I wish I could be as optimistic as you. While I don’t subscribe to this type of meltdown, I do think it will fall somewhere between you and him.
We have takers and makers in America. Right now the takers (liberals) are reaching the 50% range. Any way you slice it, it spells some form of disaster. The takers need to suffer at this point to get the message. There’s no convincing them that they have to be productive to survive unless they see it for themselves.
> We have takers and makers in America. Right now the takers (liberals) are reaching the 50% range. Any way you slice it, it spells some form of disaster. The takers need to suffer at this point to get the message. There’s no convincing them that they have to be productive to survive unless they see it for themselves.
It does not look to me that liberals are at 50%. Yes, the last three elections support this number. But, if you consider the situation each time:
2000: Peace, good economy, general well being - the fact that Democrats lost is close to a miracle.
2004: In the midst of a very unpopular war
2008: At the end of a very unpopular war, extremely unpopular President and a Republican contender who, in many ways, is indistinguishable from his Democratic opponent. Plus an excitement of having a Black President.
And each time, Democrats managed to get only 50% +/- a few points.
Now consider a possible situation in 2012 (perhaps event 2010) assuming President Obama performs according to expectations: higher taxes and tariffs will keep the economy poor, multiple depressing speeches from President and Congressional leadership (e.g., Jimmy Carter), corruption, etc. And, very importantly, we have to hope that Republicans would have learned their lesson about the usefulness of nominating Democrats-light.