Posted on 02/03/2005 9:04:20 AM PST by Publius
It's a foregone conclusion at this point in time that the Democrats have no chance of winning at the national level campaigning on their true agenda; America is a slightly right-of-center country and has been for quite some time. However, the Clintons are proving themselves to be far smarter than I had given them credit for before. They fully understand that if they're to succeed they need to lie their way into power, and that campaign is already beginning in earnest. And they don't need to fool the entire country, they only need to fool a relatively small percentage of the people in order to pull it off.
In the end I don't think she'll be able to pull it off, but it's entirely within the realm of possibility that she could, and there are a lot of things that could still go wrong for us if we're not careful. It would be a big mistake for us to begin underestimating our opponents, because not all of them are as buffoonish as Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer.
What makes the New England connecton so toxic is that New England is the most European part of America. That is the theme with Kerry and Dean. An open desire to turn America into a part of Europe. With its bicycles and pre-automobile street grid and laid back ways and static economy and abundance of cultivated entertainments and disinclination by the Red Sox to do something as gauche as winning, Boston feels something like Frankfurt.
Another party is coming. The Perot economic nationalist/protectionist cultural conservative constituency is still out there. And it seethes every time it hears Bush talk about "jobs Americans won't do". And it will take from both Dems and Repubs.
Hillary is running to recreate the Perot movement. And it is still out there waiting for a leader.
Clinton sold them out over NAFTA and Kerry had the economic nationalism of someone with a rich European wife and 7 mansions. They are waiting to be led.
As a rule, social attitudes change at their own natural speed and do not require a political party to push them along.
Social change has been going non-stop ever since the Black Death took down feudalism. Even the Marxists agree on that one. Social change eventually takes down entire institutions, such as monarchy.
But unless a social situation is truly oppressive, like slavery, people resent those who would force social change they aren't ready for. That's why gay marriage has people so upset.
Great essay. Thank you.
Given the multiple boxes the Dims have locked themselves into, I don't see how they get back in the majority any time soon.
Did you misspell "sphinctering?"
The only place 'Rats have accomplished anything remotely liberal since 1976 and the infamous 94th Congress is in the Courts. Legislatively, they have been dead for thirty years.
When was Perot the Texan anti-gun ?
And isn't the Democratic party running from gun control as an issue ?
Pro-abort ? Most of the country is of two minds. They accept the right to life argument on moral grounds but the NARAL argument on socioeconomic grounds. It's not all black and white. If it were one side would have won already.
Try making sense.
Concur. But She lacks the political instincts to pull it off, possessing a tin ear for opinions not shared by Herself. She has no patience with people less brilliant than Herself.
This is why there has been discussion in Congress about a constitutional amendment that would open the way for Arnold to run for president -- but would also repeal the 22nd Amendment and give Bill another shot at the top. Congressional Democrats don't share Her exalted opinion of Herself and think Bill has a better chance of regaining power for the party.
The key to why a splintering is so likely is that the Deaniacs are so far out of the mainstream that they will drive moderates away in droves. Zell Miller merely said he was still a Democrat, but one who was supporting Bush. The next defectors will not make that distinction.
^
It remains to be seen whether many of your predictions and analysis are spot on, but they are thoughtfully arrived upon and I'm book-marking it.
Ping.
And when was your new hero, hillary, pro-2nd amendment. She isn't, oh BTW, Perot's wife was on the board of Texas planned parenthood.
Try making sense.
Uh I ain't the one trying to sell the snake oil that hillary is the new conservative savior.
Excellent writing, Mr. Publius. Very educational and helpful for this granny who's never really studied politics, just knows integrity matters, and is means is.
Thanks.
Fill us in on their responses.
You mean Teddy Roosevelt cleaned house of the " Progressives " or did he take them with him ?
TR took the Progressives with him when he bolted the Republican Party in 1912. Once the Bull Moose Party showed that it was a flash in the pan and the Republicans nominated Harding in 1920, the Progressives settled in with the Democrats.
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.