Okay, Dems, What Went Wrong? And How Can We Fix It?

George writes


An uncharacteristically ambiguous answer for you, I think. Does that mean you couldn't think of any current good Democrat ideas either?

I agree and have also recently posted that the Democrats are always going to see government as the best means to address social issues while Republicans are more likely to look for ways to empower the people to do things themselves. And traditionally, Democrats favor raising taxes to raise revenues; the GOP favors cutting taxes, etc.

But how well will any party do running on a platform that offers nothing more than higher taxes and bigger government?

Whether or not one agrees with what they're coming up with, currently the GOP is offering proposals and ideas for everything from health care to repair of social security to immigration to grass roots programs to help the poor and disadvantaged to improving education to solving some of the energy crisis and trade imbalance to space exploration to freedom and democracy in the Middle East.

So what are the Democrats offering other than saying no to the GOP?

The 'conservatives' have become the 'progressives' and the 'progressives' have become the 'conservatives' pushing the status quo.

At least that's how I see it. And so far nobody has come up with much to dispute it.

I agree with that. My point was that while the Democrats are indeed a bit lost and in the grip of the extreme elements of their rather discordant political base, they are not utterly without identifiable political values. Moreover in a discussion with one who may be inclined to see only evil in the motives and powers behind the Republican party, it does no good to fall prey to the same rhetorical excesses.

Besides I came back from the gym just a couple of hours ago and am feeling particularly relaxed and free of vagrant hostility and irritability. That isn't always the case.

I agree. I was 'born' a Democrat and was registered Democrat for some time before my party abandoned me. I am a strong advocate for the Democrat Party to return to its roots and dump the kooky fringe in favor of the core values they one had, such values tempered by social evolution allowing for much more inclusiveness and tolerance where such makes sense. I don't know whether I could ever again embrace the benign socialism inherent in those core values, but I could at least throw support to honorably elected opposition leaders and try to be a part of solutions rather than just a member of the opposition providing as much resistance as possible.

The loyal opposition these days however cannot even discuss ideas without bashing the GOP. We try sometimes and even make it through a few pages of the thread before they just have to make it another GWB and GOP bashing session.

But it keeps the GOP in power for now I guess. So it's all good.

And George has inspired me to go take a hot bubble bath and get ready to go out to dinner with friends. That's all good too.

So was I. My father was a Democrat Congressman for many years, and I was appointed to the Naval Academy by another Democrat Congressman. One of life's many ironies is that most things are eventually carried to excess and require eventual reversal. An entirely laudable civil rights movement starts out breaking down barriers for truly oppressed people and ends up years later as a bureaucratic broker of subsidies to manipulative practicioners of government favors and special priviledges. Initiatives well designed to enrich public education programs end up as subsidies to entrenched bureaucracies and unions who use their new power to feed even faster from the public trough - and education degrades for all. We need a season (or perhaps a generatioon) of counter trends to wipe out these corruptions of well-intended policies. Later on we will need to reverse the counter trends. There are no enduring ideal solutions in politics except freedom and mechanisms for orderly change.

<< Wonders if Georgeob or Foxy's hands shook with the memory of all their ancestors who always voted Democrat as if it were a form of tribal initiation. <Smiling>

Perhaps one day it will be me in that position, pulling the lever or punching that chad for a Democrat instead of a Repub (years and years down the road of course). More likely than not, it will happen.

The thing is, I think we should all be in a mode of "transition" when it comes to politics. I have no doubts that Foxy, in her transitioning from a Democrat to supporting Republicans has come to a reasoned conclusion that they are deserving of her support.

Her phrase "my party abandoned me" struck a chord in me and I'll have no problem jumping ship if I feel a similar abandonment.

Transition. That's the ticket.

My parents came to this country as children in families that immigrated from Ireland. They were Democrat adherents of policies that are today much closer to those of the Rpublican Party. In this case the mountain came to Mohammet.

Nevertheless I do strongly believe that one of the secrets of our political and economic success - something that came down from our British tradition (note that Steve) - is a pragmatic, rather than theoretical, approach to political doctrine and policy. Political issues come and go, and political parties and their constituencies change. There are right policy decisions to be found for most situations, but they are not constant or unchanging. The world is not in equilibrium, and steady state or permanent solutions are an illusion.

