Posted on 11/04/2004 9:09:27 PM PST by RWR8189
resident Bush isn't a conservative. He's a radical - the leader of a coalition that deeply dislikes America as it is. Part of that coalition wants to tear down the legacy of Franklin Roosevelt, eviscerating Social Security and, eventually, Medicare. Another part wants to break down the barriers between church and state. And thanks to a heavy turnout by evangelical Christians, Mr. Bush has four more years to advance that radical agenda.
Democrats are now, understandably, engaged in self-examination. But while it's O.K. to think things over, those who abhor the direction Mr. Bush is taking the country must maintain their intensity; they must not succumb to defeatism.
This election did not prove the Republicans unbeatable. Mr. Bush did not win in a landslide. Without the fading but still potent aura of 9/11, when the nation was ready to rally around any leader, he wouldn't have won at all. And future events will almost surely offer opportunities for a Democratic comeback.
I don't hope for more and worse scandals and failures during Mr. Bush's second term, but I do expect them. The resurgence of Al Qaeda, the debacle in Iraq, the explosion of the budget deficit and the failure to create jobs weren't things that just happened to occur on Mr. Bush's watch. They were the consequences of bad policies made by people who let ideology trump reality.
Those people still have Mr. Bush's ear, and his election victory will only give them the confidence to make even bigger mistakes.
So what should the Democrats do?
One faction of the party is already calling for the Democrats to blur the differences between themselves and the Republicans. Or at least that's what I think Al From of the Democratic Leadership Council means when he says, "We've got to close the cultural gap." But that's a losing proposition.
Yes, Democrats need to make it clear that they support personal virtue, that they value fidelity, responsibility, honesty and faith. This shouldn't be a hard case to make: Democrats are as likely as Republicans to be faithful spouses and good parents, and Republicans are as likely as Democrats to be adulterers, gamblers or drug abusers. Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate in the country; blue states, on average, have lower rates of out-of-wedlock births than red states.
But Democrats are not going to get the support of people whose votes are motivated, above all, by their opposition to abortion and gay rights (and, in the background, opposition to minority rights). All they will do if they try to cater to intolerance is alienate their own base.
Does this mean that the Democrats are condemned to permanent minority status? No. The religious right - not to be confused with religious Americans in general - isn't a majority, or even a dominant minority. It's just one bloc of voters, whom the Republican Party has learned to mobilize with wedge issues like this year's polarizing debate over gay marriage.
Rather than catering to voters who will never support them, the Democrats - who are doing pretty well at getting the votes of moderates and independents - need to become equally effective at mobilizing their own base.
In fact, they have made good strides, showing much more unity and intensity than anyone thought possible a year ago. But for the lingering aura of 9/11, they would have won.
What they need to do now is develop a political program aimed at maintaining and increasing the intensity. That means setting some realistic but critical goals for the next year.
Democrats shouldn't cave in to Mr. Bush when he tries to appoint highly partisan judges - even when the effort to block a bad appointment fails, it will show supporters that the party stands for something. They should gear up for a bid to retake the Senate or at least make a major dent in the Republican lead. They should keep the pressure on Mr. Bush when he makes terrible policy decisions, which he will.
It's all right to take a few weeks to think it over. (Heads up to readers: I'll be starting a long-planned break next week, to work on a economics textbook. I'll be back in January.) But Democrats mustn't give up the fight. What's at stake isn't just the fate of their party, but the fate of America as we know it.
E-mail: krugman@nytimes.com
that would have been part of Mohammed (there's that goddamn name again!) Mahatir .
Simply amazing , isn't it ? That American Jews can go to these extremes against what should be most sacred to them . Shame shame , what will they say when one day they have to stand before their God?
I thought Paul Krugman was the NYT economics/financial guy, I can't seem to find any of that here.
The best part is we won't have to listen to him for a few months.
Maybe he'll wind up in the same sanitarium and Michael Moore and Dan Rather.
Courage!
Ah. That brand new jumbo box of crayons finally arrived in the mail, then. :)
Wailing and nashing of teeth PING.
What an economic genius Krugman is. Many have been watching the Social Security train wreck coming for 30 years and listening to the poliiticos lie about it. If American workers are allowed (how I hate that word "allowed" when we are talking about their own earnings) to actually own and manage their own money, that means less for the politicians to play with. That's what's making them crazy. Add to that the slim chance that the tax code can be reformed in such a way that they will find it more difficult to reward those who lobby them for special benefits and thus decrease their power, and we are going to see a struggle of epic proportions.
Well I am glad he didn't take the advice and yes I believe the story.
Kinda wishing y'all threw Clinton under the bus about now?
and Republicans are as likely as Democrats to be adulterers, gamblers or drug abusers.
Clinton, Clinton, and Clinton. Gambling is legal. As for drug abusers, y'all are using Soros's money to repeal the drug laws. Kinda doesn't square
Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate in the country; blue states, on average, have lower rates of out-of-wedlock births than red states.
You abort your babies. That really isn't something to brag about. It is sickening. But I appreciate the rallying of the troops - it's very important that they stay on liberal message until 2008.
As mean as the idea is, I think we should start playing to the libs' fears by starting internet rumors that Bush is going to deport all of our poor to India, so that there are only Republican voters left. That, and / or he's going to draft everyone from 14 to 60 and try to conquer the world? Or that he's secretly got a plan to adopt the swastika as the new American flag, claiming that it's actually a diversity plan because Hindus regard it as a good luck symbol?
What??? You mean they're already floating those ideas over at DU? But, but, I thought I was being clever and satirical.
(disclaimer: I don't know that DU is floating those ideas, but don't be surprised at ANYTHING you see over there, if you've got the stomach for going there).
This from people that have BILL CLINTON as their savior!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA!
Hey KRUGMAN, I feel your pain. (said while biting lower lip.)
They STILL don't get it. Democrats can't win the Christian vote until they change their positions on abortion (and especially partial birth abortion), gay marriage, stem cell research, euthasia, FREEDOM OF RELIGION, and other family issues. They are so out of touch that they cannot understand that most people disagree with the Democrats' point of view.
Krugman also conveniently forgets to account for blue states preference for surgical pre-birth intervention (abortion). There was no intent to present an honest, factual account here. Krugman just wanted a statistic to fit the agenda regardless of the validity.
And if my Grandmother had wheels, she would be a bicycle!
9/11 happened. When something like that happens, people remember. If a political party ignores reality and nominates a 9/10 man in a 9/11 World, it should surprise nobody when he loses.
Does Krugman think we should all just forget about 9/11? That we should let bygones be bygones and invite Osama over for Thanksgiving turkey?
Frankly, the thing that encourages me most about America in general and President Bush in particular is the ability to maintain focus on 9/11 for so long. The Islamic Imperialists are counting on us forgetting, on our yearning for normalcy to cause us to relax, which will allow them to solidify gains and prepare for the next attack. But President Bush has rallied the country, and through single-minded devotion has maintained our resolve. Doing so nearly cost him the election, but now he will be free to do what needs to be done.
Sorry Mr. Krugman. It must really suck to be you today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.