this under “Democrats are the stupidest political party in recorded history.” A recent poll asked, “In the 2010 Congressional elections will you definitely vote, probably vote, not likely vote, or definitely will not vote?” The answer:
This isn’t just the ‘liberal’ base: the entire party has been demobilized. Only 56 percent of Democrats are likely to vote, versus 81 percent of Republicans. And now, some Democrats are talking about cutting Social Security benefits, even though there is no crisis. That’s not going to rally the Democratic rank-and-file.
Democrats, and Democratic-leaning independents, didn’t vote for Republican-lite, they voted for what was in the party platform and what Obama campaigned on: serious healthcare reform, civil rights for gays and lesbians, withdrawal from Iraq, defending Social Security, and clawing back the obscene increase in wealth by the top one percent*, among other things.
Mission. Not. Accomplished.
Change that, please.
*Anybody remember the plan to raise the top income tax rate to 39.6% (on earnings above $250,000) and limit the amount of tax deductions to a maximum 28% rate? I guess that’s not the fiscal responsibility we’ve been waiting for…
And you wonder why the Republicans are sticking with the Reagan strategy of juicing up the hard core?
Saint Ronnie didn’t revolutionize American politics based on any magical platform, he did it by recognizing a fundamental truth of American politics: most of us don’t vote, and moderates vote less than either wing. Appealing to the “center” may make you popular with moderates, but it won’t make them vote for you.
Getting your “base” foaming at the mouth, now — that will get them to vote. No question of who they’ll vote for, either — the only question is whether they’ll get off their butts and go to the polls. When the turnout is less than 40%, a “get out the vote” strategy has huge potential to increase the vote count — far more than attempts to make the fickle middle like you enough to actually do anything about it.
That simple observation is the fundamental dynamic of American politics for the last thirty years. It’s the reason that the Republicans have dominated the national stage for most of that time, and only the fact that Barack Obama:
1) Got the left juiced up by a Reaganesque strategy,
2) Had George Bush to run against, and
3) Had the active assistance of John McCain running the most inept Presidential campaign since Gerald Ford
managed to get him into the White House — where he promptly demonstrated bipartisanship by acting like George Bush Lite (with added authoritarian sauce.)
Meanwhile it’s clear that Rush Limbaugh is still calling the shots in the Senate regardless of little letter in parentheses after each Senator’s name. Why bother taking time off from useful pursuits when the fix is in?
No, they voted for the people who are in congress. We don’t elect slates and platforms here, we elect by district, and you got what you got. And some of these guys ran against parts of your agenda. Some of them said little of nothing about parts of it.
Yes: mission not accomplished, this congress won’t do some of these things. I don’t see why this is so hard for you to grasp.
We’re still a long way away from the election. What percentage of these folks you think could accurately predict what they’d eat for dinner the next day, and you’re asking whether they’ll vote in a year?
And why scaremonger about social security? Some kind of reform will be needed at some point, so why not now. And we already have an unrepresentative, not very accountable group making these decisions now: the committee chairs, who wield enormous national power and yet only have to win the approval of 1/870th of the electorate to keep their power. So why not turn it over to a special committee to hash out?
The Democrats fielded a conservative, Republican-lite candidate almost solely because of his knack for soaring rhetoric. There’s no reason to be surprised that the overall direction of the country is still distinctly rightward. If the Democrats are the stupidest political party in recorded history, it’s because they have the stupidest voting base.
Your declaration, “We New Atheist types like to emphasize that religion ought not to be exempted from the usual requirement that assertions of fact be supported by evidence…” reveals an important issue in the reason versus religion dispute.
The Democrats fielded a conservative, Republican-lite candidate almost solely because of his knack for soaring rhetoric.
Who would have been your more liberal candidate standing any chance of winning? Keeping in mind Obama was significantly more liberal in the senate than either Clinton or Edwards.
Have any chance of winning what, the nomination or the election? To be honest you shouldn’t bother asking because I could care less at this point. I’ve officially become a defeatist on American politics.
Likewise, it should not matter how God created life, whether it was through a miraculous spoken word or through the natural forces of the universe that He created. The grandeur of God’s works commands awe regardless of what processes He used.
Runaway bold tag! get it!