Are we strong?
posted by randall
I argue that Republican losses do not necessarily equate to Democratic gains.
As Obama makes his grand play for the Independents – to get the votes he needs to actually win the election – I hear a lot of people criticize him and the Dem leadership for not “leading from strength.” So much so that people on the Left seem to be on verge of becoming disaffected. And while I’d love nothing more than to hear Obama give some great speech that spells out in vivid detail 1) a moderately progressive agenda, 2) an unequivocal reaffirmation of our constitution, and 3) the strongest possible denunciation of any notion of a unitary executive, I simply don’t think it is the right time.
And here is why: Governorships and Congressional seats are a zero-sum-game. Party id, voting patterns, and policy preferences are not. In other words, while the Republicans may be largely discredited in the electorate’s eyes, it does not necessarily mean the Democrats have been redeemed. For instance, how many Republican actually change their party affiliation to Democratic even though many of them are profoundly disappointed with Bush and their own leadership? Or does a block of voter not breaking for the Republicans necessarily mean that they will show up in numbers great enough to actually do the Dem any good? And let’s even assume that people are waking up to what a profound and bitter misuse of economic theory the Republicans have been using to justify their policies, does that mean people will necessarily accept the Democrat’s national economic platform? In other words, have the liberals, progressives and/or Dems’ political strength grown in proportion to the Republicans’ loss of political strength? I personally do not think so.
Also important – and a point that I know we all know but I think we sometime forget – there is a world of difference between politics and policy. So in other words, Obama will say and do what he needs to in the current political environment to get elected. But that is just politics. And on the topic of politics, we should remember that the Republicans have been expert at shaping the larger environment by conflating liberalism (e.g., the constitutional rule of law) and progressivism with socialism and communism. In fact, now that the words “socialism” and “communism” are starting to be less effective buzz words, groups like the Heritage Institute are all over “scholarship” (to use the term very loosely) that argues that we are also fascists (see for instance, Goldberg, Jonah. Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning. 2008.) Now while you and I may find that absurd, many of the people Obama has to rely on for the votes he needs simply don’t know any better. Also very problematic is that they do not seem to have even realized how profoundly deceived they have been. Moreover, it is unlikely that many will be willing to admit as much when they finally wake up.
Let me ask a question: What is strength? Is it appealing to the Independent and low-info voters in a way that confirms (in their minds)
the above nexus of terms and probably forces a voter to consciously admit to himself that he allowed himself to be deceived? Or is it finding “common ground” in vague “value terms” that no one can either disagree with or define. Obviously, I feel the second is the better one and I believe that is exactly what Obama (and to a lesser extent the Dem leadership) is doing. Moreover, I believe that when Obama is president, he will do the right thing from a policy perspective.
And here is why: Governorships and Congressional seats are a zero-sum-game. Party id, voting patterns, and policy preferences are not. In other words, while the Republicans may be largely discredited in the electorate’s eyes, it does not necessarily mean the Democrats have been redeemed. For instance, how many Republican actually change their party affiliation to Democratic even though many of them are profoundly disappointed with Bush and their own leadership? Or does a block of voter not breaking for the Republicans necessarily mean that they will show up in numbers great enough to actually do the Dem any good? And let’s even assume that people are waking up to what a profound and bitter misuse of economic theory the Republicans have been using to justify their policies, does that mean people will necessarily accept the Democrat’s national economic platform? In other words, have the liberals, progressives and/or Dems’ political strength grown in proportion to the Republicans’ loss of political strength? I personally do not think so.
Also important – and a point that I know we all know but I think we sometime forget – there is a world of difference between politics and policy. So in other words, Obama will say and do what he needs to in the current political environment to get elected. But that is just politics. And on the topic of politics, we should remember that the Republicans have been expert at shaping the larger environment by conflating liberalism (e.g., the constitutional rule of law) and progressivism with socialism and communism. In fact, now that the words “socialism” and “communism” are starting to be less effective buzz words, groups like the Heritage Institute are all over “scholarship” (to use the term very loosely) that argues that we are also fascists (see for instance, Goldberg, Jonah. Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning. 2008.) Now while you and I may find that absurd, many of the people Obama has to rely on for the votes he needs simply don’t know any better. Also very problematic is that they do not seem to have even realized how profoundly deceived they have been. Moreover, it is unlikely that many will be willing to admit as much when they finally wake up.
Let me ask a question: What is strength? Is it appealing to the Independent and low-info voters in a way that confirms (in their minds)
the above nexus of terms and probably forces a voter to consciously admit to himself that he allowed himself to be deceived? Or is it finding “common ground” in vague “value terms” that no one can either disagree with or define. Obviously, I feel the second is the better one and I believe that is exactly what Obama (and to a lesser extent the Dem leadership) is doing. Moreover, I believe that when Obama is president, he will do the right thing from a policy perspective.
| < CNN Is Terrible And Here Is The Proof | I found the woman of my dreams. > |
Are we strong? | 0 comments ( topical, 0 hidden)