'tis true george. but isn't it better to come up with the best fix as opposed to the quickest or easiest ? additionally, shouldn't we also be careful to not overly harm a good policy to fix another in that same scenario.

btw, sorry you're taking such a drubbing today, man. you know i don't agree with every single thing you say (and likely vice versa : ) ), but you usually come off pretty reasonable to me. :wink:

I fully agree with both points. I was addressing those of a highly theoreticaL bent and suggesting that (1) in politics most things go too far and eventually require correction, (2) practical solutions are generally best, and (3) the search for perfection will always fail.

Thanks for the kind words. I have fairly thick skin (usually).

The Republicans have had the majority in the House for ten years.
(Still no major effect on the morals or character of governance. Tom DeLay's GOP rivals are sharpening their knives.)

Just a reminder of the present before plunging forward:

I thought the recent posts had some merit. I signed up for some emails and jotted down a number of neo-con books to peruse (Mao's thoughts on his enemy's writings float up and drift across my brainpan) I liked george's take on the present for it's dry eyed focus, (this change to conservatism is only a temporary thing) despite the chance that "temporary", in terms of both politics and highway construction, can mean a very long time. I need to go back and read Foxfyre's "the party left me post" again, it was crunchy and full of smokiness, and not a little truth.

But none of that seems meaningful, it's personal and sweet of everyone to share, but what needs to be defined here is where we are going as a nation and who are the political entities who will lead us to that spot out there in the future.


If the American model of democracy is the one that is to be exported around the world, can the Republican Party lead the way with a straight face?

Joe(we want everyone to be themselves except those gay boys)Nation

I doubt that the "American model" can be exported at all. One can plant the seeds of freedom and elements of democracy, but each country will develop as its own culture and choices lead it. Example can be a powerful thing and the lasting potential benefit of Iraq is a new model for development in an Islamic world beset by theocrats and tyrants. The reactions in Lebanon and (possibly) in Egypt are suggestive that maybe, just maybe this example will have an effect there.

No reason at all for the Republicans to hide their faces - they are doing quite well indeed.

Okay, you don't think democracies will be akin to the American model, but do you think the most recent architects of this effort think like you do?

Don't people like Kristol, Wolfowitz and George W. Bush believe that we are creating new Ohios out there? Or do they realize, even though they aren't telling their supporters such things, that the newly created democracies will be more like Israel than Iowa?

What technique would you call that? Coalition in a afghanis CAN?

Joe(Is it possible to hear a single true word?)Nation

Joe, Bush and his people keep telling us that the Iraqi People will develop their own country's democracy.

As far as I know, they still haven't changed that rhetoric.

I know what they are saying, what do they believe?

Wolfowitz believed at one point that we would be greeted by flower bearing hoards, he was right about the hoards.

Have these guys been right about anything more than two per cent of what they predicted would happen in Iraq? You want to bet on their ability to predict what kind of government is going to emerge from the RPG dust?

Joe(You don't need a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows)Nation

If we go by past rhetoric and actual results, I'd have to agree with your assessment - 100 percent.

what ever the iraqis come up with, it's most likely to have a very heavy islamic law influence. post war baghdad's city laws lean towards sharia (sic?) from according to what i heard a while back...

We can speculate all we want about how the Iraqi "democracy" will turn out, but we're just passing wind. Why don't we just them have a reasonable period of time to find out if they will be able to create a constitution that will bring peace to their country. I personally think it'll be a long road ahead, because too many unhappy Iraqis can result in a civil war. The conflicts inside Iraq is a long term problem; it's not about to change on a dime no matter how much we wish them well.

so then maybe we should leave and let them work it out... gotta take the training wheels off sooner or later. just like the united states did.

oh. wait. that's different. the founding fathers did it themselves. except for a little help at yorktown from those pesky french...

And now back to figuring out how the Democrats went from having a "veto-proof" Congress to being the minority.

Trivia question: When was that?

Joe(Hint: There was a Democrat in the WH.)Nation

Don't know about anything that far back. Their problems this last time around however are simply explained: they made a halfhearted attempt at making it with the treason vote; they needed to go all the way, with an ultimate ticket:

http://www.designeduniverse.com/pics/arnold_iscariot.gif