10/9/2005
Uh-oh, politics
I’m on this outstanding and extremely secret mailing list where the members are generally quite well-informed, educated, and interesting. Or maybe I’m not.
On that mailing list, there’s been a lot of talk lately about the Democratic party. This is a strongly liberal bunch so pretty much without exception there’s dismay on the list about the state of affairs in American politics, and lately there’s been a discussion thread about what to do about it. The prevailing opinion is that the Dems need to start at the grassroots level, build up a nationwide organization that mirrors what the Republicans did after they started getting their asses handed to them in the last half of last century, try to influence hearts and minds on a local and municipal level, and shape the next fifty years of American politics in that fashion.
That’s a bunch of nonsense. GWB won reelection by the barest of margins despite being the sitting president, which (regardless of what he and his say) is nowhere near a mandate. As a result of the 2004 elections, the right is firmly in control of the federal government, but they weren’t swept in by a landslide, and some of their problems since then have further weakened their base. Hell, Bush can’t even keep his own people in line regarding his latest Supreme Court nominee.
Controversial Bush Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, accompanied by an unnamed “eye makeup expert” consultant.
We’ve got a lot of time between now and the elections of 2008, and of course anything can happen… but this does not look like a Republican hegemony in the making. The Republicans have lost a lot of that impregnable mythos that they were slinging around like greasy spoon hash after last year’s elections.
They still bring something the Democratic party can’t respond to, though, and that’s a tangible sense of direction and purpose. This decade’s Democratic party has a performance record of being both poll-driven (witness the “gosh, is Dean really electable?” nonsense in the Democratic primaries last year) and impotent, which is as pathetic as it sounds. For all GWB’s failures, I don’t get the feeling that he gives a damn what the country will think when he’s making policy in the White House, and that’s something I can respect. When the alternative is someone who vacillates depending on perceived public sentiment at the moment… well, what’s the point? Why not just elect a pollster?
When you give me Hillary Clinton in 2008, Dems, don’t worry about whether she’s electable or not (or if you do, at least don’t worry about it to the media). Don’t worry about whether she’ll be popular or not. Just stand the fuck behind someone, don’t apologize, you’ll have had me at “hello”.
2 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Why not just elect a pollster?
Or for true democracy, why not just eliminate the middleman and decide everything by proposition and constitutional amendment, as we do in California, so that Cody in Riverside can spend several minutes considering the net present value of a proposed bond issuance before making a reasoned decision as to its future fiscal impact.
Because that works really well.
And what’s up Miers as a Supreme Court nominee? Was Jenna Bush too busy with her lesson plans to adequately prepare for confimation hearings?
Comment by Andres — 10/10/2005 @ 11:48 am
I would agree that the dems’ recent setbacks are largely due to their unclear message, pansy party leadership, and the gamma-male auras put off by their last two presidential candidates. And certainly this ‘grassroots level’ whatever suggested by the smarty liberal internets with which you convene isn’t going to solve those problems (their actual solution is much simpler: backbone implants).
That said, it still seems there are other problems your cohorts (who may or may not actually exist) might be trying to address, namely, the vast right-wing conspiracy. I mean, during the past few decades, a damn effective wingnut apparatus has been designed and loosed on the country (i.e., heritage, talk radio, drudge, fox, etc.). Sure shrub is in trouble, and the ‘mandate’ was laughable, but can you imagine how much *more* trouble he’d be in if he were a democrat? Bush co. couldn’t have done a much better job fucking shit up on just about every issue and they still got re-elected. Clinton got *impeached* for spilling some seed! Well, and lying about it, but still. If your pals hope to re-align the national political vertebrae, I salute them.
One thing the dems do have going for them, and it’s no small thing, I hope their saving grace actually, was summed up by The Clinton (to Jon Stewart): ‘We are Democrats. We win when people think.’
Oh, and let me add: the jesush, nice f’n site!
Comment by Cowboy — 10/11/2005 @ 11:10 pm